Earth has less water than you think

May 08, 2012 by Jason Major, Universe Today
All the water on Earth would fit into a sphere 860 miles (1,385 km) wide. Credit: Jack Cook/WHOI/USGS

If you were to take all of the water on Earth — all of the fresh water, sea water, ground water, water vapor and water inside our bodies — take all of it and somehow collect it into a single, giant sphere of liquid, how big do you think it would be?

According to the U. S. Geological Survey, it would make a ball 860 miles (1,385 km) in diameter, about as wide edge-to-edge as the distance between Salt Lake City to Topeka, Kansas. That’s it. Take all the on and you’d have a blue sphere less than a third the size of the Moon.

Feeling a little thirsty?

And this takes into consideration all the Earth’s water… even the stuff humans can’t drink or directly access, like salt water, water vapor in the atmosphere and the water locked up in the ice caps. In fact, if you were to take into consideration only the fresh water on Earth (which is 2.5% of the total) you’d get a much smaller sphere… less than 100 miles (160 km) across.

Even though we think of reservoirs, lakes and rivers when we picture Earth’s fresh water supply, in reality most of it is beneath the surface — up to 2 million cubic miles (8.4 million cubic km) of Earth’s available fresh water is underground. But the vast majority of it — over 7 million cubic miles (29.2 cubic km) is in the ice sheets that cover Antarctica and Greenland.

Of course, the illustration above (made by Jack Cook at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution) belies the real size and mass of such a sphere of pure liquid water. The total amount of water contained within would still be quite impressive — over 332.5 million cubic miles (1,386 cubic km)! (A single cubic mile of water equals 1.1 trillion gallons.) Still, people tend to be surprised at the size of such a hypothetical sphere compared with our planet as a whole, especially when they’ve become used to the description of Earth as a “watery world”.

Makes one a little less apt to take it for granted.

Read more on the USGS site here, and check out some facts on reducing your water usage here.

Explore further: Researchers construct a model of impact for El Nino / La Nina events

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Enceladus on display in newest images from Cassini

May 03, 2012

The latest images are in from Saturn’s very own personal paparazzi, NASA’s Cassini spacecraft, fresh from its early morning flyby of the ice-spewing moon Enceladus. And, being its last closeup for ...

A swirling oasis of life

Feb 14, 2012

A serpentine eddy swirls in the southern Indian Ocean several hundred kilometers off the coast of South Africa in this natural-color image, acquired by NASA’s Terra satellite on December 26, 2011.

Clean drinking water for everyone

May 01, 2012

Nearly 80 percent of disease in developing countries is linked to bad water and sanitation. Now a scientist at Michigan Technological University has developed a simple, cheap way to make water safe to drink, even if it’s ...

Desalinating seawater with minimal energy use

Jul 12, 2011

At a pilot facility in Singapore, Siemens has cut the energy needed to desalinate seawater by more than 50 percent. The plant processes 50 cubic meters of water per day, consuming only 1.5 kilowatt-hours of ...

Recommended for you

The ocean's living carbon pumps

15 hours ago

When we talk about global carbon fixation – "pumping" carbon out of the atmosphere and fixing it into organic molecules by photosynthesis – proper measurement is key to understanding this process. By ...

User comments : 123

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

LariAnn
2.3 / 5 (18) May 08, 2012
An example like this gets one thinking about what the consequences would be if an ice asteroid about 100 miles in diameter were to enter Earth's atmosphere at an angle such that the friction of entry would melt the whole thing, or at least cause it to break up into small enough pieces that immediate major destruction would be averted. However, the result would be like all the ice sheets/caps melting all at once.
Vendicar_Decarian
May 08, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (98) May 08, 2012
Well, VD, mock all you want, it is a good example of meaningless propaganda, especially since the earth does not lose water over time, and has obviously supported an incredible multitude of life for humdreds of millions of years.

Comparing it to the size of the earth is meaningless, since life is so tiny by comparison.

For example, one can make it sound as if there is ALOT of water, by simply rephrasing as follows,.... there is nearly 54 billion gallons of water per human on earth,.... or there is enough water to give each human on earth 195 Empire State Buildings filled to the top.
dnatwork
2.5 / 5 (22) May 08, 2012
noumenon, why do you take this as propaganda? No agenda is put forth, other than being aware of how much water there is on Earth, and how much of that is fresh. Yes, it implies that we should conserve clean water, but that is hardly a partisan idea.

But then you do some math. Why should only humans get all the water? And what is up with this socialist notion of giving them the water? Who owns the water rights, and why do you think you can take their property like that?
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (95) May 08, 2012
dnatwork, VD is using this article as an analogy to mock responses to other articles about AGW, such as mine which reject the anti-capitalist, socialist political solutions put forth by the far left.

Likewise, my response is not just about THIS article, but the barrage of such "studies" that conclude 'were all doomed and need to change our lifestyles, and submit to government control'.
ryggesogn2
2.9 / 5 (31) May 08, 2012
A similar idea for population.
All 7 billion people can comfortably fit in a land mass the size if Australia.

Or all the high level nuclear waste stored in the US would cover a football field 4 feet deep.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.2 / 5 (20) May 08, 2012
Wrong. The entire population of the world can comfortably live in an area the size of Texas.

"All 7 billion people can comfortably fit in a land mass the size if Australia." - RyggTard

But not without using the rest of the world as a source of water, and food and other material goods.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.4 / 5 (17) May 08, 2012
Proof that the earth losing water.

http://www.dreams...8452.jpg

"earth does not lose water over time" - NumenTard

And the earth is growing larger as well as the universe expands.

http://www.youtub...7qDeI05U

Socialist Science can't explain these things, just as no one can explain the tides.

http://www.youtub...ipg71LbI

Doug_Huffman
2.8 / 5 (22) May 08, 2012
The article and comments are illustrations of pathetic innumeracy. From an Island in Lake Michigan.
Lurker2358
1.5 / 5 (33) May 08, 2012
I once proved Noah's flood is physically possible, using ONLY the water currently available on the planet.

All you'd need to have happen is an ice age, whereby the rain freezes on contact all over the world, in this way, the water could "cover" the mountains to a depth of 15 cubits without literally needing to be thousands of feet deep (as in the literal liquid water interpretation,) but rather only as little as about 22ft deep to meet the description.

After it stopped "raining," the ice could melt off the land and run back into the seas and oceans (as per the "east wind" which dried it up) and therefore, leave the tropical and temperate zones dry again, with the glaciers of the "ice age" in place over the high latitudes.

There is more than enough water on earth to allow for this to be possible, and I think it only takes a small fraction of the existing water budget to pull it off, in theory.
Jeddy_Mctedder
2.2 / 5 (18) May 08, 2012
the whole tenure of this article is nonsense. its' a lot of water on the surface. a sphere of any substance with a diameter of 400 miles would surpass the mass of the largest asteroids in our solar system and many of the moons of jupiter.

more imporatntly, this article skips over the vast quantities of water locked beneath our surface, in the mantle and crust. that amount of water is immeasurable, difficult to estimate with any accuracy, but it stands to reason that it is a massive amount of water greater or equal to the mass of all the water found on the surface. remember how thin the surface of the planet is. the ocean is 3 miles deep. yes it is pure water, but below the surface are thousands more unit volumes for water to hide at compressed high temperatures within rock.

pauljpease
3.8 / 5 (13) May 08, 2012
I once proved Noah's flood is physically possible, using ONLY the water currently available on the planet.



