Sunday, December 25, 2011

Archaeology: Digging for the Truth of the Bible

A Creation Challenge to the Chickens of Evolution - www.youtube.com (Whoops) Researchers: Ancient human remains found in Israel - news.yahoo.com Searching for Evolutionists Who will Defend Their Position (DEBATE DODGERS) www.youtube.com Digging Through the Bible: David and Goliath - www.israelnationalnews.com Among biblical figures whose existence has been attested by archaeology or other preserved ancient records are the following: www.ucg.org Influential archeologists in Israel are declaring that archeology has proved "the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on the 12 tribes of Israel," and "the empire of David and Solomon never existed." At the same time, other leading archeologists strongly disagree, assuring us that such claims "are either grossly misleading, illogical, disingenuous or all three." Can the Old Testament be trusted for its historical account and does archeology provide evidence for its accuracy. What does the evidence say? Dr. Patton has personally investigated the claims and presents the evidence in a way that will allow you to draw your own conclusions. Dr. Patton has a broad educational background; four years at Florida College, Temple Terrace, FL (Bible); two years at Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, TN (Geology); two years at Indiana Univ./Purdue Univ., Indianapolis, IN (Geology); two years, Pacific School of Graduate Studies. He has worked as Geologist in US, Canada ...

Buyers Car Detailing Milwaukee Seventh Generation Diapers Coupon Order

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Haruki Murakami's The Elephant Vanishes

!±8± Haruki Murakami's The Elephant Vanishes

The Elephant Vanishes is Haruki Murakami's first US released collection of short stories. It consists of 15 short stories showing his work at its finest, from magical lands with dancing dwarves, giant elephants, and a man searching for his cat. Every thing is uniquely Murakami though, and every single one of these stories is worthy of your time to read, and some of them to read the novel to which they are attached. Here are some notes I jotted down while reading the collection and some thoughts on his work as a whole.

- Murakami uses a singular human feeling or emotion for each of his stories, then he expands and distorts, contracts, and expands that emotion to his pleasure. Use of loneliness, Hunger, and Tiredness come to mind.

- His concepts on reality are very interesting. He is constantly letting the characters recreate it for themselves, the way they want it. The presence of dual reality is consistent, wherein there lies a layer below actual reality that the character must come to terms with.

- He uses the journal and memory as a common device. The narrator's memory and how it is utilized is consistently brought up and analyzed. His use of a journal repeats as a means of organization and structure in the dynamic and chaotic lives of his protagonists, lending a much more structured manner to their lives

The Wind-up Bird and Tuesday's Women

The first story was really odd. Mainly because it's not actually a story, but the first chapter of his most famous book, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle. After being unable to find the cat, he travels out into the blocked off alley to look and ends up in the back yard of a young girl sunbathing, where he falls asleep in a lawn chair. A series of inappropriate phone conversations with a stranger, and the weird girl in the alley set up one of his greatest stories in that novel, but here are a little out of place as all you get is the first chapter. In typical Murakami fashion though, any chapter from any of his books could be read stand alone and make sense, as very little tends to happen in the physical reality of his characters. Instead, something more that you feel more than observe occurs here. It heartily establishes the tone for the rest of the book, and sets up the reader for the oddities to come.

The Second Bakery Attack

The second story was odd too, in its execution. The hunger curse is interesting to me in that it seems to be the result of a more psychological problem. His wife is an inherently violent person here and that doesn't seem to make much sense. What purpose is there to her violence? Why is she struck by the curse as well and why has he not felt this hunger otherwise since the time at the bakery. I think it might be that he needs a companion to feel this hunger. His best friend was around the last time it happened, and then he left. Without a conspirator it doesn't matter how he feels. The hunger appears though, only 2 weeks after his marriage, and she takes up the matter quite efficiently. Her apparent knowledge on the subject is interesting though. It rouses suspicion in the narrator. Something that Murakami does in the first story as well. A sort of underlying suspicion from this man towards his wife.

