eaLIy24H0sGYsEjN2L5aT9AzMLmUjcH

Monday, December 3, 2012

What Is Often Wrongly Understood About Occult?

The word occult comes from the Latin word occultus (clandestine, hidden, secret), referring to "knowledge of the hidden". The terms esoteric and arcane can have a very similar meaning, and the three terms are often interchangeable. The word has many uses in the English language, popularly meaning "knowledge of the paranormal", as opposed to "knowledge of the measurable", usually referred to as science. By the eighteenth century unorthodox religious, scientific and philosophical concerns were well defined as 'occult', inasmuch as they lay on the outermost fringe of accepted forms of knowledge and discourse." This position holds good even today.

In accordance with literal meaning of the word 'occult', all knowledge that is not amenable to direct sensory perception is classifiable as 'occult'. But by this yardstick the word 'occult' has wide connotations. It embraces not only knowledge of the 'supernatural' or unreal but also knowledge of the 'natural' provided it is not amenable to direct sensory perception. Therefore it embraces not only direct or perceivable truth about natural phenomena but also indirect or non-perceivable truth about natural phenomena and truth about natural phenomena perceivable only with the help of instruments.

Each and every thing and event in nature has indirect truth or occult associated with it. Gross description of natural things and events is often insufficient. Almost nothing can be completely known by mere gross narration and description. Quite often, it is the hidden knowledge that carries much greater significance than the knowledge gained by direct sensory perception.

In information technology, back-end of each and every web page carries much more significance than the front end. So, undoubtedly front end is significant but it is the back-end that is vital. Similarly invisible Meta tags and Meta descriptions are vital to the purpose of a web page. But all this hidden knowledge that is vital to functioning of IT based products is nothing but 'occult'.

Likewise, in the domain of natural sciences, all the knowledge that can be perceived only with help of instruments and all the theoretical knowledge about scientific principles and scientific theories is nothing but 'occult' knowledge. Therefore it is not surprising that in the Middle Ages,magnetism was sometimes called an occult quality. Newton was even accused of introducing occult agencies into natural science when he postulated gravity as a force capable of acting over vast distances. Newton's contemporaries severely critiqued his theory that gravity was affected through "action at a distance" as occult. Likewise, in the contemporary world, scientific theories such as Big Bang theory, String Theory, M-Theory, Darwinism are nothing but examples of 'occult' scientific theories.

Keeping all above in view, it is clear that in pursuit of knowledge, dealing with 'occult' or hidden knowledge is inevitable.

The real cause of concern is the ease with which knowledge of 'supernatural' creeps into knowledge of 'natural' which leads us astray into a universe which is just not there. Such knowledge is of no use except for the purpose of writing science fiction, for example, time machine etc. Such knowledge only builds castles in air. Therefore scientific community must strictly guard against polluting of scientific knowledge by knowledge of supernatural.

Hence, over the past few centuries definition of Science has evolved from knowledge of measurable to the definition given below:-

"Science is comprehensive, consistent, coherent natural explanation of natural phenomena"

Therefore, in pursuit of scientific knowledge, conducting isolated experiments and drawing mathematically - logically perfect conclusions is not enough. These conclusions have to be comprehensive and consistent with rest of scientific knowledge. Therefore conclusions drawn have to meet tests of 'rationality' and 'plausibility' in order to be scientifically valid. This is the only way to prevent creeping of knowledge of supernatural into science so that in due course of time science does not develop a mythology of its own.

Summing up, it must be appreciated that 'occult' is unavoidable in scientific domain but it is valid only so long as it is consistent with natural phenomena, directly or collaterally.

Building Cultural Icons and Tearing Them Down - It's Wrong and Even Those Who Do, Know It China's Stealth Fighter-Bombers and the US Military's Political Sequestration Problems Pondered Getting Elected Is the Easy Part, Why Is It So Hard for the Obama Campaign to Win Reelection? Obama Says His Initiatives Would Help The Middle Class - Fact Check Please Do Lazy Americans Forgo Voting If The Weather Isn't Being Nice? Your Miracle Is On The Right Side

Yes, Mr Socialist Mayor and President, Thank You For Your Low Cost Housing?

