Stars are blue, Panthers are pink and the music plays here

Message boards : Cafe SETI : Stars are blue, Panthers are pink and the music plays here
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 93 · 94 · 95 · 96 · 97 · 98 · 99 . . . 332 · Next

AuthorMessage
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899026 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 4:24:00 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 4:28:59 UTC

Thanks for making it a link for that of my entertainment, by still keeping it.

Oh, you are still supposed to believe in both that of birth and life, if not any aliens as well, but next should it perhaps be a difference around for that of doing such a thing,
including that of a Method?

You know, such a thing as Creation could tell me about the elements making up the Periodic Table, as well as the way these elements also interact with each other.

Here it possibly becomes that of Creation myth as well, if not that of a belief in God himself.

What if I rather made it simple and next "believed" in such a thing, namely that of both UFO's, aliens and extraterrestrials?

In my opinion, perhaps we are broadening the subject a bit too much, because an assumption is not supposed to be that of, or the same as a "wild guess".

If we are questioning why a couple of a things perhaps not are true, always that of a "Method" for such a thing, if not that of any belief alone, which is perhaps not helpful at all.

Or I could perhaps be here questioning such a thing at all, if not perhaps having or coming up with any answers at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f34u9BBvOyg

Here, for your nightly entertainment, except for perhaps making it your dull day and not believing in it at all.

Or perhaps still question such a thing as the man in the street, if not the stupid idiot and next also believe in that which we sometimes could be making up that of nature.

Or perhaps a couple of missing words for that above.
ID: 1899026 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899028 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 4:58:36 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 5:06:17 UTC

Again 04:30 AM in the morning and next that of a possible meaning of words.

The more you have, the more you perhaps could get, but next also the complete meaning as well.

My guess is that you could still perhaps be questioning science, rather than that of a possible God, because at least for that of science, you also should know what it is about.

Are that of deities still supposed to be that of Religion and if perhaps not any science at all, where are the YouTube videos?

Ask questions and next you should have or receive answers back as well and next it should not be a meaning for this at all, including that of God for such.

Rather than perhaps science, if not perhaps not that of both opinion or meaning, we could still be left with a couple of subjects relating to that of both Religjon and Faith, as well as that of science.

Again the problem of sometimes having it pop up in my mind, if perhaps not expressing myself, except not for a needed break.

Make it perhaps that of "cloaking", if not any science fiction and even the Department of Defense is not supposed to be doing any science at all.

Or perhaps that of plasma as that of a subject, except for not any method of Proof at all, including a couple of things which you could believe in.

And here believing in a couple of things about, or related to that of science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f34u9BBvOyg

Still with this YouTube video, of course.

My guess is that it perhaps is not about the Method of Proof alone or only, but rather a given or possible approach to that of of science.

Is it perhaps thinking, like that above and next it also could be also guessing, like what science fiction is supposed to be.

Next the teletransporter for that of Star Trek as well, if perhaps not the silly movie, rather that of a time travel machine, which could mean or signify such a thing as time travel being possible.

Or should it be a possible Wormhole instead, except for rather possible science fiction, including that of a possible meaning?

"To the point" once again and next about a possible meaning as well.

What if such a thing, like a couple of others, including both meaning and possible wording as well, better was explained, or perhaps interpreted by that of science, if perhaps not anything else?

The stupid thing being said or stated, is that if perhaps not a speculation, or even thought or idea at all, next it also could be both a fact and also true as well.

Here listening, or watching in at 45:01 or so, where it perhaps is slightly better for that of contents.

Again, that of both specualation, thought and next also idea and next how, or in which way do you put it all on paper, except for perhaps making it Tutankhamun?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutankhamun

Next, perhaps a favorite of a couple of people here and also in my thoughts as well.

If a couple of things perhaps should defy possibilities, rather than that of a given Logic, also such a thing could be questioned, or asked for in the video as well.

Edit: "If" should be "it" a bit down the page, for that of clarity.

Back later.
ID: 1899028 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899032 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 5:28:10 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 6:02:36 UTC

Funny perhaps, because in the late night still continuing to watch a couple of videos and next, "what Logical", if any,
at least when it comes to possible questions.

Question such a thing as nature and next you could be questioning that of a possible mind, including that of Immanuel Kant, if not any possibilities.

Once upon a time and next we believed that the Earth was flat, if perhaps not the flat Earth.

But rather setting sail or perhaps ship and next traveling towards the unknown, we could perhaps believe that the edge was reached and next it was a free fall.

Always the notion for such, if perhaps not any hiccup, but also the story about the "Falling man".

Is perhaps Albert Einstein synonymous with such a thing as a Black Hole, if not that of time itself?

Or could it rather be that of "Winners and losers" instead, because you are not supposed to believe in such a thing as UFO's?

If I perhaps made it "Wonders of nature", what about such a thing as "Mysteries, magic and miracles" here and next that of Magic?

Oh, Einstein is not supposed to be any "Wizard of Oz" either, except for a given notion of time.

Therefore not any reason to believe in such a thing as aliens either.

Any "sorrow" in that of possible music, excpept for a couple of things you perhaps do not understand?

Or perhaps rather that of thinking, if perhaps not believing in such a thing at all, because in fact we do yet have to catch up with the intelligent signal coming our way.

If so, should it again be possible words or wording, rather than a couple of ideas?

What really appropriate, but right now back at the "Alien Interview", at some 15:22 in the clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgVETuXKe1I

Because of that, right now once again listening it at the video and next perhaps nothing more need to be said.
ID: 1899032 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899036 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 5:57:58 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 6:04:09 UTC

Perhaps that of a quote below, being an excerpt, of course.

"What happens when we die"?

Perhaps not the most important question, but rather the answer below and following.

"Death is a human construct".

"It does not exist".

"You will experience... and have experienced.

"every instance of so-called life".

"You, Me, Him".

"We are instances of the same life".

"Separated by what you call death".

(So let me get this straight).

"There's no death..."

"And we all experience each others lives"?

"In essence, yes".

"So, how was the Universe created and..."

"why is it perfect for us?"

"There are a number of infinite universes"

"Each with different physical properties"

"Virtually all do not support life..."

"such as you know it".


And perhaps that of the "Alien Interview" above and next I perhaps leave it there for tomorrow for that of the rest.

Except for that puzzling question, of course, namely "That is all".

So life is perhaps supposed to be a "Construct" then and what about a possible meaning, if not a meaning of the word itself?

Is perhaps a construct the same as a Dogma (or ambiguity), if not that of any "essence"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essence

Again that of a possible wording itself, except for not any stupid idiot, because for a lack of anything else, we perhaps should believe in the "Alien Interview".

Also that of both questions and answers still remaining to be both asked and next also answered, of course.

Any scientists in here. because here it became in the middle of the night.
ID: 1899036 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899041 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 6:40:55 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 7:04:39 UTC

Or perhaps that of "Essence" versus that of a given thought, or even idea, because here I think i hit the nail, if perhaps not the point.

If not wrong, there could be a similar word here, where one perhaps could be going wrong, while the other perhaps right, or correct.

Should be a nice or better word here, but right now not at it.

So, if perhaps make it a "clause" instead and perhaps it could be about Philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality

Of course forgetting the links when needed, but at least here for now.

Is that of Causality as a subject perhaps supposed to be that of the words of Einstein?

If not so, what perhaps about an idea, if perhaps not a general thought for such?

The fact is that Uri Geller perhaps thought that he could be bending a spoon, or at least having such an opinion.

Why if it rather became that of space instead and that a given notion of time perhaps could be bending space in a similar fashion?

Except for that, possibly a double wording, except for a possible notion which might be around.

So, what could be the most important here, that of a double wording, or perhaps that of a given meaning?

Again, "those or those small, etc." and next I lost the meaning of the word or sentence.

Perhaps could be that of "Let the small come to me" and next perhaps also something else.

Again the words of Jesus Christ here and next needs getting back at.

Or if perhaps not "Raiders of the lost ark", if not perhaps being lost at sea, is perhaps not any better either.

Oh, am I supposed to believe in such a thing as neutron stars and Black Holes, only because I happen to be an astronomer of sorts, or what the heck else?

If not wrong, perhaps that of Tutankhamun above and also slightly better for this as well.

Make it perhaps "your day", if not mine and we could be back at the subject of Probability, if not the subject of any hype or even guesswork.

So it goes, but still it could, or it is supposed to be science.

Oh, is it perhaps not "Our Father" for a couple of things and here lacking a possible description, or naming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jas8siNG3Bo

"You are what you eat" and next it is supposed to be science as well.

If perhaps still rather a poetry, if not a poem, why such a thing at all, except for knowing that it perhaps could be science?

If perhaps not any gods for that of science in a similar way as well, always that of both God and the Devil, it seems.

Next it also contrasts as well, each being their separate meaning.

Celebrate Christmas if you will and next you also celebrate possible happiness as well, if not any mercy, if not possible joy.

Next perhaps still celebrate Christmas, which is still not the perfect time or period and next you also could be doing so for that of God, at least celebrating,

Perhaps no reason, or even secret, that I somtimes could be making it both the Sacristy, or the Tabernacle, for that which God is supposed to be doing.

If perhaps not the Pope for the same thing, so next the possible confusion of words.

Or perhaps rather the silly or stupid man in the street instead, asking such a thing as "What" for a couple of things.

If so, what perhaps are the answers and if any answers, should they be in the context of any Religion, or should they perhaps be science?

I guess noone still knows.

Edit: Looking up "Our father", perhaps it could be a poetry for such a thing, if not already a YouTube clip already mentioned.

Getting back at it, except for perhaps the wrong sentence.
ID: 1899041 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899067 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 9:42:12 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 9:57:58 UTC

Or perhaps the link for this, because I had it already mentioned.

Namely that of Essence, except for perhaps not a clause, except for perhaps not Santa Claus either.

Here it ends if you happen to be drunk of sorts, except for perhaps not caring for science.

Here in the late night, or perhaps early morning, listening to a melody which perhaps could be "Miami Vice" of sorts, or perhaps even more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UmOY6ek_Y4

So it could perhaps be both you and me and next also science, except for perhaps the man in the street, pretending to believe what he "saw".

If perhaps nonsense versus that not so nonsense, I could make it that of Cosmology, in the lack of something else.

But next, M16 as a star cluster is sometimes supposed to be a "pillar of stars", if not even part of Cosmos itself.

Should we have two or more different pictures or notions of that of the Universe, except for perhaps that of God himself?

If perhaps so, it could get back at becoming a model as usual and here that of the Standard Model, which at least could be explaining that of the Universe, if not perhaps that of God.

So why that of of God above and not God himself as that of a possible entity?

Is the reason because of phrasing, or perhaps paraphrasing, because here I am not looking up the subject.

The old story "I love fish", perhaps could be a substitute or replacement for "I love Lucy", if not perhaps "I love science".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYe4dSunbs8

Like here or above, because perhaps listening in, you know it should be even more to it here.

Here "Perdition", by means of a translation.

Another word perhaps "conception" here, but next in the way of being moved or kept away or sorts, rather than a possible birth, or even an event happening.

Always the translation, of course.

Yet another day and next also another start, both when it comes to life itself and also possible events which could be happening.

For both we probably know both the reason for why such a thing is happening, as well as the possible results which could be coming along, or being included.

Is the "Event Horizon" perhaps supposed to be a concept and if so, perhaps a concept defined by nature, should it perhaps be defined by Albert Einstein, if not perhaps Isaac Newton?

Except for that, I find the Event Horizon a most interesting thing or subject, because it should be a matter of our existence and next also part of our life as well.

Next also gives a hint about that of "Existence" and its possible importance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence

Next that of Existence is supposed to be a Philosophical question of course, if not directly or properly answered.

Make it that of Philosophy and of course you are questioning that of God, if not anything else.

So if perhaps not that of music, we sometimes could also could believe in that of "Consequence" and next also direct consequence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequence

Always the first one here when it comes that of a possible selection and next I also tend to like the second like here as well, except for perhaps almost forgotten.

If perhaps not that of a Consequence, rather that of a possible "Reasoning" perhaps and next I could also be questioning God.

Should it perhaps be the wording here, namely that of disciples versus disciplines?

At least apprearing or pretending to be correct here, but next what about the subject?

Oh, perhaps the "Phantom of the Opera" which needs checking in the middle of the night, except for most likely not ending up there.

Or is there such a thing as a "Magic moment" when that of science is being concerned?

Or perhaps that rather a write-off of a subject also could mean the signature of your hand as well, only adding to the subject at hand.

Of course, utterly nonsense when it happens and next no science at all, except for perhaps believing in the singularity, rather than that of possible nonsense.

"In Gods hands" and next speaking about possible Creation, of course, including that of elementary particles being part of your "Existence".

Holy cow, but always that of science, if I am not wrong.

Define such a thing as science and next you also could define such a thing as "Existence" as well.

Or should it be Latin as well and here I do not have any formal wording, or even argument, for that of the similar.

Even Harrison Ford could be having an idea, if not making it a conception, or inception at all, but next always the wording.

If perhaps "In Gods hands", next perhaps not that of mine either and next that of a possible "belief" for such as well.

Oh, I hate those words, except for making it possible Religion.

If rather that of news, or even a message, a "Messenger" could be that of carrying a message by means of either a voice, or a possible belief being reflected.
possibly by means of a statement given.

But rather you could be a citizen of the Earth and next believe in the Joker, because such a thing should be about Probability and not necessarily about the Saint,
or even that of forgiveness.

If perhaps not the "Three Wise Men", always the wisest, if perhaps not even the clown.

Next perhaps possible guesswork, if not assuming. because next at least it could be possible science.

Or perhaps rather it could be the melody making up for "thrum-ti-dum", if not anything else.

Back later.
ID: 1899067 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899072 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 10:14:03 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 10:33:59 UTC

Next I guess you did not notice.

But I said "if not perhaps God", rather than perhaps "if God perhaps God", or the like for that or a similar thing.

Next "Does God exist" and perhaps it rather could be Logic rather than a given way of thinking, including possible Philosophy.

Next also that God both gives and next also takes and also that of a statement for such a thing.

Tell me such a thing as Miracles, if you will and next it is not supposed to be any Mysteries at all, if not any Creation which could be possible.

Always one thing, or perhaps "The one thing" in a given context, making it look or appear to be something else, at least when science is being concerned.

Always the facts it seems, if not any Mysteries, magic and miracles at all, because such a thing could be a possible illusion.

Rather the fact that scientists should be both concerned and also dealing with that of "truth" rather than something else, because at least next pretending such a thing to be science.

If we could be dealing with our existence as that of a natural occurrence, what next about a couple of other facts?

Again, perhaps looking at ourselves and next also taking a couple of other things into consideration.

Perhaps a book of nature, if not that of any Laws and Equations could also be around, but next also the story about ourselves, as humans.

