Category: Let's talk
so, who here thinks we're all going to be dead in 2012?
just an interesting topic... with all the hype about it, it could cause histeria, but, i'm just curious what you all think...
2012 will be yet another Y2K. We will all be alive and well come December 22, 2012.
I say since we have no way of knowing what'll happen tomorrow let alone three years from now, don't even give it a second thought. If something happens then we can worry about it at the time... if we have a chance to worry anyway.
Agreed with post 3. Why worry about something you have no control over and can only speculate about?
Sure you might be dead before 2012 then what? Me I'm planning on being one of the chosen and moving in to the moutains. Why do I feel I'm special? Why not. Lol
I've heard so many different dates assigned to the world's ending in 2012 that I really don't care. The world will end when God says it should. I have no trepidation concerning an event I have no control over whatsoever, but I really don't think 2012 will be the end.
i agree with post two, but, the thing in my head is, no one put all the media fuss of 6-6-06, or any other year, but they are doing all this media stuff about 12-21-12, but, it's all on the histroy channel, and they are putting all the worst things that we could think to happen...
odd, i posted this only a few hours ago, scary...
i frankly don't think anything will happen, but, again, i just figure i'd start this to see what happens...
but i do want to know what you all think about the media about this when there was nothing about all the other supposed apoloptic times...
Agree with second post, absolutely nothing will happen. Some people are going to go apeshit though.
Well, there was a huge hype about y2k and nothing happened, so just because the media is sensationalizing something doesn't mean it's going to happen. I agree with others here, why worry about something you have no control over? And besides, I don't think anyone can say when something like this will happen, it will whether we want it to or not, and people assigning a date to it is just putting quite a sad label on our existence. I realize that a lot of people think they have evidence to support it, but the truth is, the people who don't support it and believe in the Bible wil believe their evidence points to something else. Just my thoughts.
you surely never know what will happen, but let's not hope the worst. i don't like speculating about things happening in the future.
another question, it might sound rather stupid, but i'm gonna ask it anyway: what's y2k?
judith
Y2k was when a bunch of people thought the world was gonna end due to computers not being able to handle transitioning from 1999 to 2000.
ah. i see. thanks for explaining.
agree with post three.
Believe what one wants, but please .... don't try to authenticate it with 'science' by that I mean using pseudo science or half-terms to make it sound legit. Ask media types why media makes a big deal out of it I guess ... some of us may lose some weight in 2011 cause the topic and all the misleading info / suppositions will make us wanta puke ...
i still want to see the movie 2012 though, pitty it's only in theaters... but i'm just odd like that..
I agree. I don't think anything's going to happen. We thought the world would end at Y2K and nothing happened. But I have an x girlfriend who sets a lot of stock by the 2012 business. She's a Druid and she thinks that when the world ends she's going to get on a ship and go to Lothlorien. And she thinks I shouldn't worry about getting a job since the world's going to end.
Wow, no offense, but how negative. For someone to say don't live your life because the world will end anyway shows what that person really thinks of themselves.
Plus she is gonna survive along with me, but remembger the world is ending. Lol. In all these ending do you ever notice the ones hyping are the ones that will survive? Why are they so sure?
I've noticed that. And about ten years ago she was an extreme fundamentalist Christian who told me I was going to hell for every little thing I did, be it reading Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings. And she told me that the Rapture was coming and that I was going to hell for breaking up with her. Now it's just a slightly different thing. She's going to go to Lorien and I'd better hurry up and convert to Druidic faith if I wanted to join her on the ship. Granted she's never actually said that but the sentiment is certainly there.
all religions have different takes on things, and y should this be any different...
wants the movie...
The mayan calendar ending is no cause for panic. it was stopped because the spanish decided to invade the mayan civilization and successfully conquered all of the empire. Most died but some survived.
My question is what real valid tangible solid proof do you have. Show it to me and convince me to believe and I will. Also how could the mayans who lived 1500 to 1600 years ago really predict our future when people today can not accurately do it. Events come when they do, you can not predict it unless it's a consequence of something already previously done so creating a chain of events.
1. I am assigned moderator of a forum.
2. I don't moderate well.
what will happen? Oh, right, I'll be demoted. That's possible to predict but not other things.
Lets look at other dates, I know of two.
1984 I forgot if it was the end of the world or was it a year for some other change. Did 1984 ever occur or at least in 1984? No... orwell's story was just that.
2000 was another. Did computer crash and burn because of the numbers? I didn't think so. Wait, I think I am alive... Yes, I am. So, the world didn't end. I was in the airport and got out of it fine. I am living well.
2012? Not likely, and most of all no one can say, more information is necessary if you want to proove it valid.
They were also concerned about 9/9/99, which was September 9, 1999. They thought that was also going to mess up computers as well, though this was overshadowed by Y2K. I agree with you though. Just because the Mayan calendar ended in 2012 doesn't mean anything's going to happen. If we're right and it doesn't I'll only wish I'm able to see the disappointed expression on my x girlfriend's face.
I wish I was there to see the reaction of everyone that day.
I imagine some folks were pretty disappointed when the world didn't end on January 1, 2000. So if nothing out of the ordinary happens during 2012 I daresay some folks, my x girlfriend Chelsey included, are likely to be disappointed. The world might end someday, I don't know. But I agree with the fact that there's no point worrying over something that's totally outside our ability to control.
Yeah, and they were probably upset 1984 didn't happen either.
I'm going to paraphrase from Terry Goodkind's book "Wizard's First Rule." "People will believe a lie either because they fear it is true or they wish it to be true." Again, I paraphrase, and the book expands on that better than I can, but that's the main point I want to make.
