Creation - Evolution

[Age]

You think people don't see your negative qualities?

If you say and believe so, then it must be true, right?

Who cares what you're bullshitting

Maybe the same who what you are about.

I have one last question for you Age. Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

I will answer this in the same way, as I did last time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

[Atla]

But, nothing I have said and claimed here has actually been refuted. Although there are, obviously, some like you "atla" who believe otherwise.

It was such utter nonsense that it practically refuted itself, we just pointed it out.

So, something that you cannot even refute nor counter you claim is also 'utter nonsense'.

Just so others know, "atla" believes that 'every action causes a reaction', 'causality', and/or 'cause and effect' is 'utter nonsense'.

I have one last question for you Age.

Is this the truth, or will this end up just being another lie of yours here?

Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

Who are 'they' here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

Age now tells a lie the size of Mount Everest by claiming that I think causality is nonsense. Age is a complete and utter dishonest retard.

I have one last question for you Age. Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

[Atla]

If you say and believe so, then it must be true, right?

Who cares what you're bullshitting

Maybe the same who what you are about.

I have one last question for you Age. Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

I will answer this in the same way, as I did last time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

More bullshitting

I have one last question for you Age. Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

[Age]

It was such utter nonsense that it practically refuted itself, we just pointed it out.

So, something that you cannot even refute nor counter you claim is also 'utter nonsense'.

Just so others know, "atla" believes that 'every action causes a reaction', 'causality', and/or 'cause and effect' is 'utter nonsense'.

I have one last question for you Age.

Is this the truth, or will this end up just being another lie of yours here?

Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

Who are 'they' here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

Age now tells a lie the size of Mount Everest by claiming that I think causality is nonsense. Age is a complete and utter dishonest retard.

But it was you "atla" who said and claimed that what I said and claimed here was such 'utter nonsense'. And, obviously, what I said and claimed you said and claimed was 'just causality'. So, this means that believe 'causality' is not 'just nonsense' but actually 'utter nonsense'.

[Atla]

So, something that you cannot even refute nor counter you claim is also 'utter nonsense'.

Just so others know, "atla" believes that 'every action causes a reaction', 'causality', and/or 'cause and effect' is 'utter nonsense'.




Is this the truth, or will this end up just being another lie of yours here?



Who are 'they' here?

Age now tells a lie the size of Mount Everest by claiming that I think causality is nonsense. Age is a complete and utter dishonest retard.

But it was you "atla" who said and claimed that what I said and claimed here was such 'utter nonsense'. And, obviously, what I said and claimed you said and claimed was 'just causality'. So, this means that believe 'causality' is not 'just nonsense' but actually 'utter nonsense'.

Another total lie

I have one last question for you Age. Did or didn't they perform such a surgery on you? Just curious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-brain

You are incapable of proving your mind, mind-matter duality, evolution, time travel and infinite human potential beliefs, therefore I have every reason to view you as just a delusional liar, nothing more.

[Age]

Every action has a reaction.

Every reaction is a new creation.

Every new creation evolves.

Every evolving creation interacts with other creations.

The Universe is, fundamentally, made up of 'matter', and a distance between and around matter. This distance is 'space'.

Space allows matter to interact with itself, causing Creation, Itself.

The action of when matter interacts with itself causes a reaction, and thus a new creation.

This always occurring action/reaction process is how all things/the Universe, Itself, evolves, and how the Universe, Itself, is creating Itself.

The evolving-creation process that the Universe, Itself, is in is eternal.

No one is able to name a thing that was not created. So, the word 'creation' just means or refers to the Universe, or all things. And, obviously, all things change in ways, shape, or form, or in other words 'evolve'. Thus, all created things evolve. The Universe, therefore, is creating Itself HERE-NOW always, through evolution.

Thinking or believing that the word 'creation' refers to only the Universe, Itself, once and only being created, and/or thinking or believing that 'evolution' refers to life on earth only, is just APE-thinking, or in other words, just what arises from looking from a very narrowed or closed perspective of things.

Now, obviously, absolutely every thing was, is, and will be 'created', and every one of these created things keeps 'changing', or 'gradually developing', which is just 'evolution' by another word.

Therefore, the Universe, Itself, is in 'Creation', always, and was not 'created', ever. The living, and always continually creating, Universe, Itself, is also always evolving and/or always 'gradually developing'.

This is but just one Truth, of other irrefutable Truths, which I have, and will be sharing.

[Sculptor]

I do not and have never said, 'the necessity of cause and effect is creation', nor the rest of what you say and claim here.


