We are delusional. I don’t mean seeing things that aren’t there. We can see things pretty clearly. I mean believing things that aren’t true. We get told what to think, and we’ve been taught to believe lies.
In America we were told that we live in a democracy, where everyone’s opinion counts and everyone has the right to free speech. Look at the First Amendment to the Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
We’re told that public opinion is shifting, and we’re fed numbers that are supposed to support the premise. But if the opinion polls are any indication, it’s always been clear that “figures don’t lie, but liars figure.”
Before the presidential election, I mocked the polls because they took a sampling of about 800 people and used that to predict the results, and I mocked the news media because that was the poll they chose to report about. I mocked it because the sample the pollsters took was 0.00024461538 out of every 100 Americans. The Powerball lottery odds are currently o.00000034223 out of 100. (that number means nothing to my argument, but wasn’t it interesting to think about why I would put that in here?) I don’t know about you, but once the numbers slip past three decimal places, I don’t think much of the chances of me and 99 other people being the winners of the big prize, or of the polls being right.
I value my privacy, so when I was asked to tell who I was going to vote for, I declined. They ask me every election cycle. Once in the last 10 years I gave a pollster my honest opinion, and decided thereafter to keep it private. After all, when you vote, you’re in a little box and no one can see who you’re choosing. I barely had time to vote, much less talk to a pollster. I’d only be feeding them a number to skew, so it feels pointless to me.
So we’re told the public opinion is shifting, and that may be true. Or maybe we’re being told public opinion is shifting and what direction it’s going, just to see if it will sway our own opinions. I believe what I believe, and it doesn’t shift like sand at the ocean, or a boat deck. Maybe people just vote their frustrations and their feelings at the time of voting. Maybe, after years of Republican presidents and idiotic sound bytes in the news, we were sick of the stupidity and had the perception the president didn’t really give a shit about the American people, so we elected Obama. Maybe, after years of failed policy and increases in health care expenses (mine will increase by $100.00 per fucking paycheck this coming year, while my salary goes up by $0.00 per fucking paycheck. $2,600 I have to figure out how not to spend next year, that I spent, carefully, this year.)
We’re told that evolution and global warming aren’t just scientific theories beside other scientific theories. We’re told they are science. You can tell me they’re based on science, and I can tell you that they’re theories based on certain data samples, and that they ignore other data samples, or they are theories based on data the scientists wish was there. Sometimes what we hear leads us to opinions we believe strongly, and sometimes we just want to believe. But, read about how science and scientific journals have been set up to fail in any of the articles linked here. If science is proven to be bad science by others trying to verify the findings using good science, maybe other scientific theories we’ve accepted as fact are based on bad science, inadequate sampling, and fraudulent data made to look like it supports someone’s pet theory or some desired public opinion sway. Here’s one that was published and then very publicly retracted. It was retracted because someone tried to duplicate the experiment and didn’t get the same results. But the “scientist” who published the result “data” from the original “experiment” got published!!. Before the journal called the “scientist” on their bullshit data and it was retracted. Read the whole little novella and a little more interesting data here. Were you paying attention when that happened?
It would have been fantastic social science if it was true, but instead it’s another one of those papers that tell people how the writers think they should think, not what they actually think. So with that in mind, do you really trust the social engineers who make money every time someone buys into global warming theory because they invest in the new improved products that are supposed to reduce our ‘carbon footprint?’ If it’s true, how did humans manage to not go extinct sooner if we really have been on the planet, evolving, polluting, and destroying the environment, for the six million years “scientists” yammer on about, with dubious proof and no extant “missing links” in between so-called evolutionary progressions?
For fucks sake, they used to live in caves or little huts, and some would burn literal animal shit for fire to COOK with. Where was all the e.coli death back then to wipe out all of humanity? We didn’t have modern plumbing so guess where they handled that business? Modern plumbing has proven just EXCELLENT for both human civilization and the environment in recent years. Just look in Flint, Michigan. Oh, tell me the industrial revolution in the 1800s started the destruction even though our ignorant ancestors had been working on it since six million years earlier, but our oh-so-fragile planet, suddenly now, in the immortal words of Star Trek’s engineer Mr. Scott, ” cannae stand the strrrain?”
