It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The age of the soul. Abortion.

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


aww I was trying to think of the movie I saw that in lol, Fear and Loathing of course!

Wouldn't people just see that in this case purely that conciousness and spirituality is merely chemical interactions running a muck.




posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   
What is taboo about stem cell research and genetics in general is what is possible with it.

Genetics is basically a reverse engineering study of the most advanced technology known to man - life. Your cells are self-reproducing nanobots and the DNA is the code they follow and from that code, these nanobots build the organism.

The DNA code is really no different than a configuration file on a program. 1 small change in that file, and you can end up with big results on the output. Change a piece of code in a config file, change the size of box drawn on the page by any amount you want. Just a small config change. Same thing with DNA, change a little piece of DNA, and you can change many things about the organism. Skin color, and on and on.

But there is no instruction manual, so basically what they do is trial and error to reverse engineer what the different things do. Change a piece, see it changes the skin color on something, and tada you have tagged that piece of code.

So, it's taboo because you could possibly create anything using this technology. Create super beings and so forth. In the right hands, not too much issue. But when you have the motives of some people in the world, it becomes questionable.

I'm kind of on the fence. It's not so much the act itself that I have issue with, but rather how it is used. It's like a pandora's box, once opened that's about it. Sure, we can legalize it for only good things, but then all it's going to take 1 day is a reversal of that law, or someone working in secret and there is the ugly stuff again.

Give someone a new liver? Yeah, I'm ok with that. Create some super being for power and control - not such a good trade off.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


Didn't think of it quite that way, as of course I think about healing and repairing people.

Although I doubt the gov't wouldn't do this behind our back to create a superman. lol.

Sneaky B's

So all in all we couldn't avoid that, although, creating a superhuman would be a completely hard thing to do, so far off that it'd be inconceivable and not to be feared frankly put.

We've created nuclear bombs, and most have no fear of them anymore, they figure noone would ever use one.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
reply to post by badmedia
 


aww I was trying to think of the movie I saw that in lol, Fear and Loathing of course!

Wouldn't people just see that in this case purely that conciousness and spirituality is merely chemical interactions running a muck.


Well think about that a bit. I have put much throught into that.

What is the special chemical that has the characteristic? Is there a "observium" element out there? If you have that chemical anywhere, does that mean there is consciousness?

It's the same problem I came across with AI. How do I get 2 things which have nothing even close to that to combine to produce such a thing? It's completely illogical. So, 1 chemcial reacts with another, with a bit of electricity and suddenly you get the ability for something to observe?

It's the nagging question. Sure you can come up with chemical reactions and patterns that determine what that thing see's, but the question is always the same - to what are these things presented too? Chemcials presenting things to other chemicals? Electricity presenting itself to chemcials and itself?

People say oh it's just an illusion. How absurd. Part of having an illusion is that you need an observer to present the illusion/falsehood to. To call it such a thing completely ignores the entire problem itself.

I have thought long and hard about it. In the end, what kept slapping me in the face is that consciousness is separate of universe itself.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


Separated until we figure it out, or aliens come and tell us.

Both are tough to depend on... surely.

I find this troubling, and of course you would produce this thought to me, appreciativley and upsetting.

Maybe if we solve this problem, we can solve the problem of how life ultimately originated.

I feel lucky to have been given conciousness but also it wasn't luck it had to of happened, I ultimately was going to happen, because there was no conflict in it.

A fruit fly isn't grateful being a fruitfly, because he isn't aware or she!

Umm.... you've stumped me, that is a tough one to wrap around.

What are your thoughts/theories on this, i'd really like to see them posted somewhere. Very interesting. VERY!



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Better Mouse Trap
This may be off topic, but do any of those thousands of tadpole like sperm cells have souls?

I mean they are the beginning of life right? The sperm is "alive" right?

Doesn't life begin there?


Does that means I'm a mass murderer? Should I be tried for crimes against spermanity?




[edit on 8/14/2009 by EnlightenUp]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Know thyself. Nobody can tell you what you are, it's just something you will have to seek and then one day you will eventually know it. It's not something anyone can really tell you, it's an understanding.

And then you will be driven crazy by a society who doesn't get it and purposely ignores it.


What is spirit is spirit, and what is flesh is flesh. Marvel not that I have said you must be born again. This is what Jesus was really talking about. Before you can understand other things, you must first understand this. Impossible for you to see other things without understanding this.



[edit on 8/14/2009 by badmedia]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


Stop no, I understand chemical interactions and such, not metaphysics and pseudounderstanding.