The Kangaroo Communique

The third story was very cool to me. The way he starts it off, completely off topic, explaining his 36 steps of though--which we never actually get to hear--and then goes on, the various tangents in his conversation are brilliant. The man works a horribly boring and depressing job and when he finds a gem in his pile of coal he grasps it without abandon. He wants to talk to this girl. He wants to get to know her. He goes on about his wish to be alive in double state. He wants to exist in two places at once. A desire to overcome the monotony of his life and yet not abandon it at the same time. He's afraid of change and this is his way of dealing with it, by not changing. Thus he records this letter to the girl and tells her things that are probably not appropriate. But they are his other self acting. The reclusive, department store self is put aside and this second self, the self that wants to sleep with her and write her this letter is brought out without fear of consequence.

On Seeing the 100% Perfect Girl One Beautiful April Morning

This is another brilliant story that I couldn't get over. It was short and to the point, offering no plot, or development. Just a very cool series of thought and a seed of doubt left in the reader as to what really happened. Murakami's narrator sees a girl on the street that he knows is perfect for him. Doesn't know how or why, she just is. Love at first sight. He doesn't do anything though. Conjecture develops the ultimately tragic or ultimately romantic story that exists below the surface. If he had told her his story and they got together the reader is left thinking how horribly romantic this is. However since he doesn't talk to her, I'm left to wonder if this story might be true. How horribly sad that would be. This is a story about chances. About taking chances in life and making the most of them. Not letting fate kick your ass. Twice the narrator leaves his 100% perfect girl. Once in his story and once in real life. She will never return to him

Sleep

This is a very interesting story. It tackles a bunch of different little things about her life. She seems to be lost in a world of her own creation. Lost to the arrogance of her husband's family, she has lost everything in her life that made her her. When she stops sleeping she is denying reality to regain that part of her. She is going against her fate that has been constructed and is creating a new reality for herself. In doing so she must confront death and in that ends up meeting it. Her perceptions of reality are skewed completely. In this she creates a new one. One where she maintains her own identity. Not the one that her husband gave her. She is having a mid-life crisis and her way of dealing with it is as such.

The Fall of the Roman Empire, The 1881 Indian Uprising, Hitler's Invasion of Poland, and the Realm of Raging Winds

This piece uses key events to mark the narrator's own personal history. It follows a simple day of events for him and marks small normal events as big events with historical metaphor. It's as if he's saying that one's entire life can be marked and remembered by key points and words without all the details. A certain linearity to our lives exists that makes life easier to remember.

Lederhosen

The lederhosen act as a catalyst for her to have stepped back and see the world and her life for what it was. She had to that point built up an illusory world that she lived in. She was unable to step out of it and see how much she didn't want. She was to ensconsed in it to do so. When she finds the guy that looks like her husband but isn't, she is able to view what she has from an outsider POV. This is disturbing to her and because of it she is able to work through her emotions and forget about her husband.

Barn Burning

This is a pretty horrible little story. The man from Africa is either a murderer or a truly horrible person that scared her off. I lean toward the former in the way he described how the barn was calling to be burned. The narrator's closeness to the girl is important here because is counters the man's statement of the barn needing to be burned. His whole idea is that the barn is old and useless and it won't hurt anyone, but this last barn is such that the narrator is the one affected by it. Thus it wasn't harmless. He isn't aware of the correlation though and continues to seek out the barn and the girl. This leading to the dual existence matter again in which he is trying to seek out the literal object that hasn't been burned and inside his mind seeks out the figurative object, the girl that he misses, that has been removed from his life. Very Poe like and quite disturbing.

Little Green Monster

She rebukes love. In doing so, her every move, every bad thought and ill manner hurts the creature. Seems like a metaphor for rejection. She rejects the creatures unrequited love and in so doing destroys him. She sees him only for what he is, a horribly ugly creature, ignoring his love and calm manner. She, instead of figuring out what he wants to say or how to get him to return to his home, destroys him, mercilessly. His passion draws him into her home, unwanted, and because of that her malice is unleashed, almost by reflex. The author seems to be making a statement on women here and how unforgiving they can be for a man's love. Also a statement on the blindness of love and how the male will react without thought and not weight the choices involved.