Always the perspective for that of such and next you are supposed to be left believing, rather than making any given assumptions.
ID: 1899072 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899075 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 11:02:43 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 11:09:30 UTC

Or perhaps "your God" if you will because from memory I perhaps could make it another given thing.
without making perhaps a representation for yet another similar thing, or perhaps another.

Next tell me, if you will.

Why so, except for perhaps not having the answers.

That of a will, if you wish or will. always should be reflected by a given personality as well, in order for that of a possible "intent".

Next our personality to blame, if not already mentionining such a thing.

Here the usual halt and next thinking about that of a possible sacrifice being made and next by someone else.

Always that of Religion, it seems, if perhaps not all or any given answers at all.

Is it perhaps about wording, the whole thing, or is it rather about possible imagination, or even visualization, if not any concept at all?

Make it a term, at least when science is being concerned and next also an answer should be returned or provided as well.

Next, ask the question "Does God exist" and except for perhaps not any answer at all, even not such a thing as Logic either and so it goes.

Next makes me feel that I perhaps still am, or could be small in the Universe, but next is it perhaps so?

What about that of possible questioning versus a possible reasoning?

Should there be any difference at all, except for perhaps wording?

Ask questions and next have answers back in return and also taking it almost for granted as well, so where is the difference?

If perhaps both giving and next receiving, it also should be that of believing versus not believing as well.

Except for perhaps being late, it rather could be that of "believe" versus not believe, of course.

So, next tell me a fact and next you also could be telling me such a thing as the truth as well.

Except for perhaps the love story of course, which at times may or might not be true at all.

Except for a possible love (or even hate or hatred story, perhaps that of any God, or even Devil telling or explaining such a thing as the singularity being a notion),
or perhaps that of being an entity of possible nature, of course.

Oh no, for such, but here the answer should be both clear and clean and next nothing more at all.

Or perhaps a "tell-tale" story or stories again, or as well, which could be pure fiction, if not any fantasy.

In the end you possibly know the story here.

But rather that a given truth also could be dismissed at times as well, except for perhaps not being a written story at all.

You know, making it such a thing as truth and next it also should be about honesty as well (here Oliver North).

Next also that of a society as well, including that of a given "conscience", if not perhaps sometimes grief.

Next that perhaps digging in the sand is not necessarily any science at all, but only to have it mentioned.
ID: 1899075 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899119 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 16:15:49 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 16:22:47 UTC

So perhaps in the shop today, except for the possible usual restart of the computer.

This time she is Swedish behind the desk and apparently shouting at me as well for no reason, including using a word that perhaps is not in my vocabulary, or transalation.

Even now, late in the night, I lost both the word here and also what she said.

Never mind, if perhaps not your story at all, like "Elle melle" in my native language.

Again perhaps you or perhaps me and next also a given thing could also benefit science as well.

Anyway, apparently no nearer the original subject here, except for the stupid woman behind the desk.

I perhaps could make it that of service at times, if not possible gentleness, or politeness, by at least being believed at times.

Next make it that of a profession, including a service which you are supposed to do, or at least providing, apparently no, or nah so,
when it comes to that of your customers.

An old fashion perhaps, if not an old customs or habit and next perhaps needs getting rid of as well.

Blame the world of computers perhaps, if not any sillyness, but at least a couple of results are supposed to be returned.
ID: 1899119 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899178 - Posted: 4 Nov 2017, 21:55:14 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2017, 22:00:45 UTC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Hamilton

Why not Linda as well below the paragraph "Early life"?

Next, after a couple of restarts and this time of the computer, it could perhaps be silly or stupid me, except for perhaps making that of 61 a possible age.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy

Or perhaps that above for starters.

Edit: Also that of problem for that of a comma versus a punctuation mark as well in that of postings.

Keeping a tab on it.
ID: 1899178 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899341 - Posted: 5 Nov 2017, 16:34:22 UTC
Last modified: 5 Nov 2017, 16:40:40 UTC

Always the Friday evening.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleon

Comes as a bit of a surprise here, except for not having heard about this before, only the approximate wording.

Also a story around at Yahoo! about a pair of elementary particles when fusing together, could make for very high amounts of energy, but next needs a bit more reading here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

Also that it should be the LHC, or Large Hadron Collider as well, which should not be confused with the elementary particle itself, but rather that a big particle accelerator should be
something else than both a 32 bit and a 64 bit computer when it comes to that of making both results and also discoveries.

Keying in only Lhc, perhaps it better should be large caps here from that of the Wikipedia for this search suggestion.

Should scientists be just curious, or should they also take some time to speculate as well, including that of a possible notion of God?

Next that it rather became the start of a new day, so I better leave it off for a later time, or perhaps moment.

But if you recall my father ending up in the dilemma of having a bit too big basement needing a cleanup before next moving to another place, before finally passing away,
also there were some books and magazines which could have deserved a better destiny rather than just being throwed away.

Werner Heisenberg is best known for his Uncertainty Principle, but also that he wrote a small book with the title "Piece versus the whole", or the like.
Perhaps in the opposite order of wording when next translated, but rather that it should be still Physics as the subject.

Next not von or Von in his name either, like that of Wernher von Braun, but rather that of Karl for his middle name and also I knew that it was not with a "h" here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Heisenberg

Again becomes the thought of the notion of time as well for that of a similar thing and that also these could be different subjects, but next making up a whole when possibly combined.

But also that you are not supposed to find any DNA in empty space either, so still that of possible "thinking" for what we could otherwise believe is either a natural reason,
or even that of possible technology being used by someone.

If the genes and chromosomes making up the human body, like that of proteins and enzymes for much the same, also that of "Fundamental Forces of nature",
which could perhaps decide our future.

But next that making a possible reference here between these two, might not be possible.

Even Jimmy Carter happened to believe in UFO's apparently because he once saw such a thing and next chose to be signing a book.

If we sometimes could make it both heathen and pagan for that of possible spirits, like that of possible angels or gods as well, yet another approach for a given subject
in order for a possible understanding.

Almost making a quote of that of gods above, because if not wrong, the first Commandment of the Bible is that "You shall have no other gods than me".

Right now only a picture coming my way when starting up the day, but it could have been at Yahoo!, namely an article for that of possible Religious belief, including that of angels.

There should be no secret that having such a belief perhaps not always is science, except for making it no science at all, but rather that the surrection of Jesus only should be one
possibility among others when it comes to believing in that of a story.

"Forever young" is not the same as "Forever old" either and as a scientist you could be left believing in both Wormholes and also multiverses.

If perhaps making it the "end of the road" for a couple of pieces, it could once again be the branches of the tree, if not the leaves themselves, that make up what should be a single whole or part.

Next it again becomes that of quantisizing and also that of both Quantum mechanics and Quantum Theory for such a thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf%E2%80%93Rayet_star

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghettification

Here are some three things that came to me during the past week or so.

Do we always have an excuse for a couple of things making it perhaps not what they are, or perhaps it rather should be a different story, but at least if you happen to be an astronomer,
here are quite interesting subjects for all these three.

The fact is that you could end up sitting in bed when passing away and not standing upright at all, but next also that of your front versus your back, because you could end up sitting on
your "butt" when such a thing happens.

Or is it rather because you are not sleeping or dreaming at all, but rather is supposed to be picked up by an angel, perhaps St. Peter and next be confronted with your past life at the entrance or gate
which we sometimes could make "Stairways to Heaven", or perhaps "Portal to Heaven".

