metatron

Dynamic Systems Maxson J. McDowell A triangle is static, but a dynamic system also has such pre-existing possibilities. Think of a mountain stream. It is a dynamic system because it only exists while energy flows through it, in this case the water's kinetic energy. Sometimes the stream forms a whirlpool. Sometimes it assumes the serpentine form. The latter is seen most clearly in an aerial photograph of a river delta. Both forms are pre-existing possibilities, characteristic of rivers and streams everywhere. Even the stream of stars in a galaxy sometimes forms a whirlpool (Hildebrandt and Tromba 1996, pp. 12-13). A stream organizes itself, but the ways it can do so are constrained: only certain pre-determined forms are possible. Like a mountain stream, a living creature is also a dynamic system. It too exists only while energy flows through it, either from food if it is an animal, or from the sun if it is a plant. Like the evolution of a mountain stream, evolution in biology is self-organized: it is directed by no outside agent and it leads to emergent levels of order (Holland 1998, pp 225-231). Like a mountain stream, a living creature evolves forms which are pre-existing possibilities.The snake is an example. Not all snakes are related: at different times, several different groups of reptiles evolved the snake body-form (Zug 1993, p. 119) as an adaptation for moving through narrow spaces. A snake-like body-form also occurs in fish (the eel) and in mammals (the ferret). Amongst invertebrates roundworms, earthworms, and centipedes have a similar body-form. The first worm-like fossils, of animals about a meter long, appear in the Precambrian era, about 700 million years ago (Kauffman 1995, pp. 158-161). Thus the body-form of the snake is a pre-existing possibility which waits to be discovered by evolution.

Genes and Self-Organization Maxson J. McDowell A more general argument concerns the machinery of inheritance. I have only about 100,000 different genes while a bacterium has 3 to 5,000 genes (Alberts et. al., 1994, pp. 339-340). But my anatomy is astronomically more complex than that of a bacterium. It has been estimated that the human body contains about 5x1025 bits of information in the arrangement of its molecules while the human genome contains less than 109 bits of information. Again the disparity is of astronomical proportions. These numbers prove that my genes must be used economically. They must code for processes which enable my structure to evolve, but they are too few to form a "blueprint", or image, of my final structure (Calow 1976, pp. 101-103; Elman et. al., 1998, p. 319). My body's structure, therefore, must be emergent. An emergent structure is layered in distinct, successive levels of complexity; each level self-organizes with minimal guidance from the genes. Self-organization is directed by the inherent properties of the component parts (what fits with what). It is also directed by the inherent tendency of a dynamic system to assume an ordered form. I will say more about this later. Finally self-organization is directed by information from the environment (Elman et. al., 1998, pp. 319-323).See.... vesica attractor

The Landscape of Possibility: A Dynamic Systems Perspective on Archetype and Change Maxson J. McDowell Imagine a sand-dune rippled by the wind. The dune is an emergent, self-organized structure. Its surface organizes itself according to information contained within the wind, its velocity, for instance, and its direction. That information is translated into a particular set of ripples by the constraints of the dune's height and shape (equivalent to the gross anatomy of the brain) and by the constraints of an individual grain of sand (equivalent to the anatomy and physiology of a neuron). Once the ripples have been established they influence the subsequent movement of air over the surface of the dune. In the same way, once the fine structure of the brain has been established it controls the subsequent flow of sensory information. http://cogprints.org/1084/00/Jap_9.html

