China: Ancient Pyramids + Explosions: "Underground Forests in Mystery Holes of Guangxi"

a reply to: ArMaP

That war we have been talking about is from the Mahabharata, not from the Vedas.

Well I thought it counted as part of the Vedas, but whatever, I'll have to look it up, why the Mahabharata doesn't count as the Vedas.

So also, what, the Vedas DON'T actually contain descriptions of ancient war? Isn't that the original idea that we were discussing, lol, that the Vedas had descriptions of ancient war...

a reply to: ArMaP

Those are not craters, those are called "maria" ("seas").

Ok. Well they are only on the near side of the moon, so I think they're... impact craters, from the ancient events of the Earth exploding its surface off into space apparently, it bombarded the near side of the moon, forming all the "maria."

The far side is unscathed, it's unbelievable that people don't appreciate how strange this is, and how much it indicates the ancient events with a one-sided event happening.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
a reply to: ArMaP

Those are not craters, those are called "maria" ("seas").

Ok. Well they are only on the near side of the moon, so I think they're... impact craters, from the ancient events of the Earth exploding its surface off into space apparently, it bombarded the near side of the moon, forming all the "maria."

The far side is unscathed, it's unbelievable that people don't appreciate how strange this is, and how much it indicates the ancient events with a one-sided event happening.

We have rocks taken from them. They are flood basalt plains. And, billions of years old.

www.sciencedirect.com...

originally posted by: JamesChessman
But what's better than atheism. Is: Agnosticism. In my opinion. Meaning that a person is acknowledging what he doesn't know, and remains open-minded about what we don't know for sure.

Agnosticism states that we don't know and that we cannot know if there is (are) a god(s), so it's not really a neutral position either.

And being an atheist doesn't mean I'm not open to other possibilities, it only means that I think that the most likely possibility is that there aren't any gods.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
We do know that: All the elements of weather and geological process are known to exist on Mars: Wind, sand, storms, water, ice etc.

We haven't found any running water on Mars.

It would only just take the certain correct combination of those forces that do exist there. For sand to get blown-around and accumulate on probably any sort of terrain.

Those forces exist on Earth and we do not see that.

...It might even have some clay mixed in with the sand on Mars, so it might turn to glue when it's wet, and there can easily be some certain combination of storms and moisture that could make that sand accumulate...

There are some clay-like areas on Mars, on what appears to be the bottom of ancient lakes.

So it's all good to consider but I don't necessarily agree that their weapon absolutely NEEDED to involve heat as well as its apparent electric blast. I think it's MOST true that we don't really know what exactly their weapons were or how they worked, and it shouldn't be a huge surprise if they worked in ways that we are not familiar with.

Everything that involves electricity also involves heat produced by that electricity, unless we are talking about absolute zero temperatures, at which there is no electrical resistance.

In the case of Mars' scar, I'm not very convinced that it needs to show melt damage, one way or another. Whether there really is melted-damage, and whether or not there is sand covering it, regardless, we can see the very clear SHAPE of electricity in Mars' scar. The shape is indisputable, it's that of electric strike. It doesn't necessarily need extra signs to verify the SHAPE of electric impact that we see.

It's not, the shape of Mars feature has branches that are almost all perpendicular to the main trunk, while an electrical discharge shows the direction in which the current was flowing.

Well sure but it's that zap-shape of electric impact that's so clear.

See above.

Again I don't think it's even such a leap of imagination... that they might have hit Mars with an electric blast (as per its obvious shape of electricity) but since we don't actually know exactly how their weaponry worked, maybe it did not have a heat component too.

Electricity is always associated with some electrical resistance, except at absolute zero temperatures, and resistance implies heat. The higher the current the more heat you get, the higher the voltage for a specific resistance, the more current you get and, again, more heat.

I mean, it's really 2 different things, an electric zap, and a heat / melting impact. Seems like it could be 2 completely separate things, and that I would not necessarily think an electric blast would absolutely need to ALSO include heat / melting, too.

You cannot have one without the other.

Sir we don't even know the characteristics of the ancient weapons, to be able to debate those weapons.

Lets start by the beginning: we don't even know those weapons ever existed.

We can see that the ancients were using gigantic world-killing weapons blasts of electricity. That's what we can SEE on Mars.

Wrong, we can read that someone wrote or said that they used weapons of mass destruction, not world-killing weapons or blasts of electricity.
Unless you are talking about some other text.

I think the whole idea of debating the temperature of electricity is absurd. Because as I understand it, electricity and heat are really still two different things that are not necessarily always together.

Then you need to learn more about electricity.
Add it to the growing list of things you should learn about before acting as it you know it all.

