Wednesday, December 27, 2017

December 27, 2017

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.
Note 1:  I often dash words in phrases in order to express and preserve an idea. For example, frank-objectivity represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth despite possible error.
 Note 2: It is important to note "civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for the people more than for the city.
A personal paraphrase of the June 21, 1788 preamble:  We the civic citizens of nine of the thirteen United States commit-to and trust-in the purpose and goals stated herein --- integrity, justice, collaboration, defense, prosperity, liberty, and perpetuity --- and to cultivate limited services by the USA. Composing their own paraphrase, citizens may consider the actual preamble and perceive whether they are willing or dissident toward its principles.  

Our Views (Dec 27)


The Advocate helped me realize for the first time that press-writers are right in there with ministers in the competition for used-car-salesman reliability. (I cannot name a journalist---someone who reliably records events. That may be because there is so much I do not know, but sometimes I observe conflicts with the-objective-truth.)

In this instance, The Advocate publishes, “Baton Rouge voters might prefer that Landry . . . Sterling.” I think most Baton Rouge voters are more civic than The Advocate employees who published that claim. By civic, I mean citizens who collaborate for statutory justice rather than dominant opinion. I think most Baton Rouge citizens: are dismayed that Mayor Kip Holden’s claim that Baton Rouge is inclusive was not accepted and promoted by the media; that Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards convicted on world-wide TV two police officers who had not been indicted; that lawyers rushed in to set up a multimillion dollar suit, exciting their victims---the Sterling family; that “matters” groups from around the country came here at extensive expense to the city and state; that evil was motivated to visit Dallas then Baton Rouge; that LSU President F. King Alexander created personal promotion with the infamous “Moment or Movement?”; that, so far, President Obama’s promotion of divisive “lives matter” and his dreadful comment in Dallas continues with immunity; that local statutory justice was put on the shelf so that the federal authorities could be in control, leaving Louisiana and Baton Rouge to investigate the investigation; that the federal conclusion was insufficient to absorb the shame (the woe cannot be recovered).

Did the federal investigation discover who called 911 and why? I think Landry should take the time required to answer the unanswered questions, and I bet most voters could care less about The Advocate’s business plans regarding Sterling. Shame on The Advocate.

The Advocate justifies releasing prisoners with the hyperbole “bankrupted the state.”

Louisiana releasing prisoners, without the reform programs other states have provided, motivates The Advocate to call on their partner in civic injustice. “Religious conservative[s] often experience Louisiana’s incarceration crisis through prison ministries.” Do prison minsters teach and coach prison administrators like Burl Cain? Does The Advocate suppress this view to help their own partnership? Why not keep the people alert to actual reality?

I am tired of my perception of The Advocate’s work. I would like to see my hometown newspaper at work for the people instead of special interests.

Our Views Dec 26 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_679faa10-e759-11e7-a074-930e0ac94614.html)

Yesterday, I objected to Boxing Day (a commonwealth practice) as particularly un-American due to fox hunting not being for sustenance. The commoners who came to this country learned hunting (and fishing) for food from the indigenous people. Today, I am learning more about The Advocate’s St. Stephen promostion and assert that on that basis it is even more un-American.
Further to my claim that America is independent of the British Commonwealth, America is independent of the Vatican and its fickle, factional, feudal system of saints. St. Stephen might be the patron of Serbia, a couple towns in Italy, a town in each Belgium and Germany, and Owensboro, Kentucky. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Stephen and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patron_saints_of_places.

The latter reference lists patrons of countries: St. George for England, St. Andrew for Scotland, St. Patrick for Ireland and, beyond Britain, for examples, St. Michael for France and the Virgin Mary for the USA. Again, we’d need to apply to the Vatican for modern listings. (I’ll never forget MWW’s comment in the late sixties: “Oh, no. Just when my personal religion is being considered the Pope disqalfies some familiar saints!”) The patron system is important to many Louisiana Parishes.

