Can You Understand Me ?

In context to all who have written before me. There is nothing wrong with questioning everything and wondering where and why? People have been trying to figure out the riddle of life for years, with each individuals question opens another door, from one persons persona to the next knowledge is obtained but remember that knowledge is also a form of someone elses persona. I can say this is blue, knowing in my mind it might be something else, where as bet555 may believe we come from another lifeform. Does this make him wrong??? Absolutely not. Until one can identify all of what is created in front of our own eyes, one should never judge anothers belief in what is real. Life is a mystery, objects, colors, gases, space, sexuality etc. are nothing but taught things to us all compromised and comprehended by a single persons thought. I will leave you with one thought:

ask yourself this serious question, How come we easily accept there are micro particles floating in front of us but we cannot see them with the human eye but a scientist can see them through a microscope? Which is the distortion? Has the scientist found a gap within this, which can be seen through a machine, or has he convinced others that what he see�e through the glass eye and magnification process of his machine is what we do not have the capabilities of seeing ourselves? So in turn makes us believe he is right but then again isn�t this only his interpretation of what he feels he is seeing and now others have accepted his ideology.
(Paragraph above taken from my book)

Let me leave you with this as well:
I cannot control what you believe and you cannot control what I believe , what is truth? Nobody knows so accept this and open your eyes.. and to the poster who believes in "shrinks" have a nice life as a puppet because your own mind will never be free..

take care and keep on questioning the answers are out there we just havent found them yet.

Originally posted by Justmytype
knowledge is also a form of someone elses persona. I can say this is blue, knowing in my mind it might be something else, where as bet555 may believe we come from another lifeform. Does this make him wrong???

Er, yes.

one should never judge anothers belief in what is real.

Absurd. Why shouldn't one make such judgments?


Life is a mystery, objects, colors, gases, space, sexuality etc. are nothing but taught things to us all compromised and comprehended by a single persons thought.

Are you seriously stating that these things have no objective existence? From where have they come then? Why is it than when two people look at a triangle, they both see a triangle? Why is it that if there were a disagreement as to if it were a triangle one could measure the angles forme by the sides and find out? Obviously perception is important, but to pretend that there is nothing influenceing that perception is to ignore quite a bit.

How come we easily accept there are micro particles floating in front of us but we cannot see them with the human eye but a scientist can see them through a microscope?

You've never used a microscope? Why should any different rules apply to what other people see with their own eyes?

Which is the distortion? Has the scientist found a gap within this, which can be seen through a machine, or has he convinced others that what he see�e through the glass eye and magnification process of his machine is what we do not have the capabilities of seeing ourselves?

Sorry, but I don't understand at all, could you clarify? Also, are you saying that there is some reason to doubt that a magnifying lens doesn't magnify?

So in turn makes us believe he is right but then again isn�t this only his interpretation of what he feels he is seeing and now others have accepted his ideology.
But people don't just accept what a scientist tells them, they verify it, the find out for themselves and see if their interpretations make sense.

Let me leave you with this as well:
I cannot control what you believe and you cannot control what I believe , what is truth? Nobody knows so accept this and open your eyes
Why should anyone accept your claim that no one knows what truth is?

and to the poster who believes in "shrinks" have a nice life as a puppet because your own mind will never be free..

So the chemically imbalanced schizophrenic is bette off without medication?

take care and keep on questioning the answers are out there we just havent found them yet.

How can there be answers if there is no truth and everything is merely an illusion from person to person? If there is no way to even approach anything like an objective study of nature then how can anyone hope to find 'the answers'? According to the system you have outlined above, a person should not 'search' for answers, they should not question the answers already given to them, they infact shouldn't do anything and will just bramble on in their own little world, unsure if the heat of a flame is really burning them or unable to distinguish between the sounds they hear and the sounds that are inside their head. Heck, they'll just end up either accepting whatever propaganda makes its way to them or rejecting it, but they'll never be able to get at 'the answers' because they have no reason and no method to search for them.

