For all you anti-logic, science bashers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NirvanaStarseed
If you don't embrace the spirit of truth, it will never embrace you.
When I get the chance I will talk about this. Nothing is 'nonliving'.

---

The problem here is that you're operating according to a different definition of life than the rest of us. So, if you are ok with that, go for it buddy. Have a blast. But just know that the "definition of life" you keep talking about is NOT the scientifically accepted definition of life. You may have issues with that defintion, and that's fine, go publish a paper on it in a peer reviewed scientific journal. But for the time being, the scientific definition of life is what it is, so a rock doesn't qualify. Sorry.

Quote:

---

If you don't embrace the spirit of truth, it will never embrace you.[/b]

---

Words of the wise, my good friend. Let us all embrace truth, as well as the coherency of that sentence!

WOW! post with a conclusion! :cheers: :goodjob:

When the wind picks up dust, its mass is increased.

The wind is not responding to a stimulus from the dust.

Neither is the star.

That's not the definition of external stimuli.

The wind isn't, but the dust is!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Awaken4e1
The wind isn't, but the dust is!

---

I'm glad you're here kim, I've been dealing with statements like these for more than a year now...after a while you start to question your own sanity.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by bradybaker

I'm glad you're here kim, I've been dealing with statements like these for more than a year now...after a while you start to question your own sanity.

---

I had a dream (non-lucid, like most of the posts people are making in this thread lately) last night.

I was arguing stimuli with a playing card whilst Grace Slick was belting out White Rabbit in the background, almost drowning out the argument such that we had to shout to be heard over it. Somehow I don't think the dream interpretation on this one is terribly tough. ;)


One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small,
And the ones that Mother gives you don't do anything at all.
Go ask Alice when she's ten feet tall.
And if you go chasing rabbits, and you know you're going to fall,
Tell 'em a hookah-smoking caterpillar has given you the call.
Call Alice when she was just small.
When the men on the chess board get up and tell you where to go,
And you've just had some kind of mushroom, and your mind is moving low,
Go ask Alice. I think she'll know.
When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead,
And the white knight is talking backward, and the red queen's off with her head,
Remember what the dormouse said: "Feed your head! Feed your head!"

"Feed your head! Feed your head!"

"Feed your head! Feed your head!"

- Jefferson Airplane
White Rabbit

brady not everyone believes what you think about science, least of all those who take it seriously.

sorry I havn't posted yet.

No - only those who make millions of dollars applying it to the real world.

Not those who sit around their dorm room getting high imagining they know something.

I know the difference is subtle, but maybe if you get high enough it might make some sense to you.

Kim In a ideal world scientist know what science is and those with the passion of truth preach it in areas of teaching and worship of it in temples (or churches), but this is not entirely an ideal world. Many scientist are not capable of applying logic, and many people who preach in the churches are not capable of teaching the truth about god. And many get ritch from applying lots of illusions. As can be seen on your tv set. Just because humanity has not evolved to the point where the collective understand about the essence of life. It does not mean it is logical to look back to them and expecially use the collective misconceptions and present errors to prove I am wrong and then tell me how much money everyone is making, and compare it to your misguided interpretation of what I believe. Followed by a personal insult about me getting high in a dorm. This response is so ridiculous it becomes clear it is an emotional one more so than something thought out with the intention of seeing any truth. That response being created from what I said,(in an intention to resonate with truth) Is a trend among many that can be explained in the revelations, 'it is the smoke that is created' they are not events coming to pass, but symbolize the unveiling of ones consiousness in realizing the soul. Which I was thinking about posting the interpretation.

Anyway I'll make this a short a post as I can. I have decided I'm wasting my time posting something to long when only something brief was requested by universal.

Quote:

---

For something to be considered scientifically alive, it has to exhibit ALL of the following phenomena at some point during its existence:

1) Growth
2) Metabolism (consuming, storing and transforming energy, excreting waste)
3) Motion (either moving itself or internal motion)
4) Reproduction
5) Response to stimuli[/b]

---

At some point during its existence.

keep in mind the princibles of this is what matters. The original princibles. Not the shallow interpretation of them. Do you think a female all her life physically unable to have a baby, renders her nonliving? No because it is the essence of the princible behind these definitions of living that define the nonexistence of 'nonliving'. A tree does not move.(3 motion) Does that mean its not living? Again it's the original princibles behind the definitions. As explained below.