Exactly. And to be honest I think the real reason my x is hoping the world ends in 2012 is that then she doesn't have to consider getting off of SSI later in case Social Security runs out of money like they say they're going to. Riddiculous I know but that was pretty much her word.
BryanP22 don't know if it's that unusual: most who have a fixation like that do so in order to avoid facing their own issues / taking responsibility. There have been groups who have gone into debt, or refused to pay on their debts, among other things simply hoping the wold will end when they say it will, and they get off ...
lol, that is a bit funny. While I'm for sure a believer of 2012 (though I hate tying a date to it), I don't view it as the ending of the world. The mayans never viewed it like that, either - the media has simply made the event into something far fetched. The Mayans saw it as a new beginning: 2012 is the end of one world and the starting of another. So in terms of humanity I think we will see a shift on consciousness and an unlocking of psychic abilities, or the other 90% of your brain which you don't use. (I think the most intelligent human used 15%)
The Mayan's stopped the calendar because they saw that after 26000 years a cycle would end and a new one would start - thus the 5th world would end and the 6th begin. Each world is split into two 13000 year cycles, the ladder of which we as humanity have been trapped in a material ilusion of reality, where we see ourselves as separate from the creator and our universe.
It pisses me off, however, to see people who wine and grope about the world ending. I do think many things in it will change, like we might see the rising of a new economy based on the Nasara document, and perhaps those who have been controling our world behind the curtains will also come out - the illumanati/those who are behind the banking systems like the Wrothchilds. But it's not gonna happen in one day, or even in one year. Heck, it might be 2027 before the major consciousness shift occurs. I think the Window is between something like 1987 and 2027. (look at the event called Harmonic convergence of 1987 to learn more)
So if the world ends why would she be happy? I mean then the SSI would end, so she'll get off then too. She might get killed and not be able to jump on that ship for lack of money then what? Lol
I agree with those who've said it's pointless worrying about something that's out of our control.
I think it's interesting that it seems that no matter what people believe, even if they claim no religion, we all seem to take it as a given that the world will end. Plus, we tend to fantasize that when it ends, everybody will die all at once or it will be all loud and shiny and spectacular, just like in the movies. What about this, though. What if the end of the world were a very slow deterioration of things that would take hundreds if not thousands of years. The only example I can think of for this is what I think was happening to the world of Stephen King's Dark Tower books.
Stephen King's Cell was also interesting, though that was more of a change than a total end ... but who was it wrote: "This is how the world ends, not with a bang but a whimper" ...?
this reminds me of someone on facebook. they were watching a documentry about 2012, and a lot of it was about how it came about. apparently, it was from a certain group of historical people (i can't remember what era exactly) but they made lots of predictions about the future. acording to the documentry, none of there predictions have been wrong yet.
but there's always a first, and even if they are right we got 2 years left.
Well if something happens then it happens. But it still reminds me of Y2K, and let's face it, that was about as big a non event as I've ever heard of. But if I was going to pick a side of the coin to bank on I'd lean more toward the shift in consciousness or whatever than the world ending. I've always felt that humans have had powers within them that they haven't as yet been able to realize fully, but that might manifest themselves in subtle ways. I'm not a total believer but I've always believed that some people perhaps can see things before they happen, commune with the dead sometimes or other things like that. I don't necessarily believe in all of it and nor do I believe everyone who claims to have these gifts but I do believe that some people genuinely have such abilities. Maybe those abilities will be honed or enhanced when the shift occurs. Or maybe not. Like I said if something happens then it does. If not then it doesn't. As for the 2012 movie, I might have been willing to watch it but then I read about the marketing campaign. Let's just say it made me mad when I learned that some teenagers had written letters to I think the film's director or even someone at NASA, saying they were contemplating suicide because they didn't want to see the world end.
I don't think the shift of consciousness, or some big world change, is out of the realm of possibility. Is it going to happen on that day? Well, like many have said here, it's out of our control, so there's nothing you can do to prevent it, so don't throw your life away over it.
What is 'shift of consciousness' anyway? We can't prove it, and people go on acting pretty much the same. Didn't the hippies supposed to enlighten themselves in the sixties? They became yuppies in the 1980s and went from pseudo marxists to semi-passable capitalists in a matter of a decade. But at least they put on a good show for the rest of us, I'll give them that. Fox News Network is fast becoming the most popular of the mainstream news network for the masses to open wide and slurp in what's coming to them, the same masses that followed some of these same people in the 1980s putting on daytime talk shows featuring content that borders on the surreal.
As I say, it's generally quite a show, and you don't even have to throw peanuts to them to get 'em to perform for ya.
the bible clearly says that when the big whoosh or boom or crash or whatever happens, we will not know the time and we will not know the day. Therefore 2012 has just invalidated itself.
Hey, if we treat people like it is the first day of our life and do our jobs, go to school, or whatever like it is our last, we'll have no regrets and we can go out howling and laughing.
businesses love all this scare and hype stuff. people buy all there survival products. I have to admit i did it before the dreaded y2k. Now I have three barrels full of freeze dried food and beans that are supposed to expire this year. Do I eat them, throw them out, or use them for target practice?
Additionally you have the nutcases who say "gosh, I'm gonna die, so I'll buy and do all the stuff I woulda shoulda done."
So they make wreckless pointless purchases.
the only way it will happen is if we get so scared and panic and something stupid happens or a terrorist uses our fear to perform some opportunistic act. Now aren't I just a wee little ray of sunshine?
