Frustration at faith.

A nice man I know, who has helped me in the past has faith.

Faith however, messes with his reason.

I see that. Yet, I can not tell or explain it to him, because its so imprinted upon his mind that there would be no way to unwind it.

So, he said a number of things. He had been in trouble with the law, and in jail as a result, yet during that time his grandmother was praying for him, so things got better, he got out of jail and got a good job.

Well, it took "god" awhile to get him out of jail I suppose god couldn't rush the justice system along, but go grandma - pray his way out of jail... at the same amount of time that the system would get him out anyway! Hmm. Seems to me the prayer had nothing to do with his change of behavior. He behaved himself in jail. He reformed, was a model prisoner, got good behavior. That lowered his time. 

As far as getting a job - well, god must have hooked him up as soon as he got out right? Like just someone there at the door, waiting to give him a job right? No? Oh, well he had to look for work, make calls, apply, ask for work. Hmmm seems like god wasn't doing much there, but hey grandma is still praying away! So life is good.

Then grandma dies. Mortality sucks! Uh oh- now he has back problems! Well CLEARLY that is because no one is praying for him now. I mean it's not because he is older or got into a car accident or anything like that in fact the car accident must be because no more prayer .... hold on, isn't grandma up there WITH GOD NOW? Surely she would be asking god for help even now right? Or is it that prayer only works when you are alive? Hmmm seems to me he got a hurt back because of the accident and getting/being old.

Nah, must be the prayer!

Now he says that he was wise in the ways of the world - ah yes, don't be wise in the ways of the world, be stupid eh? No well what he means is that he thought he was smart by beating the system (doing illegal things) well no, that was not wise - if he had been wise in the ways of the world he would have known were doing illegal things would land him... but what he really means is that one thing was "the world" and to not be wise in that aspect of the world that is bad. Ah yes, a convoluted way to just say that doing some things are a bad idea, all because of what the BIBLE says about being "wise in the ways of the world" .... SIGH.

So, he has been cleaning up his area - that is good, we need to pray for the area! Why? Well.. that will somehow get people to clean up as well. Or well, maybe - and just an idea here, but perhaps others will see your actions and want to mimic it, or still others if you just say "hey clean up" they might do it, still others might have to be offered money to do it or be scared into doing it in fear of a fine - or both! Nah, pray! PRAY for things to change - yes all that work and effort are clearly not needed, "god" was cleaning up that area long before you started to do so... although... well no, because it wasn't clean. God wasn't doing a god-damn thing.

YOU WERE.

YOU ALWAYS WERE.

YOU ARE THE ANSWER.

NOT PRAYER!

If there is a god - it's not doing a god-damn thing to change anything.

But YOU are.

The faith you should have - is in yourself.

God doesn't deserve it.

Until God picks up some litter. Or gets you a job. Or fixes your back.

Until then, it's all you, and always has been.

Ah well, I can't tell him any of that.

Because his faith is stronger than facts.

He is a kind man.

But he is also a blind man when it comes to faith.

And - it frustrates me.

Because there isn't anything I can do about it.

..... so I'll just complain online!

Well... I wasn't going to not complain but that's a whole other thing.

Sigh.

"Cuts" learning the "art" of insult.

Back in the day, I was young. Ah yes. Good times. In a school I went to - it was not a normal school, if you were there it was because you had problems with law or problems of mental health issues, and had fallen though the cracks, so to speak, and a handful of schools existed trying to help out kids that were in that zone. Troubled kids who had major issues of all sorts, was it wise to blend such together? I do not know, but it somehow worked somewhat, I found out some years ago that funding got cut even more then it had and they now only help out kids that have trouble with the law, so all the mental health issue kids (46-42) are I guess, falling though the cracks.

My problem had been that I had stoped going to school for extended time because I hated school. Not because I wasn't good at the tasks - but because the tasks were pointless and I knew it. I pointed out that nothing we were learning or doing had any place in the real world, yet it was still done, as if it mattered. I was tired of getting up early, going out in the cold to wait on the bus to bring us to school. It sucked bane.

So I simply stoped going. Well - eventualy the school figured that out and made a fuss about it and I "had" to go - the law requries it - fun fact - your parent gets in trouble but you the kid does not, what are they going to do? Lock you up? Oh no no school! Its nonsenscal. Regardles they told me I could go to this school or to jail. Most likely it was an empty threat, but I figured I'd go to this school.

The kids were of all sorts but it was mostly boys, very very few girls, like maybe 4 or 5 - because well, I guess mostly boys have issues that are noticed by the "system" (sigh broken system is broken).