Bett555
I think these things are true because when I start talking about how I can control my dreams, my friends trip out on me

I don't understand, why is that a reason to think that other entities are controlling people at a distance? Being able to control your dreams is definitely a good thing, but I don't see how a persons own dreams can serve as a proper analogy for physical control over actual people. I mean, your brain is making up the dreams in the first place, so its not too surprising that it can control them concsiously. But other people?

My girlfriend gets freaked out b/c I talk to her about stuff that she doesn't know I know

What kind of stuff? I am interested.

It is hard sometimes to not listen to what I feel.

I really have to ask again if you have been to a pysch about this or have ever been on or are now on medication or if you have stopped taking your medication? I'm not saying that you must be on it or anything like that, or even that you should be on it, but you have to admit that there are lots of people saying stuff similiar to what you are saying, and some of them do need it.

Nygdan

You are seriously missing the point. If you scribbled on a piece of paper and truely believed that the scribbles meant something but others looked at it as nothing but scribbles, Who's wrong? Answer. Nobody because this is your perception, now if you could prove to 10 people that these scribbles mean something, then it would become fact because now you have taught people how to see what the scribbles mean. Correct?? Same thing in looking through a microscope... yes we all see floating little particles but what are they actually.... the scientist perception is bacteria, molds, etc..that he has named from what he has seen and now these shapes have names for others to identify them as. Its the same theory as:

Language - We speak English but others speak Itailian, French, German etc.

Are they wrong? Or whoever decided to create those diffrent languages just "Nuts". again its just perception that has been taught from ones own mind to the next which proves fact.

Questioning things outside the norm is not being nuts its actually understanding "How and Why" someone came up with the answers they have given you that you feel are correct.


I have a test that I want to run, please all participate.

"CL12b" what is it, what does it mean???

Originally posted by Justmytype
Nygdan

You are seriously missing the point. If you scribbled on a piece of paper and truely believed that the scribbles meant something but others looked at it as nothing but scribbles, Who's wrong? Answer. Nobody

If you beleived that the scribbles that you created 'meant someting' or were important to you then of course you would be correct. If 'I' scribbled some menaingless gibberish on some paper, and -you- thought it could actually be read and that it says 'and the dish ran away with the spoon], well, -you- would be wrong, irregardless of your perecptions. It would mean nothing. Similarly, if you took the english sentence 'and the dish ran away with the spoon' to mean that a cow jumped over the moon, you again would be wrong, it simply doesn't mean that. These perhaps are 'soft' examples tho and there is wiggle room to a degree, afterall, if you taught people that it means either of those things, then Iguess you would be right and the original meaning would be right too. However it still isn't right to say that temperature is a function of perception, or gravity or any other parts of the physical world.

... yes we all see floating little particles but what are they actually.... the scientist perception is bacteria, molds, etc..that he has named from what he has seen and now these shapes have names for others to identify them as

Irregardless of the name no type of perception makes them disappear or change their actual characteristics. One can look at, for example, man as an ape, as a primate, as a human being, etc etc, and in that sense all the different ones are right, however no perception changes the actual objective construction of man.

Questioning things outside the norm is not being nuts its actually understanding "How and Why" someone came up with the answers they have given you that you feel are correct.

I don't suggest it is nuts, you seem to suggest that there however are no insane people or certainly that 'shrinks' can't help them. And, again, if you are rejecting any sort of objective reality, then what is the sense of questioning the answers given to you? If there is no reality nad only perception, then there are no answers to any questions anyway no?