I do not even know of any 'main claim' 'of creation is it is novel', let alone would I take any account for any such thing.


I did, and what I noticed is you are, still, are long way of understanding what I have actually said and meant here.

What you assuming and believe I am saying and meaning is a long way off, on a lot of occasions, and explains, partly, why your views are so far astray from what I have actually said and meant.

Your OP has said nothing about evolution and nothing about creation.

Okay. If this is what you want to believe is true, then this is perfectly fine with me.

If you can't be bothered to deal with objections, I cannot be bothered to make any effort for you.

If you cannot be bothered to see what the opening post is meaning and referring to, then I cannot be bothered making any more effort for you.

NOTHING TO SEE HERE

[Iwannaplato]

Every action causes a reaction. Always has, and, always will.

This sounds reasonable to me, though I will explore it a bit, further down, in terms of discreteness.

Every re-action causes, or creates, another reaction, that is; Creation, Itself.

Same as above. I wouldn't use the word creation for a couple of reasons: one made already in the thread, but a second in that to me it has connotations of an original Creation event that started everything rolling. If it is intended this way, then I'd want to see some explanation of the beginning. If not, I'd choose another word.

Every created thing, or reaction, evolves, interacting with other created, and evolving, things, causing continuous more actions, and re-actions, always, causing and/or creating Creation, Itself.

Similar reaction.

The continual action of matter always inter-acting with itself, and thus always creating or causing just one continual re-action, is evolution, itself, in an always-constant process of, and in, Creation, Itself.

Here we have almost moved to a global view: all of matter in this process. So, the earlier discreteness seems to be part of a more global flow. And I think that's a better starting point: a global flow. I am not saying Age is talking about a global (universal) flow, but it sounds a bit more like that here and that connects with what I'd want to explore in relation to the earlier statements.

Matter being able to move about freely,

I don't know what is meant by freely. It sounds like the reactions are free somehow. Are they?

because of the distance or space between and around matter,

It seems like at the quantum level its not so clear what is space between and what is matter, with things sort of in many places, sort of nowhere, pinging in and out of existence, etc.

is an eternal process where inter-action of matter with itself is one eternal reaction, which what allows the evolution of things to happen and occur.

If it is eternal and has been evolving the whole time, it seems to me there must be cycles. That's intuitive. Because, here, in our corner of the universe, there has been a trend, at least recently in universe terms, towards complexity in self-relation. And that seems like it still has a long way to go. At least in the last 13 billion or whatever is not posited from when things were fairly simple locally at least.

This always happening action/reaction process is just how all things are creation, through evolution, and just what the 'Creation' word has been meaning and referring to, exactly.

It is, literally, the Universe Creating Itself, through an evolutionary process, always HERE-NOW.

Going back to the beginning of this post, it seems to me that if we focus on tiny discrete 'parts', one acting on the other and then the other reacts, it leads to this kind of discreteness that seems misleading to me. Those parts now reaction also had momentum or something 'going' already and probably affected what affected them. And then all these 'contacts' would be happening in the being touched by the effects of other things less nearby with with affecting fields of different kinds. I am not saying the premises in the beginning are denying this way of looking at it, but I think it's misleading to start with them. I think it's better to start with this whole things flow, rather than a reductionist sort-of particle view of things. Or already discrete things impacting each other, even if they're not particle sized.

[Gee]

Every action has a reaction.

Every reaction is a new creation.

Every new creation evolves.

Every evolving creation interacts with other creations.

I have no problem with any of the above and accept it as true and accurate.

The Universe is, fundamentally, made up of 'matter', and a distance between and around matter. This distance is 'space'.

I do have a problem here as I do not see matter and space as the 'fundamental' base. The problem is that neither matter nor space has any power to initiate creation or evolution. If matter has already been created, it can not evolve to create itself because it initially possesses no ability to be active -- no motion. This is the mistake that most people make, and then they find themselves looking for a "God" or intelligent designer or some other way to create intent to make a 'happening'.

The foundation of the universe is motion which sounds like an oxymoron. We think of a foundation as being solid, not moving, but motion creates matter and space, and then everything else follows. The motion/activity never quits, and intent is not even required. What feeds this constant motion? Energy. Itself.

Space allows matter to interact with itself, causing Creation, Itself.

The physical, the mental, and the spiritual ALL interact with themselves and each other. IMO

The action of when matter interacts with itself causes a reaction, and thus a new creation.

This always occurring action/reaction process is how all things/the Universe, Itself, evolves, and how the Universe, Itself, is creating Itself.

The evolving-creation process that the Universe, Itself, is in is eternal.

No one is able to name a thing that was not created. So, the word 'creation' just means or refers to the Universe, or all things. And, obviously, all things change in ways, shape, or form, or in other words 'evolve'. Thus, all created things evolve. The Universe, therefore, is creating Itself HERE-NOW always, through evolution.

Yes. I fully agree with this. Consider that at the level below matter and space, where there is only motion/energy, there is no awareness. Awareness can not exist without matter, time and space. In order for awareness to exist two points are required. One point for something that is aware and one point that something is aware of, which means that matter is required for the points and space is required to separate them. Because space and time are interrelated, time would also come into existence with matter and space. This would allow for change to what is essentially eternity on the level of motion/energy. IMO

Thinking or believing that the word 'creation' refers to only the Universe, Itself, once and only being created, and/or thinking or believing that 'evolution' refers to life on earth only, is just APE-thinking, or in other words, just what arises from looking from a very narrowed or closed perspective of things.

Now, obviously, absolutely every thing was, is, and will be 'created', and every one of these created things keeps 'changing', or 'gradually developing', which is just 'evolution' by another word.

Therefore, the Universe, Itself, is in 'Creation', always, and was not 'created', ever. The living, and always continually creating, Universe, Itself, is also always evolving and/or always 'gradually developing'.

I also agree with this. Creation is not an event -- it is a process.

This is but just one Truth, of other irrefutable Truths, which I have, and will be sharing.

You have some interesting ideas, but I suspect that some of them are going to upset some of the members. It is clear to me that you are a holistic thinker, which means two things -- you are probably exceptionally bright and you see things from a perspective that few share. It is often a problem with holistic thinkers.

Gee

[Atla]

Every action has a reaction.

Every reaction is a new creation.

Every new creation evolves.

Every evolving creation interacts with other creations.

I have no problem with any of the above and accept it as true and accurate.

The Universe is, fundamentally, made up of 'matter', and a distance between and around matter. This distance is 'space'.

I do have a problem here as I do not see matter and space as the 'fundamental' base. The problem is that neither matter nor space has any power to initiate creation or evolution. If matter has already been created, it can not evolve to create itself because it initially possesses no ability to be active -- no motion. This is the mistake that most people make, and then they find themselves looking for a "God" or intelligent designer or some other way to create intent to make a 'happening'.

The foundation of the universe is motion which sounds like an oxymoron. We think of a foundation as being solid, not moving, but motion creates matter and space, and then everything else follows. The motion/activity never quits, and intent is not even required. What feeds this constant motion? Energy. Itself.

Space allows matter to interact with itself, causing Creation, Itself.

The physical, the mental, and the spiritual ALL interact with themselves and each other. IMO

The action of when matter interacts with itself causes a reaction, and thus a new creation.

This always occurring action/reaction process is how all things/the Universe, Itself, evolves, and how the Universe, Itself, is creating Itself.

The evolving-creation process that the Universe, Itself, is in is eternal.

No one is able to name a thing that was not created. So, the word 'creation' just means or refers to the Universe, or all things. And, obviously, all things change in ways, shape, or form, or in other words 'evolve'. Thus, all created things evolve. The Universe, therefore, is creating Itself HERE-NOW always, through evolution.

Yes. I fully agree with this. Consider that at the level below matter and space, where there is only motion/energy, there is no awareness. Awareness can not exist without matter, time and space. In order for awareness to exist two points are required. One point for something that is aware and one point that something is aware of, which means that matter is required for the points and space is required to separate them. Because space and time are interrelated, time would also come into existence with matter and space. This would allow for change to what is essentially eternity on the level of motion/energy. IMO

Thinking or believing that the word 'creation' refers to only the Universe, Itself, once and only being created, and/or thinking or believing that 'evolution' refers to life on earth only, is just APE-thinking, or in other words, just what arises from looking from a very narrowed or closed perspective of things.

Now, obviously, absolutely every thing was, is, and will be 'created', and every one of these created things keeps 'changing', or 'gradually developing', which is just 'evolution' by another word.

Therefore, the Universe, Itself, is in 'Creation', always, and was not 'created', ever. The living, and always continually creating, Universe, Itself, is also always evolving and/or always 'gradually developing'.

I also agree with this. Creation is not an event -- it is a process.

This is but just one Truth, of other irrefutable Truths, which I have, and will be sharing.

