THE CREATION? [Archive] - Spiritual Forums

View Full Version : THE CREATION?

jamesart7

02-07-2011, 12:22 AM

Thinker108

02-07-2011, 03:59 AM

mattie

02-07-2011, 05:07 AM

‘Harvesting’ is a word that when used in this context (ETs) will have an enormous amount of fear for some, even w/ the context explained. The ‘taking back’ what ‘they brought here’ may be tied into some 2012 ideas about life ending here even though this isn’t clear.

Ascension Is About Our Spiritual Growth, NOT Apocalypse- http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=234880#poststop

Even if we have ET DNA that they contributed to the mix of ancient humans' DNA this doesn’t mean that they possess us & have the right to take us back. Our going back to our place(s) of origin is our option about how we choose to proceed w/ our journey.

Who created us goes to the what we consider God to be & God’s function. Whether God is a separate deity micromanaging us parentally or that we are connected w/ the Universe as full partners, going through our (both us + the Universe) natural cycles, actively exploring the Universe.

Anthropomorphizing God- http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=220510&posted=1#post220510

Our view of creation is also central to this. Whether one views creation as the big bang, having a starting point or part of a natural cycle that is eternal makes a difference. As w/ the concept of God, many POVs abound.

That ETs, or what is often called aliens, participated in the Earth’s terrestrials’ DNA is really no different than most on this planet being a combination of many different races that hark back to antiquity. It doesn’t mean that ETs created us, just that we are a mix of DNA from the whole Universe. It is likely that we will soon look at this as no odder than that we have DNA from many earthly origins.

There is a considerable amount of Universal xenophobia still about ETs. Some portray all ETs as evil while others portray them as all benevolent, often seeing them in the same parental micromanaging role that is often ascribed to God by some relgions. Both views (all evil or all good) are highly polarized & quite flawed. Just like us, some are OK, some aren’t. Not really that hard to tell the difference.

3dnow

02-07-2011, 07:03 AM

Lol I didn't not see your thread I started a new one with the same title.

3dnow

Chrysaetos

02-07-2011, 07:21 AM

Did god really created us??/ or something else....

what if i say that aliens brought us here on this planet as an experiment and now the time of the "HARVESTING" is near.. harvesting meaning taking back what they brought here on this planet...I believe in neither. Our make up is mammalian so where does that leave ET's?

Interventionism looks like a new form of creationism..

jamesart7

02-07-2011, 09:05 AM

thanks for the replies... but what if planet Earth is just a science project to them?? and were just an experiment..

Greenslade

02-07-2011, 09:41 AM

thanks for the replies... but what if planet Earth is just a science project to them?? and were just an experiment..

And while we would be aghast at that very thought, there are people who breed so-called pure breed dogs with physical defects. So when you go all gooey at the sight of lassie, remember that she's a genetic defect in the doggy world and that scruffy mutt is what it's supposed to be like. Where is the morality line drawn? And have we been seeded by the aliens? No doubt David Icke would have a few things to say on this one :-)

Some would say Atlantis (believe its existence or not) was an experiment to anchor the Souls of different alien races into the third dimension. Most creation myths say that God/gods created man, and in the Popul Vuh they had a few attempts at it. OK so they are creation myths, but how much of that myth is based in fact? Are they just fanciful stories or are they metaphors for what the locals couldn't understand at the time? And that's before you go into the Sumerians and the Annunaki. Depending on what you read of them, humans were merely slaves and playthings for science.

Why so many stories in the same vein, or do humans have so little imagination after all?

jamesart7

02-07-2011, 10:51 AM

i need more research ..

Inesophet

02-07-2011, 11:05 AM

Well If you look at Bacteria or Eukaryotic cells then its pretty clear that we where created by something VERY smart. Every cell is like a giant factory city.

If it was Aliens or God doesnt matter, whoever created this is a God by Default. (meaning of god => creator of life)

jamesart7

02-07-2011, 11:14 AM

well... everything is connected.. who ever created everything in this dimension has a good sense of art...

Greenslade

02-07-2011, 11:19 AM

well... everything is connected.. who ever created everything in this dimension has a good sense of art...
That's me disconnected then :tongue:

Chrysaetos

02-07-2011, 11:21 AM

People believe in creationism because they grew up with that idea. Think about spoons, chairs, computers, etc. Along the way, people got the idea that there had to be a creator of this world, and of course it had to be like the human, because who else could 'create'? Go back further and people still believed the 'creators' were animalistic. But the clustering that was a consequence of civilisation gave way to more human-centred religions.

Why choose reason or intelligence as the ultimate governing principle of the universe?

jamesart7

05-07-2011, 05:30 AM

What do you mean Chrysaetos?

Blaze

05-07-2011, 05:38 AM

jamesart7

05-07-2011, 06:15 AM

huh?? who is Erich Von Daniken?

hybrid

05-07-2011, 06:17 AM

jamesart7

05-07-2011, 06:23 AM

you have the symptoms of the "shallow happiness" hybrid =)

Blaze

05-07-2011, 08:03 AM

huh?? who is Erich Von Daniken?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_D%C3%A4niken

lemex

07-07-2011, 06:39 PM

Why so many stories in the same vein, or do humans have so little imagination after all? The reason of course is the past. Something of course happened enough to leave a lasting impression.

Consider genes actually may pass on more then personality traits they pass on information that is part of us. I've always wondered why information is so common (known) among us.

For instance my interest are stories like the Garden of Eden ones. My own belief is this dealt with observable climatic change and the story resonate with me as happening.

Time

07-07-2011, 06:49 PM

sprinter

08-07-2011, 12:15 AM

Basicaly, life is a mistake..... The right things happened, at the right place, and the right time. Not to mention the only reason life is so strong is because of how many times most of it has been wiped off the planet

What makes you believe its a mistake?
How many times has it been wiped out, and you know this because..?

Comets brought ammino acids to the planet, as well as water. Carbon was on the planet already. Those 2 things and the right mutation of cells ( probably brought on by enviromental factors) caused life to flourish.

I think you will find it's (formation of life) a little(about a billion times) more complex than your elementary school level report is trying to say.

The thing is, it stayed at a relitivly slow pace untill after the second snowball earth, then it EXPLODED. We can trace out dna back 200 million years or so, so we literaly can tell what our ancistors were. At one point we were little rat like tihngs, and even further that, we were reminicent of a salamander. All of this is reflected in the human gestation.

Wow I just love a good story with explosions and rat men and lizard people but I know where science and fiction separate.
I will say one thing you have INCREDIBLE UNQUESTIONING FAITH, I seriously doubt I could ever match it. :wink:

Time

08-07-2011, 01:57 PM

Im not talking mistake as in crashing your car accidently, im talkin mistake as in, wow, that just happened?!?!? IT wasnt predestined, or anything it was literaly the right place, at the right time, which all life is inevitably about.

THere have been 6 mass extinctions on the planet. You can see the evidence in rocks, and geology. Read up on it, its facinating.

LOL theres no need to be ignorant dude. Id rather simplify soemthing then try to make myself sound smart by trying to shoot down someone elses ideas.

And ya, it is more complicated, id rather not get into 3 billion years of earth evolution if I dont have to.. What i wrote is generaly what most say happen, and what i find to make sence, much more sence then a giant bearded human like diety, that has multiple personality disorder randomly saying " hey, im gonna make lots fo things today.... im perfect, but evidently i still need to create more things.... And even though I know they will almost destory everything I created... lets go for it"

Dude, its called evolution. Nothing on this entire planet as ever, ever stayed the same. Things change from the montains to forests to life. Before you make some sarcastic comments, dont be one sided please

sprinter

09-07-2011, 12:15 AM

Im not talking mistake as in crashing your car accidently, im talkin mistake as in, wow, that just happened?!?!? IT wasnt predestined, or anything it was literaly the right place, at the right time, which all life is inevitably about.

Yeah cause we see that sort of thing happening all the time right, entire planets spawning life absolutely everywhere, at least, we would if thats how it happened.
You didn't answer the question HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS? Did you experience it in any way at all or did someone tell you about it and you took it on FAITH?

THere have been 6 mass extinctions on the planet. You can see the evidence in rocks, and geology. Read up on it, its facinating.

Six eh, I've heard/read both more and less depending upon the publication, are you absolutely sure about that. Is there one book about it that is right and the others wrong, could you refer one?[/quote]

LOL theres no need to be ignorant dude. Id rather simplify soemthing then try to make myself sound smart by trying to shoot down someone elses ideas.
And ya, it is more complicated, id rather not get into 3 billion years of earth evolution if I dont have to..

I'm not trying to be ignorant Dude it's just that you seem to be deliberately describing the formation of life as if it's 'hey presto' when clearly it's not simple, the explanation you held up was the equivalent of saying babies are brought to us by the stork.

What i wrote is generaly what most say happen, and what i find to make sence, much more sence then a giant bearded human like diety, that has multiple personality disorder randomly saying " hey, im gonna make lots fo things today.... im perfect, but evidently i still need to create more things.... And even though I know they will almost destory everything I created... lets go for it"

Hey I thought you said (below)you didn't like sarcasm, but it seems insulting peoples beliefs is (as usual) perfectly ok.
No matter, I wouldn't believe in that type of god either, where did you get that lame idea from anyway, it's about as useful 'life forms - bada boom bada bing' theory.

Dude, its called evolution. Nothing on this entire planet as ever, ever stayed the same. Things change from the montains to forests to life. Before you make some sarcastic comments, dont be one sided please

Funny all I actually see is de-evolution everything breaking down, getting old, wearing out,,everything. What do you see evolving?

You have to have great and powerful faith to believe in evolution, you have to believe what others tell you, you have to trust that what you read is truth because no one will ever actually be able to show you something evolving.
As a great evolutionary scientist once said, "Evolution - like religion involves making certain A-priori or metaphysical assumptions which at some level cannot be proven empirically."
Hence that sticky little word theory, kinda gives the game away. :wink:

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 02:51 AM

Im not talking mistake as in crashing your car accidently, im talkin mistake as in, wow, that just happened?!?!? IT wasnt predestined, or anything it was literaly the right place, at the right time, which all life is inevitably about.

THere have been 6 mass extinctions on the planet. You can see the evidence in rocks, and geology. Read up on it, its facinating.

LOL theres no need to be ignorant dude. Id rather simplify soemthing then try to make myself sound smart by trying to shoot down someone elses ideas.

And ya, it is more complicated, id rather not get into 3 billion years of earth evolution if I dont have to.. What i wrote is generaly what most say happen, and what i find to make sence, much more sence then a giant bearded human like diety, that has multiple personality disorder randomly saying " hey, im gonna make lots fo things today.... im perfect, but evidently i still need to create more things.... And even though I know they will almost destory everything I created... lets go for it"

Dude, its called evolution. Nothing on this entire planet as ever, ever stayed the same. Things change from the montains to forests to life. Before you make some sarcastic comments, dont be one sided please

EVOLVE or die out.

My bets are on the cockroaches. Or maybe the bed bugs, the rate they are going lately.

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 03:02 AM

Funny all I actually see is de-evolution everything breaking down, getting old, wearing out,,everything. What do you see evolving?

Look at any drug-resistant bacteria. They're evolving faster than our best research efforts can find new drugs.

But I agree, humans may be de-evolving. I think I read somewhere that this generation will be the first to go backwards in expected longevity. As Darwin said, the fittest survive. We have all these massive brains yet we laze around and eat ourselves to death and pollute our air and waters. So sad.

You have to have great and powerful faith to believe in evolution, you have to believe what others tell you, you have to trust that what you read is truth because no one will ever actually be able to show you something evolving.

Huh? If you have eyes, you can see evolution all around. Just go to a natural history museum. Or breed some fruit flies. Or dogs. Or roses.

Darwin did not base his theories on faith alone - he developed them based on what his eyes could see. It's all there in front of you.

As a great evolutionary scientist once said, "Evolution - like religion involves making certain A-priori or metaphysical assumptions which at some level cannot be proven empirically."
Hence that sticky little word theory, kinda gives the game away. :wink:

Really tempted to respond to this, but in spirit of this forum, I'll shut my trap ...

All I will say is this: you can believe in evolution AND believe in god. The two are not mutually exclusive.

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 03:09 AM

Basicaly, life is a mistake..... The right things happened, at the right place, and the right time. Not to mention the only reason life is so strong is because of how many times most of it has been wiped off the planet.

Comets brought ammino acids to the planet, as well as water. Carbon was on the planet already. Those 2 things and the right mutation of cells ( probably brought on by enviromental factors) caused life to flourish.

The thing is, it stayed at a relitivly slow pace untill after the second snowball earth, then it EXPLODED. We can trace out dna back 200 million years or so, so we literaly can tell what our ancistors were. At one point we were little rat like tihngs, and even further that, we were reminicent of a salamander. All of this is reflected in the human gestation.

That's all well and good, but who created the Chaos from which all this accidental order evolved?

That's my question. It doesn't matter to me whether we were just an accident or whatever. What I want to know is how chaos arise, how did these elemental building blocks arise, and why, and from where?

It had to start with Nothing. How did things go from nothing... to something?

My best guess is that it was a thought. Which is why this "still the mind" stuff is great, but there's a flip side to it... nothingness sounds kind of... nothing to me. LOL. Having a thought isn't a bad thing, if thought creates universe. That's kind of cool. Though it makes me think it's better to have good thoughts, about rainbows and kittens, rather than bad ones, about wars and catastrophes and planetary annihilation.

sprinter

09-07-2011, 04:26 AM

Look at any drug-resistant bacteria. They're evolving faster than our best research efforts can find new drugs.

