Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Various Writings on Various Subjects

Expand Messages
  • thalprin
    You know what I think it all boils down to (besides something that evaporates) that man has a lot to learn about density a/o depth and all of its physics. For
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 31, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      You know what I think it all boils down to (besides something that evaporates) that man has a lot to learn about density a/o depth and all of its physics. For instance, as it relates to movement, time-space/space-time; a whole nanomicroscopic layer full of reality that he's yet to really pin-down, archive, or data mine.
      As you know I think all this/that relates to the Aquatic era.

      It is as if man progressed (on the Earth) to a certain point; then he wanted to have a look at that earth. Then he looked to jump further on back, to assuming the/his origins/energy, the/his most primal points, successfully at times, but, clearly "life began in the water/fluids", is the next logical step/layer for him to explore; indeed, the Aquatic Era.

      I dunno why everyone's always wanting to skip this Era. I guess that it's far enough back to be forgetful about, and yet not too far to recognize; in reality, that era, that's a whole lot of unaccounted process, a stage of development. So, inheritance and attributes of life, our life included - that's always important, and, that's a step, a learning center, which is clearly accessible.

      That's imo what's bordering him (earth/'solid') (and his theories/know-how) on either sides, water/vapor/gas.

      What's really ironic is that Mankind is supposedly 'due' to be entering/entered the Aquarian Age (water carrier,) smile.
      Man will come to know all his future's pasts.

      Right now (for example) he uses brute force to sail the stars. He knows space is/isn't filled with a whole lot of something a/b currents, winds, weight/sailing navigation; he's just got a boat for crossing those 'skies'/'waters'/'shores' - I say this many times a/b it is very much like whenman first began crossing the seas; same but different and extensive all around.

      Whenever I think about that I am always reminded of those ancient depictions of sailing the stars - it's like they say to mankind don't forget to build a boat you'll learn a lot when you do.

      As above so below, inside, outside, and all around - on and on the examples go/build as in next level coming up, imo.

      Everything's in a cocoon ('enteric egg') one reason, simply because of the way everything's moving around; forward and in cycle. So, cocoon with/of a long tail (spiral) iow making/carrying (filling-in) its own heritage and its history - that creates and establishes threads, eventually networks that also attract condensation a/o leftovers/byproducts of processing (living), so on (substrates?)
      AND near as I can tell the only scientific reason any of this/that layer a/o habitat remains elusive is that man can't as yet see/detect this/that realm of life. Spiritual reasons, look to me, to be many sided.

      Other than that, evidently, pourus is the tricky part.
      Proportionally, it's easy to see that it is a water world a/b man (of earth) underestimates its primary importance, position, disposition, yes, extending even onto its utility for vital performance, and even its place within and of our stages of life, and our coordinated inheritance.

      Sure he recognize he ain't going nowhere long without quenching his thirst, but he forgets to remember to take the hint about what that tells him about a very important and primary circumstance, a fundamental schema in and of itself.

      Honestly, I think man is blind - I been studying this for several years now - makes no sense to me why he does not understand what death is; really, he's had so many opportunities to and failed every time. Other than that imo there is a really good reason the immortals lived high up in the mountains!

      Man, what a difference a few thousand feet make/can make - well, heh difference I guess if you know what you're looking at.

      Currently, the prognosis for mankind isn't too good; his ignorance may well be the death of him a/b maybe that's right, dunno. The planet's already filled with so much death, maybe the compost pile (versus life a/o recycle) is an appropriate fate. Seems to me like that's not a very good/wise path; really as I see it man is aborting himself a/b maybe his ignorance, his myths and ideals are more important to him than his own life and survival, dunno.

      Time will tell; after all it either will or it won't eat everything.
      You can look at it like this in biblical terms; Cain killed Abel but knowing what people do, thus far, about genetics that didn't mean that Abel disappeared/went away - genetically his descendents still pop up now and again - the thing is, maybe there were/are two brothers and, perhaps, it is that they've some very different traits, dunno but what I do know is that it's high time Cain stopped killing, especially so killing his own brothers children.

      "Bury a treasure and guess what - yup, it's still there to be unearthed." The man who denies half of his existence surely will be severed. Life that chooses death isn't living up to its true potential a/b it makes good compost.

      Thinking that one may be or get closer/back closer to the source/source of life or Ggod via death is akin to thinking that one will learn more about water from a dry riverbed than from water itself.

      The best way to live and to learn about life isn't by hitting the snooze/stop button.

