Share The Seeds
General and Off Topic => General Discussion => Topic started by: 23 on August 11, 2014, 02:52:55 PM
-
I don't know if you guys are into spirituality, in my opinion this is more important than anything so i feel that i want to share some vital info regarding our universe focusing primarily on the fact that we have been constantly lied to by our governments (govern-mentis-mind "to govern one's mind").
I can't really share all my knowledge but i can link a site that explains just about everything you NEED to know to save your ass from being caught up in this vicious cycle.
www.in5d.com (http://www.in5d.com)
I hope to catch your attention with this.
We are all one if this helps even one of you it will make me very happy :)
Blessings to you all!
-
I have been acquainted with most of those concepts before but I've never seen that site before. Its pretty amazing that once you've put enough links together to start seeing a truer nature of reality that everything that's ever happened makes you everything that you are. Obviously much more than just that as well. As the view widens your constantly jaw dropped by the things you start noticing.
Thanks for the link I'm always into a good read!
-
:D
-
"We discourage topics that often bring dissent and circular arguments, such as religion, certain political discussions or conspiracy theories. We also discourage cursing words"
I understand that it is your opinion, but when linking to a site that contains dubious information, please add a disclaimer to discourage the spread of misinformation.
ie: "This site contains information that has value in creating fun and frivolous thought experiments. The information presented is predominantly unsubstantiated by experimental data or evidence. Read accordingly".
Albeit I didn't survey the site in great detail, when directed there from the link I was greeted with the headline "Did humans evolve from reptilians?"
I'm all for critical engagement with an off-topic discussion, but there should at least be a standard of some sorts.
-
"We discourage topics that often bring dissent and circular arguments, such as religion, certain political discussions or conspiracy theories. We also discourage cursing words"
I understand that it is your opinion, but when linking to a site that contains dubious information, please add a disclaimer to discourage the spread of misinformation.
ie: "This site contains information that has value in creating fun and frivolous thought experiments. The information presented is predominantly unsubstantiated by experimental data or evidence. Read accordingly".
Albeit I didn't survey the site in great detail, when directed there from the link I was greeted with the headline "Did humans evolve from reptilians?"
I'm all for critical engagement with an off-topic discussion, but there should at least be a standard of some sorts.
Hey you better stop it cloud i bet you didn't even read the whole article! i did and at the end it clearly explains this could not be true! (after explaining why they think it is)
So really stop it if you're a skeptic keep it to yourself. At least don't play the moderator OR the snitch. You already got on my nerves last time because i had never seen you nor talk to you and you were all so ready to point out my faults. It's not my intention to be mean to anyone in general. I don't think I forced you to read anything.
-
Oh and by the way cloud i hope you don't reply to this because the reason why I share my knowledge is to help people and if I don't resonate with something I keep it to myself you know.
-
Oh and by the way cloud i hope you don't reply to this because the reason why I share my knowledge is to help people and if I don't resonate with something I keep it to myself you know.
I don't want to be a part of any fights here, but I don't think that 'if you don't agree with someone, don't say anything' is a very productive philosophy for a message board.
Apart from the rules and STS policy, which I am too new to confidently comment on, I agree with cloud that the linked site is dubious, and smacks of conspiracy theories mixed with bunk mysticism and "pseudoscience".
-
23,
I didn't intend to offend you in anyway, I'm willing to apologize if I did, it was never my intention to. That being said, I don't appreciate the manner in which you respond. You posted something here, and given that it is a forum (by definition a platform to facilitate discussion on particular issues), the information shared is subject to critical evaluation.
I'd love to discuss issues with you, share ideas (even better if they differ) on various topics, I'm always open to new ideas or interpretations. If someone questions the ideas you present, why respond in the manner you did? I'd like to believe that's how we further our understanding of the world, by questioning, disagreeing and resolving different ideas.
I don't need an ultimatum to not respond, I'd gladly discuss topics and ideas with you.
-
It's not about resonating with something or not; I do resonate with the concept of a holographic universe, but if it's presented along with a collection of far fetched claims, that surely deserves some discussion, doesn't it? It's not only about ideas themselves, it's also about how ideas are presented. It's not all or nothing, take it or leave it.
To discuss the holographic hypothesis, there's great, solid references. One can read David Bohm in physics, Karl Pribram in psychology, even follow Stan Grof's work in trans-personal therapy. But if we mix it with much less solid hypotheses, it undeservedly loses value. I agree that the article about reptilians, for instance, doesn't help to take the source you shared very seriously. And yes, I've read it, and there is at least one big issue in how it's presented.
