It was lost upon us the perversion of God with knowledge and its creation by us. We got drunk with Aristotle in believing the knowledge we create is ours. Knowledge has no owner. It is there for the taking and those who take it have no possession of it. We access knowledge, we do not create it. If we could create knowledge, then that means that we can create matter and energy. We cannot, Aristotle was wrong and we must undo his poisoning. 

This space is for writings that probe our knowledge with God and science as our medium for navigating our existence and way of being with the world we inhabit. The writing is poetic with deliberate expressions of our being with all its weakness. Leave comments of your impressions or disagreements. Keep it civil, but feel free to express yourself if you must. No offense will be taken. 

Let’s not offend, explain your opinion. Enjoy the writing.

Towards a New View of Climate Change

This is imperative. Read and let’s share ideas.

Towards God and Science

Many people deny climate change because somehow, I have no
idea how, the media and scientist have used the greenhouse effect to explain
how one of the product from combustion traps heat. That is irrelevant and it is
clear that is not the best way to describe a critical problem to the entire
population. Everybody knows what happens when they mix ice and warm water: The
ice gets warmer and the water gets colder. We have an average global
temperature that has recently been around 58 degrees Fahrenheit (close to 15
degrees Celsius). The coal we burn, the fossil fuels we burn, and just about
any traditional energy production, releases gases into our atmosphere that have
a higher temperature than the average global temperature. Those gases will
equilibrate with the atmosphere to a temperature between the average global
temperature and its temperature upon release to the environment.

Nothing fancy in…

View original post 423 more words

Ending the Undemocratic Infringement

2016 was surreal. Reality overlapped with the dreams of Lorca and Dali. The absurd was made into a strength. Trump knew they would say he is a racist, sexist, fascist, white supremacist, anti-Semitic and all the negative shit you can think of. A traditional politician like Kerry or Clinton would have gone to work on creating an image contrary to any negative accusation. Trump must have looked at the monumental task of image manipulation for his presidential bid and must have said: “fuck it, I am what I am, hate me or love me”.  I don’t know if he did, but I am sure that was probably his sentiment during the early stages of his ascend to power. 

The man just said let me be me. I will say what I want and I don’t give a fuck what you think. That was the attitude and it paid off big time. Not with the media. The media has a hierarchical putrid moralism guiding it, but they forget the people have their own brain. The average American, regardless of race, has a good view of Trump. 

Trump has three years doing things that the media called impeachable a million times. When the election is a year away, three years into the firsts term, the Democrats give in to the pressure of media pundits and in doing so have interfered more with the 2020 elections than the amount interference Trump is being charged with. 

This impeachment must be dismissed immediately. It is undemocratic. It is up to the voters to decide if Trump will continue to be President. The house and the senate do not supersede the results of an election regardless of its verdict. We the people have the power to decide that, and we will do so at the ballot box in November.

A Toast for Many and the Person

Confined to a room by a deliberate choice of exasperation

The person suffers the ills of the precarious situation 

The passing time heals no wounds and brings no fortune

The will becomes subdue and sorrows overtake all feelings


A cry to God for help with the irremediable pain of seeing the sun

What the person discovers is only as good as those that agree

Many times we see a wall, but the person sees the sun

The sun becomes a sure thing for the person and they forget about others


The person begins to teach about the sun to those that just see a wall

The many reject the sun and embrace the wall in front of them

The person suffers from the rejection and falls to the deepest part of the abyss

A confession to God and a cry for help save the person from the lunacy


The mind destroys the person, the will enters a putrid crisis

An odious aura creates challenges of grave consequences

 The person contemplates the many and their refusal to see beyond the wall

The indescribable reality tears the mental stability of the person


The person battles the many and runs along the narrow road of tolerance

The desires of the person pour out in their expressions of weird dispositions

The living state forsters a stench of futility that is abhorrent in all its nature

The person battles because there is no other choice, the will achieves victory

On the Fascist Demands of the Historically Marginalized LGBTQ Identities

What I personally prefer in terms of sexually and gender identity is my business and not of any government, group, religion, or ideology. Our society has historically marginalized people with LGBTQ identities for many reasons that are not sanctioned by God, despite what many may claim, and that shows a lack of tolerance for difference in others. Nothing justifies the damage done and I am happy that we have gotten to a point as a society where millions can openly embraced their preferences for being without having the state punish them. Some individuals still choose to be fanatical and sometimes use violence to show their absolute disapproval of what people choose for themselves. Fortunately, the LGBTQ community has obtained political and social power and can now defend themselves like never before. Unfortunately, the power obtained by the group has become a fascist tool for censorship and punishment for anyone questioning what they demand.