Nygdan,
Yes, I as you do believe that a tree is a tree and water is water as we see it through the human eye. This cannot change and will always look the same to each of us. Now, ask yourself why? Its because you were taught this is what water looks like and this is what a tree looks like, so in turn everybody interpets this as the same thing. I would like to set the record straight here fact or fiction what we believe allows us all to gain more knowledge. Scientists jobs are nothing more than proving how something works, why it works, whats it made up of etc.. Think of it like this if you could allow yourself to prove something was diffrent then what you have already been taught and by examining it and restructuring it you found a diffrent meaning, would this be a bad thing or would this be a better thing because you know have gained a higher understanding of something you were already taught. In a nutshell isnt this all scientist do, try to prove things and make them work better or function diffrent?

Also I do agree that some people need therapy as they need meds but wouldnt it be nice that if you were able to think outside the box in order to truely understand something than to just discredit it for what someone else has already stated is proof.

Some of the greatest minds in our history were thought to be crack pots and why was this? Because they all were not satisfied with someone elses answers.

Just my thoughts

Originally posted by Justmytype
Nygdan,
Yes, I as you do believe that a tree is a tree and water is water as we see it through the human eye. This cannot change and will always look the same to each of us. Now, ask yourself why? Its because you were taught this is what water looks like and this is what a tree looks like, so in turn everybody interpets this as the same thing.

Then why is it that when people see something new and unknown they see the same thing? Or are you merely arguing that we all see a tree and call such because we are taught that its called that? Or are you saying that people are taught certain archetypes (ie and ideal 'tree') and that when people get sensory information from the world they are able to, becuase of this archetype, distinguish a tree from say the sky air and grass and animals in it and whatnot?

In a nutshell isnt this all scientist do, try to prove things and make them work better or function diffrent?

Science, in general, trys to explain the artifacts of existence. It does so by asking 'why does this rock dissolve in this liquid' or 'what is the mechanism by which populations of organisms change over time' or 'what allows planets to move thru space'.

wouldnt it be nice that if you were able to think outside the box in order to truely understand something than to just discredit it for what someone else has already stated is proof.

This statement does not relate to the bit about pyschiatry.

the greatest minds in our history were thought to be crack pots and why was this? Because they all were not satisfied with someone elses answers.

What is the relevance of that? You have been arguing that there is no objective knowledge, so what does it matter if other people think Einstein or Gallileo or whoever are great minds? According to you, relativity is only a perception, the sun revolves around the moon if you think it does, and people can run faster than light if they are convinced that they can.

True, some people have been thought to be rather loony, but in the end they ended up well respected. Other times people who actually were or at least went quite insane have been highly respected, like Neitsche or VanGogh. None of that means that either one of them shouldn't have been treated for their insanity.

ok here goes nothing; lets set this straight once and for all. I as you believe in fact. I am not arguing anything but stating that if you were to step outside the box and look in, your own perception would play a huge part in how we percieve things. If we were never taught certain things we would not know them today. We know what we know because of other peoples perceptions of fact.

Blue is blue
Hot is Hot
Cold is Cold
and so on and so on.

My point is, what if and how did all this become of. Your perception or someone elses that has been passed down through generations and generations of eveloution.

all this was is just an alternative think proccess, so do me a favor "Relax"
and allow yourself to think outside of the box everyonce in a while.

just my thoughts.

Se, I can understand what you are saying until this:

Blue is blue
Hot is Hot
Cold is Cold
and so on and so on.

A person doesn't learn that blue is blue or any of these other things. They learn their cultures names for them, and any tangentially associated things, but blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold, whether or not you are told they are.

Your perception or someone elses that has been passed down through generations and generations of eveloution.

Perceptions, especially the kind that people learn, are not passed biologically.

all this was is just an alternative think proccess, so do me a favor "Relax"
and allow yourself to think outside of the box everyonce in a while.
You know, I think I udnerstand now. You have some non-standard unconvential thoughts, that are incoherently arranged and poorly thought out, but that doesn't matter because as far as you are concerned, you are 'thinking outside the box'. I think i understand now. Ok, I'll relax, even tho I've been relaxed. I had thought I bumped into someone that had thought these sorts of things out, but apparently I haven't.

