|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:56 pm
Here's a place to write how you think that life came about or how things were created. All ideas are open, but I should advise you to be sincere, because you may be asked to defend/support what you say. Then Bella said, "Let there be posts!" And there were posts. heart b
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:36 am
Personally im not happy with any of the idea's of how we came into existance, If I had to choose one I deffinentl go with the hitchikers guide to the galaxy idea.
Quote: "and then one morning this "god" fellow woke up and said well this is awfully boring why dont I add some excitment" and then with one great movement the world was created not from this "god" fellow but rather from a council of higher up inter-stellar beings
or something like that
but in anycase we couldnt of just happened to be created....there has to be someone who created "god" and then who created that "god" or is it just a never ending cycle of god's, demi-god's, immortal's, and mortal's cycle or are we just another little experiment in some higher-ups eyes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:37 am
Dammie-kins Personally im not happy with any of the idea's of how we came into existance, If I had to choose one I deffinentl go with the hitchikers guide to the galaxy idea. Quote: "and then one morning this "god" fellow woke up and said well this is awfully boring why dont I add some excitment" and then with one great movement the world was created not from this "god" fellow but rather from a council of higher up inter-stellar beings or something like that but in anycase we couldnt of just happened to be created....there has to be someone who created "god" and then who created that "god" or is it just a never ending cycle of god's, demi-god's, immortal's, and mortal's cycle or are we just another little experiment in some higher-ups eyes? o3o~! this reminds me of my science teacher---he always used to say that we are, in escense, like bugs in a jar, on some alien's shelf, with said alien is some one else's jar...and on and on.... this used to fasinate me. >,O are we really? how could i tell you? i don't know... i throughly believe that god is not a person, or anything we can really describe---maybe god is an act of nature some person wrote up? maybe there is a god, but no aspects of human language can describe him, thusly this divides ppl into saying 'there is' or 'is not' a god. God, to me, is a spirit---something from nature, or is nature itself...i believe 'he' is alive and is in all of us---'he's just the part we cannot explain, but can feel...like love.. >,O *ugh, im ranting, ne?* lemme rap this up xd i think God is a part of nature, or is nature, pure and simple. I think he's in all of us. >___>! i also, HONESTLY believe that some 'aliens' are infact angels who've fallen from some part of heaven......i know i cannot fully explain that, but i do...-__-! that's just me, i guess...o3o
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:36 pm
I believe in the theory of relativity. I think that if you looked closely enough, there would be some life in the very nucleus in our atoms just as we may be life in some greater scheme (Oi, I must leave off, I'll add more later. I apologize) b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 7:41 am
Bellabie I believe in the theory of relativity. I think that if you looked closely enough, there would be some life in the very nucleus in our atoms just as we may be life in some greater scheme (Oi, I must leave off, I'll add more later. I apologize) b oh, so you sort of believe in what my science teacher spoke of...the jar theory... hn, that could be---you know...like repeating fractals..o3o >,O maybe we're just math equations D8 i hope not. xd like the Matrix (sry, i had a sci-fi moment~) *ahem* but i do believe that some aspects of life are a 'repetive' sort of life, where in every piece of our beings there lies life, if that makes sense talk2hand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 11:34 am
Fractals is a brilliant description, Czar! (I've just returned from a lecture over infinity, so it may find it's way into my writing...) My main problem with science and religion is that it only recognizes life in our dimensions (I'm not speaking of science fiction, friends. Dimensions are true and exist in many ways). Life is as we perceive it which I think is rather narrow. Even with the exclusion of "souls" and "spirit," there may be consciousness that we simply cannot recognize. In the beginning there was nothing. In the beginning there was something. In the beginning there was infinity and although we've added more, infinity is always exactly equal and unequal at once. Infinite + 1 = Infinite
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:18 pm
Bellabie Fractals is a brilliant description, Czar! (I've just returned from a lecture over infinity, so it may find it's way into my writing...) My main problem with science and religion is that it only recognizes life in our dimensions (I'm not speaking of science fiction, friends. Dimensions are true and exist in many ways). Life is as we perceive it which I think is rather narrow. Even with the exclusion of "souls" and "spirit," there may be consciousness that we simply cannot recognize. In the beginning there was nothing. In the beginning there was something. In the beginning there was infinity and although we've added more, infinity is always exactly equal and unequal at once. Infinite + 1 = Infinite hehe! im glad you liked the fractal approach~ omg, dimentions---yes, i do believe in different dimentions, different lives---and i do believe those exist