I understand feeling absolutely right, but if we are absolutely right, on anything, then we should be able to sway opposing views without resorting to the fascist tactic of shutting down any opposing view. To force an acceptance of their being, they are now using the same tactics used against them for many years. I may be wrong, but a force acceptance of their being is not in their best interest. Acceptance through understanding and tolerance was the goal, but that goal has been high jacked by coercion and antagonism of anyone that expresses rejection of their being. That tactic has some merits when addressing extreme views expressed about their being, but they have taken it too far when responding to the many Americans that do not agree with many of the social ideas that they have demanded be accepted as they request.

In particular, I am referring to the use of pronouns as they direct, sexual education, gender identities for children, bathroom designations, and raising children. Right off the back I will say that raising children should not be an issue at all. 99% of LGBTQ people likely came from straight parents, so there is no reason to believe that having LGBTQ parents will automatically make you that. Second, a foster home, with probably some rare exceptions, will not be a better home than a singular family, even if that family has two moms or two dads or gender fluid parents.

If they are sinning, as some will say, then let God judge them when they leave this world, we cannot usurp God’s power to judge our sins by rendering judgment on another. The sins God has revealed to us is for our individual prerogative, for he made us free and will not interfere in our actions. He will only judge us when we die based on the free choices we made. The free choices others make are not ours to judge.

We may highlight the sin, but we cannot impose our morality on those that choose their own. Obviously, there are many exceptions to this since we have laws to ensure order and those causing chaos and breaking our laws are judge and punished, but your being is not bound by those exceptions and we sin gravely when we include the free choices of anyone that is LGBTQ.

Now, accepting people’s choices does not mean accepting their desired societal structure in education, culture, language, arts, etc. We are being coerced to automatically accept cultural changes that, while perhaps well intentioned, are coercive against what many accept. There is no harm or oppression in using the gender pronouns we have assumed for thousands of years. Gender neutrality is a social construct and we do not accept it as a society.

There are inconclusive genetic studies on the brain and sexually by Harvard scientist that attempt to negate gender and provide a so-called scientific basis for gender-neutral terms and the elimination of gender as a binary entity. I will debate any scientist that claims this and right away say that gender for us is binary and any claim to the opposite is wishful at best and shows a lack of analytical objective scientific thinking on the part of the scientist.

We can change our gender, we have the ability to do that and if someone wants that, then that is their choice and they should have no hindrance to carryout their wish. However, because you were a man and change to a woman does not mean that I have to adjust my language. The reason to change my language may be justified from a fairness argument, but the demand of doing so and hating or judging me for refusing to is the type of mechanism fascist use to impose their beliefs on others. Sure, you may feel justified, but when your choice starts imposing rules for talking on me, you have crossed a line and have turned from an oppressed to an oppressor.

The societal and cultural norms we have collectively, cannot be change by using fascist impositions of ostracizing, labeling, and punishing those that have reservations against what is being asked. If what is being asked is so righteous and right, then reason and dialogue should be the driving force of its implementation. The fascists tactics to force acceptance of new social norms undoubtedly causes antagonistic resentment and will eventually lead to an ugly and irrational confrontation that likely will include expressions of violence to defend the stand taken by any individual.

We must become conscious of the fascist tactics being employed and make sure we kill it in its cradle before it grows and leads us down an antagonistic path that will not be good for anyone.