Nygdan You pretend to be a free thinker but you make a statement like that? If your thoughts cannot be clearly abnd coherently put forward so that others can analyse and understand them, well, why even mention that you have them? If you are reaching blocks or limits in your perception, why not try to explain them? Perhaps others have gotten past similiar blocks? Also, and i think this is a decent rule of thumb, if you can't explain something to someone else, then you don't really understand it. (actually I think that the original saying was something liek 'don't try to explain something you don't understand' or some such)

I think you misread and totally misconstrued my post, my statement about being branded a 'Lone Wolf' (read: patriot act) was regarding anjeeeee's earlier post about all this knowledge not being acted upon.

I do not 'pretend' to be a free thinker, I know that I'm not 'normal' in the everyday sense of the word. I think about things that the vast majority of the populace wouldn't even consider unusual.

Surely putting forth my thoughts for others to analyse isn't close to free thinking? This is taken from the website I mentioned earlier, it's a (slightly edited for flow) dictionary definition of 'free thought'

Free Thought
n.
1. Thought that rejects authority and dogma, especially in religion; freethinking.

2. Exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under restraint, control, or compulsion; able to follow one's own impulses, desires, or inclinations; determining one's own course of action; not dependent; at liberty.

3. That which is thought independently of the authority of others.

I don't feel I should have to explain something to you (which I already stated that I could not define in the 'normal' way) but i'll try anyway...

What I feel I am experiencing is a huge release, an ascension or awakening of some description. Something of huge spritual significance, somehow everything I had previously perceived as 'normal' is no longer so, now I feel like I'm observing the World from some other place yet still bound to this plane by some unexplainable force, (maybe a metaphor for the block I mentioned earlier or vice-versa) like I'm flicking between the two.

I hope I have helped you think for yourself by offering my thoughts for you to analyse. What I have realised is that we have pushed this Earth too far. We've diseased and ruined her and now her immune system is kicking in. It's just a case now of whether we wipe ourselves out with our all important wars, or whether Mother Nature does it for us. I now know that the most important thing we can do is think

If more follow our lead, there may be a chance we could make a difference.

Peace

-T-

Originally posted by tandino
I don't feel I should have to explain something to you (which I already stated that I could not define in the 'normal' way) but i'll try anyway...

Since this is a discussion forum, it would seem to make sense to discuss the subjects when posting yes.

What I feel I am experiencing is a huge release, an ascension or awakening of some description.

Perhaps you are then. Have you been mediatating or somethign like that? Usually acheiving 'higher spiritual planes' is not described as being associated with anything but serious effort to acheive it or something like it. Also, not to sound condescending, but, if you are one, teenagers often go thru something quite like this. Just because its common doesn't mean its inauthentic or not-meaningful.

I hope I have helped you think for yourself by offering my thoughts for you to analyse.

Sir, I do not need help from you to think for myself.

or whether Mother Nature does it for us.

Why do you think that the planet will react as a whole or as an intelligence against humanity? Why do you think humanity would even be seperate from that planetary whole?

A person doesn't learn that blue is blue or any of these other things. They learn their cultures names for them, and any tangentially associated things, but blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold, whether or not you are told they are.

Nygdan,

You completely contradict yourself by saying this above. Blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold. If you were not taught as a child that blue is blue then what would you call it? the same as hot and cold? You would not have any answer of what these things are unless taught.

Come on now, I do respect your comments and thoughts alike but now you are just acting foolish by saying what you have just stated above whether or not you are told they are.


your loosing me here buddy.

Originally posted by Justmytype

A person doesn't learn that blue is blue or any of these other things. They learn their cultures names for them, and any tangentially associated things, but blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold, whether or not you are told they are.

Nygdan,

You completely contradict yourself by saying this above. Blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold. If you were not taught as a child that blue is blue then what would you call it?

I specifically said that outside of the names 'blue' 'hot' 'cold', which -obviously- are taught, that the objective reality of these qualities are -not- taught.

the same as hot and cold? You would not have any answer of what these things are unless taught.

whether or not you are told they are.