First off, thankyou for the more graceful style of enquiry, I like it. :smile:

I have looked at the evolution claims involving bacteria, although I don't agree these bacteria are evolving so much as adapting/mutating within the parameters of their design.
I say this because if you look at what is going on, in the cases I have read about, is that the surviving bacteria are the ones that actually lack (as opposed to gaining new ones)some feature, ie a feature common to it's kind that is missing due to either genetic mutation or some kind of contamination. So when the usual round of drugs are administered the survivors are simply the de-volved mutants that do not posses the feature for the drug to act upon.
Of course without any competition they breed like silly buggers but when the original bacteria is re-introduced they quickly regain their dominance. Growing research is confirming staff bacteria are killed easily by normal everyday bacteria, so who knows, it might be prudent to take an unwashed undergarment with you if you have to stay in a hospital for any length of time. :wink:

But I agree, humans may be de-evolving. I think I read somewhere that this generation will be the first to go backwards in expected longevity. As Darwin said, the fittest survive. We have all these massive brains yet we laze around and eat ourselves to death and pollute our air and waters. So sad.

I hear that.

Huh? If you have eyes, you can see evolution all around. Just go to a natural history museum. Or breed some fruit flies. Or dogs. Or roses.

Darwin did not base his theories on faith alone - he developed them based on what his eyes could see. It's all there in front of you.

But theres no actual evolution there to see, only stories and casts and lots and lots of art. :icon_frown:
Fruit flies, dogs, actually you would think with such a designed, concentrated effort by great minds over history especially with modern scientific technology we could come up with just one with a new feature but alas only mutated, wingless fruit flies, different coloured roses and you guessed it,, more dogs.

I believe Darwin also recorded his own doubts about his theories based on what his eyes could see as well, the existence of moral behaviour was a nagging, ever present thorn in his side.

All I will say is this: you can believe in evolution AND believe in god. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I don't believe I have made that particular claim, so thats for another day.
Until then :smile:

Time

09-07-2011, 12:57 PM

FIrst off splinter, in going to say it seems we both have a very blunt in your face way of typing, and in my experience, these sort of people dont get along LOL

ITs simple, its called reading, and comming to my own conclusions. I dont disagree with things that dont fit into my beleifs, and I also dont take everything told to me as truth. This is something ive been interested in, for YEARS. IT just seems like u werent expecting an answer like mine.

Have you ever thought about the math behind life on other planets? Theres over a trillion suns in this galaxy alone, each has a planet, and the universe has trillions and trillions of galaxies. Ammino acids are found on comets that are flying around in space. Ammino acids are the main building block of life. As far as we know no life can exsist without the presence of amino acids. Theres so many comets in the universe they cant even count them all right now. The odds are, thers more life then on this planet, even the vatican reconized this.

It isnt in any particular book that ive read. Honestly every single book or show ive read spoke of 6 main mass extinctions, and some that were more localized ( not really global mass extinctions). Once again there is MORE then enough evidence to prove this.

I'm not trying to be ignorant Dude it's just that you seem to be deliberately describing the formation of life as if it's 'hey presto' when clearly it's not simple, the explanation you held up was the equivalent of saying babies are brought to us by the stork.

SO some big man in the clouds that made us out of clay is any better? It was almost "hey presto" just over a billion years. You seem to undetstand what im talking about, yet still decide to argue it. That IMO is ignorant. Im not calling you ignorant, only that statement. Im giving you things that have actual evidence, if you choose to look.

Hey I thought you said (below)you didn't like sarcasm, but it seems insulting peoples beliefs is (as usual) perfectly ok.
No matter, I wouldn't believe in that type of god either, where did you get that lame idea from anyway, it's about as useful 'life forms - bada boom bada bing' theory.

No, im actualy a very, very sarcastic person, unless in in a serious conversation. I think we can both agree sarcasm isnt the easiest thing to percieve in text:P

That part i wrote about god, is exactly how he is decribed in the bible, yes, with a touch of sarcasm for spice:P. it isnt insulting, its the truth.

And since you seem to really not undertstand the widley excepted , im going to explain it in full to the best of my abilities at 7 am. Bare with me :P

Generaly speaking there was nothing before the universe as we know it. But there was a general level of energy, that was compressed, probably due to the destruction of another universe ( everthing in the universe recycles itself its a proven fact). The compressed energy was so dense, so unstable, that it exploded, and created more elements. This created a chain reaction, that enabled helium, and heat, which created MORE elements. This inevitably created sun after a billion years of reaction and cooling ( explosions create heat due to friction). Suns explode, sending out their elements and minerals outward. The universe at that time was literaly a lake in a rain storm, each ripple effecting the next.

When things started to cool, this created "rocks" or space debris. The gravity of our sun, pulled this matter towards itself, and its gravity started to pull this around itself, and caused it to spin. This caused fusion of some debris, and created the planets. THis was still a very hot universe.

In terms of the earth, when it finally started to cool off, the earth got hit with another planetary body, or the larger moon ( this is still debated, but its still accepted that another planet hit outs billions of years ago before it fully cooled).

During and after this, the earth was literaly a shooting gallery. Remnants of the formation of the universe, and solar system rammed into the planet at an astonishing rate. Some of these were comets. These comets are thought to be the source of liquid water ( comets are solid ice) and amino acids. These are both known to change form in heat, but will re estabolish its more known form when it cools.

When the earth cooled, and the cosmic assult calmed down, rain started. This further cooled the planet. Water formation was arguably the most critical part of formation of life. Things were changing at this time as well. Amino acids were combining randomly. Life isnt linear by anymeans. There are anomolies prevalent in everything now, let alone back then. Those are things that just dont quite fit into the current form of "right".

SO somehow, enviromental conditions, over billions of years caused an amino acid to replicate itself. This is a great success story because life can actualy now spread successful attributes. After another billion years, we end up with a sort of small bacteria.

This stayed the same untill the first snowball earth. Life never changed for a very very long time. These bacteria ut carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which caused it to warm. This caused a chain reaction, that caused the entire world to freeze over.

But that bacteria survived.

Volcanoes ironicaluy enough, but enough co2 in the atmosphere to warm the planet, and life wasnt the same. According to the fossil record, life managed to not only survive, but diversify ( darwins theory of survival of the fittest, basicaly harsh conditions forcing things to evolve to survive.) This is the first time a photo synthetic organsim is found, namly algea. THis creates oxygen.

Now, the earth is constantly changing. From plate movements, to the earths orbit changing. What happened to change everything this time? Plate movement caused volcanic eruptions that shut out the light, and once again caused a snowball earth scinario.

Life was more adapted to this, seeing as its been through this before. So it came though relitivly well, and more diverse.

This is where trilobites, and jawless fish comeinto play. Life had turned into hunt, or be hunted. Plants started to colonize land, and began their conquest of earth, putting trillions of tons of O2 ini the atmosphere.

Fish evolved jaws, and diversified. Amphibians show up on the fossil record about this time. These were bound to the water, yet could take in oxygen, sort of like a lung fish right now. Our ansictors, though dna analysis show that we were the amphibians at this time.

Since plants colonized the earth, this set the scene for insects to make landfall. Amphibians followed their food. Making small steps toward shore, to finally adapting well enough to walk on land. This was followed by their predators.

At this point, life took off. Reptiles were abundant, as were amphiians, as well as mammal like reptiles. Sort of a cross roads between reptiles and mammals. Plants diversified even more, and at this point, it went from a few species of tree , horsetails, ferns and lichen, to thousands.

Once again, nature decided to play a cruel joke of " 2 steps forward and one step back". A combination of volcanic activity, earth movement, and plate movement, caused the single greatist mass extinction known in the earths history. Over 90% of everything in exsistance ceased to exsist. Plants, land and water life... gone. We know this due one again to geology. We can find the line in rocks before and after this .

The strata below, was full of life, oxygen, a "blakc line" which indicates life, while above it, oxygen levels went down 20%, and only 5 - 10% of life that was before that line, is after. This si world wide BTW, not local.

Once again, life managed to survive. Most notably, ferns/cycads, ginko, redwood trees, reptiles, amphibians, fish a few mamal like reptiles, and yes, our ancistor.

The reign of dinosaurs had begun. Life diversified liek it never had before. Dinosaurs got bigger, and bigger, while mammals, a new evolution having a great intellect, small size, warm blood, great nightvision, and, a placenta.

There was another mass extinction brough on by yet again, plate movement. Certain species died out, but as far as i remember nothing liek the previous.

Dinosaurs were still dominating the planet. Mammals were still small rodent type things, yet still surviving.

Now, the extinction of dinosaurs is a very debated subject, but there are a few widly accepted theories...

According to fossil records, they were already on their way out. Their population was dropping for a million years, presumably due to disease.

Climate change was happening as well. The inland sea in north america dried up as the rockies formed, changing an entire continents climate.

The collision between india, and euraisa, caused a gigantic "super volcanic" explosion which caused global climate to change, as well as localized destruction.

Then, the icing on the cake, the yucatan penninsula asteroid impact. You take a species already beaten down, by disease, climate change and starvation, then hit them with that, they have no chance. This killed on 60% of land species, while it left water life generaly untouched. The asteroid cut the food chain in half, starving the herbavores due to no sunlight, there fore starving the large predatorns. basicaly, nothing bigger then a house cat, or nothing that couldnt hide underground was toast.

Plants came back from the roots, and spores, and mammals came out form underground, to see their "oppresors" were gone. The age of mammals had begun.

The earth began a cooling trend after this. Presumably the asteroid impact moved the earths rotation by just enough to cause a cooling trend. Birds survived, flowering plants survived ( a new invention at the end of the age of dinosaurs), some reptiles and amphibians, 90% of aquatic life.... Thats all mammals needed was the oppertunity.

Something relitivly new happens now, called ice ages, in which the polar regions ectend their glaciation south. This posed a new hurdle to our ansictors, because this caused massive climate change.

In africa, there were apes in trees. They found out that by going on the ground they can get more food, yet it was more dangerous then in the trees. For somereason, one of them stood up on their hind legs, so they can see predators better, and bipedal humans had begun their march toward global ruling.

We used tools to help us get food and to build, developed sophisticated communication,

We had one more main hurdle to climb. The climat changed once again, and we headed into an ice age Africa dried up, except in a few small river basins. Its estimated that our species at this time was no more then 15 000 induviduals.

Then the climate warmed up, and brought rains to africa and the world abroad. We spread out from africa, meeting and outcompeting all other hominid species in eurasia.

Now, there is now, and then a phenomena called heinrik events. This is when inbetween glaciations, there are mini ice ages in europe. They come about in a few hundred years, last that long, and in a dacade, leave. This is stressful on anything, but apperantly more so on our now known anscistor, neanderthol. There is more evidence now that says early homo species, and neanderthold mated and created the successfull species of homo sapien we are today. Neanderthol was also the first homonid to use and controll fire. So why did they die, and not us?

Simple - adaptation. Sapiens evolved large, widespread communities, when neanderthol stayed in very close communities. When the hienricj events happend, our species had more ways to get their needs, then neanderthjol, due to territory. They had no chance. Homo sapiens then took over.

There ya go.....

As for de evolution, it doesnt happen. Things may stay the same, or fail to adapt to new situations, but things dont go backwards liek you suggested. While humans lifespans have gone down, this is due to our food, NOT de evolution.

You cant really see it happening because it works in time frames we barley can grasp. But its simple. Take an aloe vera plant. They are hardy to about -3C. They reproduce by sending out new plants from their roots. You can take those babies, and slowly expose them to colder and colder temps, and in a few years, a generation will be able to survive -5C, then -12 C. Its been done. Adaptation is evolution, so is death. Its happening every second of everyday.

That's all well and good, but who created the Chaos from which all this accidental order evolved?

That's my question. It doesn't matter to me whether we were just an accident or whatever. What I want to know is how chaos arise, how did these elemental building blocks arise, and why, and from where?

It had to start with Nothing. How did things go from nothing... to something?

Its because there is no such thing as "nothing". Nothing is only there because we cant percieve it thats all. Remember "energy cannot be made or destroyed, only change form". Just because we yet understand it, doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

What happens when leaves fall on the ground? They get decomposed right?

And what happens? The worm eats it, the worms deficates, and bacteria turn it into soil. Plants eat soil, animals eat plants, which turn into its reproductive cells. The animal dies, decomposes, and it begins again.

Scientists now theorize that before the big bang, there was "nothing" as we woiuld see it, but "nothing" doesnt exsist. Everything is made up of base elements, carbon being the major one. This is made up of energy. The rule as we know now is "energy cannot be destroyed or created, only change forms".

That is god, and the universe. IT never ceases to exist, only changes. The same cycle of the leaf, is played out in the universe. The earth is made up of debris from the formation of the solarsystem, which was made up of the remnants of the big bang, which was made from he destruction of another universe, or if you will, "god".

If your going to use bible verses, you have to understand "he" is a common translation. The original jewish translation wouldve been plurel, as in "they". An example is, it isnt " god made us in his image", its " they made us is their image" ( its in genesis look it up). This is how the original jewish texts read, because they dont see god as being male or female, its just is ( which is essentialy the same idea as the scientific veiw, only that science has proof, religion has faith).

The main thing is to understand there is no "nothing" or the like, its only our lack of perception, and lack of ability it percieve it at all. There is always going to be energy in some base form, just changed from what we even see as "exsistance"

NightSpirit

09-07-2011, 01:16 PM

Did god really created us??/ or something else....

what if i say that aliens brought us here on this planet as an experiment and now the time of the "HARVESTING" is near.. harvesting meaning taking back what they brought here on this planet...

