Artful Dodger: You might change your mind again in the next life!!

Übergeek 바둑이: Blind obedience to an ideology of whatever sort is based on fear. As such a person does not believe the ideology I feel but is just looking for something to believe in and have some affirm that they are right. Yes, this has and always be a dangerous situation, as a idolised leader can always take advantage of such blindness. Or, those who say they represent an idol can use such fear to affirm their own or take advantage in many ways of blind believers.

As to blindness in western society... No. No longer possible. There are those who would like such blindness carried on, but as now there is no limiting in the western world of information it cannot happen. Yet as always the sand in the hand principle regarding the end of an era comes up. Panic... we are not believed anymore, we must make our idol more solid.. hence extremism. It's a sign of an ideology dying. Some deaths are quick, some take time.

I would say Frank Herbert does a good write on this in his character Duke Leto II. As such though reading the whole series of the Dune books gives more depth... long read though

Freedom.. sometimes it needs defending, but never at the price of demonisation of a group in opposition. We've fought wars in the past against such demonisation and for the right reason. It is never good, it leads to the ability to justify being monstrous and then the question arises... who is the demon? It is in that respect that the Qu'ran has articles of war and rules akin to the Geneva convention over the treatment of soldiers and civilians in time of war. Before this I guess the Arab states (like many an army of that time) took part in the usual atrocities following a victory or as part of that war. It is said by some these articles portray Islam as a war based religion. It is not, but at the time of formation of the Muslim faith, they faced destruction by their enemies, yet the prophet of their religion wanted to teach self discipline and even in war there can be respect.

AS to a line.. The Bible says everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial. An example would be crossing the line as that in wars of the nature we face today leads to martyrs and the cycle of violence is justified. The war in Northern Ireland came to an end through talk, although most of those involved wanted an end to the violence, such was the mistrust that an outsider needed to mediate. Violence did not end the war, the desire for it's end by all those involved did, as then talks had substance.

This is what those who've never been in such a situation don't understand about wars on terror. The Northern Ireland situation went on for decades. An attack could happen at any time anywhere in the UK. Those fighting had no uniform, just their cause. Sometimes the British Army as such would take sides and supply info on an activist on the side of the IRA to loyalists rather than wait till the courts could be used. That just created more hate. Made things worse.

This is why in the UK we are sceptical of much of the Middle East business. That's why the new inquiry into the Iraq war has had much voicing done on it regarding transparency. The UK population will not accept a whitewash, we already know much from past inquiries. As such that is why millions marched in protest against the war. It didn't wash. We didn't believe our leaders and we didn't want our troops dying in vain for made up reasons. We understand that the government of the time did not want the USA to wage that war alone, yet maybe more effort on saying that the war was for the wrong reasons would have led to a more thought out approach to the situation as a whole.

The cold war taught much, that there is such as a war that you cannot win. Direct confrontation of extreme actions would lead to self destruction, nukes and biological weapons were just great ornaments for the boys as there was no way that they could be used. Even with a completely successful first strike the radiation would be blown in the wind, mutation and death would sweep the Northern hemisphere. Food would be poisoned from absorbed radio active elements. Our economies would collapse from the strain.

Is there a price that is too high to pay. Yes. When values of decency go out the window we've already lost.

gogul: Wellll ya know the old saying..

In Judea it was a fellowship, Greece a philosophy. Europe a religion and in America.. a business.

Übergeek 바둑이:

"would have seen animals die and say "I will die some day, what will happen to me then.""
..... Not at first, as such the first humans would have seen death as a natural part of life, it's not till later when mankind would have questioned death.

"has plagued humanity since its earliest beginnings, because once we die we have no sensory perception of the universe, and the living have no way to communicate with the dead."
..... I'd say we'd have a better perception of the universe as we are no longer tied to a degree a fixed point. As with no means of communication.. since a certain funeral I'd have to disagree with that.

