Stationary is absence of motion and everything is always in some form of motion.
a) The ION in stat-ion-ary implies action aka motion...stat/sta - "to stand" implies a reaction aka choice balancing within motion.
b) If the word "everything" puts together a unitary (thing) and an aggregate of units (every); then what if that's an inversion of singularity (motion) dividing each unit (matter) within?
c) What if absence implies the sense of matter abstaining from motion by ignorance? And what if words like "stationary" + "everything" are designed to shape absence by tempting ignorance?
The ground we stand on ages, the sky above swirls and flows like the sea
a) We cannot stand...only a singular can wield the free will of choice to balance within motion. Standing together as a plural (we) makes finding balance within motion harder, because it confines free will of choice.
b) Flow cannot be "like" anything else...flow implies sameness differentiating form from one another. It's ignoring flow which allows form to shape likeness with one another.
If sea represents flow, then why can a sea find balance? A calm sea implies a formed choice within the balance of flowing motion. A sea reacts to being enacted upon...as does form within flow.
What if Natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater) implies flowing nature forming land; air, and water?
But no curve means no planet means no orbit
Both NO (nothing/nihilo aka nihilism and denial) + MEANING (to measure aka to hold onto a measure within mind) prevents potential (form) within procession (flow) to shape curves; planets; orbits etc. by free will of choice.
Flow doesn't form NO or MEANING...form shapes those by ignoring flow.
Orbiting was the motion I was talking about which I am certain doesn't happen
Nature moves being (choice) from > to (balance), which allows each being the free will of choice to shape ascertained happenstance like "orbiting motion".
You trying to ascertain what does or doesn't happen a) ignores the free will of choice given by linear motion, and b) confines your free will of choice within a circular motion aka reason (does vs doesn't).
Your reasoning against others (does vs doesn't), and your circular logic (does or doesn't) implies orbiting a certainty.
It doesn't matter if you choose round or flat, because choosing either side turns both sides against each other aka into orbital motion. Orbital because whatever you choose to hold onto within yourself (logic) turns into conflict outside yourself (reason).
Even if you manage to convince another to switch from round to flat...the conflict aka versus/verto - "to turn" continues the orbital motion.
things on it are always moving
Always implies WAY(s) OF ALL motion for each thing within. It's the addition of the "S" which tricks one to ignore singularity for plurality.
A thing cannot be "always"...only within all way can each thing come into being. The suggested word "always" shapes a plurality within the mind of each thing consenting to it.
Earth
Earth/erda/er - "ground; land"...only WITHIN nature can there be L(and) A(ir) W(ater).
sometimes just a little and very slowly.
That implies to behold aka a being holding onto measurements by summoning time. One needs to resist the want to hold onto...otherwise one perishes.
If everything moves, then motion cannot be some/sum - "quantity or amount"...motion implies singularity; some-times implies plurality.
If there's sometime; then where's the other time?
Round Table
Notice round (circular) table (square) aka a circle encompassing a square. If one encircles a square; then corners have to be cut...
I don't have resources to develop a theory
The developing of a theory corrupts resource aka ones response (re) to rise (source)...DON'T represents such a theory aka a mental scheme corrupting a beings thought within the natural process.
The source of "don't" is based on not responding to source...
Flat and stationary is certain
What if certainty ignores process? What if being implies stationary potential (life) within moving procession (inception towards death). Notice that process implies a flat line, while potential implies any shape...
Are you certain that stationary (motionless) can exist outside of motion?
AIs Compete for Control
For implies nature forwarding being...AI implies artifice shaped to distract being from forwarding nature. It's few who shape artifice to distract many from nature and into competition and control of each other.
- Who goes into competition (war) with one another...few or many?
- Who controls (just following orders) one another...few or many?
Love implies versus hate...few set up leaders to mislead many into a circular conflict against each other. It doesn't matter if the leader is beloved or hated; cause it's the followers who fight each other nonetheless.
a) Only within singularity (cause) can each single unit (effect) come into being...after which plurality can be shaped by putting units together.
b) Sur (beyond) round (circular) implies tempting a being (be) at a distance (yond) aka from center into circumference aka into surrounding.
It's few who suggest SUR-realism to ROUND up many into mental (logic) and physical (reason) circles. Another example... DOLBY SURROUND to dull (dol) being (by) beyond (sur) center and into circumference (round).
c) Sound implies linear distribution of each instrument (mind structured within)...only within a line can a circle be shaped.
d) Counting others together (plural) corrupts ones self discernment (singular) while permitting another to hold one accountable.
All cults strive for
All forwards each one within...a jew suggests something to strive for to cultivate the reaction of gentiles.