as well--- its actually somewhat been proven, it was on the Science Channel at one point; very fasinating. you idea about infinity intrigues me. i believe time does flow from the past to the future, and where you fall in that line does add to the flow, but does not impact it wholely, if that makes sense. like you can add rocks to a stream, but the water will still flow and does not add to the water itself. if you all understand... talk2hand sweatdrop oh definitely there is life we cannot explain, like aliens! no one can truly explain them... stare people define life as things that need water to survive---i dont believe that EVERYTHING needs water to survive---because what we may define as life, may not encompass everything that it should. people are limited by their minds and opinions. we can only learn so much before we get all confused and disregard it as 'myth' or 'it doesn't exist because i cant touch it...' (that crap has always made me angry. domokun )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:10 pm
Actually, I disagree. First off, dimensions are not alternate universes that you can just jump to and mess around in. Each dimension adds to another axis to the graph. Try three-dimensional: length, width, depth. See? Also, (I don't mean to attack, but...) I think that the stream analogy is off. If you add rocks to the stream it is different. Infinite says that if you have infinite containers and an infinite amount of water, even if you add water or containers, there will not be any more of one than the other. Therefor, infinite=infinite and infinite=/=infinite. It is sort of challenging to grasp, I think. I don't entirely understand what you were referring to, either, so forgive me if I've misinterpreted. No one can prove aliens, so we are yet to explain them. The things that have been explained but not proven are like gravity. These are theories. I don't know, though, if I would, personally, classify extra-terrestrial life as a theory, because there is not yet enough to support it. Perhaps I am the type of closed-minded individual who upsets you? I think that there is a difference between defining life with the possibility of not understanding it at all and stating that there is life (by our measure) existing elsewhere... (I apologize, but I'm sort of tired and disagreeable right now and I just don't think that I agree, but I may later... Who knows?) b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 5:23 pm
This is one of my favorite quotes (By myself, of course!):What you cannot see, you should believe, and what you see, you should not.
Basically, you can believe in any god or gods you wish; but todays science is BULL! Lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:56 pm
Kilikrox This is one of my favorite quotes (By myself, of course!):What you cannot see, you should believe, and what you see, you should not. Basically, you can believe in any god or gods you wish; but todays science is BULL! Lol. I vastly disagree. Although your quote is quite poetic, I also find it to be very cynical, in that it seems to say that all that we know has been deception, and deceptive, in the sense that it says that the only truth is in faith or lies. (Faith=/=lies. Please do not misunderstand me) The way that you said that makes it hard for me to think you've thought this through. Todays science cannot be "BULL" because much of it is based off of a previous science and things have been proven. Perhaps you mean to say that todays science conflicts with your ideas? First off, are you one that believes in creationism or intelligent design? (You seem not to agree with natural evolution and these are the other two processes with which I am familiar.) b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:30 pm
The way I see it every possibility, every posible predictable outcome, is occurring simultaneously as we speak, as we have spoken, and as we will speak at the same time. All theories of universal creation are true, but only in the realm or realms in which they are true. All eventualities occur in the alternate timelines which are threaded about this one, like a great celestial braid of Infinite Possibility. The differences between timelines may just be minor variants, like the outcome of a coin toss, or extravagant, dratic changes, like the dominant species of the planet. And these events are repeaeating themselves all the time, meaning the past, present, and future all coincide with each other. It is the psychic reception of visual data from these alternate timelines occuring at the ssame time that we call deja vu; the reception of a memory from another version of yourself during an unconscious state to be instantly recalled before a similar event occurs in the timeline you consciously experience. This may also be the basis of idea creation; the fact that every story you write may actually be a reality in another timeline which some mechanism in your biological machinery is able to pick up like a television signal. So when you ask "Can something like that really happen?" remember this: It's already happened. It will happen again. And it's happening right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:33 pm
(Oh, and Bellabie, there are holes in all scientific theory of creation which allows the devout to retain arguement. The classic 'Missing Link' problem and the actual cause of The Big Bang are still not entirely evident, as you may recall. Let your mind be open...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:39 am
I am sorry, but I will be retreating from this debate... I CAN'T READ BIG POSTS!!! I tried... But I can't keep focused... But let me exit with this:
