tongpa-nyi

Sometimes it's awkward for me to spend time with people who have way more or way less than me. Especially if we go out to do something and I can't afford it or they can't afford it. It works OK for the one who's doing better to pay for both but not if it happens all the time, then it's just really awkward except in rare cases.

Also, the way different people dress, talk, and act, where they want to go, what type of car they drive, it's all important to some people and not to others. My car is pretty junked out and messy and I'm embarrassed to have someone in it unless they're a slob. But I feel weird riding with someone who's way messier than I am. Do we all just hang out mostly with people who are in the same socioeconomic class that we're in? I wish we didn't have class distinctions like that...

Honestly, my life just goes on as usual. The air is the same, water is water, people are mostly nice but some aren't, there's crime but I mostly feel safe, you need money in order to buy stuff, some people have jobs and others don't, some nations are at peace and others are at war, religions carry on and each still claims to be the true path, plants and rocks and oceans and clouds don't care about us, and basically the planet keeps spinning without a lot of significant change taking place.

Do we focus too much on perceived threats, disasters, rare events and conspiracy theories? Aren't we really doing fine other than the problems we invent in our own minds? Isn't thought our real enemy? If you stop thinking about politics, don't you notice that politics aren't affecting your life?

Flight 815 makes sense. 8 and 15 are numbers that show up all over, like Hurley's lotto numbers, the hatch numbers that Desmond has to punch in, etc. So I was thinking about the meaning of 316 and suddenly it struck me --- John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son," etc.

John Locke was told he would have to die (give his life) in order to bring everyone back to the Island. Then John was SORT OF resurrected. The symbolism seems like more than coincidence. And John killed Jacob, which is like a metaphor for Jesus fulfilling the laws of the Old Testament.

I've always focused on the Buddhist and Enlightenment philosophy that's in Lost, plus the obvious idea of karma that has been a theme throughout. But suddenly I see a Christian mystical idea popping up along with everything else.

What say y'all?

I have a sinus headache and some inner ear problems. I already know it's Obama's fault, but I'm curious what the wise people on this forum have to say about the specific means by which he is ruining my life. Some of my ideas include:

* Obama is a socialist Kenyan

* Obama is a Muslim

* Obama is Osama, he only changed a letter in his name so he could fool us

* Obama is helping Al Gore lie about global warming

* Obama's health care plan has secretly been passed and it's ruining my health

* Obama looks good in those Tea Bag posters where he has a Hitler mustache

What say you?

Item: "President Obama next week will announce a loan guarantee to build the first nuclear power plant in the United States in almost three decades, an administration official said Friday."

Does this signal a resurgence of nuclear power in the USA or will it be blocked by a new wave of nationwide protests and concerns from residents living near proposed nuke plants? Do you favor building new nuclear plants? If so, would you feel comfortable living near one?

NASA analysis shows continued warming. www.physorg.com/news183313791.html

Denial arguments were based on comparing 1998 (an unusually warm year) to 2008 (unusually cool year), but the overall trend (moving average that smooths out the highs and lows) shows continued warming.

What do you think is the best age of consent? It's different in each state but on a national level there is a lot of pressure to make it 18 for all purposes. Is that too low, too high, or just right?

I have mixed feelings about it. I've known 40 year olds who didn't have the maturity of some 16 year olds, so the age limit seems too arbitrary. I think it should be flexible and not a magic overnight change from "she can't do anything" to "she can do everything you can imagine in your sickest, wildest fantasies." That should be "she or he" but it's usually the "she" who is wanted for adult films or for intimate relations with older men.

It is my understanding that our awareness of self is developed through (and dependent on) our interactions with other human beings. If we never had such interactions, could we possibly develop a sense of self as separate from our environment, or would we simply respond as other animals do without having a separate internal thought-world?

Hi, it's me, the guy who posted earlier today begging that people stop talking about Al Gore. Well, one of the responses to my question, from someone who disagrees with me about global warming, included a link to a breaking news story that really disappointed me. Here's an excerpt from the article:

-------------------------------------

"Few people have been as vocal about the urgency of global warming and the need to reinvent the way the world produces and consumes energy as Mr Gore. And few have put as much money behind their advocacy and are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if and when it comes.

"Critics... say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world's first "carbon billionaire," profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in."

---------------------------------------------------------

In most contexts this combination of profiteering and political activism would be considered extremely unethical. And I'm a firm believer that humans are heating the planet with greenhouse gases, I'm not just an anti-Gore crusader. But, come on, in all fairness and for the sake of human decency, is this not a slap in the face of every low-paid researcher who has done the leg work to make Gore's venture capitalism profitable?

This is an issue that comes up a lot in this forum's debates about global warming, so I thought I'd drop the definitions in here...

Climate is the description of average weather over a period of time, most commonly 30 years.

Weather is the state of the atmosphere with respect to heat or cold, wetness or dryness, calm or storm, clearness or cloudiness, varying over short periods of time.

The most common error made in posts on this site are those that fail to recognize that climate is weather averaged over a period of 30 years. There are many comments suggesting that a cold winter indicates a climatic trend. It doesn't. Climate trends require decades to be revealed and verified. When summer arrives, we'll surely see GW advocates pointing to record highs as evidence. They will be just as wrong as those currently using the opposing argument.

There is also an assumption on the part of many that local and regional weather correlates to global weather conditions. If you're experiencing record-breaking weather of any kind, it's not relevant to what's happening in other parts of the world, nor does it mean anything with respect to climate trends. As advertisers like to say, "Your results may vary."