1) How was a rock created? Remember this. Matter must have been created as a result of growth and its processes. As was the subatomic world. Else it would not exist. The micro sub atomic world is relatively perfected. Thats why there is a misconception here about the fact there is no growth. What has happened is we have Our consious attention on a higher level. (time/evolution/life/consiousness=growth)

2)As a rock does not run around and do things that require alot of energy, it does not have to eat green vegtables and meat to excrete waste and gain the energy to continue being a rock. This doesn't mean it doesn't follow the same princible. The atoms within the rock have to 'feed' on some kind of energy to continue its processes in some form to maintain its existence, As does all matter.The main thing to remember here is without this princible of storing and transforming the needed energy for the matter. The rock would not be abe to continue to exist for long. In the same way the power to your computer is needed for you to read this. And the fuel for your car is needed for it to be drivin. Matter and such things as rocks, Also need this process of transforming energy in it's own context. According to its existence. Once again, the princible of this energy use is inherent in all things in different degrees and ways. Excreting waste of this energy in whatever form is also consistent in all these things. Just because your flowers, bees, trees, and insects in your backyard don't ask you if they can use your toliet. Doesn't mean this princible does not apply here.

3) The individual atoms and their makeup electrons ect. Is moving at incredible speed. To create the entire rock as it is being. Which seems from your perspective it is not moving. It's moving alright. Thats why it exists as a vibration.

4) Does a rock mate with another rock and produce a baby rock that needs changing at 3:30am? yeah ofcourse not. It is missing the princible of the definition. However matter is reproduced. Ultimately that is how we were produce too. We are also made up of matter. (how can we forget?) A human from sperm grows into a baby (utero) through the same process at the deepest level that a rock was created. That is how the sperm and the particles that make up the sperm and everything that makes up matter itself was created. And that is how everything reproduces. If you have intelligent life that has a form capable of choosing and producing a function of creating more of its form through a process, you could mistake that princible which is an expansion of the original princible of creation of life, can be found that which gives birth to matter.Which is ths same princible that gives birth to all things.

5) All things respond to stimuli as has already been discussed here. If you put enough pressure on a rock its going to crack. What the rock is capable of doing (cracking and all that happens when a rock is broken) is a response to what you have done to it. It responded to the stimuli by cracking into pieces. The expansion of this princible in more intelligent form could represent a spiritual pressure on a human being that causes them to 'crack' go insane, or kill themself. Or become very depressed, from not physical pressure but a spiritual pressure of the world and their life situation. Not the same thing as a rock cracking from pressure but it is all response to stimuli. Which is all essentially spiritual in its essence, as is life.

Gosh, this is so flawed that I just don't even know where to start!
It's unlikely you'd begin to grasp how flawed your "reasoning" is if I did!

>> Do you think a female all her life physically unable to have a baby, renders her nonliving?

No. If I poke her in the toe, her leg twitches. Responds to external stimulus. Check

She ages. Check

She consumes nurishment, goes through cellular mitosis, and excretes the waste product. Check.

She moves around the room under her own power. Check.

Her cells reproduce. Check The class of organism she belongs to reproduces in general. The flaw in her reproduction is identifiable - but still it exists. Check.

She's alive. Period. End of discussion.

>> Matter must have been created as a result of growth

No. Matter is neither created nor destroyed. It can be converted from and or to energy, which can neither be created nor destroyed. Matter is potential energy and vice-versa.

>> The atoms within the rock have to 'feed' on some kind of energy to continue its processes in some form to maintain its existence,

If it's feeding, where's the waste-product? Where's the cellular mitosis?

>> The individual atoms and their makeup electrons ect. Is moving at incredible speed. To create the entire rock as it is being.

Does the rock move under its own power? No. You have to pick it up and actually throw it at the morons who think it's living.

>> However matter is reproduced

No it's not. Matter is neither created nor destroyed.

>> you put enough pressure on a rock its going to crack.

That is not a response to external simulus. If you hit it with a hammer and it jumps up and kicks your ass, THAT is a response to stimulus.