I mean, is electricity ALWAYS HOT? I don't really think so? Power-cords are not always hot... they are sometimes but MOST of the time, power cables are NOT radiating heat, so I mean I think this whole tangent is just absurd. Outside the realm of appliances, is electricity ALWAYS HOT in nature, because again, I don't really think so, what about lightning storms in very cold places like the polar regions, how about lightning traveling through the ice water in polar regions, I would expect there's gotta be SOME electricity that's not always hot.

Yes, there is always some heat associated with electricity, learn about it.

Even then, again we don't know the weapon. If it was being fired for thousands of miles through space, maybe the weapon lost its heat component and cooled off, while the electric blast remained when it hit?

Not possible.
An electrical discharge in the absolute vacuum does not produce heat because there is nothing to heat, but as soon as it is travelling through some matter then there's an electrical resistance that implies an increase in temperature.
That's how things like toasters and electric ovens are made.
Remember, space is not an absolute vacuum.

The weapons are probably so exotic and advanced that we can't judge whether it should be hot or not, we don't have world-destroying laser beams quite yet.

The supposed weapons.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
But so we need to spend some time contemplating / meditating on it. Myself included, and ArMaP, you too. We need to meditate on that ancient cataclysm, that destroyed human life across the solar system, a few thousand years ago.

Sorry, I'm not going to meditate about am imaginary event.

So anyways, will you please say a prayer for all those souls who were lost in the sudden attacks. Please pray for their spirits to rest in peace.

I do not pray.

Or wait, do you disbelieve in that too? Wishing for the deceased to rest in peace? It's a pretty universal human sentiment, it's part of life for most people.

I don't know what to believe regarding that, I don't have enough information.

a reply to: JamesChessman

I didn't read all of the post, so I will say just this: how do you conciliate monotheistic with polytheistic religions?

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Haven't you established that the Vedas were written down at a certain point in time, but before that, their oral preservation goes back an UNKNOWN number of years, correct?

I haven't established anything.

But yes, it's clear by the way it is written that it was written from an oral tradition, saying the same things several times in slightly different ways is usually a sure sign that they came from an oral tradition in which people repeated things to help them memorise it.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: JamesChessman
a reply to: ArMaP

Those are not craters, those are called "maria" ("seas").

Ok. Well they are only on the near side of the moon, so I think they're... impact craters, from the ancient events of the Earth exploding its surface off into space apparently, it bombarded the near side of the moon, forming all the "maria."

The far side is unscathed, it's unbelievable that people don't appreciate how strange this is, and how much it indicates the ancient events with a one-sided event happening.

We have rocks taken from them. They are flood basalt plains. And, billions of years old.

www.sciencedirect.com...

Ok billions of years old, but it could be more recent events that exposed the old rock layer, or otherwise formed the maria from such recent events hitting the much older rock.

Surface of Earth exploded off and bombarded the moon imo.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
But what's better than atheism. Is: Agnosticism. In my opinion. Meaning that a person is acknowledging what he doesn't know, and remains open-minded about what we don't know for sure.

Agnosticism states that we don't know and that we cannot know if there is (are) a god(s), so it's not really a neutral position either.

And being an atheist doesn't mean I'm not open to other possibilities, it only means that I think that the most likely possibility is that there aren't any gods.

Alright well I guess we are similarly open-minded about what we don’t know.

I think agnosticism leaves open the possibility to learn. And you are basically saying “atheist” the same way, being open about what we don’t know.

I usually thought atheism was more disbelief than open-mindedness but apparently we are both meaning the same thing…

a reply to: ArMaP

We haven't found any running water on Mars.

Ok, not officially-recognized running water. But we do see seasonal changes of darkness in the soil which seems to be water dampness, on a yearly / seasonal cycle.

So that's almost running-water, but it's just water dampness in the soil, which spreads at predictable seasonal markers.

Then there's pockets of ice and probably pockets of water, but you're right that there's not officially recognized running water.

Those forces exist on Earth and we do not see that.

Maybe things could be getting lost in translation but it's easy for me to imagine specific weather forces to accumulate snow or sand on vertical terrain, I think...

There are some clay-like areas on Mars, on what appears to be the bottom of ancient lakes.

^Ok so my point was that such clay can make soil get sticky when wet (as the clay on Earth is like that). So clay sediment would just be extra cohesiveness if we are struggling to imagine sand accumulation in specific spots, some clay would help make it all sticky and accumulate more, I reckon.



Electricity and heat is interesting but this also comes down to the impossibility of us knowing what the weapons were, how they worked. If you're correct about electricity always having heat, even in lightning storms in polar regions and lightning hitting ice water, I would have thought there's gotta be some elecricity that's not HOT.

But even if it is always hot, in every circumstance, well hey the ancient weapons can still have exotic, impossible characteristics that we can't understand. Maybe the weapon just somehow was electricity, and almost no heat.