The article mentions David Icke (who is a very dubious source himself if you do a little research) and then goes on to say "There are certain physiological similarities between humans and reptilians" followed by a description of evolutionary connections between humans (and other mammals) and reptiles, while using the name "reptilians". The anatomic connections between mammals, birds and reptiles are a fact and are well covered in evolutionary biology. However, that does not imply reptilians exist, or ever existed. The article uses anatomical comparisons between reptiles and humans to infer we have evolved from reptilians, while there's no reptilian fossil evidence that I know of; only reptile fossil evidence.
23, if we react defensively to questioning instead of discussing the ideas and staying open minded, we're hardly going to make much progress. We need to stay open and question things to keep learning.
And of course there is no "snitching" here; this thread has been here for everyone to read, cloud's comment does not bring anything new to moderator attention.
Regards,
Mandrake
-
This is a site to share seeds and grow plants, you know that right 23?
Here that's more important then anything, so we want to read some vital info regarding seed and plant, focusing primarily in the fact we have been here for that.
-
"pseudoscience".
[/quote]
And you call yourself hippie? go look what your science has done for you.
-
"pseudoscience".
[ /quote ]
And you call yourself hippie? go look what your science has done for you.
So to be a "Hippie" you have to blindly believe pseudoscience that has absolutely no proof or scientific backing?
Also, I might add, science has brought so many positive improvements on the world. Look at where we are!! We're in a freaking virtual community discussing plants!!! In case you didn't know, science made this possible.
New Wisdom
-
"pseudoscience".
And you call yourself hippie? go look what your science has done for you.
Science uses observation, reasoning and experiment. It's a method. It can return practical knowledge and tools. Whatever people do with that knowledge, or with the tools, is another story.
Pseudoscience uses scientific forms and pretension but fails in either observation, reasoning, or experimentation. If an article says that reptilians exist (note - it does not suggest that maybe they existed; it claims they do) and does not provide solid observations, or uses wrong reasoning, or does not allow experimental verification, that is not science. And if it tries to look like science, it's called pseudo-science.
Surely you can do better than attacking science in order to discuss an idea.
Mandrake
-
It's not about resonating with something or not; I do resonate with the concept of a holographic universe, but if it's presented along with a collection of far fetched claims, that surely deserves some discussion, doesn't it? It's not only about ideas themselves, it's also about how ideas are presented. It's not all or nothing, take it or leave it.
To discuss the holographic hypothesis, there's great, solid references. One can read David Bohm in physics, Karl Pribram in psychology, even follow Stan Grof's work in trans-personal therapy. But if we mix it with much less solid hypotheses, it undeservedly loses value. I agree that the article about reptilians, for instance, doesn't help to take the source you shared very seriously. And yes, I've read it, and there is at least one big issue in how it's presented.
The article mentions David Icke (who is a very dubious source himself if you do a little It's not about resonating with something or not; I do resonate with the concept of a holographic universe, but if it's presented along with a collection of far fetched claims, that surely deserves some discussion, doesn't it? It's not only about ideas themselves, it's also about how ideas are presented. It's not all or nothing, take it or leave it.
To discuss the holographic hypothesis, there's great, solid references. One can read David Bohm in physics, Karl Pribram in psychology, even follow Stan Grof's work in trans-personal therapy. But if we mix it with much less solid hypotheses, it undeservedly loses value. I agree that the article about reptilians, for instance, doesn't help to take the source you shared very seriously. And yes, I've read it, and there is at least one big issue in how it's presented.
The article mentions David Icke (who is a very dubious source himself if you do a little research) and then goes on to say "There are certain physiological similarities between humans and reptilians" followed by a description of evolutionary connections between humans (and other mammals) and reptiles, while using the name "reptilians". The anatomic connections between mammals, birds and reptiles are a fact and are well covered in evolutionary biology. However, that does not imply reptilians exist, or ever existed. The article uses anatomical comparisons between reptiles and humans to infer we have evolved from reptilians, while there's no reptilian fossil evidence that I know of; only reptile fossil evidence.
23, if we react defensively to questioning instead of discussing the ideas and staying open minded, we're hardly going to make much progress. We need to stay open and question things to keep learning.
And of course there is no "snitching" here; this thread has been here for everyone to read, cloud's comment does not bring anything new to moderator attention.
Regards,
Mandrake
Yeah i agree apart for the David Icke discussion. I too thought he was a nut until i came to the conclusion that he wasn't an enlightened being at the time he made his claims and acted IMO disrespectfully.
The truth is none of us is perfect ATM but at the same time if someone goes out of his line to explain something to me I listen. I know you guys are probably never going to believe me but i have seen with my eyes these entities(Grey aliens and reptilians), that is why I'm not against whoever speaks about them.
-
"pseudoscience".
And you call yourself hippie? go look what your science has done for you.