      Besides, honestly, truth is how many fathers do you know who want all their children (billions now?!) moving 'back home' - fathers/parents, of course, want their children to stand on their own two feet - to go out into the world and make a good home for themselves - not come running back home because that is supposedly and in their father's eyes a great success/reward a/o achievement.

      You want to live with yor father; ok, you were obviously young a/o he was old, other than that, parentally, it makes no sense; it simply is not what parents truly wish for their kids.

      Especially so, it is not what fathers wish for their sons; geez, folks never study the animal kingdom or what - very bizarre, maybe a weird kind of way/attempt to raise up boys instead of men - heh, women gonna love that, good idea!? :)))

      Really, sure, there is other a/b that's not where man is, this is his home and he either makes it or breaks it, and then after proving/proofing himself (one way or another) he might proceed (ps: killing people is not good proof) - few people get (or deserve) to go other places; mostly people are lucky if they are useful (or advanced) enough to recycle - ah, but the compost pile, yup, there's
      a whole lot of that - primitive means for primitive aspects/worlds/cultures, what's new.

      Yeah, I see this a lot; for example I watch a documentary the other night followed by a ancient alien show - I enjoy those shows, they highlight a lot of good and important historical data a/b it never ceases to surprise me how it firstly occurs to people that man's progress goes and continues on in a straight-line - people look at all these ancient mega structures and they say; see, see, aliens built a/o aliens helped man build these things/structures - seldom occurs to them that sometimes high civilizations rise and fall and that man himself as a species has progressed and regressed a number of times.

      He up and down in/on the spiral moreso than walk a straight-line like climbing up a mountain.

      High civilizations all around the world and they all came tumbling down, down and out and without good record/accounting - that is always a serious matter, deserving a thorough and proper investigation, preconceived notions aside.

      Sometimes watching those shows frustrating too; for example, they look at the 'gateway to the stars' and ask the question is this a space portal - I'm like pssst guys notice S.A., can you say map, map with location - dang, big thing to miss.

      I think man should be focused a/o more concerned with where he is because, currently, that's his place/home (his proofing grounds) other than that if/when he progresses (inside and out, yup) then he should be granted further access until then moi why show him pictures of places/states he'll never visit - obviously, it only confuses him and inflates his ego, plus, the unrealistic safety net, in the grand scheme of things, has it really helped mankind - it's hard to argue it has.

      No doubt about it that there are relics of such around the world a/b why is it seemingly more plausible than aliens visited Earth rather than that man has before-been advanced.

      Really gonna grate yer ancestors nerves if you start attributing to 'others' the works (and brilliance) of their own two hands and cultures.

      Yup, man, he's the predominant-one that's here but certainly it had to be some body/thing else; hmmmm, very interesting, and why's that again? Yeah, it's interesting huh: and we're (mankind) right/rite where we've been how many times before; probably a good time to notice, and I guess if man wasn't where he was/is he might not otherwise be capable or equipped to be noticing - heh, time/timing strikes again, still kinda fascinating little step - man must
      have a hard time waltzing.

      Historical perspective aka who put that there: I think in many or some respects when man's out investigating/exploring the past
      he should wander around as if he has amnesia, partly because it appears that he has - walking around in his house/home (earth) going: what's this, what's that; hmmm, what was I/were we up to.

      Another straight line: It looks to me like, as a general term, man/mankind is always being told and show his limits in the past, and, his unlimited possibility in the future - obviously, that's contrived a/b what is he (that statement) really sayimg: limit, man, limitless; physics of a sort I guess.

      Myself I don't see where being realistic is a problem because dealing with reality is where things get real - and Supra is just another level like milk, whey, and cream - so near as I can tell there are no inherent conflicts just a bunch of preconceived notions (religion, science, myth, so on) that are having a hard time coordinating their activities and their outlooks, including one might hope, actually opening those great big eyes they have.

      Odd man out, with man like a (cardinal/fixed/mutable) focus-object set upon a scale - the two step or spread; either way it's best not to stand (walk) with your feet too far apart - judging the distances.
      Return to the past; isn't that (in part) what that says/preaches, or the past is your future, or go live in your father's house, or your father's house is/will be your home. I suppose those things are up to man. But, I think I finally get the ideology, biblically; 'Cain' still wants to go home as the eldest son, the 'first' born -

      Biblical Marching:
      Next I'm going to try and figure out home, as in where's home; home is the garden of Eden, home is Heaven, a/o how is it that the Garden of Eden is (was) a terrestrial and transitionary platform balanced by its more permanent (continual) and immaterial expression-of place, a certainties abode. And why exactly is it that you can get kicked out of the Garden of Eden a/b not heaven; the temporary (prior permanent, perhaps) won't have you but the (new-)permanent will/insists.
      And, who's home, Adam' or Adam' dad - and, dad or grandfather,
      great-great-grandfather (so on.) And why was Jesus calling his
      greatgreatgreat+-grandfather father, or was he calling for his father.

