Wednesday, December 14, 2011

The art of Cuddling

Learn the Art of Cuddling



                                                                                      Learn the Art of Cuddling


How many times has your girlfriend been mad at you coz you 'forgot' to cuddle her?

The chances are many. While women love very few things more than cuddling with their partners, guys somehow, always manage to not get the art of cuddling right. Either they are too sloppy, appear uninterested or rather ridiculously manage to actually doze off sometime in the middle. All these traits are hazardous (to say the least) and can definitely alter the fate of your relationship. So men, play close heed while we disclose the bare essentials about the Art of Cuddling.

1. The Hold/Touch

Gentlemen, be exactly as your title suggests: GENTLE. She is not your PSP or ipad who you clutch onto for dear life. Hold her gently, wrap her in your arms, squeeze her just the right amount. Your touch will let her know how much you love her. Yes, women are excellent at such body language reading. So let the love you feel for her seep through your gentle soft touch & hug into her skin.

2. Smell and Feel

Cuddling is not just about hugging your girlfriend as if she were a teddy bear. You need to let all your senses do the doing. Smell in her hair, and neck; move your finger (slowly) up and down her shoulders and arms. Play around with your senses, only to excite hers.

3. Talk

Cuddling, usually involves no talking. But a few sweet nothings and some sweet talk here n there would do you good. Show her your romantic side. Talk about your idea of an ideal date WITH HER, tell her how stealing a glance with her in a crowded room makes you feel at ease instantaneously and voila! she'll be yours in a jiffy.

Monday, December 12, 2011

Part time fling or long term lover?

 
 
It's the eternal question. He's cute, funny and your friends love him, but is that enough? How do you know he's ‘the one'? Here are 10 factors to consider and if you can meet at least nine of them then hold tight because he might just be the one you've been looking for...
 
 

                 

 
He makes you laugh until you cry

A sense of the humour is one of the most appealing qualities in a man and sharing the same jokes will keep you close, whatever comes your way. It doesn't matter if no one else finds you funny, as long as you can make each other laugh out loud.

 You want the same things out of life

If you want to settle down and have a family and he wants to travel the world with no commitments then you are not on the same page. Although all couples have to make compromises you should essentially want the same things out of life and be able to work towards them together.

He likes you best with no make-up on

Yes, you may think he is lying but the chances are that he really does prefer you au natural. He loves you for you, not for the clothes you wear or the make up you doll yourself up in. If he tells you you're pretty when you are cuddled up in your pyjamas then chances are that he means it.

You see his flaws but love him anyway

It is wrong to think that to be ‘the one' your man has to be perfect. Nobody is perfect. He is ‘the one' when you know him well enough to see all his flaws, accept them for part of who he is, and love him just as much anyway.

He supports you in everything you do

Whether you are going for a job promotion or planning a night out with your friends - he should be your biggest cheerleader. He may not agree 100% with all your decisions but he will never stop you doing anything, will be there to offer advice and pick you up when things go wrong.

You trust him implicitly

If you have been hurt in the past it can be difficult to trust again, but it is an important part of any relationship. Your partner should earn your trust by proving that he always keeps his word and treats you with respect. No, you can never be 100% sure he won't stray but 99.5% will do.

Even your dad/best friend/dog likes him

OK, it shouldn't matter what other people think of him, but it is still nice to know that they approve. Your dad and best friend are only looking out for your best interests and it is difficult to convince them that somebody is good enough for you. If your boyfriend manages to get them on his side then you are probably on to a winner.

You wake up and feel lucky each morning

As you roll over in the morning and see him lying next to you, you are struck with a great sense of contentment. Here, out of everywhere in the world, is where you most want to be. You feel lucky to have him in your life and can't imagine sharing it with anyone else.

You stop noticing the cute guy at the coffee shop

Of course you are still going to find other men attractive but it is amazing how much less you notice them when you have found ‘the one'. Think about it, have you met anyone recently who really got your juices flowing? No? Then chances are he's right in front of you.
You just know

Sometimes there is no defining factor or moment that confirms he is ‘the one' - you just know. When your life is brighter with him in it (even with his annoying habits and football obsession), when you feel happy each morning and can't imagine your life without him, when you smile thinking about him - you just know.

Friday, October 28, 2011

The Woman Who Bested the Men at Math



Philippa Fawcett. When she placed first in the Cambridge mathematical tripos in 1890, she forced a reassessment of nineteenth-century belief in the inferiority of the "weaker sex." 

To be a woman in the Victorian age was to be weak: the connection was that definite. To be female was also to be fragile, dependent, prone to nerves and—not least—possessed of a mind that was several degrees inferior to a man’s. For much of the 19th century, women were not expected to shine either academically or athletically, and those who attempted to do so were cautioned that they were taking an appalling risk. Mainstream medicine was clear on this point: to dream of studying at the university level was to chance madness or sterility, if not both.

It took generations to transform this received opinion; that, a long series of scientific studies, and the determination and hard work of many thousands of women. For all that, though, it is still possible to point to one single achievement, and one single day, and say: this is when everything began to change. That day was June 7, 1890, when—for the first and only time—a woman ranked first in the mathematical examinations held at the University of Cambridge. It was the day that Philippa Fawcett placed “above the Senior Wrangler.”

To understand why one woman’s achievement so shook the prejudices of the Victorian age—and why newspapers from the New York Times to the Times of India thought it worthwhile to devote thousands of words to an exam that today means little to anybody but the students themselves—it is necessary to understand why Cambridge mathematics mattered in the 19th century. To begin with, the university was arguably the finest seat of learning in what was then the greatest empire in the world. More than that, though, the Cambridge math course was generally regarded as the toughest academic challenge available to that empire’s finest minds. To be Cambridge’s champion mathematician—its “Senior Wrangler,” in the university’s ancient slang—was to attain the greatest intellectual distinction available to a quarter of the population of the globe. It practically guaranteed a stellar academic career; no fewer than nine Senior Wranglers became Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, a position held by both Sir Isaac Newton and Stephen Hawking.



The Senate House at the University of Cambridge, where examination results were historically read aloud each June. Today results are posted on the noticeboards shown; their peculiar green tinge is known as "Cambridge blue." Photo: Peter Church for Geograph, used under CCL.


Thus Fawcett’s triumph was astonishing—all the more so when it is realized that Cambridge, like most of the other great universities of the day, including Oxford, Harvard and Yale, did not admit women or permit them to take degrees. Separate colleges had been established for women only in the 1870s, and they gradually became loosely affiliated with universities. By the 1890s things had advanced to the point where the women at those colleges—Cambridge had two, Newnham and Girton—were allowed to take the same exams as males. But they were marked and ranked separately, with the women’s results read after the men’s at an annual ceremony held at the university Senate House. Math students, uniquely, were ranked in numerical order, from first to last, rather than in broad bands of ability, so it was possible to compare one student directly with another. Men taking “first class” degrees in math—equivalent to the American summa cum laude–became Wranglers; those placed below them in the second class–magna cum laude–were Optimes. If a woman scored a mark, say, higher than the 21st Optime but lower than the 20th, she would be announced as “between the 20th and 21st Optimes.”