When next looking, apparently no reference for such when it comes to the Wikipedia, including perhaps making it "Portals" above.

Next of course it could be that of death itself, which could also be a physical process as well, in that of "Rigor mortis" as part of this process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigor_mortis

Or perhaps even this could be a deviation for the real thing happening, because although not present because of own problems, apparently his life ended in a short sigh and next nothing more.

Are we really supposed to be "told" here, or should we rather still be making it that of science instead, including that of Magnetars and the like?

A priest is not supposed to be saying "Do not step on my toes" when perhaps exaggerating a little bit, in the same way as a scientist should be giving advice to a priest.

But rather that it could end up being the story about the possible Philosopher instead and what he is supposed to be doing.

The Greek scientists were apparently such Philosophers as well, except at least making it both "earth, soil, wind and fire".

Today "our" science is that above, including that of such Magnetars, because we are supposed to know even more and that such knowledge should be reflected in a nature we seek to understand.

If that of Greek science perhaps is old science as well, also the difference here between that of heathen and pagan and next that of making philosophical questions about nature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy

If perhaps not any acupuncture, or maybe not any healing at all either, both or all of these should perhaps not be science either, but could rather be such thing as myth and speculation.

If we still try to make some of these things science, it is because we could make a context of it and next relate both or all with each other in a way already being mentioned.
ID: 1899341 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899369 - Posted: 5 Nov 2017, 17:51:52 UTC
Last modified: 5 Nov 2017, 18:13:21 UTC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_circle

Or perhaps that of Crop circles again right now, because we are supposed to believe in numbers as that of poor man's science.

Therefore not necessarily a dream here, or any illusion, but rather a fact of life which possibly attracts the curiosity of some people, but also appears to be a subject which could
be readily explained away.

Definitely there are some Crop circles which are hand made, or made by humans, by using such a thing as a scythe for that of harvesting of corn or grain in old days.

Why a couple of things not only could be explained away, they sometimes could be ridiculed as well, but are we next supposed to ridicule every aspect of nature, including such a thing as
stars and galaxies in the celestial sky?

Always a difference between a metorological phenomenon and that of a possible observation of a spaceship, if not a UFO, it seems.

In which way are we supposed to be taking something not for granted and next be able to come up with a "true" story for the same thing, except for a possible dream which might not be explained,
or even explained away?

Is it perhaps about a Method, or could it be only that of speculation alone?

In fact, it now appears that some of the more reliable UFO observations could be coming from trusted people, including Jimmy Carter as a former President of the United States.

But next also the fact that what could be a close encounter, also could be that of both mayhem and chaos, including such an event happening at sea, involving both a fishing boat and also a
helicopter in the air.

Next that something apparently was crashing in the water, leaving no trail of its presence.

But also that you also may have heard about the story of the "living dead" and next also the question about the relationship between matter and energy and also that of gravity.

Everything in this Universe apparently is matter or mass, with the corresponding energy being visible or present by means of radiation.

Next that also gravity as being a Force, also should be considered matter in a similar way and next also energy, because of that of gravity waves being discovered.

Suddenly it all appears quite logic, if not simple, by perhaps explaining it this way, so it may in fact not be the whole or complete answer either.

The readily known fact from that of science is that a Method is supposed to be carrying some results with it as well, like that of both certain numbers as also that of a possible algorithm,
for that of finding new Mersenne primes, if not any Genefer prime numbers.

If it rather became a word or sentence like "Trust your feelings, Luke", next you also should believe in your senses as well, if perhaps not even more.

Why make it simple when it rather should be a complex thing or feature and next perhaps either switch it around and doing the opposite, suddenly it is not any more easy either.

Therefore, if we could make it both the Pauli exclusion principle for a couple of things, as well as a possible belief in aliens and extraterrestrials being part of what we make space,
perhaps should not be doing any difference either, at least when it comes to the subject at hand.

Is the falling leaf coming from a tree in autumn perhaps the reason for the "end of the world"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armageddon

Armageddon is both a place here on Earth, but it could also be a possible reference to events which could be telling of such an end of the world.

If we rather could make it "In the beginning", we could next think that it still should be science, rather than perhaps something else.

Everyone knows about the way we are supposed to be created and next born as humans and also that we at least should know about the process of death as well.

It should perhaps be that of a couple of traditions as well, including that of a funeral for a dead when someone is passing away, because this is not supposed to be any celebration at all.

Both or all of these are being more or less explained by means of a reference to that of processes, if not any evolution, which also could be telling about a couple of things.

By means of sometimes pretending, if not faking, both a Magician, as well as an illusionist, if any or whoever, could be coming up with a readily answer for something which sometimes
could be easy to explain, but sometimes could also be hard.

If we rather happen to question ourselves about that of nature, we are not supposed to take everything for just a fake either, but next only believe that it sometimes could be an illusion.

For this we of course could be having the Scientific Method, but this still could leave us with both questions and answers back in return.

Also that an answer should be an answer as such and not any question which still needs an answer, so here again the order of words.

So, if perhaps not only simple versus not so simple, also that of "the end of the road", because there always is supposed to be a beginning for everything as well.

This is next that we think of as "Creation" for the latter, because such a thing as creation should mean or imply such a thing as a process being started in order to next continue,
while finally finishing off, or ceasing to exist.

Or perhaps from that of wording as well, also that of the "moment" of Creation as well, which next redirects back at the word of "Instantiation" for such.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instantiation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicate

Should science always be Formal for what it is supposed to be doing and next we could have both Logic and also that of a Predicate as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formalism

Always the difference between such a thing as pure entertainment and sometimes even science fiction, for or versus that of reality, but the UFO phenomenon as a subject is probably there from a
time long gone by, like the yesteryear.

Make it perhaps the Pyramids of Giza and they could be standing on a desert field or surface with not any much reference point in addition.

Here Google Translate of course is unable to give me the proper word, but it should not be a swamp either.

But more important perhaps, the fact that it could be the old Egyptian empire for a couple of things and when next looking up Kleopatra in the Wikipedia,
no such thing as Elisabeth Taylor here, except for a possible reference to Tutankhamun instead for perhaps being such a Pharaoh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutankhamun

Scrolling down to the section Significance almost half way down and next this becomes a fact as well, but also that the word "Symbolism" should perhaps also be mentioned.

Again, perhaps not any belief in any gods and deities here, except for perhaps a notion of "the living dead", or even that of bad science at times,
we are supposed to believe that such a thing as time travel could be possible.

So, when is perhaps science supposed to meet with that of pseudoscience, except for not making it any Parapsychology at times?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology

As an astronomer of sorts, I am supposed to believe in at least space and next make it some three-dimensional in both look and appearance.

Next add to it the notion of time as well, making it that of both space and time and also that of a "space-time continuum" for such a thing as well.

If perhaps doing so, it at least should be telling about a given property of space, except for both including or excluding other factors which could be possible.

The fact is that making it that of a Singularity for a property of space which could be defined by such a thing as a Black Hole, it not necessarily should mean "The end of the road" either,
although both matter and energy should be responsible for such a thing as gravity and next also a given notion of time.

Tell me a lie and next it should perhaps not be the truth either, because we could sometimes be left with the question "Where are we going" on our lips.

That of death itself could well be that of "The end of the road" as previously mentioned, but it could also be a state of mind, or perhaps that of the soul,
which we could think of as "Eternity".

Here that "Creation" itself should at least mean something, except for perhaps believing that the Universe could be some 13.8 billion years old, or of age.