Those of you who don't believe humans are causing global warming, may I ask one little favor? Please stop accusing the rest of us of following Al Gore. We post references to many sources of information and never have I seen one of those references to anything that Gore has said or published. He's a guy who made a movie, he happens to be a Democrat (which is probably what upsets some of you), and he seems to have a massive ego (which probably contributes to global warming, but that's off-topic.)

While I'm asking for favors, could you stop giving the "thumbs down" to posts that do nothing more but link to data? It's amazing that you would think you're making an intelligent point by dissing photographs, measurements of temperature, and graphs. If you dismiss information, aren't you really admitting that you cannot debate your side when presented with contrary evidence?

Suppose that the earth is going to heat up a few degrees in the next several decades. (If you don't believe it will, just pretend.) What investments would pay off the most? In order to make this more fun, pretend that you have a few billion bucks in the bank.

I would invest in fertile lands that currently have short growing seasons, especially in central Canada and parts of Russia. Real estate near cities that are well above sea level, places where coastal residents will flee as their cities are flooded, would go up in value. Atlanta could become the size of New York, so that's a great place to invest.

Other good investments --- new technologies/methods for controlling the spread of tropical varmints and diseases. More efficient air conditioning technologies.

Tree planting will be a major effort by homeowners and governments alike. Owning a large commercial nursery to provide seedlings would be a money-maker. New ski resorts in colder undeveloped locations will be needed as current resorts lose their snow.

What else?

Much of the northern hemisphere is experiencing unusually cold weather, but the planet's average temperature doesn't vary by more than a tiny fraction of a degree from week to week, so where is all the heat? I tried to find a temperature anomaly map but can only find archives, nothing that shows current temperature anomalies. Any links would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

This is puzzling to me. There are so many issues on which people disagree, but none of them provoke the hatred and name-calling that comes with the AGW debate. Are there any non-partisan explanations for this? Will people simply use this question as just another opportunity to continue the hate?

The funny thing about this is that the weather used to be the least controversial thing you could talk about. You could be locked in a room with your worst enemy and talk about the weather as a way to pass the time without getting into a fight. Not any more!

I received a severe concussion 3 months ago and cannot afford proper diagnostics or a neurologist. In some ways I feel like I'm a different person from who I was before the concussion. Has anyone else experienced this? How can you tell what's caused by the concussion versus what is just a matter of mood and other factors?

My own ideals can be boiled down to a simple but contradictory-sounding sentence: I'd like to see the goals of communism achieved through the methods of democratic-libertarian free markets. In other words, in my ideal world there would be equality AND freedom, minimal government, no need for welfare programs, no homelessness, maximum employment, and every form of environmentally harmful production and consumption would be taxed heavily to provide incentives for conservation and efficient technologies.

To achieve what I've listed above would require an economic system that doesn't exist and has never been tried. It's probably impossible. So the next best alternative, to me, is to settle for democratic free market socialism such as is practiced in most EU nations and Canada. Unfortunately, there is no nation that has been able to achieve environmentally and socially benevolent goals without restrictions being placed by government on the freedoms of entrepreneurs and individuals. Could modifications of tax codes be used, instead of mandates and regulations, to achieve these goals without sacrificing the liberties of businesses and consumers?

I've seen a lot of positive changes in the way men and women relate, in the freedoms that women now enjoy, and in the way that feminism is expressed by those who claim to be feminist. But I'm a guy and I'm not a student of women's studies or feminism or sociology, so I only have my own observations as a guide.

Most of the changes I've seen in the movement have been toward moderation. For example, modern feminists are less likely to be anti-male, they're more likely to embrace their culture's gender-based traditions (e.g., shaving legs and arm pits, wearing feminine clothing, and wearing bras), they have a much more open, less Puritanical attitude toward sex, and they're less defensive about being female because they feel more confident.

This all seems like progress if it indicates that many of the goals of feminism have been achieved. However, there are many ways in which it seems like women have backed off of some of their original goals for equal rights, and some of the changes I noted as positive might be signs of weakness in the movement. Do girls and women really have a choice about shaving, for example? Or has feminism failed to deliver on the promise of giving women a real choice about how they express themselves?

Whether you're male or female, feminist or traditionalist, I'd like to hear what y'all think. Thanks!

I've seen a lot of positive changes in the way men and women relate, in the freedoms that women now enjoy, and in the way that feminism is expressed by those who claim to be feminist. But I'm a guy and I'm not a student of women's studies or feminism or sociology, so I only have my own observations as a guide.

Most of the changes I've seen in the movement have been toward moderation. For example, modern feminists are less likely to be anti-male, they're more likely to embrace their culture's gender-based traditions (e.g., shaving legs and arm pits, wearing feminine clothing, and wearing bras), they have a much more open, less Puritanical attitude toward sex, and they're less defensive about being female because they feel more confident.

This all seems like progress if it indicates that many of the goals of feminism have been achieved. However, there are many ways in which it seems like women have backed off of some of their original goals for equal rights, and some of the changes I noted as positive might be signs of weakness in the movement. Do girls and women really have a choice about shaving, for example? Or has feminism failed to deliver on the promise of giving women a real choice about how they express themselves?

Whether you're male or female, feminist or traditionalist, I'd like to hear what y'all think. Thanks!

She has appeared to me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZF5uQfpbDs

Have fun with this question and try not to put other people down. Think of all the labels people call you, what you call yourself, who you hang out with, your interests, beliefs, etc. How many different subcultures are part of your personality?

Mine are:

Old hippie

Liberal elitist

Nerd

Raver (the oldest person at ANY rave)

neo-Buddhist

Californian living in Austin (we are many!)

science geek

sensitive new age guy

nature nut