.

[Pariah]

"All new life springs forth from what's already living"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life

this message was brought to you by the letter N, the number 5 and the word: Abiogenic.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

"All new life springs forth from what's already living"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life

Your source refers to the life that supposedly sprang forth, not to the life that springs forth.

 

[Pariah]

sprang, spring, sprung, springs, springing.

take your pick, it still applies.

its a big, old universe, which allows plenty of time and space for things to happen, die off, or keep on happening.


"Why do you think it's impossible that life has always existed?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

The take away word this time is "singularity"

Still not happy? give us your *theory* as to why it *is* possible for life to have always existed. feel free to back it up with theoretical and practical evidence the equivalent of those for abiogenesis and the big bang.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

The take away word this time is "singularity"

Still not happy? give us your *theory* as to why it *is* possible for life to have always existed. feel free to back it up with theoretical and practical evidence the equivalent of those for abiogenesis and the big bang.

I'm glad you asked. Check it out (and take your time!): Nassim Haramein's Unified Field Theory

 

[GOD]

That was obvious the whole time that you are makeing adverts and missuseing this forum to preach your mentaly confused shit again . You and your crusade are on the same level as the jehovas witnesses . Your obviously to thick to understand what you are saying or that and plain disshonest .

Are you paid to spread your confusion and sickness ?

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

sprang, spring, sprung, springs, springing.

take your pick, it still applies.

No, the human form (which we were discussing) only springs forth from other human forms of life. Nothing but that chain of life can arrange the molecules to form a human body.

"Why do you think it's impossible that life has always existed?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

Have you ever considered the notion of a repetitive Big Bang? An expanding and contracting universe?

The take away word this time is "singularity"

In this image the singularity is the center of the double torus, where creation radiates out of the singularity and implodes into the singularity again.

It doesn't deny evolution, it doesn't deny a Big Bang, but it doesn't deny eternal existence either.

For a better explanation, read: The origin of spin: a consideration of torque and coriolis forces in Einstein's Field Equations and Grand Unification Theory

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Are you paid to spread your confusion and sickness ?

No. Are you?

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

Dishonest to whom God, to yourself because you're god or because it radically challenges your ideas about death ?

You've got to draw a line somewhere, or noone will want to be serious again and you'll have the opposite effect you intended...

It's nice to see you speak like that Pariah, I said the same thing in other words earlier and you were yelling at me, and now you say the same thing with fancy words.

All goes round and round huh ?

 

[Ed]

yesterday evening we went to Tarzan, the musical, in Scheveningen.

I am still confused what amused me most : the people that were looking at the people that were trying to look like monkees or the other way around.....

happy weekend, Ed.

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

:lol:

 

[GOD]

Disshonest in what he says , disshonest in the way he keeps useing threads to preach his brand of fringe esoterics , disshonest in the way he argues / debates / discusses , disshonest in the way he twists what other people say , disshonest in the way he avoids giving clear and rational answers to questions , disshonest in the way he uses selective truthes and burys his esoteric crusade pseudo facts in his posts , disshonest in the way he ignores facts and proofs , just disshonest and as slimey as an eel .

Are you projecting something on me ? You dont know my opinions on the sublect of death because i didnt tell you .

Yes , since hes been here all goes round and round and downwards back into the dark ages and away from light and clarity ..

Pariah said exactly what i have said but in diferent words .

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

That was obvious the whole time that you are makeing adverts and missuseing this forum to preach your mentaly confused shit again .

That's pretty rude of you to say that, as you have not succeeded in pointing out in what way it is confused. It's just as likely that I contributed to this forum. What's misuse in your eyes isn't necessarily so.

You and your crusade are on the same level as the jehovas witnesses .

The jehova's witnesses have a fixed world view, whereas I'm adding to it all the time. At least I have up until now, and I'm confident there's much more to learn.

and plain disshonest .

What have you been doing in this thread, other than pushing me into a certain direction? :wink:

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Yes , since hes been here all goes round and round and downwards back into the dark ages and away from light and clarity ..

Does your high school version of reality offer light and clarity?