"Honour to Agnata Frances Ramsay." From Punch, July 2, 1887. The figure on the right is "Mr. Punch," and the dog is Toby—both originally features of that great British institution, the "Punch and Judy Show."


The idea that a female candidate could score highly enough to be ranked among the Wranglers was still fairly startling in 1890. To considerable surprise, the earliest tests, dating to the 1860s, had suggested that men and women scored roughly equally in every other subject. But math remained inviolate; male mathematicians still did incontestably better. So when a Girton student named Agnata Ramsay topped the rankings in the Classics exams in 1887—she was the only candidate, male or female, awarded a first-class degree in the subject that year—the 21-year-old’s reward amounted to nothing more than an admiring cartoon in Punch (a humorous British weekly scarcely known for its support for women’s rights) and a proposal of marriage from H.M. Butler, the brilliant but 55-year-old Master of Trinity, Cambridge’s largest and wealthiest college (which Ramsay accepted).

Ramsay’s triumph, remarkable though it was, only reinforced the status of math as the last bastion of male academic supremacy. There, at least, female bodies and female brains still fell short of men’s. Indeed, most Victorian scholars believed a woman was simply incapable of demonstrating the unwavering logic required to master math, since women were at base creatures of emotion.



Newnham College, Cambridge, Philippa Fawcett's alma mater. Founded in 1871, it became a full part of the University of Cambridge only in 1948. Photo: Wikicommons.


Today, the science that underpinned those views seems crackpot. To the Victorians, it was breakthrough stuff. Central to the 19th-century concept of human development was the idea that the adolescent body was a closed system; there was only so much energy available, and so a body in which resources were diverted to mental development was one in which physical development necessarily suffered. This was thought to be a particular problem for women, because their reproductive system was far more complicated than men’s and so consumed a greater proportion of the body’s resources. A young woman who studied hard during puberty was believed to be taking special risks since “the brain and ovary could not develop at the same time,” as historian Judith Walzer Leavitt points out. Equally popular was the belief, based on crude measurements of skull volume, that women were doomed to remain childlike in important ways—”weak-willed, impulsive [and] markedly imitative rather than original, timid and dependent,” as Cynthia Eagle Russett puts it—because their brains were smaller than mens’.

Philippa Fawcett seems almost to have been born to achieve. She was the only child of two remarkable parents; her mother, Millicent, as chair of the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies, did more even than the famous Emmeline Pankhurst to secure for British women the right to vote, while her father, Henry Fawcett, though blinded in a shooting accident when 25, rose to be a minister in the British government. One of the few memories that survives of Philippa’s childhood has her skating along the river from Cambridge to Ely, a distance of more than 15 miles, guiding her father all the way by whistling to him.

Philippa showed early academic promise—there is some reason to suppose that her parents had her coached in math specifically in the hope that she could help them demonstrate the equality of women—and before earning a place at Newnham College she took courses in pure math and applied math at University College London (a much newer university, where even in the 1890s women and men could study side by side). Even this, though, was no real preparation for the rigors or the eccentricity of the Cambridge math “tripos”—the year-ending exams, so named after the three-legged stools on which students had sat in the 15th century.



Though blinded at age 25, Philippa's father, Henry Fawcett, served as postmaster-general in the Liberal government of William Gladstone, climbed in the Alps, and skated up to 60 miles a day.


Candidates typically sat for five and a half hours of exams every day for eight days—12 papers and 192 progressively more difficult questions in all. Those in contention for the title of Wrangler then sat for a further three days of examinations consisting of 63 still more testing problems. The most serious candidates invariably hired tutors and worked more or less round the clock for months. The historian Alex Craik notes that C.T. Simpson, who ranked as Second Wrangler in 1841, topped off his efforts by studying for 20 hours a day in the week before the exams and “almost broke down from over-exertion… [he] found himself actually obliged to carry a supply of ether and other stimulants into the examinations in case of accidents.” James Wilson, who topped the rankings in 1859, had a nervous breakdown immediately after his exams; on his recovery he discovered he had forgotten all the math he ever knew except elementary algebra. And James Savage worked himself so hard that he was found dead of apoplexy in a ditch three months after being named Senior Wrangler of 1855.

Philippa Fawcett was coached—her tutor, E.W. Hobson of Christ’s College, was regarded as the second-best man teaching at Cambridge in her time—but she adopted an altogether more reasonable approach to her studies. Stephen Siklos, a present-day Cambridge mathematician, notes that Fawcett led “a disciplined and orderly life,” rising at 8 a.m. and rarely going to bed later than 11 p.m. She studied six hours a day, but refused to yield to the then-popular practice among aspirant Wranglers of working through the night with a wet towel wrapped around her head.

One reason Fawcett did so is that she knew that she was being watched; she went out of her way to deny ammunition to those who tried (in the words of a contemporary newspaperman) “to make out that the women’s colleges are peopled by eccentrics.” Her determination not to stand out was only reinforced by a scandalous report in London’s Pall Mall Gazette that she dared to wear “her thick brown hair down to her shoulders, and has even been known (so I have heard) to ride on top of a bus.”
The challenge facing Fawcett and her fellow students was certainly daunting: the mathematics tripos questions were so complex that even the best candidates could scarcely hope to fully solve two, and make a stab at two more, of the 16 devised for each paper. Each paper ranged incredibly widely, and the questions were frequently arcane; the German mathematician Max Born satirized a typical example as: “On an elastic bridge stands an elephant of negligible mass; on his trunk stands a mosquito of mass m. Calculate the vibrations on the bridge when the elephant moves the mosquito by rotating his trunk.” And Siklos summarizes the challenge this way:
By 1890, the Mathematical Tripos had developed into a severe test not so much of mathematical ingenuity as of stamina and solid ability… The topics ranged from compound interest to number theory, hydrodynamics and astronomy. Candidates were expected to be familiar with the work of Newton and Euclid, to be able to predict eclipses, to manipulate obscure trigonometrical identities and to be on intimate terms with all possible two and three dimensional conics.


Millicent Fawcett, Philippa's mother, was not only a leading suffragist, but also cousin to Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, the first woman to qualify as a doctor in the U.K.; to do so, Anderson had to study in Scotland, as no English medical school would accept her as a student.


