Is the wind alive, a living organism? (speculative)

page: 17
19
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by BBalazs
 


>No one is denying science here.

I am denying 'science'.

The 'Ologies' are hardly anything more than layered nonsense.

The fact that they don't tie in to the wonderous reality that surrounds us is simply ignored...

The geniuses that populate it's ranks are hardly anything more than parrotting baboons... (with all due apologies to baboons!
)

Are simply incapable of understanding the difference between cause and effect!

Witness gravity. No such thing as the 'force' referred to as 'gravity'. Gravity does NOT exist.

But I digress...





posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 


> air movements are the result of planet rotation, the results of the Sun's heat-cooling
> and of course our Divine Goddess the Moon itself which creates Tides

THAT is utter nonsense!



What happened when it is totally 'calm'?

Did the planet suddenly stop spinning?

Hmmm......




posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by BBalazs
 

A "speculative theory" requires a certain amount of a) speculation and b) theorising. You don't seem to have any logical thought process or research that has reasonably lead to this hypothesis being made.

I didn't "rant about science" - I just don't see why you felt the need to create this thread and not even make an effort to back up your theory yourself.



I am sick and tird of defending this thread.
Did you read this: speculative????

I would be too! There is nothing to it man, you should have at least made some effort in your original post - people would respect you and the thread a lot more. If it's your theory, you should be compelled to research it and try to find out if there's anything to it - post your findings. But if even you can't be bothered, how can anybody take it seriously?

If you feel the need to start a thread with "you might think this is an idiotic question" then perhaps you should re-evaluate.


And i am going to say it, all you smartasses (no disrespectman) who come here to give a science lesson are mistaken, i happen to know more about science then you.

Like I said, I'm no expert by any means - but I really, REALLY doubt that statement is true, based on your approach to this thread. Even your list of characteristics of living beings is wrong.


So what would it mean to you if the wind was alive?

Ideally, it would be a biological organism. Perhaps sentient.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Ummm.......The usual suspects....out to prove their intelligence, your supreme denigration only belittles your own lack of Satori.

Not one of you "KNOW"......anything....you delve into your "Wikipedia's", urgently crunching through other peoples work, then regurgitate what you have gleaned and claim to have a learned opinion, never seeing that all you delve in is supposition................You have no....KNOWLEDGE...you plaigerize and "borrow" other peoples critical thinking and claim it as your own...as if YOU had made the effort...

The OP has provided a speculative question that none of you can disprove....You can point to all the Earth science data you want, to all the "peer" reviewed journals, that exist with chart and graph and never once approach knowledge....

You seem to think that because you read somewhere that "X" was thus "Y" that, that you had somehow gained Gnosis...NONE of you have KNOWLEDGE, you only opine. You should perhaps realize that your lack of critical thinking skills have blinded you to your own ignorance, so you pick up another's thought process and hearald it as your own, then you call the OP ignorant.

OP.......Pneuma...or breath "according to Judaic tradition" caused life to animate the inanimate.....Was it the air that was moved by the breath, or was it some other energy or effect carried by, infused within, or riding upon that "wind" of breath. As to wether that "breath of God", initiated life or was alive, I cannot say.......You see, I am not privy to all of "knowing"...or to any of it. I am however, intelligent enough and honest enough to admit that all that I "think" I know is in fact only me "thinking", that I know.

To further your thoughts, I have experiance in some of the energies, that breath carries...........any of you scoffers are simply to arrogant to admit that you might be incorrect........you will never take the time to explore, to experiment, to step beyond your preconception, your prejudice, to stand outside of that box of ignorance that you claim as knowing.......You will denigrate and slander...point your fingers and snide, laugh...to cover your embarrassment at being called out for what you truly are................afraid!

Go ahead......point your fingers.......claim that you...KNOW......however, realize, that your laughter is for you and you alone.
Everyone of you have abandoned the principles of honest science and close your mind to the bald fact that you may be wrong and have never personally tested, or experimented beyond what you have read..........."IS".
Shame on you all.........................