Family Affair

This story struck me as being fairly laced with subplots and hidden meanings. All of it was done in a very subtle manner, true to Murakami's style and it really struck well, especially at the end, with its blunt, matter-of-fact manner of storytelling. Firstly, the narrator and his sister are just what he says, "partners". Partners in living a pointless lifestyle. She has grown out of it though. In the 5 years they have lived together she has grown and developed a sense of responsibility and place in the world. He however, is still trapped in his own little world, his separate reality. This is demonstrated often by how he says things that don't affect him don't concern him, such as who wins the baseball game. It doesn't matter. "I'm not playing, they are." The differences in the narrator and Noburo Watanabe are extensive. An important thing to point out at first, is the fact that Watanabe has a name at all. Very few, if any characters even receive names in Murakami's stories. This name is important in that it symbolizes a place in reality. His place in reality is marked by his name and he conforms via that name. His sister will become a part of that reality when she takes this manes name. Thus, as the representative of reality, Watanabe begins to destroy the narrator's fantasy world. In the end of the story, after talking to this man and hearing how pathetic his life really is, he first feels the pointlessness of his life. His night out with the girl at the bar is miserable and that is the first mark of the destruction of his fantasy, drawing him into Watanabe's reality.

A Window

There's not much here that I could discern that the author doesn't say straight out. So, I'll just quote the last paragraph.

"Should I have slept with her?

That's the central question of this piece.

The answer is beyond me. Even now, I have no idea. There are lots of
things we never understand, no matter how many years we put on, no matter how
much experience we accumulate. All I can do is look up from the train at the windows in the buildings that might be hers. Every one of them could be her window, it sometimes seems to me, and at other times I think that none of them could be hers. There are simply too many of them."

Life has many possibilities. The simple place of her window is such that it could be anywhere, or perhaps even nowhere at all.


Haruki Murakami's The Elephant Vanishes

Bargain Sale Ninja Turtles Action Figures

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Who Was Siddhartha Gautama?

!±8± Who Was Siddhartha Gautama?

Most people have heard of both the religion known as Buddhism and its founder, Buddha - but who was Siddhārtha Gautama and how did he become the Buddha?

Who was Siddhārtha Gautama? Gautama is the man that Buddhists recognize as the founder of Buddhism, and the Supreme Buddha of our age. It is believed that Siddhārtha Gautama lived between 563 BCE and 483 BCE, but since there are no accurate records of his birth and death, other scholars have suggested that he might have died around 410 BCE. Siddhārtha Gautama was also known as "Shakyamuni", which translates to "sage of the Shakyas".

Gautama's teachings and rules for monastic living were followed closely by his sangha, or community, and were passed down as oral tradition for over 400 years before they were eventually written down as Buddhist texts. It is said that Buddha (Gautama) was born in around the year 563 BCE in what is now modern-day Nepal. This day is celebrated in Theraveda Buddhism as Vesak. Guatama was born to his mother, Queen Maha Maya, and father King Suddhodana, underneath a sol tree as the queen was returning home to give birth.

At the age of 16, Prince Siddhārtha Gautama was married to his cousin who was the same age, who eventually bore him a child. Gautama spent the first 29 years of his life living in several palaces throughout Nepal, with a very comfortable and materially wealthy existence. When he turned 29, Gautama decided to go out among his people and see what the common life was like. For the first time, Gautama saw sick and elderly people, and realized that all humans were destined to become old and die.

Afraid of dying himself, Gautama decided to live the life of an ascetic in order to meditate on the problems of sickness and dying. He took his meditations and living to such a meager and austere level that he nearly collapsed. While undertaking this spiritual journey, Gautama eventually decided to sit underneath a pipal tree (now known as the Bodhi Tree) until he could understand the Truth about life. After meditating for 49 days underneath the tree with no food or water, Gautama reached Enlightenment and became the Buddha.

When Buddha became Enlightened, he decided to reach out and teach others his beliefs and doctrine. The sangha, a community of followers, was formed by people that heard his teachings. Buddha also decided to spend the rest of his life, 45 years, reaching out to people from all classes and walks of life in order to help them achieve Enlightenment.

Who was Siddhārtha Gautama? Gautama was a man who started out as just an ordinary, overly wealthy prince who through meditation and the shunning of worldly goods, achieved Enlightenment and became the Buddha.


Who Was Siddhartha Gautama?