"Instead human beings became so attached to the physical world that once the body died, the person would "reincarnate" in a new life somewhere else. This cycle of death and rebirth led to great suffering in living beings because as we live we lose all those things we are attached to. Then the concept of "nirvana" and "enlightenment" came in. If a person became enlightened, the cycle of death and rebirth would end."
........... Quite frankly, you've missed the spirit of it all. The reincarnation was until the person learnt to be nothing and as such be. Joe would still be Joe, yet things would be in perspective. As they said in Greece.. an unmoved mover.

"You cannot be sure that God exists and that God will save you, so organized religion attempts to give people that certainty."
..... Now this is tricky. To me the answer is both yes and no at the same time. God as in existing as some man... no. The male and female form used in judaism as such is just indicating role and form of God in terms of our relationship. Though they tried in the formation of the RCC and doctrine to ban the idea, God is just an energy. As such the whole universe comes from that energy and is such that energy and then we get back to the self again. How do you describe it? The covenant with God is such that things will come your way to make you see what is clouding you.. some aspect where some believe God will stop anything bad happening. Well... Christ didn't want to push it in the desert As to belief on existence... Well some claim that such is the calm that can be achieved at times that they feel something. this thing cannot be described it just is.

And yes.. blind obedience to a set of rules is wrong. A person is to come as such and join with God as a matter of free will. No-one can teach you that, and if they try and force it on you then that is realistically a mortal sin.

Funny world.

gogul: Looks like they are going to give him over and he's gonna face prosecution.. not definite yet, but very likely. Which is really stupid!! If the guy can hack their systems that well they ought to be hiring him as a paid hacker (as some do) to find the weaknesses in their systems.

... And then the question arises, if he is that good.. he could hack other systems for them on an even higher pay!!

gogul: True. I've gone off meditating, thought just half an hour has passed and found it's hours later. Time is relative. Also it is not recognised in physics as being a constant in regards to the effects that such as gravity has on it.

A day in zero G is not the same as that in any place affected by gravity.

Tuesday: And if there is no family? And three comes up in many forms in Judaic based religions, as does 40.... btw.. when it comes to death, it is also said that it is not certain (see Gospel of Thomas) which refers to that the Bible talks of more then one type of death as the original texts used more then one type of hell.

Over simplification causes complication that leads away from the simplicity of the Bible. It's no good just going by what others think is right.

Btw.. Christian wise... there is always transmigration!!

gogul: Reincarnation is not alien to Judaic based religions. It was just rejected by those who decided to formalise western orthodoxy into an easily taught faith. I feel a certain amount of trying to convert pagan religions by keeping certain elements of paganism (of those dominant at the time) was used.

As to science... I don't think it can reject an afterlife as such anymore, so much is coming to light that we don't know everything and that not only is this body of ours a biological organism but also has many EM aspects.

eg .. when I was at school we were taught electrons orbited in a nice clean orbit. Now I learn that science finds that electrons though stay around the nucleus of an atom there is no clear orbit. An electron can jump around, be in more than one place at a time, etc.
..... we are now looking at multiple dimensions to explain gravity and it's weakness, that space/time is bent from gravity and that it is not an attraction as such, but matter falls when faced by gravity. Black holes I was taught nothing could escape from, now certain particles can, and in the end a black hole can explode.

Science is still learning.

Czuch: This is the problem Czuch... If taken as per the original intent of religions then death is just a normal life event. But, so much has been empathised on fear of the afterlife by nature of ... have we been good boys and girls. The original 4 'hells' have been converted by bad translation into 1 'hell'.

As to virgins.... you have to be a bit metaphorical regarding some aspects of religion.

But my original point was the difference between suicide and choosing to die with dignity. This difference has been lost somehow. We recognise when in battle a hero may sacrifice their life to save others and remember and reward such sacrifice. Yet if someone is terminally ill with no chance of recovery, and as such a painful undignified death.. we say this is wrong. Yet at the same time doctors get to choose at times when to 'switch off the machine' that is keeping a persons body alive.

Übergeek 바둑이: Death.. yes well... part of life. Biological machines are not made to last, although people have been known by will to extend a scheduled change in address, such is that our bodies are designed to break down.

So much covering death I believe is the church's fault... religion has in the past (not so much now) found it profitable to make us afraid of a change in state. But I find in such fear a paradox in that it denies part of who we are in it's belief.

Well in the UK it looks like the government (and the law as such) have backed off on prosecution of those who go abroad with their loved ones, and help out those who decide to end their lives due to incurable medical reasons.

It looks like they have seen the difference between choosing how to end your life with dignity and suicide. After all.... It's against the law to let an animal suffer and can end up in a criminal prosecution.

Strange world!!

Right... that's it. I'm getting into the Carbon offset business. I recon the religious book sellers must be fuming that it's taken over as an idol of sorts.

$5.5 billion in 2006.. No wonder every boffin that can is laughing.

Czuch: Sorry Czuch, sometimes I forget that people might not have read or seen the stuff I have. Most of what I think people know is basic stuff about geology, geography, etc is a case such as this.

As to the carbon footprint business.. I'll have to look and see how much it's worth. Seeing as everyone (pro greenhouse or anti greenhouse) is making a buck, I don't see why we shouldn't

Artful Dodger: Perhaps you don't know what I'm referring to Art regarding carbon footprint.. It's to people (or companies) buying the ability to off put their excessive production of carbon by buying someone's lack of production of carbon.

And have you read all his works to know it's true? I just read the article as presented by Czuch and found errors. Maybe it's just the way Jonathan Manthorpe presented it. But based on that presentation, there are concerns I have over what Plimer is saying.

Is that ok?

And if this Plimer bloke is right, then can you (or Czuch) provide from his work (seeing as you two are saying it's right) the evidence to show he is correct??

Czuch: I've already stated why I think he ignored it. The bloke "Plimer" says the Earth's climate is cyclic and random. To me that is wrong. The climate regarding ice ages and the like is cyclic, true. Random... no. Why ... because they come in cycles. No-one can predict exactly to the minute when they occur, we do not have the weather forecasting ability for that, but they are not random.

But I presumed people here would know that... my bad.

Artful Dodger: People can use examples Art. I see people comparing things to other things on here?

Did I miss another memo??

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/

It's a little story that you can click and read on how man spread. One such spread was the bearing land bridge. The use of tools spread through one ice age.

It's all their, including the near extinction of man. That was one event.

Artful Dodger: Yes we are and I get this every time when I have a point on here.

I can't help remembering things.

Bernice: It's called roadkill Bernice, there was a day when our roads were littered with dead hedgehogs. Scientists who study hedgehogs(it was on the news) are now saying that many are learning to not crawl into a ball which is a natural trait when they feel threatened. And a car.. especially at nights with headlamps is a threat.. so they feel.

Hence .. roadkill.

If you look on google you'll find the story.

Artful Dodger: Ok... it is a fact that we are an adaptive species.. skin colour being one, hence as man left Africa and travelled far away our skin change to match our surroundings. It is a fact that during ice ages man did travel to escape (survival technique) and hence grew stronger. Man then as such became a stronger more adaptable race, hence our ability to travel to the four corners of the earth. The way Africa's climate changed, led to man moving.

........ An opinion based on what has learnt as being held as historic fact from findings by geologists is fine. But to distort the significance of the event on human existence by taking that many humans died during the ice ages as a decline, rather than a time of hardening and strengthening as nature doth provide from time to time. The dinosaurs opened up the way for mammals, yet at cost of much of life on Earth. But some survived.

For example... the humble hedgehog here has been in decline, but now.. they are learning not to crawl into a ball when on a road. Hence those hedgehogs that do not, and instead run are transferring that trait unto their descendants and the population is now on the increase.

Do you see the basis for my opinion now??

Artful Dodger: That link based on old data. Sure that's great You are saying having an opinion is bad?

Shall we all stop posting then?? And I thought having an opinion was better then c&p stuff!! Look.. have I missed a memo?

Artful Dodger: I'm just going by what I've learnt of our history as a species. By what I've seen and learnt of how important it is that we are a race (as such) with now no natural predators.

And by what the link Czuch posted.

Seems guys on both sides of the global warming debate are making money out of this business.

And can you provide a link to that 2005 article you are going on about? I thought you would have least done that.

Czuch: Well that Ice ages made us spread more about the world tends to make his thoughts a little nuts. As to random.. that's only due to lack of info over how.

Plus he ignores that we are the first race on this planet to be able to change significantly our surroundings, such as deforestation.. The dust bowl somewhat shows what can happen. That farmers here are restoring the use of natural predators regarding bugs that attack crops, which cuts down on the need of pesticides.

I agree, the carbon footprint thing is a bit crazy in certain respects, but it's also leading to a cut down in fuel usage by making cars more economical.

Vikings: 1) needs sorting out I agree, the whole USA system of sue needs capping. Something that over here we've had.

2) Our gov uses a similar system to get part time workers into full time employment. It works. But as to people shopping around for a doc... This is a Hippocratic situation and as such I feel set limits on what doc's can charge should be limited.

3) I thought was already somewhat in place. All UK people are advised as a matter of course to take out medical insurance when visiting another country to which they are not covered automatically. Also.. if this recharge was in place then as such then every country ought to do the same.

Our docs have a sign that if you have medical insurance to tell them.

Artful Dodger: Then show it, and it's source and how they collected the data.

gogul: Nahhhh though being part of European history it's been a big subject of study. Both pre WWII and post WWII. Also due it being a hot topic, many documentaries have been made about it that I've seen. Plus live info... such as the fall of the Berlin wall.

That was a great day!!

gogul: I'll have to check if that's allowed with the Tooting Popular Front.

gogul: "Citizen Smith" has been informed

Artful Dodger: Then show it, and it's source and how they collected the data.

I know how easily some figures can be distorted. Show me it isn't and I'll believe you. But our papers agree with what I'm saying.. even Murdoch's bunch are quiet.. surprisingly

Artful Dodger: No, your stats are old regarding waiting figures. I read and checked the 2008 figures

And yes we have 24/7 health coverage... A person here has the right to be seen at any time of the day by a doctor, some clinics only run during days.. but they tend to be pre booked clinics to see specialists. Otherwise A&E is open 24/7 for serious problems. After hours GP's, etc, etc, etc.

It's no good just reading some old thought from a hater of universal health care and expect things to add up.. they won't!!

And if your courts are so plugged up... why hasn't anyone done something before? Why didn't Bush, Raygun, Bush sr, Carter, Clinton, etc??
And will that fix all the high costs in your system.. it's a start I feel, but not a total fix.

Czuch: You have proved nothing Czuch. And I didn't say cheaper was better, just that the point was effectiveness re cost. Eg.. years ago I needed a prescription, the chemist told me it was cheaper to buy it over the counter then via the flat rate prescription cost. So I bought it over the counter.

The USA per citizen pays too much for health coverage, it needs sorting. I think virtually everyone can agree on that point.

Now ... how to sort it. The plans your gov are looking at include everyone paying their bit as well as other systems.

What Art is missing is that the USA have the ability to look at various systems and (if politicians use their brains and not their parties) sort out the basis for a system that will be cheaper to run. Despite Art's saying "it'll cost too much".. your current system already does, as their is an element of companies taking the mickey over what you pay in private health insurance.

Now... If you had a situation to change things so efficient spending was the secondary protocol to Hippocratic Oath.. what would you do?

Imsoaddicted: Many want the matron back, and cut backs that were applied are now being reversed.

And they do have people who will clean that toilet seat on hand, you've just gotta tell the right person to get that cleaner moving. They gave you a non excuse.. It is their job...

They were probably just annoyed someone had not bothered to clean it after making it dirty, or they had missed it.

Artful Dodger: Our waiting lists (if you had done your research properly) were 18 months (as in average waiting times) before Labour took power.. now they are down to about 45 days... In many treatments less. The long waiting times built up due to a change in the management of NHS areas brought on by the previous conservative party in power... everyone has bad ideas!!

