Phenomena is a form of phenomenon. Both words are made plural by adding the "s." My dictionary [Meriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 10th edition--I'm out of date--and that's an absolute not a phenomena] has an interesting usage statement under phenomena. "Phenomena has been in occasional use as a singular for more than 400 years and its plural phenomenas for more than 350. Our evidence shows that it is primarily a speech form used by poets, critics, and professors, among others, but one that sometimes turns up in edited prose: the Borgias were, in modern terms, a media
I look at the word "candelabra" and recall as a young man with a friend who was a brassiere designer for Sears joking with him one night over bourbon and Locker Room [anybody remember butyl nitrate? Maybe if you're Gay you do. There was a lot of Locker Room once sold down on Christopher Street in NYC's Greenwich Village in the "good old days" of the late seventies]--I said, half-toasted, "Ya know, Cousin A, how 'bout calling a bra the Candela Bra, you know, it lights up, especially over the clasp...." Come on, folks, I was drunk. I once went up to Cousin A's office and saw projected designs for 14 bras going on at once. I was overwhelmed by all the bra-haha; it was phenomenal, it was.
What got me started on the word "phenomena"? The stock market, that's what. Today, the stock market is almost back to where it was before the disaster of Bush being appointed president and his arbitrarily involving us in "world" wars and close-call intrigues, with the help of the Christian god the Judeans called Jehovah and the Christians call their Allah (all gods in one, right?) and who Carl Jung said was the ancient Hebrew god Yahweh. Here's a nice little piece from the horse's mouth so to speak, the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Roman Catholics being the original interpreters of ancient Hebrew in those days, monks and shit like that with nothing to do but sit around all day in silence trying to prove the existence of this god by transcribing old texts into Latin, choosing whatever meanings they wanted to their interpretations, usually in favor of the existence of a God the ancient Hebrews had who they called "Yahweh," a use of the Hebrew form of "to be," or something that is to come, you know, que sera sera. This "to be" ends up personalized to Yahweh, the unpronounceable name of THE Jews's main Big Daddy--Hebrew letters that also add up to the word "Jehovah," all referring to this same Big Daddy of all Big Daddies in all religions, even those worshipping Jupiter or Jovis or Allah. So here ya go, a little Catholic humor for you:
- Jehovah is composed of the abbreviated forms of the imperfect, the participle, and the perfect of the Hebrew verb "to be" (ye=yehi; ho=howeh; wa=hawah). According to this explanation, the meaning of Jehovah would be "he who will be, is, and has been". But such a word-formation has no analogy in the Hebrew language.
- The abbreviated form Jeho supposes the full form Jehovah. But the form Jehovah cannot account for the abbreviations Jahu and Jah, while the abbreviation Jeho may be derived from another word.
- The Divine name is said to be paraphrased in Apoc., i, 4, and iv, 8, by the expression ho on kai ho en kai ho erchomenos, in which ho erchomenos is regard as equivalent to ho eromenos, "the one that will be"; but it really means "the coming one", so that after the coming of the Lord, Apoc., xi, 17, retains only ho on kai ho en.
- the comparison of Jehovah with the Latin Jupiter, Jovis. But it wholly neglects the fuller forms of the Latin names Diespiter, Diovis. Any connection of Jehovah with the Egyptian Divine name consisting of the seven Greek vowels has been rejected by Hengstenberg (Beitrage zur Einleiung ins Alte Testament, II, 204 sqq.) and Tholuck (Vermischte Schriften, I, 349 sqq.).
Except this country doesn't want economic or social stabilization in the world. The World of Captitalism is a competitive world, just like the world of the Gilgamesh and that world depicted in the holy books of all religions, an aggressive world, and wars are the solutions to keeping the world competitive--wars and rumors of wars, more and more wars, not only for territorial gain but for economic gain, too, through the commandeering of this area's main reason for existence, its oil. If there were no oil under all that sand, we wouldn't give one shitty damn about the Middle East--we'd let Israel just confiscate the whole area to continue growing their roses in the desert where most babbling gods said nothing would ever grow.
All of this confusion because the US stock indicator, the Dow-Jones (Charles Dow based his stock market predictions on the ocean tides) is zooming back up to the levels it was at when Bush was appointed "president," though down today, it still closed at 11,527, which to me is phenomenal since bubbles are bursting all over the place, the debt is over trillions of dollars, our interest rates on all the money we are borrowing from China, Saudi Arabia, and Britain are millions of dollars a day or minute or whatever (and of all the people to borrow money from--I've got a question: why can't all the MEN who got rich off this country and its enterprising people--like Bill Gates, Rupert Murdoch (not even an American), Warren "Junk Bond" Buffett, Jack "Sell His Mother on EBay to Get Ahead" Welch, Arnold "Achtung" Schwartzenegger (his father was a Nazi cop--don't plead for mercy from a man whose father was a Nazi cop), the Bob Hope Estate, the Ford Foundation (well, sorry, Ford is currently going belly up), the Rocekfeller Foundation, wherever rich family's hid their monies--a lot of these fools gains very illgotten--why can't we put a special tax on these birds and bring that damn debt down in a matter of minutes. I don't get it how we phenomenally give our wealth away, our COMMONWEALTH, all of the original states to this day are COMMONWEALTH, which means the people, the common, own the wealth of the state--true wealth is not money--of course--nor is capital true wealth--true wealth is based on your usage of your lands and the natural wealth those lands contain and how they are put to use. Read Henry George's Progress and Poverty, especially the introduction by Agnes de Mille.
TO BE CONTINUED we have a script that won't stop so it's fouled us out of commission today. See you tomorrow.