7th

The OP may have been better off just saying "timecube" as it's pretty obvious he was describing Gene Ray in most of the points. I'm pretty sure I can read people, and upon reading the part about 'suppression', then a little piece at the bottom to cover it up to make it look less aimed at Gene Ray -- I immediately knew it was about timecube. You may want to get someone to redo it if you were trying to persuade people not to visit that site. Students are getting wiser, theres no room for mistakes.

Could it be that humans are parasites and the Earth is our host? I'm aware that parasites can be good or bad, some can cure disease and some can cause it. It's repensented in our actions towards the planet; we can preserve and abolish nature, in many ways it seems. Could it be that humans are not technically the prime species, and that the planet is our reason to live? We're we born to fix the land and look after the animals as we breed, or were we simply sent here to over time deplete all resource for our own needs?

Yes, I will. After maybe can we continue the discussion on this topic? (and I won't rush the posts, I'll give it a week or two)

I am still homosexual and yes I feel attracted towards men, however I do not at any point make moves and I do my best to isolate myself from the outside world. Reformed being 'not-proud', knowing that I am sent to destroy the society I was placed into, and knowing this I'd rather take the good choice of preventing myself from doing so. I wish to one day have a family, children and a happy-home and through God I've managed to find a reason to do this, and will do it. On terms of bringing world-peace and saving nature, surely any scientist would place that high upon the scientific agenda. If you don't wish to discuss the initial post completely then I don't see how you can renounce it as being non-science related -- cause the fact is, it is. If any scientist denies that the 'life' of humanity is more valuable than venturing into space, then how can you call yourself a scientist? If there was a way to possibly bring world peace, why would it be prohibitted. On terms of the original thread, it is classed as a Religion thread and there is a Religion section: I spent some time creating it and if it's not against the rules, which I don't believe it is, surely it would be fine to move it into the correct section. It's more science-related than most of the threads in there and it has good reason. Would it be immoral to do so, I don't think so. It may attract all-sorts of attention, from religious-folk and scientists that may agree that the way to peace is through unity between Religion and Science; renoucing the hassle of 'belief' and accepting that fact that we're human. Please would you calm down, at no point have I attempted to insult you. I am a member of the Society of Jesus, until that society is no longer required, and I only mean good.

Being a homosexual myself (reformed), I think I do understand. The ideas of the society bring peace, and I know exactly what the message was. You haven't conducted any research, I have and it's through the mind you do it. I did make some good points in the original post which you haven't addressed, if you would address them and explain how they are "bad," maybe your understanding will become clearer. I presume that you didn't like the idea of homosexuality being colonized -- is that really smart thinking for humanity?

I'm trying to bring science and religion together by using science as the key element, something I believed science may want to consider; for betterment of sciences as a whole and the world that we all live on. I'm not promoting Religion, I'm promoting society, or rather attempting to get my ideas out there on how to fix it. It needs fixing, denying that is stupid. As I said in the thread, I'm not Religious, I'm pro-life -- only influenced by the society that had the same ideas.

I didnt' have a chance to reply to the topic you just closed, (can you move it to the Religion section); it was an idea how to bring world-peace and unity. Although it didn't seem like it, I was attempting to get the message across of what Jesuits believed in before I continued with the idea of how to bring Science and Religion closer together. "If the holy books can be related to real-life and scientifically then why not?" - this is how. Atheists seem to believe that the source of the problem is Religion and do their best to promote against it. I don't believe this is the way forward and instead is causing more disruption as you'll never be able to kill God and the message of God. We need to unite as a species to progress and our first priority should be the health of our planet, for if our ecosystem is destroyed we will surely die. We can apply scientific evidence to religious books and use created-things to promote the idea of God, as well as science and advancement; saving the world is advancement for humanity. If humans were able to create a bible that talked of peace and eternal life 2000 years ago, then any human with an educated mind can create a bible now, in more depth and with better equations - more spirit and more wisdom; and by doing so are continuing spreading the message God, which is peace and good. Being one of the few remaining Jesuits, I have changed the message of the Society of Jesus, I think I have enough love for my father and mother to do so; "Ad maiorem Dei gloriam, quod orbis Terrarum," which means "For the Greater Glory of God, and the World." The idea is simple and good, it promotes all Religions, simply asking them to unite for the Greater Good of God, and the World. It is not a 'belief', it's being human; a pro-life idea that accepts current society, but with a view to fix it and keep it controlled. If we continue with all this indifference, we will surely die. I needed to say that. (If you see what the idea was now, if you could add it to the thread upon moving would be great) To conclude, I am a member of the Society of Jesus, that's until the Society is no longer required.

