GREEN! GREEN! GREEN!

It is 12:05am and I probably should be sleeping but I just had to pen this article. I was just watching a episode of Penn and Tellers Bullshit ( a wonderful show with a unfortunate tendency to bias on occasion but at least it’s the opposing view of things people take for granted)

I just watched a show about Environmental Hysteria. Well, I say watched. I got to about half way before I realized that I have the same type of ideals as the beloved Peoples Action Party of Singapore even though I used to be against it.

Those who know me would certainly ask why. And to this I would say that I am firmly in favor of protests requiring a police permit because unless these people knew exactly what they are in favor of are protesting for they are seriously causing a disruption to everyday life for the rest of the citizens.

To put it simply, the show interviewed a lady called Julia Butterfly Hill. A woman who once spent two years up a Redwood tree in an effort to prevent it from being cut down. She succeeded and all the more power to her I say considering the age of the tree and I am not one who dislikes natures own relics. Mind you, I’d be thinking of it more in terms of showing the need for more effective government but it’s a two way thing.

What caused me to stop the set was her saying and I quote “I would never take something from life that I don’t need”. All the while sitting there in well, normal modern clothing, wearing a chain around her neck with a butterfly pendant on it and earrings.

Now most of you would say “So what?” Well, think of this for a moment. That bloody pendant required the bloody raw material out of the earth somewhere. Someone is mining for that ore. Someone else is then further refining, smelting that ore and thereupon it gets sent to or bought by the various craftsmen who shape the raw material into the desired shape and then colour it with further chemicals and pigmentation. As for the chain she used, either that was plastic with bits of bead threaded through or just all plastic. Either way, aren’t plastics bad for the environment? Wouldn’t a real environmentalist then actually all wear pretty much the same drab utilitarian clothing so that as little industry is used and its not environmentally affecting anything? Wouldn’t they stop using, buying or creating extra demands for all that electronic equipment they use at rallies. All that face paint they eventually wash up and make it enter into the water supply where it has to get filtered again or all those trees that died for those freaking paper mache dolls or masks or whatever the fuck.

And the message is confusing as heck too. First they want to shut down or stop the big corporations because they’re damaging the environment and then they say the reason they do that is because if the environment deteriorates, industries will fail and then people will lose their jobs and anarchy will spread. Um??? I really wshould advertise this blog more cause I wish someone could answer these freaking questions! Logically!

Bible Study Part II

I have just purchased a King James version of the Bible from a Christian bookstore somewher ein Far East Plaza. Nice classic looking book. In other words, leather binding and well, goldish looking lettering on cover. Sleek. I have read up to page 2 and I have realized to post all the questions I feel need addressing are beyond the scope of this blog. It would simply overwhelm it.

Hence, anyone interested in my research into this text would do well to look at my alternative blog

http://doomdoomwoeisme.blogspot.com/

Created when I wanted to mock the depressive statement of most blogs. it never worked out and rather poor choice of name now it is yet seemingly apt for a text such as the Bible. There will be two main, constantly edited parts.

One part deals with all the precepts listed in the Bible that a full believer should live their life by. (No inerpretations! This is an important retieration! If you are of this faith and you believe then you claim that the whole book has been written by God as proxy and the words cannot be altered! God can do no wrong but man definitely is no god when it comes to translation)

The second part deals with the questions raised as I read through it. I.e How the people began to multiply so rapidly from just Adam and Eve who were stated to be the only two people on Earth but suddenly Seth (Adam's third son) is raising his own family bu not listed as having obtained children through his mother (only female on planet as of that section).

This is probably the last thing to do with Bible related reading material to be posted on this blog and everything else will be on the cheerful 'doomdoomwoeisme' site.

Le Placebo Effect (s'French for The Placebo Effect)

The placebo effect, a symbol of man's mind to successfully fool the body if the conviction of the mind is strong enough. Scientists are now just beginning to understand it's effects but from what I can deduce from the behaviours of others and myself, it seems like a long established thing always. But due process must be followed for once you throw that out of the window it is easy to get any half number ninnies claiming to have gotten an alien probe up the jacksie.

At any rate, there is evidence that the placebo effect to some extent can actually modify completely our perception of reality as itis. The example I saw was on a documentry nicely funded by the National Geographic channel. The test subject had a hot iron held to his arm. Painful enough to possibly make him regret his decision about being a test subject but not hot enough to burn. After subjecting him to the iron whilst monitoring his brain activity. The researchers proceeded to give him two placebo pills (sugar of course. If nothing the placebo effect could be associated with diabetes... haha...) and told him it was a new pain killing drug. 15 minutes after taking the pills the subject's brain patterns subsequently showed a decrease in the registration of pain by the subject until eventually no reaction could be elicited even when the iron was put to the skin. The subject simply did not register the heat/pain believing the pain killer was in effect. Certainly says something about the mind...