I also thought that the possibility of the weapon blast shooting through SPACE for thousands of miles, I thought THAT made sense as a cooling factor, if we are looking for such mitigating factors that could change the outcome of the weapon impact on Mars.

It's not, the shape of Mars feature has branches that are almost all perpendicular to the main trunk, while an electrical discharge shows the direction in which the current was flowing.

Suit yourself but the images speak for themselves, Mars got hit by a weapon that was largely based on electricity. The images of the physical terrain of Mars are the ultimate answer on this, it's not a matter of debating small details like we have been, about soil accumulation and melting etc.

a reply to: ArMaP

We can see that the ancients were using gigantic world-killing weapons blasts of electricity. That's what we can SEE on Mars.

Wrong, we can read that someone wrote or said that they used weapons of mass destruction, not world-killing weapons or blasts of electricity.
Unless you are talking about some other text.

^No I meant that we can see it on Mars. The scar is just the crystal clear impact of Mars' ancient world-killing impact.


I think the impact was probably the largest shape in the center, and then apparently, spread out left and right, from that impact point.

The far left side seems to show some especially obvious shapes of electricity that apparently accumulated there, and fizzled out, on that left side.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
But so we need to spend some time contemplating / meditating on it. Myself included, and ArMaP, you too. We need to meditate on that ancient cataclysm, that destroyed human life across the solar system, a few thousand years ago.

Sorry, I'm not going to meditate about am imaginary event.

So anyways, will you please say a prayer for all those souls who were lost in the sudden attacks. Please pray for their spirits to rest in peace.

I do not pray.

Or wait, do you disbelieve in that too? Wishing for the deceased to rest in peace? It's a pretty universal human sentiment, it's part of life for most people.

I don't know what to believe regarding that, I don't have enough information.

Well OK but in my perspective, there must be billions of ghosts from the ancient apocalypse, and they surely must appreciate it that they are remembered sometimes and prayed to be happy.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: JamesChessman

I didn't read all of the post, so I will say just this: how do you conciliate monotheistic with polytheistic religions?

Actually I already edited the post to be smaller, soon after I first posted, so maybe you didn't see the shortened version of it. Well here is an even shorter version of it:

It's not necessarily every religion against every other religion though.

There's a few major different categories of religions.

There are ancient legacy religions that are basically reporting a collection of ancient thought and records.

These are essentially ancient attempts at history, and they're not really AGAINST anything. This includes the ancient Indian texts, and the ancient Jewish texts, Old Testament.






Then there are more recent religions with more recent prophets, mainly the Buddha, then Jesus, then Mohammed.

Each person was a leader of new thought, for their time & place, and so each of these newer guys has his own following to this day. So that's a nice idealistic way to look at that.






However, even if Jesus was really the Prince of Peace, even then, his teaching has been largely lost, plus he has been used for EVIL and murder and violence, especially that Christianity is well-known to be the most violent religion of all history.

But Jesus presumably didn't want any of that to happen, it was evil that took over / replaced his message, and it was evilness from outside forces, unrelated to Jesus. Mainly his influence became co-opted as the stamp of violent, murderous empires, who were spreading their own empire. Mainly the Roman Empire and the Spanish Crusades. They were carrying the stamp of Christ in a false way, because it was really just the empires murdering everyone.




^So we have to distinguish different things like that. The ancient legacy collections are really not against anything, they're just collections of ancient thought.

And the 3 main recent prophets, they presumably all had pure teaching, and it's a completely separate matter that their legacy was corrupted / scrambled by evil, violent war-mongers, many centuries removed from Jesus himself.

Essentially the same applies to Islam, which I am the least familiar with, but I assume Mohammed was a good person for his time & place, and when Islam is mis-used for evil, that is outside evil, misusing the stamp.




Then there's Buddhism, which has managed to remain intact, preserved better than the others, and Buddhism hasn't been misused for evil so much as the others. It's the least misused of these religions, and the best preserved meaning that the Buddha's teachings were recorded in real-time, and preserved for 2,600 years. You can read, or listen to audio of, the Buddha's speeches today, if u want to.

Buddhism is also the correct focus because it's about THE TRUTH of life and the universe, and it's really mainly focused on personal health and well-being. So it's demonstrably a positive way of life for an individual, and it's also good for everyone (if each individual is focused on his own wellness, then yes, that's good for the whole world).

So we gotta distinguish what is preserved truth from the original prophets' inspiration, which is a good thing, and... unrelated to whatever ways in which bad forces corrupt different religions for evil.