As I also mentioned, "Forever young" perhaps also could mean "Forever old" as well, but next perhaps it becomes two separate meanings here, each ending up in a different context.

Let me hear the melody, or perhaps song of that of Creation itself and next perhaps it could be that of "Heaven and Hell" for such a thing, or at least the song.

If a process happening, like that of evolution, could be replaced or substituted with a state or condition for which something is supposed to be happening, we could be having not only that of
a possible Afterlife, or even that of "Existence" possibly explaining a couple of things, but also could be able to unite these two things together.
ID: 1899369 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899420 - Posted: 5 Nov 2017, 22:56:50 UTC
Last modified: 5 Nov 2017, 23:34:41 UTC

So perhaps the story of Christopher Columbus setting sail from Spain with his three ships right now and next for that of the west when it comes that of direction or course
and guess what, but next he discovered the continent of America.

Next also the old story as well which is almost boring, but at least it was being mentioned at Yahoo! during the day, because suddenly there were Indians living not only in India as a nation,
but also in both North and South America as well.

I sometimes, if not always make that of science that of best knowledge possibly at hand, including sometimes tracing ourselves as humans back to both monkeys and apes, if not anything else.

Because of that, both the Paleontologist for that of Paleontology and also the Archaeologist for that of Archaelogy, at least for given subjects.

Next perhaps also that of "give and take" as well, because as usual, you are supposed to believe in a story being told because it could be science.

If perhaps rather sometimes the story or history of the unknown, next which story?

The Little Green Man or Men is perhaps someone you may not be able to see or catch, but at least a knowledge about the Universe could be about a given comprehension as well,
because there could be moments where we could catch or grasp such a thing.

There is no secret that science sometimes is not for neither you or me to believe, if not understand, but in a similar way we should also believe in the notion of time,
because of someone having freckles and next a long white hair as well.

Or perhaps rather than freckles, rather that he started to get old and also that it could be showing up in his face.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity

Is it perhaps of the sometimes bad day, or is it because we sometimes do not understand each our language, which often could be found to be both separate and specific?

I mentioned both the leaning towers of Pisa and also the Hammer and Feather experiment on the Moon, but also that there should be a difference here from that of travel through the
streets of New York, if not Manhattan itself and this time at a speed close to light.

Of course I both do not wish or will such a thing happen either, but except for perhaps not coming down, the buildings could start bending down at me when traveling at such speed,
which is a direct consequence of that of Special Theory of Relativity, if not directly observed at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm

Both that of a Paradox and a Paradigm, including a Paradigm shift, could be telling about a condition which either does not exist, or perhaps is not true.

I also mentioned that of hoaxes and illiusions during the day and also the fact that a Magician is not supposed to be believed, despite his possible performance or skill.

Except for "Man of our times" in some sequences, it rather could be such a thing as trusting both a man and next also a subject as well, in that it could sometimes be the
"Man in the street" for such.

Make it that of Roswell, New Mexico and at least you have a city in New Mexico, but perhaps no reference to such a thing as "secret military bases", or hangars.

We could be left to believe that some or certain kinds of UFO research were either that of the development of the secret Stealth plane, or it rather could be the
reverse engineering of a captured alien saucer and this time by the U.S. military.

In fact apparently not classified or secret anymore, but one picture around could be showing such an hangar in its entirety, together with possible captured saucers as well.

Not available or present right now, I do not go for this material myself, but only that it looks pretty obvious and clear from the picture only.

If Columbus rather had been born in 1783, he could be using a balloon, or gondola for making a similar voyage, but next he could have been drifting to the east.

The fact is that I could both speaking to the wall, if not perhaps even hitting it, but next also sitting next to a computer coming with a quite advanced processor at my disposal.

After some 14 years at Seti@home and also BOINC, there are times when I perhaps could rather let it go, except for perhaps not expressing my meaning in a complete way.

Look back and next you could look forward as well, if not perhaps not in time.

When we could be speaking about such a thing as reverse engineering, it is because we know that a thing could be manufactured or built.

I perhaps could make it both Big Bang Theory as well as the Steady State Model for that of Cosmology, but only because each such model could be telling about a different set of facts.

You are always supposed to make such a thing as both Project Management and also that of CASE analysis fit a certain model as well and because of that, we also could have that of
prototyping, or sometimes even reverse engineering as well.

If Cosmology perhaps could sometimes mean that of one thing for another, if perhaps that somtimes it is or "ain't working", at least we should know what the subject is all about.

Next perhaps think of both the Laws and Equations by both Isaac Newton, as well as Albert Einstein for that of gravity, in also the same way we should also believe in that of Special Theory of Relativity,
which is dealing with the notion of time.

If you happen to be a photographer, it could be a still picture and next a frame being up a brief moment of time as it is being experienced.

But if you rather happen to be a cameraman, you also could catch up with an event as it happens, without perhaps being able to make a reference to that of such a brief moment at all.

This because a given notion of time should always be made with reference to something else, because as we know, time is always flying, or "Tempus fuight", except for the possible
Laws and Equations which make such things possible to happen.

Ending up at the Talk page for that of Paradoxes, before next clicking back at the following or next subject, because I wanted to know a little more about Wormholes right now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

Guess it becomes both Mathematics and Physics right now, but except for that, I could still be back with both the same scientists and also equations for that of the same.

Is it perhaps of the coloring, but the figure to the right of "Development" a little down the page, makes a reference to that of Special Theory by means of its appearance only.

Therefore both should be perhaps thought of in the same reference or framework of knowledge.

Here that of an "Embedding diagram" of a Schwarzschild wormhole, to be more precise.

If perhaps not any real for all, such a thing as a Wormhole could still be a fact of both life and reality and next not only a dream at all.

Special Theory is definitely a difficult subject and the opposite of shying away from a couple of things is sometimes hitting one in the face, if perhaps not any details.

Or perhaps the fact that where one thing perhaps stops, including that of our knowledge, if not even comprehension, nature could still be the winner and could be dealing a blowing hand.

Always the bad day, as mentioned and next yet another day of mass-slaughter of people as well and once again in the United States.

Should tell that a couple of names became new these days, because they are those of a volcano lying asleep or dormant under the main glacier of Iceland, except for that of the ice.

Perhaps that of a prophet versus that of a Pharaoh should be reflected upon as a subject, because these two things could be different, but next mean almost the same.

Tick-tack, but next such a thing as the notion of time, except for the possible slaughter which could happen at times and here my condolences.

It becomes much like that of our food, because at times you could be saying such a thing as "I love you", if not rather "I really hate you".

If you rather end up on the surface of a neutron star, of course you could be squeezed almost flat, but why always a reference to that of a bit of sugar for such a thing?

Or is it perhaps because it could be boring, because if rather than perhaps being my own weight, it rather could be a spoon, or "ounce" for such a thing, except for that of a bad naming scheme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ounce

First of all there should be no secret that you perhaps are what you eat, but next that your day is perhaps not about such a thing as neutron stars either.

Like a couple of other things, we could be ending up believing in such a thing as Creation, only because of a given reference to both matter, energy and gravity for such a thing.

Still Creation myth could next also be science as well, of course, but still from a different angle of approach when it comes to the same subject.

Being sometimes scientists, we could be left not believing in such a thing as "Mysteries, magic and miracles", except for perhaps not the same as that of Creation myth.

If you rather could end up believing in both Newton and Einstein for that of the Laws and Equations making up science, no secret that perhaps you sometimes could believe in the
secret or clandestine project as well, because this is what it is supposed to be all about.