      At any rate good thing dad's picking them up or, dang, not knowing where home is, surely it c/would be a problem, just getting there.
      Home/Heaven: Oh, I think I've figured sum of this out, man like many creatures on the planet has a migration urge - species do that especially to breed - only difference is he's written his ideal/instinct down.

      "This is my blood. This is my body." Do you think Jesus was saying he was a vegetarian? At the very least it looks to me like (wine/bread) he was affirming that he was very much of the Earth.

      Today that statement has been interpreted in such a cannibalistic way; still, it's hard to imagine a man throwing a party and saying to his closet friends eat me, no matter the time/century.

      So, today, people line up (as they have for centuries) for their spiritual medicine/sugar pill and I think maybe it's a good thing they don't have his body, or maybe it isn't. Maybe it'd be good therapy to plop him down on a table and say: this is his blood, this is his body, now, want to eat him - and, do you really think, in any way, shape or form that drinking/eating him will change you for the better?

      Yup, you can eat fish for years and years and still you will never grow gills.

      Fascinating bit of mass psychology, especially so because that statement could've been interpreted a/o enacted any number of ways -

      In and of itself, as a perspective and an assumption, I think that the
      interpretation speaks volumes. And, if that's not gluttony I dunno what is.

      heh, maybe Jesus not coming back until the natives agree to forget about eating him. Could be, knowing the end was near aka last supper, that he was trying to notate something important, perhaps, for example his own bloodline/s like my family grew grapes/made wine and we live/lived over by the grain fields/grainery, dunno.

      This reminds me of something interesting that I think about sometimes; namely, feelings/emotions. I don't understand why people expect feelings to be like logic, after all logic is logic, otherwise it's just repetitious. As I see it feelings are more like art, expressionism, impressionism, so on - probably developing as many inner aps did from instinct, however feelings different from
      logic/thinking, that's part of the reason they can/could work so well together.

      Imo, feelings aren't there to make sense, they're there to sense/feel.

      I keep an eye out for stories like this:

      http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20110304/sc_livescience/newzombieantfungifou\
      nd

      As we all know microbes have and can have great impacts upon our planet and upon Man's physical well being, for good and for ill. My question is, ifn we know such impacts his physically how do we know whether or not such affect him at any rate psychologically. What if man isn't half as savage (or or or) as he thinks he is? What if he's just not aware of some of the baser contributing factors effecting him?

      The thing about geometry like the world is that it is self expressive, because it is real it is factual as in apt to be self descript. So that makes it handy and all we ever have to do is get our ideals out of the way enough to really notice what we're seeing.

      I often like to motif, in/as theory, simplest to complex because I agree that it's a good working premise in science, so it's interesting to fiddle with and example that.

      In mathematics, for example we see/theorize as like plotted an ever-increasing, like an arch, 1, 2, 3, so on and on - the quantity line from nothing to infinity
      -

      Ah, but, how we deal with that is to pick a place to cut the string/line, and loop it like a spiral, via the zero. Zero, as a spacer (something of nothing/hole) makes it possible to take that finite mathematics box-o-sumthangs we've made (1-9) and, via place-values, ever increase its parameters and its encompassing or higher mathematics; but, basically, it's, of course (because of the strict and finite arrangement: 1 through9, a/o 10/100, 100/1000, so on and
      on) the same set-series/spiral-box, rooming around ever expanding and
      contracting, morphing its potentials.

      Built on algorithms from the very beginning, it's a standard/box, a really handy box (tool) since any time, place, we can inact/exact it to describe/account nearly any plausible place/point/value on or of the natural arch, but, yeah, it's still not the arch; ie not the natural order.

      So far as a progression, we're not much keen to that, in and of itself, as a whole and natural set - you/we just know there's natural order a/b as yet we still know very little about these natural constructions.

      Often enough, people wonder why we can't just look in a box and learn everything there is to know about the cosmos. Really, mostly, these are about matters of tooling, imo For example, I'll give you a couple of examples of the kinds of things that I notice right off the bat:

      1 splits in two, can be more than two, expands, contracts; and/and so from there 1 isn't always followed by 2 a/b by more or less and many - compared to; 1, 2, 3, 4, so on - it's already very unrealistic description of what is actually natural, or natural physics/expression.


      Terrie
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.