Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Proof of God (Gnosticism = Knowledge is Power)


InvestigativeThinker
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

Also, before you reply READ MY STATEMENT FIRST AND TELL ME WHAT IS WRONG WITH IT. You need to SPECIFY from the OP what I was wrong about in regards to Darwinian "Big Bang" and I will address it. I never claimed to be the smartest man in the universe who knows everything for I am not God. I made trial and error. That's literally how ideas work. They're not always right at first. I've said it once and I'll say it again: this is a PROPOSED OR PATENTED IDEA!

Sleep well at night. Nobody is going to steal your ideas.

 

4 hours ago, Guyver said:

You must listen to the “outro” that is the ending, to really see my point expressed perfectly.  Listen to the drums.  AI can’t do that I don’t think.

Can't do it here and now, or can't ever do it?

I don't have an answer, but I thank you for a good question to think over.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

 

Uh huh. So this is what I get for actually explaining my proposed concept. It's almost like nobody can question your worldviews without you getting super defensive about it. Atheists, Muslims and Christians are all full of bs. You clearly have read nothing I stated. If you think my opinion "doesn't matter" then I guess this debate is over then, because you were never serious from the beginning. I proposed an idea and you never seriously evaluated it. 

There is no reason at all to be serious.

6 hours ago, SecretSanta said:

Starting? 
Seemed like it from the beginning to me.

I was trying to be polite.:lol:

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Guyver said:

You must listen to the “outro” that is the ending, to really see my point expressed perfectly.  Listen to the drums.  AI can’t do that I don’t think.

 

I'm with you on this. I don't see how the computer will ever replace a real drummer. Ever jam with a drum machine? You can play to it but it doesn't play to you.

Like you, I'm also a multi-instrumentalist. Although I don't involve myself with playing anymore. When I was much younger drums absolutely fascinated me and I could not keep from sitting down with them. But at the same time playing guitar equally grabbed my attention. I've noticed over the years that some guitar players have spoken about the fact that they also played the drums and those particular guitarists always seem to have a certain feel that was very drum-like. Tommy Emmanuel, Eddie Van Halen and Carlos Santana come to mind. But there are many others.

The reason why I don't think a computer can be programmed to do what a person can do with the drums or any other instrument for that matter, is because music in and of itself has something to do with this universal connection that we have with each other. I've always thought of music as being a way to experience something with others all at the same time that's hard to explain. This connection even goes on with the people in the room, who are standing around listening or perhaps dancing with the music.

I like how you used a tune from the Police as an example of what a drummer does and how he contributes to making the music what it is. Stewart Copeland is one of my favorites so I'll post an example of what he does as a drummer too. The intricacies of what he does on his ride symbol and hi-hat is really amazing.

 

Sorry I just noticed. I guess this should have been in the other thread?

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

Also, before you reply READ MY STATEMENT FIRST AND TELL ME WHAT IS WRONG WITH IT. You need to SPECIFY from the OP what I was wrong about in regards to Darwinian "Big Bang" and I will address it. I never claimed to be the smartest man in the universe who knows everything for I am not God. I made trial and error. That's literally how ideas work. They're not always right at first. I've said it once and I'll say it again: this is a PROPOSED OR PATENTED IDEA!

The Big Bang isn't Darwinian and scientists don't see it that way.

Most, including myself see it as the super fast expansion of a singularity which was probably a previous universe which grew old and collapsed.

I'm a cultural and natural resource specialist and not a physicist, but you ideas about quantum physics are really something to be desired.

Let me ask a few that have a clue.

@zep73 @Harte Here's some bad physics to enjoy.

Edited by Piney
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Piney said:

The Big Bang isn't Darwinian and scientists don't see it that way.

Most, including myself see it as the super fast expansion of a singularity which was probably a previous universe which grew old and collapsed.

I'm a cultural and natural resource specialist and not a physicist, but you ideas about quantum physics are really something to be desired.

Let me ask a few that have a clue.

@zep73 @Harte Here's some bad physics to enjoy.

There are so many things wrong with it, that there's nothing left to salvage, if we tried. Into the bin it all goes.

But it's funny as hell! :tsu:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me begin here:

On 6/20/2022 at 5:11 PM, InvestigativeThinker said:

Unlike Atheism, Gnosticism actually explains metaphysics - something we can physically observe. For example, ghosts are a group of photons without an electronic source while shadowpeople are a group of electrons without a photonic source. This is why ghosts can pass through solid state objects and "vanish" without physically changing the state of that object. Your body is photons/refraction and your shadow is electrons/reflection.