You have some interesting ideas, but I suspect that some of them are going to upset some of the members. It is clear to me that you are a holistic thinker, which means two things -- you are probably exceptionally bright and you see things from a perspective that few share. It is often a problem with holistic thinkers.

Gee

Age is saying that mere cause and effect automatically is creation and evolution. Like you randomly throw the pieces of a 1000-piece puzzle into the air, and all of them fall into the right place and create the picture.

And you're already talking about three things, mental physical and spiritual.

Just because you guys are pushing your self-serving ideas, doesn't mean that the problem is with others and their low intelligence / lack of holistic thinking.

[Gee]

Atla,

Age is saying that mere cause and effect automatically is creation and evolution. Like you randomly throw the pieces of a 1000-piece puzzle into the air, and all of them fall into the right place and create the picture.

I do not need you to tell me what Age is saying. I can figure it out for myself and do a better job of it.

And you're already talking about three things, mental physical and spiritual.

I certainly do not need you to explain what I am saying.

Just because you guys are pushing your self-serving ideas, doesn't mean that the problem is with others and their low intelligence / lack of holistic thinking.

This statement is just plain rude. If you have nothing of value to add to this thread, you could stop posting here. If you insist on posting here, but only wish to insult members, call people names, etc., then your posts have no value. So far in this thread, you have called Age a liar 67 times -- I counted -- and you repeated other insults. I have already reported your posts, and will not accept the abuse that you have heaped on Age. Why do you think that I stopped posting for 14 pages? I had hoped that some members would get bored of abusing other members and leave this thread, but you seem to think that abusing the original poster is how you make a point or how you are supposed to debate.

I may have to stop posting in this thread. If I really feel the need to communicate with Age, I can always use the PM system.

Gee

[Atla]

Atla,

Age is saying that mere cause and effect automatically is creation and evolution. Like you randomly throw the pieces of a 1000-piece puzzle into the air, and all of them fall into the right place and create the picture.

I do not need you to tell me what Age is saying. I can figure it out for myself and do a better job of it.

And you're already talking about three things, mental physical and spiritual.

I certainly do not need you to explain what I am saying.

Just because you guys are pushing your self-serving ideas, doesn't mean that the problem is with others and their low intelligence / lack of holistic thinking.

This statement is just plain rude. If you have nothing of value to add to this thread, you could stop posting here. If you insist on posting here, but only wish to insult members, call people names, etc., then your posts have no value. So far in this thread, you have called Age a liar 67 times -- I counted -- and you repeated other insults. I have already reported your posts, and will not accept the abuse that you have heaped on Age. Why do you think that I stopped posting for 14 pages? I had hoped that some members would get bored of abusing other members and leave this thread, but you seem to think that abusing the original poster is how you make a point or how you are supposed to debate.

I may have to stop posting in this thread. If I really feel the need to communicate with Age, I can always use the PM system.

Gee

Ah yes you reported me because I handled the most destructive entity on this forum, who also is in fact a pathological liar, the way it should be handled.

You two narcissistic, dishonest, delusional fucks can court each other as much as you want, but just because you're broken, doesn't mean that others are bad thinkers.

[Age]

Every action causes a reaction. Always has, and, always will.

This sounds reasonable to me, though I will explore it a bit, further down, in terms of discreteness.

Okay.

Every re-action causes, or creates, another reaction, that is; Creation, Itself.

Same as above. I wouldn't use the word creation for a couple of reasons: one made already in the thread,

Do you have some sort of fear of just expressing what the actual thing is, exactly, which you are referring and/or alluding to?

For, once again, I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to or alluding to here, which is somewhere in 'the thread'.

Now, if one was to assume that the words 'the thread' were referring to or alluding to 'this thread' here, and this was correct, then that one would be one step closer to finding out what you are referring to and alluding to here. However, instead of one looking back over this whole thread, reading all of this whole thread, and then just, still, assuming what 'it' is that you are talking about, referring to, and alluding to here, would it be possible if you just informed 'us', directly, what 'the reason' here is, exactly, why you would not use the 'creation' word here?

Doing so would really help in speeding things up here for 'us'.

but a second in that to me it has connotations of an original Creation event that started everything rolling.

Exactly like the words, 'In the beginning', have been spread among people with the connotation of 'a start', in the past, when it is 'imagined' all was 'created' all at once, with nothing prior or with an unknown and/or unexplained prior.

