Edward Wilson, The Creation: Evangelical and Science

As an environmentalist myself, I'd always say, "one small difference or one big difference, no matter what, there is a difference. If all do small parts then together it makes a huge difference." There are small things we can do to preserve mother earth and can even save you $money$ also. Like switching a regular incandescent light bulb with a compact fluorescent light bulb (CPL) or any energy saving bulbs. CPL and other energy saving bulbs costs less than the regular light bulbs, lasts up to 10 times, and each lifespan of the bulbs depending on hours of use can save you up to $91.00 on electricity. It also use 60-75% less energy than a regular bulb. This simple switch will save about 300 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. Win/ win situation, isn't that great! For more small things you can do go to: http://globalwarming-facts.info/50-tips.html

I am glad that global warming has finally been taken upon more serious now a these days, because I remembered one year ago, the issues of global warming was placed to be the 5th place of "Most Important" and of course the 1st place was some celebrity going through some psychological breakdown or whatever. However there are still many people who are not aware about global warming. The people whose not aware like most of my friends and family members. When I approach them about being environmental friendly for global warming awareness, they all response similarly; "I'm not rich so I don't think my voice will be heard or matter" or "No thanks, I don't got the time to protest." They all think they need to sacrifice big in order to make this type of change which I think why not because they are part of the environment, but I tell them- "No, that's not true. We all can let our voices be heard and doesn't matter small or big differences, we all can make a difference." Each citizen in the U.S. has the rights to let our voices be heard, one of the ways is by petitioning. By gathering enough signatures to the White House can start the petitioning process. Here are some of the websites I had been participating in:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2167/t/5243/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=876
www.coopamerica.org/takeaction/fordandgm

It is true of what Edward Wilson listed in the lecture; the loss of animal and habitants, and where half of the population's species can be gone or be brought to an extinction. This all will happen if we do not take actions now to fight global warming. Some of his ideas found here under 'Ecology' : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Osborne_Wilson explains the big picture of how the loss of animals and habitants can affect our ecosystem and the food chain.

Science and Religion Can Be Compatible

I was fortunate because I was able to discover the Professor Dumont and I shares a quite similar view when responding to; if science and religion is compatible. Below is Dumont's response and was found from a Professor in philosophy, David Lane's website: (http://elearn.mtsac.edu/dlane/socra5.html)

Dumont's (Mt. Saint Mary's College) Response: "Frankly I see both as relying heavily on faith in the unknown. Both are human disciplines/activities, expressing human aspirations and subject to human limitations/faults. Both are institutions and belief systems. I see many problems with both as they are practiced today. At its best science is humble before its limitations and honest in its claims. At its best religion provides comfort, consolation, inspiration, and motivation without claiming to have all of the answers nor to order people around. I see no reason to think that they should in principle conflict, since to me they are both human pursuits of truth. There is a lot of bad religion around (arrogant and unloving) but the good religion that is there could do a great deal to support and limit (through true humility before nature and our limitations and through a proper sense of responsibility for life) the aspirations of science."

In other words, the professor suggests that science and religion can be compatible; since both of the institutions offers humans to practice and to pursue to search for answers about life and the universe. Dumont refers, "its greatest in science is acknowledgeable of its progress and obstacles, its greatest in religion can be realistic and would not distinguish itself to be superior than others. The professor does acknowledge that there are a bad religion and a good religion. The good one does lean in and offer the support in scientific research, yet also can take its stand and abolish in research studies if founded to be inhuman to their beliefs. Altogether, Dumont's responded deligently. Moreover, my approach to this question is similar.

Similar and agreeing with Professor Dumont; in my point of view I do think science and religion can be compatible. As a dedicated student in Buddhism and in the sciences; both of their teachings were equally important and precious to me. Both served as a counterbalance; in providing me aspirations to strive in my achievements, provided me answers when I was most confused. This is the main reason why I believe it is so possible for the science and religion to be compatible. Dumont said it best when he mentioned, "that its best science should be humble and know its limitations and honest in its claims. At its best religion provides comfort, consolation, inspiration, and motivation without claiming to have all of the answers nor to order people around." It is true. Throughout my studies of sciences; for some of its matters do still need light for its grey area and holes still need to be filled. The ones whose literate in science can tell you how many doors has still left unclosed by scientists. This idea also applies samely towards religion. In its religion it does still contains the flaws like science, with grey areas and holes.

Science and religion has been providing valuble resources to humans and the universe. Such resources is extremely valuble to us all. It is for this reason these two institution continues to grow in popularity amongst humans. We all should be acknowledgeable of both. Therefore it is important not one should never limit themselves from getting too egocentric or bias.

What level of dimensions does psychic has access to? Is it the same dimension as Lisa Randall and hologram?

I was reading a book called, "Your Sixth Sense," written by Ted Andrews.
He uses the Hologram Peredigm to explain why a person is able to access
and foresees intuitively of another person that once lived or is still
living. However, it seems that Lisa Randall is speaking of the matter as
mentioned for the hologram. So are they actually speaking of the same
dimensions?