YouSir
edit on 22-1-2012 by YouSir because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
What the OP is proposing is basically what the ancient civilisations thought. In a primative way it makes sense, movement = life. We breath, we stop when we die, so maybe breath/wind is alive. This is the basis of animism, spirits, and the seed of polytheistic and monotheistic religious and myths.

Of course we have several thousand years of scientific pondering, experiement and discovery that tells us there is no invisible man in the sky setting off volcanos and throwing thunderbolts whenever you do something he doesn't like.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

ATTENTION!!!!!!!!!!!



We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.
That means what it says...please discuss the topic and not each other.


This forum is dedicated to the all-important highly speculative topics that may not be substantiated by many, if any facts and span the spectrum of topics discussed on ATS. Readers and users should be aware that extreme theories without corroboration are embraced in this forum. Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals.


Further rudeness and personal attacks will be removed, with the possibility of Temporary Posting Bans.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
You might not be too far off, maybe there is a certain amount that is controlled in ways we do not know.
They say that the record breaking Tornadoes in America in 2011 had some spiritual meaning behind it when America which blesses Isreal who are blessed as the richest country also who turned their back on Israel's Holy Land were landed with a big dividing line of destruction across America like God drawing a line with his finger across the land because America failed to deal with Israel's boarder disputes, but neither can things like this be proven you just have to go by instinct here. There are many other instances and patterns like Katrina and Israel's settlements being taken away and Turkey/Iran boarder earthquake with Palestine terrorists released for no real reason and Turkish prisoners escaping in the process.

Maybe the elements do have some control by God and the Angels, here are some examples.

______________________________________________________________________________________

2 Samuel 22:11
He mounted the cherubim and flew; he soared on the wings of the wind.
Psalm 18:10
He mounted the cherubim and flew; he soared on the wings of the wind.


Hebrews 1:7 In speaking of the angels he says, "He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire."

Genesis 8:1
But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and he sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded.


Exodus 10:19
And the LORD changed the wind to a very strong west wind, which caught up the locusts and carried them into the Red Sea. Not a locust was left anywhere in Egypt.

Psalm 48:7
You destroyed them like ships of Tarshish shattered by an east wind.

Psalm 78:26
He let loose the east wind from the heavens and by his power made the south wind blow.

Psalm 104:3
and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind.

Psalm 104:4
He makes winds his messengers, flames of fire his servants.

Isaiah 11:15
The LORD will dry up the gulf of the Egyptian sea; with a scorching wind he will sweep his hand over the Euphrates River. He will break it up into seven streams so that anyone can cross over in sandals.

Isaiah 28:2
See, the Lord has one who is powerful and strong. Like a hailstorm and a destructive wind, like a driving rain and a flooding downpour, he will throw it forcefully to the ground.

Isaiah 29:6
the LORD Almighty will come with thunder and earthquake and great noise, with windstorm and tempest and flames of a devouring fire.

Revelation 7:1
[ 144,000 Sealed ] After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree.

Matthew 24:31
And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Mark 4
Jesus Calms the Storm

39 He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.

40 He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”

41 They were terrified and asked each other, “Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!”
edit on 22-1-2012 by The time lord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I can prove the wind is not a living organism

if it was, it would have helped tebow beat brady

you're welcome



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by YouSir
 

Of course, there is the argument that one cannot objectively know something to be true outside of what they have experienced themselves. However, to adopt such a paradigm is useless and nihilistic at best - not in a constructive sense either. Moreover, one can argue that such personal 'truths' can be subjective and the result of delusion or hallucination, as is arguably such in the case of religious visions.



Not one of you "KNOW"......anything....you delve into your "Wikipedia's", urgently crunching through other peoples work, then regurgitate what you have gleaned and claim to have a learned opinion, never seeing that all you delve in is supposition................You have no....KNOWLEDGE...you plaigerize and "borrow" other peoples critical thinking and claim it as your own...as if YOU had made the effort...

No, many of the people that have posted here have studied scientific subjects at advanced levels. I know enough from my own school education and research outside of that to know the OP doesn't have a case. Unfortunately, nobody has thousands of years to re-evaluate and re-examine every scientific theory, or every observable trend in the universe. All we can do is examine the work of others with a critical eye and a keen mind. That applies to every field of study, whether it be music or maths.