Please explain how you have photons without electrons and vice versa, given that the photon is the carrier of electromagnetic force (electrons.)

That is, you can't simply make something up about electrons - which are particles defined by physics, studied by physics, and (you may know) are quite well known and understood by physics.

After all, you're using them to post your insane religious beliefs (which, by the way, are NOT Gnostic at all.)

Harte

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Harte said:

After all, you're using them to post your insane religious beliefs (which, by the way, are NOT Gnostic at all.)

Perhaps I should've done this.

https://gnosticismexplained.org/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

I'm with you on this. I don't see how the computer will ever replace a real drummer. Ever jam with a drum machine? You can play to it but it doesn't play to you.

Like you, I'm also a multi-instrumentalist. Although I don't involve myself with playing anymore. When I was much younger drums absolutely fascinated me and I could not keep from sitting down with them. But at the same time playing guitar equally grabbed my attention. I've noticed over the years that some guitar players have spoken about the fact that they also played the drums and those particular guitarists always seem to have a certain feel that was very drum-like. Tommy Emmanuel, Eddie Van Halen and Carlos Santana come to mind. But there are many others.

 

I have a drum machine and looper pedal on order right now, and I think it will arrive today, since the main and monitor arrived yesterday.  I agonized over the decision to but the thing, but I decided if nothing else, Incan loop the rhythm parts and practice solos over the top, which I can’t do by myself, and don’t have a band to play with right now. Thankfully, the pedal wasn’t that expensive so I was willing to part with the cash.  But just what you said is a concern for me.  You can play with a drum machine, but it can’t play with you.  Now, they do make another machine called the Boss RC 600 which is a little expensive, but if I sprung for that, I could record all of the percussion, bass, and rhythm guitar parts, play with feel, and then run them back to sing or solo over.  That’s probably what I will do eventually, no pun intended.  But yeah, playing with feel is what makes the music great IMO, and that’s not something computers can do right now as far as I know.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Guyver said:

but you also make stuff up.  For example, when you say you believe in Satan, that means you believe the Bible, since that’s the only place you find him.  I don’t believe the Bible is any kind of factual or metaphorical resource at all.  I believe that God if it exists, does not live on this plane, and could be the program of a supercomputer from the future, and admit that’s a possibility.  I’m open to more things than many atheists because they require real proof for everything.  And I ask, what’s wrong with that?  What the heck is wrong with making a decision that you’re not gonna believe Jack Diddley on a stick unless it’s proven?  I like that about the atheists,  they call that one right IMO.  That’s how I want to live, I don’t believe anything that can’t be proven.  I admit some other things could

"But you also make stuff up" well that's what a "hypothesis" is. You fill in the gaps and provide your own explanations for certain phenomena. Making a generalized "theory of everything" is beyond most people's understanding to begin with, so I attempt to explain certain things in my own words without relying too much on Google. 

In the OP, I mentioned "innate knowledge" and what I'm talking about here is natural skills or talents. How do you explain that? As a kid, I loved to draw and make art. When I discovered Quantum science, it was almost like 2 + 2 = 4 tier for me. You have the Newtonian Laws of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, the Pauli Exclusion Principle for photons and so on. I am good at patenting and graphics design. 

In order to understand the Bible, you need to understand what Gnosticism is first. You can look it up on Wikipedia, but basically they do use the Bible in a way to explain the verses and fill in the gaps that everybody else is wrong about. That's how probability works. Think of the Bible as that Dan Brown book called the Da Vinci Code. It needs to be solved, but by a human brain, not a computer (like that "Equidistant Letter Sequence" bs from the '90s). 

As for the supercomputer, that idea doesn't really make sense. I personally believe Max Berg (dude behind YTMND - he's a troll) was behind that "John Titor" character in the early '00s (Whang made a video about it). In reality, I seriously doubt time travel could happen. You'd be dealing with Quantum tunneling and wormholes (so bs it's true). This is why people claiming to be "time travelers" are really LARPers. Not saying this affirmatively, but I will comment that if time travel were true, it would involve cloning, most likely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Harte said:

Let me begin here:

Please explain how you have photons without electrons and vice versa, given that the photon is the carrier of electromagnetic force (electrons.)

That is, you can't simply make something up about electrons - which are particles defined by physics, studied by physics, and (you may know) are quite well known and understood by physics.

After all, you're using them to post your insane religious beliefs (which, by the way, are NOT Gnostic at all.)

Harte

1.) Pauli exclusion principle to fermions (in this case, electrons) exists.