Even if you aren't religious, why 2012? Unless there is a scientific way to prove it, I'll believe it when I see it.
Going to hell when you're breaking up with a girl? How dumb can that statement be?
sounds like if she was that insecure he was living there prior to the breakup.
OK I only got threw half of these post, but I want to point out something that is in the bible:
It says:
No one will know when the end will come, and it will happen when everyone least exspects it.
So if so many think that it is in year 1212, then how could this be if this is what the bible says.
by the way:
My quote isn't word for word.
dam, i lost track of this topic. i agree on the emergence of psychic powers. and, there's no scientific proof, just speculation...
1212? I think that particular year is long gone.
Can we wait until 2020 to die? It sounds like a better number to me.
The problem with 2012 or even 2020 being the end is it'll totally cancel out that song about what was supposed to happen in the year 2525. Hahahaha!
2012 is a complete crock! It's supposedly based on the Mayan Calendar, but the Mayan Calendar doesn't end in 2012; it's simply the start of a new baktun, the 14th baktun in fact. Since a baktun lasts just under 400 years, and we know the world didn't end 400 years ago, or 800, etc., then there's no reason to assume this one will be any different, and the Mayans certainly didn't think it would be, since some of their prophecies speak of events still thousands of years in the future. The whole thing is just hype, pure and simple, and a way of selling books. Predictions of the end of the world have been ten a penny throughout human history, and guess what? Not a single one of them has turned out to be accurate.
I think it's just the usual. People get excited with something that sounds as big and dramatic as this. Who came up with the idea of Y2K?
exactly; people are all up in arms about this, which is more than likely what was wanted when bringing it up again...
I expect we'll all wake up on Dec. 22, 2012. The planet Earth, our friends and our enemies will still be alive and kicking. Sorry, no relief from the drudgery of life by having everything destroyed and everybody killed. Also, no magical rise in consciousness. This means that all of us will actually need to exert some effort to try and get along with our fellow Earthlings. No supernatural power will just fix things. Maybe there'll be some time left to do some last-minute shopping for the holidays.
Yup, and I doubt I'll be probed by the martians anytime soon.
me too, but if we don't die on the 21st, we'll die on the 23rd, that's the other date... well then, let's take it one step further and have us die on the 25th, now that would be a christmas to remember indeed lol
There'll probably be all sorts of dates and predictions coming up, just like they did with y2k, something about the 9s then so there was April 9, September 9, even a group claiming the crash wouldn't happen till January 5.
Nuts all of them
I really do not think the world will end. I also think that this crap about it on tv needs to just stop.
it's all hysteria-mongering.
it's basicly all I see when I flip to the history channel.
omg, lol Ashley.
Let's see, I'm writing all this before I read the actual board, so that might cost me, but I honestly don't believe in it.
I mean, if the Earth were going to blow up (or how ever we were set up to die in that movie [I haven't seen it]) don't you think there would be some kind of sign our world was screwing up or something?
Dunno, just my opinion..
Well the business so far this year with the mining accident in Virginia and now the oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico could be construed as signs. That x girlfriend I told you all about (and no Turricane we never actually lived together), would have had a field day with this stuff if she watched the news.
You want to talk signs...I will admit to certain patterns:
That earthquake in Hatie, the volcanic ashe that prevented those flights, the strange up and down climate, the economy going down the toilet, etc. These are no signs that the world is ending, however. I do believe that the world is changing.
The world is always changing. I'm sure the earthquake in Hati was not the biggest earthquake ever. Besides, earthquakes won't be a sign because there are many earthquakes that occur every day.
I agree with the majority here, I don't think anything will happen. If the whole y2k thing was true, I wouldn't be around writing this lol. I would've been dead when I was 3. But there's this guy in my class who makes a huuuuge deal out of it. Also:
I think 2020 would make more sense than 2012. Just because the Mayan calendar ends in 2012, won't mean anything will happen ...
And I bet after 2012, people will make up another date when the world will end.
What are construed as signs of the end, can mostly be written off as signs of a memory of history no more complex than that of a chicken.
This and worse have happened before, in greater succession. Seismic activity (that's earthquakes, volcanos and the like, for those without a vocabulary much beyond 'OMG'), happens in fits and spurts. The earth's crust is actually very malleable and flexible, the mantle being something akin to a viscous fluid. What that means to us that walk on top of it, after one or mor occurrences of this activity, especially as it pertains to certain seams and faults, aka the Ring of Fire, more will follow till the whole thing settles for a bit.
An oversimplification, yes, but gets the job done till you start with Wikipedia and then move on to more thorough sources.
The oil leak is more a man-made and man-caused incident than anything superstitiously significant.
i agree with the last post. but people will say that all the earthquakes that have happened is a sign of the world ending
the two volcanic eruptions is a sign of the world ending
the fact that it's may here in the north east and we're getting freeze warnings tonight is a sign of the world ending.
rumph.
but as to the larger psychic change, now, i've always been spiritually aware. so, to maybe be moreso, would make me very happy.. but i'm wierd like that...
We all have different ways of interpreting these various world events. Nobody mentioned climate change, although we seem to be more aware of this now. I agree with the poster who said that these are probably signs that the world could be changing rather than ending.
You know, the fact that we've had a nice long respite from earthquakes and volcanoes happening in quick succession is quite unusual, apparently. There used to be big earthquakes all the time. Look, Alaska lived through a 9.3 earthquake. I live on the Ring of Fire, I know how active it can be, and if you're going to use it as an example the world's ending well damn. We should have been blown out of the sky in '64.