I actually started reading about our sixth sense before class and it's
great that I am knowing more of it. But of course, no matter what, I
don't think anyone is able to answer this question, but hopefully
someone can make some senses out of this. My first thoughts of getting
this book was because I wanted to get in touch with my gut feeling.
However, I found out further that it was related to psychicism. I kept
reading but I refuse to practice any the lessons offered in the book.
I've always had believed in spirits but never really got in touch of
any, I want to keep it that way. I mean, who knows, I don't want create
an access of any chances with any occurrences with them. Now I'm just
more freaked out. I wonder if anyone shares this same experience with
me?

How to Sleep Well If You Are Afraid of The Dark

You are not alone. Being scared in the dark is not a childhood fear and most of the adults that I know of are still scared of darkness. From all the people I have known, I am have the worse case of panics when sleeping alone in the dark or being home alone. I get uncomfortable easily when I'm sitting in a room filled with dead silence. It is most worse when I try to sleep at night and in the dark I hear crackling noises made by my wooden desk or the TV stand. Because once I hear cracklings I start starring and searching.

I used keep my eyes wide open to watch out for myself in the dark and this makes me more awake and scared. I guess it is true since when a person is in the dark they start creating images and freak themselves out. But it was hard for me to close my eyes since I'm so paranoid of being in the dark by myself. Recently, I discovered a way to help me fall asleep easier in the dark and avoid starring at objects in the dark. Thanks to the invention of the eye cover. When I'm ready to go bed, I just strap it on to cover my eyes. The eye cover kept my eyes blinded so it prevents me from starring at objects in the dark space. The woods still crackles but as long as I am being blindfolded it will keep my eyes shut and away from freaking myself out.

Apology by Plato

If it was for anyone who was able to write empathetically well, it will be Plato in Apology. I don't care for all of the people who thinks I'm weird from those who criticize about the writings of Plato. I found him to be the the greatest writer in empathy. I know it's not hard to write for pity or asking its audiences for sympathy. However, he slowly builds his character to a brighter light, then slowly, slowly, Socrates shines. For this is part of the reason being I found him to be such an amusement. Well maybe because I'm just easily moved by empathy. But most importantly, it is because I use this style of writing- well depends on circumstances. I guess it is because it works! But of course I'm not in any level close to Plato. But let's see what seems to make his writing so eloquent.

I know for a fact that his overall style is reeling in the reader gradually. For example; at the beginning of the story Socrates was fighting for his own defense. As the story progress, he found himself in a more unfavorable situation with the judges. So as the courts' injustice rises to the defender, and this drama gets more intensive, so did Plato write the lines of Socrates to be yet more prideful and righteousness. Towards the end of the dialouge; where more prideful of himself and his friends and the people of Athenians. Socrates announces for himself that he would be this single person to sacrifice for the civilians of Athenians, because now, shinning its brightest, he has a heroic light on him. Overall for me, I will remember this talent and will in the future to read more of his writings.

Reaction to the film, Aldous Huxley "Man Search for Truth"

I had the toughest time balancing out my beliefs and values for these
past couple of years. I choose to major in science, so I was going
back and forth this whole time questioning about my beliefs between
spirituality and science. At one point, I found myself replacing all
my spiritual beliefs since my science classes practices on producing
hard facts and evidences. However recently, somehow conscientiously
my spiritual side grew upon me, reminding me not to forget what I had
once valued. I've decided to find an explanation for both of these
two beliefs and try my best to make senses from both sides so I can
bring peace inside of me. Believe me, this is not easy and even I
started to get confused and got blurred while researching on my own.
I almost thought of giving up. However after watching the film of
Aldous Huxley, I was able to find a conformation from him. That a
human being should have two types of education; scientific language
and literature. Above all, most importantly is intelligence and
consciousness.

Huxley explains that the scientific language is a one word, which
stands for one theme between given word and event talked about. In
literature literature work can be expressed in two types of ways;
expressing the inexpressible, and expressing good work in multiple
events human have and expressing it in multiple meanings. Most
important and above most was intelligence and consciousness. These
key points serves as a guidance for me as an individual to let me know
that even though I am in a blur right now, I should continue my
searching.

Francis Fukuyama

Francis Fukuyama

I disagree with Fukuyama's prediction on where he mentions that no
large states or powerful industries would go to war unless big issues
seems to arise. In addition he also added that no more bigger in
space to fight about since spaces has reached its limits and
capacities. This is not true in my point of view. Did we all forget
that our government sponsors on the new innovations and technology for
mars and the moon? Let me remind us all with such administration
called, NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. In the
article written by Mark Whittington, published Sep 21, 2007
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/384514/will_china_beat_the_united_state\
s_back.html

In the past we have been competing with China for the race of to get
to the moon. It was most recent in 2007 that China has surprised the
U.S., Russia and India with their new innovations in space technology.
The strongest country of the nation is sure not pleasant. Besides,
these four countries are aiming for all the same ideas; in new
inventions to strengthen their military weapons, and promoting the
expansion of life and spaces. Therefore I disagree with Fukuyama. I
strongly believe that there is still spaces available for our country
and other countries to go to war for.