Creation - Evolution

[Age]

Okay but then your creation has nothing to do with creation and your evolution has nothing to do with evolution.

Really?

Now, not that you ever will but would you like to explain to the readers here why the so-called 'my creation' and 'my evolution' has, supposedly, nothing at all to do with 'creation' and with 'evolution', themselves?

In fact, would you have the courage to even begin to tell the readers here what the actual 'creation' and actual 'evolution' is, exactly?

In English they are just called cause and effect, causality. So explain why you are using such deceptive words for them?

Lol "atla", when and where, exactly, have I ever used, supposed, 'deceptive words' for anything at all?

Also, 'evolution' nor 'creation' are never just called, in any language, 'cause and effect, causality'. Unless, of course, you have some written proof, or sound recorded proof, of and for this somewhere.

Furthermore, that the Universe, Itself, is one Thing that is creating Itself, through and by evolution, itself, continually-always is something that you just do not like to admit and accept. And, especially more so because it was 'I' who said and wrote this.

So to summarize, the universe evolves without any intent towards the bright future that you keep telling us about?

I never ever alluded to this, let alone ever said absolutely anything like this. So, 'where' you got this summation from, only "atla" would know.

But it's just cause and effect but it's not cause and effect?

Now, what 'we' can clearly 'see', once more, here is just how far astray people can wander from the actual Truth when they presume things, or how far they will go when trying to deceive others about what the True intention are that the other is actually meaning.

One only has to read what I have actually written here to see just how far this one will go in trying to twist and distort my words here.

[Age]

The type of change that would require more effort to describe than I am prepared to provide at the moment.

Okay, fair enough.

This might be another sign of how when people assume things, and when asked for specific clarification and they actually 'think about it', then what they were assuming may not well be, exactly, what is True and Right.

What is the purpose of your speculation about what my comment might be a sign of?

So that I can refer back to this when I start explaining how the human brain works, compared to the Mind, or so others can and/or will 'see' things clearer when they fully understand my writings here.

Does it help to further clarify or explain the meaning of your opening post?

No, this is another issue.

If not, then what function does it serve, other than being a distraction from the subject at hand?

As I was just explaining the function it serves is when all of what I have to say is expressed it helps bring all of the pieces of the puzzle I say and talk about together, forming one crystal clear picture of all-there-is, and especially of how each and every one can and will 'see' the big and full picture "themselves" crystal clearly.

We will just have to wait, to see.

What use will that knowledge be to us, once we have seen, and will it be of sufficient value to have made it worth waiting for?

Being able to provide the actual proof for what one says and claims I find is very necessary. Using this forum, and especially so the words from others, is one way of how I can and will back up, support, and prove my future words and claims.

Knowing how the Mind and the brain actually work helps absolutely tremendously in causing and creating a Truly peaceful world for everyone, as One. So, this is what this knowledge will be useful for and to human beings.

Once this knowledge is obtained, and understood, then this is very, very sufficient in causing and creating 'the world' and the way of life that every human beings wants, or started out wanting anyway.

The species 'human being' is just a part of the ongoing evolutionary process, and the knowledge needed in order to create what Life is evolving to or for is just an ongoing process as well. And, let us not forget that 'Life', Itself, is never about individual human beings. So, what is actually 'sufficient value' is gradually coming to be understood, and known, and is something that the one and only 'I' could not do other than wait for, anyway.

By the way, the type of change that is involved in 'evolution', itself, is already well understood and was just more or further knowledge gained, along 'the way'. Well 'this knowledge' is also obtained and well understood, then it can also be very simply explained, and be very easily understood by others. In other words there certainly is no real effort at all needed to describe.

'Evolution' by another word is just 'change', itself. And, every thing is just constantly-changing, in a way, shape, or form.

Now, if you would like to stay with your view or belief that 'evolution' is just 'a particular type of change', and not 'all change', but still do not want to put absolutely any effort at all into explaining how and/or why, then I will again suggest if one cannot stand behind what they say and claim here and/or do not have the actual proof for what they say and claim here, then I ask, 'Why have and/or hold that view or belief, in the first place?'