Fawcett’s ingrained fortitude appears to have stood her in excellent stead during the examination period. She declined the chance to get away from her college for the last few days before the papers began, on the ground that it might disturb her routine. When asked if she wished the ordeal were over, she answered that in no circumstances would she want to wish away three weeks of her life. Although depressed by her first encounter with a tripos paper, on which she could answer only three problems and “try at 6 or 7″ more, she recovered her spirits when she discovered than none of the other candidates she knew had completed a single answer. By the end of May 1890, expectations were high at Newnham that Fawcett had done better than any other candidate the college had ever entered in the math exams. It remained far from certain, though, how Newnham’s women would rank against the men.

G.F. Browne, the secretary of the Cambridge exam board, was also concerned—because he feared that the women entered in the 1890 exams might be so far below par that they would disgrace themselves. He feared that one might even place last, a position known at Cambridge as “the Wooden Spoon.” Late on the evening of June 6, the day before the results were to be announced, Browne received a visit from the senior examiner, W. Rouse Ball, who confided that he had come to discuss “an unforeseen situation” concerning the women’s rankings. Notes Siklos, citing Browne’s own account:
After a moment’s thought, I said: ‘Do you mean one of them is the Wooden Spoon?’
‘No, it’s the other end!’
‘Then you will have to say, when you read out the women’s list, “Above the Senior Wrangler”; and you won’t get beyond the word ‘above.’ “
By morning, word that something extraordinary was about to occur had electrified Cambridge. Newnham students made their way to the Senate House en masse, and Fawcett’s elderly grandfather drove a horse-drawn buggy 60 miles from the Suffolk coast with her cousins Marion and Christina. Marion reported what happened next in a letter:
It was a most exciting scene in the Senate… Christina and I got seats in the gallery and grandpapa remained below. The gallery was crowded with girls and a few men, and the floor of the building was thronged with undergraduates as tightly packed as they could be. The lists were read out from the gallery and we heard splendidly. All the men’s names were read first, the Senior Wrangler [G.T. Bennett of St John's College] was much cheered.
At last the man who had been reading shouted “Women.”… A fearfully agitating moment for Philippa it must have been…. He signalled with his hand for the men to keep quiet, but had to wait some time. At last he read Philippa’s name, and announced that she was “above the Senior Wrangler.”
The male undergraduates responded to the announcement with loud cheers. Back at the college, “all the bells and gongs which could be found were rung,” there was an impromptu feast, bonfires were lit on the field hockey pitch, and Philippa was carried shoulder-high into the main hall—”with characteristic calmness,” Siklos notes, “marking herself  ‘in’ on the board” as she swayed past. The men’s reaction was generous, particularly considering that when Cambridge voted against allowing women to become members of the university in 1921, the undergraduates of the day celebrated by battering down Newnham’s college gates.

The triumph was international news for days afterwards, the New York Times running a full column, headlined “Miss Fawcett’s honor: the kind of girl this lady Senior Wrangler is.” It soon emerged that Fawcett had scored 13 percent more points than had Bennett, the leading male, and a friendly examiner confided that “she was ahead on all the papers but two … her place had no element of accident in it.”

Philippa Fawcett was not only the first woman to place above the Senior Wrangler; she was also the last. Cambridge dropped the ancient distinction in 1909 because, as mathematics became more specialized, it had become increasingly difficult to rank candidates with skills in different branches of the subject in purely numerical order.



David Hilbert: "Gentlemen, we are not running a bathing establishment." Photo: Wikicommons.


It took much longer for academics to abandon their prejudice against allowing women to take their degrees alongside men. Although the University of London had led the way in granting women equal status in 1882, it was not until 1919 that the great German university at Göttingen followed suit (and then only after a debate during which, asked “Whatever would our young men returning from the war think of being taught by a woman?” the chair of the math department, David Hilbert, famously responded: “Gentlemen, we are running a university, not a bathing establishment”). In Britain, Oxford yielded in 1920; in the United States, Yale did not desegregate until 1969, and Harvard not until 1977.
As for Cambridge, women were finally allowed to take degrees alongside men in 1948. Happily, Philippa Fawcett lived to see this confirmation of all she had stood for in the 1890s. Having spent her career as an educator–lecturing at Newnham for some years, but of course being denied the academic career a male Wrangler would have thought his right–she died, aged 80, one month after her alma mater approved the principal of equal education for women and 58 years after she had been placed “above the Senior Wrangler.”



Sources
Anon. “Miss Fawcett’s Honor; The sort of girl this lady Senior Wrangler is.” New York Times, June 24, 1890; Alex Craik. Mr Hopkins’s Men: Cambridge Reform and British Mathematics in the Nineteenth Century. London: Springer Verlag, 2008; D.O. Forfar. “What became of the Senior Wranglers?” In Mathematical Spectrum 29 (1996); Judy Green; “How Many Women Mathematicians Can You Name?” Colloquium address at Miami University [OH], June 29, 2000; Judith Walzer Leavitt. Woman and Health in America: Historical Readings. Madison [WI]: University of Wisconsin Press, 1999; Jeremy Gray. “Mathematics in Cambridge and beyond.” In Richard Mason (ed.), Cambridge Minds. Cambridge: CUP, 1994; Susan Sleeth Mosedale. “Science corrupted: Victorian biologists consider the women question.” In Journal of the History of Biology 11 (1979); Newnham College Roll Letter, February 1949, 46-54. Newnham College Archives, Cambridge; Katharina Rowold. The Educated Woman: Minds, Bodies and Women’s Higher Education in Britain, Germany and Spain, 1865-1914. New York: Routledge, 2010; Cynthia Eagle Russett. Sexual Science: the Victorian Construction of Womanhood. Cambridge [MA]: Harvard University Press, 1991; Stephen Siklos. Philippa Fawcett and the Mathematical Tripos. Cambridge: Newnham College, 1990; W.W. Rouse. A History of Mathematics at Cambridge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903; Jonathan Smith & Christopher Stray (eds). Teaching and Learning in Nineteenth Century Cambridge. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2001; Patricia Vertinsky. The Eternally Wounded Woman: Women, Doctors and Exercise in the Late Nineteenth Century. Manchester: MUP, 1989.

A collection of books and papers on women and mathematics in the nineteenth century, named in Philippa Fawcett’s honor, is held by the London Mathematical Society.

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Paranormal

What is a Paranormal Body?


A paranormal body or ghost or spirit or apparition is the energy, soul or personality of a person who has died and has somehow gotten stuck between this plane of existence and the next. Some knows and some does not know that they are dead. Mostly they have died under traumatic, unusual or highly emotional circumstances. Ghosts can be perceived by the living in a number of ways: through sight (apparitions), sound (voices), smell (fragrances and odors), touch and sometimes they can just be sensed.

An earthbound spirit or paranormal body can be a human spirit that has not properly passed over. They have not gone onto the next level, the light, heaven, whatever we can call it. They remain behind, here on earth, and the place they live we call haunted.
Sometimes there reason to stay behind is to take care of unfinished business, there love for their children. Often these earthbound spirits do not remain here for long, once they can complete their desire, they normally pass over.