What if this is so? How is that going to make a difference to you?
What if your sitting behind some big ole desk in space dreaming all this up?
What if the world tipped on its axis tomorrow and pooofff...end of story?
What if God did create us and we all end up in 'heaven'?

I hope that UFO comes by for you :smile:

Time

09-07-2011, 01:35 PM

Id ask for pages evidence:P

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 02:05 PM

First off, thankyou for the more graceful style of enquiry, I like it. :smile:

I have looked at the evolution claims involving bacteria, although I don't agree these bacteria are evolving so much as adapting/mutating within the parameters of their design.

Sprinter, first off, I apologize because I realize that I jumped to some assumptions about your beliefs, with only one or two posts to go by, and read between your lines something you did not intend. Me, bad!!

I see what you are saying now, and think I understand where you are coming from. If so, it's an interesting way of looking at things.

Most people do tend to define "evolution" as adapting and mutating. Adapt, or die off. Adapt, to be fit, survive and thrive. But I think I see what you are saying - that it seems most creatures adapt in such a way that they are de-evolving, not evolving, and many eventually do themselves in (like we humans seem to be on course to do).

Time

09-07-2011, 02:09 PM

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 02:28 PM

Scientists now theorize that before the big bang, there was "nothing" as we woiuld see it, but "nothing" doesnt exsist. Everything is made up of base elements, carbon being the major one. This is made up of energy. The rule as we know now is "energy cannot be destroyed or created, only change forms".

That is god, and the universe. IT never ceases to exist, only changes. The same cycle of the leaf, is played out in the universe. The earth is made up of debris from the formation of the solarsystem, which was made up of the remnants of the big bang, which was made from he destruction of another universe, or if you will, "god".

If your going to use bible verses, you have to understand "he" is a common translation. The original jewish translation wouldve been plurel, as in "they". An example is, it isnt " god made us in his image", its " they made us is their image" ( its in genesis look it up). This is how the original jewish texts read, because they dont see god as being male or female, its just is ( which is essentialy the same idea as the scientific veiw, only that science has proof, religion has faith).

The main thing is to understand there is no "nothing" or the like, its only our lack of perception, and lack of ability it percieve it at all. There is always going to be energy in some base form, just changed from what we even see as "exsistance"

I don't claim to be an expert or have the answers here, but I'd like to throw this out as food for thought: 1) you are still describing the material world and 2) who created the energy?

As for "he" in the Bible, I think I heard it explained that Elohim means male/female. Here you go - found this online:

"The word Elohim is a plural formed from the feminine singular ALH, Eloh, by adding IM to the word. But inasmuch as IM is usually the termination of the masculine plural, and is here added to a feminine noun, it gives to the word Elohim the sense of a female potency united to a masculine idea, and thereby capable of producing an offspring. Now we hear much of the Father and the Son, but we hear nothing of the Mother in the ordinary religions of the day. But in the Kabbalah we find that the Ancient of Days conforms himself simultaneously into the Father and the Mother, and thus begets the Son. Now this Mother is Elohim."

The writer then goes on to show that the Holy Spirit, usually represented as masculine, is in fact feminine. The first Sephira contained the other nine, and produced them in succession. The second is Chokmah (Wisdom), and is the active and evident Father to whom the Mother is united. The third is a feminine passive potency called Binah (Understanding), and is co-equal with Chokmah. Chokmah is powerless till the number three forms the triangle."

It is interesting how religions all seem to describe something that science is slowly proving, isn't it?

Okay, so many creation theories describe a trinity of sorts. It takes three to create the world. The masculine energy (+) and the feminine (-). Plus some third thing... the holy spirit, in christian terms. What is this third thing, if we could describe it in scientific terms? Is it an energy? Or something else?

Incidentally, and I am probably walking myself out on a teeny tiny fragile limb here, but it's nagging me so here goes: somewhere recently I read something that suggested that the law of conservation of energy is untrue. I believe it was in an article about black holes. Don't quote me on this; I may have misunderstood the science (not a scientist).

NightSpirit

09-07-2011, 02:33 PM

http://www.pnas.org/content/104/30/12235.abstract

I think Time wins LOL

sound

09-07-2011, 02:34 PM

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 02:36 PM

de-evolution means death. Things seem to stop evolving, ie crocs, but they still changed. They are much smaller then they were, and arent as widespread.

FYI "adapting/mutating" IS evolution.

Nothing can de evolve, only fail to adapt

I think this is a question of whether you view the glass as half full ("evolve" - as in become better and better) or half empty ("De-evolve" as in adapt in such a way your critter may flourish in quantity, but at the sacrifice of quality).

It's quite arguable that humans are de-evolving. Yes we've reached 7 Billion on this planet and we adapted to inhabit every corner of the earth, but we are doing so at great expense and may soon extinct ourselves. Even if we don't, the reality is that while we've been a success at quantity, we really have sacrificed quality. We are not as smart, not as healthy, not as fit, and don't live as long as our early ancestors. But boy, there are a lot of us!

But the glass is half full if you choose to look at this as a good thing - if humans can't get their act together, and they go extinct, the earth will still go on. The jellyfish and plastic-eating bacteria will flourish in our place. And maybe they'll adapt to be wiser.

Time

09-07-2011, 02:43 PM

1) you are still describing the material world and 2) who created the energy?

Its because everything is "material". The thing is, the more we learn about the universe, the more likley that its never really had a beginning. Even if you trace back the history of life on eart, there are points where things happened, but we can ( and i think wont ever) be ale to say " this is where it all began".

The big bang us always used to decribe the beginning, but thers more evidence now to suggest that thres always been something, just because we dont understand it fully , doesnt mean" nothing" exsists. The onlyr eason we percive and feel is becasue we are physical.

Your still thinking in terms of "things making things". Life doesnt decide "oh im going to evolve these cows" it just happens due to enviromental factors ( material once again) ALthough, it SEEMS and we say that life thinks like us. A good example is the evolution of fruit. The plant knew that animals help spread their seeds, so they developed collurful, tasty fruit to make them more appealing to animals, so that their seeds go further. They dont think, they dont percieve like us, yet, we percieve it as a "choice" so we can understand it better. The mind only can understand what it already knows, it associates things to the familiar.

LOL i meant to delete the :him" part in the thread, it was pasted form another post i made, which pertained here. LOL

It is interesting how religions all seem to describe something that science is slowly proving, isn't it?

yes, im going to have to agree with you there, like " energy cannot be made or destroyed only change form" and the description of god " he has and always will be there". They seem to be talkin about the same thing, just different sides of it.

In terms of "trinities", it depends id say. We say " the name of the father son and holy spirit", no mention of women there at all ( although classicaly the "father" was both masculine and feminine). Most would say its the "soul", the part that never dies, which i guess could be said is energy, the basic elements of us. This is a bit more of a slippery slope IMO.

Black holes are still highly debated, but are getting more and more understood. From what ive heard, is that black holes break things down into the most basic forms of matter. Almost liek galactic recycling centers.

NightSpirit

09-07-2011, 02:49 PM

I wonder who created the aliens?

Good thought sound :smile:

Time

09-07-2011, 02:50 PM

It's quite arguable that humans are de-evolving. Yes we've reached 7 Billion on this planet and we adapted to inhabit every corner of the earth, but we are doing so at great expense and may soon extinct ourselves. Even if we don't, the reality is that while we've been a success at quantity, we really have sacrificed quality. We are not as smart, not as healthy, not as fit, and don't live as long as our early ancestors. But boy, there are a lot of us!

You hit the nail on the head! We are just as smart as we were, BUT i agree we arent as heatly or as fit. This is due to food.

Out brains evolved to be as large as it is, due to us eating meat, namly cooked meat. The organ meat allowed us to build up enough fat reserves, and get all the proper nutrition, incorrespondance to our hunter gatherer habits at the time. In lame terms, we ate everything that wouldnt kill us.

Then after the last ice age, we developed farming, due to climate change forcing us to stay put. We then evolved the farming. We mostly farmed grains, and lost the diverse food supplies we had. Grains are great food, but we have problems digesting them, that along with the loss of variety, we ended up getting food easier, and making it easier to supply a larger group with food, but as you said, we took quantitiy over quality. Right after this in the fossil record, we have dental problems, cancers, shorter life spans, and shorter people.

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 02:55 PM

Its because everything is "material". The thing is, the more we learn about the universe, the more likley that its never really had a beginning. Even if you trace back the history of life on eart, there are points where things happened, but we can ( and i think wont ever) be ale to say " this is where it all began".

The big bang us always used to decribe the beginning, but thers more evidence now to suggest that thres always been something, just because we dont understand it fully , doesnt mean" nothing" exsists. The onlyr eason we percive and feel is becasue we are physical.

Your still thinking in terms of "things making things". Life doesnt decide "oh im going to evolve these cows" it just happens due to enviromental factors ( material once again) ALthough, it SEEMS and we say that life thinks like us. A good example is the evolution of fruit. The plant knew that animals help spread their seeds, so they developed collurful, tasty fruit to make them more appealing to animals, so that their seeds go further. They dont think, they dont percieve like us, yet, we percieve it as a "choice" so we can understand it better. The mind only can understand what it already knows, it associates things to the familiar.

LOL i meant to delete the :him" part in the thread, it was pasted form another post i made, which pertained here. LOL

yes, im going to have to agree with you there, like " energy cannot be made or destroyed only change form" and the description of god " he has and always will be there". They seem to be talkin about the same thing, just different sides of it.

In terms of "trinities", it depends id say. We say " the name of the father son and holy spirit", no mention of women there at all ( although classicaly the "father" was both masculine and feminine). Most would say its the "soul", the part that never dies, which i guess could be said is energy, the basic elements of us. This is a bit more of a slippery slope IMO.

Black holes are still highly debated, but are getting more and more understood. From what ive heard, is that black holes break things down into the most basic forms of matter. Almost liek galactic recycling centers.

So (and I hope you can follow my mind-leap here), then we have the enigma that is the quantum observer effect... which suggests that science only proves what the experimenter wants to prove. Which makes me wonder and marvel.... can you ever really prove anything with science? Are we finding scientific explanations for age-old creation theories simply because the stories came first?

Is all materiality merely a creation of our thoughts?

Is the mind the Holy Spirit, the third entity?

NightSpirit

09-07-2011, 02:57 PM

[quote=SerpentQueen]which suggests that science only proves what the experimenter wants to prove. Which makes me wonder and marvel.... can you ever really prove anything with science?

I like your line of thinking here :smile:

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 02:59 PM

You hit the nail on the head! We are just as smart as we were, BUT i agree we arent as heatly or as fit. This is due to food.

Out brains evolved to be as large as it is, due to us eating meat, namly cooked meat. The organ meat allowed us to build up enough fat reserves, and get all the proper nutrition, incorrespondance to our hunter gatherer habits at the time. In lame terms, we ate everything that wouldnt kill us.

Then after the last ice age, we developed farming, due to climate change forcing us to stay put. We then evolved the farming. We mostly farmed grains, and lost the diverse food supplies we had. Grains are great food, but we have problems digesting them, that along with the loss of variety, we ended up getting food easier, and making it easier to supply a larger group with food, but as you said, we took quantitiy over quality. Right after this in the fossil record, we have dental problems, cancers, shorter life spans, and shorter people.

So then it seems to me you and Sprinter actually agree? LOL

Time

09-07-2011, 03:03 PM

Ive thought this for a long time. Think what is the point of experimentation? To repeat results. BUT, to get the resulkts proper, we have to tweat the experiment sometimes, becaus what we percieve wont make what we want. Most of the time it doesnt even work. Look how long it took us to accept the earth was round:S

This is the way I see it. IF we didnt have startrek, we wouldnt have gone to space ( this is actualy the truth, the space program didnt go forward till after startrek started :S ) If we dont belive in things that arent true, how can they become truth?

Thoughts werent in exsistance untill life became present. Spo what WE create is a product of our thoughts, but life in general isnt, it just happend. That doesnt mean that there is no point to life, only that since we have the CHOICE, we can create what ever meaning we choose

SerpentQueen

09-07-2011, 03:06 PM

[QUOTE]

I like your line of thinking here :smile:

Cool!

This is why I believe that enlightenment leads to the revelation that we are Gods. That it is our minds (our thoughts, our imaginations) that create - or destroy. We can create wonders of beauty, or we can create ****** worlds with pain and suffering. It's all within our own power.

The Buddhists would suggest that one still the mind, and remain a neutral observer. I understand this, and I can totally see how one would be at peace and find peace in the "eye of the hurricane." But I propose that if we remain neutral... if we all were neutral... the universe and all creation would disappear and cease to exist.

I'm going to tie this back to another thread I posted on a few days ago, about how I suspect I am some sort of graduate that chose to come back. I have long found it hard to relate to people who view this world as filled with pain and suffering, and something to escape. I have never really understood this longing for the afterlife and going back to heaven or home.

I think this world is absolutely amazing!!! If I went home in past life, I can definitely see why I would have decided to return again. The world is one big playground to be enjoyed and experienced. It's much more fascinating and interesting than... nothingness.

And I believe that was my one allowed soapbox spiel for the day. LOL

NightSpirit

09-07-2011, 03:56 PM

[quote=NightSpirit]

Cool!

This is why I believe that enlightenment leads to the revelation that we are Gods. That it is our minds (our thoughts, our imaginations) that create - or destroy. We can create wonders of beauty, or we can create ****** worlds with pain and suffering. It's all within our own power.

The Buddhists would suggest that one still the mind, and remain a neutral observer. I understand this, and I can totally see how one would be at peace and find peace in the "eye of the hurricane." But I propose that if we remain neutral... if we all were neutral... the universe and all creation would disappear and cease to exist.