From what I see, the word is being used in almost every thread, and therefore is being used out of context in many of them. If the debate truly gets out of hand, then it should be used (whilst in context); not when it is nothing but a scientific debate between different beliefs - that's how debating goes, as long as there is no, "You're wrong and I'm right, btw your a prick," it should be alright. That's what 'debates' are, "I'm right, you're wrong," being said by both parties; the idea is the prove the other person wrong or at least challenge what the other is saying. Again it's a word to describe a certain element, but most of the time it is that element that makes scientific debate what it is. Upon hearing it the person you're debating with has it imprinted in his/her head that everyone is against his/her beliefs, because you all gang up and start pounding the word at him/her. This leads to the person just giving up on debating his/her case, and therefore is not at all fair, but sort of 'internet-bullying'. I just think it should be used strictly when things get out of hand, rather than disrupting the natural flow of debate. I'm okay with this.

I dont' mean "stop using it," but I think it should be used less often, especially if the attack was unintended but rather a part of the debate at hand - it brings more vigour and fairness to the table.

I've noticed the word being thrown about a lot during debates to try and suppress the offensive nature of debating. I think it's being used out of context at times and should be considered before being put to the table. Almost every thread where a less-educated member debates with a more-educated one, the term is used. It shouldn't be constantly used like that and the debate should be conducted fairly, non-biased and with structure. If someone has a point, and it seems offensive, one shouldnt' take offense -- especially if that wasn't the nature of the post. If you were debating in the presence of a judge and jury, you would not be able to pull the 'suppress' card, and as you take pride in being a scientific board, and a great one at that, allowing fairness during debates should be a priority. This is science after all.

I disagree with this sentence whole heartedly. I believe psychology is nothing but a hoax as no-one will never be able to truly understand what someone else is thinking and all the education students recieved on the subject will not help them achieve that goal, now or any time in the future; it only gives them a false sense of intelligence. All minds are their own, and everyone is different -- a psychologist may be able to help some cases with psychological problems, but only those who are influenced by their techniques; and that's not being 'educated' but rather 'influencial'. Psychological science is level with tarrot reading, plate spinning and other nonsense money-making arts. No offense intended, I just don't think it's a required field to be knowledgable in, especially whilst interpreting past events and people alike. I'm a good judge of character and very good at spotting liars, and I've never studied psychology. The above statement also applies to the thread itself, my opinion on Psychological Science.

