I was going to major and work in entomology when I was younger since I love living bugs like ants. I even hung out with a few local entomologists like Robert H. Crandoll (RIP since he passed away in 2006). He had a cool insect collection (dead and alive) in his house.

However, computer science took over since I love computers especially their digital bugs. I don't like the chemical odor/smell, traveling, low pay, etc. However, I am still fascinated with nature today as an old fart.

MIddle-class?? Sounds more pretentious an entomology, most-likely French aristocratic-

http://www.savagechickens.com/2014/01/entomology.html

Everyone's an atheist, if they're not a theist. One is active one is passive. This is what NDT hints at with his "why does this word exist". Recently Atheist has become a label for the more active, atheist "preachers" if you will, but that's a re-definition of the word. The conflation of meanings into that one word is confusing, and seems to get even NDT on thin ice.

Agnostic is not what he says it is. It is only "I don't know, I make no claim either way". Not a middle ground as so many people seem to think it is. Everyone is agnostic, unless they're will fully ignorant. Not everyone has made up their mind on theism, but I will make this bold claim, everyone lives as if one or the other, whether they consciously thoughtfully make the choice or not, I've not devoted much thought to the existence of a Loch Ness Monster, and I don't have to because it has never influenced my being in the world. I have made up my mind on bacteria, and I thin they're real, and I live as if they are real (wash hands etc). I have not really given much thought to UFOs, as in aliens in planes, but I'm assuming they don't exist and I live as if they don't exist.

When you talk about such an important claim as a god, a being that influences EVERYTHING, you do take it into account in your daily life, because if you don't you would, if you were wrong, already be condemned, so you live as if it doesn't exist (unless you actively live as if it does).

@GeeSussFreeK Entomology is the study of insects, I think you're looking for Epistomology.

In any case, whenever someone goes "I don't care" or "I don't want to spend/waste my time contemplating that" I count that as a win for secularism.

Agnosticism is an entomological position, Atheist is a religious position (or a position on religion). But he and I am nearly on the same page. I have always been against categories to, they seem to usually be vessels of group think. Even while I claimed Christianity, people weren't satisfied with that answer alone, and wanted to know WHAT KIND, I always wised I had the bravery to respond...the me kind. I am a me kind of me, I feel ya Tyson.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

@ MaxWilder
I would like to propose a slight edit to this. There is only strong and weak agnosticism, not atheism. The question of "Do you believe in a deity" only has 2 answers; yes and no. Now, you can not believe because you didn't know of an idea like God. This is implicit atheism as opposed to explicit atheism.
Or more to the point, atheism only pertains to the question of do you believe, agnosticism relates to what can be known. Atheism is a theological position, Agnosticism is an entomological position.
This is the condensed version of my comment here

You are correct, though, Possibilianism is a form of explicit atheistic weak agnostic position.


That's why I put "Agnostic" in quotes. Everybody uses it incorrectly, and I believe they do so because the word Atheist has such a stigma amidst those who have only heard of "strong" atheism.

@MaxWilder

I would like to propose a slight edit to this. There is only strong and weak agnosticism, not atheism. The question of "Do you believe in a deity" only has 2 answers; yes and no. Now, you can not believe because you didn't know of an idea like God. This is implicit atheism as opposed to explicit atheism.

Or more to the point, atheism only pertains to the question of do you believe, agnosticism relates to what can be known. Atheism is a theological position, Agnosticism is an entomological position.

This is the condensed version of my comment here


You are correct, though, Possibilianism is a form of explicit atheistic weak agnostic position.

acl123 I beg to differ on your last comment - "(and are therefore much less effective). Therefore they are not the same."

I'm not arguing purpose, but effectiveness. All weapons are effective at killing some one the end result is the same. I think the word you are looking for here is convenient, that is why gunpowder and projectile weapons caught on. Yes projectile weapons are more convenient.

My argument against your statement ends here, the rest below is my opinion.

A hammer is arguably just as effective as a gun at killing some one. One because a person is less likely to think you are meaning to kill them. After all it is just a tool, and a weapon. They are one in the same, and the duality is novel.

A ball point pen is just as effective at maiming as a hammer is. Demonstrated in the video below.

At any one moment there are an abundance of weapons, and tools at your disposal and a knowledgeable person does not discern between the two.

On a side note:
The entomology of guns, evolved from spears and sling shots. These killing tools have been around for quite some time. This has nothing to do with whether they are dangerous or not. I think its interesting how long humans have been killing each other.

People will kill each other accidentally or intentionally. That is the way it is, for now. The day that it isn't will be a great day indeed. A day that I look forward to.

MachineGunrock: From my forum, "Drone is not a myrmecological term, which is to say it has no formal use in regard to ants. As an entomological term the word refers only to the males of honeybees. In non-entomological language as applied to humans, drone refers to the concept of a mindless, duty-bound laborer, and there is a military use of the term as an unpiloted spy plane. Neither has anything to do with the apiarist's meaning of the word, though the first is somewhat similar to the way workers in a social insect colony are viewed. Either way, you won't see the word drone used in any scientific, or even in well-written popular writing on ants."

reference was to hollywood...from "Race" live in San Fran...forgive my stream a conciousness-the whole idea of picking apart the surreal or ultra-unreal, and boxing it up, for whatever reason....seems silly..probly' why sayyyy entomology is not a good choice for some.....from, "What Insects Think Vol IV"...

A relative of mine does entomology research in the rainforest each year, and he has a fun story about a botfly growing on the side of his leg.

Back in the States they just made a small incision and quickly removed the creature, instead of mucking around with vasaline and stuff, but I guess if its on your head its easier to do it the gross way they in this video.

It seems that the worm eats quite everything in the body of the insects it infects, except the head and some vital parts, then leads them to water by getting them thirsty, and they finally get out...

(Yep, I checked Google cause this video disturbed me (Really gross))

http://www.ag.ndsu.nodak.edu/aginfo/entomology/entupdates/Indoor_pest/horsehair_worm.htm