[Harbal]

Now, if you would like to stay with your view or belief that 'evolution' is just 'a particular type of change', and not 'all change', but still do not want to put absolutely any effort at all into explaining how and/or why, then I will again suggest if one cannot stand behind what they say and claim here and/or do not have the actual proof for what they say and claim here, then I ask, 'Why have and/or hold that view or belief, in the first place?'

I have my views and theories, and it is sometimes interesting to discuss them, but doing that isn't actually important to me. In fact, it is often more trouble than it's worth.

[Walker]

Now, if you would like to stay with your view or belief that 'evolution' is just 'a particular type of change', and not 'all change', but still do not want to put absolutely any effort at all into explaining how and/or why, then I will again suggest if one cannot stand behind what they say and claim here and/or do not have the actual proof for what they say and claim here, then I ask, 'Why have and/or hold that view or belief, in the first place?'

The word change is like the word snow. The eskimos have something like 26 words for snow. We in the warmer climes have far few words for snow. Do eskimos have a lot of words for change, or do they have a word for evolution? Couldn't say, offhand. Maybe their notions of evolution have something to do with snow.

[Age]

Now, if you would like to stay with your view or belief that 'evolution' is just 'a particular type of change', and not 'all change', but still do not want to put absolutely any effort at all into explaining how and/or why, then I will again suggest if one cannot stand behind what they say and claim here and/or do not have the actual proof for what they say and claim here, then I ask, 'Why have and/or hold that view or belief, in the first place?'

I have my views and theories, and it is sometimes interesting to discuss them, but doing that isn't actually important to me. In fact, it is often more trouble than it's worth.

Okay, but why even bother expressing a view or theory if discussing them is not even actually important to you, or if you would find discussing them would be more trouble than it is worth to you?

So, as it now stands 'evolution', by another word is just 'change', well according to me anyway, and which I am prepared to discuss, back up, support, and with proof. Whereas, you say and claim 'evolution' is 'a particular type of change', of which you are not really prepared to even discuss, let alone back up nor support with absolutely anything, right?

[Age]

Now, if you would like to stay with your view or belief that 'evolution' is just 'a particular type of change', and not 'all change', but still do not want to put absolutely any effort at all into explaining how and/or why, then I will again suggest if one cannot stand behind what they say and claim here and/or do not have the actual proof for what they say and claim here, then I ask, 'Why have and/or hold that view or belief, in the first place?'

The word change is like the word snow. The eskimos have something like 26 words for snow. We in the warmer climes have far few words for snow. Do eskimos have a lot of words for change, or do they have a word for evolution? Couldn't say, offhand. Maybe their notions of evolution have something to do with snow.

Okay, but for those who want to claim that 'evolution' is 'a particular type of change', then what are 'the different types of change', exactly, and which one/s relate to 'evolution', itself, exactly?

[Harbal]

Now, if you would like to stay with your view or belief that 'evolution' is just 'a particular type of change', and not 'all change', but still do not want to put absolutely any effort at all into explaining how and/or why, then I will again suggest if one cannot stand behind what they say and claim here and/or do not have the actual proof for what they say and claim here, then I ask, 'Why have and/or hold that view or belief, in the first place?'

I have my views and theories, and it is sometimes interesting to discuss them, but doing that isn't actually important to me. In fact, it is often more trouble than it's worth.

Okay, but why even bother expressing a view or theory if discussing them is not even actually important to you, or if you would find discussing them would be more trouble than it is worth to you?

So, as it now stands 'evolution', by another word is just 'change', well according to me anyway, and which I am prepared to discuss, back up, support, and with proof. Whereas, you say and claim 'evolution' is 'a particular type of change', of which you are not really prepared to even discuss, let alone back up nor support with absolutely anything, right?

I know what I mean by "evolution", and it is obvious that you mean something different by it, so I don't think this is a discussion I am able to be involved in.