Then there's another category that crosses other categories like a Venn diagram:

The category of religions that are focused on personal health and wellness, and this makes them harmonious with others, thinking mainly of Buddhism here, but AFAIK Taoism is along similar lines (and it has even mixed with Buddhism). Basically along the same lines is Yoga which goes back to Hinduism, but especially physical yoga, i.e. Hatha Yoga, is based on physical wellness, and that's harmonious with anything.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
I usually thought atheism was more disbelief than open-mindedness but apparently we are both meaning the same thing…

The problem with atheism is that, being more of a personal thing and not an organized thing, each person has their own version, so while some, like me, don't believe in the existence of god(s) but accept proof that there is something more, others are more against all religions than anything else.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Ok, not officially-recognized running water. But we do see seasonal changes of darkness in the soil which seems to be water dampness, on a yearly / seasonal cycle.

If you are thinking about what most people think about, that's not water.
The most likely possible running water events are those that appear on crater walls from time to time, like the one below, which they call "recurring slope lineae".


But some people say that water tends to form shapes that get thinner at the end instead of wider, as the ones seen on Mars, so they think those lines are made from darker sand.

Maybe things could be getting lost in translation but it's easy for me to imagine specific weather forces to accumulate snow or sand on vertical terrain, I think...

Snow and sand are very different, snow adheres easily to everything while sand does not.

^Ok so my point was that such clay can make soil get sticky when wet (as the clay on Earth is like that). So clay sediment would just be extra cohesiveness if we are struggling to imagine sand accumulation in specific spots, some clay would help make it all sticky and accumulate more, I reckon.

The problem with that is that the clay-like soil stays at the bottom of the dry lakes, Mars' atmosphere is not strong enough to blow it away.

Electricity and heat is interesting but this also comes down to the impossibility of us knowing what the weapons were, how they worked. If you're correct about electricity always having heat, even in lightning storms in polar regions and lightning hitting ice water, I would have thought there's gotta be some elecricity that's not HOT.

If there is, nobody ever saw it, in all the centuries humans have been studying electricity.

But even if it is always hot, in every circumstance, well hey the ancient weapons can still have exotic, impossible characteristics that we can't understand. Maybe the weapon just somehow was electricity, and almost no heat.

Sure, imaginary weapons can have all the characteristics you want. In reality, things are different.

I also thought that the possibility of the weapon blast shooting through SPACE for thousands of miles, I thought THAT made sense as a cooling factor, if we are looking for such mitigating factors that could change the outcome of the weapon impact on Mars.

It doesn't work like that, the heat comes from the electricity flowing through thinks, it's the electricity itself that is hot.
At absolute zero temperatures, as there is no electrical resistance, there is no associated heat produced by electric currents.

Suit yourself but the images speak for themselves, Mars got hit by a weapon that was largely based on electricity.

I agree that the images speak for themselves, only our interpretations are different.

The images of the physical terrain of Mars are the ultimate answer on this, it's not a matter of debating small details like we have been, about soil accumulation and melting etc.

Reality is made of small details, sometimes are those small details that make a big project fail because nobody thought about them.

a reply to: JamesChessman

It still doesn't answer my question: how do you conciliate monotheistic with polytheistic religions?

The Mahabharata is based on Hinduism and all their gods, so if all of that is true, monotheistic religions like Christianity cannot be true.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: JamesChessman

It still doesn't answer my question: how do you conciliate monotheistic with polytheistic religions?

The Mahabharata is based on Hinduism and all their gods, so if all of that is true, monotheistic religions like Christianity cannot be true.

I’m not concerned with it.

I love Buddhism and it’s really an individual’s efforts to be healthy and happy, which is also the best way to be good toward others, and so it’s good for everyone.

We seem to be using the two terms differently but Buddhism is “agnostic” about God or gods, meaning that it’s not the focus or concern.

People can think what they want about God or gods. The more important thing is for a person to live good and healthy and intelligent, and being good to others.








Also Hatha Yoga is physical yoga and it saved my life a couple times. I fell off my bike and landed on my forearms in a yoga pose, with my body and legs vertical, in the air.

This would have broken the bones in probably most people’s back or neck. My face was almost on the ground. Incredibly I only scratched one of my elbows, my only injury, not even scraping a knee. 2021.

I also used to suffer pinched nerves for several months before the bike accident. Late 2020 through early 2021. Around nine months, I saw a chiropractor who was worthless to me, eventually I finally realized how to stretch my entire back and neck. I cured my own pinched nerves there, which was debilitating when I had it, so generally my focus on yoga / stretching, cured me there.

So there’s how Hatha Yoga saved my life twice in 2021.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
I’m not concerned with it.

I'm not surprised.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
I’m not concerned with it.

I'm not surprised.

Why?

Because… you don’t understand that Buddhism isn’t based on ideas of gods?

So u think it’s some clever obnoxious remark that you’re “not surprised” that someone who loves Buddhism, is not fixated on ideas of gods, based on your lack of understanding that Buddhism is nontheistic…?! Yikes, lol.