I'm going to tie this back to another thread I posted on a few days ago, about how I suspect I am some sort of graduate that chose to come back. I have long found it hard to relate to people who view this world as filled with pain and suffering, and something to escape. I have never really understood this longing for the afterlife and going back to heaven or home.

I think this world is absolutely amazing!!! If I went home in past life, I can definitely see why I would have decided to return again. The world is one big playground to be enjoyed and experienced. It's much more fascinating and interesting than... nothingness.

And I believe that was my one allowed soapbox spiel for the day. LOL

LOL....*dusts off soapbox for you* ....I'm agreeing with you yet again on it all :D

Time

09-07-2011, 08:42 PM

NightSpirit

10-07-2011, 12:30 AM

I dont agree or dissagree with anyone ususaly. I dont think we de evolve because that is impossible. De evolving would mean the animal would REVERT back to a former self, not un adapt. other wise its just failing to adapt, we are an adaptive species, yes but apperantly not adaptive in the way of knowing when enough is enough

Did you read that link I put there for you Time? I thought it interesting...about adapting and mutation. I agree, its not possible to devolve, only adapt.

Time

10-07-2011, 12:36 AM

YES i saved that link, that site really good thanks *evil laugh

sprinter

10-07-2011, 11:53 AM

FIrst off splinter, in going to say it seems we both have a very blunt in your face way of typing, and in my experience, these sort of people dont get along LOL

ITs simple, its called reading, and comming to my own conclusions. I dont disagree with things that dont fit into my beleifs, and I also dont take everything told to me as truth. This is something ive been interested in, for YEARS. IT just seems like u werent expecting an answer like mine.

Have you ever thought about the math behind life on other planets? Theres over a trillion suns in this galaxy alone, each has a planet, and the universe has trillions and trillions of galaxies. Ammino acids are found on comets that are flying around in space. Ammino acids are the main building block of life. As far as we know no life can exsist without the presence of amino acids. Theres so many comets in the universe they cant even count them all right now. The odds are, thers more life then on this planet, even the vatican reconized this.

The odds might be a fair bit slimmer than you can imagine, it's all very well to mention amino acids but it's not obvious you have any understanding of types, numbers of, ratios of types required to get anything even resembling a proper life building block let alone the amount required for any kind of organism. Look into this a little closer, the odds of a random formation are higher than the amount of particles in the known universe, but way, way before we get there you have to have a universe and I'm wondering have you ever heard of or researched a thing called the cosmological constant?
Research that and you might find this little universe of ours a very, very unlikely thing given the known laws of physics. You should really enjoy the mathematics and probabilities involved there.

It isnt in any particular book that ive read. Honestly every single book or show ive read spoke of 6 main mass extinctions, and some that were more localized ( not really global mass extinctions). Once again there is MORE then enough evidence to prove this.
SO some big man in the clouds that made us out of clay is any better? It was almost "hey presto" just over a billion years. You seem to undetstand what im talking about, yet still decide to argue it. That IMO is ignorant. Im not calling you ignorant, only that statement. Im giving you things that have actual evidence, if you choose to look.
No, im actualy a very, very sarcastic person, unless in in a serious conversation. I think we can both agree sarcasm isnt the easiest thing to percieve in text:P
That part i wrote about god, is exactly how he is decribed in the bible, yes, with a touch of sarcasm for spice:P. it isnt insulting, its the truth.

I'll work to tone the spice now I have a better overview, I've never disliked you I just don't agree with some of your ideas, sometimes. :smile:

And since you seem to really not undertstand the widley excepted , im going to explain it in full to the best of my abilities at 7 am. Bare with me :P

Generaly speaking there was nothing before the universe as we know it. But there was a general level of energy, that was compressed, probably due to the destruction of another universe ( everthing in the universe recycles itself its a proven fact). The compressed energy was so dense, so unstable, that it exploded, and created more elements. This created a chain reaction, that enabled helium, and heat, which created MORE elements. This inevitably created sun after a billion years of reaction and cooling ( explosions create heat due to friction). Suns explode, sending out their elements and minerals outward. The universe at that time was literaly a lake in a rain storm, each ripple effecting the next.

When things started to cool, this created "rocks" or space debris. The gravity of our sun, pulled this matter towards itself, and its gravity started to pull this around itself, and caused it to spin. This caused fusion of some debris, and created the planets. THis was still a very hot universe.

In terms of the earth, when it finally started to cool off, the earth got hit with another planetary body, or the larger moon ( this is still debated, but its still accepted that another planet hit outs billions of years ago before it fully cooled).

During and after this, the earth was literaly a shooting gallery. Remnants of the formation of the universe, and solar system rammed into the planet at an astonishing rate. Some of these were comets. These comets are thought to be the source of liquid water ( comets are solid ice) and amino acids. These are both known to change form in heat, but will re estabolish its more known form when it cools.

When the earth cooled, and the cosmic assult calmed down, rain started. This further cooled the planet. Water formation was arguably the most critical part of formation of life. Things were changing at this time as well. Amino acids were combining randomly. Life isnt linear by anymeans. There are anomolies prevalent in everything now, let alone back then. Those are things that just dont quite fit into the current form of "right".

SO somehow, enviromental conditions, over billions of years caused an amino acid to replicate itself. This is a great success story because life can actualy now spread successful attributes. After another billion years, we end up with a sort of small bacteria.

This stayed the same untill the first snowball earth. Life never changed for a very very long time. These bacteria ut carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which caused it to warm. This caused a chain reaction, that caused the entire world to freeze over.

But that bacteria survived.

Volcanoes ironicaluy enough, but enough co2 in the atmosphere to warm the planet, and life wasnt the same. According to the fossil record, life managed to not only survive, but diversify ( darwins theory of survival of the fittest, basicaly harsh conditions forcing things to evolve to survive.) This is the first time a photo synthetic organsim is found, namly algea. THis creates oxygen.

Now, the earth is constantly changing. From plate movements, to the earths orbit changing. What happened to change everything this time? Plate movement caused volcanic eruptions that shut out the light, and once again caused a snowball earth scinario.

Life was more adapted to this, seeing as its been through this before. So it came though relitivly well, and more diverse.

This is where trilobites, and jawless fish comeinto play. Life had turned into hunt, or be hunted. Plants started to colonize land, and began their conquest of earth, putting trillions of tons of O2 ini the atmosphere.

Fish evolved jaws, and diversified. Amphibians show up on the fossil record about this time. These were bound to the water, yet could take in oxygen, sort of like a lung fish right now. Our ansictors, though dna analysis show that we were the amphibians at this time.

Since plants colonized the earth, this set the scene for insects to make landfall. Amphibians followed their food. Making small steps toward shore, to finally adapting well enough to walk on land. This was followed by their predators.

At this point, life took off. Reptiles were abundant, as were amphiians, as well as mammal like reptiles. Sort of a cross roads between reptiles and mammals. Plants diversified even more, and at this point, it went from a few species of tree , horsetails, ferns and lichen, to thousands.

Once again, nature decided to play a cruel joke of " 2 steps forward and one step back". A combination of volcanic activity, earth movement, and plate movement, caused the single greatist mass extinction known in the earths history. Over 90% of everything in exsistance ceased to exsist. Plants, land and water life... gone. We know this due one again to geology. We can find the line in rocks before and after this .

The strata below, was full of life, oxygen, a "blakc line" which indicates life, while above it, oxygen levels went down 20%, and only 5 - 10% of life that was before that line, is after. This si world wide BTW, not local.

Once again, life managed to survive. Most notably, ferns/cycads, ginko, redwood trees, reptiles, amphibians, fish a few mamal like reptiles, and yes, our ancistor.

The reign of dinosaurs had begun. Life diversified liek it never had before. Dinosaurs got bigger, and bigger, while mammals, a new evolution having a great intellect, small size, warm blood, great nightvision, and, a placenta.

There was another mass extinction brough on by yet again, plate movement. Certain species died out, but as far as i remember nothing liek the previous.

Dinosaurs were still dominating the planet. Mammals were still small rodent type things, yet still surviving.

Now, the extinction of dinosaurs is a very debated subject, but there are a few widly accepted theories...

According to fossil records, they were already on their way out. Their population was dropping for a million years, presumably due to disease.

Climate change was happening as well. The inland sea in north america dried up as the rockies formed, changing an entire continents climate.

The collision between india, and euraisa, caused a gigantic "super volcanic" explosion which caused global climate to change, as well as localized destruction.

Then, the icing on the cake, the yucatan penninsula asteroid impact. You take a species already beaten down, by disease, climate change and starvation, then hit them with that, they have no chance. This killed on 60% of land species, while it left water life generaly untouched. The asteroid cut the food chain in half, starving the herbavores due to no sunlight, there fore starving the large predatorns. basicaly, nothing bigger then a house cat, or nothing that couldnt hide underground was toast.

Plants came back from the roots, and spores, and mammals came out form underground, to see their "oppresors" were gone. The age of mammals had begun.

The earth began a cooling trend after this. Presumably the asteroid impact moved the earths rotation by just enough to cause a cooling trend. Birds survived, flowering plants survived ( a new invention at the end of the age of dinosaurs), some reptiles and amphibians, 90% of aquatic life.... Thats all mammals needed was the oppertunity.

Something relitivly new happens now, called ice ages, in which the polar regions ectend their glaciation south. This posed a new hurdle to our ansictors, because this caused massive climate change.

In africa, there were apes in trees. They found out that by going on the ground they can get more food, yet it was more dangerous then in the trees. For somereason, one of them stood up on their hind legs, so they can see predators better, and bipedal humans had begun their march toward global ruling.

We used tools to help us get food and to build, developed sophisticated communication,

We had one more main hurdle to climb. The climat changed once again, and we headed into an ice age Africa dried up, except in a few small river basins. Its estimated that our species at this time was no more then 15 000 induviduals.

Then the climate warmed up, and brought rains to africa and the world abroad. We spread out from africa, meeting and outcompeting all other hominid species in eurasia.

Now, there is now, and then a phenomena called heinrik events. This is when inbetween glaciations, there are mini ice ages in europe. They come about in a few hundred years, last that long, and in a dacade, leave. This is stressful on anything, but apperantly more so on our now known anscistor, neanderthol. There is more evidence now that says early homo species, and neanderthold mated and created the successfull species of homo sapien we are today. Neanderthol was also the first homonid to use and controll fire. So why did they die, and not us?

Simple - adaptation. Sapiens evolved large, widespread communities, when neanderthol stayed in very close communities. When the hienricj events happend, our species had more ways to get their needs, then neanderthjol, due to territory. They had no chance. Homo sapiens then took over.

There ya go.....

I really appreciate you did all that, but don't a lot of those things raise obvious questions in your mind, I mean (speaking for myself) nearly every paragraph seems to rely upon circular reasoning.
For the most part the story slips from one stage to the next without ryme reason or mechanism by which each major event/stage is initiated (read handwaving), and I'm wondering are you in any way curious/concerned about that pattern of reliance upon the, just so element, at such a large percentage of the vital junctions in the story? :confused:

As for de evolution, it doesnt happen. Things may stay the same, or fail to adapt to new situations, but things dont go backwards liek you suggested. While humans lifespans have gone down, this is due to our food, NOT de evolution.

Yes, on consideration the term 'de-volve' probably didn't convey my meaning very well, I really wasn't refering to a backwards evolution process. :rolleyes:
Perhaps 'Decay' would be a better expression of what I am describing,, unceasing, unstoppable, universal decay. :icon_eek:

Guard

10-07-2011, 12:21 PM

I beleive in creation for sure..However, I do not believe theat God/The divine, is micromanaging everything. Just started the motions and the laws of the universe. Everything follows its own course. God is not causing tornades, earthquakes, famon, bountiful havests, lush landscapes, pristine, lakes, forest fires. It just happens as to the laws. IMO, the purpose of the exisiting laws of the universe is so that everything will always rebalance.

Evolution is real like it or not. You can't dispute that because you see it with your own eyes. Just one of the laws of perfections. Why do you think seeds are not digestible for example? So animals/people eat them...and deposit them (if you no what I mean ) in feces which will also act as soil to start sprouting) It is nature at work.

Time

10-07-2011, 01:37 PM

The odds might be a fair bit slimmer than you can imagine, it's all very well to mention amino acids but it's not obvious you have any understanding of types, numbers of, ratios of types required to get anything even resembling a proper life building block let alone the amount required for any kind of organism. Look into this a little closer, the odds of a random formation are higher than the amount of particles in the known universe, but way, way before we get there you have to have a universe and I'm wondering have you ever heard of or researched a thing called the cosmological constant?
Research that and you might find this little universe of ours a very, very unlikely thing given the known laws of physics. You should really enjoy the mathematics and probabilities involved there.

Unfortunatly no one seems to agree, or even put forth an accepted hypothesis on how it actualy happened. Im assuming they are using modern evolution theories and genetics to say that it "happened at random", which most evolution happens. Even carl sagan, one of the greatest all around "space guys" of the last 100 years, thought it was highly doubious to think there isnt any life out there other then us.

I do remember a bit of the cosmological constant, but it is a bit.... debated. It seems to make sence in normal physics, but once you break out he string theory and quantum mechanics, the theory falls apart. I think that it was a very early theory of string theory, and or particle physics/quantum theory.

Not to mention theres a thing called chaos theory that is a major player in space mathmatics.

Oh, please dont tone down the spice, because I can assure you I wont :D LOL. Asa I said its just a bit hard to tell sarcasm in text, I try to put a smily face, or something to show that im being sarcastic. Trust me, you didnt disrespect me at all,

Its circular reasoning, becasue thats how life works, a never ending circle. Life works on closed systems not straight lines.