Science uses observation, reasoning and experiment. It's a method. It can return practical knowledge and tools. Whatever people do with that knowledge, or with the tools, is another story.
Pseudoscience uses scientific forms and pretension but fails in either observation, reasoning, or experimentation. If an article says that reptilians exist (note - it does not suggest that maybe they existed; it claims they do) and does not provide solid observations, or uses wrong reasoning, or does not allow experimental verification, that is not science. And if it tries to look like science, it's called pseudo-science.
Surely you can do better than attacking science in order to discuss an idea.
Mandrake
I'm not attacking science, by science i meant the current status of "modern science".In case you don't know, NASA is financed by corporations. And that tells everything
-
And stop hating on me people i haven't started ANY fight.
-
I'm not attacking science, by science i meant the current status of "modern science".In case you don't know, NASA is financed by corporations. And that tells everything
NASA has done a lot for the scientific discovery. And it's actually funded by taxes, not corporations. Now they do get paid to do research on certain subjects, but a lot of research institutes do that. That's how we learn about the world around us. The world would be lost without a lot of the scientific breakthroughs we've encountered in the last 100 years. I think it's amazing how far we've come.
New Wisdom
-
I'm not attacking science, by science i meant the current status of "modern science".In case you don't know, NASA is financed by corporations. And that tells everything
NASA has done a lot for the scientific discovery. And it's actually funded by taxes, not corporations. Now they do get paid to do research on certain subjects, but a lot of research institutes do that. That's how we learn about the world around us. The world would be lost without a lot of the scientific breakthroughs we've encountered in the last 100 years. I think it's amazing how far we've come.
New Wisdom
I completely disagree
-
What do you disagree with? I'm not trying to pick a fight I'm just curious.
According to wikipedia "As a federal agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) receives its funding from the annual federal budget passed by the United States Congress."
If necessary I'm sure someone will list every breakthrough they've discovered in the last 55 years. And to be honest I can think of one thing specifically that really can't deny what they've done, if you don't think the photos that the Hubble telescope have shown us then idk what is wrong with you.
-
In my opinion NASA is the BEST government sanctioned entity. They are purely for learning and discovery rather than all these other government groups that are purely for money and power. It's refreshing if you ask me.
Like Chickasaw Man said, just the Hubble Telescope alone has broadened our view of the universe SO much. Given us so much knowledge. Plus the pictures of nebulae that it has produced are breath taking. And the missions to mars and mercury have given us a great understanding of our planetary neighbors. I don't see what's so terrible about that. If you ask me it's WAY better than what they usually spend tax dollars on (military, government bailouts, ect...)
Our view of the universe and how it works is something that cuts to the core of humanity. It is what we do. We learn, we search, we discover.
-
No im fine thanks regarding hubble its ite too (its practically a super lens gravitating in space (wow)). Regarding the money issue, well, what pisses me off is how corporations have much higher technologies in their hand but they are unwilling to help humanity instead they have spent 21 TRILLION $(this amount actually disappeared along all the gold in the reserves, this is scientific fact), in who knows what.
DISCLAIMER
All right they spent it to build giant underground bases under every (United)state and on the moon, finance in every possible way the extinction of humanity(that's what they are trying to do in fact). This includes the chemtrails full of illuminum, monsanto, war in the middle east for oil etc and countless other acts of high treason towards humanity.
DISCLAIMER END
And you would think that they are not paying NASA? C'mon bro
-
And the missions to mars and mercury have given us a great understanding of our planetary neighbors. I don't see what's so terrible about that.
mm so they gave you understanding of what?
As of now do you seriously think that if NASA encountered alien or alien craft they'd let the public know?
-
No im fine thanks regarding hubble its ite too (its practically a super lens gravitating in space (wow)). Regarding the money issue, well, what pisses me off is how corporations have much higher technologies in their hand but they are unwilling to help humanity instead they have spent 21 TRILLION $(this amount actually disappeared along all the gold in the reserves, this is scientific fact), in who knows what.
Just because it's a fact that the biggest corporations don't care about humanity doesn't make science a bad thing.
DISCLAIMER
All right they spent it to build giant underground bases under every (United)state and on the moon, finance in every possible way the extinction of humanity(that's what they are trying to do in fact). This includes the chemtrails full of illuminum, monsanto, war in the middle east for oil etc and countless other acts of high treason towards humanity.
DISCLAIMER END
And you would think that they are not paying NASA? C'mon bro
I have no comment on the moon base and all the other conspiracy theory stuff. But, I know for a fact that it's the tax dollars funding NASA.
Also no, I doubt they would tell us if they found aliens. Definitely not right off the bat. Anyways, my point is that science is a good thing. Not whether or not NASA is being funded by corporations to build secret moon bases to kill humanity or whatever.