Also, an 'original Creation' can just mean one of only, and not 'the start', nor 'beginning' of some thing. See, the word 'Creation' does not have to be included, involved, nor connected with 'an event' nor 'an original event'. These two words have just detracted from what the 'Creation' word is meaning and referring to, exactly.

So, if you removed the False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect connotation that there was an 'original Creation event', in the past, as though there was a 'prior beginning' to all-there-is, then you will not be having nor holding a view/connotation that is stopping and preventing what the actual irrefutable Truth is, exactly, from being 'seen' and 'understood' here.

Also, there is far, far more that has to be explained and understood before what actually happens and occurs is able to see fully and for what it Truly is. But, for the time being removing those connotations that limited the field of view or limited the ability to see past what is conceived/perceived allows further and more information/knowledge to enter, and to be 'looked at' and 'seen'.

If it is intended this way, then I'd want to see some explanation of the beginning. If not, I'd choose another word.

Why do you view that it is I who has to change words?

Do you not want to change your connotation? Do you want to stay rigid with your views, beliefs, perceptions, and/or connotations here?

Have you considered that the reason you, or other human beings, do not come to learn or see and understand things quicker, simpler, and easier could be because of having or holding onto the 'current' views, definitions, meanings, perceptions, beliefs, connotations, and/or opinions that you have 'now', and that maybe they might just be Wrong, from the outset.

The word 'Creation', by itself, holds no meaning, definition, nor connotation of some 'first nor original event'. Although people can be 'taught' and 'teach' that it has.

The 'creation' of 'the world', or of 'the way we live', for better or for worse, for example, is a 'creation', or a 'work, in progress'. The Universe, Itself, could be no different, in this way.

There is absolutely nothing that leads to the conclusion that the Universe, or all-there-is, 'was created'. But, that there is an ongoing process of 'Creation' is backed up and supported by countless examples and proofs.

Every created thing, or reaction, evolves, interacting with other created, and evolving, things, causing continuous more actions, and re-actions, always, causing and/or creating Creation, Itself.

Similar reaction.

I have absolutely no idea nor clue as to what the words, 'Similar reaction', mean nor what they are referring to.

The continual action of matter always inter-acting with itself, and thus always creating or causing just one continual re-action, is evolution, itself, in an always-constant process of, and in, Creation, Itself.

Here we have almost moved to a global view: all of matter in this process.

A so-called 'global view' could be said or argued is a much smaller or narrow view compared to a 'universal view'.

So, the earlier discreteness seems to be part of a more global flow. And I think that's a better starting point: a global flow. I am not saying Age is talking about a global (universal) flow, but it sounds a bit more like that here and that connects with what I'd want to explore in relation to the earlier statements.

What I talk about and refer to here is for ALL things. So, this means from the smallest to the largest, and thus the whole.

Matter being able to move about freely,

I don't know what is meant by freely.

And you never will if you never ask.

It sounds like the reactions are free somehow. Are they?

The part you quoted here talks about ' 'matter', being able to move about freely '.

So, what are you talking about when you say, 'the 'reactions' are free, somehow'?

I was talking about 'matter', whereas you are talking about, and asking about, 'reactions'.

To me, 'reactions' cannot be 'free', in the sense that they were, obviously, caused, or created, by something else, namely; the 'action' of at least two other things coming together.

because of the distance or space between and around matter,

It seems like at the quantum level its not so clear what is space between and what is matter, with things sort of in many places, sort of nowhere, pinging in and out of existence, etc.

1. Why, at the quantum level, it is not clear, to you, what is space between and what is matter?

2. What do you mean by, 'things sort of in many places'? What are the 'things' that you are talking about and referring to here, exactly?

3. What do you mean by, 'sort of nowhere', exactly?

4. All things, besides the Universe, Itself, of course, so-call 'ping in and out of existence'. All of these 'things' 'ping into existence', 'exist', 'and then ping out of existence' or 'exit'. Now, as absolutely everything is relative to the observer the 'duration of ping' is just different. Suns, or stars, also 'ping in and out of existence'. The 'ping' is relative. And, when the 'ping' is 'looked at' from all perspectives, then this is how the what is called the 'quantum level' is, and can be, 'seen' to be unified with the what is called 'classical level'.

is an eternal process where inter-action of matter with itself is one eternal reaction, which what allows the evolution of things to happen and occur.

If it is eternal and has been evolving the whole time, it seems to me there must be cycles.

Okay. Absolutely everything is relative, to 'the observer'. So, if it seems, to you, that there must be cycles, then okay.

That's intuitive.

To you.