I do believe in the "Big Bang Theory", however, I have a different version for it. God was tired of the everlasting nothingness that was the universe back then, so he found the bravest star, and told it to create. And it did, in the only way it knew how; it exploded. It's matter spread, and others followed its example. Soon, planets were born from the matter of the stars, and God created new stars, ones that could live longer, but could not understand anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:15 am
Mobius Nightshade The way I see it every possibility, every posible predictable outcome, is occurring simultaneously as we speak, as we have spoken, and as we will speak at the same time. All theories of universal creation are true, but only in the realm or realms in which they are true. All eventualities occur in the alternate timelines which are threaded about this one, like a great celestial braid of Infinite Possibility. The differences between timelines may just be minor variants, like the outcome of a coin toss, or extravagant, dratic changes, like the dominant species of the planet. And these events are repeaeating themselves all the time, meaning the past, present, and future all coincide with each other. It is the psychic reception of visual data from these alternate timelines occuring at the ssame time that we call deja vu; the reception of a memory from another version of yourself during an unconscious state to be instantly recalled before a similar event occurs in the timeline you consciously experience. This may also be the basis of idea creation; the fact that every story you write may actually be a reality in another timeline which some mechanism in your biological machinery is able to pick up like a television signal. So when you ask "Can something like that really happen?" remember this: It's already happened. It will happen again. And it's happening right now. very deep. ninja i want to see if i understand most of this---i will make this example: say, your looking into a mirror, said mirror could be another dimention that we are not for certain exists because there is no way to prove it does exist besides the fact that you can see it, and feel the mirror---but you cannot travel the distance between your 'reflection' and your 'real self' but on the other side, the reflection is 'real' and 'you' aren't. deja vu---hn. your example is ever so slightly like in the movie 'Deja Vu'--- or like the example of 'deja vu' in the movie, the 'Matrix'---im sorry to be using movies to prove points, but in actuality this is the easiest way. and it does make sense. in the movie 'Deja Vu' there were two 'dimentions'---one where the lead woman was alive and one where she wasnt--- the man who was trying to solve her murder lived in the dimention where the woman was killed--- but using a method to travel the dimentions---like a mirror---he somehow got in contact with his 'reflection' changing the outcomes of both dimentions-- one where she was now alive in both---because of a split. so now that makes three. one where she is definitively alive, one where she was not, and one where she was going to be killed. this last dimention was infact now where the man resided---because he changed the outcome---effecting both dimentions thusly creating the rift. Bella, this is where your infinity comes in---and i do understand you now. in all three dimentions where the man and woman existed---all outcomes were the same, they would both, eventually, die. but WHEN they would has totally changed. this is like infinity, no? Time will keep moving, and you can add to it--but it does not effect the flow or the outcome---because it has already been determined, by what ever circumstances their may be effecting your 'world', 'self' or 'lifetime.' sweatdrop please, lord, tell me some of that makes a bit of sense to someone...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:18 am
Bellabie Actually, I disagree. First off, dimensions are not alternate universes that you can just jump to and mess around in. Each dimension adds to another axis to the graph. Try three-dimensional: length, width, depth. See? Also, (I don't mean to attack, but...) I think that the stream analogy is off. If you add rocks to the stream it is different. Infinite says that if you have infinite containers and an infinite amount of water, even if you add water or containers, there will not be any more of one than the other. Therefor, infinite=infinite and infinite=/=infinite. It is sort of challenging to grasp, I think. I don't entirely understand what you were referring to, either, so forgive me if I've misinterpreted. No one can prove aliens, so we are yet to explain them. The things that have been explained but not proven are like gravity. These are theories. I don't know, though, if I would, personally, classify extra-terrestrial life as a theory, because there is not yet enough to support it. Perhaps I am the type of closed-minded individual who upsets you? I think that there is a difference between defining life with the possibility of not understanding it at all and stating that there is life (by our measure) existing elsewhere... (I apologize, but I'm sort of tired and disagreeable right now and I just don't think that I agree, but I may later... Who knows?) b no, its not upsetting me---it just makes me wonder--- i talked more about the dimentions in my other post, it should be above this one. *lol the stream---i wasn't really sure i agreed with that myself cause i couldnt find the words---but i did now *in my other post* and yes, i did use movie references---cause not every movie is full of someone blowing something up and women---some make you think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