Oh and Robo, those whose vocabularies don't extend much beyond "omg" "lol" "ttyl" and the like probably don't understand that you've just insulted them...
I think Pat Robertson just ruined it for me. After his outrageous statements about Haiti's supposed deal with the devil and his claim that the earthquake was God punishing them for that. now everytime I hear about an earthquake I think to myself, "OK, what did these people do to piss God off now, and is God ever happy?" The real mindblower is that if these earthquakes happened and were in areas that were not populated, they would not be seen as anything more than earthquakes. When humans go squish and buildings go breaky-smash, and it happens several times, all of a sudden somebody's god or even the earth itself is angry. Hey, have we tried virgin sacrifice yet if this is the case? Hahahahahaha!
dianic wiccan here, yes i'd have to agree that the earth is angry. i mean, look at what we do, we tear down trees, blow up oil rigs, burn forests, and generally don't respect it. we polote her air, and, a lot of other things. so, if she takes her revenge. well, that is her right.
so all i have to say is mother don't punish all of us for the mistakes of a few... but, you do what you will.
and to the last post.
people go squish and buildings go breaky smashy, i just laughed at that...
Whether you buy in to "the Earth has a spirit" thing or not, you have to agree that even things without spirits feel pain. I personally wouldn't claim to know if the Earth is thinking what a bunch of morons we are--to play devil's advocate, logic says it's not--you can pay attention and know that it's hurting. Just look at abandoned mines, wastelands caused by nuclear accidents, and places where there have been massive oil spills--to name a few things--if you want evidence of that.
Does your room feel pain because you didn't clean it?
Just sayin'.
Naturally, you should clean up your room, and we ought to better manage resources and stop being so silly and juvenile with how we're handling our planet. But I can't see an inanimate object feeling anything. Does it help to perceive / make believe it does? I don't know: let's see how many kids clean up their room if they are told the room has a lonely and unhappy vibe if it's not taken care of right. When that works / across the country we see kids' rooms cleaner and all because they think this stuff, well, I'd have to turn my head and take notice.
Animals, even mollusks, feel pain of course, as they have the structures to do that. But what point would there be in a rock feeling pain? It can't improve its situation, close a shell, get out of the way.
No, but the earth is a huge system supporting unbelievable amounts of a simply amazing variety of organims, and it has uncounted processes going on within and without it constantly. Our rooms are made of dead wood and stone, metal and glass, plastic, and fibery things if you have carpet so that's not a really good analogy. Plus, a room's not "hurt" if it's a little messy.
no worries about 2012, we'll just have kanye interupt it. haha
Feathery, the earth is, as you describe, a huge system. Not all systems are alive, though:
It is more a huge machine. Now although it is a very fault-tolerant machine, we have servers that do this, it doesn't feel anything. And although it's fault-tolerant, I fear that in principle you all are right: the systems will break down, and anyone who has made any repairs on any functioning system knows once it starts there's often a domino effect. As imaginative as it is to anthropomorphize (attribute human characteristics to) the problem, I don't think it's useful if having an intelligent discussion on management of resources. May have helped at one time, when human reasoning was primitive and religious dogma was all there was, but those days are gone.
Another illustration that of course breaks down, but works:
When my daughter was two, I would make her shoes ask her to put her feet inside them.
As she got older, it was more "C'mon, put your shoes on, you don't want to be out barefoot." Her reasoning was improved, and in fact she would have been resentful if I had gone and done that with her shoes. Now she's a teenager, I never mention the shoes unless she wants to a., buy some, or b., leave them lying around.
You get the picture: perhaps this could be applied to environmental issues: A primitive society that doesn't understand how systems works, but may of course feel there's something greater than their immediate need, may benefit from making believe the earth would take some revenge, or has a will of its own.
Naturally a bit of applied physics, environmental science and the like can render a population capable of a reasonable discussion on how to manage systems so they stay operational. The earth is inanimate, though of course it houses many animate creatures. A stone rolling down the hill and crushing someone's leg may have been loosened by mining, and not properly disposed of by one of the workers, but this fall and crushing the leg is not so much revenge as simple inertia, avoidable by taking care of one's surroundings.
When I hear people talking about the Earth getting back at us, it makes me think of my daughter's shoes, when she was two.
On the other side, when people say it's endless, or act presumptuously as though they may thoughtlessly mismanage any natural resource they want, makes me think of the spoiled privileged brat who breaks things thoughtlessly, because they "look solid enough", and so takes no care / leaves your tools out in the rain and the like.
I seem to be perfectly capable of incensing both sides of the earth debate. Then again, to me it's not so much a debate as a few major problems that need to be fixed / better management.
No, the earth is not a living thing, but many of the things on it are. That's mostly what we're destroying. The earth itself is a rock. It would take more than polution to destroy the foundations of the planet, but whether they show it or not, every living thing is affected by the frivolity of some of our actions. Now, what does that have to do with 2012? I don't know, but there is definitely evidence to support a change in the near future.
A change perhaps, but I somehow doubt that's when the world's going to end. And I absolutely refuse to watch the movie. I actually did a bit of research on this a while back and apparently even the Mayans didn't set much stock by this business. And apparently they still don't.
I am not superstitious in the least but I do notice changes. Yes, the planet is always undergoing changes as is our atmosphere...I was just pointing out that I understand how these self-proclaimed profits think.
i still say that the earth is angry due to everything that goes on, but that's just my view. ok, you see it as a rock, fine. i see the earth as a living thing. it's all a matter of oppinion. but either way you have to admit that it's angry.
ersonally I don't believe it but it's a scary thought indeed.