As I said - your entire premise is flawed from the first words.

kim honey. It is not flawed. Please be rational and think about what I have posted. Just really sit down and think about it. That's the only way you will tune into the princibles and truth that I wish to speak to you about and understand. If you have ears listen. Else the misconceptions on your behalf, which I am not going to go through or it will be simply repedative, will get the better of you. You need only read my post and contemplate it intelligently. Otherwise its your choice to either ask logical questions or continue to be blind to that which I have already said. You will only see what you want to see, and what you are willing to see or open up to, or able to. To me what you have mentioned is already clarified in the other post and there is no need to go over it. If you do not understand about something ask honeslty. And I will answer about it.

Do you dissagree with me because you want to and for the sake of dissagreeing? I was not arguing that the girl was not alive or living. I thought it was obvious my point is she is living darling ;) As I explained the subatomic world is relatively in perfection in regards to its evolution. It moved under the same power we move. Our attention is on this level now.

If matter was not created, and is not destroyed. Consider the big bang. There is definetely some kind of creation going on there with matter, Your physical body was not always here. And it will not always be here. Matter does transform and is created. It's a simple observation.

The rock does not have the ability and it's not its function to 'jump up and kick your ass' ofcourse. It doesn't mean you can define this matter as something which is nonliving or void of life essence with no quality that defines consiousness in all these things. because it does not speak to you when you hit it with a hammer, doesn't mean it does not respond.You are unaware of its response. You must remember the individual particles that make up the rock and what they are. There is life in the subatomic world but it is 'asleep' somewhat due to the relative perfection achieved in that world. It is creating all the matter of these things. If you were able to decend to the smallest particles of that rock and communicate with it. It would respond to you. And it would ask you why you wake it from its slumber. That is if you had that privlidge. You would know it is alive. It would be the same being that is as a whole of this universe, when you expand and commune with the universe as a whole.

You're wrong. You have absolutely no concept of science and the physical world. You had no sensible answer to any of the points presented.

Just to get the next person that decides to take it up with you started: As noted, matter is neither created nor destroyed. The big bang was a conversion of energy to matter. Nothing was created. The mass that is my physical body was not created. The matter that makes it up started as energy and was converted. Looooong before that mass became a body.

I see very little point in having a further battle of wits with an unarmed man.

True that the energy is present before the matter is created, else it would not be possible. What does not have a beginning cannot have an end. That is my point about the definition of 'living' Matter is part of the original energy that is was created from it. If you go back and define the energy and the process you will find your consiousness at its essence is that which defines you and everything that exists.

And it's not a battle of wits honey. We are trying to explain the truth of the matter. Anyone for truth is for me. But anyone against truth is against me.

Quote:

---

Anyone for truth is for me. But anyone against truth is against me.[/b]

---

I'd be careful about saying stuff like that...

...historically...psychologically...that is possibily the Most Common Lie. :|

A ventriloquist dummy has a heartfelt such for truth, unlike me. :? A rock is conscious, but I am nonliving. :wink:

:?

Ever notice:

That when (K) impossible says something it is constructed in such a way as to lead all other readers to the conclusion that hers is the final word on the matter. Wow, haven’t seen that much arrogance since Lucifer buffed up like a balloon, and then blew away.

The Rev.

The big mistake is imagining I'm hunting your soul.

The souls of the drowned weevels in the bottom of my cheerios bowl have more intrinsic value.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kimpossible


- Jefferson Airplane
White Rabbit

---

That was SUCH an awesome band. They're my second favorite, second to The Beatles. In one of my first long lucids, I went back in time and watched them perform "Won't You Try/Saturday Afternoon" at Woodstock. The experience ranks very high in my lucid hall of fame.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Universal Mind
A ventriloquist dummy has a heartfelt such for truth, unlike me. :? A rock is conscious, but I am nonliving. :wink:

---

I have no idea what that was about. I don't even remember writing it. The only thing I remember about last night is a cop threatening to take me to the "Brandon Hilton" (Brandon jail) if my friend's neighbors call him again. On that note, I have officially quit drinking, again. :shakehead2:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Universal Mind


I have no idea what that was about. I don't even remember writing it. The only thing I remember about last night is a cop threatening to take me to the \"Brandon Hilton\" (Brandon jail) if my friend's neighbors call him again. On that note, I have officially quit drinking, again. :shakehead2:

---

Lmfao. :chuckle: