Rick Warren's evolution teaching animals

7.24: news.relig/evolution vs creationism/
evolution teaching makes us act like animals:
co.twitter#Rick Warren:

"When students are taught they are
no different from animals, they act like it."

--{slate, whyEvolutionIsTrue}
. notice how Warren does assume that
    if we are taught we are
    no different from animals,
    then regardless of how smart we could be
    we will then start acting like animals .
. now why wouldn't he instead assume that
    if we are taught we are
    no different from animals,
    then we might tend to treat animals better?
maybe because he knows [7.24: 9.28:
    we're going to act like animals anyway
    even when following Warren's religion
    so when we find animal behaviour
    we should go for the Big Lie
    and claim that such is de facto proof
    of being unfaithful to Warren's religion .]
. I do believe in the one true god of
    doing good vs evil for
    evolving to eternal survival
and I believe in its creationism via evolution
so, I don't think teaching about evolution
is hurting his religion .

for a proof of supernatural plays god

7.22: relig/god/a consistent intent that
doesn't seem to belong to anyone in particular:
. the reason for your personal behaviors?
it's all explained by just your DNA?
what about random variation isn't really random?
how do you show intent?
a consistent intent that doesn't seem to belong to
anyone in particular
could be god's intent .

revelation's worshippers of wealth

7.7: news.relig/bible/revelation's worshippers of wealth:
. a radio preacher is saying the bible warns of
worshipping wealth vs god?
(he can't mean it warn against being wealthy,
so what does it mean?)
. I think this means using wealth to love only self;
wealth can also represent investing in arks (loving of future),
but vs god it means wealth wasted on vanities
as opposed to wealth used for god's purposes .
. some of the bible-mentioned wealth worshippers
are actually not wealthy at all:
dirt-poor in their drug or gambling addiction
yet these also may be the "(wealthy)
that the bible is warning us about .
. another version of vain wealth is anti-charity
when capitalism will promote desperation
-- an impoverishing level of overpopulation --
simply because it's good for the business .
web:
. the preacher started by mentioning
revelation 14:7-11:

7 In a loud voice he said, "Fear God, give him glory,
for the hour has come when he will pass judgment!
Worship the One who made
heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water!"
8 Another angel, a second one, followed, saying,
"She has fallen! She has fallen!
Bavel [Babylon] the Great!
She made all the nations drink the wine of
God's fury caused by her whoring!"

[whoring is selling sex (for this context
sex is god's tool for ensuring future by having
an escape from both culture death
and from species extinction
-- by allowing us to change genetically
in order to succeed in new environments;
if this gift is instead traded for vain wealth,
it actually endangers the future
by spreading blood-borne diseases )
hence whoring may be an icon of
worshipping money (idols)
instead of future (god) .]

9 A third angel followed them
and said in a loud voice,
"If anyone worships the beast and its image
and receives the mark on his forehead or on his hand,
10 he will indeed drink the wine of God's fury
poured undiluted into the cup of his rage.
He will be tormented by fire and sulfur
before the holy angels and before the Lamb,
11 and the smoke from their tormenting
goes up forever and ever.
They have no rest, day or night,
those who worship the beast and its image
and those who receive the mark of its name."

Rush`speech & Loughner`violence

7.24: news.pol/purges/mass murder/Loughner/
how Rush and Glen Beck incited him:
Thomas @ townhall.com:

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman
wrote on his blog that the "hate-mongers"
Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck
contributed to the Giffords shooting,
despite later reports that the shooter,
Jared Lee Loughner,
had never listened to their programs.
The discovery that Loughner liked
"The Communist Manifesto" and "Mein Kampf"
forced media types to quickly abandon that smear,
but not retract their comments.
They're running the same play again.

. actually, Krugman still makes sense
but not in the way Thomas assumed:
Rush and Beck represent
the right-wing capitalist views
that america implicitly listens to
as they embrace reaganomics .
. Loughner was pointing out
Hitler's "Mein Kampf"
and Communism's "Manifesto"
in order to tell us that
reaganomics caused his hate
-- and it just so happens
that the icons of reaganomics
include Rush and Glenn Beck .
. so Thomas is right in one way,
but Krugman was right in another way:
Reaganomics -- and its supporters ---
caused the unemployment
that caused Loughner's desperation,
that unleashed a hail of bullets
on the Washington who will not listen
-- won't listen to conservatives
and won't listen to the jobless .
. communism always found jobs,
and Hitler even de-immigrated to make jobs .
. Loughner was all about jobs
or at least relief from homelessness;
too bad he wasn't about real population control
(immigrant control isn't enough).

Beyond Coal

7.13: news.pol/energy/
natural gas is cheaper than coal!:
. a natural, capitalistic reason to dump coal
has finally arrived -- yahoo!!