 

How do ghosts (paranormal body) possess a person?

paranormal
The act of possession can happen in a few seconds or over a period of few months. It primarily depends how vulnerable is the person. Here vulnerability means at a physical or mental level. Ghost or paranormal body weakened the possible victim by creating a vulnerable atmosphere, like they cause sleeplessness. Some times if they have the power to create voices, they make sounds to create a fearful atmosphere. They take advantage of the resultant vulnerability to create an entry point. They take advantage of personality disorders such as anger, fear, over-emotional nature etc. They aggravate these personality defects adding more vulnerability. Addition to that they put negative thoughts, creating self doubts, instigating depression, causing fights between couples. The incorrect thoughts planted in a person by the ghost make the person misbehave. There normal behavior changes to a larger extent. Ghosts destabilize a person’s mental balance and thereby create vulnerability. And then they take over.

Ghosts can possess easily when the sheath of the physical body is separated from the mental sheath, e.g. in dream state, state of despair etc. In some cases this can happen even in a meditative state. Only a higher level ghost can take advantage of the subtle body being separated from the physical body during meditation.

 

What times the paranormal bodies are most active?


Paranormal bodies are most active during the transitory times like the twilight zone between day and night, the new moon day (dark moon) and full moon day between the waxing and waning phases of moon, eclipses, etc. These are periods with highest likelihood of people being possessed. They are also most active between 12.00 to 3.00 a.m.

 

How a person get possessed?


A ghost takes possession or control of a person through black energy. Black energy is a spiritual negative and harmful type of energy. The ghost infuses black energy into the vulnerable person and make a centre. And then onwards the ghost goes on to progressively transmit black energy, and make the body his home.paranormal_1

The possessing ghost (demon, devil, negative energy, etc.) covers the sheath of the physical body of the possessed person with its own mental and causal (intellect) body sheaths. By this process the mental and causal body sheaths of the possessed person become non-functional. The person then begins to talk, walk, think and behave according to the new mental body sheaths of the ghost. In a way the possessed person’s subconscious mind is now in the control of that particular paranormal body. Most people suffer in silence, there are people who have no idea that they are possessed and lead a normal life.

 

What are the signs of possession?


A change in character, taste, life-style, few changes that appear suddenly like a person may begin to express cravings he never had before like for specific food, alcohol, drugs, sex or anything else, a person’s behavior may change drastically , a complete change in interest, change of voice and behavior. The person may also have wild mood swings.

Sometimes the possessed person has an idea that something is wrong or different is happening, sometime other’s point out about the changes. The most common environments where possessions occur are hospitals, graveyards, funeral homes, wells, battle-fields etc.

 

Why they trouble?


They want to enter in a person’s body or cause trouble due to unfulfilled desires and due to the inability to move on in the after life and attain a higher positive region or sub-region.
The manifestations of distress due to ghosts or negative energies are varied, and can be from a person displaying uncharacteristic behavior to erratic violent behavior, addictions, various physical and psychological illnesses, family problems, business problems etc. Also in case of possession by powerful spirits, the voice and mannerism of person entirely change.

 

Do ghosts have a gender i.e. are they male or female?


They do not have a physical body. Hence in this perspective there is no gender. But on the basis of the appearance of their subtle form and psychological characteristics, and what they were in the past, they have genders. When ghosts materialize the apparent form is most influenced by the appearance and sex of their immediate prior birth. That is, if the ghost were a female in the human form, it would materialize as a female. Higher order ghosts like sorcerers have the ability to assume a form as per their liking. Sorcerers (Maantriks) are ghosts with very high spiritual power comparable to the spiritual powers of Saints. In order to acquire such levels of spiritual powers, a sorcerer needs to perform intense spiritual practice.

 

What is the lifespan of a ghost (paranormal body, demon, devil, negative energy, etc.)?


In case of humans, the term ‘lifespan’ means the period between their birth and death. In the case of ghosts, this would signify the period between the subtle bodies becoming ghosts to their eventual rebirth on Earth or going back to the light or heaven. Thus the lifespan of ghosts is varied. In the case of inferior order ghosts, it could be anywhere around 40-400 years. Ghosts that have been relegated to the deeper rungs of Hell and who have lot of powers are instrumental in doing wide-scale harm to humanity can remain as ghosts for thousands of years.

 

Can paranormal bodies exist or survive in the earth, water or fire?


Yes, all such paranormal bodies can exist or survive in all these areas. This is because ghosts being subtle bodies, i.e. without physical bodies, are unaffected by earth, water or fire. However ghosts of a lower order like the common ghost or those who have just entered the ghost order fear water or fire, based on the lingering impressions from their human life. This soon passes away as other ghosts educate them about their new status.

 

What can a paranormal body cause in my life?


Ghosts can be responsible for many type of illnesses, mostly mental and sometimes physical illnesses. They mostly are responsible for strong negative emotions, poor interpersonal relationships, life breakdowns on different levels: mental, financial, sexual, health etc. It can manifest itself in many ways which depends on the personality of the person possessed, one’s conscious and subconscious mind, needs, emotions, lifestyle etc.

 

Can ghosts persuade one to commit a suicide?


Yes, this is their first desire and motive, they do this very often. Ghost is an entity who passed thorough the death for various reasons. Very often they are resigned and have only little energy. As they are dead they wish the possessed person also join their world.

 

Is it possible that a ghost who has been removed off enters someone else’s body?


Yes, it is possible. after removed by force or leaving by choice they look for an other person to possess. Like we have a free will , same they also have.

 

Are there good ghosts around?


There are both kinds of ghost, but mostly they are evil, and in principle dangerous for the living human beings, because they need to steal our energy in order to survive. Very often they also want to steal our body to find a vehicle to fulfill their own desires like sex, power etc.

 

Is it possible to talk to a paranormal body? Can they hear us?


It is very much possible to talk to ghosts, but it is very dangerous, Talking to ghosts is equal to summoning them, which is very dangerous even if the ghost is someone very close to you. When you call them you are invoking their desire to live in this world, they here what you say. In a way you are disturbing their peace. This is not a good practice and one should avoid it. There are many other adventure sports to try.

 

What are the symptoms of a possessed (haunted) house ?


If the house is possessed or we say haunted, there are noises in your home, waking in the middle of the night, banging, knocking, objects moving or falling, being touched, being raped, the sensation of cold, the sensation of invisible attacks, being manipulated, humiliated and oppressed, if bruises of unknown provenance appear on your body, scratches, wounds, then it’s very likely that you are not alone in the house.

In such houses the dreams become intense nightmares. Sleep is constantly disturbed. Constant headaches. Negative emotions-Fear, Hate are intensified. Person might talk aloud to the spirits. Person hears spirit voices that confuse thinking patterns and hinder concentration needed for school, work and normal life. Fear that the person cant control or stop the spirit. Thoughts of suicide are frequent and uncontrolled.

 

Who is more prone, male or female?


Females are are more prone to becoming a victim of the spirit world compared to men. They are more vulnerable during their monthly cycles, if during that time period she goes near the graveyard or a river or lake or under trees, uses perfumes, drinks alcohol or take drugs, keeps herself dirty, open hairs with perfumed oil she is inviting trouble as spirits are everywhere and can take charge of the female body anytime the circumstances are right.

On the other hand in men the possibility arise when they take alcohol in open area, urinate in open areas or under tree, involve with women who are possessed or are unhygienic. In both men and women when the aura weakens the possibility increases.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Mail bag!

I’m sick of repeating myself but  you seem to have low comprehension and thick skulls. But I love you so this one’s for you  - an entire post, only for your reading pleasure, answering all those deep, existential questions that keep you awake at night. You ask why I delete your insightful questions? Do you not have a right to ask? Do you not bleed when they cut you? Of course you do . I just delete them because they seem to have nothing to do with the matter on hand and we don’t want the issue derailed, now do we? Also, I must tell you that your language stinks. Clean up and we’ll publish you once in a while. Do you feel loved and special yet?

1. Your posts so holier than thou.

Because I am deeply insecure about my parenting skills and often need the internetz to validate what I am doing. Please, please say I have your stamp of approval before I break my heart.  I am not half as confident about my parenting as you all must be. No doubt that is why you find my posts difficult to appreciate.
OR
I am holy – please kneel down and take my blessings. More holey than righteous in fact. Look, there’s a  big hole in the knee of my pajamas.

2. Mommy bloggers are back scratchers.

Mommy bloggers have their hands full – kids, husband, jobs, homes, social lives, charity/causes, blogs  (do you want me to go on?)  At times like this it is helpful to have a friend scratch that awkward spot we can’t reach.
OR
I am guessing you’re too thick to understand the real reason which is that mostly like minded people read a particular blog which is why we get a lot of agreement on our issues. Why do you read us, again? No life of your own? Even a busy mother’s hectic life is entertaining? Too much time on your hands and an unwillingness to scratch a friend’s back and help out, huh?

3. Mommy bloggers are cliquish.

It’s called being friends. All you need to do is stick out a hand and say Hello, how do you do? Go on, you can do it. Even my four year old can. On the other hand, if you have attention problems like a spoilt three year old and imagine that kicking, biting, screaming, frothing at the mouth and cussing will get you in, you’re wrong. Ask nicely.
OR
Most of us started blogging at the same time and have a lot in common. More than kids that is, be it food, fashion, politics, films.. so much. Why not aim that accusation at film bloggers, tech bloggers or anyone else? Is it hard to imagine finding common ground with others, camaraderie? I’d suggest you look around. I am sure you will find a group for abusive, nasty little misfits and warty toads – they will welcome you with open arms.

4. You’re a hypocrite. 

And you know that how? By the spy camera you fitted in my bed room? Or because you know someone who knows someone who is married to someone who went to school with someone who lives next door to my third cousin’s wife’s step brother and they said so? Right. Of course. That makes sense.
OR
Because I agree with something that you believe I shouldn’t because of something I said somewhere else? Well, tell you what, I’ll burn up that certificate that says I am a Saint and that should do. At times I agree, at times I don’t. Yes, I am full of contradictions. What I will find acceptable in A, I will find unacceptable in B. I’m not a machine where you will get the same output each time you click on a button. I change my mind and I often write posts to admit that I have changed the way I feel. It’s called being human. Again, not something I’d imagine you understanding. The swamp under the bridge probably functions differently.

5. Your family/brother/husband/kids suck. You should all die. 

We all will. Eventually. You might go faster with all that anger you’re bottling up and taking out on the unsuspecting www.
OR
You should get counselling for allowing a glimpse into someone’s family life get you worked up to the extent where you get so nasty. Fie!

6. You never allow disagreement.

Yeah. So? My blog, my rules. What sense of entitlement makes you think you have a RIGHT to voice an opinion here? The only right you have is to read. The rest is my call. I do plan to start reservation for rude morons and then you will have your very own quota to apply under. Until then…
OR
I do. Keep it clean, don’t cuss (wash your mouth with Dettol before you address something directly to me), be less venomous and we’ll get along fine. The oldest commenters like M, n!, (damn, I need an O, P and Q!) Choxbox, Poppy, Rohini – all disagreed with me vehemently and continue to do so. They just do it in a way that shows they were brought up well, not dragged up from a well. Some are here to win popularity contests, I am not. If I don’t like the way you address me, I’ll slam the door in your face so mind your toes.

7. You spend a lot of time on the blog for someone who has kids and a job.

And this is affecting your life in what way? Did I not deliver your pizza on time? Did my kids complain about my absence? Has my boss sent you a letter complaining about my performance? Has my husband complained about my err.. performance? So then how, how, how is this either relevant or your business? Is it deep concern and love for me? In which case I can send you my bank account number – send me some money and I’ll get myself something pretty as a token of your love.
OR
Clearly efficiency and time management are not your forte. Else you’d not find mine so shocking. Would you like me to take classes in management of time? Start with skipping the blogs that obviously tick you off and leave you frothing like the coffee you’re drinking when you should be getting work done.

8. I hate you and I hate your writing. 

I’m deeply concerned. I could suggest a counsellor who will help you deal with these conflicting emotions. You hate me, but you read me… the fascination of the abomination, huh?! I understand. Even I am drawn to watching blood and gore on Dexter. On the other hand I do rein my emotions in well enough to not cuss out the person who entertains me so.
OR
Your comments are in poor taste. Refer to point # 6. Do try not to behave as though you were born in a barn and are interacting with another human for the first time in your life. If you don’t like something or someone, don’t interact with them. Didn’t momma teach you that? Also, didn’t she tell you, IF YOU DON’T HAVE ANYTHING NICE TO SAY, DON’T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL. Send me your address and I’ll send you the Barney CD that says so.

9.  Your posts are always about how great a parent you are, how fantastic your kids are and how good looking your husband is, how happy your life is. 