As an economic advisor for a think tank which happens to operate online, I've always been an advocate for free-market capitalism. This is because I know it will solve all the challenges of human in our society and civilization. I cringe when I hear left-wing socialist concepts in our cities and towns as the way forward, or the progressive and intelligent way to do things. It simply isn't so. Take low income housing and rent control districts for instance.

When you put low income housing in a specific area, and allow people to move in without paying very much in rent, next thing you know the place is totally trashed as no one takes ownership type responsibility. Then they complain of slum landlords, and government agencies that don't care about them. Obviously, the government cared enough to put in rules, restrictions, and regulations as well as putting up housing for poor people. It's amazing so many folks that live there are the first to complain when anything goes wrong.

The New York times had an interesting piece on November 3, 2012 titled; "In New York's Public Housing, Fear Creeps in With the Dark" by Cara Buckley and Michael Wilson, which stated; "Perhaps more so than in any other place in the city, the loss of power for people living in public housing projects has forced a return to a basic existence."

Another article the same day in the NYTs was "Anger Grows at Response by Red Cross" by David M. Halbfinger which stated; "The American Red Cross struggled on Friday to reassure beleaguered New York City residents that its disaster-relief efforts were at last getting up to speed."

You see, all of these folks voted for government officials that promised them they could get free housing, low income housing, or that the government would step in with rent control. But still, when the government did all that it wasn't enough. Along comes a big hurricane, and everyone is complaining. They're upset as they are in the dark and the power isn't on yet, and because it's cold, and quite frankly they are sick and tired of being soggy.

After all, what good is a roof over your head if you can't recharge your free cell phone, iPad, or watch your large screen TV? No wonder those people are so upset, the power isn't on, and it's the government's fault. Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama promised that they would do everything in the power of the government to ensure that everyone was okay in the aftermath of hurricane Sandy.

Well, this is your big government at work, how do you like it now? Aren't you glad you voted for these big government, left-leaning, socialist policy politicians? Please consider all this and think on it.

The Result Of Disobedience Is An Ishmael

Disobedience to the word of God can bring harm to us or put us in His permissive will. It is never His best that He has desired for us; it would be an Ishmael.

In Genesis chapters fourteen through twenty one God promised Abraham an heir that would come from his loins but his wife Sarah was old so she told him to lay with her handmaiden to bear a child for him. He did and the handmaiden conceived and gave birth to a son, Ishmael. However, this was not Gods perfect will; His will was for him to have an heir with Sarah, his wife. God covenant was with Abraham to make him a father of many nations but that covenant was in his son Isaac who Sarah gave birth to; not Ishmael.

We can be in the permissive will of God because He loves us but it is not His best; His best is His perfect will for us, which is where the fullness of His blessings lies. Sometimes being disobedient to the Lord will bring harm to us but He will always have a way of escape for us. Nevertheless, we might have to endure for a while; this was certainly the case with Sarah for she said to Abram in Genesis 16:5 my wrong be upon you. I gave my maid into your embrace and when she saw that she had conceived, I became despised in her eyes. The Lord judge between you and me. Sarah regretted what she had request Abraham to do and apparently there were discord in Abraham's household which made him uncomfortable.

When we disobey the will of God, things will not go right with us. We might try to justify it but deep in our heart we will know the truth. We will know that we are not in His perfect will. A friend told me some years ago that God gave her the name of her husband but she got tired of waiting for him so she married someone else. The marriage was a disaster and she finally got out of it but the time that she spent in it was wasted time. It could have been best spent waiting on the promise of the Lord but we all have turned from the perfect will of God and gone after an Ishmael; the reason why I know that is true because the word said, all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. However, we have a Redeemer; His name is Jesus and He will restore us to the perfect will of the Father. In Him there is life and life more abundantly.

Twelve years ago I disobeyed the Lord and went through a very difficult time, it was the worst time of my life but prior to that, God had given me His word. I decided to do something different but I paid for it. However, His word still stands and is true so I am still waiting for the manifestation of it. If I had obeyed Him back then, I would be in my promise land today. Disobedience brings delay.