Originally Posted by Metatron; "They are not, however related by a linage of developing body plans. This is the conclusion that I came to after deciphering the artifact. When I checked the present scientific text, it not only confirmed that conclusion,{by tying together lose ends in our present understanding the development of complex morphology} but answered many other questions that I had not even considered asking." Originally Posted by Hellbender; "ok, I will ask again; what is a "vesica attractor" and where are they? How did an artifact start life as we know it? Do you believe these artifacts were placed here by aliens? (no, I am not being sarcastic) What loose ends are you talking about here?" \Quote These attractors formed from water waves, oolites, cyanobacterial filaments, and eukaryote cells, Prior to the cambrian explosion. As for why these vesica attractors are not still forming. I would say that the pristine conditions that formed these nurseries would disappear after the Cambrian explosion . The metazoans would have changed the environment drastically and permanently. An analogy of the Genetic controls in the formation of the original body plans might be compared to how snow fakes crystallize from the underlying order of the water molecule. As the oolitic mass shrinks....A crystallization of genetic probabilities emerge from a medium of cohesive networks, forming self reflexive circuits of tension.{ see tensegrity } This is what I am referring to as a {descending order of iteration matrices that self organize the cellular structure}Tensigrity combined with fluid dynamics, builds the architectural framework first. This wave of tension descends to the cellular level. The extracellular matrix will begin to form bonds with the intracellular matrix inside the individual cell. [This intracellular matrix controls gene switching] This resonance results in a synchronization and amplification of genetic responses resulting in network of connections in the architecture of the emerging organism, enabling the individual cell though it's own intracellular matrix to respond to this outer matrix. This crystallization of the recursive dynamic structure might well result in an "algorithmic self-assembly" of genetic probabilities. This may be a solution to some lose ends in our present understanding the development of complex morphology. The answer it appears is the architectural framework formed first, from wave dynamics working from the outside inward, while the interior design of genetics, worked from the inside out. Presently most research is focused solely on genomic controls in the formation of complex morphology. The answer it appears is that nature hired its architect first {wave dynamics} its interior designer second, {genetic probabilities} Just as we would in building a structure. Originally Posted by Ophiolite "Now, I asked a very clear question (re-the Burgess Shale's) which he seemed unable to answer. Here is why that was, in my view, an important question. If I understand Metatron's concept it is that the sudden explosion of complex life with hard skeleton's is explained by some heirarchical phenomenom related to a specific fossil find. But all that is predicated on the Cambrian explosion being sudden. The Burgess Shale preserves the remains of a complex ecology of complex animals with soft parts. His 'hard' fossil is, by their evidence, unecessary. This is what I want him to explain. I am still waiting."Quote Darwinian models do not address major gaps in our understanding of the development of complex morphology. My model not only fills these gaps. Morphology itself, viewed objectively, can be seen as an artifact of this developmental process, Anatomically, as well as viewed from the record of metazoan paleontology. The following is just one example. A quote from The Cambrian Big Bang; '' Furthermore the postulation of exclusively soft-bodied ancestor for hard-bodied Cambrian organism seems implausible on anatomical grounds many phyla such as brachiopods and arthropods could have not evolved their soft parts first and then added shells later, since their survival depends in large part upon their ability to protect their soft parts from hostile environmental forces. Instead soft and hard parts had to arise together. As Valentine notes in the case of brachiopods, “the brachiopod bauplane cannot function without a durable skeleton.” To admit that hard-bodied parts in the Cambrian animals had not yet evolved. As Chen and Zhou explain: [A]nimals such as brachiopods and most echinoderms and mollusks cannot exists without mineralized skeletons. Arthropods bear jointed appendages and likewise require a hard, organic or mineralized skeleton. Therefore the existence of these organisms in the distant past should be recorded either by fossil tracks and trails or remains of skeletons. The observations that such fossils are absent in the Precambrian strata proves that these phyla arose in the Cambrian.