Common sense suggests that the tale of Noah's flood was an attempt to describe something that ancient people must have observed. Namely, why there are fossils of marine animals on the top of mountains. You see, the idea that mountains were thrust up by tectonic action wasn't hypothesized until the 19th century. Many fables from ancient texts display a similar hallmark of early attempts to explain readily observable facts. For example, the story that snakes were animals that were forced to crawl on their bellies for some misdeed. Well, people used to be very familiar with animal anatomy and skeletons. It turns out snakes have vestigial hind legs that are internal (look it up, they're really cute little legs). Our understanding of facts has improved but we still have these old stories...
DoubleD
4.6 / 5 (10) May 08, 2012
I think that the point was... "Hey, while it seems like there is a lot of water in/on/around the planet, it much smaller than you likely think when you put it all in one place." The illustration shows scale that normal people can understand. Kind of like saying if you shrink Earth down to basketball size, the moon is the size of a tennis ball orbiting the earth at an average distance of about 21 ft. Nobody's claiming that this results in any kind of calamity. Its just information presented in a format that is easily understood by the layman.

Not everything is a proclamation of impending doom contrary to what some people would love to believe. How else can they feel superior if they don't have things to belittle? Poor, sad people.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (24) May 08, 2012
Wrong. The entire population of the world can comfortably live in an area the size of Texas.
But within a few weeks most of them would be dead.
But not without using the rest of the world as a source of water, and food and other material goods.
But logistics would make this untenable.
Comparing it to the size of the earth is meaningless, since life is so tiny by comparison.
You are naive and need to change your perspective.

"E. coli bacteria reproduce every 20 minutes under ideal conditions; if this rate of growth were to persist unchecked, after 36 hours the descendants of a single bacterium would cover the entire surface of the earth one foot deep, in the next hour be over our heads, and within a few days weigh as much as the visible universe and be expanding outward at the speed of light."

-Even elephants can do this:
http://www.athro....ame.html
to a depth of 15 cubits
-Cubits. Ahaahaaaahahahah!!!
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (24) May 08, 2012
I once proved Noah's flood is physically possible, using ONLY the water currently available on the planet.

All you'd need to have happen is an ice age, whereby the rain freezes on contact all over the world
-I suppose this meshes well with your proof of dry ice in the antarctic? Of course, god can do anything, we all know that. Even the megamaniacally stupid.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (23) May 08, 2012
Comparing it to the size of the earth is meaningless, since life is so tiny by comparison.
Also, life has apparently created all the free O2, not to mention limestone mountains and all fossil fuel deposits. But we know that thats a myth - hydrocarbons are everywhere.

It would be interesting to see a similar calculation of the volume of all the crap that life has created on this planet though.
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (89) May 08, 2012
Comparing it to the size of the earth is meaningless, since life is so tiny by comparison.


You are naive and need to change your perspective.

"E. coli bacteria reproduce every 20 minutes under ideal conditions; if this rate of growth were to persist unchecked, after 36 hours the descendants of a single bacterium would cover the entire surface of the earth one foot deep, in the next hour be over our heads, and within a few days weigh as much as the visible universe and be expanding outward at the speed of light."


I'm not sure I understand your point. Nature is self regulating, and so has 'checks', clearly, as the above does not occur, nor can it. So it is theoretical non-sense. Life will not increase indefinitely because of this, anyway. So the idea of 'conserving water' is nonsensical.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (22) May 08, 2012
Life is configured to produce more of itself than can be expected to survive to reproduce. This is what drives natural selection, the expansion into new habitats, and subsequent speciation.

Your 'self-regulation' happens through predation, disease, suffering, starvation, and death. This is true for e coli, elephants, and humans.

And I reiterate that the effects that life has had, and has the potential to have, on this planet ARE huge and far exceed the tiny little wad that it might comprise all by itself.

Is life just the substance which is alive at the moment? Or is it the sum total of all it has created?
So it is theoretical non-sense.
Yes I am waxing philo-sophical.
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (87) May 08, 2012
Your 'self-regulation' happens through predation, disease, suffering, starvation, and death. This is true for e coli, elephants, and humans.


It's not "my" self regulation, it's natures, and is unavoidable. 

It also occurs with reduction in the birth rate which occurs with increased standards of living, which in turn, is brought on by capitalism and freedom, another natural force.

"So I believe deeply that the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history." - Barach H. Obama
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (88) May 08, 2012
And I reiterate that the effects that life has had, and has the potential to have, on this planet ARE huge and far exceed the tiny little wad that it might comprise all by itself.


The relative effect is that we kicked up a little dust, while our energy technology was in it's infancy and crude.

Technology will advance past co2 based energy, and the earth will barely notice our use of it, given the tiny time scales. Perhaps a few tenths of one degree per century will be a good thing for humans for a few hundred years.

In any case, since it is clear that humans have not even solved global poverty, nor solved crime, nor has the UN been competent in preventing genecide in recent times,... it does not seem likely that man will be able to control the climate.

We can't even agree on a protocol for reducing co2 emissions,.. even Canada bailed. This is a failure of the far lefts mentality of Regulate and Control,.. i.e. each country is acting in it's own best interests.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (24) May 08, 2012
t also occurs with reduction in the birth rate which occurs with increased standards of living, which in turn, is brought on by capitalism and freedom, another natural force.
This also includes religious freedom, which is used to reproduce beyond all reason as a form of aggression.
The relative effect is that we kicked up a little dust, while our energy technology was in it's infancy and crude.
Thats us... so far. I was referring to the effects that life has had on this planet which have been substantial.
http://www.creati...ne2.html
http://www.scient...mosphere
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (31) May 08, 2012
In any case, since it is clear that humans have not even solved global poverty
This of course is caused primarily by our tropical reproduction rate which is routinely exploited by the world religions to increase the flock.
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (86) May 08, 2012
,.... the rational course of action, is the one occurring as we speak,.. that is, free market capitalism continuing full bore ahead as usual. Only then will civilization be sophisticated and advanced enough to adapt to alternatives.

The far leftist with their big gov regulation and control of human behavior, will have us living in the stone age completely at odds with the nature of man, which will prolong the use of oil/coal not decrease it,... since population will continue to increase and thus such controls would have to be ever more restrictive on account.

Do you see governments controlling the masses and their energy use? No, not even close to the same hysteria we hear from the AGW alarmists. This means such cataclysmic propaganda HAS BEEN REJECTED by the collective genius of mankind. This is a fact.
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (86) May 08, 2012
In any case, since it is clear that humans have not even solved global poverty
This of course is caused primarily by our tropical reproduction rate which is routinely exploited by the world religions to increase the flock.


As you know, I don't believe in god and agree that religion is on it's way to obsolescence. But, population growth has little to do with religion and anti-contraceptive (most Catholics actually use contraceptives anyway) and much more symptomatic of poverty, and poor standards of living.