Yes, you would not, after touching a red hot frying pan, say, 'ow, that was hot' if you didn't speak english. You would, however, irregardless of whatever language you were brought up around, still feel pain and feel heat. I would have thought that this was obvious, but apparently it needed to be repeated, again.

Since this is a discussion forum, it would seem to make sense to discuss the subjects when posting yes.

Please don't patronise me, there is a difference between explaining something to an individual and discussing something as a group is there not?

Perhaps you are then. Have you been mediatating or somethign like that? Usually acheiving 'higher spiritual planes' is not described as being associated with anything but serious effort to acheive it or something like it. Also, not to sound condescending, but, if you are one, teenagers often go thru something quite like this. Just because its common doesn't mean its inauthentic or not-meaningful.

I have been meditating for a long time now and I feel that meditation is definately an important factor in my personal awakening but not my personal awakening itself. Are you trying to put across that none of us here are actually experiencing what we feel we are, but are instead imagining it? Please forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you but you're going off on a few tangents here.

I am not a teenager so no offense taken.

Why do you think that the planet will react as a whole or as an intelligence against humanity? Why do you think humanity would even be seperate from that planetary whole?

Open your eyes friend, she already is reacting, it's called Global Warming - humanity as a whole is 100% responsible for this. When you become ill, your immune system kicks in. The reaction is to get rid of the infection, humanity is that infection and global warming is the reaction... But wait a minute, haven't I just contradicted myself by saying that this Earth's immune system only exists because of our treatment of Earth itself? Not when you consider us as a part of this Earth. Your own body turning against you, a cancer.
I wanted to give all the Matrix cliches a wide berth, but the Agent Smith character had a point.

I value everyone's input on this topic, including yours. But blue isn't always blue, cold isn't always cold and, on the flipside, sometimes a cake is exactly that, a cake.

Peace

-T-

quote: Originally posted by Justmytype

quote:
A person doesn't learn that blue is blue or any of these other things. They learn their cultures names for them, and any tangentially associated things, but blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold, whether or not you are told they are.



Nygdan,

You completely contradict yourself by saying this above. Blue looks blue, hot things have heat, and cold things are cold. If you were not taught as a child that blue is blue then what would you call it?

Totally agree with you there justmytype.

This has just turned into a debate with Nygdan and Justmytype, everyones got their own opinions and there is no way anyone can change an opinion which you think is right.

I agree with the blue looks blue,because we were taught that what we percieve as a certain colour is called a certain name.

Blue is Blue Orange is orange and so on.

But we could easily have been taught that what we perceive as Blue could have easily been programmed into our brains as the name orange.

Ok this may be off topic but its along the same lines....

Lets say someone died and we had the technology to totally clone 100% everything from that person.

Now we cloned him twice.

So would both of these clones be the same person eg, think the same remember the same, i mean they just wouldnt be the same person would they but they have been 100% cloned so what makes us us?

Some people say its your soul but i just cant and will never understand this.

Try this... Just think to yourself really deeply and think how do i know this is me what makes me...me, how did i get to be this person... what time in my life did i realise i was me.

I dont think i can put this sort of thing into words but i have tried my best just hope someone understands and im sure some people will.

Tandino.

it's called Global Warming - humanity as a whole is 100% responsible for this.

Please dont think this my friend, if anything its the governments fault for not letting us use friendly fuels, or even trying to research a way for us to stop emmisions etc.

A good example is Mars, this planet used to have(still has a little) atmosphere and i doubt there was humans/aliens on that planet using deadly emmisions and polluting the atmosphere.

The sun has many factors on what goes on with planets atmospheres.

We have helped a little but i wouldnt say 100%

Originally posted by tandino
there is a difference between explaining something to an individual and discussing something as a group is there not?

Ok, fine, don't explain or discuss anything. Or do. Feel free.

