"The virtue of the gentleman is like wind; the virtue of the small man is like grass. Let the wind blow over the grass and it is sure to bend."--Confucius
Interests:Drawing, writing, Politics, God, creation science, politics, history, big dogs, women, lifting weights, and sci fi and Fantasy in general. The order is completely random and in no way indicative of priority.If you are going to debate with me, do not use wikipedia as a source. Wikipedia is not legitimate or trustworthy, and I will disregard all such links. Expertise:Lecturing Occupation:Wouldn't you like to know. Industry:Other
INTP - "Architect". Greatest precision in thought and language. Can readily discern contradictions and inconsistencies. The world exists primarily to be understood. 3.3% of total population.
According to this article there is a fairly decent sized scare over the fact that the Mayan Calender ends in 2012. There are people from a wide range of belief systems that are frightened by it. I can sort of see why Christians might be frightened by it, but not why the left should be, and I will explain why.
The Mayan Calender begins with the year 3,114 BC which is roughly around when the flood occurred. The Mayans believed that time and history were divided into ages and that the last age closed with a catastrophe. For some reason the Calender ends in 2012. According to this article some inscriptions have been found which contain predictions about what is supposed to happen at the end of the Calender:
One of them is Monument Six.
Found at an obscure ruin in southern Mexico during highway construction in the 1960s, the stone tablet almost didn't survive; the site was largely paved over and parts of the tablet were looted.
It's unique in that the remaining parts contain the equivalent of the date 2012. The inscription describes something that is supposed to occur in 2012 involving Bolon Yokte, a mysterious Mayan god associated with both war and creation.
However — shades of Indiana Jones — erosion and a crack in the stone make the end of the passage almost illegible.
Archaeologist Guillermo Bernal of Mexico's National Autonomous University interprets the last eroded glyphs as maybe saying, "He will descend from the sky."
The part which I have bolded is the part which I find to be most significant from a Christian perspective, as it describes the manner in which Jesus is supposed to return. Of course I realize that from a pagan perspective that could refer to almost anything. So again, the predictions themselves may mean nothing, but the question remains as to why the Mayan Calender ends in 2012, when clearly it counts back to a significant event. Just because they were aware of the past, it does not automatically follow that they should also be aware of the future. So I can't say whether or not the Mayan Calender has any prescient properties, but I suspect it does not. At any rate, time will tell. What concerns me most about 2012 is that Obama will be up for re-election. I hope he loses, but we will see.
Now, as to the leftists/evolutionists. There is no reason why they should be scared by the ending of the Mayan Calender. Certainly it is not the only calender from an ancient civilization which has run out (or will run out). If I really believed in evolutionism and thought the earth was 4.8 billion years old, and if I really accepted every modified date for the age of the earth which is continually being pushed back further, then I would have no reason to attach any significance to a timescale produced by ancient people which does not line up with the evolutionary chronology. Evolutionists measure truth by whether or not items line up with their paradigm, and any ideology that teaches a world wide catostrophe occured around 3,000 BC does not. The Mayan time scale and the evolutionist time scale represent two completely different views of reality (I happen to favor the Mayan view). In the case of evolutionists, they are basically trying to manufactor a scare because they want something to be scared over. It's the same reason why they go and see movies like "Paranormal Activity": http://insidemovies.moviefone.com/2009/10/14/real-paranormal-activity-movie-haunting-fans-reactions/
I want everyone to watch these videos about how the Obama administration is working to rapidly construct a one world government. The first one is short, the second one is long but highly informative. We should all be disturbed by this, and a lot of us would be better of dead than under a one world government:
So now Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace prize, just because. Supposedly because of his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," but that is really just a round about way of saying "just because." I would like to remind everyone that he hasn't done anything other than try to steer the country more towards communism. This is just a case of international brown nosing, and the only reason that he is being brown nosed is because the Nobel committee has become peopled with liberals. Which is evidenced by the fact that they also gave a Nobel Peace prize to Yasser Arafat. I'm starting to think that if Hitler were alive today they would give him one as well.
Conclusion: the Nobel Peace Prize is a farce, and liberals around the world worship Obama just because.
A few days ago my sister was made to write an essay for a standardized test at school. The question was (and this is not an exact quote but it's basically what they said): Many people think that the money spent on the space program could be better spent helping the poor, do you think that the government should spend money on the space program or on programs to help the poor?
Of course the way she answered it was that she thought the money should be better spent on the space program and she gave some good reasons why but not quite as many as I would. At any rate, it turns out that everyone else in her class (11th graders) with the exception of some girl that had moved here from Taiwan and my sister, said that the space program should be scrapped in favor of more "social spending." The most frightening aspect of this, is that someday those kids are going to be able to vote.
At any rate, the question creates a false dichotomy, it is not an either or scenario. There is already a great deal of money spent on welfare and other forms of "social spending." I have decided that "Social Spending" is essentially a bureaucratic euphemism for socialism. There is already a great deal more spent on socialist programs than there is on space exploration. Scrapping the space program in favor of spending more money on socialist programs is really not going to make a huge difference in how much money is delved out to people who are out of jobs or whatever. Now in terms of what is better for society as a whole, space exploration bears fruits which enhance the lives of everyone, whereas social spending does not. For example, the microwave was invented to give the astronauts a way to prepare food. How many people cook primarily with the microwave vs. how many are depending on subsidies from the government? Also, do you like using a GPS unit to find new places? Do you like knowing when a hurricane is getting ready to hit? If you answer yes to these things then you are probably one of the people who benefits more from the space program than social spending. Which is actually the majority.
Space exploration leads to innovations and scientific discovery, welfare and other social programs fuel the development of a class of people dependent upon the government, sometimes over multiple generations. Whether those people are helped by being dependent on the government is negligible at best, but certainly the majority of people who are not part of those programs do not benefit from them, and in fact are harmed by them because it is their money which is being taken in order to provide the government with revenue for all that.
I don't understand why the left does not see that space exploration provides the only long term answer to two of their favorite issues/concerns. Those issues being pollution and overpopulation. Imagine if all the garbage in landfills were jettisoned into space instead of left beneath the ground. Or if heavy industry was relocated to the moon. No one would care if there was a nuclear meltdown on the moon, of if heavy industrial pollution were released into the vacuum of space. Also, if space technology improves colonies could be established on other planetary bodies in the solar system (relieving population pressure on the earth), and perhaps a way to reach other solar systems could even be discovered. What I don't understand is why the liberals are trying to call themselves progressive, when their politicians (whom they almost always agree with) continually cut spending on useful things like the military and space program (the only useful things the government does), and spend it on programs with negative returns. That is regress, not progress.
I'm considering coming back to Xanga, but I am trying to decide whether or not it will be worth it. For certain there need to be voices criticizing Obama and the Democrats, and the only public areas where it occurs are talk radio and blog pages. On the other hand, I'm kind of burned out and of the same mentality as Chief Tyrol at the end of BSG. Meaning that I don't care too much for dealing with people and would rather spend most of my freetime drawing than arguing and what not. If I come back the first entry is going to be a scathing commentary on Obama's "health care" plan. I can't stand despotism.
Lifetime