An after death army of aetheric corpses
If all forwards (inception towards death) each one within (life); then following cultivated strife establishes an army of the living dead aka incorporated essence.
to learn truth to be protected
Pro (forwards) tect (to cover)...it's holding onto suggested truth or lies which covers ones perception of being forwarded.
subjugating their minds to certain aberrations of truth
Consenting to any suggestion aka holding onto...subjugates first mind; then body to "certainty" aka the aberration of holding onto truth or lies, while ignoring that everything moves.
Being moved from inception towards death implies the natural way...circular logic (mind) turning into a conflict of reason (body) represents the artificial aberration thereof.
This has NOTHING to do with AI...This is the modern version of the great book burning.
Accumulating information from the world wide web into centralized AI represents the book burning. AI is used to funnel flames of burned information.
For example...the google of billions of search results became the google of a couple of pages of results vetted for search, which is now becoming the google of ask AI for different shapes of the one answer you're allowed to search for.
The burning itself was never about books, but about information held within mind/memory. Books are used as physical manifestations for mental inflammation.
Measuring THINGS (plural) thru ONE'S (singular) perception
Try to explain this contradiction.
But holding onto measurements and sharing it with others to establish a consensus contradicts self discernment...
The rule/reg (to move in a straight line)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/rule set through you cannot be held onto; only drawn within. Taking a measurement distracts ones mind from given line.
AI cannot be conscious
But BEING can be made con (together) scious (to perceive) by consenting to suggested AI.
trapdoors and backdoors
It's ones consent to any suggested AI which represents the door entering into a trap, while backing away from being free.
All machines that mimic the thinking capacity of a human should be destroyed.
Suggestion mimics perception. Capacity (ability to contain) represents a suggestion (synthesis) tempting one to ignore perception (analysis). Destruction implies the analytical process of nature setting apart each being within from one another.
weaponization
Nature offers only one weapon in-between offense/defense...free will of choice. It's choosing to consent to any suggestion which permits another to weaponize it.
they' need to corrupt
Corruption isn't need...it's ignoring need for want which corrupts. Plurality (they) isn't needed but wanted...choosing want corrupts ones perception of singularity (theos).
One needs singularity; one wants plurality.
There's a universal subconscious assumption that "They" are
Assume implies "to take upon ONEself"...assumption implies a singular undertaking. It's the suggestion of ones singular assumption which establishes a plurality.
The origin of plural implies singular taking for self, while withholding from one another.
everything "They" do is inimical towards the rest
Everything implies each thing within...it's the singular thing summarizing things together which establishes animosity.
There's nothing inherently bad
Bad implies versus good...versus/verto - "to turn" implies friction among many by turning against one another, which continuously worsens both sides. It's the versus in-between the sides (good or bad) which represents adherence/haerere - "to stick together".
I mean, within reason.
Good versus bad implies reasoning...
ruling out the idea of ai being conscious
a) The con (together) scious (to perceive) mind holds onto an idea suggested by another. Doing so corrupts perception by suggestion.
b) Rule implies natural; others suggest artificial to tempt one to make a ruling. "Judge not lest ye be judged"...
we can't even define it
Holding onto any definition obscures ones perception.
no one understands human consciousness
Con (together) scious (to perceive)...one cannot understand consciousness, because perception is singular to each being and cannot be shared as a plurality without distorting/deceiving/corrupting a beings perception.
The "blind men and an elephant" parable is about ones blindness to the perception of one another, while being tempted by the suggestions of another into a consensus aka a collective consciousness.
even in its fundamental aspect.
Aspects can only be at odds with one another within an even foundation. The entirety (cause) implies even; each aspect (effect) within implies odd aka a unit (ones perception) in excess of an even (all perceivable).
That's a strong claim
A claim implies the weakening of potential by taking into possession. To starve of that weakening one shares claims to parasitically draw strength from anyone giving acclaim.
it comes from anesthesiology
It's logy (logic) which anesthetizes thought within circular thinking, while tempting one to ignore that thought comes from a line of progression aka all perceivable > ones perception.
is so poorly understood that a dedicated specialist is required
It's ones choice to stand-under (understand) which specializes another above one, while putting self into a common category.
they do not know at all how it works
Nature moves through being...anesthesia corrupts a beings perception of being moved. The longer the anesthesia; the more damage to being based on lack of adaptation to nature.
informational black holes
Whole implies light inspiring; hole implies ones lack (black) of discernment (white) when holding onto suggested information instead of adapting to perceivable inspiration.
the entire culture
Only within entire can each aspect be cultivated. Entire divides each aspect from one another before cultivation can be used to put them together.
Think of it like this: if you discover
It's thinking alike one another which covers DIS (to divide). Thinking alike implies con-sciousness, which represents an inversion of dis-cern-ment.
Germaine B.
a) That ain't a German name.
b) Germaine B. aka "be german"...that ain't a coincidence.
attacker’s social media content, in which he promoted “Free Palestine” content, including “Allahu Akbar” chants and the Tawhid gesture, a finger pointing to the sky that has regularly been adopted by Islamic extremists.