And the way i wrote it, yes, its a bit cut and dry, but its hard to condence 4 or 5 billion years in a few paragraphs. Most shows on the subject are like 5 or 6 hour long episodes, and books are thick. Most changes were caused by things that werent instant, but happened over a few days, weeks months years, decades, centuries or even a millenia.

For instance, the second ice ball earth, that occured due to massive amounts of oxygen in the atmosphere, took a few million years to really do anything, then it was nigh unstoppable.

If you have questions about how somethings started, look it up or ask. IF your interested, I suggest ypou take a look at the program called " miracle planet". Its on youtube. Another good one, that is harder to find, is a PBS program called "origins" a VERY good program.

Yes, on consideration the term 'de-volve' probably didn't convey my meaning very well, I really wasn't refering to a backwards evolution process.
Perhaps 'Decay' would be a better expression of what I am describing,, unceasing, unstoppable, universal decay.

Word can be tricky, especialy when people dont know how to use them. We get taught meanings to words that dont really have any real meaning or doesnt pertain to what it actualy means.

De evolution was a good example actualy. To evolve, means to go forward, and adapt and turn into a new species eventualy, or adapt to your surroundings so that you can pass your successful genetic material to the next generation. When you add "de" to anything, liek "de toxify", it means to reverse what has been done. So like i stated "de evolution" would mean reverting.

I think the word you work looking for is " failing to adapt to our surroundings in a homeostasis with our enviroment ( homeostasis meaning some form of harmony)

When a species acts like we are, it usualy means something is going to check our numbers, its happened throughout history, even recent history ( the plagues of europe where 1.3 of the population died), that is unless we manage to wake up, and or grow up...

jamesart7

11-07-2011, 01:30 AM

a backward evolution?? thats so impossible!! it kinda makes me laugh though....,.

Blaze

11-07-2011, 02:33 AM

a backward evolution?? thats so impossible!! it kinda makes me laugh though....,.
Yeah me too! :D

Time

11-07-2011, 02:04 PM

Exactly, that was my point. But the word is stillt here, because people use it in reference to things failing to adapt, or ceasing to exsist, but the word really doesnt exsist.

hybrid

11-07-2011, 09:46 PM

the word devolution means to evolve in such way to manifest the original original nature. it is an idea used in monism where consciousness is the primordial stuff and created the universe and sentient life to manifest this same consciousness.

on a personal level, devolution is the inward direction of direct experience on knowing that consciousness is your true nature. as opposed to evolution which seeks all avenues to express everything that you can be.

imho

moke64916

11-07-2011, 09:57 PM

Did god really created us??/ or something else....

what if i say that aliens brought us here on this planet as an experiment and now the time of the "HARVESTING" is near.. harvesting meaning taking back what they brought here on this planet...
Space is nothing, yet space is 'no-thing.' Was God waiting for a vast emptiness to be fulled. No. Space is no-thing. It was never created.

hybrid

11-07-2011, 11:23 PM

since sub atomic particles the building block of matter simply appears in space, we also came out of space

Xan

12-07-2011, 04:25 AM

Space is nothing, yet space is 'no-thing.' Was God waiting for a vast emptiness to be fulled. No. Space is no-thing. It was never created.

Look again, moke. Space is actually full of pure Presence.

Xan

Xan

12-07-2011, 04:26 AM

sound

12-07-2011, 08:13 AM

Well then... who created the aliens... not to mention the planet?

Xan
I already asked that question a few pages back Xan, however nobody was interested ...

NightSpirit

12-07-2011, 08:53 AM

hi sound...I also left that one out there waiting to see if there were any bites. I guess not. Perhaps it was overlooked? Personally, the question opens a huge can of worms doesn't it? hehe

Blaze

12-07-2011, 12:20 PM

I already asked that question a few pages back Xan, however nobody was interested ...
Yeah maybe all those self called intellectuals who take their mathematical reasonings too seriously could answer those questions, but no answer yet eh?

sound

12-07-2011, 12:44 PM

Well ... I met a bunch of self-proclaimed R-aliens once and asked them the same question ... "Who created them?' and, not so remarkably, they abruptly announced that the 'seminar' was now 'over' ...

Time

12-07-2011, 02:06 PM

I did answer it. No one created them, they just happened due to cause and effect, plain and simple ( well the explination is simple, what happened is anything but simple:P)

hybrid

12-07-2011, 03:10 PM

itself must have created everything (men, aliens and angels)from itself for itself thru and by itself. hehe

Mathew James

12-07-2011, 03:18 PM

God is an alien in the minds of most people

mj

Xan

12-07-2011, 08:14 PM

Well then... who created the aliens... not to mention the planet?

I already asked that question a few pages back Xan, however nobody was interested ...

Yeah... I didn't read the whole thread.

It does remind me of this little story you may have heard.

An arrogant type (alien, maybe) tells God. "What's so hard about making a planet? I could do that with one hand tied behind my back."

God says, "Ok then... show me."

The type says, "Well, I'll just get some dirt."

God... "Oh no you don't... Make your own dirt."

blessings
Xan

Xan

12-07-2011, 08:15 PM

I did answer it. No one created them, they just happened due to cause and effect, plain and simple ( well the explination is simple, what happened is anything but simple:P)
Well then, what's the cause that created the principle of cause and effect, Time?

Xan

Xan

12-07-2011, 08:19 PM

Seperate_Reality

13-07-2011, 05:22 PM

There is a lot to this subject and I can try to relate some kind of understanding, but it really takes studying, learning, and self-realization of the correct truth or knowledge of our existence.
At one time trillions of years ago there was the Supreme Spiritual Being. Then, we each came off the Main God Body as, non-physical, immortal, aware of being aware, spiritual beings with freewill. This was probably before the physical world or universe was created. Down the line a ways after the physical universe (Time and space, etc) was created and became real and solid, we each decided to operate physical human bodies for a physical world experience. For awhile we could play this physical game or not play it at will.
Then we started forgetting who we were and why we were here to begin with. We then got stuck in the physical body birth-death cycle of the body dying and getting another body, new parents, new name, etc (rebirth). I think the original Buddha was the first to start figuring this or part of this out by reaching the state of Bodhi, or, moving away from the physical body as a spiritual being and knowing the difference. later on Jesus came along and new the difference also and tried to relay this knowledge to man, but did not have the knowledge to get man to understand, because that knowledge was not available in that time period like it is today in a certain religion. So, we have two separate and completely different realities going on in the term human-being. The human body is physical and animal and then add to this the non-physical, spiritual being operating this body. There is a lot more to this story and I just briefly described part of it for some hint of an understanding. Read You can Google, The Bible UFO Connection - Ezekiel - Text Version, for some hint of aliens on this planet a few thousand years ago. I normally don't get into that part of man's history even though aliens are most definitely a part of it. The important thing to remember here is, that there are two separate realities, our own non-physical, immortal, native spiritual nature-reality and the physical world reality of mortal, physical bodies. Kinda like the Matrix movie, but the Matrix was not real and the physical world is.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh;(mortal, physical, human body) and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.(you as a non-physical, immortal, Spiritual Being).

Psalm 90:10The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away. (as non-physical, immortal, spiritual beings, we each Depart the Deceased mortal, physical, human body.)

Luke 17:21Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (Heaven is not someplace we go and God is not over there someplace. Our own non-physical, immortal, native spiritual nature and reality is withing each of us)

Xan

14-07-2011, 01:04 AM

At one time trillions of years ago there was the Supreme Spiritual Being.

It's still here. When you find out where to look you'll feel The Presence for yourself.

Xan

Seperate_Reality

14-07-2011, 02:21 AM

I agree the Supreme Being still exists and I was referring to Creation of Spirits in a past reference compared to the later creation of the human-beings, (spiritual being, plus a human body). The below verse Jesus mentions the spiritual-collective and man misunderstood what he meant, because humans have a hard time understanding spirituality. The second verse is from The Bible UFO Connection, Lost Book of Adam and Eve which shows, before and after. Non-physical, immortal, spiritual beings and then operating mortal, physical, human bodies. (becoming human-beings)

John 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I [am] in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. (Jesus is referring here to when you "realize" your own native spiritual nature)

Adam And Eve Could No Longer See The Angels In Heaven
"4:8 And Adam said to Eve, "Look at your eyes, and at mine, which before beheld angels praising in heaven; and they too, without ceasing. 9 But now we do not see as we did; our eyes have become of flesh; they cannot see like they used to see before."

jamesart7

14-07-2011, 05:07 AM

At one time trillions of years ago there was the Supreme Spiritual Being.

It's still here. When you find out where to look you'll feel The Presence for yourself.

Xan

A Supreme being? what kind? and is it still here? i really doubt it....

Topology

14-07-2011, 05:57 AM

A Supreme being? what kind? and is it still here? i really doubt it....

You doubt because you reject the term, the word, and close yourself to exploring your reality because you presume to know it.

When you get out of the house of defensive tactics you've created for yourself and go explore with others into what can be experienced, you might find the quibble over words was a waste of time, regardless of what words you decide to attach to things.

There is a a definite Presence and Intelligence. Whether you call it God's, or your own, or the Universe's, or nobody's does not matter. It is there to be discovered if you're genuinely curious. What you're saying is that you are content with how you conceive of the world and not curious to go beyond it.

NightSpirit

14-07-2011, 12:18 PM

everyone has their own reality and its not for someone else to dispute it. After all, what you are disputing is your own reality not in line with another's anyway....so by judging another you are also judging yourself. What makes your reality any better then the other persons?

edit...btw...ps...you know who I'm aiming this at.

Xan

15-07-2011, 02:50 AM

A Supreme being? what kind? and is it still here? i really doubt it....
james... What kind? Spirit being... non-physical and pure love.

It's good to doubt until you see for yourself, unless your doubts block your vision, that is.

How do you see for yourself? Meditation practice until you get into deep levels of the Silence.

Xan

jamesart7

15-07-2011, 04:33 AM

Well., theres only one way to know the truth about this spirit beings. "death"

Enlightener

15-07-2011, 11:27 AM

Look at any drug-resistant bacteria. They're evolving faster than our best research efforts can find new drugs.

But I agree, humans may be de-evolving. I think I read somewhere that this generation will be the first to go backwards in expected longevity. As Darwin said, the fittest survive. We have all these massive brains yet we laze around and eat ourselves to death and pollute our air and waters. So sad.

Huh? If you have eyes, you can see evolution all around. Just go to a natural history museum. Or breed some fruit flies. Or dogs. Or roses.

Darwin did not base his theories on faith alone - he developed them based on what his eyes could see. It's all there in front of you.

Really tempted to respond to this, but in spirit of this forum, I'll shut my trap ...

All I will say is this: you can believe in evolution AND believe in god. The two are not mutually exclusive.

http://www.naturalnews.com/033008_copper_antimicrobial.html

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/07/04/uk-ageing-cure-idUKTRE7632I320110704

Xan

15-07-2011, 11:23 PM

Well., theres only one way to know the truth about this spirit beings. "death"

Well james... not the Only way. Why wait, when there are ways to know now?

Xan

jamesart7

16-07-2011, 12:24 AM

Well james... not the Only way. Why wait, when there are ways to know now?

Xan

what do you mean by this? are you saying that i should not wait for death to come?

Xan

16-07-2011, 12:51 AM

I'm saying in deep meditation we can know infinite supreme being... while in this life.

Xan

jamesart7

16-07-2011, 08:45 AM

Meditation? like the bold headed monks does? that's kinda hard to do...

Xan

17-07-2011, 01:20 AM

Meditation like many ordinary people do these days.

Here's a simple one you might like to try: Three Steps into your true nature - http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=32551#post32551

Xan

Time

17-07-2011, 03:09 PM

Look, we always think that theres a reason for everything, and that everything is created by something. Unfortunatly, the evidence goes against this. Theres no evidence anything was made for any reason ( except the purpose it evolved to do), and in terms of the creation of the universe ( which means ET as well), needed nothing to create itself. That is thinking in a human perspective ( as in we are the center of everything), not with a proper understanding of evolution of the universe. There is always something left, even after the destruction of the universe. WHen we die, we get broken down into the most basic elements. We cant see them, we barley see anything working, but thats what happens and its literaly a scaled down version of what happens in the universe...

As for "devolution", no that isnt the proper definition at all hybrid im sorry. There are 2, one has to do with the government, and the other has to do with evolving backwards, not moving forwards in anyway. Matt (Devolution) probably knew this, and used his nick as a bit of a twist on words. IT has nothing to do with the mental reversion ( only in regards to physical de evolution).

Both examples hybrid gave were still moving forward, which totaly negates the whole use of the "de" in "devolution". For example
wu
he word devolution means to evolve in such way to manifest the original original nature

That is a major contradiction. You cant de evolve, yet evolve. Youd stay the same in that case. The only way to truly deevolve is to go back in time.

moke64916

17-07-2011, 04:06 PM

Did god really created us??/ or something else....

what if i say that aliens brought us here on this planet as an experiment and now the time of the "HARVESTING" is near.. harvesting meaning taking back what they brought here on this planet...
Nothing could BE without space, yet 'space' is nothing. Before the universe came into being, Before the "Big Bang" if you'd say. there wasn't a vast empty space waiting to be filled.
There was no spacem and there was no thing. There was only the Unmanifested-The One. When the One became the "Ten thousand things" suddenly space seemed to be there and enabled the many to be. Where did it come from? Was it created by God to accommodate the universe? Of course not. Space is no-thing, so it was never created.