The perfect will of God might seem long in coming but it is definitely better to wait for it than to receive an Ishmael.

By Lizzie Ducking

Allowing the Obama Administration to Play Angry Birds With Our Economy for 4 More Years, Why?

Before, the Junior Senator from Illinois had promised us during the 2008 election that if he was elected he would usher in a new age of alternative energy, bring back American jobs, and save us from economic ruin. Obviously, he hasn't done any of those things, but he still wants four more years to continue to institute his version of socialism because somehow he believes that might be best for America. The reality is it would be a disaster for our economy, and America's future.

Why should anyone vote for President Obama and his administration if they are just going to play Angry Birds with our economy in a second term? Their alternative energy strategy fell flat on its face, it was laden with political kickbacks, deals, and crony capitalism from the get-go. It was part of an overall scheme to create a carbon tax credit trading in Chicago, a new financial sector which would easily be worth $25 billion per year, and with that kind of money the Democrats could enjoy unlimited campaign contributions going forward.

It is amazing that so many Democrats decry what happened during the Enron years, and yet they want to duplicate that sort of crony capitalism, insider trading, and allowing their friends to scrape the cream off the top of our economy for doing nothing - this at the same time that they claim to care about the working man, about jobs, about education and the future of our children. It's all a bunch of horse crap. Yes, I admit that young man can read a Teleprompter fairly well, but the reality is he has allowed our economy to go to hell.

He tells us he's done well, that he's created jobs, that the economy is fundamentally fine, and all sorts of other things. It isn't. Corporations are afraid to spend and they are sitting on 10s of billions of dollars, well over 2.5 trillion in total so far if you add it up; why aren't they investing in America? Because it doesn't make sense to, they can't testify to their shareholders, and they can't afford to take the risk when the socialists have the nation's treasury and purse strings - who knows what they might try next, or what industry they may attempt to harvest for their agenda.

Indeed, the gentleman gives a wicked speech, and he can read those carefully prepared words that someone else wrote and deliver them almost flawlessly, almost enough to convince himself. No, I'm not calling him a psychopath, but I'm sure it's going through your mind. Perhaps we should give him the benefit of the doubt and realize he just doesn't know what he's doing, and his handlers control him well. Still, if we continue on this path we will rape and destroy all the abundance we have created in this great nation. He's asked for four more years; Request Denied.

What's With All the Government Security Paranoia - Why Are They Worried?

With all the sound and fury out here in the public domain we have begun to destroy the American psyche. In doing so, we have created a very large number of paranoid people and citizens. In turn, many of the citizens have infiltrated the government, and they no longer trust the people. What we have today is a citizenry that doesn't trust the government, and I might add for good reason, while we have a government which no longer trusts the people in which it is entrusted to serve.

When the government stops protecting the people or serving the people, and moves into a defensive position protecting itself against the people we are in for a real problem. I fear that is happening right now in the United States. Have you ever noticed that the government is busy protecting government facilities, rather than protecting our borders? Why is the government so worried about incidental and ancillary bureaucratic agencies in nondescript buildings?

The reality is they fear they might be attacked by angry citizens. However, why might the citizens be angry? We are supposed to be a government made for and by the people, but as government becomes too large, too centralized, and to overbearing it no longer serves the people, rather it acts as if it is a giant prison system within the borders of our nation. That's not what we signed up for, and that's not what the United States of America is about, as it crushes the ideals brought forth in the formation of this great nation.

On Homeland Security News Wire, there was an interesting article recently titled; "Domestic terrorism by members of extremist groups a serious threat: FBI," published on August 10, 2012 which stated:

"The FBI and other government law-enforcement agencies have been convinced for a while that terrorism from extremist domestic organizations is just as dangerous as terrorism from foreign organizations, but efforts by authorities to detect and pre-empt violent extremists have faced serious legal and political hurdles, including free speech guarantees and push back from political lobbies suspicious of the government's motives."

Right, surely there are groups suspicious of government's motives, but that's not a bad thing, that is a good thing, further, it seems that the FBI, Janet Reno, and others are indeed suspicious of citizen's motives calling American Citizens a bigger threat than foreign terrorist organizations - amazing actually. So, one has to ask why the leadership is so sketchy and paranoid? Do they have something to hide? If so, what is it? You see, we can play this game all day long, the tit-for-tat accusations of threat assessment.