Hellbender,This May help, I do not agree with some of Chien's proposals,[iDst} but he is pointing out in the section of this interview, the gaps in the the fossil record of the development of complex morphology,..... during the cambrian explosion. Chien: A simple way of putting it is that currently we have about 38 phyla of different groups of animals, but the total number of phyla discovered during that period of time (including those in China, Canada, and elsewhere) adds up to over 50 phyla. That means [there are] more phyla in the very, very beginning, where we found the first fossils [of animal life], than exist now. Stephen J. Gould, [a Harvard University evolutionary biologist], has referred to this as the reverse cone of diversity. The theory of evolution implies that things get more and more complex and get more and more diverse from one single origin. But the whole thing turns out to be reversedwe have more diverse groups in the very beginning, and in fact more and more of them die off over time, and we have less and less now. RI: What information is the public hearing or not hearing about the Cambrian explosion? Chien: The general impression people get is that we began with micro-organisms, then came lowly animals that don't amount to much, and then came the birds, mammals and man. Scientists were looking at a very small branch of the whole animal kingdom, and they saw more complexity and advanced features in that group. But it turns out that this concept does not apply to the entire spectrum of animals or to the appearance or creation of different groups. Take all the different body plans of roundworms, flatworms, coral, jellyfish and whateverall those appeared at the very first instant. Most textbooks will show a live tree of evolution with the groups evolving through a long period of time. If you take that tree and chop off 99 percent of it, [what is left] is closer to reality; it's the true beginning of every group of animals, all represented at the very beginning. Since the Cambrian period, we have only die-off and no new groups coming about, ever. There's only one little exception citedthe group known as bryozoans, which are found in the fossil record a little later. However, most people think we just haven't found it yet; that group was probably also present in the Cambrian explosion. Also, the animal explosion caught people's attention when the Chinese confirmed they found a genus now called Yunnanzoon that was present in the very beginning. This genus is considered a chordate, and the phylum Chordata includes fish, mammals and man. An evolutionist would say the ancestor of humans was present then. Looked at more objectively, you could say the most complex animal group, the chordates, were represented at the beginning, and they did not go through a slow gradual evolution to become a chordate. RI: In the December 1995 issue of Time magazine in the article "When Life Exploded" the writer implied that there was nothing to get worked up aboutthe theory of evolution was not in any danger. Chien: The scientists come out and say, "Oh yes, we've heard this before and it's very similar to the Burgess Shale," and so forth, but the Burgess Shale story was not told for many years. The Burgess Shale was first found by Charles Walcott in 1909why was the story not reported to the public until the late 1980's? At the very beginning I thought it was a problem for them; they couldn't figure out what was going on because they found something that bears no resemblance to the present animal groups and phyla. Walcott originally tried to shoehorn those groups into existing ones, but [his attempt] was never satisfactory. It was puzzling for a while because they refused to see that in the beginning there could be more complexity than we have now. What they are seeing are phyla that do not exist nowthat's more than 50 phyla compared to the 38 we have now. (Actually the number 50 was first quoted as over 100 for a while, but then the consensus became 50-plus.) But the point is, they saw something they didn't know what to do with; that's the scientifically honest position they're placed in. Later on, as they began to understand things are not the same as Darwinian expectations, they started shutting up. RI: Now that the information is coming out, what are they saying? Chien: We really don't have much of an explanation yet, although there are a few biological and environmental theories that have been kicked around. Stephen Gould was quoted by Phil Johnson [in Darwin on Trial] as saying that things like [the Cambrian explosion] are the trade secret of paleontology, and not many people know about it. And that includes Gould's own crusade for punctuated equilibrium as well. I know of some people who teach evolution but do not mention Stephen Jay Gould or punctuated equilibrium. They know about it, but they are of the old school and can't accept it. So there's a lot of politics involved in this, even among themselves. RI: Does the drift of evidence in the Cambrian Explosion lean toward speeded-up evolution? Chien: There are two major camps on this explosion business. One is the good old Darwinian explanation that we simply haven't found the intermediates. For those who tend to think that way, they say the Cambrian period was just the best time to preserve a lot of fossils, and they refer to it as a "fossil explosion." They hope that by looking more they might find some evidence of evolution, or they simply say (like Gould), "Well, we'll never find it. Fossils are hard to form in the first place." This is called "artifact theory." But a lot of younger scientists are turning to new ideas. The first idea put out was the oxygen theory. They say that maybe in Cambrian times the oxygen level in the atmosphere and in the oceans suddenly arose to a critical level which could support larger-sized animals. That theory is pretty much shut down because there should be geological evidence for a sudden increase in oxygen. There are other theories, too, like that of Berkeley professor James Valentine. He is now working on something new that relates to Jonathan Wells' work. (Wells is the Berkeley biologist who spoke at the Mere Creation conference.) In developmental biologythe study of embryo developmentthere's been a big discovery of something called Hox genes. They are regulatory genes, and they turn on and off sequencesthe development of the eye and so on. Valentine infers that primitive organisms accumulated enough Hox genes to suddenly make a different body plan. So he's trying to correlate Cambrian explosion with the development or accumulation of Hox genes. But I think there are many theoretical difficulties he's facing. John Wells has the idea that Hox genes won't do it. He claims that Hox genes are only switches. You can put the switch on different systems and it just turns on and offyou're not getting new information out of Hox genes. RI: So when they ask you about it, what do you say? Chien: Well, it depends who is asking. In scientific dialogue I think I can be very honest with whatever present findings we have. We can all discuss objective data, but pretty soon we find out that whatever conclusion each draws is far from what the evidence says. In other words, I think every theory is still more belief than scientific fact. I wouldn't use scientific findings as evidence to support Biblical creation. All science does is begin to tell us what happened 540 million years ago, and we have just little bits and pieces. However, I think we can use the evidence to strongly show that Darwinian gradual evolution did not happen.