Xan

17-07-2011, 09:21 PM

The only way to truly deevolve is to go back in time.

Or go out of time where our original nature abides as ever.

Xan

hybrid

17-07-2011, 10:03 PM

time,

devolution 1 - The process of declining from a higher to a lower level of effective power, vitality or essential quality

devolution 2 - (government) the delegation of authority (especially from a central to a regional government)

Time

18-07-2011, 12:36 AM

But that isnt the biological definition, its the definition for government law... Your ignoring the actual context of the word and using it as your own. I cant say thats bad, but you cant ignore the original intent behind the word.

Wikipedia

Devolution is the statutory granting of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to government at a subnational level, such as a regional, local, or state level. Devolution can be mainly financial, e.g. giving areas a budget which was formerly administered by central government.

and theres

n common parlance, "devolution", "de-evolution", or backward evolution is the notion that a species can change into a more "primitive" form.

Xan - yes, but wed still have some perception of time, just not mechanical.. ( as in clock)

Xan

18-07-2011, 01:24 AM

Xan - yes, but wed still have some perception of time, just not mechanical.. ( as in clock)

When we are outside of time we have no perception of it... only when we return to ordinary consciousness.

Xan

jamesart7

18-07-2011, 04:14 AM

being outside of time?
for me, if a person manages to go outside of time will become nothing... thats because something is telling me that without time,, nothing will exist!

moke64916

18-07-2011, 12:51 PM

When we are outside of time we have no perception of it... only when we return to ordinary consciousness.

Xan
I agree with Xan. Time as in sense of clock time AND psychological time goes away when one is SO FULLY present in the moment.

Time

18-07-2011, 12:51 PM

Time itself has exsisted only after the big bang. It never exsisted before. If you are in the universe in any way, shape or form, you are part of time, even if you think your are outside of it. IMO even death, is still a part of time, because in some way you still exsist in this universe because the universe was created the same time as "time". So in essence you can say time IS the universe, or as I think of it, time is our perception of the expantion/movement of the universe...

Enlightener

18-07-2011, 01:01 PM

Agreed. Time and Space are one in the same.

Xan

18-07-2011, 08:12 PM

being outside of time?
for me, if a person manages to go outside of time will become nothing... thats because something is telling me that without time,, nothing will exist!

Your awareness will exist, which is the essence of your being.

In fact, that's how we can know there is a 'no time' state, which I do experience in meditation.

Xan

Xan

18-07-2011, 08:14 PM

hybrid

19-07-2011, 12:39 AM

Time

19-07-2011, 01:01 AM

noooo............................................. ..

Devolution is when something reverts to an earlier form of life, for instance, humans reverting to neanderthol.... OR birds reverting to dinosaurs.

Enlightener

19-07-2011, 06:23 AM

Yes, but devolution is impossible. Not because I say so, but because it goes against the natural laws of physics and spirituality. There is nothing that de-evolves. Even when it looks like something, or someone is in the process of de-evolution, it is not. Evolution isn't a straight line. Blah! hahahahah

Time

19-07-2011, 01:11 PM

LOL no thats exactly it enlightener. The term exists, but i can only think of one animal that can do this... its that jelly fish that is "immortal". It reverts back to a primitive member of its family to be able to survive dought and the like. Theres one that is over 500 000 years old!!!!

But generaly speaking, it still isnt devolving. Even when something fails to adapt, it didnt devolve, it jsut failed to adapt.

Enlightener

19-07-2011, 01:38 PM

Haha, yes, but is it adapting by de-evolving?

Time

19-07-2011, 02:06 PM

no, its just the death of the species. LOL sad, but.... tis life

eyalec

19-07-2011, 03:23 PM

Did god really created us??/ or something else....

what if i say that aliens brought us here on this planet as an experiment and now the time of the "HARVESTING" is near.. harvesting meaning taking back what they brought here on this planet...
The meaning of god is very controversial. This is therefore a very complicated question.

Xan

19-07-2011, 03:41 PM

Here's another take on 'devolving'. Evolution has been from one simple cell to the complexity of life forms in this world, and from simple ideas and language to the intellectual and psychological complexity we have now. In devolution we return to simplicity, at least in the experiential and mental/emotional realms.

Xan

Time

19-07-2011, 03:55 PM

Ya but that is very relitive. Humans can create life, distinguish life, heal diseases, yet we still havnt evolved enough to learn when enough is enough.

So is that devolving? No, because even though our lifespans are shorter then they were a few thousand eyars ago, and we are shorter, and weaker doesnt mean we are devolving, and the same goes with mentaly. Sure you mind does evolve, but only when the species itself evolves ( im talking about evolution, not learning and adapting)

NightSpirit

20-07-2011, 10:38 AM

are we stuck on 'devolve'?

3dnow

20-07-2011, 11:49 AM

Enlightener

20-07-2011, 11:58 AM

I don't understand this thread. Why would they harvest us?

3dnow

Genetics/DNA

3dnow

20-07-2011, 12:00 PM

Genetics/DNA

They could simply ask no? Why harvest? Are we chickens?

3dnow

Student4Life1975

20-07-2011, 12:04 PM

Did god really created us??/ or something else....

what if i say that aliens brought us here on this planet as an experiment and now the time of the "HARVESTING" is near.. harvesting meaning taking back what they brought here on this planet...
anybody who claims to answer if god really created us, would just be their opinion. nobody knows for sure.

the harvesting question is the last one i'd expect here in this forum, but if you entertain that as a legitimate question, you also have to entertain so many more that are just as interesting.

there are soooo many theories on extra terrestrial life, and if they created us, in my opinion, wouldnt be nearly as interesting compared to if god did...

NightSpirit

20-07-2011, 12:07 PM

Genetics/DNA

bahhhh! ...........

georgeTmaxwell

20-07-2011, 12:54 PM

Time itself has exsisted only after the big bang.
Sorry to go back in time, :D just back-reading.

I am invested to hear your thoughts behind the comment. Is it because time can only be when Space exists, and that space didn't exist before the big bang? Even so, IMO and following this thought, time would have started at the moment of the big bang, not after it started, like the moment a stop watch is started.

If time didn't exist before the big bang(BB) then nothing happened before the BB, therefore the BB is the start of it all. Is that the thought?

The universe keeps on showing us that wherever we look and we think there is no more to see, we always find more. Smaller than the small. Bigger than the big and I think further back before the beginning of time.

Sorry if this has been covered - I didn't back-read too far.

gTm
.

Time

20-07-2011, 03:22 PM

I am invested to hear your thoughts behind the comment. Is it because time can only be when Space exists, and that space didn't exist before the big bang? Even so, IMO and following this thought, time would have started at the moment of the big bang, not after it started, like the moment a stop watch is started.

It wouldve been JUST after ( i guess during). Or at the moment of. The only tihng thought to exsist at that time, is the most basic elements of the universe ( energy). Time is just the expantion of the universe :D

georgeTmaxwell

21-07-2011, 12:04 PM

It wouldve been JUST after ( i guess during). Or at the moment of. The only tihng thought to exsist at that time, is the most basic elements of the universe ( energy). Time is just the expantion of the universe :D
Ok, using those thoughts, when the particle level was back as a singularity, therefore time hadn't started. But was the quantum level still in motion in the singularity? Maybe the singularity has a smaller quantum universe inside it meaning time still exists but at a different level.... :wink:

Therefore, I am thinking that your mention of time is just our perception of time.. There could have been time before it. :icon_eek:

gTm
.

NightSpirit

21-07-2011, 12:09 PM

Everything is present in singularity, including quantum and all else. No thing can exist inside or outside of singularity...it is simply ONE.

georgeTmaxwell

21-07-2011, 12:59 PM

No thing can exist inside or outside of singularity...it is simply ONE.
Hi NS, How do you know?
Tmax
.

Mathew James

21-07-2011, 01:26 PM

...it is simply ONE.

simply one what?

mj

NightSpirit

21-07-2011, 01:38 PM

Well I guess it begs the question, but in my world singular is one only. Are we trying to expand single?

I'll leave you guys to do it. :D

sound

21-07-2011, 01:41 PM

simply one what?

mj

Simply one expression ....

georgeTmaxwell

21-07-2011, 02:04 PM

Well I guess it begs the question, but in my world singular is one only. Are we trying to expand single?

I'll leave you guys to do it. :D
I basically agree but am interested to explore this. Just like the word atom was supposed to mean the smallest thing and then they discovered another layer underneath, maybe singularity is the same...

gTm
.

Time

21-07-2011, 02:10 PM

Scientists only know that there was the most basic elements, condenced. When you have energy condenced, and building pressure, what is going to happen?

I think most people who study physics are saying there was no time, because there was aboslutly nothing to percieve it. There was no expantion. It just exsisted. But then you have to think - since that energy did exsist, that means there was something to percieve technicaly right?...

As for the "smaller quantum universe", I truely beleive, that the universe is almost like a giant being. It has its own self supporting systems, that die and regrow, and replenish itself. Our bodies arent any different from the actions of the universe. The same is with the universe in the soil.

Read up on the mendalbrot set. "As above so below" !!!

NightSpirit

21-07-2011, 02:18 PM

hmmm...sorta makes me think...
Universe a giant being with all its systems...magnify....
Humans being part of that system living on the universe...magnify..
Organisms living on the human...magnify...
Bacteria living on the organisms, living on the humans, living on the universe...magnify...
Sub-atomic particles living on the bacteria.....Well you know the rest! :D

Time

21-07-2011, 02:20 PM

Yup, its all pretty much the same. No matter how different the pattern may seem, it still will eventualy reflect the main patter, and repeat itself..

Such is life!

NightSpirit

21-07-2011, 02:23 PM

Which....keep magnifying and we eventually get to the point of the Dot...yep Tmax..the Dot...Singularity...the first/beginning/pin-point :smile:

georgeTmaxwell

21-07-2011, 02:28 PM

But then you have to think - since that energy did exsist, that means there was something to percieve technicaly right?...
mmmm.... Yes, technically. Are you questioning yourself? :D I Do that all the time.

Read up on the mendalbrot set. "As above so below" !!!
I was first introduced to the Mandelbrot 25 years ago. My friends at work had a computer program of it. But if the particle world has one set of laws and then the quantum has another set of laws, excluding the Theory of Everything which has a lot less credence than the other two, then maybe there are different laws at different levels, making it different to a Mandelbrot.

But yes, I agree the universe is one giant being - the Personified Universe.:smile:
gTm
.

georgeTmaxwell

21-07-2011, 02:32 PM

Which....keep magnifying and we eventually get to the point of the Dot...yep Tmax..the Dot...Singularity...the first/beginning/pin-point :smile:
Lol. I wonder what the square root of a Dot is.... Must ask a mathematician. :D

TIME, if you do magnify, is it the same?

Tmax
.

Enlightener

21-07-2011, 02:34 PM

Which....keep magnifying and we eventually get to the point of the Dot...yep Tmax..the Dot...Singularity...the first/beginning/pin-point :smile:

I'm sorry, I may have misunderstood what you guys are talking about, but you don't ever stop magnifying. The more you magnify, the more will be there, it never ends. It keeps going in both directions, bigger and smaller.

Am I on the right path here?

georgeTmaxwell

21-07-2011, 02:48 PM

I'm sorry, I may have misunderstood what you guys are talking about, but you don't ever stop magnifying. The more you magnify, the more will be there, it never ends. It keeps going in both directions, bigger and smaller.

Am I on the right path here?. Yep, that's the discussion... Does it keep magnifying in or not?

Time

21-07-2011, 02:49 PM

Thats the thing about the mendalbrot set, it never ends. Even if what you are looking at is different then what you originaly saw, the original pattern will repeat itself, in the smallest, or largest "zoom", even the part your lookin at will repeat itself.

Time

21-07-2011, 02:50 PM

I guess the question is, if it repeats itself, is there even a "zoom" to begin with?

Xan

21-07-2011, 06:57 PM

Time

21-07-2011, 07:35 PM

Since there's only one universal reality everything would necessarily be included and nothing separate or left out.

But its a bit more complicated then that I think. Even if its just life on earth (which is highly, highly unlikey), there is still variations because nothing on earth sees things exactly the same. No one can prove that what we see is reality. Only that what we see, is how our eyes and brains interpret reality. IF there was only one universal reality, then wed all have the same eye sight, but we dont. Since theres such a variation in eye sight, whos to say what one is the proper reality? Eyes are how we see, which is our own reality. So if we all see different, how can we all have the same reality?

Xan

21-07-2011, 07:51 PM

IF there was only one universal reality, then we'd all have the same eye sight, but we dont. Since theres such a variation in eye sight, whos to say what one is the proper reality?

So if we all see different, how can we all have the same reality?

This is the paradox, Time... that there are multiple individual relative viewing points, consciousnesses, as expressions of the one existence. Yet when any one person 'wakes up in the oneness', their experience of it is the same universal reality.

Xan

Time

21-07-2011, 08:12 PM

But it still doesnt mean there is only "one". Yes the communities make up the country, but without the communities, there isnt a city at all.

Your saying "all is one" but what about "one is all"? There is never ever one answer.

Xan

21-07-2011, 11:49 PM

Yes... one is all. The macrocosm is in the microcosm.

But oneness is not a collection of puzzle pieces stuck together, it's the original one primordial formlessness from which all forms arose.

Stilll, until oneness is experienced directly for oneself it's all speculation.