Promo Culligan Softener Kongming Lanterns Quick Promotional Haan Floor Steam Cleaner

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Michael Moore - "The Dumbest People on the Face of the Earth"

!±8± Michael Moore - "The Dumbest People on the Face of the Earth"

"Fahrenheit 9/11" auteur Michael Moore recently fueled the epidemic of hatred for America by denouncing his own country and his own people to the foreign press. The UK's Mirror printed Mr. Moore's observation of Americans: "They are the dumbest people on the face of the earth...in thrall to conniving, thieving, smug pricks...We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing." (1)

That's right. We are. In fact, we're stupid enough to believe that we have a great country. Why? Let's look at the facts...

In 2002, the US Census Bureau estimated that 32.5 million people, from places Moore claims our children can't find on a map, lived in the United States, the largest foreign-born population in America since we started keeping records in 1850. (2) Why are all these people risking drowning, hardships, cultural barriers and possible contamination by our laziness, aggression and arrogance, incompetence, shallowness, and sexually explicit media? Why do people such as California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger come here, entertain, take advantage of opportunity, and enrich our economy through business and philanthropy?

Shock time: Americans are not nearly as despised as Al-Jazeera would have you believe. In fact, the PEW Global Attitudes Project reports that in its 2004 survey, roughly half the respondents in Russia, Turkey and Morocco say people who have moved to the U.S. have a better life (natives of Germany, France and Britain who responded to the survey disagreed, but that's hardly a surprise, even though Britain has always been a friend).3

None of the usual pat phrases such as "land of opportunity," "let freedom ring," and "democracy, democracy, democracy," seem to explain why Elian Gonzalez' mother died to bring him to America.

But perhaps we as Americans are stupid enough to believe that those phrases actually mean something. Perhaps we are the dumbest people on the face of the earth. "Dumb" in this case can mean "naïve," generally meant as an insult, as in "Don't be so naïve about why al-Qa'eda hates us so much."

These days, anyone who doesn't adopt the de rigueur attitude of boredom and yawning in the face of just about everything is called naïve. But Americans have always been known for innocence and openness.

Beverly West quoted actress Alicia Silverstone in Culinarytherapy. Ms. Silverstone, perhaps channeling President Abraham Lincoln's optimism, once remarked, "Like when I'm in the bathroom looking at my toilet paper I'm like 'Wow! That's toilet paper!' I don't know if we appreciate how much we have." (p. 184)

The idea of anything-therapy and the overuse of "like" appear to the global audience to be authentically American, impressed with our own coolness in one breath and cheerfully mangling the English language in the next, not to mention taking the words of a nubile young Hollywood actress (who starred, interestingly, in a contemporary remake of Jane Austen's satire on manners Emma) as wisdom. Being excited about toilet paper seems, in this high-tech age, a little backward and disingenuous.

Yet all major religions, particularly the Judeo-Christian tradition on which America as we know it was founded, emphasize gratitude as part of spiritual consciousness. Gratitude for the simplest of things, like toilet paper. The great composer Aaron Copeland based his "Appalachian Spring" symphony on the Shaker song of gratitude, "Simple Gifts."

"Simple" is often a synonym for "dumb." Yet if simplicity means stupidity, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau were prize idiots. Both of these quintessential American philosophers emphasized simplicity.

In a land of high-speed Internet, 500 channels, strip malls, and coffee companies proliferating like WMD, simplicity seems a foreign concept. Yet in America, we're "simple" enough to believe that we live in a land of liberty, that (political correctness aside) we can pray, say, or sing whatever we want. We're simple enough to believe that there still is a personal God, no matter what name we praise; that our kids have the right to attend church, despite the brouhaha over "one nation under God" in the Declaration of Independence; and that (reality shows and a 50 percent divorce rate aside) saying "till death do us part" still means something.

We're naïve and open enough to believe that, "conniving, thieving, smug" CEOs notwithstanding, we can work hard, start businesses, take care of our families, and create a life that we can be proud of when we leave this world. Even the much-vilified Martha Stewart is admired as a self-made American success story, someone who has used traditional homemaking arts to build a worldwide brand that emphasizes the good life. So much for the idea that Americans are a land of instant macaroni-and-cheese and fast-food eaters. Yes, people sue McDonald's over getting fat, but the majority of Americans work hard, try to eat well (often together as a family), and pride themselves on playing fair and upholding the law.

Despite celebrity trials, racial prejudices, judicial snafus, serial killers and publicity-hungry lawyers, we still think that "the little guy" still gets a day in court and a fair trial by jury. There is still a sense of personal responsibility for oneself, one's fellow citizens, and one's children.