Originally Posted by metatron The assumption that {I think} you are still holding on to, is that one phyla evolved and branched into other phyla.

Hi, Sayonara³ It look's like something I need, along with a upgraded pc and soft-ware ect. This is what is keeping me from posting pictures, Thank's Metatron

I think I may have an analogy that can better illustrate this model, and explain the phases { vesica attractor } Here’s a little known fact……… one of the very first mediums that man developed to communicate with was light waves…… no kidding! A hundred thousand years before fiber optic cable man developed whites in his eyes so they could signal to one another thoughts……. by the subtle nuances expressed by the shape and intensity in these flashes of light. The eyes became the windows to the soul. Then as we all know we harnessed sound waves to communicate even more complex thoughts in language. We then did something completely fundamental to evolution and at the same time astonishing, we developed a way to capture and contained these waves! A simple clay tablet captured the sound and light of the universe into words. This manifested space held a world between worlds. This is the essences of the vesica attractor. A shared space for information to pass between two separate fields. An overlapping area of information focused into a central stable point. This point than emanates its own wave function to any that can read it. Today right at this very moment you are looking deeply into a vesica attractor. This computer is the direct result of that clay tablet. You are probably asking yourself that’s real interesting but what’s it got to do with your fossil find and your convoluted theory on evolution! Everything, this is the same process that created life itself, but instead of people being connected, the universe was connecting itself to itself the separate fields were the elemental particles representing by myriads of tiny vesica attractors [cells] emerging from the elemental quantum soup. The other field is the macrocosm of stars planets black holes all emanating a spectrum of waves. I believe light waves probably initiated the formation of the first photosynthetic cells. This is not what my manuscript deals with specifically, but I have been clear that life forms around a wave function. What my paper deals with specifically is a complex assemblages of eukaryote cells that form around water waves and oolitic spheres. These waves are still pulsing at this very moment as you breath in, and breath out, as your heart beats to this rhythm of a primordial ocean. This is a contained wave trapped in a circuit captured by billions of tiny vesica attractor in the form of a cellular matrix that also crystallized and capture the universe of light sound and memory. We not only capture and contain these waves, they are the fundamental forces that created us and sustains us. We are emanating connecting points, between the universe within and the universe all around us........ We are the universes clay tablet.

The assumption that {I think} you are still holding on to, is that one phyla evolved and branched into other phyla. What I am stating is the individual phyla emerged separately and suddenly from attractors. The vesica attractors only accounts for the higher taxon that appeared during the Cambrian. The simple multi-celled life are only related to the complex life in that the both emerged directly from a microbial substrate. They are not, however related by a linage of developing body plans. This is the conclusion that I came to after deciphering the artifact. When I checked the present scientific text, it not only confirmed that conclusion,{by tying together lose ends in our present understanding the development of complex morphology} but answered many other questions that I had not even considered asking.

Evolution is not shaped like a tree but more like a galaxy. A galaxy is formed after an implosion of the central blackhole. Complex life formed the same way. Because life is based on a wave function. As for as a picture, be pateint do some reading in systems science. The web of life : A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems by FRITJOF CAPRA