Folks in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana have an indigenous remembrance. “In 1810, President James Madison claimed West Florida as part of Louisiana and sent William C. C. Claiborne to claim the territory. Claiborne established the boundaries of the Florida Parishes. He created St. Tammany Parish and named it after the Delaware Indian Chief Tamanend (c.1628-1698), who made peace with William Penn and was generally renowned for his goodness. Among the nine Louisiana parishes (counties) named for "saints" (see "List of parishes in Louisiana"), St. Tammany is the only one whose eponym is not a saint of the Roman Catholic Church, the ecclesiastical parishes of which formed the basis for the state's civil parishes. In fact, Tamanend is not known to have been a Christian, and was certainly not a Roman Catholic. However, he became popularly revered as an "American patron saint" in the post-Revolutionary period (long after his death).” See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Tammany_Parish,_Louisiana.

America can be great because of its unique past collaboration for goodness. By educating both the young and the immigrants to the neglected American promise, a better future may be made possible. The neglected American dream is stated in the civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. The preamble invites human collaboration for mutual, comprehensive safety and security for everyone, including dissidents. In other words, a culture of statutory justice. Dissidents either reform to the culture’s example and statutory law or suffer constraint.

Dissidents include those who want to change the American republic, for example, into a European model or Christian style democracy. The Advocate opines for themselves, but I consider many of their causes, including Boxing Day, un-American. The Advocate might respond that I am just not among the elite---a modern Tammany proponent rather than a Cincinnati patron. I argue that on the basis of trust and commitment to the agreement stated in the preamble, I represent the elite American.


Members of the British Commonwealth cannot possibly understand the promise that is offered Americans and the future greatness that can accrue to the world. Most Americans may encounter, consider, and accept the authority to personally take the responsibility for human freedom in both public and private human contacts each person needs or wants. Just as a person must work for food, a person must work for statutory justice.


We know that neither government nor theism seeks to deliver statutory justice: The authority to discover and establish statutory justice rests with willing persons.

  
Today’s thought, G.E. Dean (Psalms 32:1 CJB)
How blessed are those whose offense is forgiven, those whose sin is covered! How blessed those to whom Adonai imputes no guilt, in whose spirit is no deceit!

Dean says, “It is a joy to be forgiven by the Lord. He will forgive you too if you repent and turn to him.”

David seems to support antinomianism. Dean seems to think offense might involve guilt. Either view seems unreliable to me. Humans have the authority to conduct themselves so that other humans depart needed/wanted connections, whether public or private, in mutual appreciation.
    
Letters

Actual reality vs emotions (Edmonston, Dec 23) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_a2e2f16c-e66f-11e7-a9c8-ab0e63bdd067.html)

To Al Fletch:  Your response seems an example of “social science” reason for existing---fooling the public: in this case, attempts to benefit from social engineering by the USA to favor the ethanol industry and consequential special interests such as high compression engines. In other words the articles you site have statements by vendors and universities using statistical statements to convince the public, omitting the negative facts. Additionally, they overlook the comparative costs from potential energy to delivered energy, wherein ethanol is the loser: That’s why only Brasil and the USA use it.

For example, car manufacturers do the best they can with bad legislation. “Ethanol contains approx. 34% less energy per unit volume than gasoline, and therefore in theory, burning pure ethanol in a vehicle reduces miles per US gallon 34%, given the same fuel economy, compared to burning pure gasoline. However, since ethanol has a higher octane rating, the engine can be made more efficient by raising its compression ratio.  Based on EPA tests for all 2006 E85 models, the average fuel economy for E85 vehicles resulted 25.56% lower than unleaded gasoline.” See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel#Dehydration. Thus, the economy loss was decreased 25%. The 75% loss is being legislated for what? “Renewables”?

The Oak Ridge study says, “(note that full useful life emissions have not been measured) on the FTP, and also within the 4000 mile (6400 km) US06 emissions limits. Emissions of hydrocarbon-based hazardous air pollutants are higher on Federal Certification Gasoline while ethanol and aldehyde emissions are higher on ethanol fuel.” Quite obviously, if you aren’t using gasoline the instantaneous emissions from gasoline are less, but if you’re consuming more fuel to make up for the lower energy ethanol, emissions go up. And you have to contend with ethanol’s affinity for water and the consequential 90-day storage limit.