The message of God is clear, peace and love, good deeds and eternal life around the world for everyone. The message the Jesuits attempted to get across was that God can be found in created-things, spreading God's message further accross humanity, with greater ease and no need for dispute between different beliefs, as it combined every belief for "Ad majorem Dei gloriam" (the Greater Glory of God). When I interpret the bible, I do not interpret it personally as I believe in humanity as a whole and that not one human is 'a' human, but rather a part of the bigger picture (humanity); so ones evil deeds has an effect on all of us; an example being the 9/11 attacks, it shook the whole world, however I don't believe it was as evil as it may have seemed, and I'll explain that further on. Jesuits were driven out of empires and countries for influencing too many people to join their cause, to bring peace, spread the true message of God (love and peace, good deeds and eternal life + more), and give citizens their freedom -- which they have a right to have, as they are human and neither one of them 'a' human. We know that Jesuits believed God could be found in created-things, we can start to interpret religion with a ~Jesuit frame of mind~, rather than a fantasy-like almost unbelievable story: for the Greater Glory of God. This is what Jesuits believed Jesus Christ wished, and for him they would surrender their lives to help the world, as it gave them peace of mind knowing that they were doing the best they could to bring peace to the world. I do not believe it's immoral in anyway to kill or punish those who do not believe in eternal life, for spreading death is worse; only bringing hatred and war, disputes between beliefs and destroying humanity as a whole. If it's possible to give everyone peace of mind, freedom and a better life then why should it be prohbitted; if it would bring religions together then, for the Greater Glory of God, it should be influenced. If we continue with our evil ways and destroy nature, gradually we destroy our mother (the cold) and our father will punish us (the heat). We are already being punished by God for repenting his message in the form of: homosexuality (through education against God), weapons of mass destruction, depletion of resource, famine, man-made diseases and much more. Almost all evil and unfairness in the world is due to our own ignorance, and if the bible is interpreted with a ~Jesuit frame of mind~ then you will surely know. To the 9/11 attacks, 3000+ people died, but all were sinners for they worked against the will of God and rather for Satan -- not one of them deserved eternal life, no matter how strong their faith was, and that's due to the evil education and media that taught them that the road they were taking was correct; given false morals to literally beleive that what they were doing was harmless. And the after effect was for the greater good, a gigantic dip in the econemy which prevented much of nature being depleted and caused disruption in the flow of the evil controlling society we live in. When you look at the attacks with a ~Jesuit frame of mind~, everything changes. Does it mean that God hated the people in the building, of course God didn't, God hated what the building stood for, and as I said before, God always wins. On terms of homosexuality, I do not want to rid the world of it, I think it should be controlled so it's not bred into society, colonizing is a brilliant idea. It doesn't mean they cannot recieve outside contact, but at least they are in one place where maybe they can find God and turn straight. If they cannot do it for the world then they do not deserve to be part of humanity; if a homosexual believes that "he/she should have as much rights as anyone," he/she is correct, but that also means he/she has the same burden we all carry, and that's protecting humanity. I hope that cleared things up. If not please provide more simplified questions; I do best to avoid gaining too much knowledge that may lead me in the wrong direction, so some of the questions you asked were a bit too complex for my uneducated mind.

Society of Jesus I've recently conducted a vast amount of research on the Jesuits and the Society of Jesus. I now consider myself an asset to their cause and I will do whatever I can to spread their true message; which I won't do here as it's obviously against what science currently believes in. I will however explain exactly how I think they were judged unfairly, treated unfairly and banished for reasons no other than 'power hungry dictatorship'. Rather than the usual message of God and religion as a whole, the Jesuits would use life elements rather than spiritual and fantasy-like 'man-made' elements to describe the true message of God. They were considered to be a pro-life group (the Society of Jesus), and they would interpret the holy books in their most primitive form -- the way the writers intended them to be interpreted. Substituting the definitions given by society and replacing them with their originals, for example; the Synagogue of Satan, is the government. The Jesuits would venture through different countries and influence many citizens, too many in fact -- to a point where the governments that controlled them would have no choice but to repent and banish them from the lands, as the pro-life beliefs were against the governments pro-control beliefs. Therefore, their ideas were not wrong, but removed power from the power-hungry dictators and placed truth back into the minds of the people. I'm not trying to offend anyone with the next statement, so if you are offended then that is really your problem, for I'm offended if what I'm about to say is true; in fact, extremely offended, much more than you would ever be. I understand that Jesuits may have been existent in Germany a number of years ago during the second world war, whilst Hitler conducted the mass slaughter of Jews that we know as the holocaust -- I don't believe it was Jews he killed; for one, Einstein claimed to be Jewish on many occasions, although I'm sure that there’s some 'pieces of evidence' (excuse my ad hominum) out there on the internet that will say that he 'didn't really care for the Religion'; for two, Hitler had relations that were Jewish and many connections that were Jewish; finally, I don’t' see exactly how Jews can be a burden to the 'advancement' of the human race -- and therefore that is my structure as to why I believe that Jesuits were killed. In the present day the amount of Jesuits is decreasing, and the control of the government could not be better. However, God never loses and always catches up at one point, whether it be now or 10,000 years in the future -- one day God will get revenge. What I don't understand is why the Society of Jesus was frowned upon, "cause they talked nonsense," I expect to be the answer - wrong, saying that God is a man on the moon or another dimension being is wackier. It's because their beliefs held more logic to life, stability and brought more peace than what the government did, and that's why 'power-hungry-dictators' are the reason that right now there isn't world-peace, and there is weapons of mass destruction, famine, homosexuality, depletion of resource, etc. All these nihilistic elements brought into existence by the Synagogue of Satan. The bible even says it, and if interpreted correctly it explains everything else that science had 'discovered' (proved); and don't get me started on the Hebrew version -- I imagine no one here understands Hebrew? I have a close friend who is sort of my research buddy, he's Egyptian by birth and speaks Hebrew fluently, he's translated it for me on many occasions, and that describes a totally different story to the one pasted in churches, on wikipedia and the internet alike. Could the translators really be that bad? I don't understand, adding words and altering the original message. To conclude, Jesuits are the way to peace, the way to live a better life for everyone, the way to prevent nature from being destroyed and the way to bring all religions together as one. Current society will only bring war. Government: War Society of Jesus: Peace Any questions?