[Age]

I have my views and theories, and it is sometimes interesting to discuss them, but doing that isn't actually important to me. In fact, it is often more trouble than it's worth.

Okay, but why even bother expressing a view or theory if discussing them is not even actually important to you, or if you would find discussing them would be more trouble than it is worth to you?

So, as it now stands 'evolution', by another word is just 'change', well according to me anyway, and which I am prepared to discuss, back up, support, and with proof. Whereas, you say and claim 'evolution' is 'a particular type of change', of which you are not really prepared to even discuss, let alone back up nor support with absolutely anything, right?

I know what I mean by "evolution", and it is obvious that you mean something different by it, so I don't think this is a discussion I am able to be involved in.

Okay, and just as I said, you are not really prepared to even 'discuss' this.

To me it is really rather pointless people 'discussing' what they already agree with and accept.

To me, people 'discuss' things, in a philosophical context anyway, when they want to learn more or new/er things.

[Harbal]

Okay, but why even bother expressing a view or theory if discussing them is not even actually important to you, or if you would find discussing them would be more trouble than it is worth to you?

So, as it now stands 'evolution', by another word is just 'change', well according to me anyway, and which I am prepared to discuss, back up, support, and with proof. Whereas, you say and claim 'evolution' is 'a particular type of change', of which you are not really prepared to even discuss, let alone back up nor support with absolutely anything, right?

I know what I mean by "evolution", and it is obvious that you mean something different by it, so I don't think this is a discussion I am able to be involved in.

Okay, and just as I said, you are not really prepared to even 'discuss' this.

To me it is really rather pointless people 'discussing' what they already agree with and accept.

To me, people 'discuss' things, in a philosophical context anyway, when they want to learn more or new/er things.

I'm not really interested in the topic, but I read some of it, and then saw where someone had questioned your use of the word, "evolution", and I happened to agree with what they said, so I said so. That might have caused you to re-examine your definition of the word, and been of some use to you. Apparently, it wasn't, which is fair enough. That's all there was to it.

[Atla]

Really?

Now, not that you ever will but would you like to explain to the readers here why the so-called 'my creation' and 'my evolution' has, supposedly, nothing at all to do with 'creation' and with 'evolution', themselves?

In fact, would you have the courage to even begin to tell the readers here what the actual 'creation' and actual 'evolution' is, exactly?



Lol "atla", when and where, exactly, have I ever used, supposed, 'deceptive words' for anything at all?

Also, 'evolution' nor 'creation' are never just called, in any language, 'cause and effect, causality'. Unless, of course, you have some written proof, or sound recorded proof, of and for this somewhere.

Furthermore, that the Universe, Itself, is one Thing that is creating Itself, through and by evolution, itself, continually-always is something that you just do not like to admit and accept. And, especially more so because it was 'I' who said and wrote this.

So to summarize, the universe evolves without any intent towards the bright future that you keep telling us about?

I never ever alluded to this, let alone ever said absolutely anything like this. So, 'where' you got this summation from, only "atla" would know.

But it's just cause and effect but it's not cause and effect?

Now, what 'we' can clearly 'see', once more, here is just how far astray people can wander from the actual Truth when they presume things, or how far they will go when trying to deceive others about what the True intention are that the other is actually meaning.

One only has to read what I have actually written here to see just how far this one will go in trying to twist and distort my words here.

More miserable attempts to hide your lies, delusions, misuses of language.

[Age]

I know what I mean by "evolution", and it is obvious that you mean something different by it, so I don't think this is a discussion I am able to be involved in.

Okay, and just as I said, you are not really prepared to even 'discuss' this.

To me it is really rather pointless people 'discussing' what they already agree with and accept.

To me, people 'discuss' things, in a philosophical context anyway, when they want to learn more or new/er things.

I'm not really interested in the topic, but I read some of it, and then saw where someone had questioned your use of the word, "evolution", and I happened to agree with what they said, so I said so. That might have caused you to re-examine your definition of the word, and been of some use to you. Apparently, it wasn't, which is fair enough. That's all there was to it.