Are you trying to put across that none of us here are actually experiencing what we feel we are, but are instead imagining it?

Nope. Is there much of a difference anyway? Between perceived 'awakenings' or 'real' ones anyway? If one beleives that one has become more aware, then is not one more aware (or perhaps the resverse is true no?)?

However, come to think of it, what else could it be but something that is 'imagined' (in teh non derogatory sense)? I mean, are you contending that you have had your brain physically or chemically altered, or something like that? Ultimately its a matter of perception no?

Global Warming - humanity as a whole is 100% responsible for this. When you become ill, your immune system kicks in.

But thats because a human bein is a system that has portions that react in certain ways to certain things. Granted, the planet getting warmer becuase of chemicals that result in the retention of heat is a reaction, just like in a system (although in this case a very simple one) thats not to say that 'mother nature' is actively conspiring against humanity, or that it when humanity reaches a certain critical mass their reproductive abilities will be shut down or some other specific complex reaction like that right? I'm all for the basis of Lovelock's ideas, but one can only take them to a point.

The reaction is to get rid of the infection, humanity is that infection and global warming is the reaction...

How will global warming get ride of a creature that can build domiciles in space and turn deserts into gardens by watering them?

But wait a minute, haven't I just contradicted myself by saying that this Earth's immune system only exists because of our treatment of Earth itself?

No, not really, because the reaction is a side affect of burning fossil fuels and the like. I guess in a sense humans are effectively just dumping green house gases into the atmosphere, and in that way its not at all like an immune reaction.

a cancer.

True, however the immune system doesn't kill cancer, its really the cancer that kills the cancer, by killing the host. Sort of like any successful disease. I don't see how that can be a 'plan' of nature, to destroy humanity by destroying itself. And, again, even if the whole world were a desert, what of it? Water can be pumped in to allow food to be grown. Heck, a really advanced civilization could just move everything underground and suck water off the surface.

But blue isn't always blue, cold isn't always cold and, on the flipside, sometimes a cake is exactly that, a cake.

Unfortunately no matter what ones perception when cold is applied, it still causes frostbite. Similarly, frequency of the electromagnetic radiation comming off it remains the same. Call it snurlel, and in your mind's eye it looks like iradescent xrays, the frequency is there.

marjaxson
This has just turned into a debate with Nygdan and Justmytype

If the discussion has been made up mostly of posts between myself and JMT, well, thats because other people haven't been posting. But its hardly a debate, I have no position antagonistic to his that I am only trying to defend, and I assume he isn't trying to merely defend some position agianst me, I am certainly not trying to break it down. This is a discussion, not a debate.

Totally agree with you there justmytype [re:I contradicted myself]

I addressed why I didn't contradicted myself, perhaps you could address that?

So would both of these clones be the same person

No more than two twins. Infact, they'd be less 'the same', because they'd've been reared under different conditions for a longer period of time (I'm assuming that the conditions of twins during gestation are more or less similar, not an effectively unreasonable assumption I think )

And, again, I have not, anywhere, stated that people everywhere call 'blue' by the word blue. THat would be completely idiotic. I have been considering the claim that there is no objective existence, and that everything is mere perception, that individuals make their own realities. Usually when this is talked about in the 'blue is blue' discussions, people don't even bother with the irrelevancy of what the color is called. They consider what the mind's eye perceives. For example, picture the sky. We are all told 'the sky is blue', so we all say its blue. Fine and well. But what is each individual perceiving with their minds eye? Ultmately, the colour of a blue ball is merely the result of the frequency of a particular type of electromagnetic radiation that is reflecting off of it. The object as itself has no colour (or rather, it has the color it has when all light sources, all of them, or shut out). The EM radiation hits the human eye, some pigments reaction because of the energy, and ultmiately the brain 'knows' that a signal of such and such frequency and intensity (and sometimes polarization) is comming from such and such area. All well and good. Now, what does it -actually- picture? It doesn't picture a graph showing the transmittance of the radiation over time. It applies a color, the actual color concept to the area that that frequency is comming from. Where does that color concept come from? Society? Probably not, indeed, how could it? And do different people use or apply 'different' colors to the same objects? Does somone else see a green ball and another person see a red ball, but they've all be told 'that frequency of EM radiation is blue', so they all say, even if they've never seen the ball together, even if no one has ever told them that the ball is blue, they all say 'its a blue ball'.