Wealth is not like furniture in a room, where we can only move them around without any fundamental difference. Wealth can be created scaled globally.
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (83) May 08, 2012
The relative effect is that we kicked up a little dust, while our energy technology was in it's infancy and crude.
Thats us... so far. I was referring to the effects that life has had on this planet which have been substantial.
http://www.creati...ne2.html


Even if that was true, and you may be right,,... we can't get out of our own way, and negate our existence. If man cannot continue to exist on this planet with his intrinsic nature intact, then we shall go down with the ship.
smee
4.2 / 5 (5) May 08, 2012
doesn't add up, am I missing something?
"if you were to take into consideration only the fresh water on Earth (which is 2.5% of the total) youd get a much smaller sphere less than 100 miles (160 km) across."

so V= 4/3*3.14*50^3=523,333 cubic miles

"up to 2 million cubic miles (8.4 million cubic km) of Earths available fresh water is underground. But the vast majority of it over 7 million cubic miles (29.2 cubic km) is in the ice sheets that cover Antarctica and Greenland."
PoppaJ
1.5 / 5 (17) May 08, 2012
the whole tenure of this article is nonsense. its' a lot of water on the surface. a sphere of any substance with a diameter of 400 miles would surpass the mass of the largest asteroids in our solar system and many of the moons of jupiter.

more imporatntly, this article skips over the vast quantities of water locked beneath our surface, in the mantle and crust. that amount of water is immeasurable, difficult to estimate with any accuracy, but it stands to reason that it is a massive amount of water greater or equal to the mass of all the water found on the surface. remember how thin the surface of the planet is. the ocean is 3 miles deep. yes it is pure water, but below the surface are thousands more unit volumes for water to hide at compressed high temperatures within rock.


Thank you. I am not sure what the intent of this article really is but it grossly misleads on the amount of water resources actually available.
ryggesogn2
2.2 / 5 (29) May 08, 2012
"if you could somehow gather every scrap of gold that man has ever mined into one place, you could only build about one-third of the Washington Monument."
"all of the platinum in the world would fit in a cube that is 6.3 meters (about 20 feet) on a side. In other words, all of the platinum in the entire world would easily fit in the average home!"
http://money.hows...n213.htm
verkle
1.6 / 5 (14) May 08, 2012
doesn't add up, am I missing something?
so V= 4/3*3.14*50^3=523,333 cubic miles
"up to 2 million cubic miles (8.4 million cubic km) of Earths available fresh water is underground. But the vast majority of it over 7 million cubic miles (29.2 cubic km) is in the ice sheets that cover Antarctica and Greenland."


smee---I was thinking the exact same thing, and did the calculations before I saw your post. This article is written weirdly.

mosahlah
1.9 / 5 (13) May 09, 2012
This article is Filthy Liberal JunkScience.

I demand that the world will have more water than what is shown.
What is shown is just politically wrong.

Not having more water gives an excuse for Commie socialists to take away my freedom to crap in my neighbor's pool.

Which proves the earth has more water than what is shown.


Physorg has no problem with VD and his liberal dribble.
bluehigh
1.7 / 5 (23) May 09, 2012
Physorg recognizes sanity perhaps. It can only be good that people understand the limited nature of Earths resources, including water.

Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (83) May 09, 2012
Physorg recognizes sanity perhaps. It can only be good that people understand the limited nature of Earths resources, including water.



Why? There is no shortage of water.
DarkHorse66
1.2 / 5 (18) May 09, 2012
[q Why? There is no shortage of water.
There is no GLOBAL shortage, but there is shortage on a local/regional level.There may not be a shortage of water per se. But you forget that NOT ALL water is potable (fit for drinking). Not all water is accessible. Ever tried slaking your thirst by drinking a big glass of salty ocean water (the biggest proportion in the H2O 'pie')?Not to mention the bellyache you are risking from whatever else is in there...Water is also unevenly distributed across the landmasses. In the more inhospitable environments, people are often forced to depend on brackish water to survive. As a result, they often catch many illness. Bilharzia is just ONE these.http://www.ncbi.n...0002298/ Yes, it can be made drinkable, accessible, but not everyone has access to the (usually expensive)technology or resources required to do that.It's not a good idea to make such a non-differentiating. That ignores the impact of individual details. Regards,DH66
DarkHorse66
1.2 / 5 (18) May 09, 2012
Drought is another example. If you have ever lived in a city where there isn't enough water to go around because of lack of water from the sky and the ground supplies drying up. Have you ever experienced mandated water restrictions because of this? People have been forced to walk away from their livelihoods on ranches/farms because entire herds of cattle and sheep have died from sheer thirst and hunger. Nothing grows either. I'm not even going to start on the African 'situation'. I just hope that you can accept these statements as food for thought and be a bit more careful and considered in your response next time. Apart from that, I enjoy a good discussion, minus the vitriol that seems to be running rampant on this site. :) Best Regards, DH66
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (25) May 09, 2012
Have you ever experienced mandated water restrictions because of this? People have been forced to walk away from their livelihoods on ranches/farms because entire herds of cattle and sheep have died from sheer thirst and hunger.

This has happened for thousands of years.
Modern govt seem to believe they can 'fix' it so they dig canals across the state of AZ so cotton can be irrigated.
Dams and canals are built so CA can grow rice.
Don't get me wrong, I don't oppose such engineering. I oppose taxpayers subsidizing the costs and unintended consequences.
Such as farmers in the NW who depended upon govt irrigation but had it cut off to save fish downstream.
And then there are places that are perfect for certain crops but have socialist govts that restrict the investments needed to produce efficiently.
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (82) May 09, 2012
There is no GLOBAL shortage, but there is shortage on a local/regional level.There may not be a shortage of water per se. But you forget that NOT ALL water is potable (fit for drinking). Not all water is accessible


True but the above article is about Global water amounts, and that's what I responded to. Conserving water in one local area does not help another local area somewhere else.

The above article just feeds into the mindless tree-hugger mentality, and is non-sensensical.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (22) May 09, 2012
But you forget that NOT ALL water is potable

But it can be made potable.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.2 / 5 (17) May 09, 2012
that is, free market capitalism continuing full bore ahead as usual. Only then will civilization be sophisticated and advanced enough to adapt to alternatives.
Newsflash - the forces of allah have outlawed free markets because they feel sharia is sophisticated and advanced enough to usurp western decadence. Their thorough education, and the epiphany of course, are what convinces them of this. And there are SO many more of them than there are of you.

Convert or die.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (20) May 09, 2012
But, population growth has little to do with religion and anti-contraceptive (most Catholics actually use contraceptives anyway) and much more symptomatic of poverty, and poor standards of living.
My but we are especially naive today arent we? I blame philoblah and political dogma. They dull the senses like a quart of Ripple.

Why is it you deniers always fail to consider statistics, history, and common sense when reaching your conclusions? Population growth is highest in religion-dominated countries:
http://en.wikiped...wth_rate

-which are also where most of the violence and misery is. And good luck educating them; they are already very well educated. Ask these guys:

"Boko Haram, translates as "Western education is sacrilege""
http://en.wikiped...ko_Haram

cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.2 / 5 (21) May 09, 2012
-But the main thing you deniers fail to see, is the impact of family planning and ABORTION on the world. ONE BILLION ABORTIONS in the last 100 years. A country the size of india was never born, never lived to reproduce to the 3rd and 4th gen at their traditional, prewar religionist rate.
http://www.johnst...310.html

Even more telling is the percentage of pregnancies aborted by country:
http://www.johnst...4pd.html

-Many populations in these prewar cultures were set to double in 20 years. Germany. Russia. Japan. China. And as you are quick to point out, this doubling could not have occured. These areas would have degenerated into war AGAIN, within a generation, and with nuclear weapons at their disposal.

This potential was simply unacceptable and so was not Allowed to occur.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (21) May 09, 2012
What 'progressive' AGWite baby killers fail to see is the lost potential of those murdered babies.
After all, if they truly believed in evolution, they could be killing off the next advanced human species.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (28) May 09, 2012
Another strange lapse in your cognition - the nature of economic cycles. At the beginning there are new markets, new opportunities for growth. New investments create new wealth, and populations grow in concert.

But people by and large do not consider the future when making babies. They make babies when times are good, at a rate which typically exceeds the economic growth rate. Malthus taught you this.

And so commodities unavoidably become more expensive, and a surplus of labor develops which FORCES wages to decline. Babies begin to starve and their parents blame whichever government is in charge no matter how benevolent and well-conceived it may be.

Western society is Designed to mitigate this potential, but it is comparable at the moment to that little blue marble in the photo above, next to a big world FULL of people with nothing better to do than procreate whenever possible.

This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (22) May 09, 2012
What 'progressive' AGWite baby killers fail to see is the lost potential of those murdered babies.
What rabid religionist adolescent-killers do NOT fail to see is the Utility of those adolescents on the battlefield and in the streets, killing and dying for their god.

What potential do the hapless Taliban volunteers have, but to walk into coalition guns? No jobs, no homes, no food, no future. They were conceived for one Purpose, as were those who died in the mud in Flanders.

"3 Children are a heritage from the Lord,
offspring a reward from him.
4 Like arrows in the hands of a warrior
are children born in ones youth.
5 Blessed is the man
whose quiver is full of them.
They will not be put to shame
when they contend with their enemies in the gate."

-Every religionist who indulges in their selfish fantasies shares responsibility for this travesty.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (21) May 09, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.

Didn't know you believed in God.
That's who constantly manage the little marble for billions of years.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (24) May 09, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.

Didn't know you believed in God.
That's who constantly manage the little marble for billions of years.
I believe your belief in your god is the single most destructive social force on the planet.

And according to him he has been managing things for only 5 or 6 thousand years?
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (25) May 09, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.

Didn't know you believed in God.
That's who constantly manage the little marble for billions of years.
I believe your belief in your god is the single most destructive social force on the planet.

And according to him he has been managing things for only 5 or 6 thousand years?

You assert earth needs to be managed by a socialist dictator. Who did this prior to man?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (20) May 09, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.

Didn't know you believed in God.
That's who constantly manage the little marble for billions of years.
I believe your belief in your god is the single most destructive social force on the planet.

And according to him he has been managing things for only 5 or 6 thousand years?

You assert earth needs to be managed by a socialist dictator. Who did this prior to man?
Hmmm well it is most obviously people who require Management as they cannot be trusted to do it themselves. So before there were people I guess you could say that it was natural selection? What do you think?

Because you know your little fairy sky demon does not exist. This is obvious to all but the most desperate and self-deluded.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (81) May 09, 2012
Population growth is highest in religion-dominated countries:


False logic, as this does not mean one causes the other. The power of religious dogma on ones daily life is inversely proportional to education and directly related to poverty,..., your desire to blame religion is clouding your reason.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 09, 2012
I believe your belief in your god is the single most destructive social force on the planet.


Try studying history. Your statement is factually incorrect given the sheer millions killed off by non-religious motives. For example, the mass murder inflicted by Stalin and Mao, by the millions, were in the name of socialist control, not religion.
Mike_Massen
2.1 / 5 (18) May 09, 2012
Lurker2358 implied it was worth researching old irrational scifi
I once proved Noah's flood is physically possible, using ONLY the water currently available on the planet.
I would like to see that but, pray tell was it fresh or salty that fell to cover the earth ?

If fresh then thats a lot of dilution, how is the sea then salty as such & not merely brackish or was it more salty to start with ?

If salty then its not rain as such & can one work out the molarity ?

In that case, why would a deity that is supposedly all knowing need to fix something by killing millions and not through education, foreknowledge is a big problem.

I saw your brushed suggestion re ice but, hey did you factor in specific heat calculations and how long ago is this supposed to have occurred ?

Overall, are you trying to find some way that the claim of a flood re Noah was real & constructing a way it 'must' have happened or exploring some sardonic irony knowing the bible story was only scifi of the time ?

Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 09, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.


More non-sense. Who is in control now? What global governing body is managing world affairs now? The answer is None.

There is zero chance in the foreseeable future, that countries will submit an ounce of control over their citizens to some global "managing" entity.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (18) May 09, 2012
they cannot be trusted

By whom?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (20) May 09, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.


More non-sense. Who is in control now? What global governing body is managing world affairs now? The answer is None.

There is zero chance in the foreseeable future, that countries will submit an ounce of control over their citizens to some global "managing" entity.
You say this but want to ignore the control the church had over all of western society for 1000 yrs? Managing Entities can and do exist.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (21) May 09, 2012
The power of religious dogma on ones daily life is inversely proportional to education and directly related to poverty,...
-And your understanding of education is stunted. Hardcore religionists are educated in religious doctrine from birth. Wahhabis and hasidim and mormons and amish et al are VERY WELL educated to the fact that what you have to teach them about reproduction for instance, is EVIL.

Their gods all teach them that any non-procreative alternatives to sex is deeply depraved and satanic. They have no choice but to engage in the kind of sex which leads to conception. They have no choice but to assume social roles designed to grow large families.

And their education tells them that god will provide for however many babies they might produce. THIS is how reproductive aggression operates.
your desire to blame religion is clouding your reason.
It is my reason which leads me to conclude that religion is the main source today of poverty, suffering, and conflict.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 09, 2012
High birth rate is caused by poverty,... that impoverished people are also religious is due to the fact that the vast majority of humans on this planet are religious. When some 80% of the worlds population are religious, it is meaningless drawing any correlations between religion and other such phenomenon.

Deaths on account of religion pale in comparison to that caused by social engineering dictatorial governments, such as Stalin and Mao, where failed control of the masses and means of production lead to millions of deaths in each case.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (20) May 09, 2012
Attacking religion IS a religious rite for atheists.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (19) May 10, 2012
High birth rate is caused by poverty,...
No you have it exactly backwards. No wait - I thought you said it was caused by lack of education -? Your fluctuation may mean you haven't thought it through maybe?

But if you think it is poverty, you are saying that people who are already poor will only increase their birthrate which goes against your other theory of self-regulation. You should resolve this.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (21) May 10, 2012
Deaths on account of religion pale in comparison to that caused by social engineering dictatorial governments, such as Stalin and Mao, where failed control of the masses and means of production lead to millions of deaths in each case.
No there is no difference. The 30 years war killed 1/3 the Germans in Europe. And if there had been 10 times the number of cathars in southern France then the inquisition would have killed 10 times as many, along with the proportionate number of innocent Catholics.

You are only citing the most recent of the mega killing machines. Religions SHOULD be different as they claim the moral high ground, but they're not.

Besides communism is just another form of religion. Marx used terms like the soul in his manifestos. Ask ryggy. Marx was using the power of the hereafter to justify his own particular set of morals. I have a vid of Dawkins describing this in detail. Maybe I post it tomorrow.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (78) May 10, 2012
High birth rate is caused by poverty,...
No you have it exactly backwards. No wait - I thought you said it was caused by lack of education -? Your fluctuation may mean you haven't thought it through maybe?

They of course go hand in hand. Poverty is symptomatic of poor education and birth rate is high in lower classes, lower standards of living which is due to poverty in extreme cases.

But if you think it is poverty, you are saying that people who are already poor will only increase their birthrate which goes against your other theory of self-regulation. You should resolve this.

You're trying to conflate two different effects on two different time scales. Nature is self regulating in the sense that lower availability of food & energy means less life to be supported,... so any given species can't increase in population indefinitely. There is still much room for humans (compare Japan to Texas), but eventually the population rate of humans will start to level.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 10, 2012
Deaths on account of religion pale in comparison to that caused by social engineering dictatorial governments, such as Stalin and Mao, where failed control of the masses and means of production lead to millions of deaths in each case.

No there is no difference. [....] You are only citing the most recent of the mega killing machines.


If there is no difference than why cite religion at all, why not just blame man attempting to control the masses,.. which is what religion is to you, right.

I cite the most recent because it's the most relavent.

The difference with Stalin wrt religion is that he USED 'the opium of the masses' to control them. He wasn't supporting or advocating religion in itself (in fact communists rejection religion so it does compete with the authority of the state) ,.. that is, he didn't cause the death of millions on account of religious principals,... he did so as a means of controlling the masses.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (78) May 10, 2012
,... it you were at all consistent in your dislike of religions controlling people, you would be against the progressive far left, as well, because they desire to control and 'engineer' behavior,... except without it being voluntary.
Anorion
2.8 / 5 (9) May 10, 2012
ghost leave them, religious slaughtering other religious , cause of different type of religious fairy tale .
its a win-win situation
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (80) May 10, 2012
This requires constant Management and Proaction to keep that little marble from evaporating completely.


More non-sense. Who is in control now? What global governing body is managing world affairs now? The answer is None.

There is zero chance in the foreseeable future, that countries will submit an ounce of control over their citizens to some global "managing" entity.
You say this but want to ignore the control the church had over all of western society for 1000 yrs? Managing Entities can and do exist.


Except, religion is a FREE choice, whereas the socialist 'progressive' left desire to manage human behavior completely in opposition to natural instincts of man. Huge difference. Anyone can leave the church at any time, but simply being born as a citizen of a progressive left controlled gov forces one to comply with what ever societal defect these people wish to "fix" on any particular day.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 10, 2012
ghost leave them, religious slaughtering other religious , cause of different type of religious fairy tale .
its a win-win situation


Really, It's and win win? So you still maintain that your humanity is superior after such a statement?
Mike_Massen
1.9 / 5 (17) May 10, 2012
Noumenon betrayed his ignorance of psychology & emotional hypnosis with:-
Except, religion is a FREE choice, ..
No.
It can only be a truly free choice if an individual is fully informed & that means more than basic parent directed 'education'.

When parents who are religious zealots indoctrinate their pre-pubescent children with irrational beliefs they force a type of emotional hypnosis which quells intellectual rigour, reduces creativity & dulls imagination. There is even a report on part of that aspect here:- http://medicalxpr...tal.html

An old testament claims we have free will but, without education!
ie Its Wrong.
We have some free will which increases with information, education & intelligence, the setup of the story of Eve/Adam is an example of bad thinking & its sad people suggest we have free will to follow a religion, no, its a bad meme, pressed mostly by parents before children develop analytic skills :-
Anorion
3.4 / 5 (10) May 10, 2012
ghost leave them, religious slaughtering other religious , cause of different type of religious fairy tale .
its a win-win situation


Really, It's and win win? So you still maintain that your humanity is superior after such a statement?

hey, its for you, since the purpose of your entire existence is to go live in heavens with your god, but your forbidden to suicide , so you believers do that service to each other, sending each other to paradise to live in with your creator. isn't what you want ?
and we can leave religion today only cause recent development of separation of church and state, before when religion ruled, acknowledging not being believer = torture and death .
its still like that in many islamic countrys who don't separate religion and state, apostasy is still punished by stoning, imprisonment , ...
so yeah, why you all believers just don't go in heavens and leave us live in peace on earth ? and everyone will be happy !
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (26) May 10, 2012
fully informed

How does anyone make a 'fully informed' decision when so much is unknown?
No one can ever make a FULLY informed decision as life is full of uncertainty.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (25) May 10, 2012
Except, religion is a FREE choice, whereas the socialist 'progressive' left desire to manage human behavior completely in opposition to natural instincts of man
Your mindless dogma makes me laugh ha. What free choice did these poor women have, and what natural instincts required such treatment?
http://www.bbc.co...16543036

-They were judged by very well-educated clerics with laws enacted by very well-educated, often western-educated, politicians, who learned much of western decadence and the indecent ways we treat our women.

So what exactly would you want to teach religionists nou? These women already know they were mistreated. But thousands more are routinely treated in much the same way, and their educations TELL them that this is what Allah requires. And they have learned ALL about you as well.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (19) May 10, 2012
so yeah, why you all believers just don't go in heavens and leave us live in peace on earth ? and everyone will be happy !
Because a great many of them believe that unbelievers are the reason their savior hasn't yet returned to bring heaven on earth. They think we threaten their very souls and the souls of their loved ones. And they hate areligionists more than other religionists who are only misguided (except the Jews of course).
How does anyone make a 'fully informed' decision when so much is unknown?
Well one young woman in the story I posted made the free choice to escape her attackers, but her neighbors returned her to her family. Per law I suppose. And as the article states it is ILLEGAL for women to try to leave a marriage.

They all know these things full well as they have been well-educated from birth.

Amish youth are given the choice whether to leave or stay. But if they leave they are shunned by the community and their families. Tough choice.
Mike_Massen
1.2 / 5 (18) May 10, 2012
ryggesogn2 got upset & cast a wide net
How does anyone make a 'fully informed' decision when so much is unknown?
No one can ever make a FULLY informed decision as life is full of uncertainty.
Valid point but, on a wide net.
One can make acceptable decisions on a narrower contextual basis. Which just goes to show that the wider the net the wider the bell curve of permutations available. One can then appreciate that to make better decisions with the necessary focus & cognition of those permutations requires higher intelligence.

ie.In narrow context with minimal permutations one need not be [that] intelligent, that's how most of the world gets by but, only just, in general. As context widens, so the consequences diverge exponentially, demanding greater cognition of the 'gestalt', requiring more intelligence of the 7 or so variants.

Clearly reality & universe (& personal experience confirms it) is fundamentally probabilistic & not deterministic at all (as most religions claim).
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.2 / 5 (18) May 10, 2012
He wasn't supporting or advocating religion in itself (in fact communists rejection religion so it does compete with the authority of the state) ,.. that is, he didn't cause the death of millions on account of religious principals,... he did so as a means of controlling the masses.
So... you mean that since they didn't CALL it a religion, then it wasn't a religion? Perhaps they didn't acknowledge it as such so they could persecute the other religions, which was indeed one of the main Reasons the communist religion was established.

If you read their books you see they appeal to the same supernatural sources that any other religion appeals to, because people accept these as the ultimate source of authority. It doesn't matter what THEY call themselves. Good commies are assured a place in eternity just like any Jesuit.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (77) May 10, 2012
When parents who are religious zealots indoctrinate their pre-pubescent children with irrational beliefs they force a type of emotional hypnosis which quells intellectual rigour, bla bla potato salad


Are you actually saying that if one is religious they're not educated or intelligent!?!! Seriously are you that immature and clueless that you can't admit that intelligent and educated people CAN at the same time remain religious!!!?

Those children eventually grow up, obtain various degrees of education, and many of them remain or become religious. Newton, for example, wrote more on theology than on science. Since his time, no one has demonstrated there is no god. In fact it has been proven to my satisfaction (Kant) that metaphysics cannot be a source of knowledge (thus the requirement of belief),... knowledge that is either positive nor negative (for nor against).

I'm not here to support religion,.. I don't even believe in god myself.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (77) May 10, 2012
hey, its for you, since the purpose of your entire existence is to go live in heavens with your god, but your forbidden to suicide , so you believers do that service to each other, sending each other to paradise to live in with your creator. isn't what you want ?


You don't know what you are talking about. I don't believe in god.

What is certain is that you demonstrated your ignorance and inferior humanity in your statement than religious teachings.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (77) May 10, 2012
@Otto, I'm definitely not interested in defending barabrious Islamic cavemen, I'm not even interested in defending western religions. The point was that the recent mega-deaths had nothing to do with religious principals or motivation. I cited two examples of "engineered" societies gone horribly wrong, so why on earth waste time and be intellectually lazy by focusing on an easy target like religion, when there are other far more dangerous mentalities in the modern world?
Anorion
2.3 / 5 (6) May 10, 2012
hey, its for you, since the purpose of your entire existence is to go live in heavens with your god, but your forbidden to suicide , so you believers do that service to each other, sending each other to paradise to live in with your creator. isn't what you want ?


You don't know what you are talking about. I don't believe in god.

What is certain is that you demonstrated your ignorance and inferior humanity in your statement than religious teachings.

yeah right, when religious appeal to murder of infidels, and that infidels gonna burn to hell... then its FAITH, we have to UNDERSTAND and ACCEPT their FAITH cause its gods.
but when no religious , reject god and religion and say to the the believers that they tired of their fucking superstitions and oppression and other fairy tales then its LACK OF HUMANITY and IGNORANCE .... you talk about some events in 20th century . freaking religious fanatics are on our neck since over 3000 freaking years, give me a break!
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (78) May 10, 2012
I think we are on the same page wrt Islamists. They are barbarians, indeed. As is anyone wishing they would kill themselves off. I wish Muslims would defeat their radical hardliners and enter the 21st century,... but not that they should kill each other off.

Again, are you more superior having made that statement above than a western religious person? The answer is no, since it requires a profound LACK of understanding to wish such things upon fellow human beings.

My only point above was again, religions were not the cause of the some 55 million who did in WWII. No. That was caused by a relativeily small group of radicals 'intellectuals' who thought they knew better than the 'ignorant' masses,... a purely secular control and subjection of human beings,... by the communists and dictatorial socialists.
Anorion
3 / 5 (7) May 10, 2012
I think we are on the same page wrt Islamists. They are barbarians, indeed. As is anyone wishing they would kill themselves off. I wish Muslims would defeat their radical hardliners and enter the 21st century,... but not that they should kill each other off.

Again, are you more superior having made that statement above than a western religious person? The answer is no, since it requires a profound LACK of understanding to wish such things upon fellow human beings.

My only point above was again, religions were not the cause of the some 55 million who did in WWII. That was caused by purely secular control and subjection of human beings,... by the communists and dictatorial socialists.


my bad if you though i was wishing it, i was merely stating a fact of what they doing of they own will.
and about ww2:
I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (26) May 10, 2012
not deterministic at all (as most religions claim).

How do you know?
Have you returned from heaven or hell?
No one can claim to be fully informed on Christianity until one has been their and done that.
Which is one reason it is called faith. Ever wonder why faith is so important to God? God doesn't seem to care much about religion, churches, govt but He does care about faith. And it is consistent over thousands of years.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (77) May 10, 2012
I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2


I don't know the context, and in anycase there is no religious principal that supports mass murder of "undesirables", and German superiority. As I already mentioned, not Hitler, nor Stalin, nor Mao were motivated by religion. Each is an example of radical "intellectuals" thinking they knew better than the "ignorant" masses, that they knew how to engineer a society. They failed cataclysmically. They are the ones you should denounce if you has a clue, rather than religious people.

You see, people have a RIGHT to believe in whatever they want in free societies. It is you who wishes to oppress them. They are not bothering me at all, so I know YOU are not being harmed by them.
Anorion
3.5 / 5 (8) May 10, 2012
neum,
well im orginate from Bosnia, where was civil war between orthodox serbians, catholic croatians and mulsim bosnians.
you have NO IDEA what there have been done in the name of religion,
bass graves of entire villages of people killed on just 1 criterium , how they pray ...
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (20) May 10, 2012
neum,
well im orginate from Bosnia, where was civil war between orthodox serbians, catholic croatians and mulsim bosnians.
you have NO IDEA what there have been done in the name of religion,
bass graves of entire villages of people killed on just 1 criterium , how they pray ...


What has been done in the name of 'fairness', aka socialism?

So many attack religion and defend socialism.
Anorion
3.7 / 5 (6) May 10, 2012
neum,
well im orginate from Bosnia, where was civil war between orthodox serbians, catholic croatians and mulsim bosnians.
you have NO IDEA what there have been done in the name of religion,
bass graves of entire villages of people killed on just 1 criterium , how they pray ...


What has been done in the name of 'fairness', aka socialism?

So many attack religion and defend socialism.

go ask those people who went in muslim villages and killed everyone and throw them in holes like trash or ask those mujahedins who went in christian villages and slithered throats of everyone from youngest baby to oldest dude. or ask those who died from hunger cause muslim organizations were helping only muslims and christian ones only christians, cause you needed a paper from church or mosque that your member of congregation to get food or medicaments. i had 13 year and wes there , did you ?
Deathclock
2.2 / 5 (23) May 10, 2012
there is no religious principal that supports mass murder of "undesirables"


Really? God commits mass murder of undesirables all throughout the bible...
Vendicar_Decarian
3.1 / 5 (15) May 10, 2012
That was the old God. he reformed his ways after he got off the drugs, got married, and had a son.

"God commits mass murder of undesirables all throughout the bible" - Deathclock
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (26) May 10, 2012

go ask those people who went in muslim villages and killed everyone and throw them in holes like trash or ask those mujahedins who went in christian villages and slithered throats of everyone from youngest baby to oldest dude. or ask those who died from hunger cause muslim organizations were helping only muslims and christian ones only christians, cause you needed a paper from church or mosque that your member of congregation to get food or medicaments. i had 13 year and wes there , did you ?

What did the religious doctrine have to with anything here? Substitute nationality and there would be no difference.
Face it, much of the world is still tribal.
The fight was not religious doctrine but territorial control.
The next major fight will be over the individual sovereignty vs national sovereignty.
You prefer a return to communism so all are equally oppressed?
BTW, Muslims murder Muslims, Christians murder Christians all the time. Maybe that is why God told them NOT to murder.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (19) May 10, 2012
I don't know the context, and in anycase there is no religious principal that supports mass murder of "undesirables", and German superiority. As I already mentioned, not Hitler, nor Stalin, nor Mao were motivated by religion.
YES they were. Here are dawkins and maher explaining to you how religion was responsible for the perception of german superiority during the 3rd reich; and how communism is for all intents and purposes a religion. At 5:45
http://www.youtub...=related

Marx and lenin both invoked the soul in their discussions and there can be no soul without a god. They were using the religionist party line as the traditional source of authority because it has always worked oh so well. The people are conditioned to fall for it. Soul = immortality = religion = superstition = worth dying for.

And check out richards description of the value of religionist educating at 7:50.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (27) May 10, 2012
Maybe that is why God told them NOT to murder.
Except then in the next chapter he told them to do just that, with joyful abandon:

"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." 2 Chron 15:12-13 NAB

"Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock." deut 13

-Etc. Here is a nice long collection of examples of god declaring that murder is not only moral, but COMPULSORY.
http://www.evilbi...rder.htm
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 10, 2012
So Stalin, Mao, and Hitler were just following the teachings of religion? Um, no is the answer. They may have used religion to gain trust, as "the opium of the people", but none of the atrocities they commented or caused had any religious cause. Communism and national socialism are not religions, they're a form of government. Hitler and Goebbels used all manner of propaganda as well. It helps forming trust in getting their ideas accepted. It's called politics.

The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.
Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (78) May 10, 2012
dp
CHollman82
1.6 / 5 (21) May 10, 2012
The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.


Religion attempts to control the masses...
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (79) May 10, 2012
The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.


Religion attempts to control the masses...


Does it control you? It doesn't control me. Freedom of choice.
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (20) May 10, 2012
The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.


Religion attempts to control the masses...

Those in power try to control those under their rule. This has been the history in Europe and elsewhere. This what the 'progressives' are trying to do in the USA. When they acquire power they attack those who oppose them, regardless of the Constitution.
Isn't that what happens in the Balkins? One group gains power over another and mistreats those they don't like and when those mistreated gain power, they do the same.
The US guaranteed religious freedom and minority rights in a Constitution.
As long as those in power enforce the laws for all, there should be few problems. But we now have a socialist regime that attacks its enemies in states that enforce federal immigration laws, for example.
It is called Balkinization. Wonder why.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (19) May 11, 2012
So Stalin, Mao, and Hitler were just following the teachings of religion?
And you didnt even read those quotes from the OT I posted. Joshuas minions were every bit as ruthless and genocidal as the einsatzgruppen. The Nazis and stalinists and maoists LEARNED how to do what they did, from the religious regimes which preceded them. Read about the Taipei rebellion as one example.

They had a long history of R&D to draw upon when writing mein kampf and the communist manifesto. Mao, Stalin, and hitler were religious icons in the divine aegis they used to do what they did. In the eyes of their followers they were inspired by god in the very same way as Moses. And Jesus. And mohammad. No difference.

They rejected 'religion' because their Task was to destroy all obsolete and troublesome cultures throughout Eurasia which were based on it. They were being clever in denying the religiousity of their own dogmae. It's what they DID, not what they said, which informs us; as with any religion.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.2 / 5 (18) May 11, 2012
As long as those in power enforce the laws for all, there should be few problems.
Those in power? I thought you hated those guys. Anyway, soon those who manage to become the majority will be the ones in power and they think their god is better than yours.

But who knows? Haredi/Hasidim, Hispanic Catholics, Mormons, and the Amish are all feverishly procreating as well. It should be interesting.

The Balkans are only a microcosm of conditions throughout the world. Tribe against tribe engaged in Religionist reproductive warfare. You should learn from this.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (17) May 11, 2012
The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.


Religion attempts to control the masses...


Does it control you? It doesn't control me. Freedom of choice.
It forces you to pay taxes to support a standing military to fight wars halfway around the world so they do not have to be fought HERE. It forces you to vote against religionist attempts to curtail freedom of speech and scientific inquiry. It forces you to resist the attractive compulsion that there might be a chance of escaping death, if you would only pray for absolution.

Religion is an irresistible influence and a major impact on all our lives.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (22) May 11, 2012
It forces you to pay taxes to support a standing military to fight wars halfway around the world so they do not have to be fought HERE.

Nothing to do with religion. Everything to do with socialism.
Socialist leaders use any ideology for power and control.
In the US, climate change, racism are used to gain power.
Deathclock
1.4 / 5 (11) May 11, 2012
The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.


Religion attempts to control the masses...


Does it control you? It doesn't control me. Freedom of choice.


I said "attempts to", and yes, it controlled people very successfully for a very long time... thankfully it is losing that control in modern times, as you mentioned.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (19) May 11, 2012
The deaths of WWII had little to do with religion, and everything to do with forms of government attempting to control the masses.


Religion attempts to control the masses...


Does it control you? It doesn't control me. Freedom of choice.


I said "attempts to", and yes, it controlled people very successfully for a very long time... thankfully it is losing that control in modern times, as you mentioned.

No, it is not. We still have socialists and AGWites.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (24) May 11, 2012
Nothing to do with religion. Everything to do with socialism.
Socialist leaders use any ideology for power and control.
In the US, climate change, racism are used to gain power
Socialist dogma does not include restricting women to bearing and raising children. It does not use reproduction as a form of aggression. Communism only enthralled the starving masses which were created by religionist doctrine, and then turned these masses on the system which created them.

The eurasian religionist cultures were thus destroyed by the instruments of their own making. Without the starving masses, communism has nothing to work with.

Pretty brilliant huh? It tells me that this was Designed to happen this way.

Socialism RESTRICTS growth - you have said so yourself. This is why the soviets and the red chinese remained at peace for so long. That, and the 800 MILLION ABORTIONS their ideology enabled, and which the former religions would have prevented.
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (25) May 11, 2012
Socialist dogma does not include restricting women to bearing and raising children.

Depends upon the socialist. It did in Romania when they were losing population.
What will socialists do when their demographics show they are losing population?

"They include a new form of state-funded child welfare support, whereby parents (either the mother or father) will be entitled to 67% of their previous incomes while staying at home, up to a maximum of 1,800 euros (£1,240; $2,160) per month. "
http://news.bbc.c...2040.stm

They will 'pay' women to have children.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (25) May 11, 2012
Socialist dogma does not include restricting women to bearing and raising children.

Depends upon the socialist. It did in Romania when they were losing population.
What will socialists do when their demographics show they are losing population?

"They include a new form of state-funded child welfare support, whereby parents (either the mother or father) will be entitled to 67% of their previous incomes while staying at home, up to a maximum of 1,800 euros (1,240; $2,160) per month. "
http://news.bbc.c...2040.stm

They will 'pay' women to have children.
This is called pragmatism. Canada was doing the same thing.

With religions it is a core doctrine and is called naked aggression. 'Fill up the earth' with more of us and fewer of them. Because god demands it. The First and most Important Mitzvah. The intent is to cause pain and suffering and then to blame the unbeliever for it and then to take everything he has because he so obviously doesnt deserve it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (22) May 11, 2012
Hey ryggy remember this?

"Why yes indeed does marx speak of the spirit and the soul:

"The representation of private interests ... abolishes all natural and spiritual distinctions by enthroning in their stead the immoral, irrational and soulless abstraction of a particular material object and a particular consciousness which is slavishly subordinated to this object."

Marx, On the Thefts of Wood, in Rheinische Zeitung (1842)

-Could it be that socialism is only another way of offering favoritism and immortality?"

"So rygge the thing which you hate is apparently the image in the mirror."

-Otto also said:

"you havent responded to my revelation of marxism being a purveyor of the immortal soul myth and the supernatural source of morality, exactly as your religion is. Arent you shocked? How else was marx (or mao or hitler) going to get throngs to fall for their stuff, if it didnt offer the same things? If it aint broke dont fix it -? A sucker born every minute -? Big enough lie, etc."
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (28) May 11, 2012
'Fill up the earth' with more of us and fewer of them. Because god demands it.

"He began his campaign in 1966 with a decree that virtually made pregnancy a state policy. "The fetus is the property of the entire society," Ceausescu proclaimed. "Anyone who avoids having children is a deserter who abandons the laws of national continuity." "
http://www.ceause...hood.htm
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (23) May 11, 2012
'Fill up the earth' with more of us and fewer of them. Because god demands it.

"He began his campaign in 1966 with a decree that virtually made pregnancy a state policy. "The fetus is the property of the entire society," Ceausescu proclaimed. "Anyone who avoids having children is a deserter who abandons the laws of national continuity." "
http://www.ceause...hood.htm


-Yes and as I recall this was rescinded later on. When quotas were reached I suppose. God does not rescind his mandate to conquer the world with babies. The people only lose faith, yielding to the heretical notion of living within their own means. As god never does provide does he?
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (22) May 11, 2012
A religion, a state, a nation a family that does not promote life, reproduction, dies out.
Ever hear of the Shakers? They no longer exist.
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (28) May 11, 2012
Rescinded later on? Not by Ceausescu.

""Celibacy tax": A woman didn't have to be pregnant to come under scrutiny. In 1986 members of the Communist youth group were sent to quiz citizens about their sex lives. "How often do you have sexual intercourse?" the questionnaire read. "Why have you failed to conceive?" Women who did not have children, even if they could not, paid a "celibacy tax" of up to 10 percent of their monthly salaries.

The rebels who overthrew Ceausescu last month quickly rescinded the policy."
http://www.ceause...hood.htm

This lasted for over 20 years.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (22) May 12, 2012
A religion, a state, a nation a family that does not promote life, reproduction, dies out.
Ever hear of the Shakers? They no longer exist.
Ever hear of Islam?

"Between 1900 and 1970 the global Muslim community grew from 200 million to 551 million;[184] between 1970 and 2009 Muslim population increased more than three times to 1.57 billion."

-Which is only typical of the surviving religions which, through natural selection, are better at outgrowing and overrunning their unfortunate forebears and their paltry gods. Communism has proven to be useful for destroying them, but past performance does not guarantee future results.

Communism in actuality is only a form of martial law and has functioned very similarly to the church in europe. Which is more reason to consider it another form of religion. Islam operates in much the same way in many regions.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (21) May 12, 2012
The rebels who overthrew Ceausescu last month quickly rescinded the policy."
These regions are being targeted by Islamic reproductive aggression. Many of those who fought to overthrow communist regimes were Islamist.

Many western countries are encouraging their people to reproduce, and are offering subsidies and tax breaks. Modulating and metering growth does not equate to demanding it despite the suffering and violence it causes, like all the religions do in their most pristine forms.
SleepTech
3.3 / 5 (7) May 12, 2012
Why is it I get moderated for saying "Wow, that looks like fun!" on an article about skydiving from the stratosphere, but these losers are given free reign to flood the comments with off-topic religious debate and partisan nonsense?

Put a lid on these guys! It's not like you don't know who they are.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (18) May 12, 2012
These regions are being targeted by Islamic reproductive aggression

Ceausescu was not Muslim, he was socialist.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.2 / 5 (17) May 12, 2012
These regions are being targeted by Islamic reproductive aggression

Ceausescu was not Muslim, he was socialist.
And I'm saying, that he was obviously trying to grow non-Muslim pops in order to compensate for religionist aggression.

Hey sleeptech noob - you are a NOOB aren't you? We are fixing the world here. Shut up and learn or just shut up.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (19) May 12, 2012
obviously trying to grow non-Muslim pops in order to compensate for religionist aggression.

He was trying to grow more socialists.
But that is the problem for socialists. The victims of socialism have no incentive to have or raise children.
Why should women bear children for the state? Children are the ultimate ego trip, naturally, in order to pass on part of your individuality on to the future. Mothers, fathers and families are willing to do this for their personal, individual reasons, not for the state or society.
And children are a lot of work and expense. If the state redistributes wealth making life too comfortable, why should anyone sacrifice their fun for children?
Romanian communism made life so difficult parents couldn't afford children. Romanian people still had compassion and did 't want to bring children into such socialist poverty, but the state had other ideas.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (18) May 12, 2012
"According to IINA, Francois Hollande was the only candidate of Muslims, while Roman Catholics overwhelming backed the failed bid by Nicolas Sarkozy to win reelection:

According to a survey of 10,000 voters conducted by Opinionway for Le Figaro (not online), 93 percent of French Muslims voted for Francois Hollande in the second round of the French election, La Vie reports."
http://patriotupd...ocialist
Doc_aymz
2.5 / 5 (6) May 12, 2012
You should see how little atmosphere there is then. A skin of water on a football represents the part of the atmosphere we can use (if the football was earth). But I agree with the comments that this is nothing more than out of interest - if you stacked all the humans into a tin like sardines, how big would the tin be? I suspect smaller than you'd think.
ryggesogn2
2.2 / 5 (23) May 12, 2012
You should see how little atmosphere there is then. A skin of water on a football represents the part of the atmosphere we can use (if the football was earth). But I agree with the comments that this is nothing more than out of interest - if you stacked all the humans into a tin like sardines, how big would the tin be? I suspect smaller than you'd think.

With people standing, about the size of Texas.
Size of Texas: 7,494,271,488,000 square feet.
wwqq
1 / 5 (7) May 13, 2012
[...]or at least cause it to break up into small enough pieces that immediate major destruction would be averted.


That doesn't help. We are still talking about 30-200 trillion tonnes of TNT equivalent depending on speed.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (18) May 13, 2012
But that is the problem for socialists. The victims of socialism have no incentive to have or raise children.
Hawhaw you think socialists stop being human? We are tropical species of ANIMAL and like the other animals we want to make and raise children. East and west have similar abortion rates. Like I say Canada was subsidizing children. I had an uncle who had 4 or 5 kids and didn't have to work.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.3 / 5 (24) May 13, 2012
DavidW the silent religionist troll, has this to say on his profile page:

"Killing anything without the need to do so is hypocritical to what we all hold truest. All actions can be measured by this one truth. Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Does david know that jesus also said:

21 "Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death.

34 "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

"39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it..." mat10

-And so those who loved him were called upon to lay down their lives (kill themselves through martyrdom) in his name, as he himself had done.

Presenting oneself for killing is exactly the same as killing someone else, and every bit as violent.
Terriva
1 / 5 (7) May 27, 2012
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) May 27, 2012
Ceausescu must have been reading favorite Libertarian Circle Jerk publication, "The Freemen"

"In short, although there are now more people in the world than ever before, by any meaningful measure the world is actually becoming relatively less populated." - The Freemen - Overpopulation: The Perennial Myth - Sept. 1993

"Anyone who avoids having children is a deserter who abandons the laws of national continuity." - RyggTard quoting Ceausescu

http://www.thefre...al-myth/
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) May 27, 2012
This Jesus guy seems to have been one seriously pissed off Socialist.

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." - Jesus

Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) May 27, 2012
A great state if you have a need to be covered in the excrement of your neighbour.

"With people standing, about the size of Texas." - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) May 27, 2012
Is that why India's population is booming and why China has had to establish a 1 child per family policy in order to limit population growth?

"But that is the problem for socialists. The victims of socialism have no incentive to have or raise children." - RyggTard

Libertarian "free thinkers" will "free think" any contradictory thought as long as it can be used to justify their mindless political liedeology.
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) May 27, 2012
Why was he reading the Libertarian Circle Jerk publication "The Freemen"?

"Ceausescu was not Muslim, he was socialist." - RyggTard