2.) See also: Bose-Einstein Condensate and Fermionic condensate. Also see Hanbury-Brown-Twiss effect (used in Intensity Interferometers). The first applies to Bosonic electrons and the last refers to Photons grouped with pi-mesons -- an example of photons that don't group with electrons (fermions). Everybody at the time called it impossible, and yet they were still able to prove it didn't violate the laws of Thermodynamics and it was physically possible. General Relativity basically states that light doesn't travel straight under gravity. It bends.

3.) All the original texts of Gnostic works were destroyed. Modern Gnostics range in beliefs.

[QUOTE]Nonetheless, early Gnostic teachers such as Valentinus saw their beliefs as aligned with Christianity. In the Gnostic Christian tradition, Christ is seen as a divine being which has taken human form in order to lead humanity back to recognition of its own divine nature. However, Gnosticism is not a single standardized system, and the emphasis on direct experience allows for a wide variety of teachings, including distinct currents such as Valentinianism and Sethianism. In the Persian Empire, Gnostic ideas spread as far as China via the related movement Manichaeism, while Mandaeism, which is the only surviving Gnostic religion from antiquity, is found in Iraq, Iran and diaspora communities.[5] The Mandaeans may have been the inventors of Gnosticism, or at the very least, contributed to its development.[6]: 109[/QUOTE]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

Also, when one is talking about "ghosts" they're talking not about people (physical) but an fallen angel (demon) in this case. You're only speaking of PHYSICS (the basic elements of it, that is). Also, you don't know what "pantheism vs panentheism vs theism" is because what I'm describing are not THEISTIC (religious) beliefs. There are Atheists that believe in all types of stuff similar to this in alternative hypotheses.

Edited by InvestigativeThinker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

you need to understand what Gnosticism is first.

You don't even know what it is.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, XenoFish said:

You don't even know what it is.

Well you apparently don't either. This is my own explanation or version of "Gnosticism." 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

1.) Pauli exclusion principle to fermions (in this case, electrons) exists.

2.) See also: Bose-Einstein Condensate and Fermionic condensate. Also see Hanbury-Brown-Twiss effect (used in Intensity Interferometers). The first applies to Bosonic electrons and the last refers to Photons grouped with pi-mesons -- an example of photons that don't group with electrons (fermions). Everybody at the time called it impossible, and yet they were still able to prove it didn't violate the laws of Thermodynamics and it was physically possible. General Relativity basically states that light doesn't travel straight under gravity. It bends.

3.) All the original texts of Gnostic works were destroyed. Modern Gnostics range in beliefs.

[QUOTE]Nonetheless, early Gnostic teachers such as Valentinus saw their beliefs as aligned with Christianity. In the Gnostic Christian tradition, Christ is seen as a divine being which has taken human form in order to lead humanity back to recognition of its own divine nature. However, Gnosticism is not a single standardized system, and the emphasis on direct experience allows for a wide variety of teachings, including distinct currents such as Valentinianism and Sethianism. In the Persian Empire, Gnostic ideas spread as far as China via the related movement Manichaeism, while Mandaeism, which is the only surviving Gnostic religion from antiquity, is found in Iraq, Iran and diaspora communities.[5] The Mandaeans may have been the inventors of Gnosticism, or at the very least, contributed to its development.[6]: 109[/QUOTE]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

Also, when one is talking about "ghosts" they're talking not about people (physical) but an fallen angel (demon) in this case. You're only speaking of PHYSICS (the basic elements of it, that is). Also, you don't know what "pantheism vs panentheism vs theism" is because what I'm describing are not THEISTIC (religious) beliefs. There are Atheists that believe in all types of stuff similar to this in alternative hypotheses.

Also, this article should be helpful for you @Harte:

https://www.livescience.com/54667-bose-einstein-condensate.html

Also, see "ghost condensates". 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200123095846.htm

You do know this can be demonstrated in a lab, right?

Edited by InvestigativeThinker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

This is my own explanation or version of "Gnosticism." 

Which is a terrible idea. You've overcomplicated something rather simple. In Gnosticism there is God, who is basically complete. It doesn't create or destroy it is whole. Then from it came another, this other created the god of this world. Cast out of "heaven" this other created our reality. When it created man it could not give it life, so it stole from the source. The source sensing this gave humans a chance of escape. Thus many paralles between Christianity and Gnostism, which what we call Gnosticism may very well be actual Christianity. The "apple of knowledge" didn't curse humans, it woke them up to what was going on.