What God are you thinking of ? @needimprovement

Penumbra ~Source "?" said father. "!" mother replied; and life began... Mother had bore a hot daughter named pressure; and alike mother, she was all-loving - mother also bore a cold son named space; and alike father, he was all-searching. Space asked "Where are you sister?" to which Pressure replied "I'm here!" and she courageously burst through her parents to reach him - for a brief moment she turned cold as Space had surrounded her and she began to twist and turn as they intertwined creating a massive surge of energy that spread and forced them away from each other. Space shouted "Sister, where are you going?" and Pressure painfully replied, "I'll never leave you brother!" and she bore a daughter named gravity which stopped them from falling apart; and alike her mother she was all-loving - and she threw Space and Pressure into a vortex-like frenzy as they both tried to reach each other. As their love for their daughter became stronger, they became closer to one another – eventually crashing at high speeds. In the process they had bore a son named light; who alike his father he was all-searching. Space and Pressure were now one, permanently attached to one another, the holster to both their children: light and gravity. ~Binding Light said, "Where are you sister?" to which Gravity replied, "I'm here!" and they both crashed into one another causing a massive explosion through the means of hot/cold pressure which expanded through space – creating trillions of daughters/sons (asexual) called matter; who alike their mother and father were all-loving and all searching. Matter began to pull pressure, space, light and gravity towards them, creating huge balls of water and fire through pressure which combined with each other over and over in a chaotic binary attraction; sometimes the fire would over-power the water, and other times the water would over-power the fire; in rare occasions the attraction would create solid rocks named planets. The planets would tumble through the chaos - some picking up parts of fire and others parts of water. ~Flux Eventually the planets broke free from the chaos and drifted into space; and the water/fire eventually cancelled out becoming huge balls of flame called stars along with huge balls of ice called comets. The planets then clamped unto the stars masculine power and were forced to rotate; the masculinity of the matter inside the planets prevented them from crashing into the balls of flame, and the femininity of the matter inside the planets prevented them from flying away. There were many collisions over time as the balls of fire now known as stars would become too-hot or collide with one another in war, exploding and leaving behind black holes (pure loving pressure). The black holes would pick up a few planets/stars and create separate galaxies that held a number of different combos of binary attractions. It continued in this manner until finally there was peace. ~Creation Once peace had been achieved, the feminine comets would then push around space fixed in-between the love generated by the planets and stars; being more forced away from the masculinity of the stars and less forced away from that of the planets. Over time the comets would find host-planets and be forced (from the star) to combine with them, turning into water and blessing the planet. Once blessed the planet would then begin to heat from the star and once again chill through rotation (day/night cycle). Many years would pass until the dry water produced clouds which eventually revealed the dry land which was hidden underneath. The clouds continued to grow and alike the chaos between the hot/cold pressure, crashed into one another causing massive strikes of lightning. Gigantic storms would begin to arise, causing flames to appear on the dry land, and turning into living forms within the water – these forms at first were asexual. ~Evolution

If you imagine a car moving, you are already imagining light - that is if you're visually seeing it (A.K.A dreaming). So.. no. @swasont, I understand now, thanks.