The old question is perhaps still "Is time travel possible" and next we perhaps came to the conclusion that traveling backward in time is perhaps possible, but not such a thing as that of
traveling into the future.

Prediction, if not any Climate Prediction, is perhaps a subject on its own, including possible wording and Terminology which could be used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostradamus

Again, I once both saw the book and perhaps also gave it a read as well, but next it disappeared from the home of my parents and next I did not ask my mother here.

If you still think it is impossible, meaning that of time travel, also that of perhaps believing in a given Prophecy and next that it could also be a prophet for such a thing.

But here, except for that of a correct wording, again also that of both knowledge, if not any comprehension at all, because like the Hammer and Feather experiment and also the
Leaning Tower of Pisa, if not any buildings coming tumbling down when traveling at speed,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_consequence

But rather that we could sometimes believe in such a thing as Creation, whether or not any science, or possibly a myth, except for not having a similar answer for where it possibly could end,
except for that of a possible wording.

The movie "The Day After" could perhaps be able to portray or depict the day after a Nuclear Holocaust happening, which next should be that of "Doomsday" here on Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_After

Always the needed context for such a thing perhaps, except not for perhaps a "Cry from space", or even that of the Ice Age, which could be both a different story.

I guess that we also could end up a bit Philosophical at times as well, making a possible notion of time always flying as that of a given "Existence".

Therefore that of both Paradoxes and Paradigms above, except for perhaps being a bit short, at least for that of the first reference, or article.

The fact is that Existence could still be about that of Philosophy and next I do not see such a thing as the Pauli exclusion principle here.

Also that "Existence of God" as a subject makes for a series about God in the Wikipedia and not that of any Philosophy itself as a subject is perhaps yet one more thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logic

The second link from a brief or short read down the first article.

Nature is supposed to be telling us about itself by means of such a thing as both Laws and Equations for the same, except for perhaps not rolling any dices either.

But next that rolling a dice, at least it could be the subject of Probability in order for at least guessing and next nothing more.

Always the hard science at times it seems, including that of possibly not wishing any alien visitors welcome at times, or rather that there also could be a hidden story as well.

Is it perhaps that one Method, or perhaps way of thinking, could be a substitute or replacement of yet another given thing, in order to perhaps tell, or even not tell,
about possible conditions or events which could be making up that of nature, except for that of an event itself?

A summary, if perhaps brief, also should reflect a conclusion being obtained on a given subject and therefore also much the same as the article itself.

Therefore, perhaps believe in the scientist when it comes to a possible notion of time, if not that of any Prophet making such a thing as time travel possible.
ID: 1899420 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899425 - Posted: 5 Nov 2017, 23:27:32 UTC
Last modified: 5 Nov 2017, 23:32:53 UTC

Except for the typo which I missed during the day, also perhaps a reference to that of Eternity in the previous post, at the bottom, or closing, should be appropriate.

Only a short one right now for you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternity

Here perhaps that of a couple of circles, if not any symbols, except for being only a short one, at least when the article is being concerned and better should be looked at from a point of Creation myth.

The fact is that perhaps the reason for this being so, is that perhaps science could be the winner, or winning factor here as a subject.

Make it both that of the "Living dead", if not any prophet, if you will and next it could be that of both birth, life and death itself and also the ways and means we are supposed to be
dealing with the subject.

What is the possible alternative to both Mathematics and Physics, except for not making it any science at all, but perhaps rather such a thing as pseudoscience.

"Believe" in a thing and next it also should be about both Religion and Faith, if not at least the latter subject.

Martin Luther, as you may know, is the founder of the Protestantic church, to which many people are part of, or the better word for this, which I do not have right now.

Next which Pope, I may ask.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clause

Except for perhaps that of a neutron star, or a Black Hole, I perhaps could come up with an answer to a couple of other questions, only with that of a general reference at my disposal.

For this there both might, or even should be an answer around to some questions as well, depending on the question being asked, or perhaps the original subject.

Like that of "popularizing" a given subject, also such a thing for that of science as well, except for perhaps not such a thing as the Method of Proof, or any secret military undeground bases
which could be underground.

Is perhaps driving a lorry carrying a UFO in the open telling about any secrets at all, or is it rather that we should be taking such a thing for granted, except for not asking any questions at all?

Definitely that of dinosaurs is for the Paleontologist to answer, like that of skeletons of humans for that of an Archeologist to be looking at and next observe, if not study,
but next ask a ufologist the same and next it could be either the skeptical look or view for such a thing, except for perhaps not a true story being told at all.

What is supposed to be the more interesting, the possible subject at hand, or perhaps available, or rather the possible answer which could be returned?

Asking such questions and there always could be answers back in return so, here most likely that of science in a nutshell, if not a case for such.
ID: 1899425 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899442 - Posted: 6 Nov 2017, 0:51:58 UTC
Last modified: 6 Nov 2017, 1:10:18 UTC

Yes, which Pope, except for that of Existence as a general subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence

Almost becoming that of Philosophy above with the late dinner, but that when rather making it Existence and still part of Philosophy, it also could suddenly go wrong.

Make it the book of both knowledge and also reference and it also could be that of aliens and extraterrestrials for such a thing as well.

Next it could be Erich von Däniken for this and not Wernher von Braun, except for at least von Däniken being able to express himself rather clear and concise right now.

A given notion of time is perhaps not the same as the spoken word, or that of the similar in writing, but perhaps making it both that of Time dilation, if not any Climate Prediction at all,
there could perhaps be more than a single subject being readily available here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

A given frame of reference, as previously mentioned, could be that of a still photograph, or even a video showing a possible event happening.

Making it perhaps the Big Bang for our existence, we also know that the world was set into motion because of events happening which next should be as a result of such an event
and not necessarily the event itself.

Is it perhaps because one thing could be explainable or interpretable the reason for it sometimes being science, or could there be times when we are traveling into the unknown?

Like that of both the Pauli exclusion principle, we also should believe that both Uncertainty itself and also that of Prediction, if not any evolution, could be explained by such a thing as
the Laws of Mathematics and Physics.

Einstein is using the word "Tensor" here, because at least this should be about Mathematics as a subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_stress_tensor

"I know what I saw" and the fact that such a thing could also be science as well.

Next that we could be having a willingness to both accept when needed, or perhaps be throwing one thing out for another when also needed.

The perfect example of perhaps not knowing at all, except for the subject of UFO's, are events happening in that of plasma, where even an exposure lasting a millionth of a second
does not reveal all the details.

And here that of a photographic exposure above.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)

Here the ambiguation page first, but perhaps not needed next.

You know, at least I could make a difference between Frank Drake as an astronomer and next Charles I. Halt for that of being Deputy Commander of the Rendlesham Air Force base.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_I._Halt

Again a possible name change around, but next I really do not know.

Make it both fun and entertainment if you will and next also you could take both science and even science fiction for granted as well.

But next not any scientist around when it happens, only those military men which we should trust.

Believe it or not, but except for a couple of philosophical questions during the day, I also could be back at questions related to that we are supposed to both see and observe.

The sun is definitely shining, but next in which color?

Make it rather that of Chinese lanterns instead and we could be still in the blue for a lack of a possible answer, except for only making it simple rather than a complex thing or feature.

I could perhaps be the one telling about such a thing as aliens or extraterrestrials and next also a possible encounter as well, but also that I do not have such a thing either.

Again it slips away what I meant or intended to say, but rather that the Rendlesham Forest Incident, like a couple of other things, should be that of hard science sometimes being carried out.