Who in the world is using ethanol? “The world's top ethanol fuel producers in 2011 were the United States with 13.9 billion U.S. liquid gallons (bg) . . . and Brazil with 5.6 bg . . . accounting together for 87.1% of world production,” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_by_country. “The first production car running entirely on ethanol was the Fiat 147, introduced in 1978 in Brazil by Fiat. Ethanol is commonly made from biomass such as corn or sugarcane,” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel. Obviously, America is influenced by the corn industry and Brazil is influenced by the sugarcane industry.

“A study by the International Institute for Sustainable Development found there was no economic or environmental benefits to ethanol fuels, and the sole motivation for E85 was to subsidize the corn industry. Total CO2 emissions for the production and use of E85 was higher than total CO2 emissions for the production and use of gasoline,” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85.

Rep. Graves has the ability, desire, and performance of acting for the people (except imposing minister’s sermons in town meetings). What is your interest and motivation, Mr. Fletch?
 
Columns. (The fiction/non-fiction comments gallery for readers)
  
A liberal-democrat hope (Lanny Keller) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/lanny_keller/article_7deebaf0-e677-11e7-b49f-f7a3a28c17ba.html)

How can The Advocate support Gov. Edwards' failure to make the people of Louisiana No. 1?

I understood the announcement. I understood the poll reports---they're images of the polls that have Hillary Clinton president of the USA. Did the poll include even one flood victim still displaced? Any policemen? Any Baton Rouge residents?

I have personal authority about fact vs fiction; promise vs performance; honesty vs integrity; success vs failure; leading vs reacting.

Mr. K's surprising conclusion seemed more mysterious prayer than objective hope: “[The] 2019 governor’s race might not seem like a sure thing for the GOP.”

I’m scratching my head again, Mr. K.

To Julius Dooley:

I appreciate "TRUTH" and would like your detailed explanation. I think “Truth” seems to deify, but all caps does not. I work on "truth" all the time.

I gave a talk in 2006 or so, "Faith in the Truth." Today, I write about trust-in and commitment-to the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered.

I learned that many people equate "faith" with "religion," and therefore, they cannot understand my message. So I use "trust-in and commit-to."

The content of the talk might suggest the-objective-truth to some people, and one person, Harold Weingarten, a teacher in general and PhD in chemistry, asked, I recall, "What truth are you advocating: absolute truth, ultimate truth, God's truth, or Phil Beaver's truth?"

Over the subsequent decade, I considered alternatives and found that all of them, including Harold's four require evaluation: For example, one cannot conclude the ultimate truth has been reached without some sort of process with a conclusion based on evaluative criteria. Also, none of the standard short cuts---revelation, reason, proof, disproof, or tradition---hold up to discovery.
The study we refer to as “science” is a process but not a conclusion or product, even though a technology or invention may result. When the study is over, the student fully expects a future discovery to change the view of the-objective-truth. Inventions become obsolete.

Even “objective” and “actual” are insufficient modifiers and “reality” is insufficient. I concluded that the article "the" is essential and wanted to invite the reader not to separate words essential to my expression: the-objective-truth.

The-objective-truth exists and can only be discovered, and humankind is the only species with the physical and psychological power for discovery. For example, civic people do not lie because they want to communicate. It seems everything in the universe began 14.8 billiion years ago, beforehand there may have been only potential energy, and knowbody knows if "why?" is a valid question. Humankind continues to study the "how".

Because of grammar, the individual human may accept the authority to discover the-objective-truth either by experience or observation. Fidelity to the-objective-truth cannot be taught. Yet a (willing) student can be coached to discover and benefit from comprehensive fidelity to the-objective truth.

I would appreciate your comments on these ideas, too.


Phil Beaver does not “know” the-indisputable-facts, or actual-reality. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth of which most is undiscovered and some is understood. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.

No comments:

Post a Comment