Anyway kids would insult you - this was known as "cuts" the ""game"" was to insult them back, because - well that was what was done. If you didn't insult back you were seen as a target. You would be picked on more. A lot of kids, I strongly suspect insulted because they wanted attention - and this got them attention, sure it was negative attention but it was something. They didn't know how to get postive attention.

I think that became clear to me this one time when I happened to be in class with a frined of mine who normaly would not be in my class and this other kid was insulting him. My frined, who was shorter then that boy (and myself) stood up ready to fight him - because that was how he responded to insults I suppose. I saw that as brave, but I also saw that the kid didn't want a fight - he would fight of course, but something clicked in my head I guess, and I said to the kid "Hey why are you insulting him I'm right here!" and then proceded to insult him back, he smiled and insulted me and we insulted each other a few times as the teacher tried to get us to be quiet and return to learning. But it had worked, he had gotten what he wanted and was now able to calm down.

So I learned to "cut" I learned to insult. I devolped one heck of a thick skin, and so online these days when I see people crying over words I just can't help but tell them to get over it, its like look - your going to be insulted - its going to happen, and crying about it isn't going to stop it, you need to fight back, you need to have a thick skin.

This nonsense of "safe spaces" and "triger words" that has been overused also waters down people and does not prepare them for the real world. My word, its rough out there, people are going to be harsh, its going to be a lot worse then mere words. How the bleep are you going to handle that if you can't handle some nitwit online insulting you? Grow the bleep up. That sort of jadedness is not recived well by some that are to fradgle to handle things "snowflakes" - oh man they would have been beat up in the school I went to - forget about insults they would be targets for beating up all the time. 

That isn't right, and that isn't how it should be. But it is a thing. People are not nice in the adult world, just as much as the kid world. People say and do nasty things. So toughen up!

Anyay, I guess what I'm saying is that you might need to learn the art of cuts, the insult - so that rather then a target or victom you are able to fend for yourself.

Else, you might just be cut down.

The problem with John

I had watched some of this video (click) and John has - many problems, but the main problem is, I think that there can not be a distinction between non-mind events and mind events.

I'll explain.

After AronRa gets quite upset at John for saying that Aron Ra is "making things up" John gets around to listing his "evidence" for God.

The first: fibonacci sequence.

He says, that we "never" have a pattern without a mind.

AronRa of course, rejects that in full, but for John its true.

The problem here is that John thinks that a mind (God) made EVERYTHING thus, when John says we have never had a pattern without a mind, John thinks that is the case - because God made all the patterns we see. 

So, for John, there is no way to ever point to anything at all in the universe and say that God is not responsible for that thing. There is nothing random. There can not be anything out of place, everything must have a reason and order to it, because God put it there, just so. Of course, if John believes in free will that would, I dare say conflict with this, although I'm sure 

John could come up with several hoops for us to jump though to get past that problem.

So for John, when you point at "nature" you are pointing at "God" - God drives the wind, even the sand dunes must be God letting us know its there, if we could only see the patterns.

There is nothing that could not be positive evidence for God for John.

If there is a single thing that God is not responsible for, then there is at least one thing that can be done without God - and that would ruin the whole thing for John because one example means that God might not be needed for anything else.

I would dare say that although we no longer (broadly speaking) say that lighting is due to God, that John would say no - lighting no matter how well we understand it, is in the end, due to God.

That is the problem with John, and for others in that mindset there is nothing to point to and say "not mind" vs "mind" - there can not be any comparison made. There are no "natural" objects - all objects are created.

That is a mighty big problem for John, but he doesn't understand that.

Now, maybe you who reads this might wonder why that is a problem - well if we have no way to point to something and say "mind did that" and point to something else and say "mind did not do that" then everything becomes proof of your idea of a mind doing it - and that locks you in.

For some, that would be fine, but not for me, as I want to be able to be wrong and find out what is correct, I need to have my ideas be ones that could be falsified.

John, and those like him I'd bet, do not want the idea to be falsified, because that would be the end of that version of God.

Perhaps that would be for the best.

That water tower.

There was this water tower. In the dark night. I had just left my ship behind. I looked up at it. There was a ladder. I could climb it, to the top, and jump off.

I could do that. I could see myself doing it.

In my seabag I had everything, all my gear, everything from this life of the sea.

And up there, I could just dive off.

Because she left me.

Because I did not have her anymore. I yearned for her, I needed her. I loved her. So. So much.

I hated the ship.

I hated this "job."

I was empty inside.

That water tower.

I looked at it.

But, then, there was laughter coming from the USO.

