XII. Bakit May... Part IV... Seriously

-

 Pagkatapos ubusin ng Covid 19 ang tao sa mundo, ang dating 7.7 billion katao ay... (roll the drum please)... naging 8 billion na lang!🤣

Anak ng... Akala ko ba ay naubos?

Bakit may heartaches? Kasi ang hirap kumita ng pera pang gatas ni baby. Tigil muna? Hindi nga tumitigil e. Which means afordable pa rin.

Qualitatively, no! Nature na mismo ang nagsabi. Maaaring mas malala pa ang abutin ng siksikan ng manok (bird flu), siksikan ng baboy (swine flu), at siksikan ng tao (Covid-19) sa isang lugar sa darating na panahon. Si Mother Nature na ang nagbabala. Di nabawasan ang tao. Pero ang babala ay iintayin pa ba nating mag negative ang population sa susunod na pandemic? At magtatatalon tayo sa tuwa at sa wakas ay paunti na ang tao? Bakit di uso ang abstinence sa pag-aasawa? Bakit di pwedeng ihinto ang pagbuga ng usok ng mga sasakyan at factory kahit sa loob lamang ng isang linggo? Bakit di pausuhin yung ganun? Ako ay nagtataka at bakit iyang metro na iyan sa baba ay walang tigil🤣... At bat napakabilis.😟



Birth less death na po iyan.
 
Sabi sa year 2100 sa bilang na 10.9 billion katao ay kusang titigil ang metrong iyan na may 1.9 births per women na lang.

Bakit? Ewan ko. Yan ang forecast ng statistics, ang nababasa nya sa galawan ng mga bagay.

A ok. Malapit na pala tayo sa tugatog. Kaya marami ang napapa-asawa na e di pa rin makayanang sabayan si economy.🤣

Tiis-tiis lang Bebe ko.😟 Di kayang sabayan ang ganyang mga pangyayaring pilit isinisiksik na ang kanilang katotohanan sa ating present situation. There is a time for everything sabi nga ng Bible.

At bakit naman kasi itong sex instinct ko ay sumabay pa sa ganyang mga pangyayari. Kung kelan may giyera, may pandemya, ay saka naghanap... Ay anu na!🤣

Pero may awa ang Diyos. May panahon ng kamatayan at pagtangis. May panahon din para sa kapayapaan at pag-iibigan.

 « Previous Chapter | Table of Contents | Next Chapter »

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Conclusion

-
Image
 I started phenomenologizing about my career choice but ended up praying. What happened? Recall me as a catholic who cannot bracket out my faith because it is a fundamental part of my being. It is also not helpful if we go on the other side of the linear equation, positing there is no God, and do phenomenologizing atheistically. We have lots of proof you can review why it isn't the road we took for such things as personal as my life career choice. We didn't focus on proving the existence of God though. There are lots of better proofs out there. We merely focused on doing phenomenology and my chosen topic, which is my career choices. If I phenomenologized during the boom of television, my career would also reflect on its effect. But I reflected today wherewith AI is affecting how I work. I used AI to simplify my complex ideas about my own career choices, which is like using a calculator to help me understand and situate those things that are bothering me about my career. Like ve...
Read more

Practical Thinking

-
 Would you believe that practical thinking is ethical thinking? "What path will I choose to achieve the end? Or what means will I use to achieve my goal?" "What should I do," is a practical question. But "What should I do with my life," is already half practical and half theoretical. It can include ethical philosophy already. Now extending it, the question "Lord, what should I do with my life?" becomes a prayer, a summon for help since we know by experience that the situation that is in front of us, is beyond our capacity to solve. We know by experience if something we need to solve is within our capacity by way of skill, knowledge, or accumulated experiences. We also know if its beyond our capacity to solve. We give thanks God that we have a banana to eat--we don't commonly ask God for help in eating the banana.🤣 I asked an AI and I actually learned a lot about my situation, why it's different from other's experiences, why it seems ...
Read more

Artificial Intelligence

-
Image
 You are also a model maker you may not yet realize though. The model out there for the taking is 20-20-20 rule for avoiding gadget glares and its consequences that for every 20 minute use of gadget with glares, you stop for 20 seconds and look 20 feet away. Then you observed it and acted on it. However, through trial and error you noticed that when you have migraine or is about to onset, 20 minutes is too long, and the 20 second time out is too short, and that 20 feet looking away is abrupt for you that you observed that you still look blank or blurred before you look and observe something 20 feet away. Perhaps you're still in your thought and can't observe things right away. You observe too that its better to stop, look away, and think about what you're reading for example without any timer which is more at pace with your thinking processes. The additional problem that you noticed though is that you tend to bypass the 20 minute focus when you don't have migraine and s...
Read more