Paranoia is very dangerous - and it is often pervasive in the Machiavellian world of political rhetoric, where no one can trust anyone else. Yes, it's true that trust is difficult to achieve, and hard to obtain, but when that happens organizational capital is diminished, it's every person for themselves in government, and they are always assessing new threats from the outside. In this case those on the outside happen to be all of us citizens.

Perhaps the government needs to stop their insistence on controlling every single aspect of individual citizen's lives. Taking away freedom once it has been granted and guaranteed to our citizens is not a noble thing to do, and it will come with consequences. As merely an observer of the flow of society, having my finger on the pulse of America, I see more storm clouds on the horizon between big government and individual citizens. I don't like what I see, and the trend is very troubling. Perhaps it's time we had regime change here the United States, and got back to being on the same team, and doing what were good at.

Our great nation works better when we have freedom and liberty for all, and legitimate upward mobility for those that perform, or decide to pursue that as part of their inherent rights to chase their own happiness. As we get further and further away from that we will have more and more citizens, and perhaps radicalized ad hoc group who are angry at the government, wishing to take back which has been taken from them and promised to them at their birth - whether actual or merely perceived. Who is really at fault here?

Isn't this unfortunate all this rhetoric further incited by the media which has put unnecessary stress on the minds of the masses? Is it the government which hopes to lead by fear rather than legitimacy or leadership by example? Is it both the citizen's fault for demanding too much, and the government's fault for being too paranoid? Perhaps it's some of all of that, but it's time we get back on the same page, back on the same team, and take the United States to the next level.

Although we are the greatest nation ever created, we can still do better than this - there is a lot of upward potential and room for improvement. Rather than hoping for change, perhaps it's time that we set some goals, got back to our strong foundation and enjoyed another 200 years at the top of the food chain. Indeed I hope you will please consider all this and think on it.

Why On Earth Would Hollywood, A Free-Market Business Industry, Settle For Socialism?

The other day, a friend of mine told me that a certain actor was supporting Barack Obama for his reelection as president. I thought that was interesting, but then again; who cares? Sure, endorsements from famous people are important in politics, but that's a silly reason to vote for anyone. One thing I find quite fascinating is that Hollywood keeps supporting socialists who seek office, and many of them lean towards a communist political displacement themselves.

How can an industry which survives in the free-market and relies on people to watch their movie so they can make millions of dollars support anything except for free-market capitalism? If an entire industry is that silly to support candidates which will ruin the chances of survival of their bread-and-butter mainstay, and even their jobs, then how can you trust anything that they might think relative to politics?

You see, as the middle-class becomes smaller and smaller due to socialism and the attack on free-market capitalism there will be fewer people that will have the money and wherewithal to go see these movies at $10 a pop. This means Hollywood cannot survive within the domestic market, and they will have to seek moviegoers overseas to make money. Indeed, they don't make as much overseas because there is so much piracy going on, and let me let you in on a little clue.

In the summer of 2012 box office receipts were terrible overall, and Hollywood cannot enjoy staying in its heyday without an American middle-class to buy tickets domestically. Sure they can make money abroad but if the US economy doesn't stay healthy, no overseas nation is going to be batting a 1000 either. Meaning, there won't be anyone who will pay the big bucks to see those movies in the first place.

There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal on September 4, 2012 titled; "Summer Box Office Closing With a Record Dud," by Erica Orden which stated; "A sluggish summer for Hollywood came to a close with a movie that earned the dubious distinction of the worst opening of all time."

What I'm saying is this; first, why and Earth would the people who run Hollywood and the major stars support socialism over free-market capitalism; and two, why on earth would you listen to a Hollywood movie star or their endorsement based on such poor judgment.

How can a Hollywood movie star spout communist or socialist leaning politics on one hand, and willfully have their hand out to collect money from free-market capitalism? Anyone who is that schizophrenic, probably doesn't have a lot of political sense, that's my guess. Please consider all this and think on it.