Make it rather such a thing as alien recovery or retrieval and again it becomes one of those things in the background for which there is never an answer to.

Make it "A brief moment of time" and next it could be about a moment of creation as well, because we are supposed to believe what such a thing is supposed to mean.

If for some reason I could make that of time only a deviation from that of gravity as a subject, still the fact that the Universe could be some four dimensional in nature,
if not even some 11 in all, when next considering such a time and also that of Time dilation as a subject.

Slowly getting back at me, because I rather gave a thought about the Kardashev scale above, in that this scale is dealing with only that of energy production versus consumption.

Next that it also should be about that of technology as a subject, of course, if not even more, or anything else, except for possible UFO's which could be visible in the sky.

Step on someone's toes next and always that of science versus that of the church for such a thing, except not for that of possible science itself.

Should it be any reason for asking about my whereabouts here on Earth, including that of the daily events possibly making up my life and perhaps not too much interesting.

But next that even Pink Floyd as a musical band could sometimes be asking a couple of philosophical questions by the music they are playing and also the lyrics which could be part of their music.

Next move along and ask the question "Where are we coming from and next going" and also it could be a notion of "Heaven and Hell" for such a thing as well, except for both
Mathematics and Physics as a subject.

Make it perhaps one thing and it also could be two things as well, if perhaps not even more and again the whole question in a nutshell, because either it could be that of Matter Creation for
telling about a possible existence, if not any Creation myth for such, but still a Theory around as well which could also be giving such an answer.
ID: 1899442 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899446 - Posted: 6 Nov 2017, 1:12:17 UTC

If you do not mind, but is it "extraterrestial", or "extraterrestrial" here?

Notice the small difference here, because apparently both things could be used, but perhaps the latter here.

Suggestions welcome.
ID: 1899446 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Mr. Kevvy Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 3776
Credit: 1,114,826,392
RAC: 3,319
Canada
Message 1899468 - Posted: 6 Nov 2017, 5:15:45 UTC - in response to Message 1899446.  

Only "extraterrestrial" is correct; the other is other is just a spelling error.
ID: 1899468 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899470 - Posted: 6 Nov 2017, 5:43:59 UTC - in response to Message 1899468.  
Last modified: 6 Nov 2017, 6:26:17 UTC

Thanks for that Mr. Kevvy, but also that here it should have been a "s" at the end, at least for my own part, in order to perhaps clarify the subject.

But rather it becomes that of an "r" here instead so next yet another interpretation of the possible meaning of the word.

Like that of a Virgin perhaps for that of a constellation in the sky, if not perhaps someone singing a song for the same, always that of both aliens and extraterrestrials for that of a subject,
except for both possible wording and also a given naming for the same.

But next also about the constellations in the sky as well, at least at some moments of leisure, except for perhaps your birthsign could be that of such a constellation, if perhaps not naming.

Or perhaps not birthsign either, because still in the middle of the night here, or perhaps early morning, but next look into the sky, if you will, from the view or perspective of an astronomer and you always see the same thing.

Throw me a horoscope for that of such a thing as astrology rather than astronomy and guess we could have both a subject and debate for such a thing as well, which perhaps also has been mentioned in the past.

Make it perhaps a "Journey to the end of space" and next I also could choose where to go as well.

A constellation in the southern sky is having the name of Microscopium, but apparently not such thing as the galaxy M64 (or the Black Eye galaxy) there.

Therefore, perhaps a travel into the unknown if you rather choose to be going that way, rather than past the galaxies of the Virgo cluster and next into the unknown.

Regardless of any way or travel of direction, no such a thing as "Paradise" for neither these things and next also because of an obvious explanation for the same.

I made some fun at Mersenneforum.org of that of 127 being a Genefer factor of sorts because like that of Seti@home itself, always that of a "niche" for a couple of subjects which could be discussed.

"I love Lucy", if not any pancakes at times, but next that also it could sometimes be a discussion of that of the use of technology for a given purpose in mind.

If perhaps making it "Humble stance", of course we should be having a melody for such as well, but should it next be that of both "Heaven and Hell" for a couple of things,
because it also could mean both creation and destruction for the same?

Again perhaps the same meaning or interpretation of both words and their possible meaning for the same, in that we could perhaps make it both Matter Creation and also that of Creation myth in a similar way.

Getting late here right now, so back tomorrow, because for now it becomes a restart of the computer by only touching the icon for BOINC Manager, so here perhaps not only an undervolt issue,
but could rather be about the application itself, or possibly the driver being used, since it should be the CUDA applications here.

The driver perhaps is the most recent here, but upgrading to the most recent version, 7.8.3, should only be able to fix a small flaw being mentioned.

Also that I choose to launch the nVidia Control Panel without finding an Update button for that of the driver, but also that there is a quite nice picture for that of Arecibo at the top of the page for the
GPU users group and here the page for this itself and not here at Seti@home.

http://gpuug.org/

I will perhaps do this tomorrow, but for now signing off for the night.
ID: 1899470 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899567 - Posted: 6 Nov 2017, 18:27:02 UTC
Last modified: 6 Nov 2017, 18:39:08 UTC

Or "a possible wording" below.

Such a thing as innovation and invention should be telling me about something new, if perhaps not on the market itself, but also that it sometimes could be ideas around as well.

Ray wreath, or perhaps wreath for that of possible spirits which could be around, if not any aliens or extraterrestrials at all, but if not wrong, there was a picture,
or perhaps painting of that of Jesus around, next with such a ray wreath also visible, which next also could be thought of as that of an Aura and this time for a living person, or human.

What is the better option or alternative here?

Are we still supposed to believe in such a thing as mass-slaughter happening and this time inside a church, or should it rather be a notion of Jesus, only because it could be that of a painting,
if perhaps nothing else?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlife

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_myth

Did both these articles here perhaps get a little larger in size?

Except for that, even both the Wikipedia article about that of the Afterlife and also that of Creation myth, for now appears incomplete in their intended meaning,
or perhaps when it comes to that of contents available.

Perhaps not the main point here, but in order to make it a posting, I need to get to both the links and also the articles themselves.

Next, one of these and perhaps a different one, was still a bit short, but next came included with a couple of figures, which I next chose to refer to as symbols and next possible Symbolism.

If we could still be in the blank here, not only because it sometimes could be science, rather than that of Religion, for one thing that these articles have still to come into one piece,
being one subject only and next part of a given understanding as well.

If such a thing as "belief" next also could be that of being trusted as well, always that of both Religion and Faith for what we sometimes could also believe could be that of Creation.

If making it "Formal logic" for a couple of things, it still should be science, but if rather making it a painting, or even fresco on the wall, perhaps it could be something else.

If you happen to be a scientist at CERN, you also should know about such a thing as hadrons, including the Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, which could be used.

Next that also such a thing as gluons could represent that of elementary particles as well and next also being slightly more diffuse or unclear when it comes to given subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon

Again you probably noticed what I meant to be saying, but next the question perhaps on my mind, is whether that of the Weak or Strong Nuclear Force is the main reason behind here.

Here I do not have the details, but it comes to me that a possible subdivision, or perhaps further splitting up here, making it that of Quarks, could be possible.

I also am dealing a bit with the sun as well, because it should be responsible for both life here on Earth and also the climate, including that of the weather.

If not perhaps the old story which perhaps became not told, it still could be science for many or much of these things, except for making it something else.

This because while even scientists could be idiots at times, also that of the same for the man in the street as well, making for such a possible reasoning.

