Jalopy

Good and evil are arbitrary constants wherein human beings measure, on a scale of relativity, how each other's actions measure up to the needs and wants of the others. In the theme of cause and effect, good and evil don't matter. Cause and effect; that nothing matters. The law of the jungle prevails and the winner is the fittest, the smartest. The cause and effect ideology vs the good and evil ideology, which one is better for a society? Even if the law of the jungle did prevail, the weaker creatures would evolve in other ways to survive. It's just that evolution in a cause and effect society would be haphazard, and depend on individual needs. In other words, every single organism would evolve differently, a law unto self. In the good and evil themed society, morals and values would be established by the masses and everybody would follow those rules, but evolution would be hampered greatly. evolution would not be required, for everybody would just get along under one blanket of rules. The rules, a secondary set of values, might evolve. Is this world a cause and effect society or a good and evil society? Or does a cause and effect society, at some point, turn into a good and evil themed society?

It's quite improbable that humans are the only living creatures in a universe that spans trillions of light years. Probability and the law of recurring patterns must contend that what occurs in one place must occur in another. So if there's humans on earth, there obviously must be humans on mars too. Then how come we havent met humans from mars? The answer is simple; light distortion. The universe is expanding, and every time that happens, light beams also stretch, or curve. This causes them to change speed which causes a distortion in the time space matrix, like a wormhole. (For according to einstein, where the speed of light is traversed, time distortion occurs.) The staggering conclusion is that the rest of the universe isnt really what we percieve it to be. For example, if we look at planet venus, we don't really see it as a planet inhabited by aliens, even though it is in fact, that. The light distortion presents venus to the human eye as a sort of hellish place with fire and brimstone.

you say cats live longer than dogs, but thats just nitpicking. on principle, the bigger the animal, the longer it lives. otherwise trees would have a lower longetevity than cats, which would never be the case. not trying to be pert or cheeky, jussayin.

If the egg came first, then it follows that science is correct about one thing; the chicken was born from an egg. The egg could have just evolved into eggdom/ egdarton. If the chicken came first, then religion wins. God made the chicken and gave it the ability to lay eggs, whence other chicken would sprout forth. The real winner however was KFC.

Have you noticed that the smaller the organism, the lower the lifespan? Mice have a lower lifespan than cats, who have a lower lifespan than dogs. Humans have a lower lifespan than bears, who have a lower lifespan than giraffes. The scientific explanation is that the more complex an energy lifeform, the more time it takes to do its thing before fizzling out. And the religious principle of Karma contends that every energy being, a compilation of matter of all sorts, must run its course, complete its destiny, before the totality runs its course. Each individual bit of energy must complete it's god given purpose on the universal plane, and the more energy there is in a thing, the more destiny there is to be traversed, in a vague sort of way. So the trick about increasing human lifespan is to make ourselves a bigger species. One way to do this, is to clone human genomes with giraffe genomes. Giants would result, and giants of the old testament lived for hundreds of years, which supports that theory too.

Obviously the idea that the universe could have come out of a single particle, so tiny that you'd need a microscope to see it, the idea that something so massive as the universe could have been brought forth out of a single particle that tiny, is nearly impossible. I think what really happened, that scientists don't get, is that the universe emerged like a thread, out of the eye of a needle. That very first 'particle' that science teaches us wasnt a single particle, but the beginning of an ever growing thread, that began out of the eye of a needle, in figurative terms. The origins of that thread lie behind the needle, if you can imagine that. I'm talking about huge volumes of universe-fabric, stretching on for light years, that keep entering the next universe through the eye of a needle as it were. It's easy to imagine that the beginnings of that thread, making it's very first appearance through the eye of the hypothetical needle, was a 'single particle', i.e all the hypothetical fabric in the above illustration, coalsced into one particle. What an absurb idea. Surely theory (II) is more logical, that the universe actually grows through a particle sized hole from one universe into another, and then fades out of one universe, slithers into the next, and the process repeats. This is actually in line with the matrix theory that the universe expands and contracts and expands again. The hypothetical eye of the needle through which each consecutive universe slithers into existence in time space continuum B, from time space continuum A, is probably a time vortex or something. Or it could be time itself. Time, the eye of the needle through which universes are born.

Are there advanced civilisations on other planets?

my theory is that the speed of light being unable to be surpassed is significant. It means that the speed of light is a godlike particle, or essence, that cannot be surpassed by any other element in the universe. That is because the speed of light was one of the first things that ever came into existence, like the god particle, which cannot be controlled.

If the time space continuum is divided into time and space, and the speed of light is the one aspect of the time space continuum that cannot be surpassed, then surely it follows that light is a boundary of the time space continuum. Light, like time and space, is a founding father of the time space continuum, in a figurative sort of way. So basically, the time space continuum is made of time, space, and light. That's why the speed of light cannot be surpassed. If light were a product of the founding fathers of the time space continuum, it could be surpassed, speedways. Light is energy, and energy can take many forms. I reckon the universe was made of light energy, that then assumed different forms of energy that comprise the universe. This would indeed agree with the religous view that God said let there be light, and there was light. Then out of the light he created the world.

I think pressure is the solution. If enough pressure was exterted on a Silver atom, one electron would be forced out of orbit, causing it to turn into a gold atom. I think that's one way alchemy could be accomplished, without having to resource to nuclear fusion etc. Pressure can be found in plenty in the natural world, weights, slinkies, a very primitive device could be invented that exerts pressure on atoms that way. One wouldnt even need to turn to technology for the answer. In fact as far back as the middle ages, people used to cause alchemy, which proves the secret to alchemy is in the primitive not in technology. If they could do it, then so can we.

but in a previous thread, i explained just how jesus may have attained immortality, an artificial form of life, via lightning that entereed his nervous system on the cross, through the nails in his hands.

Jesus lived in 00.00 AD. Muhammed came forth a few centuries later. How, you ask, could one person be two people, especially when Muhammed was born 400 years later? For your theory incorporates the stupendously maniacal idea that Jesus could have lived past the age of 400 years. Ah, but thats just what I am saying. The fellow was an immortal remmeber? So Jesus the immortal lived on for how long? Who knows? but if he was an immortal, then chances are he went upon the middle east 400 years after his original name of jesus, under a new name muhammed he created islam.

Jesus was half dead on the cross, his blood ebbing out, gasping his last, but then... the storm hit. The wind and the waves where whipped up and just before the Lor' cried out with a loud voice, tis finished, a storm brew forth. It had lightning in it. And that lightning had electricity. The electricity in that lightning entered through the nails in the saviours hands and went into his nervous system. His nervous system, possessed by this new electric energy, exactly like human nervous system electricity but artificial, was spurned back to life. The deadish brain of the saviour was from then on possessed by the artificial electricity that pervades the atmosphere. And whenever the northern lights hit, he would be double possessed, and could swallow fire, break iron bars with his bare hands, etc. Theory of reincarnation; infallacious or otherwise?

Can the human being, a reproducing, self-willed being, be replicated via technology? Can we create a human being from scratch? If yes, then how? If no, then why not?