Towards an End of Media Destruction of Critical Thinking (A Defense of Trump)

The American subconscious has taken a grip on the masses. It has rebelled against structures of decay and decadence in our public discourse. Our conscious has created this great nation and it has also created the chaos before us. We have a choice to make as individuals and that choice cannot be taken lightly. There are many threats before us and many who can neutralize them. We cherish our past and revere our history, recognizing many of our abhorrent mistakes, but our duty is to now and later. Our laws are broken in front of our eyes and we do not notice it. We let our moral judgment and sense of justice blind us to the power we are usurping from our institutions. Is every person not innocent until proven guilty? We no longer abide by this and lynch our fellow citizens with putrid satisfaction. 

This is not the case for everyone. Many of us feel disdain, fear, and insecurity in the face of immediate public verdicts of our actions. It is a nightmare we have seen and see many experience.  Our current president lives this on a daily basis. I am not here to defend him or endorse every action he takes. I do, as many of you, see the blatant daily assaults on everything he does. Some of it is probably right, but so much is wrong that we are baffled by the public endorsement of his incompetence.

From day one it was prophesied by the pundits, the media, intellectuals, and many more with mass media access, that he would fall soon. In October 2016, it was getting clearer to many in power that Trump was going to win and so an investigation was opened into foreign influence on our elections. We all know about it, the media let us know daily. At the same time, Hillary was crowned the winner without a single vote being cast. Look at all the media and twitter post from that time, everybody was sure of what the result was going to be. Ironically, at the same time, there was an investigation of foreign influence on the election. I guess, in the minds of those that perpetrated it, it was an insurance policy against a Trump victory. The insurance policy has failed and now we have a “quid pro quo” insurance of the insurance that is frustrating for many Americans. 

Now, how has Trump survived for so long under constant assault? The media constantly has a variety of different people with high credentials expressing that Trump is a foreign agent and always diminishing his authority as president of our great nation. It is of tremendous credit to Trump that he has not let any of the daily attacks take any power from him. The daily insinuations that he is losing have become like the warnings of the boy who cried wolf. 

The declarations of his imminent demise is coupled with orchestrated social unrest and racial tensions. Our differences are constantly pitted against each other as if we are wimps and incapable of brushing aside the slightest insult. We are ordered to feel hurt and demand severe public shame and punishment towards those that express disrespect towards our “identities”. We explain our moral standing and sense of justice to justify and execute punishment for any expression perceived as insensitive. We talk of our past as if we are still living it. Some pretend we are in Jim Crow’s world while indulging in all the privileges that nobody in those time had. 

As a nation, it is time to move beyond this. We cannot judge our fellow citizens in the court of public opinion regardless of the crime. We have a legal system that in its essence and nature, although not always the case, would rather have one thousand guilty go free if one innocent is wrongly convicted. 

We cannot usurp the function of our institutions behind a sense of morality because we are presented with an accusation and riled up with moral outraged. If true, any wrongdoing, perhaps, deserves the greatest of disdain, but our courts determine if it is true and as lawful citizens we must respect that and not usurp and diminish our legal system because of sensationalize propaganda from powerful interests that control the mass media. As Americans, most of us do not like what the media tells us and we must find a way to change the lies we are fed daily, else we may perish as the greatest nation the world has ever seen. 

The discourse in mass media is not the consciousness of Americans. They are not representing us. Sure, there are some that agree with the narrative, but it is not the majority, and the goal of the discourse is to coerce us into what they have already determined to be right and wrong. The media and the segment of Americans that believe its propaganda are fascist in their tactics and actions while proclaiming to be the complete opposite. Rednecks, white supremicist, Trump supporters, christians, minorities that support them, and all others that are chastised are not idiots and bigots like the media paints. They are people like anybody else and their outright dismissal in public discourse is censorship at best and is responsible for the political chaos our nation is currently experiencing. 

Liberals and leftists have assumed that they are open minded, but they have shown in the last decade that they are not. I do not mean to dismiss them as they are dismissing many views, I will gladly engage their views, but that is only possible if they become open to dialogue without resorting to outrage to quell discourse. If we react to racist views by suppressing and marginalizing those that hold them, then we are saying that we do not have the ability to articulate our greater understanding on the issue. It may be “self-evident” that racism is bad, but if it is then it should be easy to engage it in discourse and shut it down. Having the freedom to express divergent, or bigoted and extreme views, should not be viewed as giving an endorsement of those views. If you can’t use reason, logic, science, or God to engage and refute a point of view, then you do not understand what you are defending. 