The OP has provided a speculative question that none of you can disprove....You can point to all the Earth science data you want, to all the "peer" reviewed journals, that exist with chart and graph and never once approach knowledge....

It has been disproved, through application of commonly held scientific principles. As I already told the OP, if he wants to challenge the status quo - the burden of proof is on him.



You seem to think that because you read somewhere that "X" was thus "Y" that, that you had somehow gained Gnosis...NONE of you have KNOWLEDGE, you only opine. You should perhaps realize that your lack of critical thinking skills have blinded you to your own ignorance, so you pick up another's thought process and hearald it as your own, then you call the OP ignorant.

This sounds like an ignorant claim in itself - to say 'nobody knows anything, its all opinions' is ridiculous. Once again, you assume the the maxim 'I think therefore I am' is the only one that can be applied to acquisition of knowledge. This is useless towards our collective progression as a species. Would you rather everybody sits under a tree for ten years, fooling themselves?



OP.......Pneuma...or breath "according to Judaic tradition" caused life to animate the inanimate.....Was it the air that was moved by the breath, or was it some other energy or effect carried by, infused within, or riding upon that "wind" of breath. As to wether that "breath of God", initiated life or was alive, I cannot say.......You see, I am not privy to all of "knowing"...or to any of it. I am however, intelligent enough and honest enough to admit that all that I "think" I know is in fact only me "thinking", that I know.

See, you don't even make an attempt to know. Science does - science admits it knows very little for certain, but scientists attempt to unravel the rainbow as a collective and timeless breed. The works of those before, during and after individual lifetimes are integral to the success of such studies. You, on the other hand, merely speculate and condemn science based on primary and secondary school education - which is too rigid - but doesn't apply to science in the real world.

The rest of your post is a series of assumptions and attacks that you apply to everybody that disagrees with the uninformed and unjustifiable OP. It's not even worth dealing with, it sounds like something a preacher of the Church of Ignorance would come out with and is finger pointing in itself. I certainly, for one, wasn't pointing fingers and laughing - I gave him constructive advice.
edit on 22-1-2012 by arollingstone because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
our current definition of "life" is kind of flawed to begin with though.
it applies to many things we know are inanimate, and dosnt 100% apply to a few organisms that are obviously life.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by banishedfromthisarea
I put on my running shoes and stepped outside in the cool evening air here in Florida. I started jogging slowly down my dirt road, the wind gently caressing my face. My dog beside me, as wisps of tiny water droplets from every breath float away from him. I speed up, now running. My heart begins to race and I feel warmth coming to my skin where the cool wind takes it away. I breath in deep - it feels good to take in the wind deep into me. My lungs expand and the air seemlessly passes into my being, into the very cells of my body. The air now circulates throughout my body, mind and soul - joining with the other elements that are me - carbon, hydrogen, iron, calcium and potassium. I have given life to the very air that I breathe. Who gave life to me?


The scientific definition of life - from those definitions that have been kindly provided by many people herein - is one of synergy - the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. It is a wonderful definition because it religiously promotes life - it provides that life continues on, which is our paradigm of what we believe life should be. But that definition does not allow for the component "parts" to have "life" in the full sense of the definition provided.

The structure that is my arm cannot reproduce any more than the components of the cells in my arm can reproduce by themselves - the cell membrane, chloroplasts, cytoplasm, DNA, golgi complex, lysosomes, microfilaments, mitochondria and RNA. Yet, I like to think of my arm as alive because I feel it, it's warm and it held my children. If you say that it is ridiculous that one's arm is not alive, is it not also ridiculous to claim that the cell components are any less alive - for they contribute to the life of the cell as completely as my arm contributes to the life of me. And if those components do define life in this new paradigm, then why would their subcomponents - the atoms of oxygen in the air we breathe be denied the benefit of that definition as well?

There is an intelligence that is obvious in human society revealed by the communications between individuals and the things we build - just as there is in the cell. Maybe that intelligence doesn't exist at the macroscopic level, but instead is grounded in the quantum level, giving great relevance to the contribution to life provided by the subcomponents mentioned herein. Perhaps what you are struggling for is a new definition of life in a paradigm that frees itself from the linear constraints of the current definition and incorporates intelligence as the prime determining factor of life.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
I will repeat: this thread is without true meaning, so long as the OP refuses to answer the question he/she poses. if you are unable to answer the question you have offered, then why do you ask us to answer it WITHOUT answering it? It is truly illogical....