I guess we sometimes could be left asking ourselves "how" for a couple of things, except for perhaps "why".

If perhaps such a thing as both "Afterlife" and also that of Creation myth could help explain such a thing as both Jesus, if not any gods or angels in the sky,
no such thing should be better at all than making it all into one given context in order for next having it all explained.

Next perhaps be speaking about the weather for such a thing as well, if perhaps not a given notion of time, as usual.

Is it perhaps more easy, or even harder, believing in such a thing as Hadrons, Gluons and Quarks, rather than the story of Jesus as it is being told, only because one or more thing
could perhaps be science, while the other thing perhaps Religion and Faith?

If perhaps so, always the Method which could be used as well, in order to explain each of these subjects, or even their respective parts.

Next that we also could be hitting the wall here on these subjects as well, because we could be unable to make it even more of a couple of things right now.

Becomes a need for a bit more of thinking and perhaps I will have a little more later.
ID: 1899567 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1899601 - Posted: 6 Nov 2017, 20:58:13 UTC
Last modified: 6 Nov 2017, 21:11:49 UTC

And perhaps not "me" for everything here or around either.

It better should be a clear written note and next also precise and concise as well, but next you never know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution

Mentioned at Mersenneforum.org the other day.

In the old days of both television and entertainment, we also might have become familar with that of Maria Magdalene as a symbolic figure, if not any symbol, or even Symbolism itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Magdalene

Like the fact that often such a thing as Religion and Faith could be having different aspects for its possible meaning,
possibly confusing Mary Magdalene with that of Maria herself, as that of the wife of Josef, being the parents of Jesus, makes for another possible confusion.

If for one thing it could be the story of technology rather than that of a given Faith, always the story of Apple versus Microsoft and next I am perhaps not that eager anymore here.

Always the difference or separation for that of Creation myth versus a given Creation, but next we also could take some time at looking at both of these in a given context.

Is Albert Einstein perhaps supposed to be a prophet, only because he could be coming up with a notion of time by means of his Special Theory of Relativity?

Or are we perhaps still left with a Methodology which could make it possible to think about a couple of things and next also coming up with possible answers?

Creation itself as a subject could be possibly two-part, if not even more, but for some reasons we choose to leave one or more parts left or behind, for that which could be still left, or remaining.

If that of technology should also be part of science, why not such a thing for that of Erich von Däniken and his possible scientific research being carried out?

Or is it perhaps rather supposed to be that of angels and gods, if rather not any science at all?

The old explanation around could still be that we could make it such a thing as both angels and gods, if not any heathen and pagan, for a lack of knowledge, but rather a
possible belief in myth and superstition.

In the world of programming, we could have such things as both the heap and the stack, if not any iterative or recursive functions as well.

Next make it such a thing as pointers and dynamic structures as well and it adds to the whole picture when being put together.

A big earthquake happening is perhaps not the same as mass-slaughtering, which also could happen at times.

Even today, we sometimes could be fearing the unknown, except for a lack of knowledge when perhaps needed.

Therefore, scientists could be quite familar with such a thing as matter versus antimatter, in that these two could possibly annihilate each other when in direct contact.

But next no such thing as "Armageddon" here, or even the "dead end" or demise which could signify the end of what we possibly could think of as "inflation" and this time such a
thing for that of the Universe itself, making it that of "Cosmological expansion".

If for some reason we could believe that the Universe could end up in oblivion, next no such thing as the leaf being a branch of a tree, except for not the "Butterfly effect" itself.

Are we still supposed to believe in such a thing as Matter Creation for our existence, because it could be explained by such a thing as the Big Bang?

Next the fact that we could still make of a Type I civilization as making a hard landing here on Earth, if not at all, so what next for that of any Type II, or Type III civilization?

Always that of nature itself being the possible answer when any questions are being asked.

Both that of making it 0 and 1 for that of false and true, respectively, should be much the same as that of a given Probability of 50/50 when possible.

We still do not make such a thing as "chance" that of any Prediction either, only that the latter sometimes could be about making a "guess".

At least Einstein was able to spell it out, by saying such a word or phrase "God is not playing with dices".

But rather that it sometimes could end up "Run like hell", because rather than such a thing as "Love from God", it rather could be such a thing as Dark Matter / Energy for much the same.

Take that of an egg as an example, at least when it comes to that of both boiling, if not cooking such an egg.

Leave it running and it becomes a hard-cooked egg, perhaps needing some anchovy or anchovies included as well.

Make it rather a bit shorter and next it could be the big splat when being knocked open, but still it should be an egg for your breakfast.

The absolute zero temperature of the Universe is some -273.15 degrees Celsius and next a bit too cold to possibly endure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero

But also that we should know that it could be some 6,000 degrees on the surface of the sun and next some 15 million degrees or so at the stellar core.

When a star heavier than the sun ceases it life because it has exhausted its nuclear fuel, it ends up as a supernova explosion.

The temperature in the core could next reach billions of degrees, making for such Periodic Elements like Gold and Platina being the result of the Cataclysmic event as the result of
such a thing happening.

Here noticing Periodic Element "Sb" for that of element 51 in the list and in fact here I am stuck on the possible naming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_table

This because here at least it should be Gold above, but when next perhaps adding one or two more such, I could end up being biased, because perhaps it should not be that of
Mercury or Lead either.

This because making it Radiocative decay for at least Uranium and next into Lead should be a different story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungsten

Here it now is Wolfram for this, Periodic element 74 in the Table.

Perhaps making it Wolfram is still the better wording here, except for the W itself in its name or designation.

Finally, if it still rather is supposed to be what it should be, also the fact that there could be civilizations hiding themselves in space, by perhaps "cloaking" their presence,
including a possible energy production and consumption which could be needed.

If it rather ended up being still the fact that the Universe could be having a possible Creator, always the questions which could be asked for such, except for the answers back in return.

A gravity amplifier for that of a possible engine, could perhaps be almost a logical subject and also a possible explanation, if you happen to be a member of "Skunk Works"
but next that Nuclear fusion and such a thing as gravity for that of possible time travel, should still not be the same.

But rather the fact that Einstein most likely believed in such a thing as science, except for perhaps a notion of time as well and that therefore we should always make the difference,
when perhaps needed.

So, perhaps take "No" for an answer if it perhaps rather should be "Yes" and next it always should be so, for a couple of reasons.

By making it perhaps Fusion power, rather than Nuclear fusion, it of course could be that of fusion "our way", if or when so needed.

If nature is supposed to be made for us, or in our behalf, by means of us perhaps benefiting its resources, always a thing to be thankful for and have in remind.

Energy is perhaps the most superfluous of everything, including both that of generation and also output, so therefore another reason for being thankful.

But also that such a thing as "Lord gives and next takes", also could be part of your prayer as well, if not sometimes also experiencing the unexpected, or perhaps unwelcome.

If such a thing as mass-slaughter could be still part of nature, always the Logical explanation for such a thing as well, if not sometimes even the irrational part.

Are such a thing as gods and angels, if not any heathen and pagan, part of a question for which there is no logical answer for, or should we rather be better and next pretend it to be
science at times?

But rather that it sometimes could be that of "Open up your eyes", because I see a different meaning in a couple of things.

If perhaps doing so, it possibly is not always any science either, because seeing is next also supposed to be believing.
ID: 1899601 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 . . . 93 · 94 · 95 · 96 · 97 · 98 · 99 . . . 332 · Next

Message boards : Cafe SETI : Stars are blue, Panthers are pink and the music plays here


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.