Edited by XenoFish
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2022 at 1:15 AM, cormac mac airt said:

I thought it was Russell Crowe? :w00t:
 

cormac

Blasphemer Blasphemy GIF - Blasphemer Blasphemy GIFs

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

https://home.cern/science/accelerators/how-accelerator-works

How a Particle Accelerator works:

Accelerators were invented in the 1930s to provide energetic particles to investigate the structure of the atomic nucleus. Since then, they have been used to investigate many aspects of particle physics. Their job is to speed up and increase the energy of a beam of particles by generating electric fields that accelerate the particles, and magnetic fields that steer and focus them.

An accelerator comes either in the form of a ring (a circular accelerator), where a beam of particles travels repeatedly round a loop, or in a straight line (a linear accelerator), where the particle beam travels from one end to the other. At CERN a number of accelerators are joined together in sequence to reach successively higher energies.

The type of particle used depends on the aim of the experiment. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) accelerates and collides protons, and also heavy lead ions. One might expect the LHC to require a large source of particles, but protons for beams in 27-kilometre ring come from a single bottle of hydrogen gas, replaced only twice per year to ensure that it is running at the correct pressure.

41586_2019_1533_Fig1_HTML.thumb.png.9848d5e71e90e20f7eae2713326f0209.png

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1533-4

Edited by InvestigativeThinker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is up with people wanting to prove God exist? It doesn't matter, that's the whole point of faith. If you're trying to prove God. 

i-find-your-lack-of-faith-disturbing.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Piney said:

The Big Bang isn't Darwinian and scientists don't see it that way.

Most, including myself see it as the super fast expansion of a singularity which was probably a previous universe which grew old and collapsed.

I'm a cultural and natural resource specialist and not a physicist, but you ideas about quantum physics are really something to be desired.

Let me ask a few that have a clue.

@zep73 @Harte Here's some bad physics to enjoy.

You're not a physicist, but you already have a clue this is bad science, but you just can't put it into words? Makes sense. Btw, if the Big Bang was a "stipulation of a previous universe" it begs the question of who (or what, even) created the first (and so on). This is a qiestion none of you have provided any answers to. All you've done is try to paint me as some schizo dumbass for simply trying to answer that question because science is, after all, absolutely complete now, and there's no way you can possibly ever expand our knowledge because humanity is all-knowing, right?

Edited by InvestigativeThinker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On what basis do you claim a photon is an 11-dimensional object?

Quote

So, when an Atheist asks "who created God" the answer is simply magnetism.

Since magnetism and gravity didn’t exist until AFTER the BB how could God pre-date AND post-date magnetism and gravity simultaneously? 
 

Quote

The Bible's chronology of events basically say the Earth is about 10,000 years old in a sequence of events.

Actually the Bible suggests the Earth’s age is closer to 6000 years, not that that’s right either. 
 

Quote

See also, modern technology in ancient hieroglyphs and dinosaur cave paintings.

Let’s not, as neither are valid. 
 

Quote

We didn't come from Africa, and the fact that Caucasian people exist (Europeans) is testimony that OOA is fake.

Genetics, specifically archaeogenetics, shows otherwise. 
 

Quote

The real Jews and Israelites are Europeans.

Actually they’re Canaanites, belonging to Israel and the Levant. 
 

Quote

since we started off as Annunaki/Draconians/Reptilians

Which means you’re as wrong as Zechariah Sitchin and don’t know what “Annuna-ge” means or is. 
 

Quote

Neanderthals/Denisovans are who they bred with to create what we have now so that man fits God's image

Nope since Homo sapiens, us, predated the hybridization with Neanderthals and Denisovans by 150,000 - 200,000 years. 
 

These are just a few of the many, MANY errors of the OP. 
 

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Since magnetism and gravity didn’t exist until AFTER the BB how could God pre-date AND post-date magnetism and gravity simultaneously? 

How do you think you would escape gravity? Mass x velocityx2 (squared) aka Kinetic energy! That's how you escape a vacuum. What is space? 0. Gravity. 0=1. You clearly don't read before you jump to conclusions, do you?

56 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Actually the Bible suggests the Earth’s age is closer to 6000 years, not that that’s right either. 

Why does that matter to you if the Earth is billions of years old? But if you want a source:

https://creation.com/old-earth-or-young-earth-belief

56 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Let’s not, as neither are valid.

So maybe that's why your I LOVE SCIENE ™ types make all those documentaries on the History channel about "ancient alien technology"? 

56 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Genetics, specifically archaeogenetics, shows otherwise. 

Oh, the classic appeals to authority! MUH CARBON-14/12 DATING, OH LOOK AT YOU!

https://www.conservapedia.com/Carbon-14_dating#Limits_of_Carbon_Dating

http://www.nwcreation.net/young.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20120217144658/https://www.google.com/patents/about?id=TXg4AAAAEBAJ&dq=patent:4612050&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=0&as_miny_ap=&as_maxm_ap=0&as_maxy_ap=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=

https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,612,050.PN.&OS=PN/4,612,050&RS=PN/4,612,050

58 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Actually they’re Canaanites, belonging to Israel and the Levant. 

If Khazars are the Israelites of the Bible, explain Genesis 10:1-3 please? I'd love to hear your explanation. 

1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

Nope since Homo sapiens, us, predated the hybridization with Neanderthals and Denisovans by 150,000 - 200,000 years. 

That's what created homo sapiens and the races of man. It was breeding with other hominids. Caucasians (including Caucasus and Europe) have neanderthal DNA, Mongols have Denisovan DNA, Sub-Saharan Africans bred with other hominids, and I'm assuming Australoids are hominids (homo erectus) because they are very old (see aboriginal skeletal remains in the Americas and Europe before any native settlements). 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

How do you think you would escape gravity? Mass x velocityx2 (squared) aka Kinetic energy! That's how you escape a vacuum. What is space? 0. Gravity. 0=1. You clearly don't read before you jump to conclusions, do you?

Why does that matter to you if the Earth is billions of years old? But if you want a source:

https://creation.com/old-earth-or-young-earth-belief

So maybe that's why your I LOVE SCIENE ™ types make all those documentaries on the History channel about "ancient alien technology"? 

Oh, the classic appeals to authority! MUH CARBON-14/12 DATING, OH LOOK AT YOU!

https://www.conservapedia.com/Carbon-14_dating#Limits_of_Carbon_Dating

http://www.nwcreation.net/young.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20120217144658/https://www.google.com/patents/about?id=TXg4AAAAEBAJ&dq=patent:4612050&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=0&as_miny_ap=&as_maxm_ap=0&as_maxy_ap=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=

https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,612,050.PN.&OS=PN/4,612,050&RS=PN/4,612,050

If Khazars are the Israelites of the Bible, explain Genesis 10:1-3 please? I'd love to hear your explanation. 

That's what created homo sapiens and the races of man. It was breeding with other hominids. Caucasians (including Caucasus and Europe) have neanderthal DNA, Mongols have Denisovan DNA, Sub-Saharan Africans bred with other hominids, and I'm assuming Australoids are hominids (homo erectus) because they are very old (see aboriginal skeletal remains in the Americas and Europe before any native settlements). 

Oh, so you’re writing religious fiction, shouldn’t that be in the Writer’s and Artist’s Hangout lower in the forum? 
 

cormac

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But as for the other posts responding to @Harte :

"Radiation" consists of photons. You can say ghosts are "straight outta Compton" because "ghost hunters" use Geiger Counters to pick them up. The reasoning is because houses with a "haunted presence" tend to have unusually high amounts of radiation. A Quantum field study would need to be conducted where the test subjects of the trial are people who live in houses said to be "haunted" and those that don't, and both are to be scanned with a Dosimeter to read the results, and it needs to a large enough sample size to maintain accuracy. That's how you could approach it and explain it. 

As for the other stuff I posted, the "particle accelerator" and "Thorium-229 clock" that's basically demonstrating two concepts: how particles interact with gravity to create these "stipulations" by simply smashing two and two together from hydrogen (LHC) and how a nuclear clock (as opposed to atomic energy) could measure time in one second at the speed of light via ultraviolet laser transition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, InvestigativeThinker said:

You're not a physicist, but you already have a clue this is bad science, but you just can't put it into words? Makes sense. Btw, if the Big Bang was a "stipulation of a previous universe" it begs the question of who (or what, even) created the first (and so on). This is a qiestion none of you have provided any answers to. All you've done is try to paint me as some schizo dumbass for simply trying to answer that question because science is, after all, absolutely complete now, and there's no way you can possibly ever expand our knowledge because humanity is all-knowing, right?

If it's cyclic, it's been doing it for eternity and there is no god needed in the equation and I read enough of Harte and Zeps discourses to understand the basics. I just don't feel like slugging through all that mess because I'm working on my own scientific and business crapola when I'm online.

And yes, revelation from smoking dope is dumb and that's coming from someone who is on the broken end of the autism spectrum. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the New New Age Movement  folks.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

    • +Liquid Gardens