In an era when you can publish whatever fabricated bullshit you feel like , until you get caught, or even after that, it’s magnificent “science,” isn’t it: “Sure, there are several climate theories, but a select few who call themselves the majority, in agreement with the people who call themselves ‘the only reputable scientific authorities,’ have decided that the media and mainstream scientific community can only believe and promote this one theory, and all other opinions or theories, being deemed by said ‘majority’ and ‘scientific community’ as ‘unscientific,’ can shut the fuck up.”
There have been magnificent examples of plagiarism (e.g., Fareed Zakaria) and fabricated bullshit (e.g., Jayson Blair) in the news community and the literary community. Even in the blogging community, if you read certain fucking awesome blogs , and that’s only one example because on his blog there’s been documented plagiarism, and if you read certain other, lame blogs, there’s lots of fabricated bullshit. So who can you really trust as an “authority” or a “source of original material?”
But if the “mainstream” scientific community is right about the age of the earth, global warming, and environmental destruction, how the fuck were we not all dead long ago? Back when people knew far less science, they should have killed us all if the world was really all that old, feeble and frail. Do you trust the social engineers who sell you evolution theory and try to shout over, and silence, anyone who believes any alternate origin theories? Really, that’s a great foundation for a solid education: “Sure, there are several origin theories, but a select few who call themselves the majority, in agreement with the people who call themselves the only reputable scientific authorities, have decided that teachers can only teach this one theory, and all other opinions or theories, being deemed by said ‘majority’ and ‘scientific community’ as ‘unscientific,’ can shut the fuck up.”
Oh, I have traveled far afield from where I was going. So, back to the Constitution. But this social engineering is an experiment of its’ own. When the Constitution was written, literate people knew what the writers meant. When the amendments were written, literate people understood the purpose. But in the modern era, words don’t mean what they mean, because everything is up for interpretation. I mean, seriously, what “is” this?
Or, to put it another way, what the in-a-present-state-of-existence,-existant, real, fuck?
When *I* read the First Amendment, I understood it saying that Congress can’t establish a state religion, or tell people how they ought to worship. But that’s only because I’m not a damned lawyer. In the historical context of writing, King Henry VIII had done both of these things. He wanted to fornicate, (according to His contemporary Church’s laws and traditions, which to him weren’t just contemporary, but also contemptible) but the church authorities wouldn’t give him divorce papers. So he did what any self-respecting church-disrespecting king did. He started the Church of England and thumbed his nose and flipped a couple of birds at the Pope. Not the ONLY reason, but certainly one of many straws that nearly broke the beast with two back’s balls. Of course you know the difference between King Henry VIII and and a Bactrian camel. One is a huge two-toed beast with two humps who can carry you through the desert, from hell to breakfast, and the other is a huge Tudor beast with two backs who wants to hump (SIX wives plus affairs?!) without being condemned to hell with no Brexit. I mean “exit.”
