5 Questions to STIMULATE You. -- Just for Fun --

reply to post by Zanzibar


Nature itself is the pinnacle technology. All we need is laid out before us. Our mis-allocation of resource and fund, prevents human cooperation, which prevents man from amassing as a whole body. A "peaceful" body, a healthy whole. There are cancers on our individual selves, in our minds, that appear on and scar the whole. If your toe is bitten by a black widow, the body as a whole, the mental being included, becomes ill, unhealthy, and broken. Too many untruths, too much mental poison, fear.

We cannot assemble our own minds properly, let alone all of ouselves together. Language needs to keep evolving, we need to introduce new words for the infinite amount of finely differing feelings our minds produce. Can't we all just get along? Not if we can't understand eachother. Instead of building WMD we need to build WMCommunication.

Yes we have massive communications networks, but all too often it's a game of telephone with valuable information. Important truths become tainted, are consumed, swallowed by the human body (human race), and from the lies it contains, ends up poisoning the body. Information ends up getting people killed.

Everything is affected by which gauge we use to judge right and wrong, what is true, necessary, and what is false, nonessential, wasteful. There are too many false scales in use today.

The future is bleak. A dark cyber-age where man modifies endlessly, without understanding what effect the change, vibrations, the ripples he creates in the pool of life, will produce. The boulders his waves will loosen, that will end up tumbling down upon him leaving him worse off than when he began.

Man is a starving animal in the deserts of space, may God help us all, may we all find the true food. The true bread and water, of life.


[edit on 5-10-2007 by depth om]

reply to post by Zanzibar


Nature itself is the pinnacle technology. All we need is laid out before us. Our mis-allocation of resource and fund, prevents human cooperation, which prevents man from amassing as a whole body. A "peaceful" body, a healthy whole. There are cancers on our individual selves, in our minds, that appear on and scar the whole. If your toe is bitten by a black widow, the body as a whole, the mental being included, becomes ill, unhealthy, and broken. Too many untruths, too much mental poison, fear.

We cannot assemble our own minds properly, let alone all of ouselves together. Language needs to keep evolving, we need to introduce new words for the infinite amount of finely differing feelings our minds produce. Can't we all just get along? Not if we can't understand eachother. Instead of building WMD we need to build WMCommunication.

The future is bleak. A dark cyber-age where man modifies endlessly, without understanding what effect the change, vibrations, the ripples he creates in the pool of life, will produce. The boulders his waves will loosen, that will end up tumbling down upon him leaving him worse off than when he began.

Man is a starving animal in the deserts of space, may God help us all, may we all find the true food. The true bread and water, of life.

woooaah sorry about that, I can't even edit the second post to remove all of it. sorry.

5. If the universe is constantly expanding, what occupies the space it hasn't reached yet?

A.: The concept of an expanding universe, in the way it's described, is a lie told to us by "science". As someone already said, there´s no "there".

4. Why does it seem that most people of religious faith are so adamantly against having faith in anything else they can't see, taste, touch or smell? Wouldn't it make sense for them to be the most willing to accept the mysterious?

A.: You can chaged the word "religious" on the question to "scientific" and it's all the same. The problem here is "faith", witch is something you consider to be TRUTH but is actually a lie with the purpose of control.

3. Why are humans considered by some to be the pinnacle of evolution when 90% of the planet's other species are so far superior to us in everything but ruthlessness?

A.: Though it's not true, this idea (that humans are the pinnacle) has an agenda, witch is also to make us believe we are in control of our own fate.

2. If there were no humans, what purpose would god serve?

A.: "god", as a imaginary non-tangible being, would vanish along with men.

1. If you could travel back in time and change just one thing, what would it be?

A.: I wouldn´t make a phone call that ended up screwing up my life for a very long time.

I have 2 for the OP.

1) Why do we drive on parkways and park our cars on driveways?

2) What came first....the chicken or the egg?

5.Massive Voids of nothing, the space between our universe and the next in the Multiverse. infact the gaps may be far bigger than the infinite number of universes themselves. ( a complete absence of all energy and matter as we know it..cough)..

4.I think they are just as open as anyone else with regards to other idea.. u.fo.s bigfoot etc etc as you stated earlier. the only thing in my experience they are not open to is.....Any other religion.

3.It depends on what you call 'the pinnacle' but if your talking on the evolutionary scale ...survival of the fittest etc. the fact that we are the most ruthless, may very well make us 'the pinnacle' of evolution (on this planet so far)

2.Scientifically the universe and its law looks very much like 'intelligent Design' this i am open to... however 'God' is Manmade , a distorted belief that gives people hope that theres some big reward at the end of it all. no humans .. no God.

1.Go to the exact spot of Rosewell New mexico, 1947 , with a video camera. in the exact reported location of the crash , and film what really happened so i could tell the world the truth either way.

About the universe, God and the assumption that technology will save us: I'm reading a very interesting trilogy right now, "My Big TOE" by Tom Campbell -- TOE standing for Theory of Everything. He's a physicist who actually tries to combine the physical with the nonphysical reality... and in doing that, he explains the nature of reality a heck of a lot better than any mainstream scientist I've ever seen.

He says, for example, that consciousness -- in the form of an Absolute Unbounded Oneness (AUO) -- was here first, before physical matter, and all individual forms of consciousness gradually evolved from this original consciousness. He also says that our physical reality is a subset of a larger, nonphysical reality, which, in turn, is probably a subset of another, even larger reality. It's like an onion with lots of layers.

To us, he says, AUO -- what you could call a pantheistic form of God (although he doesn't talk about God at all, it's all very neutral/scientific) -- and its beginnings are mystical to us, and thus we see AUO as infinite, with no beginning and no ending. Which it may not be, since it could have its origins in the next higher layer.

He compares the situation to that our intestinal bacteria (were they as intelligent as we) are in: to them, the source of the food they receive has to be mystical, since they don't know where it's coming from. And even if they could grasp the idea of the food source, they would never understand things like grocery stores or the stock market motions, which might indirectly affect them, but is so removed from their experience that it is outside their means of comprehension. It's the same with us, he says -- we just cannot grasp the outermost layers of the onion.

About technology, he says that we don't lack intellectual power but QUALITY of consciousness, because it hasn't grown in lockstep with what we can do technologically. Thus, every individual should strive to increase the quality of its consciousness; otherwise it is almost assured that we will blow ourselves up at some point (through viruses, nanotechnology, genetic meddling, new weapons, or what have you).

I love his theory... still in the middle of reading, but I'll keep you updated.

My perfect world would be on where technology and nature can co-exist and hopefully well see that soon.

i agree that would be good, but i just dont think that the people of this world can do that! dont get me wrong im not saying that its impossible but most technology uses lots of recources that we are running out of! if they can come up with something that dosent destroy the planet but saves it then im in....but like i said most people just dont! its all money and personal gain

Originally posted by traderonwallst
I have 2 for the OP.

1) Why do we drive on parkways and park our cars on driveways?

2) What came first....the chicken or the egg?

1. Because our language is very flawed. By the way, are you Gallagher? hahaha

2. The Chicken. When the egg came, it was quite surprised which is why they first began clucking.



Jasn