I apologize for my writing skill, or lack there of. I have started taking classes at night in order to improve, so I can translate this information into a presentable text. This is why I am seeking feedback. I do not mind constructive criticism but some of the feedback seems to have no purpose at all. This is something I take seriously and I do need help. writing is not my best skill I tend to think in dynamics rather than words. I am use to expressing my self though sculpture or paintings, so English is my second language in a way. My computer skills or not good either so be patient about the picture, but my understanding of this planet is as good as it gets. This came from many years in the field and serious study. New discoveries are not always made by people that are already theorist. I am an engineer that studies nature though the lens of system science. I am not yet accustom to expressing this in the written word but I urge you to look closely at what I am proposing, and check it on a logical bases. This artifact exists, a picture is not going to help until I have begun to get across what it represents. Keep in mind, much of the information is beyond present theory. I feel responsible as the discover of this artifact to bring this information to light, and am convinced it will add to our understanding of how life came into existences . Remember new discoveries are found in the strata not in a book that is already written... or on the internet. Do not confuse the map with the territory, which is vastly unexplored and…. unexplained. Thanks for the feedback and the support, Christopher Humphrey Ophiolite: There are no intermediaries in the fossil record between simple body plans to complex. This is a hard fact, that I was not aware of until I took a closer look at the fossil record. "The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, (must) be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory". Darwin, C. (1859) The Origin of Species (Reprint of the first edition) Avenel Books, Crown Publishers, New York, 1979, p.292 292 "Indeed, it is the chief frustration of the fossil record that we do not have empirical evidence for sustained trends in the evolution of most complex morphological adaptations." Gould, S. J. and Eldredge, N., 1988 "Species selection: its range and power" Scientific correspondence in Nature, Vol. 334, p. 19 Most families, orders, classes, and phyla appear rather suddenly in the fossil record, often without anatomically intermediate forms smoothly interlinking evolutionarily derived descendant taxa with their presumed ancestors. Eldredge, N., 1989 Macro-Evolutionary Dynamics: Species, Niches, and Adaptive Peaks McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, p. 22 The fossil record suggests that the major pulse of diversification of phyla occurs before that of classes, classes before that of orders, and orders before families. This is not to say that each higher taxon originated before species (each phylum, class, or order contained at least one species, genus, family, etc. upon appearance), but the higher taxa do not seem to have diverged through an accumulation of lower taxa. Erwin, D., Valentine, J., and Sepkoski, J. (1988) "A Comparative Study of Diversification Events" Evolution, vol. 41, p. 1183

You ask me what the lobster is weaving down there with its golden feet,I tell you, the ocean knows this You say who is the acedia waiting for in its transparent bell, I tell you its waiting for time, like you You say who does the macrocystis algae hug in its arms? Study it. Study it at a certain hour and in a certain sea I know You question me about the wicked tusk of the narwhale and I respond by describing to you how the sea unicorn with a harpoon in it, dies You inquire about the kingfisher's feathers which tremble in the purest springs of the southern shores I want to tell you that the ocean knows this, That life, in its jewel boxes, as endless as the sand, impossible to count, pure And the time among the blood colored grapes has made the petal hard and shiny, filled the jellyfish with light, untied its knot, letting its musical threads fall from a horn of plenty made of infinite mother of pearl I'm nothing but the empty net which has gone on ahead of human eyes, dead in the darkness', of fingers accustomed to the triangle, longitudes in the timid globe of an orange I walked around like you investigating the endless star And in my net during the night I woke up naked The only thing caught, a fish, trapped inside the wind - 'The Enigmas' by Pablo Neruda

What logistical point our you dismissing? It took ten years to see this model as a cohesive whole, if you are any one would address any point I will be more than happy to discuss it on a logical basis, step by step. But first you need to look over the data and be prepared to evauate it on a informational bases, point by point.

It has been examined by two geologist their views were conflicting and not much help except confirming what I knew about the components of oolites and cyanobacteria It needs to be examined in a laboratory to confirm the eukaryote colonization' date=' I will try to get a good picture up as soon as I can. Keep in mind what I am saying the data is showing . Let me be clear and unphilosophical as possible. It appears the phyla formed from original archetypal life forms that crystallized out of the environment. These original creatures than gave birth to the phyla and remained as a central organizing point for the phyla. This model not only fit’s the fossil record, as for as the sudden emergence of a top down hierarchal appearance of body plans, but also follows the same pattern of organization of the every archetypal component of the universe. All these basic components [Electron to neutron'] [black hole to stars ][planets to stars ] have a central stabilizing point that is surrounded by orbiting components in a more dynamic temporal state. The phyla…… it appears also emerged around a central point of organization. An attractor. This model answers to many question to be dismissed out of hand. It also appears that biological systems formed around a wave function I believe this wave function can be harnessed in such a way that communication technology can be integrated to our biological cognitive system ,benefiting both, Initiating a second spontaneous evolutionary integration,…. The third ring of life. The holy grail of communication, cyberspace that can be experienced as reality.

I will, but right now I am taking my nephew to see robots.I do not have the imagination to make up this sort of thing. If you look at the data that I am gathering from this artifact it will become apparent that this information is coming from nature. be back In a bit Thanks for the feed back. Christopher Humphrey aka Metatron.

A lot of big breakthroughs are made by accident or happenstance. A good example is this discovery. At the time my only intent was to walk the river beds and read the information contained in the strata. It was my way to become aware of another aspect of nature, one of deep time, not just from a book or computer but to experience it first hand though the rocks. I found once you crossed a threshold of understanding the language of the rocks, they came to life, and contained a dynamic all their own. One way I found to enhance this dynamic is to connect it to a system view. My goal was just to see what I could see. When I found this artifact I was a Darwinist and had no knowledge of any major flaw in this theory. When it became apparent that this was an embryonic form that was in the process of self assembling from a totality of environmental components, my first reaction was that this was something completely out of sync with the natural order, a parallel evolution of sorts. It forced me to take another look at the fossil record of the early Cambrian. What I found in the text was that this represented a missing piece in organizational phases of the evolution of complex body plans, such as how shelled animals could have survived before developing shells. How eukaryotes cells could come together to form a dynamic self sustaining system cooperatively without starving each other first, just by competing for energy in a contained space. The answers where provided before I had ask them. The elemental components formed around a logarithm. This geometry is expressed as the wave curls in on itself redirecting the linear flow into a circular one. Once the mico-environment had reached an energetic threshold, the archetypal components of the environment ( oolitic spheres, cyanobacterial filaments, eukaryote cells ) assemble into these spiraling patterns. The oolitic spheres and cyanobacterial filaments are rolled into a recursive, concentric contained form. This layered circular mass begins to act not only as an Architectural framework, but also as a bridge, connecting fluid dynamics and a life support system for a self-organizing eukaryote system. Macro-dynamics construct and assemble the Micro-components, that intern capture and contain the Macro-dynamics. The wave pulse was the breath of life that the components formed around. I was cognitive of the answer but blissfully unaware of the question. Life, it turns out is based firstly on a flow of energy and secondly on the physical components contained in this flow, and this flow pattern is based on a logarithmic curve, or more well known as, The geometry of phi. Interestingly this dynamic appears almost identical to the formation of a galaxy. The grain size oolites formed by accreted aragonite rolling within the waves. These spheres are then rolled together to form the "vesica attractor" which would have resembled a pin-wheel rolling back and forth in a recursive pattern of wave cycles. after it came to rest and reformed it would have been originally about the size and shape of a large ostrich egg with a flat underside. The right and left central apertures open, {which resemble a paisley }and begin to spiral as it redirects the wave pulses into the vortex like orifices. The internal motion is made possible by the recursive constructed layering. The formation of life appears to follow the same universal pattern of wheels within wheels. As for intelligent design it seems apparent nature is more intelligent than we are and always was. The best test for a new scientific model dealing with the natural world is that it be much smarter than the one presenting it. In this case I would say that it is, and secondly can it connect information in such a way that it produces "Information for free" if it can it not only references evolution, it is evolution. This leads me to another way to test this new model. I have intentionally left many lines of logic open ended in such a way as to see if anyone would fill in some of these the same way I have, and also there are always some that I never considered. What I would like to attempt is to highlight one particular component as a thread. Here is the question for anyone out there with a good sense of imagination and deductive reasoning. Assuming this model is basically correct. What would lie at the "core" of these original creatures and how would this core component potentially enable it to act as a sustainable central organizing point of the phyla? What I believe we are all searching for is a central governing principal of life, that can help us to understand how biological systems self-organized in the past, so that we may better adapt our own self-organizing potential as humans for the future. To recognize developing currents between existing components, that can relate to a larger view. One that links us to inherent aspects of nature. To redirect our energies spent on outdated models, by acknowledging governing dynamics beyond our illusionary ideas of control. Allowing these creative elements to manifest by simply providing a environment conducive to these archetypal currents. I believe what I have discovered written in the record of the earth can help us. This Second ring of life. A pre-emergent synergy that sparked the Cambrian explosion. This dynamic represented by a fossilized embryonic form containing a confluence of environmental elements, that represent not only the birth of life in the distant past, but reflects our present stage of development as a civilization.

http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-26-t-000007.html The Second Ring of Life; The Vesica Attractor