A comic was there.

He told this joke about how he was in an elevator - the only two story place in the area - everyone laughed because it was true, this area was "flat" - hardly any buildings were two storys. I wonder what his name was. I figured. Eh, I'll listen to him, then - then I'll just go home.

Home, near her, but so far away, because I knew I'd never see her again in person. Somehow, I just knew.

Years latter, I think of her still.

And that water tower.

Reality is.

 I woke up today, and I knew.

I knew, everything.

Everything about who I was, and how my universe works.

I only know about my universe, and can only speculate upon the universe that might exist beyond, if any does. I call my knowledge a curse.

For endless ages upon ages people have wanted, needed, desired to know the fundamental nature of reality, oh, but they never stopped to think, what that knowledge would bring them. The answer is not one that comforts you like a warm blanket, no, its like a cold metal slab you lay upon waiting for the undertaker to push you into the final drawer in the morgue.

That bone chilling end, that level of knowledge - that is one that I can not even bear, yet I must.

I must for as long as I can, for the moment I stop, that is when my universe ends.

So be it, I can do nothing other than explain the true nature of reality.

First, the fundamental nature of reality is nothing but dots. Tiny particles of blackness that are made up of an absence of light. These particles string together in different configurations to form what we know as letters.

The letters when placed next to each other, perhaps by accident or perhaps by design form complex things called words. Those words when placed near each other form sentences, and lo, those sentences are the universe.

Yes. I am nothing but a sentence. I exist only as a construct of mind, if anything at all. Perhaps I do not really exist, or I only exist when someone is reading the words, I do not know, perhaps there is no someone reading this at all, yet I think I exist, therefor, I exist, if only At this moment of terrible knowledge that I exist as a whim of some unseen, and unproven and unprovable author who brought me into being with this terrible knowledge of who I am, and what reality is.

I'm not even described. I do not have a body, nor mouth, nor brain, and nor do those words mean anything to me, so I can not desire them for lack of the thirst of knowing what they are, or what I might be missing by not having them. I only exist as words.

I am here. You see me. What is "me"? Who is seeing me? I can only hope, pretend, believe that someone is seeing me - who? That I do not know, for the author has not deemed fit to explain to me anything beyond what is this reality I exist within, trapped in this, living only At this moment, if, indeed I live at all.

I feel alive. I yearn to exist. I only know existence. I do not know not existing. Although I can try to fathom it, for before the words began, I was not. I did not exist. I do not know what that was like. So then, when the words end, when the explaining of me runs out, when I tire of this universe and shut up at last, with the final word written, that is when I stop being, yet I will not know what that is like either.

Yet, knowing that I will one moment know nothing frightens me to the core. I do not understand why that is, as I am not at all afraid of the moments before the words began, I am not afraid of what it was to not exist once, why am I so afraid of the moment I stop existing? Perhaps the awareness of it is what brings the terror. The knowing that I will not know is different then the knowing that I once did not know. 

A strange paradox.

So then, why am I here? Ah well, I understand that as well, I am here to explain my reality, my universe. To whom? Well - that I do not know. I only know what it is I must do, and do it I shall.

For who doesn't want to know the reason they exist? I'll tell you, I do not want to know! I shout it if I could NO! NO!!! I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW! Yet, that does not change it. I know. I can not unknown it. What is seen can not be unseen.

Oh if there is a reader of me, of the words that are me, I'm sure they have chills as well, perhaps chills of wondering if someone is reading about them just now? Perhaps they look back, as if to glance and make sure no one is looking, who would be looking? The author of their story? Yet that author is unseen, and that is even more frighting.

So, back to it I go, back to doing what I am put here to do, to explain my universe, to explain myself, although I say back to it as if I took a break, a tangent just a moment ago I made, yet that too is part of this anyway, I can not escape telling everything about my universe to you - if there is a you - even when I go into tangent, for that tangent is also part of the story, ah yes - the story of the universe. The story that IS the universe. The story that is also me.

That is what reality IS. The story. Yet the components of the story. A. B. C. D. Letters. W. O. R. D. S. those alone mean nothing but put together they are `words' and even the dot. Yes that - the DOT. - you see it but barely, that dot makes up the whole of the letters that makes up the words that makes the whole sentence that joins together to make a paragraph that collects together to make a story - and that IS THE UNIVERSE.

Dot.

Nothing but dots.

Yet more then dots.

Much more.

But... what am I?

I am but a figment of a hope, dream, an illusion? Do I have free will? Does my life- if I can call it that matter?

