On Islam, and other things.

Muhummad had the advantage of knowing the work of Jesus. Jesus had the advantage of knowing the work of Moses. Moses suffered more than Jesus or Muhummad and I think had a greater effect than they did. He probably wasn't interested in history. I feel no need to position him, as that is probably not the way to understand his importance. I would hope the same is true of me since I have made the claim to be something of an equal to him. I judge myself on my effects, and I have a need to keep my discipline as high as necessary to achieve my potential. I have argued that war is a consequence of a poor relationship between mankind and his perported CNS regulator, that is, bacteria, and specifically mankind's decision to put his dead in coffins. I don't think anything less than abandonment of that pracitce will bring about an end to war. It is an arbitrary practice and one might think it easy enough to abandon, but there are many such arbitrary practices by mankind and how is one to settle on this one as more significant that the others? It is an impossible approach, the straightforward abandonment of the said practice. Besides that, it just has no sense of global values, but only would seem to emerge from a basically retarded motive with respect to the problem on earth. Ending war is an object of gratification in terms of any individual espousing it. The motive has to be decentralized. A world of no kings or hierarchies would result from decentralized senses, although this is a lie. Vast expanses of individuals would find equality amidst themselves, and competition would lie around momentary objectives. But certain understandings would separate out sets according to unattainable function. It is a matter of value.

God, homosexuality, and the problem of H. sapiens.

Homosexuality is one of those things like war and poverty that men have looked at uncomprehendingly since the beginning.

It is my feeling that my own language, based on sixteen characters I cannot share because I haven't the stamina to research how to get a computer to produce them, is responsible for certain positions I have taken on the frontiers of civilization, one of them my position that homosexuality is best eliminated, with as much care as possible not to cause the individual comfort of these people to be encroached on. That homosexuality is a sign of a dysfunctional civilization, even a dysfunctional species, is easy to see for those who also see that there is no God. Unfortunately there are billions of people who don't see that about God, and this makes it a demanding task to have a reasonable discussion about homosexuality, even speaking alone as a writer does.

So here is my position:

This species is subject to universal substitution of sufficiency, as a valid motive of comment, for progress in argument. If a comment has some way in which it can be taken immediately as sufficiently motivated, with a threshold of sufficiency on the order of what allows people to remain unmoved, to fit where it does into a discussion, then that comment is justifiable under the universal consensus of the species. Thus outfitted, the members of this species propagate their status gotten by the generosity of others far away and perhaps long ago, without having to do any Goddam thing of their own to progress beyond war, poverty, and homosexuality. As a state of species motivation, this amounts to an enormous bulk of material precious to each person that commands attention only because some or other rule of order allows it, and thus the beast is so arrayed for being out at pasture.

The species is proud of its self-image. It associates that image with God. In fact, there is no argument in it. Modern appliances in a civilization that has no argument preventing the occurrence of war and panic seems to me what we expect of children. "Don't worry about learning how to earn a living now. It's time to play and have fun. Worry about earning a living when you're older."

The argument is harder than this. So far I have dealt in plausibilities. These are closer to argument than sufficiency, but still not as argumentative as what the best science demands. I am not arguing with a prototypical individual, but with what I can make out to be a statistical description of the whole population, without depending on the existence of some who agree with me. Those who agree with me will have their battles but until progress is made in the discussion with the whole population there is no solace from being not alone.

Truth is fine. Navigating points of argument is considerably wider in scope. It cannot be done by professing commitment to truth. What is in common with all H. sapiens? What frequency are its other characteristics, not in common? Those who have seen the greatest variation in these characteristics are confined by the things in common. There knowledge is blocked.

Let me rest. Call it be-ers block.

Chicago's elite ready to implement my solution to war without paying me for it

Having published the fact that I have a solution for war, succinctly put in my own writing and kept secure in my possession, which I am willing to share and submit to the test of results provided $7 billion is put into escrow so that I will be paid upon satisfactory performance of the solution, I believe that those who affirm my right to see disposal of my effects in the manner of my choosing will in the very least satisfy themselves that what they can make out of the solution shall not be found taking shape in reality without the payment I ask for being delivered into escrow for payment to me in the event the use of the solution proves successful.

I say this because I have seen preparations being made by the elite of Chicago society to put my solution into effect. They have special access to my personal effects because of the nature of their leadership of Chicago society, and in addition I have yielded upon one occasion to the need for conversation on this topic so that I could hear myself think in more realistic terms than solitude allows, thus giving evidence away to those who make it their business to know the substance of all conversations relevant to the city.

While the elite of Chicago make my life secure by arranging that superior forces do not impinge upon me in opposition without sufficient alert, a benefit of being chosen first in 1992, it is clear that my personal survival, including my potential mates and offspring, is not considered a priority, since my efforts at business have proven for the most part unsuccessful to date. Clearly, my independence is not considered potentially valuable to the elite, which causes me to speculate in general about where the points of difference lie between my values, which my independence would advance, and the values of the elite. At first I wondered if maybe my relative youth and lack of wisdom were the difference. But events have shown that my wisdom is second to none in Chicago. The only explanation is that people differ and values accord with that, with the result that the independence that comes from secure personal survival will displace others' independence. The issue returns to whether I can prevent my solution to war from being used, and dying without heirs will be tantamount to confiscation of my solution without payment. Eventually, the elite will make it possible to use it by discouraging memorialization of my life to any large degree. Those who lionize me, and they exist, are considered by the Chicago elite to be "overawed". I don't think that in light of having a solution to war which they take seriously, by all evidence, they can defend themselves successfully against any claim I might make that their motives are purely competitive, and that this is consistent with them calling my adherents overawed.

I place here a request for an escrow of $7 billion for a measure to end all war forever.

I have a new product to be considered by the powers that be. It is a measure that will end war forever. I am asking $7 billion for it. Setting aside the question of credibility, let alone proof, of my measure being able to put an end to war, a serious negotiating state will want to calculate the equivalent capital stock in the present whose interest over time would pay for all anticipated wars engaged in by the negotiating state. Such calculations probably are a fantasy given uncertainties in politics, but an anthropological study, over a long period of time, might not be a fantasy, at least to the point of indicating that such a capital stock would by any estimate be vastly greater than $7 billion for a major power.

That leaves for consideration the question of proof that my measure will end war forever. My credentials are just about zip, me being mentally ill and all. Nevertheless, I am not so stupid as to state my measure openly and then defend it against counterarguments. I have written down succinctly and it is brief. It is not especially technical and I believe a politician could understand it in essence. The problem is escrow. How do I convince a state to make a $7 billion escrow deposit? I am confident my measure is correct in similar terms to the confidence the Manhattan Project scientists that their first atomic bomb test would work. (I recently read a book entitled, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, written by a Pulitzer Prize winner, though I don't recall if he won it for this book. I thought it was excellent. And I do have a bachelor's degree from U.C.S.C. in physics.) My confidence relates to my part of the escrow. I would have to agree to a definite criterion of success for my measure, and most likely such a criterion would have to have a very long term of application. For one thing, I haven't calculated how long it would take to work. It might not be immediate. For another, since the calculation of an estimate of the cost of past wars would best be made over a long time span, a criterion for success of my measure would best also reach a conclusion only after a long future time span.

I would have to agree to a criterion reaching completion almost certainly long after my own death, causing me to bring into my side of the negotiations a consideration of the certainty of my establishing a lasting genetic line without benefit of a realized payment. I would have to not divulge my measure not only unless the escrow deposit were made, but also not unless I was satisfied it had legal and constitutional strength lasting to the same completion time for the criterion of success. This becomes tricky because states have a tendency not to last long in anthropological terms, which is why I added constitutional strength to legal strength. I believe that if the negotiating state expects me to act in good faith on my side of the escrow, coming to terms with certainty of genetic continuation to my own satisfaction and in my own way, it will act in good faith on its, and only a constitutional provision--an amendment--would give me anything approaching certainty that future citizens of the negotiating state will abide by the terms agreed to by the current citizens.

These are heady notions given my mental illness.

One thing is clear though, the exact time at which the criterion of success of my measure would be assessed determines much of the rest of the deal. I would hope it to be soon, but keeping $7 billion in escrow for a long time would be expensive and the negotiating state would for that reason want it to be soon also.

As for providing a reason for a state to make the escrow deposit, my sole recourse at this stage of discussion is the integrity of my blog. It has been described as great by one of my associates. This gives me confidence I am going in the right direction, and to continue in pursuit of greater objectives than supply and demand allow by themselves.

language causes war

Mentally ill persons' essential atoms being unprotected by an inner membrane, normal people live in a state of constant incursion on them. This produces the effect of tending: The mentally ill person's mind is a tending pivot point which the normal people bear off of, causing the mentally ill persons to hear voices, and, as mentally ill persons are distributed all over, the normal people are stabilized isotropically, their misdirected comments, that would otherwise spew out into the environment and be picked up by other species, remain centered in the species skull distribution, and don't spew out.

Mentally ill persons are selected from a broad range of human ranks. Their ejection from species interest might be thought to be a result of the irritation they cause the species due to some sort of inherent pathology. But such a mechanism would not result in a uniform distribution of draftees from the population. Irritation is highly special in each case and would not result in uniform frequency. The frequency of the mentally ill is uniform throughout the population, in order to produce isotropy and stabilization of misdirected comments.

From my own case I can assert that it was precipitated by rank strife, a loss of a personal dispute. I believe that this is what the species uses in all cases to generate draftees. The species is turning rank strife into protection from misdirected comments escape.

For reasons connected with my theory of the physical foundation of mental illness, it is claimed by me that when a person first becomes mentally ill his location becomes irrelevant to the species interest. For this reason the locations of the mentally ill are immaterial. They can be put here or there for convenience's sake and it won't affect their being used to achieve isotropic stability of language.

However, because the minds of normal people are dependent on these mentally ill people's minds as tending pivots, everyone, both the mentally ill and the normal people, must be treated by the species together in death, when active language management ends. to maintain the concealment of the effects of language, the species started to bury its dead in boxes. As a result, the anisotropic impulses caused by vision stimulated by all the light of the sun on the earth no longer were deposited into the soil at death.

But because the earth created life for a reason, it needs all these anisotropic impulses to be deposited in the soil, and that is not happening with humans. So the earth is quite able to get what it wants, and causes wars, to inject chaos into the function of deaths and take back the anisotropic impulses of human beings.

So to escape the interminable periodicity of war humans have to find a different system of communication than language.