Go on about your previous post, i'm very intrigued, surely you've visited quite a few sites, i'd like to see them! Not in a attacking way, it's got me truly thinking.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
I have thought long and hard about it. In the end, what kept slapping me in the face is that consciousness is separate of universe itself.


But that's an absurdity in that once you've identified something as outside the universe, you should quickly realize it has to be part of the universe. I'm confident we're talking about ALL rather than just this little bubble of spacetime. Even then, the organism must interact with it somehow and therefore it's included.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
Stop no, I understand chemical interactions and such, not metaphysics and pseudounderstanding.

Go on about your previous post, i'm very intrigued, surely you've visited quite a few sites, i'd like to see them! Not in a attacking way, it's got me truly thinking.


There is the old saying - the doors can be pointed out to you and even opened for you, but it's up to you to walk through them.

You just have to question reality. I can't do it for you. The real answers will come from within from you thinking about it on your own.

Think on it.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Strassman and others believe that the chemical interactions are the VEHICLE for consciousness and the soul, and as far as I know there isn't an atheist anywhere who's partaken of '___' or 5MeO-'___' in particular, who remained an atheist afterwards.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
reply to post by Republican08
 


Strassman and others believe that the chemical interactions are the VEHICLE for consciousness and the soul, and as far as I know there isn't an atheist anywhere who's partaken of '___' or 5MeO-'___' in particular, who remained an atheist afterwards.


I'd do it, but as a once addict, I would be skeptical to take a substance that's mind altering. Or possibly addictive.

Although i'd doubt i'd find it in the good ole USA.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Until 2001 it was readily available on the Net, but now it's harder to come by. '___' is a controlled substance, but 5-MeO is not.

If you are fascinated by that topic, and are familiar with Rick Strassman's work, I highly recommend both Strassman's book,
www.rickstrassman.com...

but even moreso, a new one called Tryptamine Palace by James Oroc
www.amazon.com...'___'-Sonoran-Desert/dp/1594772991/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1250238482&sr=8-1

That's a must read. Written by a former atheist who encountered the ultimate entheogenic mystical experience.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnlightenUp

Originally posted by badmedia
I have thought long and hard about it. In the end, what kept slapping me in the face is that consciousness is separate of universe itself.


But that's an absurdity in that once you've identified something as outside the universe, you should quickly realize it has to be part of the universe. I'm confident we're talking about ALL rather than just this little bubble of spacetime. Even then, the organism must interact with it somehow and therefore it's included.


Consciousness is that which creates logic, it is that which observes, that which feels, that which makes it possible to have understanding, to reason and so forth. Without consciousness, this does not exist and you would be like a robot. Just a bunch of unconsciousness patterns going about.

The universe/creation or physical is the result of logic being applied. Action and reaction is no different than "if's and thens" in a program. Creation is made by the "word", that word is logic, same as a program.

It is a void. We can only describe it through attachments. But what we are really talking about in essence is not an attachment/item/possession, but instead that which does the possessing. So to call it as a "thing" at all is a bit of a misnomer, but it's kind of impossible to talk about it otherwise.

Rider vs ride, thought vs thinker, observation vs observer, creator vs creation etc.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 

"The God Theory" by Bernard Haisch
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249274834&sr=8-1

Haisch is an astrophysicist whose professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Deputy Director for the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, and Visiting Fellow at the Max-Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany. His work has led to close involvement with NASA; he is the author of over 130 scientific papers; and was the Scientific Editor of the Astrophysical Journal for nine years, as well as the editor in chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

an excerpt



If you think of whitte light as a metaphor of infinite, formless potential, the colors on a slide or frame of film become a structured reality grounded in the polarity that comes about through intelligent subtraction from that absolute formless potential. It results from the limitation of the unlimited. I contend that this metaphor provides a comprehensible theory for the creation of a manifest reality (our universe) from the selective limitation of infinite potential (God)...
If there exists an absolute realm that consists of infinite potential out of which a created realm of polarity emerges, is there any sensible reason not to call this "God"? Or to put it frankly, if the absolute is not God, what is it? For our purposes here, I will indentify the Absolute with God. More precisely I will call the Absolute the Godhead. Applying this new terminology to the optics analogy, we can conclude that our physical universe comes about when the Godhead selectively limits itself, taking on the role of Creator and manifesting a realm of space and time and, within that realm, filtering out some of its own infinite potential...
Viewed this way, the process of creation is the exact opposite of making something out of nothing. It is, on the contrary, a filtering process that makes something our of everything. Creation is not capricious or random addition; it is intelligent and selective subtraction. The implications of this are profound. If the Absolute in the Godhead, and if creation is the process by which the Godhead filters our parts of its own infinite potential to manifest a physical reality that supports experience, then the stuff that is left over, the residue of this process, is our physical universe, and ourselves included. We are nothing less than a part of that Godhead - quite literally.