Xan

NightSpirit

22-07-2011, 08:19 AM

But its a bit more complicated then that I think. Even if its just life on earth (which is highly, highly unlikey), there is still variations because nothing on earth sees things exactly the same. No one can prove that what we see is reality. Only that what we see, is how our eyes and brains interpret reality. IF there was only one universal reality, then wed all have the same eye sight, but we dont. Since theres such a variation in eye sight, whos to say what one is the proper reality? Eyes are how we see, which is our own reality. So if we all see different, how can we all have the same reality?

Its not the eyes that see images, they only see lines and motion. Its the brain that interprets those lines and motions into images based on pattern recognition.
So we're back to the brain, Time, being the perceiver of our world...and I doubt any two brains would interpret things the same way. They could range from minor differences to vast contrasts. That's why we read so many varying posts on the same thing in here.

georgeTmaxwell

22-07-2011, 09:01 AM

NightSpirit: No thing can exist inside or outside of singularity...it is simply ONE.

Tmax: How do you know?

There are two ways to know this:

Logic - Since there's only one universal reality everything would necessarily be included and nothing separate or left out.

Mysticism - We can experience/become aware in the singularity, the wholeness of existence which includes all forms within It.

Singularity means only One... no matter how the multitude of things may appear.

Xan

Mmmmm - definitions of singularity - is it scientific or spiritual? Science says : "a hypothetical point in space-time at which matter is infinitely compressed to infinitesimal volume" which is where I am referring.

NS said "no thing can exist in a singularity". If the universe is a single thing with everything in it an nothing out of it, then I am a thing that exists in that singularity - well I think I am :smile: Therefore some thing can exist inside the singularity, even though it is a part of the singularity.

Also on definitions, the number 1 can be broken into parts/fractions, etc. Is a single pizza cut in slices still a single pizza, even if it has tiny gaps between the slices. Or, if the 8 pieces of pizza are put on 8 different plates, is it still a single pizza with bigger gaps between it?

To us, it is a label to describe what it is and I have i touched on in another thread, labels are open to intepretation.

I think I might be confusing my self here but I will push the "Submit Reply" button anyhow and see how it flies :D

gTm
.

NightSpirit

22-07-2011, 11:20 AM

Mmmmm - definitions of singularity - is it scientific or spiritual? Science says : "a hypothetical point in space-time at which matter is infinitely compressed to infinitesimal volume" which is where I am referring.

NS said "no thing can exist in a singularity". If the universe is a single thing with everything in it an nothing out of it, then I am a thing that exists in that singularity - well I think I am :smile: Therefore some thing can exist inside the singularity, even though it is a part of the singularity.

Also on definitions, the number 1 can be broken into parts/fractions, etc. Is a single pizza cut in slices still a single pizza, even if it has tiny gaps between the slices. Or, if the 8 pieces of pizza are put on 8 different plates, is it still a single pizza with bigger gaps between it?

To us, it is a label to describe what it is and I have i touched on in another thread, labels are open to intepretation.

I think I might be confusing my self here but I will push the "Submit Reply" button anyhow and see how it flies :D

gTm
.

Hi Tmax...
See I'm confused. How can anything more then one/single exist inside singularity? I will retract what I said about 'outside of' though....I'm female...we're allowed to change our minds in mid-stream :D
I believe maybe that's where we spring from - on the outside of singularity.

As for the pizza example.....once its sliced into more then one piece then doesn't it become more then one pizza? ....doesn't it then become 8 slices of pizza? Sure, those 8 slices all come from one whole pizza, but now they are partitioned.

georgeTmaxwell

22-07-2011, 01:50 PM

Hi Tmax...
See I'm confused. How can anything more then one/single exist inside singularity?How about, because it may seem to be a singularity when actually it isn't. Calling it a singularity doesn't make it so.

I will retract what I said about 'outside of' though....I'm female...we're allowed to change our minds in mid-stream :D
Permission granted :tongue:

I believe maybe that's where we spring from - on the outside of singularity. :confused:
I am thinking the universe was created from the desire within.

gTm
.

NightSpirit

22-07-2011, 03:28 PM

[quote=georgeTmaxwell]How about, because it may seem to be a singularity when actually it isn't. Calling it a singularity doesn't make it so.

unfair play! :tongue:

I am thinking the universe was created from the desire within.

within what?

Xan

22-07-2011, 05:35 PM

georgeTmaxwell: Mmmmm - definitions of singularity - is it scientific or spiritual? Science says : "a hypothetical point in space-time at which matter is infinitely compressed to infinitesimal volume" which is where I am referring.

Oh... hypothetical... hmmmm. This means it's a concept yet to be proven.

NS said "no thing can exist in a singularity".

I think the meaning of this idea is, there's never just one of any thing, any form... rather than referring to the singular universal reality.

If the universe is a single thing with everything in it an nothing out of it, then I am a thing that exists in that singularity - well I think I am :smile: Therefore some thing can exist inside the singularity, even though it is a part of the singularity.

That would be so... existing inside it would necessarily mean you are part of it.

Also on definitions, the number 1 can be broken into parts/fractions, etc. Is a single pizza cut in slices still a single pizza, even if it has tiny gaps between the slices. Or, if the 8 pieces of pizza are put on 8 different plates, is it still a single pizza with bigger gaps between it?

If it's a holographic pizza where each part contains the whole... like the holographic universe.

Xan

NightSpirit

23-07-2011, 01:48 AM

hmm...I love that each of us can perceive a different slant to the other on one thing. It gives me more fodder to chew on. Reading Xan's selections is a new way again of looking at something. It's like a big Think Tank, isn't it?

If the universe is a single thing with everything in it an nothing out of it, then I am a thing that exists in that singularity - well I think I am :smile: Therefore some thing can exist inside the singularity, even though it is a part of the singularity. Tmax aka gTm

This post in particular is my focus. I'm still not convinced of my thoughts. I think the problem for me lies in the words "exist inside". To me that suggests a baby chick developing inside the egg, type thing. Whereas singularity to me means only 'one', nothing more. Its still suggesting separation, would you agree?

So when I look at the singular universe, nothing exists inside it, but one energy...the primal. Out of that primal energy comes the idea of 'existance'. *scratches head* :confused:

Xan

23-07-2011, 01:56 AM

Whereas singularity to me means only 'one', nothing more. Its still suggesting separation, would you agree?

It's not suggesting separation but universal inclusion, when you think of it not as 'one thing' but as 'oneness.'

So when I look at the singular universe, nothing exists inside it, but one energy...the primal. Out of that primal energy comes the idea of 'existance'. *scratches head*

Yep... That's the mystery. How all these things came from no-thing.

Primal awareness had a thought... creative intention... the first energy movement from absolute stillness.

Xan

NightSpirit

23-07-2011, 04:10 AM

Whereas singularity to me means only 'one', nothing more. Its still suggesting separation, would you agree?

[QUOTE]
It's not suggesting separation but universal inclusion, when you think of it not as 'one thing' but as 'oneness.'

There's the clincher 'one-ness' .... Oneness has two definitions:- singular or wholeness, whereas 'one' is single. I know my response is knit-picking, but sometimes the words we choose to define something like this, don't always seem to do the job. Thanks

georgeTmaxwell

23-07-2011, 10:23 AM

How about, because it may seem to be a singularity when actually it isn't. Calling it a singularity doesn't make it so.
unfair play! :tongue:

C'mon, I worked hard to think of that one :D

I am thinking the universe was created from the desire within.

within what?

From within the universe, which was compressed as a singularity before it expanded.

Tmax
.

georgeTmaxwell

23-07-2011, 10:36 AM

Oh... hypothetical... hmmmm. This means it's a concept yet to be proven. For me, mmmmmm is me thinking :D

That's the mystery. How all these things came from no-thing. Primal awareness had a thought... creative intention... the first energy movement from absolute stillness.
I agree with this, that before the big bang was a singularity, the compressed universe had no motion just thought. IMO The desire to experience beyond thought triggered the bang. But, I am also now investigating whether quantum motion could still be occurring which is why/how the thought occurred. Where the singularity came from I do not know...

There's the clincher 'one-ness' .... Oneness has two definitions:- singular or wholeness, whereas 'one' is single. I know my response is knit-picking, but sometimes the words we choose to define something like this, don't always seem to do the job.

I think this is where our discussions are different and that is in the definition of singularity versus wholeness. It can still be a whole pizza even if in pieces. I think that one-ness is different to singular as one-ness is more about joining togther as one.

gTm
.

NightSpirit

23-07-2011, 12:36 PM

[quote=georgeTmaxwell]

I think this is where our discussions are different and that is in the definition of singularity versus wholeness. It can still be a whole pizza even if in pieces. I think that one-ness is different to singular as one-ness is more about joining togther as one.

Below is the definition of oneness which is similar to your reference to the pizza. Mostly we draw on our own individual word interpretations and associations. No, I have been debating singular till this came up.

Definition of Oneness
The fact or state of being unified or whole, though comprised of two or more parts

georgeTmaxwell

23-07-2011, 12:59 PM

Just to add some more for thought:

Holism : A theory or belief that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

gTm
.

NightSpirit

23-07-2011, 01:11 PM

Just to add some more for thought:

Holism : A theory or belief that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

gTm
.

That would make sense...given the pizza sliced into 8 pieces.

Enlightener

23-07-2011, 06:19 PM

. Yep, that's the discussion... Does it keep magnifying in or not?

Sorry for such a delayed reply. In answer to your question, I would say, what if you got an orange, and cut in half? You'd have two halves. Now, cut it again. More halves. You now have two halves of a half, and the remaining half that you did not cut. Now, cut the part that you already cut, again. You now have more halves.

Now, do this over and over and over and over, and over lol. You will continually have more and more halves of the same object. There is literally no end to how many halves you can have of this damn orange, it just keeps going.

Even when you have reached the point of atoms and molecules, what happens when you cut those in half? You get more halves. You can literally keep going with this into infinity.

Understand?

Enlightener

23-07-2011, 06:30 PM

I thought this video was relevant to the discussion :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Aurpr68uE

Xan

24-07-2011, 12:00 AM

I agree with this, that before the big bang was a singularity, the compressed universe had no motion just thought. IMO The desire to experience beyond thought triggered the bang. But, I am also now investigating whether quantum motion could still be occurring which is why/how the thought occurred. Where the singularity came from I do not know...

I think this is where our discussions are different and that is in the definition of singularity versus wholeness. It can still be a whole pizza even if in pieces. I think that one-ness is different to singular as one-ness is more about joining togther as one..
But, Gtm... thought is quantum motion... energy.

Before the bang of creation there was absolute stillness without even a thought. Since the first thought/creative intention everything has been in continuous motion and change.

In exploring the nature of reality experientially rather than conceptually we find that beyond the constant movement of energies within and around all forms... the original stillness from which is all arose is still there. It's our own essence of being.

'Things' can be cut into pieces and put back together, but oneness is not a thing and cannot be cut up. It's indivisible, even while the vast variety of its expressions exist within itself.

Xan

NightSpirit

24-07-2011, 12:01 AM

....and this is why everyone's beliefs are different.....

Quantum Reality!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qL1OKrs-q4&NR=1

I agree with this, that before the big bang was a singularity, the compressed universe had no motion just thought. IMO The desire to experience beyond thought triggered the bang. But, I am also now investigating whether quantum motion could still be occurring which is why/how the thought occurred. Where the singularity came from I do not know...Tmax

Xan

24-07-2011, 12:03 AM

Holism : A theory or belief that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Now you're talkin' :smile:

Xan

NightSpirit

24-07-2011, 12:44 AM

It's the act of consciousness that actually creates the building block of the universe. A universe without us, because its the act of us observing the world around us that is allowing us to create as we go in a participatory universe.

We may never find the edge of our universe as we're looking to define what this universe looks like. We may never find the smallest particle in the quantum world, to see what this stuff is that we're made out of, and the reason is.....
because everywhere we look, everywhere that consciousness explores with the expectation that something will be there...that act of looking/observation is the act that creates something for us to see. That we are actually building this universe as we go.

We are modulators...transmitters of our universe.

[quoted from Quantum Reality 2]

Interesting huh! :D

georgeTmaxwell

24-07-2011, 02:03 AM

Holism : A theory or belief that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
That would make sense...given the pizza sliced into 8 pieces.
Actually, it means that if you add the 8 pieces, the pizza is bigger than the sum of those 8 pieces. So where does the rest of it come from? :D

gTm
.

NightSpirit

24-07-2011, 02:09 AM

Actually, it means that if you add the 8 pieces, the pizza is bigger than the sum of those 8 pieces. So where does the rest of it come from? Tmax

From the mumma?....:D

Actually, reading the definition of holism below does not indicate that the act of viewing holism makes it grow in any way. Its an observation of all the parts to the whole.

Holism (from ὂλος holos, a Greek (http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/redir.php?link=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwik i%2FAncient_Greek) word meaning all, whole, entire, total) is the idea that all the properties of a given system (http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/redir.php?link=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwik i%2FSystem) (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic (http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/redir.php?link=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwik i%2FLinguistics), etc.) cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone. Instead, the system as a whole determines in an important way how the parts behave.

georgeTmaxwell

24-07-2011, 02:15 AM

But, Gtm... thought is quantum motion... energy.

Before the bang of creation there was absolute stillness without even a thought. Since the first thought/creative intention everything has been in continuous motion and change.

Hi Xan
Based on you quote "absolute stillness" how do you know this? Is there a theory reference?

I tend to follow NighSpirit's comment

It's the act of consciousness that actually creates the building block of the universe.

Therefore meaning that consciousness created the universe from the singularity as apposed to just exploding for no reason.

gTm
.

Xan

24-07-2011, 02:25 AM

georgeTmaxwell: Based on you quote "absolute stillness" how do you know this? Is there a theory reference?