PAngry? I somehow don't like the sound of that. Not to mock you or anything, but how do you think we can calm the angry earth? I can see that polution needs to stop but that mostly recks the oceans. I guess I don't see the anger and I hope I never do.
by taking better care of our enviroment as a whole, our air our oceans, put more money towards green technology and energy saving stuff is the way i see...
Well I of course concur with your solutions. However I fail to see chemical reactions as angry.
However, I do know we people can become incensed or angry at the thought of leaving the place worse for our kids than when we found it. But as I said in an earlier post, in being truly conservative with how we use our resources (I don't mean politically but the true definition of the word), requires an adult mind that thinks of its posterity and not just today / right now.
There are a lot of different technologies being developed right now which will help in energy conservation, an old word for what we now call 'green technology'. The question will be how quickly can these be deployed on the consumer market at a rate and cost that the majority of the earth's population (very poor population) can aford.
I'm not a religious person, but I do believe that everything you do has a way of coming back to you in the end, whether that would be good or bad. That's just one of my philosophies on life. I also believe that an ability does exist in the mind to read the future. I don't know how exact this is, but I think it's definitely there, and that it takes a completely selfless person to be able to use this ability. Did those who predicted 2012 have this ability? I don't know. Did they predict how it would end, or just that it would? I'm not saying I totally believe in the 2012 prediction. I have too many questions about it, but I don't think the idea is impossible.
Oh I agree. One of the things I love about my field of study is I get to experiment. Signal processing can open doors in our mind...doors that we didn't no were there. Now I don't know about mind reading but I do feel that if people's EEG patterns were more regulated...we'd have less mental instability. Wo...I went off topic but...ehem.
Robo, in computing, as I'm sure you know, green tech called the cloud is beeing worked on. Some sort of super-network I guess. What are your thoughts?
I've had funny dreams about things and intuitions a few days before something would happen. Once, the name "Lillian" popped in to my head one day, and a few weeks later ky mother's friend found out she was pregnant and she was naming the baby Lillian if it was a girl--and lo and behold, it was. So I certainly don't discredit that. And sound can do a lot of things to the mind, or the touch of one with an innate ability. A couple of times I've been able to touch someone's face--and it works especially if the person has agreed for me to "experiment" (oooooh, scary lol jk) on them and if they're someone already close to me in some way--and I'll catch strange glimpses of what's going on in their minds. I've helped a few people solve problems that way by seeing things in their minds that their consciousness can't get at readily. It also depends where your hands go; you can activate spots from which you can heal best or read best, or send things directly to them best. I don't understand a lot about it, and it's hard to tell when something will happen or not because sometimes I can't just poof, make it work. And I don't have a perfect understanding of contact points and such, so obviously it's dangerous if one doesn't proceed with caution--to the sender and receiver. But look, now I'm going off topic. Anyway my whole point was to say that I don't discredit strange things like that because I've had experiences with that sort of stuff, and the more I have, the more intrigued I am and the more questions it raises. For a while I toyed with the idea that we might undergo a collective "awakening" (for lack of a better word) in 2012 and set it aside because I simply didn't know enough to say.
Margorp, interesting question.
The cloud is more a hive, or colony of machines, not so much a Skynet or Borg. For that cloud, basically a group of servers managing workload, to work right, it needs to not be centrally controlled, and in fact that what makes both the Web and the offshoot we call the cloud, so really powerful. Unlike science fiction, where the net is monolithic and controlled by a few, the real net is basically croudsourced, if you will, which is why repressive governments are so afraid of it.
If virtual servers and server load management software became conscious, it would result in a lot of conscious entities, not just one. And that's a big if, because even if we could make machines really and successfully pass the Turing Test, we most assuredly wouldn't, if said machine's purpose was just to manage data streams, and what files and parts of files get stored where.
No, in fact unlike Science Fiction, the power in the cloud is in the individuality of the virtual and real servers, where no one network can get overloaded.
Anyone remember all the 403 and Server Busy errors right after 9/11? And how often, excluding small sites of course, do you see these errors anymore? That's because even a single server manager anymore is becoming far less common.
Sorry to take this off track here, but Margorp's question gets to the root of something I always find fascinating: the real differences between what is thought of in science fiction, and what we end up developing in real life.
feathery iyana, chackras probably will help with the energy flow. the third eye for seeing things, mentally in a person's mind, and what not...
Yeah, but these are points on the face itself, two under the eyes, where you can observe, two near the temples, where you can interact actively, and two lower, sort of under your ears, through which healing and rebalancing energy flows. and if you balance across all of these you get full contact, a way to temporarily travel through another's mind, as long as you're careful of the internal energetic structures. I think there's another set k"n the face as well. On either side of what you'd call the throat chakra are two more, which specialize almost solely in the transfer of pure energies and almost no thought. There is one, possibly two, near the heart, through which pure life force is directed--this one's only used in dire situations. there's one you know where which is solely devoted to sexual energy... and there are probably a few more.
Feathery, I think your dreams could be written off as cooincidence.
Robo:
Thanks for answering my question. I've tried to do my own research on the cloud but the good folks at I B M have agents to cover up the "research." Talk about monopolization of technology...a true crime indeed.
Um....both times the kid broke his arm, I dreamed of it--I even knew where he was on the rink and what bit broke....coincidence? Once is coincidence. This poor kid broke the same arm twice in a year in two different places. There are others, but they're more personal, so...