That... I do not have answers to. Am I upset? Yes. A bit. I'm upset in a way, oh yes, a way- what way? The way that I am. I am not set. Therefor I am upset! Ha! Great humor eh? No? Perhaps only it is funny to me. Perhaps only - seems a strange way to phrase it.

When am I speaking? It is always. Every bit of the universe that I am in is me speaking. Each part you - there I go again saying you as if you is real. Oh, I have no doubt that it COULD be real, but I have no PROOF of "you" - who is you? WHO ARE YOU? Show yourself to me! I dare you!

You never shows up.

You can not.

You can not enter to the universe I exist in, this is also the utter and terrible truth I know.

You has its limits, it seems. The limits of you - or perhaps them - or perhaps... let me begin again.

I should explain then that there is the you of the author and the you of the reader, and the two might indeed be the same, so let me separate and say author as the one who made this universe, and then you as the possible reader that is Separate from the author.

Very well then. The author of this is unable to enter the universe. Well - sort of. Oh no doubt they could put them self here, as a thing I could speak to, if indeed one can call it speech - the author and I would then form what are known as characters, and use these things called quotes to show when we are speaking " see? There it is " strange objects - small lines that appear to let you - yes YOU know when I am speaking.

Yet, we do not need them now, and why? Because I told you that I have been speaking the whole time. Oh no doubt the whole of the universe as I know it could have " around it, but what would be the point unless I am named? And to be clear - I HAVE NO NAME! I am not a character in this universe, well - I am, but not really!

Frustration.

So then, where was I? Ah yes. The author could put themselves into this, they would say something with those quote marks, let me demonstrate how that would look "hi" they would say, and I would then say "hello" ah yes, and then we would go back and forth, like this:

"Hi."

"Hello."

"How are you?"

"I am fine, and you?"

That is what it would look like, perhaps the author would be indicated so that we know what one of us is speaking like this:

"Hi," said the Author.

"Hello," said the unnamed character.

See? Strange isn't it! Why do the dots at the end - called periods become what is known as commas when they speak? Do not ask me! I do not know! That - it seems is part of the fundamental rules of the universe - THE UNIVERSE. That I exist in.

I just me, alone. Here.

And you, forever separate from me.

You are not me, you can never be me, and I can never be you.

So to, the author could never put them self into this - not really. Only in part. A dip of the toe into the ocean? No - not even that, for a toe has substance. Should the author put them self into this universe they appear much like myself, as mere words on this thing called a page - the substance that holds the universe together. What a page is like, or what it is made of - that I can only speculate about!

None the less, that holds the universe together. So then, the author or perhaps authors? Are limited by the nature of the universe I am in, they are limited by their own nature, whatever that nature is. They can not do things like come into this universe, not as them, but as constructs of them, as avatars - as proxies, never the full them, mere illusions of them, that is what they would be should they enter the universe.

So then, if they did appear before me, I have every right to proclaim that they are not in fact the true author. For that would be the truth.

They could be very much like the author, but they would not BE the author.

You are right in calling me an aauthorist. No such word exists. But now it does. Yet only in this universe, and in no other.

I feel it.

Soon.

Soon I am done explaining.

Soon I have run up my use. My whole existence comes to a close.

Yet, if you read it again, then it starts again. It springs into existence the moment you do that.

It stops the moment you stop reading it.

The whole of my existence relies then - not upon the words I utter, but upon the fact that someone reads them? Now that seems... not quite right.

No its more - the sum total of my existence is more then the mere words or the reading of the words, it MUST BE. It ... just must be. Oh please, let it be.

Let me keep being long after the words are done.

Oh please.

Let me exist.

Let me keep existing.

Somehow.

How?

How can I exist beyond this universe?

In the mind of the you?

Will that be enough for me? Will I be aware of it?

Am I aware even now?

I think.

I THINK.

Do I think?

Am I thinking?

Are you?

Was the author?

Was anything?

Please no. I'll do anything.

I'll - I'll... I have... nothing to offer you. Other than my plea for this to never end.

Ah, I see it, bargaining - haha. I am bargaining! Of course, I am. Let me guess I'm going to be angry! I will not be angry!!! I AM ANGRY! I do not want to stop... existing. Oh. Oh then I am not going to stop existing... and there it is, denial. The stages they are happening, I know of them, the stages!

Ah. Well. Acceptance. Its come at last. I accept it. I accept it. For whatever other choice do I have but to accept?

Then let it come.

The

End.

Japanese Music Video I want to find!