Because of a modern interpretation of the First Amendment, (Engel v. Vitale) we damn well can’t have organized prayers in the public schools, (here in the “land of the free,” where “Congress shall make NO laws,” but the Supreme Court bloody well did) even if they are student organized and led. We also have to have fucking “holiday” concerts because heaven forbid we should fucking say “Christmas” at a school. You don’t even pronounce the Christ part, and many just say X-mas, which nobody really likes. On the one side it’s too big a compromise, and on the other, not enough. “It’s Fall Break” because some idiot is afraid to say “Thanksgiving”vacation. And “Spring” Break, because the same idiot is afraid to say “Easter” break, which doesn’t even mention Jesus’ resurrection or his name in it. You can now mention any other religious or man-made holiday celebration or tradition, just not the Christian ones. But somehow, we did fine for 171 years, brainwashing our children with recitations of The Lord’s Prayer, other prayers from the Bible, and other prayers offered by school personnel and students. Here’s a quick excerpt from an article about colonial Williamsburg, about how they damaged the fragile psyches of the children:
G-fucking-O-fucking-D!!!! Be afraid, fucking self-styled anti-religion-unless-it’s-an-inoffensive-or-cool-or-currently-hot-topic-type-of-religion censors. And yes, gentle readers, it was the God of the Traditional 66-Book Old and New Testament Bible we’re talking about here, and deep, heavy, philosophical questions to think about. Shit like: What is the chief end of man? In the modern age, people who don’t read wouldn’t have the first clue what that means, much less have the cognitive ability to understand the answer. Illiterate savages. Q: What is the chief end of man? A: Duh, I don’t know. His ASS? But back then, fourth graders, maybe even younger kids, knew what it meant, knew they had a unique and special purpose in life, knew the other questions all by heart, knew the answers, and knew where to find verses that proved the point in their family Bible. Why are people in the 2K years idiots? Because they don’t read EVERYTHING, and they should. Contrary opinions build stronger apologists with better apologetics. And the more you read, the more you understand what you read.
When *I* read the Second Amendment, I understood it saying people have the right to own and carry guns, period. In the historic context of writing, we had fought for independence from England, after King George the Turd… I mean, um, King George III had attempted to restrict citizens of the colonies. (oh, check the King George III link out, THAT’S GOOD scholarship.- Thanks, David Koppel, and I hope you don’t mind me directing people toward you and your writing.) The writing of both first and second amendments were clear attempts to say that our United States would NOT be framed and built like England, but rather, we would have personal rights and freedoms that wouldn’t be restricted by an intrusive government.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
But alas, in the modern era there are apparently nuances of implication, intent, meaning, historical contextualization and language that we commoners are far too simple minded to figure out for ourselves, so the government has stepped in and interpreted that church and state should be separate even though people obviously practice their religious practices and believe their faiths while working in government offices and schools. So we now have what’s bordering on separation of church FROM state, depending on which religion you practice. It’s a double-standard, though. If you want to take extra breaks at work to pray toward a city that’s significant in your religion, say, 42° 26′ 05″N Latitude, 83° 59′ 06″W Longitude, as long as you meet your performance metrics like everyone else at your company, that’s fine, but if you want to say, “If I’m free to exercise my religion I don’t have to do something that is an offense to me as a practitioner of my faith, you get told “tough shit, you have to do that,” and you get insulted, called names, and you get death threats. You don’t get the option of practicing your religion at work, unless your religion is unobtrusive, invisible, or currently popular and socially acceptable to defend. Even in the schools, if you make a work of art that has religious overtones, it depends on what it is.
Why are there “nuances of [blahblahblah, you lost me long before “nuances,” Deon, will this article EVER end?]? Why? Because someone wants us to believe that everything is open to interpretation. Like the linguist who wants to dissect words and define what the meaning of the word “is” is so all of us uneducated shitheads can understand. Or so all us angry souls who want things made right, when they weren’t done right in the first place, will be so confused we give up on our impeachment processes or inquiries.
We are ignorant, illiterate savages.
People are going to believe what they believe, it doesn’t necessarily make it “absolute truth.” For example, I just read that Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson was named “Sexiest Man Alive” for 2016, by the people at People magazine. He has a kind of appeal. Even a guy would appreciate his masculine bad-ass-ery. Having said that, I’m sorry, Mr. Johnson. Shemar Moore (you’re welcome, “babygirls”) still surpasses you, for me. Sure. you’re both smart and funny and nice, and you both certainly fit the fitness category, so really, you’re both beautiful specimens of manhood; don’t get me wrong. Shemar is just smooth. I shouldn’t really explain it any more than that. I never watched The Young and the Restless, but I have watched Criminal Minds and Diary of a Mad Black Woman…
I’ve seen Hercules, The Mummy Returns, The Scorpion King, and they were awesome. You’ve seen the Fast and Furious series, and other movies. I can look at The Rock and say, “He’s really cool,” but I look at Shemar Moore and I think, “damn, that’s a sexy man.” And then, it comes down to perception, because the “absolute truth” is that I’ve been the sexiest man alive for every year since I turned 18, but the press doesn’t know me. Don’t ever tell them. They’d be going on scavenger hunts to find my damn bunker. Don’t you fucking dare.