Regardless, that hasn't been what anyone was talking about here. All that was being promoted was some facile idea that, if some people are told that the ball is blue, then to them its blue, but to another group, taught differently, its red. Yeah, fine, but thats effectively a matter of them speaking different languages. TO the britisher the grass is green, to the frenchman its rougue, but so what? No one is saying that they are each saying its a differnt color, they both are recognizing the same color. And, by extension, one weird group of people taught that bluestuff is red colored would have their words similarly translated by the rest of the english speaking world to say 'blue'. The color of the ball does not change by changing the word for that color. And the same applies to 'heat' and 'cold' and even 'pain'.

Who cares, if blue is blue or green. Reality is or is not simply put we are alone.

We are born

We experience

We die

The end [or is it]


One mans cow is another mans dinner.

I took you 20 minutes to read that little post?

If you don't care, then fine. But why respond that you don't care, rather than say, you disagree? Also, I am not saying that I think that 'perceived colors applied' business is even true. Infact, I suspect it might not be. I mentioned it becuase, well, I had thought, intially, while in the middle of reading a post, that thats what they are talking about. That little digression is something that, strangely enough, many people consider independantly of one another. But, bizzarely, it hadn't come up here, even tho it was incredibly appropriate to the subject of objective versus perceived reality and whatnot.

First of all, I understand u all!!!! It's not an easy thing to discuss, it's kinda unexplainable

The color thing, we don't really HAVE to care about that...We live in the 3rd dimension, that is the solid dimension, we beleive what we can SEE, that is why we give importance to these colors or objects or money or whatever...it's a material world created for our bodies to live in and learn! Like in the movie the matrix.
but beside the 3rd dimension, there is other astral plane that we humans can't see...no one ever thinks about that. In that dimension, we can be controled by the negativity..that is what is happening right now. Humans have lost their fate in spirituality because everything HAS TO be explained with Science...but science is something that is of the 3rd dimension. Brains is something of the 3rd dimension, it's nothing compare to the soul that live within our body and will survive after death. We are 3D, but real life ain't 3D...We could heal our body, dematerialised and do freaky thing if we could just forget about 3D...but I guess earth is too much controled by the dark forces who wants to control the world...

Check this out, HOLOGRAPHIC PRISON, god resum�

www.luisprada.com...

Merci
Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Nygdan
I agree with you 100% this is not a debate, This is nothing more than one person to another discussing diffrent views of how and why things are percieved or even how they came about. I personally am glad that others have joined as part of this discussiuon because it actually validates both points of view. I do believe though you did contradict yourself when saying something that is hot is hot. In reality if you were never taught warmth how in the world would you be able to say something is hot? Think about it this way "blank your mind of knowing nothing, then light a match and feel the flame, not ever being taught of "Hot" or "heat" what would you call it??? "Ouch" well why wasnt it then named "Ouch" instead of heat? I love the fact that we can discuss this with both having opened minds, and having respect for one anothers opinion.

To All

Who agree with my point of view, "Thank You". It just allows me to accept that we dont all have the correct answers and in a sense nobody is wright or wrong in this discussion, because thaught is a proccess we all learn individually some with more of an open mind than others, some with a more restricted proccess of believing what has been taught. In a nutshell everyone has a choice, to believe or not to believe and with this I believe it allows us to have more important conversations as we have had here in the last few days on this topic.

Once again thanks for the mind blowing conversation, especially to "Nygdan".


again " Just my thoughts"