Twice in one year? Yikes. I still say that it is just....happenstance. I mean, I have had dreams that came true but that is a mathmatical certainty given the number of events in the world.
I agree with Feathery. I think all dreams have some sort of meaning, no matter how small, and nothing is coincidence as far as such dreams are concerned.
feathery, hmm, that is something i'm going to have to look into, i've never heard of that before!! coolish! i'm not a healer, more an astral warrior, but i know who'd be interested in that...
I don't know what net material there is out there. Hey! I should go look, too! Those points I discovered myself, through trial and error, on someone who'd done a brilliant bit of psionics and had what you could call the "mental version of VMWare". Basically they had a little partition in which they'd built the simple likeness of a mind from extra energy. The healing/life force/sexual ones I found by trying when I knew I had to...and somehow I knew the points were there, don't ask how because I don't know, it scares me a bit sometimes, when I know something because I have to.... Silly me, looking on the net for that stuff was something I never really thought of, I wrote it off as something like the Chronicles that was new, and Ashley you'll know what that means, and I--the queen of run-on sentences--shall depart for now...
I must say it is a fascinating belief system indeed. I know that many times, it seems as if we have abilities but what really happens is just a series of random events that make it seem that way.
Everybody is entitled to their beliefs.
Oh I agree. That is what makes the world go round.
Trial and error, my friend, trial and error. Lol I could use the scientific method on it repeatedly and post the results...
yes feather i do know what you mean, i still need your cronical, as i don't know it, and that makes me sad...
wow, I say, you guys have taken this topic all over the place lol. I provided my thoughts on 2012 in one of the earlier posts, so I won't repeat much of it-asside from the fact that I am a believer that our Earth will ascend. Science has to realize that quantum physics defies all of the garbage neutonian physics taught us-the physics we are taught in schools is purely third-dimensional and attempts to create a mind-set that beyond the physical world there is nothing else. Trust me, there are millions of findings which are hidden because they are contrary to science.
I'm a big quantum physics guy, and so am I big on the spiritual aspects of things. Lately my family's comments about me and college have taken me away from that path but I'm looking to get back into it...
A more synicle view towards the topic of 2012 is that all of the things happening now are being played out by the illuminati-the government new world order is under way. I can see this viewpoint as well, though I ultimately think that the new world order will not succeed. I've listened to a radio show called Coast to coast AM, which goes on AM stations after 1 AM eastern, and it is my way of gathering all perspectives on a lot of issues. Simply put, what we are taught and told is not true. There are more things hidden than people realize-imagine what this world would become if everyone was told that they are creators of their reality and that their thoughts do make an impact in our quantum universe?
Everything is connected. While you might not see the Earth as living, you have to acknowledge that everything on our planet vibrates at a certain frequency-matter winks in and out of existance. Earth has a vibration too, and this has been rising steddily over the years. That's scientifically proven. If everything vibrates-you vibrate as a particle and/or wave too-the level at which objects vibrate in relation to your frequency counts.
-Tomi
Matter vibrating at increased rates, the loose boundary between matter and energy, or as you call it winking in and out of existence, are of course part of quantum physics. They neither prove nor disprove anything spiritual, they simply act and react. Of course anyone can believe what they want, but science and religion are two very different solutions to two very different problems.
I, too, have listened to Coast To Coast, but that was about fourteen years ago, and it was particularly entertaining during some rather tough times. But simply because it's late at night and hosted by a rather authoritative elder gentleman doesn't make it any more credible than anything else. Personally I don't buy the reasoning that sources can't be given because there's a cover-up or a conspiracy. Funny during the early to mid nineties when it became trendy to think that way in some quarters, but it's about worn out like the mat in my garage by now.
why worry about the unknown but not working on the known instead?
the speculation of 2012 is like the version of y2k during the late 1990s. look what happen, we are surviving so far.
if you ask me, it is just another way for all those self claiming to be spiritual leader or whatever to get people interest and join their group.
This is true.
However wouldn't it be great if science and the spiritual united once and for all? I'm not talking about the teachings that today's mainstream religions give, as they don't focus on much else than following a certain book for practices. In that perspective I don't see, let's say Christianity and science murging.
There's a difference between religion and spirituality, in that the ladder has no official book. Sure, some choose to subscribe to certain "gurus"-I don't because I'd rather try and see all sides of it and not follow a certain person's "teachings". Again, people are different and I certainly respect that;I know that there advantages and disadvantages to both types of systems for spirituality.
The only way we can see science and the spiritual murge is by changing both. It will take time but I think it's possible.
Tomi, you'd be an interesting one to talk to. I don't know if you've ever talked to Geoff--Sledge071--but I talk to him about this stuff too.
Okay: Robo, I have to disagree with you at one point. All religions have a strong spiritual element--but not all spirituality is religious. Someone who decides to develop psi talents and contact various entities and look in to other dimensions of energy is spiritual--even if they're trying to approach it scientifically--but he/she isn't necessarily religious. I astral travel, I can use mind-touch to an extent, I use psionics to customize my mind's psychic barriers, and so on--but I wouldn't call myself a very religious person. I don't know if there's something up there, and if there is and it wants to stay hidden, it has the right to.
Tomi, I agree. People get thrown out of scientific circles all the time when they suggest that so-and-so's findings give credit to psychic ability. And no, the psychics that take your money on a website aren't real...
Believe what you will...we all need hope.
ello!
Iyana, no, I have not heard of Jeff-i shall assume he's on here then?