7.26: co.pol/pol/energy/
the Production Tax Credit:
Mary Anne Hitt @sierraclub.org
date:     Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:00 AM
subject:     Tell Congress: We Can't Wait!

Tell Congress, we can't wait.
Urge them to support incentives for clean energy today!
Scaling up wind and solar power
will not only help reduce our dependence on
dirty coal and other fossil fuels
that are driving climate disruption and extreme weather;
it will also help support
tens of thousands of American jobs
in the growing clean-energy industry.
The bad news is that Congress is on the verge of
letting the wind energy Production Tax Credit expire,
jeopardizing tens of thousands of jobs,
and forcing America to continue relying on the
dirty energy sources that are threatening our climate.
Tell Congress to extend the Production Tax Credit
and ensure that a job-creating industry
can keep up the fight against climate disruption.
With tens of thousands of jobs,
a growing clean-energy industry,
and our future on the line,
there's no time to waste.
Thanks for all you do to protect our environment!
Sincerely,
Mary Anne Hitt
Beyond Coal Campaign Director
Sierra Club

Congress: Support Clean Energy and Curb Climate Disruption!

As drought decimates half the country
and wildfires rage in Nebraska and Arizona,
it's all too easy for Americans to see
the effects of climate disruption.
More than 3,800 temperature records were
broken in the first week of July,
and things aren't exactly getting better.

Tell Congress to extend the Production Tax Credit
and ensure a job-creating industry can continue to
keep up the fight against climate disruption.
    Complete the form below with your information.
send your message to:
        Senator Jon Kyl
        Senator John McCain III
        Representative Ron Barber
Thank you for signing our petition
to mitigate climate disruption!

.  the Production Tax Credit (PTC)
to support wind power development
has not yet been renewed.
. it's ironic that some are now worried about
jobs in the clean energy industry;
because, the main cause of global warming
was giving all our manufacturing jobs to China
-- we did that exactly because they have
an utter lack of pollution regulations;
but even if we did our own work cleanly,
the rest of the world might still use China's
care-free coal burning services .
. I wouldn't worry about global warming;
but I am worried about our growing poverty
and our inability to handle the new climate .
. we need a Tax credit for not breeding;
and that would reduce unemployment
thereby having the same effect as job creation .

Greg Hunter's usawatchdog.com

7.22: news.pol/Greg Hunter's usawatchdog.com:
. his C&C show:

"( . investigative reporter Greg Hunter
. he reveals how the banking system is rife with
fraud, instability and infighting
which could collapse the entire system,
resulting in a prolonged bank holiday.)
heard on coast to coast
"( . you think that 401k is designed for you?
if the market tanks, that money stays in the banks!)
"( . buy gold? to fight the impending inflation
buy what goods you need sooner than later:
buy your car tires, some dry food! )

can "(organic) include nanotech? ........... ENM's are the new GMO

7.20: co.pol/nanotech/fda needs to regulate ENM's:
Center for Food Safety office@centerforfoodsafety.org
date:     Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:18 AM
subject:
    Urge FDA to Regulate Nanotechnology
    to Protect Consumer Health

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has a public comment period open through July 24th on the oversight of nanotechnology in food. Amazingly, the FDA currently does not regulate the use of nanotechnology in food, despite its widespread use, and serious public health concerns.
 Already a wide variety of nanoscale applications in food packaging and processing are being developed. Yet, we know very little about the health effects of exposure to engineered nanomaterials, and what we do know, is cause for alarm.
Make your voice heard and urge FDA to regulate nanotechnology to protect consumer health.
To: Office of Food Additive Safety, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Re: Guidance for Industry on assessment of the effects of the incorporation of Engineered Nano-scale Materials (ENMs) in food ingredients (food substances and food contact surfaces) (Docket number: FDA-2011-D-0490)
It is shocking that FDA does not yet regulate the use of ENMs in food ingredients, given that nanomaterials are reportedly widely present in food ingredients and food contact substances. A 2012 National Research Council report found that “there is little progress” on research into the effect of oral consumption of engineered nanomaterials on human health. The FDA should commission, finance and publish such research as an urgent public health priority, and a basis for regulation.
The FDA’s draft guidance to industry should be a first step towards regulation to protect public health and the environment.
Neither FDA nor industry should assume a food ingredient at its macro-scale to be safe at the nano-scale, since we know that nanomaterials can behave completely differently than their bulk counterparts. These unique behaviors are what make nanotechnology so attractive to industry, but they also raise unique risks that must be addressed through unique regulation and oversight. The FDA should require those companies to submit data showing that their products are safe. Further, these safety assessments should be publicly available and the consultation process transparent.
All engineered nanomaterials used as food ingredients, food contact substances, and food colorants should be subject to a rigorous pre-market safety assessment. FDA should withdraw from the market all products shown to contain engineered nanomaterials as food ingredients that have not undergone the pre-market safety assessment and been shown to be safe for daily human consumption.