My own experience of absolute stillness, available to all who investigate deeply enough within, beyond the busy surface mind.

Xan

georgeTmaxwell

24-07-2011, 02:50 AM

NS - so we are back with different definitions again :confused:

I as hoping to buy a pizza, cut it in 8 pieces, put it back together and since it would be bigger, I could cut it into 9 pieces :D

Xan - If you are thinking, how can you be absolutely still? Because we understand that observation can also be an influence.

gTm
.

Xan

24-07-2011, 03:03 AM

Xan - If you are thinking, how can you be absolutely still?

Excellent question!

When we are aware in absolute stillness there is no thinking. It is silent and unboundaried in empty awareness, and beyond the thinking mind entirely.

Xan

NightSpirit

24-07-2011, 07:46 AM

[quote=georgeTmaxwell]NS - so we are back with different definitions again :confused:

I as hoping to buy a pizza, cut it in 8 pieces, put it back together and since it would be bigger, I could cut it into 9 pieces :D

Sorry Tmax...you may not be able to invite that extra guest for pizza after all. :tongue2:

Xan

24-07-2011, 10:19 PM

Well umm.... infinite beingness is not a thing, not a pizza or like any thing else.

Xan

georgeTmaxwell

25-07-2011, 10:07 AM

When we are aware in absolute stillness there is no thinking. It is silent and unboundaried in empty awareness, and beyond the thinking mind entirely.
OK. So where is this absolute stillness? If the sub-atomic particles are in motion, who knows when they stop,
gTm
.

NightSpirit

25-07-2011, 10:19 AM

georgeTmaxwell

25-07-2011, 10:36 AM

It's all conceptual...all of it! We can spruke about this and that, but in the end there is no proof of any of this...be it stillness, big bang, consciousness. Interesting reads and thought processes though.

And yes Tmax, I know you're going to say that it all starts with a thought to find proof. lol so that's why I indulge in this mind-play :D

:D You are starting to predict me by reading my words on other threads, I'd better change tact.

Did you know that the universe is actually running backwards? It started off big and shrunk to a singularity and is expanding back to where it was. I have the proof - it's called de-ja-vu!

Tmax
.

NightSpirit

25-07-2011, 10:49 AM

:D You are starting to predict me by reading my words on other threads, I'd better change tact.

Did you know that the universe is actually running backwards? It started off big and shrunk to a singularity and is expanding back to where it was. I have the proof - it's called de-ja-vu!

Tmax
.

LOL....

Oh really! hmmm...I reckon de-ja-vu is because of parallel universe. :wink:

georgeTmaxwell

25-07-2011, 11:11 AM

I reckon de-ja-vu is because of parallel universe. :wink:
If it was paralel, wouldnt it be happening at the same time as apposed to de-ja-vu which is a remnant of the past?:tongue:

NightSpirit

25-07-2011, 11:16 AM

If it was paralel, wouldnt it be happening at the same time as apposed to de-ja-vu which is a remnant of the past?:tongue:

Yep! But you're assuming that dejavu is of the past. What if its a glimse into another parallel universe and one only perceives it as past because of our cling to time?

georgeTmaxwell

25-07-2011, 12:38 PM

Yep! But you're assuming that dejavu is of the past. What if its a glimse into another parallel universe and one only perceives it as past because of our cling to time?
Since deja-vu is the feeling of being there before. Therefore, using the word before demands a link to time. So are you saying a parallel universe can be running ahead or behind your existing one?
.

NightSpirit

25-07-2011, 01:32 PM

Since deja-vu is the feeling of being there before. Therefore, using the word before demands a link to time. So are you saying a parallel universe can be running ahead or behind your existing one?
.

No..I'm not saying that Tmax. I get what your saying and it does feel like that. I'm simply planting another seed of thought that can make us squirm uncomfortably in our seats at times..lol

Just for one moment set aside any thoughts of time elements...past, present, future.

Now imagine parallel universes...slices if you will. There are 3 ways to go with this.
a) All is playing out right now in parallel universes.
b) Everything has already played out and 'we' are observing it now.
c) If all is in the now then I can be playing out different scenarios of my life in each universe...sort of like a slide-show of universes.

Then its possible in these instances, that one can slip through time (dejavu) unwittingly and glimpse a snippet from another parallel play giving us the feeling that we've been there before.

We must admit, dejavu is quite an eerie feeling. Some might explain it away with the 're-incarnation' theory. I prefer to stick to the notion that time is irrelavant and all is in the now.

Have I confused you more? :D

nighs (aussie slang for good night) & Namaste

Xan

26-07-2011, 02:43 AM

Xan: When we are aware in absolute stillness there is no thinking. It is silent and unboundaried in empty awareness, and beyond the thinking mind entirely.

OK. So where is this absolute stillness? If the sub-atomic particles are in motion, who knows when they stop,
gTm
.
The particles are in motion within the absolute stillness... like bits of dust in the stillness of space.

The stillness is not a theory but can be experienced by anyone who goes deeply enough into meditation.

Xan

georgeTmaxwell

26-07-2011, 07:45 AM

No..I'm not saying that Tmax. I get what your saying and it does feel like that. I'm simply planting another seed of thought that can make us squirm uncomfortably in our seats at times..lol

Just for one moment set aside any thoughts of time elements...past, present, future.

Now imagine parallel universes...slices if you will. There are 3 ways to go with this.
a) All is playing out right now in parallel universes.
b) Everything has already played out and 'we' are observing it now.
c) If all is in the now then I can be playing out different scenarios of my life in each universe...sort of like a slide-show of universes.

Then its possible in these instances, that one can slip through time (dejavu) unwittingly and glimpse a snippet from another parallel play giving us the feeling that we've been there before.

We must admit, dejavu is quite an eerie feeling. Some might explain it away with the 're-incarnation' theory. I prefer to stick to the notion that time is irrelavant and all is in the now.

Have I confused you more? :D

nighs (aussie slang for good night) & Namaste
Hi NS, I know we stir each other up - fun isn't t :D

Actually, your description was good. I could look from outside the slices to see the views - like watching a wall of tv's in the shop. So your explanation was good.

I haven't been a subscriber to multi-dimensions. it doesn't interest me much. I have enough fun with this one :D

Actually, I picture deja-vu and dreams as peeks into our imagination. We (the Dots) imagine all things possible and sometimes we get a glimpse or an awareness.

Tmax
.

NightSpirit

26-07-2011, 12:27 PM

NightSpirit

26-07-2011, 12:33 PM

Hi NS, I know we stir each other up - fun isn't t :D

Actually, your description was good. I could look from outside the slices to see the views - like watching a wall of tv's in the shop. So your explanation was good.

I haven't been a subscriber to multi-dimensions. it doesn't interest me much. I have enough fun with this one :D

Actually, I picture deja-vu and dreams as peeks into our imagination. We (the Dots) imagine all things possible and sometimes we get a glimpse or an awareness.

Tmax
.

Well now, am I a tease? :D I must admit you get my grey-matter firing more then usual to keep up lol

So we've each presented our theories...both logical...and I can only add to your response that all that we observe in our universe is of one's own manifestation. This is the ultimate to me....the 'I'/Dot....I am it...the centre of my universe. I perceive and presto! :D

georgeTmaxwell

26-07-2011, 02:09 PM

Well now, am I a tease? :D I must admit you get my grey-matter firing more then usual to keep up lol

So we've each presented our theories...both logical...and I can only add to your response that all that we observe in our universe is of one's own manifestation. This is the ultimate to me....the 'I'/Dot....I am it...the centre of my universe. I perceive and presto! :D
And we can perceive/believe what we want.... and enjoy it :smile:

Does the knowledge of how the universe was created affect our lives, not really. We just hate unsolved puzzles....

jamesart7

27-07-2011, 02:38 AM

So..... Whats happening to my thread? I think you guys are going way way out of topic... You guys forgot about my question on who really created us?

Xan

27-07-2011, 02:49 AM

Does the knowledge of how the universe was created affect our lives, not really.
You're right, knowledge or ideas about it don't affect us much.

However, directly experiencing the infinite source of it all... the same as our own essence... makes a very big difference.

Xan

jamesart7

27-07-2011, 05:36 AM

Are you all sure that it is not affecting us today?

NightSpirit

27-07-2011, 09:49 AM

So..... Whats happening to my thread? I think you guys are going way way out of topic... You guys forgot about my question on who really created us?

You reckon? I guess then that you must have been hoping for a particular answer to your question then James? I would have thought that all discussed here in your absence, is all part of 'creation'. :smile:

georgeTmaxwell

27-07-2011, 11:40 AM

So..... Whats happening to my thread? I think you guys are going way way out of topic... You guys forgot about my question on who really created us?
Oh My God : The thread creator has returned. The prophets told us of this day but I never believed it would happen while I was still posting. James, we kept this thread alive for you, veering off topic but sometimes returning to the core. We stood true and believed :D

Did you read the whole thread or just jumped in at the end? It may look off track but it was all related to flow of thought.

gTm
.

Sentientno1

27-07-2011, 03:51 PM

OK. So where is this absolute stillness? If the sub-atomic particles are in motion, who knows when they stop,
gTm
.

gt... is it absolutly known that the singulairity spent all of itself within movement and objectification?

OR...if the singulairity is truely a singulairity, is there truely movment and objectification? Would it be possible for objectification/ movement to be other then the singulairity?

If, IF it's not then what does that leave us with? :icon_eek:

BTW the two questions are tied together.

jamesart7

28-07-2011, 04:23 AM

Oh My God : The thread creator has returned. The prophets told us of this day but I never believed it would happen while I was still posting. James, we kept this thread alive for you, veering off topic but sometimes returning to the core. We stood true and believed :D

Did you read the whole thread or just jumped in at the end? It may look off track but it was all related to flow of thought.

gTm
.

Ok. Thanks for that... No I did not jumped in at the end... I teleported... :D :tongue: :cool:

georgeTmaxwell

28-07-2011, 09:14 AM

gt... is it absolutly known that the singulairity spent all of itself within movement and objectification?

OR...if the singulairity is truely a singulairity, is there truely movment and objectification? Would it be possible for objectification/ movement to be other then the singulairity?

If, IF it's not then what does that leave us with? :icon_eek:

BTW the two questions are tied together.
Hi Sent, nice to have you back :D
Absolutely known - I dont think this is possible hence we have theory and belief. Regarding the rest of it, I am not sure I understand the question, maybe someone else can help.

No I did not jumped in at the end... I teleported...

LOL!!!!

Sentientno1

28-07-2011, 01:32 PM

Thx gtm...will maybe persue this later.

James, apologies for wandering off course, is it the brig for us captain? :redface:

jamesart7

29-07-2011, 02:33 AM

So, whats happening now? Why isn't god punishing me for asking these questions... Oh yeah.,, god don't exist... Whew...

NightSpirit

29-07-2011, 06:09 AM

So, whats happening now? Why isn't god punishing me for asking these questions... Oh yeah.,, god don't exist... Whew...

Even if god did exist, s/he/it is not finite....so its not as if s/he would be sitting on her throne dispensing punishment to all the naughty people.

We all do well at doing that ourselves without anyone else's help. :smile:

NightSpirit

29-07-2011, 06:13 AM

Well c'mon James, you're back now so get the energy surging again. It kinda stopped when you teleported in. Did you forget to turn on the light switch? :D

jamesart7

29-07-2011, 08:24 AM

Sorry... In my place, we don't have a "switch"... We have the string thing that when you pull it the lights turns on... And you have to admit, thats cool :cool:

jamesart7

29-07-2011, 08:32 AM

Sorry... In my place, we don't have a "switch"... We have the string thing that when you pull it the lights turns on... And you have to admit, thats cool :cool:

NightSpirit

29-07-2011, 11:15 AM

Sorry... In my place, we don't have a "switch"... We have the string thing that when you pull it the lights turns on... And you have to admit, thats cool :cool:

LOL...that's too cool mate :D

Xan

29-07-2011, 05:56 PM

Why isn't god punishing me for asking these questions... Oh yeah.,, god don't exist... Whew...

It's not that god doesn't exist, but what most people call "god" is a whole lot more accepting than you've been taught. Also god has no rules... just people do.

I like your inquisitive nature, james, and I hope you keep investigating... What is true?

Xan

jamesart7

01-08-2011, 02:41 AM

Im gonna burn in hell for asking these question.... :icon_frown:

Xan

01-08-2011, 02:49 AM

james... That just means you're already burning with guilt you've been taught to believe you should feel.

Do you really think that the supreme being would burn you, just for wanting to know the truth for yourself?

Nada.

Xan

jamesart7

01-08-2011, 04:22 AM

I know the supreme being is gonna burn me again... And the supreme being is gonna send me back where i came from... And i'm gonna take someone with me....

moke64916

01-08-2011, 02:14 PM

Take someone with you? What do you mean by that?

moke64916

01-08-2011, 02:16 PM

The supreme being is you my friend.

Xan

01-08-2011, 07:04 PM

I know the supreme being is gonna burn me again... And the supreme being is gonna send me back where i came from... And i'm gonna take someone with me....
You don't Know that, you Believe that. Big difference.

Beliefs are ideas we think are true. Knowing is not any idea but directly experiencing within yourself... pure divine presence for instance.

Xan

Time

01-08-2011, 09:00 PM

Were all goin back to where we came form dude, earth and space man!

Xan

02-08-2011, 12:23 AM

And the supreme being is gonna send me back where i came from...

Now I'm curious.
Where do you think you came from, James?
And what do you think it would be like to be sent back there?

Xan

norseman

04-08-2011, 02:24 PM

Now take a slightly different tack and consider synergistic relationships. :smile: