Christ slave

Consciousness, which affects the choices--and our choices are very much relevant in terms of evolution. And, how do I know for certain know what the future holds? I am not a psychic, but it doesn't take a rocket-scientist to notice the more obvious changes the more local events have on life, it's only wise to assume that just as the more obvious events like the changing of day and night, winter into spring, spring into summer, summer into fall, fall into winter, the changing of the years (which hold lines of seasons), the changing of the solar bodies like solar eclipses, the tides, the effects it has on our brain chemistry (both the moon and other planets), and so much more. So, if the sun and everything else effect life on earth, then certainly the stars, which we assume have always been among us and changing, have dramatic effects on life, because their distance does NOT deny their effects, just as if the sun were to be altered, its solar events effect the earth most dramatically...and the evolution, therefore, which can ripple outward into the future for all eternity (butterfly effect). So, then, what effects do our stars have on us as they change? Astrology is shifting an ENTIRE constellation the more the Aquarian age approaches. So, the months depicting the astrological signs will shift one constellation/astrological sign over. Don't you think this has an effect on life? Surely Evolution has noticed the stressed involved with the changing in the astrological events...over 3 billion years, that's surely enough time.

I don't know, why do planets not go crashing into the sun? Why do they instead uniformly orbit about each other? Why do they roll around each other as if space itself is some sort of woven material?

You have been quite close-minded and judgemental.

Absolutely, so the implications of the events attached to the evolution of these changing seasons/astral bodies is enormous.

Whereas a honking goose is ridiculously ignorant. If they had more predators, they wouldn't be honking all over the neighborhood...heck, people can't even scream without causing a problem, yet them gooses somehow do as they please. So, does the goose's freedom give it creative freedom and intelligent ability, or would it need to have more predators? That's something to consider.

I simply challenge gravity as a separate force...I think it may be a complex interworking of another or several forces.

Yes, I've heard some birds' songs are actually evolving (taking on the characteristics/likeness) to the sounds of traffic. In fact, there are really smart parrots out there. Perhaps parrots can evolve so much that they become radio hosts or song artists.

Precisely, and if other things happen in season, then what does evolution have in store for us for the upcoming new astrological season of the Aquarian age? Perhaps humanity's "season of love" by their "testis" bloom in season. An astrological age/season is some 2,100 years long. Pisces age began around when Jesus lived, what now can we expect? Evolution has been occurring for some 3 billion years, right? That's quite a lot of time to be evolving and responding to seasons. Perhaps some ages (seasons) ago, we went into hibernation, and now as the Aquarian age comes, what if evolution is discarding of this cocoon (the flesh) and we are blooming like bird testis? Just something to think about. I'd think anyone who notices the different phases in biology and whatnot taken by Evolution would find this post interesting and absolutely agree that, yes, Evolution has evolved and taken into account the astrological seasons as well. I am quite curious as to what the dawning of this season (Aquarian age) is going to do. Heck, if winter is absolutely so vastly different from spring when flowers, bees, etc. come out, we should all be very interested in seeing what types of conditions arise in the dawning of the new Aquarian season (age). Perhaps the extinct or dead will come back to life? Heck, if bees come out in the summer, it's quite possible to stretch your mind and recognize that evolution and this existence (life) has even wilder things in store. 3 billion years is too long of a time to ever deny that the astrological seasons don't have just profound effects on us like the changing of winter into spring, night into day, etc. So, don't be surprised when the "bees" come out and we have to "mow the lawn"...and certainly don't be surprised when the "trees spawn their leaves and grow fruit". One can only imagine the profound possibilities/things Evolution has in store for us...and this is why the Aquarian age is considered the spiritual age ("second coming" of Christ). It's a spiritual awakening when we awake from our slumber as the "sun" dawns (or, the transition of the seasons take place). Sure, it might "periodically snow again into the end of April", but summer does indeed come, doesn't it? The rooster does indeed crow, doesn't he? Let us consider the account of astrological seasons in terms of Evolution...and nature has given us no indication to consider anything fat-fetched, fantasy, or idiotic...we've seen winter blizzards and scorching summers, caterpillars becoming butterflies out of cocoons, lightning bugs lighting up the skies, flowers turning fields yellow and purples after opening up during the day as the sunlight beats down while disappearing in the night, green grass and tropical forests as opposed to deserts and fields of grain, babies coming out of women, and so much more. Let us be not ignorant. Consider and discuss!

The same thing as "gravity"--in other words, outerspace or whatever. So, this is also why an object's gravity speeds up the further it falls, why air is thinner up high, etc.

I wonder if this is true.

Okay, so suppose the "skin" of the earth is 8,000 miles thick. Why would the pressure be greater? And, at any cost, suppose the earth's "skin" was so thick that it went all the way deep as to form a solid sphere. Okay, so, supposing this is the case, wouldn't the tension be greater, as you proposed? So, then, how can you argue this theory when your own proposal suggests that a solid sphere is actually even more wild of a data result? Something is obviously flawed here, and while you suggest that, I am quite glad you're beginning to see things as I see them. In another threads (Big bang and bubbles: some philosophy)

Despite all the clever scientific explanations, you cannot explain the beginning which extends into infinity, the existence itself, and the fact that this existence exists now as it existed before. What is time? Time is hardly anything except that it's a constantly changing present. There is no past or future, really, but only a present and this presence changes. So what is the present, then? Or, the presence? If you stop measuring it in time, and simply realize the present just simply exists--there is no beginning or end, then you have to come to the conclusion that there is some constant in all this...something unchanging and an alternate reality, measured by time, which changes and evolves. So, what is this constant which existed in the beginning, which exists in the end (still now) and has always existed? Well, you cannot use science to explain this because the more you attempt to explain something that simply IS and has always been and always will be (that always IS), the more you separate yourself from the reality that that which IS...IS. The moment you reject it to explain it or figure it out, you now have denied its properties and so have accepted a lie. We don't separate ourselves from the properties of Evolution in order to explain it or any other law or reality...so, why do people accept those faithfully but when it comes to the being that IS (God), they attempt to separate their selves from its properties and omniscience to explain it? If you separate yourself from anything that is true to explain it, you deny the truth and accept a lie. Why would it be any different with God? Well, many people accept it as "okay" to reject God because other people do it, whereas they put their faith in other facts as if God is some sort of tumbleweed to be tossed around. No, the truth must always be accepted with faith--as with God, so with all truth. If you deny that gravity exists, until you begin to faithfully accept it, how can you acknowledge it or speak of it? So where does time begin? You cannot deny the fact that there is a point where time itself ceases and you simply have to accept that existence exists and always will and always have. Everyone of us innately know this, which is why the question is proposed and there's conflict with it...people are attempting to separate their selves from common, faithful sense and somehow change the reality that separating their selves from what they already know for certain isn't accepting a lie.

Well, I figure if you can see a bubble form, perhaps planets, like bubbles of air or other elements that form when submerged in foreign substances (such as matter within space, air within water, air within magma, or something else), this explains why planets are so perfectly round. If you'd look at the formation of bubbles and their characteristics when floating on the surface of a glass of milk or spiraling down a drain, they take on the very properties of what we might assume to be gravity. The smaller bubbles cling to the outside of a larger group of bubbles while spinning around a larger bubble in the middle. At this rate, it's obvious then to see that using the properties of bubbles can help to explain the physics on the larger scale (galaxies, solar systems, etc.). If a larger bubble is in the center of a group of bubbles and all the smaller bubbles surface around it, perhaps it has not much to do with some mysterious "gravitational" center than it does with some other laws of physics working together to make gravity function. A bubble by nature because of its perfect round composition is able to exist and free-float without bursting. Likewise, why is this? Because of the air pressure from the outside being equal all around, likewise, if this is the case, then perhaps the pressure being equal around a planet or some other object are what create the illusion of gravity, some force claimed to be located at the center of an massive object, solid object. What if the object doesn't have to be solid at all? If you were to expand an ordinary bubble to the size of a planet, would it indeed appear to be a real planet? Perhaps we should consider before blindly accepting illusions.

Let's adopt "wang" and "choing".

Existence has always existed. There is a timeless state of being, namely consciousness (call him God), which knows no beginning or end. It's simply a state of being, and it's much more existent than our lower-states of evaluating events with time, which is a measurement. It's like a person who says "what". The person existed and when they said "what", the "what" had a beginning and then an end, but the person still existed during the what and after the what. Don't think in terms of "well, where did that person come from?" If you do this, you back into a huge line of evolution from which we all descend, and you'll never essentially discover a beginning to the "BEING", because the "BEING" is like saying a single word--the word begins and then ends, but the being never ceased. Imagine now that the being had always existed...likewise, time itself is a creation, like the speaking of the word "what". It has a beginning "vocalizing the W-sound" and then an end "closing with a t". The being itself needs no resources and just simply goes on being. You, at your core, are part of the being--one with God. Say to yourself, "I AM below as I AM above."

Oh I know, but I have several options to that: provide proof of fallancycall them liars or provide some other findings I don't want to get into those options in this thread yet, be patient. I am trying to discuss middle earth as a possibility now and the implications, and it seems some people like you are too far ahead of the game and want to rush rush. Be patient, please You want a hypothesis.

"My fellow forum members"? Okay, fine. But, anyhow, stop throwing around accusations, no one ever said I had to counter-argue everyone's objections. I never claimed to know everything.

His nosing in on my personal business and character is where he doesn't belong. Me and you have been getting along pretty well lately, and I'm glad...but let's not be shallow. I am not telling Aardvark to build a fence in the public area, but I am telling him to build a fence away from me, at least...and if you knew some of his other posts, you'd agree.

Actually, what I meant is that speculation leads to proof. It is quite clear speculation itself is not proof, so yes, let us move forward.

That is exactly what I meant when I said it's on the grounds of speculation--scientific discovery, that is. Does not the ground give rise to things? Without the ground, where is a reference point to rise? Why you called it nonsense and then agree with me I do not know for certain.

Fine fine, so Bill Gates isn't a good example. I agree his computer technology is a productive resource. However, I'd be better off not keeping up-to-date with the fortunes of others.

Possibly, but then when you use the term "best", you are not confining it solitarily to one side, are you? Likewise, what is your point then? Spam? I believe intuition and consideration can render one the truth...don't you? Not all things are proven solely on the grounds of scientific discovery, but often (frequently) on the grounds of speculation. Why is this? Perhaps because the truth lies within us?

The rare oarfish, "sea serpent": There are others, too.