I can though, that's the point. I can imagine light, and so can you along with everyone else. If it can be pictured in our minds, a fundemental resource to create any visable being/vision, then how can it have a speed? It seems to be the mark for top speed, so are you sure that it even has a speed but rather has "0" speed, and its just the mark for everything between, 0% and 100% speed?

Two things: Firstly, conciously I can create 2 lines in this manner: "^" once I close my eyes. I can rotate the lines and break the ^ shape into two \ /, lines, that rotate seperately - purely through the "thought process". I can sort of do it with my eyes open. This isn't creating light, however it's creating an image, and for an image to be "seen" it must have some form of light. Secondly, dreaming, when we dream, light is present - from memory or not, it is still present in our minds for we see it and therefore the light is observed in our mind; and this light most definetly doesn't have a speed...

to OP: I can do this thing with my concious mind, where I close my eyes and picture two lines, and I am able to rotate them. I was wondering if you could too? They usually rotate simultaniously. You have to sort of twitch your eyes a bit to begin the rotation, it may be something to do with the eye itself; just to add, not trolling, I literally can do this. Just wondering if you've come across this yet.

then why am I able to create light in my brain?

I can't say I trust wiki, although I will read it! I don't wish to disucss it I'm sorry for mentioning anything! It's not because I'm selfish, it's the complete opposite. I have beliefs and certain obligations I don't want to break! If no-one truly wants to discuss scientology as a whole then there's no point in discussing, as I really do not wish to speak of it. I believe that aliens brought us here from another planet, I have strange dreams.

Respectfully, could you tell me what rule I am breaching and I'll act accordingly to make sure I don't break it.

I'm done with discussing this then. If you have no interest in researching it then why do you require the answer? I specifically asked what you guys thought of scientology and gave a quote from skepdic.com. It's really up to you and when I gave the reply I wasn't just thinking about you. I have no interest of discussing my beliefs, however I'm happy to discuss scientology and see other peoples opinion on the religion. Do remember this is a discussion board and we're both well aware that there are others here who may like to contribute. I've' you the premise as to why I suddenly changed, I did some research and I tried to look behind the media presentation of the group; that's all one needs to know. There is more to discuss, like they help people rehabilitate, out of third world countries, etc. I'd like to know why they have such a bad name whilst their website and current actions show no hatred to mankind. I apoligize if I come across mystical, you must understand that I am a religious-supremacist, and I worship my beliefs 24 hours a day 7 days a week, whilst doing other hobbies that I enjoy. I'm always thinking spiritually, and to be quite honest it makes my life more... alive. On another note, why wouldn't you be interested in researching such a 'cult'?

Scientologist-Christian... I guess.

I wouldn't jump to conclusions on the premise behind scientology. I don't think it's truly what it's made out to be, very discreet and subtle, giving advice to people behind shadows attempting to lend a hand to those who may be in the same position as I. An alien, maybe but the image? I don't think so. Agreed. I'm aware of the rules and I've seen the true scientific nature of this board, and I respect that greatly; furthermore I'm aware that the information I may provide may not go down well, whether accepted as true or not - either way, perhaps it's better if I keep this information to myself and let those who truly want to understand what I understand, do it by there own means. The danger of even the "thought" is too much of a risk to just throw around in front of a majority. This is partly answered in the before answer; however I'll allow myself to say, "It ties in with what I knew before hand". It doesn't take much digging to find your own evidence, and it's probably better that way, as it won't disturb anyone. I hope you understand. Youtube Video (a few minutes in) 5 minutes - 5:30 I hope not! I don't meet the post requirement! But go ahead and I'll just lurk for a few hours.