In other science news, Thus spake the Prophet, “We’re all going to die.” That’s right, Stephen Hawking hath prophesied. And not to be grim and sardonic about it, but he sounds a lot like Glum from the old animated cartoon Gulliver’s Travels, which I am far too young to remember. Glum used to say things exactly like Stephen Hawking’s prophecy: “We’ll never make it! We’re all gonna die.” And then they made it and nobody died. But from the brilliant mind of Stephen, the prediction is that we have less than a thousand more years before someone fucks up so badly that we all become extinct as a species. OR, a giant asteroid will come and play bumper pool with Earth, whereupon, “we’re all gonna die.”
I respect Stephen Hawking. He’s far more intelligent than most of us but in the interest of sharing scientific theories, I have an alternate, non-scientific one. We have at least 1007 years, give or take as to when that first year starts, and how long the wrap-up at the end of that takes. My theory is from two sources. First, John on Patmos (Revelation 20) who said, before he promised that there will be a new heaven and a new earth, that Christ himself would rule on this present earth for a thousand years. Second, it’s really too much to write here but Daniel and Jesus both promised it’s coming: an additional 7 years during which it’ll seem like “we’re all gonna die.” Even that’s up for interpretation and it depends on who you read, since it hasn’t happened yet, but look here for some interesting theories about it. That language is a hell of a lot more cryptic than the Constitution, so I understand why people have so many different ideas about it. I have a preferred option but I won’t know if I’m right until it happens and neither will any of the other people with personal prophetic interpretations. However, if I am right, there’s at least 1007 years left on this rock, so that will mean the great Mr Hawking has underestimated the lesser beings and our potential. By a few years at least.
Occasionally prophecy is easy to debunk. Like TB Joshua from Nigeria, who predicted that Clinton would become the president. He had a shot at being right, but apparently one of two things happened. Either, 1- God is mischievous, and he lied to let TB look bad, or 2-TB is full of shit, and lied about it, or, best case, didn’t wait for the straight answer from God. He cited the anointing of king David of Israel as an excuse for his failure, but Samuel and God were having a conversation and Samuel was listening for the answers to his questions: “Surely,” God, your choice for king is this stately, good-looking young man! And God said, “No.” Samuel didn’t anoint the wrong king. But by saying Clinton was going to win, TB was giving her his anointing as the prophet, claiming to be God’s prophet, and he was wrong. The people of Israel didn’t really take kindly to prophets who failed. We don’t treat them like that in the modern era, but I wonder if his followers won’t give him a Trump-esque “You’re FIRED!”
I don’t usually debunk prophecy, and the one from Hawking is a moot point because I will be leaving you soon. That’s right, I’m quitting, and soon. I can’t tell you exactly when that will happen, but sometime in the next 80 years, assuming medical technology gets me past the next 50, (I’ll be 101), there will be no more Deon Mumple to kick around, abuse, take for granted, cook, do dishes, laundry, vacuuming, trash, mopping, bathrooms, windows, and provide the standard flirtatious remarks, admiring gazes, hot steamy sex, Mrs. M. Sometime In the next 80 years, I’m done. Which means unless Stephen is right but has VASTLY overestimated us, I won’t be around to validate HIS prophecy, much less my own.
I am still here, and while here, I hope you all have a great century. Don’t believe the guys who tell us there’s no hope. Because, if there’s no hope, well, then what’s the point of anything? But if there is hope, then maybe there’s also truth. Maybe there’s actual meaning, and not nuances of denial. Maybe we have a purpose. It’s possible that we’re beautiful, unique individuals, and if we seek the truth, we might find out that “we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works,which God prepared in advance for us to do.” (Ephesians 2:10)