I will debate any racist or white supremacist without censoring. They can say what they need to and all they say will be addressed without resorting to categorically dismissing them. Of course, if they resort to not engaging in the ideas then my engagement will be futile and our differences will be left with two options: tolerance or violence. Throughout human history tolerance or violence has been the prevalent dynamics for divergent views, but as Americans we have proven to have the ability to go beyond that and create meaningful discourse that leads to a better coexistence for all. 

Let’s stop the impeachment and let Trump govern. The 2020 election will be the verdict on whether or not he goes, we are to close to it to entertain the circus of impeachment created. We are wasting time on petty desires, let Trump govern until he loses in 2020 or his time runs out in 2024. The attempt to remove him by other means is un-American and fascist at best.

On the Healthcare of Americans

As Americans, we have a silly debate surrounding our healthcare and it is that at best. Frankly, it is stupid and regressive beyond anything we have ever seen. I do not want to hear about the ideological capitalist-socialist antagonism surrounding this. We act as if the two political and economic philosophies are like night and day when in reality they are just hours apart. Some services are common to both, but somehow we have come to believe that healthcare is an ideological tool for the socialist and so we must have private healthcare in our capitalist system. By that logic, we should have a private legal system and police force. How about a private army to defend us?

I would guess that a vast majority of Americans would not support the privatization of our laws and army, and by a vast majority it is probably 99%. Healthcare is a vital service for all individuals of any society and should be available to all people in our nation just like our military is available to fight off foreign invasions and our police are there to enforce our laws and protect us from those that break it.

We are not socialist because we have a state run legal system and we will not be socialist if we have state run healthcare. Given that, we do have an existing and efficient private system. Yes efficient, but only if you have the money. Since our healthcare is for profit, those with the means to increase the profits of the healthcare providers naturally, and regardless of what people say their intentions are, will have the best service and care while the masses get a standardized sub par service. That is a fine dynamic for how we distribute the best quality products to consumers, but crazy that it is applied to our health.

Our healthcare must be free and available to all. We can’t just do it how our politicians are proposing. We do not need to dismantle the existing private system; we need to integrate the system. We need to get rid of all insurance companies but maintain all private medical services (medical insurance is not a medical service even if some classify as such, if I pay my doctor out pocket I did not provide a medical service. Insurance companies do not get to say they are providing a medical service because they paid). The well over three trillions dollars American spent on healthcare each year will have to be paid by the government.

Now we get to the typical “how do we pay for that”? I wish someone had asked that same question as a way to object going to war with Japan at the end of 1941. Healthcare is vital, it is not some unnecessary government spending. Now some one that is sold on their stance might say that we risk going bankrupt and increasing our debt and other non-issues. We have the greatest military the world has ever seen, we do not need to worry about debt. When Ronald Reagan said  “deficits do not matter”, he did not mean that they did not matter in an absolute sense. He meant “do you want to get into some gangsta shit with us”. Of course, he could not just say that, but he knew the power he had and that no nation can enforce any debt on us beyond what we choose to comply with willingly. No nation can bully us over debt, bullets are more real than financial duties and boy would we destroy any nation that tried to leverage debt against us. Reagan knew that, could not say it. Trump knows it now and so did Obama, Bush, Clinton, and Bush sr. before him. So yea, let’s get our heal

On American Morality

As Americans, has our understanding of morals and ethics, right and wrong, become so advance that any expressions that infringe upon them are to be censored with the utmost brutality of public outcry and societal shaming? Our current attitudes towards moral and ethical transgression from individuals help nobody and only serve to feed a putrid sense of satisfaction from revenge disguised as justice. Accountability is important, but we seem to think that accountability means only punishment. True accountability is obtained from learning from our transgressions and understanding them so that we may reach a better coexistence with each other.

After all, that is all people want; we want to live peacefully within a fair society. Our society is not fair and so different individuals and groups within society find different culprits for our societal woes that may or may not be a contributing factor to our dismal outlook on life.