Your facts are old and out of date..."period"

And still I see nothing about how to fix the problem from you.

And we still have 24/7 healthcare. People say "this ain't right" and MP's have to use their brains and fix it.

Artful Dodger: Yes we have a waiting list.. and they took steps to sort it.

And please.. with the cancer business, much of it was due to patient recognition. It is inappropriate to use statistics without the full depth of how they came to be.

doctors were overworked, but that was due to an archaic system of training doctors.. It's been sorted. And they are just introducing a new computer system, so any doc, etc can look up any notes they need online. And our nurses kept getting knicked by a certain allies hospitals. The training is so good. So a recruitment campaign started.

As for Red Tape... Changes are in place so I hear regarding the worst problems, but that could apply to the USA model of medical insurance. A patient waking up in A&E finding he has a big bill for just a Red Tape glitch due some very un Hippocratic attitudes. Our feedback systems are such that citizens can change things, and those who care are changing things our side of the pond. You know your system is not perfect, so what do you feel needs to be changed?

What is a perfect model Art? Surely if politics were dropped over matters of health....

And isn't it a bit corny using old figures after moaning about old figures, and not knowing the background behind figures??

BTW.... imho politics and running a country don't mix. In the end, it is what's best for the people. For eg.. despite party's here all claiming we want the expense system transparent, the voting was as such, that prosecution is harder. Despite criticisms of the PM and defence budgeting, our troops (by the two main parties) are not guaranteed what they need no matter which gets in. Despite Gurkha's fighting as British Army soldiers, it took public outrage and a certain Celeb to get them the right to live in the country they lived in for many years.

People change things, not parties.

And Czuch.. we have no problem seeing GP's same day 24/7... Blood tests, X-rays, Scans, A&E, MRI, etc.. all 24/7.

Czuch: This is my point....

"Lack of health insurance does NOT equal lack of health care, not in the US anyway!"

you are basically telling me that socialised (as such non private) works. And our socialised system costs less to run then your mixed up system per person. If you think it doesn't, then please provide a source for such a claim.. As it appears from recent news that the costs in America have gone up!

Artful Dodger: Nope. the WHO rankings I was using are 8 years old. And since it appears your costings of your current system have gotten worse. But that is beside the point.

40 million USA citizens in the most advanced (as you are saying as others would disagree) country in the world are without healthcare. 40 million And while you may talk about yourself... what about one of those 40 million who has to wait?

And btw... if you didn't know... Cancer is not the big killers in terms of USA people or as per globally recognised major health problems. Heart and obesity seem to the big western problems... well as per USA and UK they are.

And hasn't the VA health care always been a problem? And I have to ask why?? various sides have been in power and done (according to you) little to improve it. That seems to be a symptomatic failure through embarrassment then 'social medicine'.
And yes here, you can sue a doctor, we also have the GMC by which a doctor can be struck off, we also have as well as each NHS trust's internal complaints dept, a health service ombudsman.

And btw.. no-one here can be refused health care due to the whim of a health company saying "you are not covered", and our doctors here are good, A thing arises before wages as such and has done so for many many years....

It's a thing called the Hippocratic oath.... And please tell me.. why is it acceptable to have 40 million or so American people without the same health care you can expect as a paying person to a healthcare company? Is it acceptable that you have a two tier system in which the government already uses a form of socialisation via the medicare and mediaid systems and regulates. Why is it that some states have felt it necessary to set limits on docs charges for emergency care through A&E (ER to you)??

Artful Dodger: And why is Canadian health going down.. due to the strain from the USA!!

And USA health care is 37th in the world. Did you miss that fact from the WHO?

Our *cough* socialised system ranks 18th yet we pay about half the GNP rate you do.

So.. being honest and faced by details and not political dogma... which is more efficient?
And.. if we increased our GNP input by just a few %, then how do you think the UK would fair?

Btw... Cuba is only two points behind you, and it was a special favour by the Cuban medical services. Your guys who rescued people were being mucked about by your medical system, the Cubans on film agreed to treat them and could not understand why those who put their lives at risk were being denied treatment!