Next, by Ervin Laszlo

Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything, 2004
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249275852&sr=8-1

And, his other seminal work
Science and the Reenchantment of the Cosmos: The Rise of the Integral Vision of Reality
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1249275852&sr=8-6

Ervin Laszlo is considered one of the foremost thinkers and scientists of our age, perhaps the greatest mind since Einstein. His principal focus of research involves the Zero Point Field. He is the author of around seventy five books (his works having been translated into at least seventeen languages), and he has contributed to over 400 papers. Widely considered the father of systems philosophy and general evolution theory, he has worked as an advisor to the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2004 and 2005. A multidisciplinarian, Laszlo has straddled numerous fields, having worked at universities as a professor of philosophy, music, futures studies, systems science, peace studies, and evolutionary studies. He was a sucessful concert pianist until he was thirty eight.

In his view, the zero-point field (or the Akashic Field, as he calls it) is quite literally the "mind of God".

Naming Hal Puthoff, Roger Penrose, Fritz-Albert Popp, and a handful of others as "front line investigators", Laszlo quotes Puthoff who says of the new scientific paradigm:



[What] would emerge would be an increased understanding that all of us are immersed, both as living and physical beings, in an overall interpenetrating and interdependant field in ecological balance with the cosmos as a whole, and that even the boundary lines between the physical and "metaphysical" would dissolve into a unitary viewpoint of the universe as a fluid, changing, energetic/informational cosmological unity."

an excert from Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything



Akasha (a . ka . sha) is a Sanskrit word meaning "ether": all-pervasive space. Originally signifying "radiation" or "brilliance", in Indian philosophy akasha was considered the first and most fundamental of the five elements - the others being vata (air), agni (fire), ap (water), and prithivi (earth). Akasha embraces the properties of all five elements: it is the womb from which everything we percieve with our senses has emerged and into which everything will ultimately re-descend. The Akashic Record (also called The Akashic Chronicle) is the enduring record of all that happens, and has ever happened, in space and time."

Laszlo's view of the history of the universe is of a series of universes that rise and fall, but are each "in-formed" by the existence of the previous one. In Laszlo's mind, the universe is becoming more and more in-formed, and within the physical universe, matter (which is the crystallization of intersecting pressure waves or an interference pattern moving through the zero-point field) is becoming increasing in-formed and evolving toward higher forms of consciousness and realization.

------------

According to Oroc's experiences (Tryptamine Palace), when the ego is dissolved in consciousness through the temporary formation of a type of neurological "Bose Einstein Condensate", there is no real dilineation or distinction between individual consciousness and God-consciousness or the universal "akashic field" (Lazslo) aka Zero Point Field.

So you are correct badmedia, in your evaluation, and this has been tested, experiencially. It is no longer mere speculation. And that experience CAN be accessed, although not easily.

[edit on 14-8-2009 by OmegaPoint]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:38 AM
link   
According to ancient vedic wisdom (dont remember the exact place within those many-thousand pages) its after around 3 months that the soul enters.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
According to ancient vedic wisdom (dont remember the exact place within those many-thousand pages) its after around 3 months that the soul enters.


I apologize SkyFloating, I know you have been, unappreciative of my threads...eek. But what is Vedic. I'll research it, but haven't heard it maybe in this terminology.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


en.wikipedia.org...

Aww, nevermind I thought it sounded familiar, Hinduism, lol, my boss :/

Good to hear what the texts say. Still not enough for the Buddhist and Hindus to effect stem cell research.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
I apologize SkyFloating, I know you have been, unappreciative of my threads...eek.


On the contrary. I have been most appreciative of your threads because they were instrumental in pointing out the shortcomings of the atheist-mind in threads of my own.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Republican08
I apologize SkyFloating, I know you have been, unappreciative of my threads...eek.


On the contrary. I have been most appreciative of your threads because they were instrumental in pointing out the shortcomings of the atheist-mind in threads of my own.





Don't know if you're trying to trick me... I remember a Mother Teresa thread, where you called me (indirectly) a person who had a lot of free time, and nothing better to do then criticize the dead.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join