Recently, Stephen Miller has been exposed as having very abhorrent views on immigration and as a result many are calling for his resignation and publicly dismissing anything he says without any consideration to his thinking. We have come to react to views like this in a way that assumes the moral high ground that justifies not engaging his views and just calling for punishment for having such thoughts. I get that, for thousands of years we have used race and many other factors that distinguishes us to cause unfair harm to many people, we are traumatized and assumed a very high moral conviction that begets hate and division among us.

Forcing Stephen Miller to resign is not going to cause the millions of American that agree with him to take on a new view. If anything, it will have the opposite effect and bury them deeper into their convictions. The outrage culture surrounding this reaction is fascist at best and highly dangerous for our future as nation. We tend to associate the outrage culture with the left, but it has permeated the majority of all political and social views across a large majority of individuals. The right calls for leftist to resign just as the left calls for rightist to resign whenever the transgression of any individual is made public. We must stop this way of being before it destroys.

A perfect example of this is the resignation of Katie Hill. She was given a shirt that says, “If you are not outraged, then you are not paying attention”. That is a very dangerous slogan to promote and certainly will lead to violence among us if we take that stance. Just from a psychological perspective, we know that our cognitive abilities are not as good when we are mad (or outraged) in comparison to when we are neutral or happy. You can’t pay attention if you are outraged and even if you pay attention first and then get outraged, well then you are not setting yourself up for the best possible solution to whatever made you outraged. I hope that makes sense, it is a dangerous idea to promote and I fear for us if we continue embrace such thinking.

Stephen Miller, like Katie Hill, is now in the crosshairs of outraged culture and I hope he holds his ground. I do not agree with him, but I am willing to engage him and not outright dismiss him. We value free thoughts, at least we claim that, but we do not value the free thoughts when we think our morality outweighs its expression. That was fine at some point in our history, but today it has become dangerous and will surely destroy us.

Our morality cannot turn into a fascist persecution of dissent because of our supposed moral high ground that cannot be questioned. Everything and anything can be questioned. Even God is questioned and he is omnipotent. Let’s engage in discourse with Stephen Miller, to not do so is to be a hypocritical fascist too sure of ourselves. Humility goes a long way.

On the Superposition of God

Recently, someone objected that there are 3000 gods, and so God must not be real. First, I will not address the accuracy of the number, but I will concede that there are many different religions that claim God or gods.  The objection is that if God is real, why so many religions claiming God or gods in different ways with different rituals and dogmas? Given what we have discovered about matter and energy in the last 100-200 years, it would be inconceivable, analyzing what we have determined about matter and energy, that God exist if his being had not been manifested in many forms and interpretations by our being.

All major religions have given God omnipotence and omnipresence throughout space-time with no bounds in range.  Worshiping God, praying to him, or just thinking of him must have the same result that measuring a particle has at the quantum level: Before the measurement all states are possible, but we can only yield one state any time when we make a measurement. This may make no sense, but it is somewhat analogous to knowing what other people are thinking, you have no idea what they are thinking until they say or do something to let you know. Before that action, analogous to the measurement, they could be thinking anything, but after you hear them or see their actions you know what they are thinking. Once the interaction is over, they go back and can be thinking anything once again until you inquire about their thinking. But a single measurement of their thinking can never encompass all their thinking and so you never fully know what someone truly thinks, you only have an idea.

Since God is omnipresent, when we try to understand his nature, we only understand one state of many and as a result over thousands of years we have created different ideas and attributes of the same God. For God is only one and our different ways of worshiping and appealing to his grace is just a natural consequence of his nature and that of the world he brought us into to share with him.

If we did not have many religions, and if we would have had discovered quantum mechanics, as we have, then perhaps we would have proven that God does not exist; but the many religions and the ways of interacting with God, is further evidence of quantum superposition and the existence of God.


A merciful grief of creation surrounds the destructions created.

A rearrangement in configuration, sudden changes in a short time.

The reality we see is molded, and we imitate you in awe of your power.

To control you is our desire, we are a sink of your energy for being set in space. 

A deposit with the hope of saving continues flames that wants to be. 

A desire to evade the end of the flame creates the autonomy we need.

For eternity the fire will burn if its source stays in existence.

As long as we live it exist and if we die it dies too: In a field of darkness.

On the Dynamics of Spacetime

Our existence encompasses all ranges of space through time. Vacuums are theoretical and only artificially made. Energy and matter can be found at any instantaneous moment in any unit of spacetime. In absolute terms, our matter occupies little space at any instantaneous moment of time, but we are dynamic. The movement of energy and matter passes through every point of spacetime sooner or later. 

We seek the most fundamental units of matter and energy along with the mechanism for how its numerous quantities behaves to interchange their essence with each other and spacetime to create all the interactions we see. As the fundamental unit increases in quantity, new units are made that can build more units and ultimately be reduced again to its original irreducible form. 

Modern physics has classified what it deems to be the most fundamental particles.This is not possible, for even electrons can be reduced to infinite packets of mass-energy entangled into a unitary existence without fundamentally just being an “electron”. After all, we have shown that electrons can be a particle and a wave at the same time (just like photons), and so if we can observe it as matter and energy, how do we classify it as an irreducible form when we have not determined the nature of the duality we observed from it?  

The wave particle duality of electrons and other fundamental particles means that there are infinite irreducible states independent of other irreducible states in spacetime that prohibit us from, in an absolute sense, having a fundamental particle. String theory, appears to be the best idea to begin tackling this realization. The idea is phenomenal, it does suck that those that have been working on it have complicated it with unnecessary math. 

Somehow, the people working with our latest advancements on the dynamics of spacetime have decided that using complicated forms to communicate their meaning is what they must do. At the end of the day, physics, and all of existence, must be described with words. Math will be very helpful for our engineering and manipulation of what we have learned, but if we cannot describe it with words in ways that can be understood by many, then we are failing and science will surely be doomed along with all of humanity. 

Brian Greene seems to have understood and as a result he wrote a great book titled “The Elegant Universe” that describes well the many behaviors of matter without resorting to complicated mathematics. More importantly, he introduces us to string theory. Certainly something in its infancy and given what we know about matter and what I stated earlier about “fundamental particles”, it is the best idea so far to embark us on a path towards understanding the dynamics of our existence. 

In many ways, string theory begins to set aside our primitive conjectures, a side effect of newtonian determinism, about fundamental particles to create the idea that all we see is just a result of how space and time interacts with matter and energy at the most irreducible state possible that we can imagine. With some complicated mathematics, strings appears to be what Greene and others are advocating for. I do not know why they are married to it, I like the idea, but I do not believe it is a mountain worth dying on. 

As Greene has asserted himself, we do not have the technology to experimentally confirmed strings. In that realization he, and many others, have failed to recognize that they have uppended the newtonian ideas of absoluteness that has stymied quantum mechanics and general relativity for the last century. Quantum mechanics had achieved that, but nobody caught on, and now string theory is another form that confirms the same implications of quantum mechanics: Any event, in spacetime, cannot be predicted to a new event over time with 100% certainty. 

Of course, 100% is not a do or die for us. Things behave in accordance with their probability, the very small chance of deviation should humble us to accepting that all we really know is that we know nothing (not literally, but we must always be ready to be wrong even in our most certain of states. And yes, I am relaying an idea that has been expressed by Socrates). String theory and quantum mechanics reminds us of that with their predictions and description of our world that defies what we expect to be “natural”. We have not embraced this reality and as a society we still functions in newtonian ways. We cannot keep functioning that way, especially in our scientific inquiry, if we hope to advance humanity beyond the basic peril we currently face. 

Yes, climate change is basic. We can easily engineer our climate to whatever we want with just newtonian mechanics. We do not need the more profound possibilities of quantum mechanics to solve our climate problem. Well, if we accept gas laws and thermodynamics to be newtonian that is. Regardless, it is a simple problem given the science we know. It baffles me that experts with “PhDs” are advocating non-engineering solutions. I hope science has not become a probing discipline with no application. Perhaps grants and media are to blame for our brightest minds taking such a cowardly disposition in the face of perils. 

I have gone off from where I started writing, but I guess it is enough for now. I will continue these thoughts on a future post.

Create your website at WordPress.com
Get started