I certainly see why science "despises" of those who are spiritual. It's simply because it's not proovable!Oh you stupid cd-drive go back inside!
Ok, sorry, pushed the cd-drive with my leg. Anyway... As I was writing. Science can't proove that these so called "psychic" ideas are real.
I have tried to astral project myself before, no luck with it thus far-I have too many fears of skeletons. Or the titanic-I have fears that I'll land in the bottom of the titanic with skeletons there. So no, no luck with it.
Getting back to the topic though. I always like to say, "science has the answers, spirituality has the tools.". Once science starts understanding just how complex our brain and even consciousness is, they will recognize that these abilities people have are in deed in existance. When that will happen? I don't know. 2012? Maybe, maybe not. I certainly won't bet on 2012 but hope for it of course. :)
-Tomi
science tries to do experiments with the paranormal, they just don't let it happen, they observe document, and when something new happens, they freak out... just let spirits alone you science idiots... you just make them angry some times...
We do not despise this stuff. We believe that we all give off energy and we can read that energy if we listen.
As I said before science and technology solve one set of problems while religion and spirituality solve another set.
I realize there's differneces between religion and spirituality, but there equally are between science and technology. Naturally, science, technology and engineering of all types deal in the practical universe, because you wouldn't want us to build a bridge that sometimes worked, and sometimes didn't, depending on how a being felt that day, and whether north was north or south didn't really matter because it was all up for perspective or whatever.
In perhaps overly simplistic terms, , scientists figure out principles, engineers use them to create solutions for people, while spiritual and / or religious explain either the not-yet-known, or uncomfortable. They're not enemies, this isn't a war, they just address different problems, and use different methods. The methods used aren't always cross-compatible is all.
Verry well put...and diplomatic.
The way I see it is each does perhaps solve one set of problems but they create a whole other list of them.
I definitely agree with that. Science deals with what can be proven, whereas religion, as I understand it, deals mainly with theories and faith. Choosing to believe only what can be proven can be good, but you could face problems when it comes to subjects that are strictly emotional, such as love. Sure, there are ways to show your love, but could you imagine how far you would go in a relationship if you were asked to prove it every time you said "I love you"?
Choosing to believe in your faith can be good, and it definitely makes trust a lot easier, but can you imagine what the world was like before the Renaissance, when Galileo and others were convicted just for trying to prove a theory that was against the faith of the Roman Catholic Church?
that's an interesting idea :)
On the same note though, is Science being the roman catholic church by not seeing any tangible (that is, physical) evidence for ESP and other such ideas? Quantum physics show that they exist but not tangibly-meaning that right now we don't have precise devices to view ghosts and say, "oh yes, that's a ghost and there is really a 4th astral dimension.".
Thus science simply can't believe that these ideas exist.
That is why in the face of society those who have these views are frowned upon as psychotic cases. I do respect you ugys, however, for not going that route. Regardless, I do have a feeling that science is just a "new church"-this is meaning that in the sense that it has a set of faiths (scientific method and the idea that if it can't be proven, it isn't real) and anything else that falls outside those boundaries aren't right. Perhaps there is no God belief in Science which does make it less bias (e.g. no wars on who's god is right like with religion), but there is for sure a faith behind it.
All the best,
Tomi
oops, meant to say you guys haha-missplacement of the u there. :)
I did hear a lot about the 06 06 06 thing, but haven't heard much about 2012. I haven't really thought about it, but whatever hapens will happen, so.
Belief is one thing but we must beware of superstition. Doesn't the Bible even caution against that?
you want to hear about 2012, then watch the history channel, stuff is on at least once a week lol...
lol
Tomi, science is not and cannot be a religion.
Science is no more than principles. Hence it can neither support nor deny the existence of anything spiritual. Your perception of science suppressing belief in ghosts and the like is incorrect.
First, science is a collection of principles with data to support it. The scientific community is a collection of professionals who mine, gather, process, analyze and compile the data, and occasionally come up with new findings. Science is more than willing when proven to be wrong, to admit it. More often than you realize, wrongly held assertions about things are put right.
Nobody has faith in science, science is a collection.
Religion on the other hand, or spirituality, is often a collection of texts or materials and / or experiences, which by their very nature cannot be proven. To prove something is to be able to perform controlled experiments with and without the factor in question.
There are two scenarios I imagine you or some others may consider science and faith to clash: that of the faith healer and that of the psychic.
Now I have actually seen controlled experiments with psychics where various material objects were used: example, "Name the three face playing cards I have on the table," and she got one out of three. All through the episode, failures I could never live with as an engineer, and you wouldn't live with as a consumer of my products.
That being said, the psychic was perfectly capable within her own space to go happily along, explaining away every failure with some elongated response far from logical but makes sense to anyone who wants to believe in a psychic's abilities.
Now faith healers, particularly of the Christian persuasion, have an alarmingly low success rate. Any hospital with that success rate would be closed in short order and lawsuits would abound. In fact, the success rates among the faith healers tend to be psychosomatic in nature, or shall we say medically unprovable. To believers I am not saying they're frauds, the believers may *feel* healed, but that is not the same as actually having been cured. These faith healrs and their followers have a myriad of explanations for why administration of x did not produce y results, many of said explanations either overlap, contradict, or simply to a logical mind are quite meaningless.
Add to this that many faith-based instructors of sorts will say of you or I that being blind, a particular biological phenomenon or mishap depending on how you look at it, has a higher purpose in and of itself. Aside from it being quite mind-boggling to assert that a defective or missing biological component contains a higher purpose in and of itself, what does that even mean? No offense to any of a faith that asserts this, and if one is helped by it, then by all means. However these are areas of what some would call conflict between science and faith of any sort.