-
Not going to beat around the bush but your wording is very condescending and aggressive.
those missions gave us a greater understanding of mars, our solar system, our galaxy and the universe at large.
Do you have any sources for this?
-
Not going to beat around the bush but your wording is very condescending and aggressive.
Hey I'm not the one who told YOU " i don't know what's wrong with you" remember that.
Yes i have sources. I don't invent anything. But i really have to see if i
can post more because its getting stressful. :-\
-
Lol again with the aggression. Remember it again cos I'll say Whats wrong with you if you don't think this is amazing. You have been far more aggressive to everyone in a lot of your posts. And I'm gunna end it there.
Please show sources.
-
I didn't write anything aggressive.
BTW god created that not NASA.
-
So really stop it if you're a skeptic keep it to yourself. At least don't play the moderator OR the snitch. You already got on my nerves last time because i had never seen you nor talk to you and you were all so ready to point out my faults. It's not my intention to be mean to anyone in general. I don't think I forced you to read anything.
Oh and by the way cloud i hope you don't reply to this
And you call yourself hippie? go look what your science has done for you.
mm so they gave you understanding of what?
And you would think that they are not paying NASA? C'mon bro
:o
-
Actually star supernovae made those! Hehe. NASA just took some pictures.
-
I didn't write anything aggressive.
BTW god created that not NASA.
Thats super aggressive, all your post are aggresive to be honest.
And wtf you think its convenient to make that "god was not nasa" stament? lol bro you clearly has no interest on the argument at all (i dont even know what it is righ now), but you clearly have some interest on proving that your right and everyone else is wrong.
Chill out men relax!
-
Wow, looks like I missed all the drama.
I strongly deeply believe some pretty wacky stuff, stuff that many folks here and elsewhere would either think is crazy, or may even be offended by.
In the past I felt a powerful urge to share my newly discovered "wisdom" with the world, and doing so, bulldozed and bullied my way over others, "ridiculous " beliefs.
It caused me conflict and drama, and in the end, my "education" was just a cause of frustration, not enlightenment to others.
It was not a gift I was sharing, it was a religion, with all the negatives that come with it, just in a different package.
It is ok to share your beliefs, the key is to be open to others beliefs at the same time. Their beliefs have as much right to coexist as yours, and as belief is a fluid thing, constantly changing and being tuned in and out of existence, your opinion of their "ridiculousness", may very well change given enough time and new experiences.
Offer others your beliefs, (and the reasons you believe them) ONLY if you think it may be wanted, but do not be offended if it is not.
They are not you, and do not think like you, so to expect them to feel or act like you is a bit unrealistic.
Offering someone a huge rump steak that is perfectly seasoned and cooked to perfection with a great deal of love, is a wonderful thing to do.
To be offended if they do not eat it because they are vegetarian is just silly.
As is being offended if you are the one offered the steak....
;)
-
Oh yeah, awesome pics Chickasaw Man.
Love looking at the Hubble pics. Blows my mind right open.
-
As far as this thread has gone off topic from plants, one more won't hurt...
A bunch of picture-quality Hubble images are available for free download on their site. 2 or 3 bucks apiece in printing and cheap frames makes cool wall art if you're into space.
-
To be fair this topic wasn't about plants in the first place, and this is the general discussion area.
Nice pictures Frog Pajamas!
New Wisdom
-
23, science is awesome. Science isn't just about creating new technologies or esoteric discoveries; it's a way of thinking. A way of thinking that you can use almost anywhere, anytime. "Doing" science means developing a system of thought and experiment in such a way that the result at which you arrive is an answer in which you can have confidence. When I use the word "pseudoscience", I am referring mostly to Karl Popper's understanding (with some modifications) of falsification. If you make a statement, like "There is a giant spaghetti monster that rules the universe," then that could be true, but there is no way to prove that it is false. That statement, given our abilities, cannot be falsified, therefore it is not scientific. I think this is a really useful lens.
Also, I have worked most of my adult life on government funded science projects. From US Department of Defense and the National Science Foundation as well as EU-funded projects. There is not some huge conspiracy. The system of private and public funding of research and development is pretty simple. Allocate limited resources to the highest potential valued projects. Also, there is a lot of inefficiency in the bureaucracy, and things get more complicated, but that's another topic.
As of now do you seriously think that if NASA encountered alien or alien craft they'd let the public know?
Yes. They would. You know how I know? :) Because they already have. It's not as exciting as a sci-fi thriller, but super strong microorganisms have been discovered to be able to survive in space. That's incredible to me. Constant bombardment of radiation, incredibly cold. Life in the universe is amazing!
-
Awesome delta9!! I would love to see what they find when they dig into the ice on Europa. It would be incredible if they even found bacteria on that moon.