Eh? Did you miss the part about the husband being grey, pockmarked and decorated with ugly toes and fingers? Clearly. Or the bit about the Brat being stubborn beyond measure? The Bean being a very plain looking child? Clearly you don’t pay attention in class. As to how great a person I am, that of course is indisputable. *takes a bow*
OR
Where in the memo does it say I must write about every part of my life, good, bad, ugly for you? Who died and made you moderator of my posts? Is it hard to imagine a person loving their life and their family? How sad are you?!
Also, perhaps you’ve missed the point of blogging. We mediocre writers whom no one will otherwise publish choose this platform to showcase how awe-effing-some we are. The blog could be about anything but the point is the same. That we’re simply terrific and no one recognises our formidable talent – Laud my photoblog and admire my great camera technique, appreciate my astute political opinion, what do you think of my hilarious Bollywood posts? Applaud my arts/craft/recipes. Critique my absolutely brilliant poetry. Marvel at my rather witty, random thoughts. Adore  my fantastic babies (that would be us “mommy bloggers”) and of course the anti-mommy bloggers who consider it infra dig to actually admit that their kids matter and say – I’m not a mommy blogger, I’m just a blogger who writes about her kids among other earth shaking matters. Whatever. We’re all navel gazers. Read, don’t read, yawn, move on. Click on the X. Get out of our faces. Get your own blog if you want to rant. Get out of our spaces. (wow! poetry, did you see that?!)

10. You say you’re tired of responding, but that is because everyone is disagreeing with you. 

Absolutely. I’m so effing brilliant that I don’t see how anyone on earth could disagree with me. I should be making government policies.
OR
I think it’s rather dense of them. They come up with the exact same thing someone 4 comments above has said and still think it’s the tactical response of the century. You might not agree, but unless you say something new, I am fast losing interest in the issue AND I also have a life that I must get back to living so that I have something to blog about tomorrow! What can I say, I have a low threshold for idiots who cannot just read the argument in the comments above them. Yawn.
Next round coming up in another post. Until the next time you get your knickers in a twist, fare thee well.

Source

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Sex secrets sure to drive him wild!

Men reveal sex secrets that drive them wild. They maybe simple things women do most unconsciously, but they are potent enough to have a man go up in smoke - thank heavens, not literally!








When it comes to sex and for*play, men think differently and so do women. What may work for the goose, may not necessarily work for the gander as well, and so to have sex that is thrilling, memorable and completely au naturale for both, men let women onto their secret fantasies!

Action: Pretend to not want to make-out. Keep your lips closed and clench your legs together.

Effect: Once he notices that you are not kissing him back, he will realise you are up to something. His kiss will become passionate as he will try to pry your mouth open. Fighting for it brings on an exhilarating primal instinct in men.

Action: Have plenty of white tees. Wear them while working with water – watering the garden, washing the dishes and more.

Effect: See-through, wet clothes are a real turn-on for men and they can't wait to pull them off you.

Action: A woman gliding her lips on the mouth of a bottle – whether it's water or an aerated drink.

Effect: The sensual caress of her lips on the bottle makes men go weak in the knees and their imagination runs away with them, wishing those lips were on them.

Action: While out shopping, take him along with the clothes you want to try on, into the changing room, especially if you are buying lingerie.

Effect: He'll love you for thinking on your feet!

Action: Climb into bed looking very innocent, then do wonderfully dirty deeds.

Effect: Looking pure and being devilish is a heady combination and every man's dream.

Action: Do yoga and let your man watch.

Effect: It can be the most exciting form of for*play without touching each other.

Action: Kiss the patch of skin in front of his ears.

Effect: It's an erogenous zone and he will quickly beg you for more.

Action: When your man leans forward to kiss you, hold the back of his neck in your hands.

Effect: It's a tender move and will definitely bring your bodies closer to each other.

Action: Caress your man's chest often.

Effect: It's another erogenous zone. Tantalize him with light, feathery kisses to get the fire burning.

Action: Whisper your man's name during the session.

Effect: It can really turn up the heat!


Source unknown

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Be focused.






There once lived a great mathematician in a village outside Ujjain. He was often called by the local king to advice on matters related to the economy. His reputation had spread as far as Taxila in the North and Kanchi in the South. So it hurt him very much when the village headman told him, "You may be a great mathematician who advises the king on economic matters but your son does not know the value of gold or silver." 

The mathematician called his son and asked, "What is more valuable - gold or silver?" "Gold," said the son. "That is correct. Why is it then that the village headman makes fun of you, claims you do not know the value of gold or silver? He teases me every day. He mocks me before other village elders as a father who neglects his son. This hurts me. I feel everyone in the village is laughing behind my back because you do not know what is more valuable, gold or silver. Explain this to me, son." 

So the son of the mathematician told his father the reason why the village headman carried this impression. "Every day on my way to school, the village headman calls me to his house. There, in front of all village elders, he holds out a silver coin in one hand and a gold coin in other. He asks me to pick up the more valuable coin. I pick the silver coin. He laughs, the elders jeer, and everyone makes fun of me. And then I go to school. This happens every day. That is why they tell you I do not know the value of gold or silver." 

The father was confused. His son knew the value of gold and silver, and yet when asked to choose between a gold coin and silver coin always picked the silver coin. "Why don't you pick up the gold coin?" he asked. In response, the son took the father to his room and showed him a box. In the box were at least a hundred silver coins. Turning to his father, the mathematician’s son said, "The day I pick up the gold coin the game will stop. They will stop having fun and I will stop making money." 

Moral: Be focused on goal. Ultimately it matters. Don't ever forget your goal.

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Ground Zero : Ramlila Maidan (Delhi)


This was a great experience sitting all night in the Ramlila maidan.. There were people all night from all different backgrounds united for the same cause. Amazing to see people coming with food water and various things for the people holding ground in the Ramlila maidan. I hope all this effort will bring something good....

When fight against British started i dont think anyone might be thinking that it will be possible to get freedom from a supreme world power, but it happend...a hope lead to the freedom. This time same hope will lead to a better future.

 
 


India Corruption Protest Supporters of Indian activist Anna Hazare march through a flyover in New Delhi, India, Sunday, Aug. 21, 2011. Hazare, who is on his sixth day of hunger strike to demand that Indian lawmakers pass his anti-corruption bill said Sunday that his supporters comprise a "people's parliament" above the nation's elected assembly.(AP Photo) INDIA OUT AP

Hope




RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal related the Hongkong cleanup story. In the1970s Hongkong was so corrupt with police-mafia nexus so strong that hundreds of thousands of angry citizens came out on the streets to protest against it. The government had to set up an independent body Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) to deal with corruption. The Hongkong government gave complete powers to the Commission to take any action, it saw fit to rid Hongkong of this corruption which had led to an out-of-control spiraling crime graph.

The first thing the ICAC did was to sack 103 police officers from a force of 107 officers. The message went out immediately that corruption would not be tolerated any more and today Hongkong is one of the most honest countries in the world.
 
If it worked in Hongkong, it can work in India. Presently the two bodies dealing with corruption in the country are the Central Vigilance Comission (CVC) and the Central Burea of Investigation (CBI). The CVC is an advisory body. It can only recommend to the Government that action should be taken against erring officers or polticians. The Government has not jailed anyone in the last 5 years based on recommendations of the CVC. The CBI are completely controlled by the government. This is why the corrupt go free, unless there is a Lokpal Bill in place.