Note: I am drunk as I answer this, but it still makes sense...do not ask us to answer your question, then berate us for answering it scientifically without offering an answer of you own. It is not justified. So shut up, and answer us with your own theory, or leave us alone.

That is all I ask.
edit on CSundaypm292934f34America/Chicago22 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
So.......... who won.? maybe you can think up some other looney topic to post soon. There is one outcome here though, a lot of people looking totally ridiculous. Now you can all go have some herbal tea and burn some Nag Champa .....ohmmm .ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Ha ha ha ha ha...... so if it's alive ???
How can you kill it?



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by BBalazs
 


You said

Is the wind alive, a living organism? (speculative) VERY VERY VERY SPECULATIVE

It is the movement of air NOTHING more and NOTHING less!!!.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by BBalazs

Originally posted by UltraDOSEcious
So is the wind one very large organism, covering the entire planet, or is every little gust an individual?

Please stop calling this a "theory." This is NOT a theory, and since it is not testable, I wouldn't even call it a hypothesis. This is metaphysical discussion, and while it is worth talking about to help think outside the box, it has no bearing on physical reality.

Deny arrogance.S

Really!?
You are know going to show your arrogance and misunderstanding of speculation?
Gaia theory, check it out.
Theory is speculation my half witted friend (since sou are unaware of what words mean).
Here is the definition, enjoy:
The English word theory was derived from a technical term in Ancient Greek philosophy. The word theoria, θεωρία, meant "a looking at, viewing, beholding", and referring to contemplation or speculation, as opposed to action.[1] Theory is especially often contrasted to "practice" (from Greek praxis, πρᾶξις) a Greek term for "doing", which is opposed to theory because theory involved no doing apart from itself.


Ps: dont tell menwhat i can or cannot do, or i will also start telling sou what sour family can and cannot do.
Okay?


No, theory is a hypothesis after the hypothesis has been backed up by some sort of evidence, my personally attacking friend.I can't believe how ridiculously illogical, close minded, and misleading you are.

First of all, the definition of theory, according to marion webster: a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

I never said what you can and can not do. You are now putting words in MY mouth, my no witted friend. There's nothing wrong with discussing this topic, in fact it is a good thing, but don't call it a theory when it is just an idea. I never said it was a bad idea, I just have objection to you using a word that gives something credibility when your idea has, in fact, 0 credibility, or usefulness, or predictive power, or anything outside of philosophy.

edit on 22-1-2012 by UltraDOSEcious because: no reason



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
I will repeat: this thread is without true meaning, so long as the OP refuses to answer the question he/she poses. if you are unable to answer the question you have offered, then why do you ask us to answer it WITHOUT answering it? It is truly illogical....

Note: I am drunk as I answer this, but it still makes sense...do not ask us to answer your question, then berate us for answering it scientifically without offering an answer of you own. It is not justified. So shut up, and answer us with your own theory, or leave us alone.

That is all I ask.
edit on CSundaypm292934f34America/Chicago22 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)


.....so I can only ask the questions that I have an answer for? How will I ever learn anything new ?

...More to the op's topic: I do believe that the wind can be 'called'.....whatever that might suggest. ( just more unanswered questions, I'm afraid....lol)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by BBalazs
 

Winds are caused by high and low pressure boundaries.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
WAIT a minute Now....... you only answering what you want?????????? So if it's alive as you SPECULATE....question.... then can it DIE, or be KILLED? And if it can't then it's IMMORTAL, and that would make it a GOD maybe, or at the least an IMMORTAL. Come on answer the question. of course you pose this question in a way that excludes you from having to give an answer since you use that little tricky (CLINTON) word (IS)........So what say you.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by arollingstone
 


Great post, sir! Shatter their ignorance! Some people don't want to pursue knowledge when they can just sit there and make things up, and back it up with nonsensical statements.





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join