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

I think God you just invented a new word to explain something you feel is wrong. Dishonest is when you don't tell what you have really in mind or think is your living truth, I don't think Ivar does that at all... Disshonest, sounds like a mix of dissing and honesty, it would make sense in a way, but noone has been challenging what CM says, which is why I say it's out of context...

I would challenge you say what is better, we've known for a long time you disagree with all this, just contribute your point of view ; we wont judge you and all think for ourselves (I hope thats what we do anyways).

 

[GOD]

"Dishonest is when you don't tell what you have really in mind or think is your living truth,"

Thats what hes doing when he keeps twisting things back to his personal esoteric fringe propoganda crusade . Or didnt you read both of these "I'm glad you asked. Check it out (and take your time!): Nassim Haramein's Unified Field Theory" .

"we wont judge you "

You just did here in this thread several times .

 

[Pariah]

lordi, this is just like "the sun has stopped" thread.


"No, the human form (which we were discussing) only springs forth from other human forms of life. Nothing but that chain of life can arrange the molecules to form a human body. "

Is a human still a human when one gene is changed, 2? 3? 100? ...etc. Remembering that other completely different life forms share genetic sequences with us, does that make them human? What you call "the human form" is and has been constantly changing through generations of selection. The separation of humans as a life form is purely arbitrary.


"Have you ever considered the notion of a repetitive Big Bang?"

Yes, but DNA cannot exist at temperatures found at the "crunch" part of that cycle -

which part(s) don't you agree with?:

Nucleic acids are molecules made up of atoms,

Life is only possible when nucleic acids retain structure,

molecules and atoms lose structure at *singularity* temperatures,

there were singularity temperatures at the big bang,

Therefore no life was possible at the big bang.


When something is happening now, that was not happening at an earlier time, it can be said that it *started* at some point.

Life was not happening then, and is happening now, so must have started at some point.

Charley said:
"I said the same thing in other words earlier and you were yelling at me, and now you say the same thing with fancy words. "

what are you refering to?



***
On the "scientific" Paper:

The nassim position contains a heady amount of massive leaps in logic - he makes assumptions and claims without justifying them - it seems he makes them more to conform how he thinks they *should* be, without due thought to evidence.

"it doesn't deny eternal existence either."

Just because it doesn't deny eternal existence doesn't mean it proves it.

Where does the paper prove eternal existence? if it doesn't then you've just wasted my time by getting me to read it, please explain where it refers to eternal existence.

One last point:

The paper doesn't look properly peer reviewed to me. Its published by:

"The Noetic Press"

Which isn't really in a position to tell whether he's talking rubbish or not.

There are flaws I see in it, and I'm not even a physicist. but I think I've wasted enough of my time on this stuff.

 

[GOD]

"lordi, this is just like "the sun has stopped" thread. "

Exactly . Caduceus being a slimey clever dick and chanting the same old esoteric fringe bullshit that he doesnt understand again and again and ignoring any rational critisism .

"On the "scientific" Paper: "

Thats what i was refering to before but caduceus ignored it .


I did give this link before but caduceus chose to ignore it as well .


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_ ... c_Sciences

Thats all part of what i mean with being disshonest or to thick to understand what hes saying .

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I'm an open book. Everyone here knows what sources have contributed to my worldview, and I'm straightforward about my current influences (written and herbal). I'm not the mouthpiece of one particular author or one particular way of viewing things.

I think it's perfectly fitting for the geometry of creation and consciousness to be discussed on a forum for psychonauts, the psychonaut forum. For unless we figure out what the observer is, how can we make sense of the observed? Unless we understand what trips, how can we make sense of the trip?

 

[GOD]

"I'm an open book."

Yes you are .

"I think it's perfectly fitting for the geometry of creation and consciousness to be discussed on a forum for psychonauts, the psychonaut forum. For unless we figure out what the observer is, how can we make sense of the observed? Unless we understand what trips, how can we make sense of the trip?"

Another confused answer . No one has anything against talking about anything from what i`ve seen here , but you dont talk about things rationaly you keep preaching your esoteric fringe ideas and presenting them as fact .

To understand something one has to at least look , think and talk about it neutraly , objectively and criticaly or one is just doing what your doing preaching your "world view " as fact to other people .

 

[Mr.Smith]

so far humans are the only species capable of fighting over the internet