Why if people pay are they being denied treatment??

Czuch: Are you sure about the biggest and brightest? I suggest you look back in the field of medicine and invention.

And if how medical orgs run in terms of rules are set, then they should be able to regulate themselves. It'll be then only the law breakers who face government involvement.

Czuch: You think doctors only make 75K.. is that dollars?? As UK doctors (GP's) make at least £80k and some much, much more.

The point is your system costs so much as it in some respect at fault for your countries bad balance. You go on about things being cost effective, yet you applaud corruption and high costs for a service that does not deliver the service in respect of how much it costs as part of your GNP.

If we in the UK paid that proportion of GNP.. we could all have private doctors and nurses virtually living with us. Get served silver service at hospitals.

So.. what on earth is your system doing with that cash, seeing as 40 million are not covered!

Artful Dodger: then you've missed several events!! Like USA citizens going into Canada with dubious papers to get free health care. Those who took part in the 9/11 rescue having to go to Cuba to get treatment as they were refused it by the healthcare companies. Also an African free medical treatment team going to the USA to treat those who are in need.

Btw.. it seems many republicans in gov like the idea, just the nuts and bolts need sorting. If it's an emrgency we have 24/7 doctors.. A&E just a 999 away. Blood tests and the like we can get done straight away as well. How many MP's and from what party(s)? Many here have strange ideas that are not practical!! Or common sense led. The recent expenses affair is still not sorted, as MP's, etc are still seemingly trying to be above the common law in regards to fraud and criminal prosecution. Yet from New Jersey in your country we learn that is not a good idea.

And people can always go private as it is an option.

gogul: Of course it does.. billions wasted every year, when that money could be in the pockets of the people of America. And as such (knowing that many Americans are generous people) lost to those who have need, whether internal or external.

gogul: I cannot understand why certain Republican factions want to keep a health system that is so expensive. Those here are moaning about spending money, yet at the same time supporting a system that if changed would save the USA people so much money and deliver a more comprehensive health system in which (one of the options) everyone working pays a contribution. Also the right (if the UK style is used) to have a private medical insurance is still intact and also that the health companies would have to remember the oath of the health trade and not that of the dollar.

What is the problem with this??

Übergeek 바둑이: So basically if the Republican party were to be as it was, it'd have to drop it's radical approach. Also that the progressive movement within Democrats is of a Republican origin!!

Strange old world!

Artful Dodger: Which ideas in particular are too radical? Most things are not new in politics, just revamped.

And if I may say so, a problem with politics is such that it is a race to be in power rather then service of the people. I see that your gov suffers from a problem like ours. Transparency.

Übergeek 바둑이: Tony Blair made Saddam's threat capability out to be worse than it was to parliament. That's the only way the war was passed.

And yes... Millions marched in peaceful protest regarding the war. We didn't want our troops fighting in a war that just didn't make sense as to the reasons being forwarded by our government.

Czuch: The USA borrowed so much from others in terms of it's set up and constitution I would have to disagree. You still use 'governors'.. Isn't that a spin off from British Colonial rule of the Americas?? Your founders borrowed many ideas of how to govern from forms of democracy past and present... eg .. republic.

I cannot agree unless you show that as such in it's forming the USA is unique.

Even your science... look back at when the hydrogen fuel cell was invented!!

Artful Dodger: Details are in essence never fully known till someone gets into office Art. You know that by nature of information that is at hand to a person running for office who is not in office. That's why the Pres in gets to inform the Pres coming in.

Czuch: Thing is.. many country's in the western world, etc are doing the same.

If it was such a bad idea, why are all these governments doing it?

No questions asked.... Please.. it is our right to ask questions, governments are supposed to be accountable to the people... even if they try and be above the law.

(that's a joke at a recent Parliament decision )

Now. Being in the position where your Pres is not republican and you are questioning him. How do you now stand on not questioning your Pres and that he is always right?

Artful Dodger: But didn't the people of the USA know before hand what your Pres's plans were, and as such "shoving" is not true as they elected him knowing his ideas?