They are incongruous in many instances but they don't really conflict. Consider that most faiths are older than science, from times when there was neither proof nor precision, when the difference between 1000 or 2000 was insignificant, when there was no standard of proof, no units of measure.
So if I read from my own faith that Christ says, and I paraphrase, that in the same way Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, he would also be in the earth (buried in a tomb, it is assumed).
Technically this is incorrect based on dates and times set forth in other places Christian and otherwise. A crucifixion on Friday mid-morning, resulting in a death at approximately 3:00 PM and presumably interment between five and six in the evening, followed by the account of ressurrection at around 6:00 A.M. on Sunday morning is not three days nor is it two nights.
Now, which of these numbers is off? I would suggest from a faith-based perspective that it doesn't matter. It doesn't change the significance, at least for us who call ourselves Christians, because of the greater significance. But I would not use said texts for measuring angles, times, or any other concrete units which had no meaning to the authors.
If a faith speaks of earth, wind, water and fire as elements, you and I would of course know they cannot mean base material elements. However it has significance for them which outsiders, if you will, may not understand.
Where problems arise is when faith and science attempt a blend where there is simply not a match. With 2012, you will probably find some Wiccans, Mayans and others who are said to support it, who probably don't believe any of it. When the supposed Y2K craze was around, I was a pretty new convert to Christianity, but naturally because of my profession and disposition did not give any stock to any of the claims. Many of the popular faith-based claims were made with very gross technical errors.
But I learned around the close of 1999 there were actual fundamentalists who, without any technical data, had basically arrived at the same conclusions. One that stands out in my memory was an older southern woman who had no access to a computer, no technical data from which to form what I would have called a reasonable conclusion but there she was totally confident nothing was gonna happen. I didn't do to well at hiding my surprise when she gave me her whole conclusion lock stock and barrel.
So don't be surprised if a number of Wiccans sleep peacefully the night of the supposed event, knowing full well what most of us know, that nothing abnormal is likely to occur.
But in any case science won't be taking the place, as you suggested, as any universal church or religious organizations, because its aims are completely different. Were that to change, it would no longer be science.
I want to make two points, both of them unrelated, I think, to this debate over religion and science.
First, for you religious folks and 2012 believers, there's a crowd who's got ya beat. Google for May 21, 2011 and there's a whole raft of folks and websites and things who are convinced that Christ returns or judgment day will happen or the world will end on that date. Not sure if all three events are synonymous, but there you go.
Second, when you think of the end of the world, what sorts of events do you think will happen. I mean, yeah, it seems to be a fairly broad concept, doesn't it? Will the entire planet just go poof at the appointed day and hour, just wink out of existence? Or will there just be an avalanch of destructive weather patterns which will destroy all life and property, with the break-up of the actual planet as an option? Or will some supernatural force just zap humanity out of existence and leave the animals and the planet intact and just call do-over?
Oh, I have one more point, although I wish I could remember where on the web I read this. Somebody somewhere said that all this thinking and talking and setting dates for the end of the world is people's reaction to their perception of everything just going way out of control in their view. I guess it's a psychological reaction to an inability to cope with change, especially when change happens pretty fast. You think this is credible?
You know, getting back to the thing about Galileo and others being frowned upon or in many cases actually being hung for their beliefs and trying to prove them, I do remember reading about a case that was much more recent, albeit perhaps a hundred or two-hundred years ago, where a schoolteacher was going to be hung for teaching Darwin's theory instead of divine providence in his classes. I don't remember how it actually turned out but I do seem to remember reading about it in a history class. So things like that didn't just happen before the renaissance, although admittedly I imagine their frequency did decline following.
BrianP22 it still does happen only the fundamentalists aren't in Europe anymore they're in the Middle East. Parts of North America, in the South of the U.S. while they do not yet hang anyone, do interfere science curricula with their religious beliefs, a phenomenon as intellectually embarrassing as was Outcome-based education in the 1990s. Wherever there is theocracy of any kind, yu will see science, technology and engineering take a very steep decline. And in an increasingly global world, they can do this, while still reaping the benefits of said sciences by simply importing the benefits.
I mean: You can remove instruction on basic DNA and evolutionary theory from your schools, the backbone behind how we solved several major medical problems of late, while still importing doctors who understand it and technologies who use it from other areas.
In the same way, Jihadist groups in the middle east wouldn't dream of allowing Nuclear physics instruction in their classes but they will import bombs from places who do.
Give a particular persuasion's fundamentalist extremists enough power and sway, and they will all without exception behave the same. Ultimate outcomes may differ: which modern device, scientific principle or social structure they abhor, but the common denominator is still the same: excise the supposed infidel device / science / social or technical development, while continuing to import the benefits. At the same time overweaning and churlish, in my opinion.
So basically they're hypocrites. Doesn't surprise me.
I wouldn't say that. Hypocrisy implies two-faced. No, they are precisely what they say they are. The problems many have with religion are often problems with its fundamentalist extremists. I simply posit that fundamentalist extremism is a mentality and not a belief system or faith. It has characteristics in thought and behaviors towards society in general, and people groups in general. So while the behaviors are the same the targets may be different. But no, they're not hypocrites: part of the phenomenon is that they are exacty what they say: they've re-branded their particular faith groups to excuse otherwise uncivilized behaviors is all.
Basiccally, people belive what they want to believe.
Consider the people who claimed to see the immage of Jesus in a piece of toast.