By Abhishek Chaturvedi

Monday, August 1, 2011

Men Need to Cuddle!

That old chestnut about women always wanting to cuddle? Myth, according to a Kinsey Institute study, which finds that kissing and hugging were more important to the happiness of men than of women.





The study involved 1,009 heterosexual middle-aged and older couples in long-term (average 25 years) committed relationships in five countries. Researchers asked participants to fill out questionnaires about their satisfaction with their relationships and sex lives, revealing some surprising truths: for instance, men who reported frequent kissing or cuddling with their partners were on average three times as happy with their relationships as men who reported limited snuggling. For women, such shows of tenderness didn't have much impact on relationship satisfaction.


However, both men and women who reported frequent touching, kissing and hugging, as well as higher sexual functioning and more sex, were more likely to be sexually satisfied. For women, sex got better over time: they reported significantly more sexual satisfaction after being with their partner for 15 years.

"Possibly, women become more satisfied over time because their expectations change, or life changes with the children grown," Julia Heiman, director of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction and lead author of the study, said in a statement. "On the other hand, those who weren't so happy sexually might not be married so long."

Both men and women became happier with their relationships the longer they stayed together. But, in a reversal of stereotype, men were more likely than women to report being happy in their relationships, while women were more likely to report being satisfied with sex.

The couples in the survey hailed from Japan, Brazil, the U.S., Germany and Spain. The study found that Japanese couples were significantly happier with their relationships than American couples, who were in turn happier than couples from Brazil and Spain. The Japanese were also more likely to report sexual satisfaction than Americans: Japanese men in particular were 2.61 times more sexually satisfied than American men. As for women, Japanese and Brazilian women were more likely to report sexual satisfaction than their American counterparts.


What predicted overall satisfaction? For women, key factors were relationship duration and their own good sexual functioning. But for men, there seemed to be a larger variety of contributors to happiness: longer relationships, good physical health (healthy men were 67% more likely to report being happy with their relationships than men in poor health), good sexual functioning and their wives' sexual satisfaction: a man's happiness rose 17% with each additional point he rated the importance of his partner's orgasm.
"This study on heterosexual couples provides a basis for future research on sex and gender, such as how same-sex couples may or may not show similarities and differences in relationship and sexual satisfaction," said Heiman.

Monday, July 25, 2011

Bhagavat Geeta

Bhagavat Geeta is very huge. So why we read the Bhagavat Geeta, even if we can't understand it? I always wondered why! I am starting with a story . . .

An old farmer lived on a farm in the mountains with his young grandson. Each morning, Grandpa was up early sitting at the kitchen table reading his Bhagavat Geeta.

His grandson wanted to be just like him and tried to imitate him in every way he could.

One day the grandson asked, "Grandpa! I try to read the Bhagawat Geeta just like you but I don't understand it, and what I do understand, I forget as soon as I close the book. What good does reading the Bhagawat Geeta do?"

The Grandfather quietly turned from putting coal in the stove and replied, "Take this coal basket down to the river and bring me back a basket of water."

The boy did as he was told, but all the water leaked out before he got back to the house.

The grandfather laughed and said, "You'll have to move a little faster next time," and sent him back to the river with the basket to try again.

This time the boy ran faster, but again the basket was empty before here turned home. Out of breath, he told his grandfather that it was impossible to carry water in a basket, and he went to get a bucket instead.

The old man said, "I don't want a bucket of water; I want a basket of water. You're just not trying hard enough," and he went out the door to watch the boy try again.

At this point, the boy knew it was impossible, but he wanted to show his grandfather that even if he ran as fast as he could, the water would leak out before he got back to the house. The boy again dipped the basket into river and ran hard, but when he reached his grandfather the basket was again empty.

Out of breath, he said, "SEE.... it is useless!"

"So you think it is useless?" The old man said, "Look at the basket."

The boy looked at the basket and for the first time realized that the basket was different. It had been transformed from a dirty old coal basket and was now clean, inside and out.

"Son, that's what happens when you read the Bhagavat Geeta. You might not understand or remember everything, but when you read it, you will be changed, inside and out. That is the work of GOD in our lives."
 
So sometimes, thing we do we do not see the results for them, we have to just perform. Latter in life we tend to see the results. Some take time, some take even more time. Some make you more talented and perfect. 

. . .

Saturday, July 16, 2011

Hypothesis of Andrew Stankiewicz (1.0):

Olivia Cassandrae

Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae  -  Yesterday 1:20 AM  -  Limited
Beta version 2.0:
+modifications made by Dave Pearson

Hypothesis of Andrew Stankiewicz (1.0):

Theory: If there is a person who believes in God is 99% atheist!

Answer:...
Expand this post »
  -  Comment  -  Share
+1
 by Badger (stealth)
Dave Pearson's profile photo
Dave Pearson - Not that I think this approach makes sense, but I think the function you want to define, if you must, would be called isAtheistInRespectOf(), and which takes a list of deities. That's the point here.
Yesterday 1:22 AM   
Heather Wiech's profile photo
Heather Wiech - "Number of gods = 100" is false. There are thousands of different deities in mythology. India alone has more than that. This is a foolhardy endeavor.
Yesterday 1:25 AM   
Dave Pearson's profile photo
Dave Pearson - I think you'll find that the 100 figure is the deity count version of ahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow
Yesterday 1:30 AM   
Miles Kurland's profile photo
Miles Kurland - I have to respectfully disagree (and I know it's a joke) because atheism is the lack of believe in any god or supernatural phenomena or agencies.

99% atheist is a little bit like 99% pregnant: it's a binary condition. The atheism bit is either flipped on or off.
Yesterday 1:32 AM   
Adam Hirschfeld's profile photo
Adam Hirschfeld - Very few humans truly believe in any god anyway. Do you wonder why they spend so much time perpetuating the same garbage? that is why. Only the severely mental ill have what is called true faith.
Yesterday 1:33 AM   
Dave Pearson's profile photo
Dave Pearson - It'd be generally understood, and would be binary, if one said "I am atheist in respect of the Flying Spaghetti Monster".

It's true, of course, that you can't really be 99% atheist, but... yeah, it borks the joke. ;-)
Yesterday 1:34 AM   
Marshall Gillson's profile photo
Marshall Gillson - First of all, I don't think you can be an atheist "with respect to" a specific god. I consider atheism an absolute state. If you do not believe in any gods then you're an atheist. Otherwise you're not.

Second, as some blogger pointed out to me once (maybe PZ Meyers?), this line of reasoning is counterproductive. Theists don't decide on their god by looking at a list and systematically eliminating ones they disbelieve. They are by-and-large taught a god and stick with it. The other gods are just out by default.
Yesterday 1:35 AM   
Dave Pearson's profile photo
Dave Pearson - +Marshall Gillson It's not uncommon parlance, and would be understood within context, to describe someone as atheist in respect to a deity.

But, of course, it shouldn't be confused with being atheist, period.
Yesterday 1:37 AM   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - +Heather Wiech I wrote there to suppose: Let's suppose. It is used in Maths, when trying to prove a hypothesis.
Yesterday 1:39 AM  -  Edit   
Marshall Gillson's profile photo
Marshall Gillson - Just because it's understood doesn't make it correct. I know what she means, I just don't think it makes much sense to call people who are clearly theists "atheists".
Yesterday 1:40 AM   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - There may be hundreds or thousands of Gods but here in my thesis I said let's suppose, Number Of Gods = 100;

Therefore it's not wrong.
Yesterday 1:40 AM  -  Edit   
Heather Wiech's profile photo
Heather Wiech - +Olivia Cassandrae And in philosophy, which gave birth to math, all premises must be true for the conclusion to be true.
Yesterday 1:40 AM   
Marshall Gillson's profile photo
Marshall Gillson - +Heather Wiech: Then we can't ever ask any questions about fictional universes? PS... triple points for being another Rhode Islander.
Yesterday 1:42 AM   
Dave Pearson's profile photo
Dave Pearson - I'd say it's correct in context, but the context is being lost a little (mostly because it seems it's a joke that's being dissected). Moreover, the other bit of context that it has been stripped of is this is a way of explaining, to a theist, how one can even be an atheist in the first place and that, and this is the vital bit, it isn't about the god they believe in, their god is not special.
Yesterday 1:42 AM   
Jim Lloyd's profile photo
Jim Lloyd - atheist: a person who believes god is an unnecessary explanatory concept.
Yesterday 2:01 AM   
Kyle Grove's profile photo
Kyle Grove - An atheist doesn't believe in any gods... this is kinda pointless.
Yesterday 2:03 AM   
Badger (stealth)'s profile photo
Badger (stealth) - This is fun to watch! ^.^ /popcorns <is glad he circled Olivia>
Yesterday 2:09 AM   
Miles Kurland's profile photo
Miles Kurland - Jim, I think many atheists would say that it's not a matter of belief: they'd assert that atheism is a logical conclusion that there is no conclusive evidence to support the existence of god, gods, or supernatural phenomena.
Yesterday 2:12 AM   
Miles Kurland's profile photo
Miles Kurland - Dave: that joke has elsewhere been posed as "You know how you don't believe in any of those other gods beside you God? The only difference between you and me is that I disbelieve in just one more god than you do."
Yesterday 2:18 AM   
Jim Lloyd's profile photo
Jim Lloyd - +Miles Kurland - Yes, many would say that. But I think they've let the faith-heads hijack the world believe to imply belief without evidence.
Yesterday 2:23 AM (edited Yesterday 2:24 AM)   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - +Badger (stealth) I am taking it as a compliment, therefore thank you gentleman.
Yesterday 2:24 AM  -  Edit   
Dave Pearson's profile photo
Dave Pearson - Yeah, although it's an old sentiment, it's one that was, arguably made popular by Dawkins (in tGD, wasn't it?).
Yesterday 2:25 AM   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - +Badger (stealth) I was just wondering who is 'he' in your attribute, I am glad he . . .?
Yesterday 2:27 AM  -  Edit   
Chris Gomersall's profile photo
Chris Gomersall - Crazy thread. Much misunderstanding. Olivia's thesis is what it is, unaddressed for what it is. The clear exchange of ideas through text is still SO lame...
Yesterday 4:13 AM   
Badger (stealth)'s profile photo
Badger (stealth) - Olivia: he=me, meaning I'm glad I started following your timeline. ^.^
Yesterday 4:17 AM   
Dave Spencer's profile photo
Dave Spencer - Theists and atheists both based on belief. I don't believe a purple bunny with green eyes that speaks and understands klingon exists. While unlikely, can not rule it out, although one might consider it a fools errond to spend a life searching for said bunny. Goes to the earlier truth thread, belief is subjective and even when it is widely held we cannot afford to make the mistake of calling it truth. There is no shame in saying "The evidence suggests, but we cannot prove or disprove the existance of the klingon bunny".
Yesterday 5:38 AM   
Adam Hirschfeld's profile photo
Adam Hirschfeld - You are making the rainbow mistake again. I see no example of how Atheists have faith in anything.
Yesterday 5:39 AM   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - +Adam Hirschfeld are you suggesting that Atheists don't have faith at all?

+Dave Spencer thank you.
Yesterday 9:42 AM  -  Edit   
Jim Lloyd's profile photo
Jim Lloyd - +Olivia Cassandrae Consider the various connotations of these three words:belieffaithtrust. They aren't all purely synonymous, yet they are often used interchangeably, even by atheists. But a pedantic atheist (well, this one anyway) is likely to say that while we have trust in our friends, we don't have faith in them. Faith is belief without evidence, or even despite contrary evidence. A claim for which there is no evidence for or against the claim is provisionally false, even if millions of people have faith the claim is true. Especially if the claim is tied to one culture.
Yesterday 10:48 AM   
Edward McGuire's profile photo
Edward McGuire - The argument hinges on a definition of "atheist" which is artificially narrow. The word "atheist" was made up by the religious. For 2,000 years it was a term of contempt. It meant a blasphemer or heretic, and did not mean actual disbelief. If you offend the gods, they will abandon you and you will then be godless (atheist). So atheism began as a social construct, not a self-identification. The word "atheist" has been adopted by atheists themselves for about 500 years, but also still has its original meaning when spoken by a believer. So it is not necessarily true that a person who believes in Yahweh but not in 99 other gods is 99% atheist. Despite his belief in Yahweh, if the Yahwist community considers him a blasphemer, he is an atheist according to them also, and therefore 100% atheist.
Yesterday 10:51 AM   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - +Jim Lloyd wonderful explanation of faith. So crystal clear.

+Edward McGuire Why does a Yahwist considers him a blasphemer when he believes in Yahweh. He should be considered as theist. Right? I do not understand this logic.
Yesterday 11:37 AM  -  Edit   
Edward McGuire's profile photo
Edward McGuire - For example, he might believe the "wrong" thing about Yahweh, the thing that makes the community consider him a heretic. Or, he might believe in Yahweh but be angry with him, and speak about him with disrespect, so that the community considers him a blasphemer. In either case the community can think of him as having lost his god. It is still true today that such people are called atheists even when the people themselves deny they are atheists.
Yesterday 11:48 AM   
Olivia Cassandrae's profile photo
Olivia Cassandrae - +Edward McGuire very well explained about atheists and how they are emerged.

Ha! Now I totally got you. Thank you.
Yesterday 11:53 AM  -  Edit   
Add a comment...