Okay.

If you did not want to examine, and discuss, your definition at all, then this is fair enough as well.

[Age]

So to summarize, the universe evolves without any intent towards the bright future that you keep telling us about?

I never ever alluded to this, let alone ever said absolutely anything like this. So, 'where' you got this summation from, only "atla" would know.

But it's just cause and effect but it's not cause and effect?

Now, what 'we' can clearly 'see', once more, here is just how far astray people can wander from the actual Truth when they presume things, or how far they will go when trying to deceive others about what the True intention are that the other is actually meaning.

One only has to read what I have actually written here to see just how far this one will go in trying to twist and distort my words here.

More miserable attempts to hide your lies, delusions, misuses of language.

Once again, I will point out that this one makes accusations and claims, but when I ask it to provide clarification or proof for what it says and writes here, then it will provide absolutely nothing at all.

I have not lied anywhere here, I am not delusional anywhere here, nor have I misused language at all here. But, if you want to believe and claim otherwise "atla", then will you provide clear examples of where you believe I have?

[Atla]

I never ever alluded to this, let alone ever said absolutely anything like this. So, 'where' you got this summation from, only "atla" would know.


Now, what 'we' can clearly 'see', once more, here is just how far astray people can wander from the actual Truth when they presume things, or how far they will go when trying to deceive others about what the True intention are that the other is actually meaning.

One only has to read what I have actually written here to see just how far this one will go in trying to twist and distort my words here.

More miserable attempts to hide your lies, delusions, misuses of language.

Once again, I will point out that this one makes further accusations and claims, but when I ask it to provide any clarification at all about what it says and writes here, then it will provide absolutely nothing at all.

I have not lied anywhere here, I am not delusional anywhere here, nor have I misused language at all here. But, if you want to believe and claim otherwise, then you provide clear examples of where you believe I have?

More lies. It was made clear to you that creation and evolution don't mean general change. You know this too. You deliberately continue to use these words anyway in order to smuggle your metaphysical baggage into the picture, doing which you then deny again (lie again) but also affirm elsewhere, as you are are even far too stupid to avoid writing down such contradictions. Well guess what, some people do notice what you're doing. Also, zero proof again for your overall claim, so you lie about proving it too.

[Age]

More miserable attempts to hide your lies, delusions, misuses of language.

Once again, I will point out that this one makes further accusations and claims, but when I ask it to provide any clarification at all about what it says and writes here, then it will provide absolutely nothing at all.

I have not lied anywhere here, I am not delusional anywhere here, nor have I misused language at all here. But, if you want to believe and claim otherwise, then you provide clear examples of where you believe I have?

More lies. It was made clear to you that creation and evolution don't mean general change.

you just said what you believe is true. NO one has discussed this here. And, what you believe is true is not necessarily True at all.

You know this too.

Now 'here' is one of the primest examples of lying and attempting to deceive.

You deliberately continue to use these words anyway in order to smuggle your metaphysical baggage into the picture, doing which you then deny again (lie again) but also affirm elsewhere, as you are are even far too stupid to avoid writing down such contradictions.

If absolutely any one of you human beings would like to 'discuss' this with me, then please by all means come forward, and let us discuss. Doing so in a public forum like this I would find very vitalizing.

Knowing I can back up and support what I say and claim with actual irrefutable proof, leaves me in a position I desire here.

Well guess what, some people do notice what you're doing. Also, zero proof again for your overall claim, so you lie about proving it too.

All this one can do with my words is just say and claim 'the author' is lying.

Never once has this one provided any actual contradiction, counter, nor refutation for what I have said and claimed. But, it continually tries to discredit 'the author'

This one here known as "atla" is a prime example of those who tried to discredit the one who was just trying to inform 'the others' that actually it is the earth that revolves around the sun, and not the other way around like all of them believed was true.

Once again, would absolutely any one like to have a 'discussion' here?

[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'.

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, are/is evolving.

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

No one, yet, has been able to counter nor refute this. So, 'the wait', continues.