Codex Sinaiticus

Doing research on the various Bible types. There is no doubt that the most literally translated Bible is Young's Literal Translation. However, even a cursory examination of it showed that the wording was way too arcane to be trifled with but it reads well. All the chapters (biblegateway.com) read well. Arcane sounding but with good english and thought it works. Well.. after a fashion but I'll be mogadored if I know what Ghenna of fire is.

Kings James is of course the preferred Standard and it seems that version is the most quoted one. The other suggested new life versions were of course easier to understand but I feel the chance of altered message is still there and so I shall probably go with the 21st Century King James. If I need help I'll use Bible gateway for the E-Z-Read Bible as they seem like.


I've been doing research on the oldest bible. The Codex Sinaiticus. The text is the oldest surviving Biblical text. Split into 4 parts and with the British Museum holding the majority of pieces thay are coordinating with the other piece holders (in Russia) to make a digital translation. Good luck to them. I post this because of the significance. Both the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus omit the word "without cause" in Matthew 5:22. A very very significant change. The old one says any man angry with his brother is in danger of some serious judgement, council or hellfire. Can't imagine what judgement is or Council but my guess is smiting than stoning respectively. Older one doesn't have the "safety net" of "without cause" Interesting ommission... or addition as it were.

Bible Study

I have resolved tomorrow to gout and purchase a Bible and read it from cover to cover. Hopefully within the time period Evelyn Waugh set Randolph Churchill during World War II. Waugh, in an atempt to shut Randolph up bet him he couldn't finishing reading the Bible in 2 weeks. He had not counted upon the younger Churchill's fascination with a religious text which he had hiretho never encountered before punctuating the reading with comments (and I quote) "Isn't this a shit!"

The exact meanings of such comments are, I presume lost to time. However, in my bid to understand the religious perspective, I have decided to undergo this endavour. Starting with the Bible of course, the most familiar text to me along with the majority of the Western population to some extent or another. Who could forget Noah's Ark?

I have attempted to source the most accurate Bible available, I.E one which is closest in all meanings intent and message, to the original in Hebrew. While I'm at it, I might as well search for the crew of the Mary Celeste since that'll be an easier job. For a text which has been translated from Americ, to Hebrew to Greek, Latin, Olde English, Olde German, French, etc.... there can be no doubt that certain translators endavoured to make what thy felt was the "intent" behind the Bible's Holy Writing rather than what was down there right on the paper. Words may have not changed but a single word where none was before can radically alter the message. This would be totally harmful to my purpose for reading it cover to cover.

I have decided to read up on the Bible without outside interference. The Bible is said to be God's True Holy Word. No errors, no mistakes, and definitely no metaphors. Approaching it rationally, as a believer, every single word written in the Bible is true, no mixing of analogies and actual real life events. None of that "I'll interpret it for you" sort of thing. Just reading what is fully written down and listing out all the important events (some might argue the whole thing is important in which case, you can bloody read it yourself cause I'm not copying it out verbatim) as well as listing all the precepts God has set own in this book containing his Holy Word. And when I mean ALL PRECEPTS. I mean ALL PRECEPTS. Not just the 10 Commandments. EVERYTHING. And none of the "reinterpreting it for modern times" Oh no. Cause thats just well, hogwash. If it is the Holy Word of God than it must be read as appropriate to the time period. In regards to the Bible, that is going on the basis that all the people referred to in the Commandments "Thou shalt love thy neighbour" are Jewish and that the message was intended to be diseminated to a Jewish audience. Well, the Old Testament that is. May be a bit trickier in that regard for the New Testament.

And in reply to the "Reinterpretation for modern times" the Old Testament God definitely didn't have the Hitties or Cannites filed under "Love thy neighbour part" Not unless loving Thy Neighbour includes Genocide. Then again, you see some of the wars countries have launched accross the borders and maybe tough loving is the order of the day. Irregardless, that is an opinion formed before having read the Bible. I will be trying to find the oldest (accurate) Bible available. Not the Olde English or German ones as there are reports that some of the subtleties are lost. If that proves fruitless I'll take the King's James version as thta is the most widely circulated.

Any suggestions on how to go about it in a better way would be welcomed. But no, no outside interpretation until it (The Bible) is read in its entirety.