Despite increasing pressures that erode childhood, our kids still have faith in parents to set limits, to be an example, and to lay the foundation for a good life. Certainly many of the young men and women we have seen interviewed in Operation Iraqi Freedom represent the best and the brightest. Our children exhibit the unique dedication to serving others that so many of our leaders, from President Kennedy to Eleanor Roosevelt to Colin Powell, extol. Ms. Stewart advocated teaching disadvantaged women how to start their own businesses. In America, even some of our high-profile so-called criminals want to improve life for others.

We're simpleminded enough to believe we can make a difference abroad and in our own communities. We have a strong commitment to preserving the earth for future generations. From Thoreau to Rachel Carson to the eco-friendly celebrity spokesperson of the week, Americans show a love for the natural beauty of the earth, a beauty that we celebrate in our own homeland. Many of our citizens support recycling, controls on pollution, wilderness/rainforest conservation, and wildlife preservation. As the riots at the 1999 WTO Summit in Seattle show, Americans can be quite over-zealous when supporting their causes. In short: Americans care.

This should come as no surprise. Our ancestors banded together to secede from British rule. Even in our fight for liberty, we held opposing views, contrarian views amongst ourselves. The Whigs who supported the Revolution and the Tories who supported England clashed with the fervor of their descendants, demonstrators with opposing views on wars from Vietnam to Operation Iraqi Freedom.

This passion for ideas, this devotion, may seem to undermine the unity we boast of. We're naïve enough to protect the free expression of ideas, even sometimes seemingly at great cost. You don't see death squads breaking into antiwar protesters' homes. For all the controversy over the Patriot Act, people who disagree with the US government do not simply disappear without a trace. Case in point: "Fahrenheit 9/11." It has made over million (the first documentary to do so), yet people coming out of movie theaters don't get dragged into unmarked cars and interrogated. You can't be more critical of the government than Mr. Moore, and yet he won an Oscar for "Bowling For Columbine." Unlike Soviet artists who criticized Communism, Americans are not forced to flee their homeland--the rest of us won't stand for it.

Lest we forget, it was recently-deceased and much-praised former President Ronald Reagan who uttered the famous phrase, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." His administration was hardly free of controversy, and yet "the Gipper" maintained a cheerful optimism, an openness to the "Evil Empire," and yes, a naïve belief that America was "a shining city on a hill." Reagan was actually dumb enough to believe that America would prosper long after he left office. From this standpoint, "the Gipper" personifies Mr. Moore's idea of American idiocy.

In that case, the countless mourners, including children too young to have heard of President Reagan, who streamed by the casket in the Capitol Rotunda and at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library all suffer from a collective lobotomy. For that matter, so do the world's most famous figures, including Mr. Gorbachev and Dame Margaret Thatcher, who all responded to President Reagan's uniquely American character.

At this rate we'll be a nation of Forrest Gumps, which wouldn't be all bad if it meant we could have his decency and kindness (not to mention Tom Hanks' sense of history).

Oh wait...maybe we do. Perhaps that's what Mr. Moore means when he calls us "the dumbest people on the face of the earth." By that standard, we're an entire nation of "Jeopardy" champions.

So the next time people here or abroad say, "You Americans are the world's dumbest people," we can say with pride, "Yes, we are. God Bless America!"

Postscript: Michael Moore's IMDB.com entry includes this quote: "I like America to some extent. Take the Japanese for instance. They are complicated and tend to be reserved in expressing themselves. Sometimes, it is difficult for me to understand them. Americans are simple and clear. They are charming people. You will understand how good an individual American is. What I am not satisfied with America is that the nation cannot control the government and economy. Only a handful of people have the power to control the country." He also reportedly liked Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ," since he has stated in DUDE, WHERE'S MY COUNTRY that the left has a "hoity-toity view of religion"--we give the devil his due.

1 June 26, 2004, http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/26/103545.shtml

2 http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0073.html

3 http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=206


Michael Moore - "The Dumbest People on the Face of the Earth"

Coupon Pasta Maker Machines Best Spin Bikes Order Now Shopping Captains Beds


Twitter Facebook Flickr RSS



Fran�ais Deutsch Italiano Portugu�s
Espa�ol ??? ??? ?????







Sponsor Links