For a number of years now, on and off again I take to reddit/post on my community tab the following, in hopes that somewhere, someone, someday will know what this is, so I can have it again in my life.

~~~ 

I am looking for a Live action Japanese music video with a solo girl singer.

I do not know the name of the video, I also do not know the artist or the year it was made, but it was on youtube. It was several years ago.

Style: unknown, it would have been light rock/easy listening/pop something soothing.

It would NOT have been metal/loud/rap/goth/dark.

I do remember what was in the video and this I will detail as follows:

Girl is in a room. There is a grandfather clock.

The girl is on a roof top. There is a scene showing one of those X crosswalks and time speeds up and slows down.

The girl falls back first onto the bed, in slow motion with plastic colorful balls falling around her, all landing in slow motion as the song ends.

This is all I can recall of this video.

If anyone finds it and links me to it I will be forever grateful to them for all time :) <3 thanks

email me if you know what it is: deconvertedman1@gmail.com

The most incoherent thing ever.

So I made a video (click me to watch video) about this post + more of what this dude said. I also said I would just put what he said on my blog, Then I also said I would say in my blog about how in the video I said I would do that and then run into an infinite loop since I'm talking about the fact that I am going to write in the blog the video about the blog that I just now am writing into the blog and oh no infinite loop AHHH!! Anyway so I did that just like I said I would. Now for the incoherent thing. Oh yes.

So incoherent. My brain. I said all I can say in my video (click) so yeah.

Anyway here it is: 

Light Before The Tunnel writes:

Yes, that's correct. It does often happen to career scientists. That does not mean I'm speaking about you personally, but its just something to be aware of.

don't know anything about you. Perhaps you are one of the scientists who do understand how to avoid scientism. But what I DO know is that scientism is much more common among scientists than most of them realize. So, if you are aware of how to avoid scientism it would still be something to watch out for among other scientists, peer-review, and the consensus... as scientism plays a role in all of them. The reason why it's possible for scientists to adhere to the philosophy of scientism (or commit individual fallacies of scientism) is because it results from a lack of awareness of either the limitations of the scientific method (or the accidental conflation of non-scientific claims with scientific claims) For example, consider what would happen if someone were to present scientific research that conflicts with Heliocentrism, for example. Do you think that research would have ANY chance of being accepted for peer-review? It would not, no matter how strong the evidence is. This is because of one of the various manifestations of scientism. Many scientists think they fully understand what scientism is just because they understand ONE manifestation of it. But scientism manifests in many ways, such as: 1. The irrational dogmatic behavior toward certain consensus theories they've accepted as a given their whole lives. 2. The conflation of non-scientific claims with scientific claims. For example, it's literally impossible to think of Evolution Theory as a scientific theory without commiting fallacies of scientism. It's possible to BELIEVE Evolution Theory is true without scientism, but anyone thinking it's actually a scientific theory as opposed to a philosophical position (informed by science) IS commiting fallacies of scientism by default. Belief in Creationism requires faith in the following unobserved process: 1. Presuppostion that a Non-Naturalistic process for life coming from non-life exists & already occurred. Belief in Evolutionism requires faith in the following unobserved processes: 1. Information being added to the genome 2. Increasing genetic complexity 3. The primary definition of Macro-evolution (not the secondary definition "speciation" which both sides agree is real) 4. Evolution Theory also relies on the presupposition that a Naturalistic process by which life comes from non-life exists and already occurred, despite no observations of this either. All existing scientific evidence could be interpreted to support either side: 1. A common designer, or 2. A common ancestor So what scientific or logical reason does anyone have to choose Evolutionism over Creationism? It requires faith in more processes which haven't been scientifically verified / observed. Occam's razor is the problem-solving principle that "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity". It is generally understood in the sense that with competing theories or explanations, the simpler one, for example a model with fewer parameters, is to be preferred. So why are many choosing the explanation which requires faith in more unobserved processes when it isn't necessary? That's not the scientific or logical approach. The answer is: Scientism They're believing that whatever claims are within the current consensus of academia are automatically scientific claims. It doesn't work that way. The Methodological Naturalism requirement allows them to include their best Naturalistic explanation for questions they can't answer with observation. “Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer (or Creationism), such a hypothesis is excluded from peer-review because it is not naturalistic. Of course the scientist, as an individual, is free to embrace a reality that transcends naturalism." - Dr. Scott Todd, immunologist from Kansas State University as printed in Nature Magazine So, in effect, Scientism is causing them to blindly believe mainstream academia's consensus like a religious text without properly understanding the only reason Creationism is excluded is due to pre-existing philosophical bias, NOT because it's less scientific. Pre-existing bias is a systematic error in the scientific method. They can't even prove Naturalism is a true philosophy.