Because, here, in our corner of the universe,

Are there, really, 'corners', 'of the Universe, Itself'?

there has been a trend, at least recently in universe terms,

In a 'limited temporal universe' there may well be a 'recently', perspective. However, in the, actual, Universe terms there is only the HERE-NOW. This is because the Universe, Itself, is eternal. And, 'recently' is a redundant term and phrase, in relation to the Universe, Itself.

towards complexity in self-relation.

There have been many 'trends', which are not necessarily true, right, nor correct.

Also, what do you even mean by 'complexity in self-relation'?

Who and what people, human beings, and the Self is, exactly, is not complex, and there is absolutely nothing towards complexity in self-relation, well to me anyway, other than the Truly unnecessary 'complexity' that adult human beings make and create, and maybe more so do in 'the days when this is being written'.

And that seems like it still has a long way to go.

When you say and write 'it' here, then what do you mean by, 'it still has a long way to go'?

What, exactly, supposedly, has a 'long way to go'?

you were talking about, 'pinging in and out of existence', 'if the Universe is eternal and evolving always, then, to you, there must be cycles', and of something about some 'trend towards complexity in self-relation', and then 'now' you talk about, how 'that seems' '[some thing] still has a long way to go'.

Are you able to express "yourself" more clearly here, stop using words that just allude to some things, and instead just say what those things are, exactly?

At least in the last 13 billion or whatever is not posited from when things were fairly simple locally at least.

See, even here I have absolutely no idea nor clue about what 'it' is that you are talking about and referring to, at all.

There is no 'locally' in the Universe, and there is nothing complex, nor hard, anywhere, nor at any 'time', in the Universe, Itself.

What the Universe is actually made up of and how the Universe actually works is very simple, everywhere and always.

This always happening action/reaction process is just how all things are creation, through evolution, and just what the 'Creation' word has been meaning and referring to, exactly.

It is, literally, the Universe Creating Itself, through an evolutionary process, always HERE-NOW.

Going back to the beginning of this post, it seems to me that if we focus on tiny discrete 'parts', one acting on the other and then the other reacts, it leads to this kind of discreteness that seems misleading to me.

What 'kind of discreteness' are you talking about, exactly, that seems 'misleading', to you?

So you become aware, there is no actual 'discreteness' nor actual 'discrete' things anywhere. There is, however, an appearance of 'separate things' as this is the way the human brain can makes sense of, comprehend, and understand the one and only 'Thing'.

Those parts now reaction also had momentum or something 'going' already and probably affected what affected them. And then all these 'contacts' would be happening in the being touched by the effects of other things less nearby with with affecting fields of different kinds. I am not saying the premises in the beginning are denying this way of looking at it, but I think it's misleading to start with them.

I find the way you speak and write here somewhat hard to comprehend and understand, and so much so I do not even know where to begin to start asking you to clarify things here. Are you able to say and write what you did here in a different way?

I think it's better to start with this whole things flow, rather than a reductionist sort-of particle view of things.

Thank you for this. This might work much better.

To start with the whole Universe flowing, as one Thing, I would still need to show and prove how the Universe, Itself, is eternal, and thus has no beginning, nor ending.

The way I came to understand this was by 'seeing' what the Universe is fundamentally made up of.

Or already discrete things impacting each other, even if they're not particle sized.

Either way, all, perceived, 'things', of all sizes, impact 'each other', in one way or another.

By the way, I do not see any difference at all between how the Universe works in 'particle' or 'object' sized 'things'.

[Age]

Every action has a reaction.

Every reaction is a new creation.

Every new creation evolves.

Every evolving creation interacts with other creations.

I have no problem with any of the above and accept it as true and accurate.

The Universe is, fundamentally, made up of 'matter', and a distance between and around matter. This distance is 'space'.

I do have a problem here as I do not see matter and space as the 'fundamental' base.

Okay, and thank you for sharing this with me, and us, here.

The problem is that neither matter nor space has any power to initiate creation or evolution.

Was there some previous view or presumption that 'matter' and/or 'space' has some power to initiate any thing?

If matter has already been created, it can not evolve to create itself because it initially possesses no ability to be active -- no motion.

Human bodies have already been created. And, according to, and following on from, your logic or claim here, human bodies can not evolve, right?

This is the mistake that most people make, and then they find themselves looking for a "God" or intelligent designer or some other way to create intent to make a 'happening'.

What mistake?

What is the mistake, exactly, that you say most people make here?

The foundation of the universe is motion which sounds like an oxymoron.

Okay.

But, the Universe can only be 'in motion' if there is something, fundamentally, that is able to move.

We think of a foundation as being solid, not moving, but motion creates matter and space, and then everything else follows.

But, what is 'in motion' if it is not 'matter' to begin with?

Also, why do you, and some others, think of 'foundation' as being solid?

So, if 'motion', itself, creates 'matter', and, 'space', themselves, then what is 'motion', exactly, and how does 'motion' work, exactly, which makes 'motion', itself, able to create things like 'matter', and, 'space'?

See, to me, things work the other way around here.

The motion/activity never quits, and intent is not even required.

I agree 'intent' is not required, which is one reason why I never introduced the 'intent' word here. And, since 'intent' is not even required, there is absolutely no use bringing that word into the discussion here. It would be a bit like saying, and 'chocolate cake' is not even required, when I never brought up nor introduced the 'chocolate cake' words anywhere here. Again, someone else introduced the 'intent' word to try to deflect and fool and deceive readers here.

Now, you say that 'motion/activity' never quits, which I totally agree with, but you will need to explain how and why 'motion/activity' never quit, and how it is 'motion/activity' that, supposedly creates 'matter', and, 'space'.

What feeds this constant motion? Energy. Itself.

Now, you will have to explain how 'energy', itself, exists.

Also, why do you think or believe that it is energy first, then motion, and then matter and space?

Could it be a possibility that it is the other way around. That is; first, or fundamentally, there is 'matter', and, 'space', which matter is always in constant-motion, because of the space, between and around matter, which allows absolute freedom, or friction less movement of matter to occur, which is just 'motion', itself, and matter is always 'in motion', and always has been and always will be, that is until matter interacts with itself, which in turn is what causes energy to always be existing, as well.

Well this is what I see and know, but I will wait for you to explain how 'your way' of things works here.

Space allows matter to interact with itself, causing Creation, Itself.

The physical, the mental, and the spiritual ALL interact with themselves and each other. IMO

I do not disagree at all.

But until you or I explain what the 'mental' and the 'spiritual' means or refers to, exactly, and how and why these things work, exactly, just saying that they interact with each other is, really, not saying nor explaining that much at all really.

So, would you like to explain what these things are, exactly, and how and why they interact with each other?

The action of when matter interacts with itself causes a reaction, and thus a new creation.

This always occurring action/reaction process is how all things/the Universe, Itself, evolves, and how the Universe, Itself, is creating Itself.

The evolving-creation process that the Universe, Itself, is in is eternal.

No one is able to name a thing that was not created. So, the word 'creation' just means or refers to the Universe, or all things. And, obviously, all things change in ways, shape, or form, or in other words 'evolve'. Thus, all created things evolve. The Universe, therefore, is creating Itself HERE-NOW always, through evolution.

Yes. I fully agree with this. Consider that at the level below matter and space, where there is only motion/energy, there is no awareness.

But, saying, 'consider that at the level below matter and space', implies that there is a level below matter and space. And, if you want to say and claim there is, then you will need to start explaining how all of that works, exactly. That is; if you would like me to comprehend and understand what you are talking about and referring to, exactly.

Awareness can not exist without matter, time and space.

What is 'time', to you, exactly?

In order for awareness to exist two points are required. One point for something that is aware and one point that something is aware of, which means that matter is required for the points and space is required to separate them. Because space and time are interrelated, time would also come into existence with matter and space. This would allow for change to what is essentially eternity on the level of motion/energy. IMO

Okay. That is your opinion.

To me, however, you seem to be using more words than necessary, and thus over complicating and making harder what is actually simpler, and easier, to comprehend and understand.

If anyone would like to know how and why, exactly, then just let me know.

Thinking or believing that the word 'creation' refers to only the Universe, Itself, once and only being created, and/or thinking or believing that 'evolution' refers to life on earth only, is just APE-thinking, or in other words, just what arises from looking from a very narrowed or closed perspective of things.

Now, obviously, absolutely every thing was, is, and will be 'created', and every one of these created things keeps 'changing', or 'gradually developing', which is just 'evolution' by another word.

Therefore, the Universe, Itself, is in 'Creation', always, and was not 'created', ever. The living, and always continually creating, Universe, Itself, is also always evolving and/or always 'gradually developing'.

I also agree with this. Creation is not an event -- it is a process.

This is but just one Truth, of other irrefutable Truths, which I have, and will be sharing.

You have some interesting ideas, but I suspect that some of them are going to upset some of the members.[/quote]

'Suspect'.

It is very, very clear, already, that some members are absolutely 'upset' in regards to some or even a lot of what I said and claimed here, so far. And, I have not yet even really begun.

It is clear to me that you are a holistic thinker, which means two things -- you are probably exceptionally bright and you see things from a perspective that few share. It is often a problem with holistic thinkers.

Gee

i am probably the least so-called 'bright' one, in this forum. i just came to learn and realize a, relatively, 'new way' to just 'look at' and 'see' things, that is all. Which in all honesty probably came about because of my naivety and/or lack of intellect.

[Age]

Every action has a reaction.

Every reaction is a new creation.

Every new creation evolves.

Every evolving creation interacts with other creations.

I have no problem with any of the above and accept it as true and accurate.

The Universe is, fundamentally, made up of 'matter', and a distance between and around matter. This distance is 'space'.

I do have a problem here as I do not see matter and space as the 'fundamental' base. The problem is that neither matter nor space has any power to initiate creation or evolution. If matter has already been created, it can not evolve to create itself because it initially possesses no ability to be active -- no motion. This is the mistake that most people make, and then they find themselves looking for a "God" or intelligent designer or some other way to create intent to make a 'happening'.

The foundation of the universe is motion which sounds like an oxymoron. We think of a foundation as being solid, not moving, but motion creates matter and space, and then everything else follows. The motion/activity never quits, and intent is not even required. What feeds this constant motion? Energy. Itself.

Space allows matter to interact with itself, causing Creation, Itself.

The physical, the mental, and the spiritual ALL interact with themselves and each other. IMO

The action of when matter interacts with itself causes a reaction, and thus a new creation.

This always occurring action/reaction process is how all things/the Universe, Itself, evolves, and how the Universe, Itself, is creating Itself.

The evolving-creation process that the Universe, Itself, is in is eternal.

No one is able to name a thing that was not created. So, the word 'creation' just means or refers to the Universe, or all things. And, obviously, all things change in ways, shape, or form, or in other words 'evolve'. Thus, all created things evolve. The Universe, therefore, is creating Itself HERE-NOW always, through evolution.

Yes. I fully agree with this. Consider that at the level below matter and space, where there is only motion/energy, there is no awareness. Awareness can not exist without matter, time and space. In order for awareness to exist two points are required. One point for something that is aware and one point that something is aware of, which means that matter is required for the points and space is required to separate them. Because space and time are interrelated, time would also come into existence with matter and space. This would allow for change to what is essentially eternity on the level of motion/energy. IMO

Thinking or believing that the word 'creation' refers to only the Universe, Itself, once and only being created, and/or thinking or believing that 'evolution' refers to life on earth only, is just APE-thinking, or in other words, just what arises from looking from a very narrowed or closed perspective of things.

Now, obviously, absolutely every thing was, is, and will be 'created', and every one of these created things keeps 'changing', or 'gradually developing', which is just 'evolution' by another word.

Therefore, the Universe, Itself, is in 'Creation', always, and was not 'created', ever. The living, and always continually creating, Universe, Itself, is also always evolving and/or always 'gradually developing'.

I also agree with this. Creation is not an event -- it is a process.

This is but just one Truth, of other irrefutable Truths, which I have, and will be sharing.

You have some interesting ideas, but I suspect that some of them are going to upset some of the members. It is clear to me that you are a holistic thinker, which means two things -- you are probably exceptionally bright and you see things from a perspective that few share. It is often a problem with holistic thinkers.

Gee

Age is saying that mere cause and effect automatically is creation and evolution.

Does this 'upset' you in some way "atla"?

Like you randomly throw the pieces of a 1000-piece puzzle into the air, and all of them fall into the right place and create the picture.

When did I ever imply 'this' "atla"?

However, to 'see' how all of the 'pieces of the puzzle' fit together perfectly, forming one perfectly crystal clear big and full Picture, then one, obviously, just needs to 'look at' and 'see' things from a different way that human beings have been doing hitherto to when this was written.

And you're already talking about three things, mental physical and spiritual.

Just because you guys are pushing your self-serving ideas, doesn't mean that the problem is with others and their low intelligence / lack of holistic thinking.

What 'problem'?

I do not see absolutely any 'problem' at all here.

Also, why are you under some sort of 'illusion' that these views/ideas are so-called 'self-serving', exactly?

What would be 'self-serving', exactly, in saying things that gets people like you to 'see' 'me' as a 'delusional liar, and nothing more but, with a multitude of other disorders'?