Tawhid (to unite; to make one) implies tikkun olam (repairing the world by bringing together). Freeing Palestine would require a separation from Israeli occupation...not a tawhid. Furthermore...God (allahu) can only represent the greatest (akbar) if there's a lessening division into each being within.
Settlement aka to settle (colonize) the mind...hence establishing a penal colony to punish the mind.
There's a lot of holes in the theories, imo.
Theory aka theos (god) + ōrare (to speak)...speaking implies the articulation of Gods nature. To articulate implies summoning up partials (creation) within whole (creator) aka casting "lots" together in the attempt to make "whole/hole" by theorizing.
There are no holes in Gods holistic nature unless one ignores practical (perception) for theoretical (suggestion), which establishes a hole in one aka a mind empty of natural thought, yet filled with artificial apathy.
How does all these ideas come together and what are your overall thoughts?
Few utilize physical idols to sell mental ideals to tempt many into a consensus called idealism. Joining a consensus establishes few OVER-ALL many.
Why would whoever reset society decide to...
Consenting to a suggested -ism (socialism aka society) permits another to decide for one. Letting another decide for one contradicts ones free will of choice responding (RE) to being SET into natural balance.
Each being implies the RE-sponse within the natural SET-ting. Few suggest artificial resets to disable response among many.
to leave the buildings up and then dismantle the buildings later after the repopulation of the world had begun?
If nature cannot stop populating; then artificial repopulation has to work within the natural process of population. Right now the old world populace is being repopulated into a new world order under the disguise of "replacement migration"...simultaneously the old buildings are both being destroyed and rebuild like an hotel of old becoming a shelter of new.
The deception...old vs new represents an artificial conflict distracting from natural NOW. While being moved...one can only perceive "now"...not before or after. The moment one perceives implies the momentum of ongoing motion for each temporary matter within.
technology to destroy an advanced...
Techno (artifice) + logy (circular logic)...that's what destroys a being advanced within nature by tricking one to ignore natural for artificial.
If it was a mud flood then where isn't there more evidence of this?
Because evidence aka ex (out of) videre (to see) shared by suggestion and mentally held onto, prevents one from seeing that fluid (flood) dissolves solid (mud)...
If there was an apocalyptic event
Apocalyptic implies "to reveal" aka nature revealing being by moving life from inception towards death. The state of being represents the apocalypse...it's theorizing over one another's suggestions which artificially distorts natural revelation.
Satan was freed
a) God gives free will of choice...choosing to ignore God binds free will of choice to a chosen adversary.
b) God WAS before freedom came into being. Satan IS shaped by ones choice to ignore all that was (perceivable) for one another (suggested).
I have a hard time accepting
God neither requires acceptance ; nor denial...God (action) forces adaptation (reaction). God implies linear direction (action > reaction); satan implies circular misdirection (acceptance vs denial).
Only letting go of SIDE frees ones SIGHT. God doesn't give a side to hold onto; only the choice in-between needing to resist the wanted temptation of holding onto aka taking into possession aka becoming possessed.
we see today that we attribute
WE (plural) tempts ONE (singular) to tribute self to another aka self sacrifice.
guys like Elon Musk are living in meh ok houses
The switch from operative masonry (physical idols) to speculative masonry (mental ideals) corrupts one to mentally want more than physical offers.
You'd think a trillionaire would be able to build something grand to live in
Trillionaire implies the physical idol to sell the mental ideal of wealth...both representing idolatry used to corrupt the linear thought process of nature into a mental (logic) and physical (reason) loop around artifice.
I don't really understand what happened
Happenstance (come by chance) + understanding (to stand under) + don't (doing nothing) represent artificial distortions of reality...held within your mind.
doesn't seem to add up.
Only nature adds (inception) and subtracts (death) each divided being (life), while allowing multiplication (intercourse for off-spring) aka "be fruitful and multiply".
Adding up represents tikkun olam (repairing the world by bringing together) aka artificially putting together what nature divides from one another. No matter how much one adds up...within all; one can never make whole again.
There does appear to be a missing link
Linking together (synthesis) tempts one to miss the natural process (analysis). Appearances can be deceiving if one permits another to deceive one. Permission implies linking consent and suggestion together.
free energy
En (within) ergos (work) implies being set free...
a) Thinking implies letting input pass through...wanting implies holding onto input, while ignoring the need to let go. Choosing want over need evokes emotions aka feelings, because continuing need moves want out of ones hold.
b) To be part of a people (plural) requires a person (singular) to join by free will of choice...the closer one holds the joined together; the less room for ones sight to express itself.
Nature gives sight by setting each being apart from one another; thereby making room for each being to see moving differences among each other. It's few who tempt many together to corrupt the sight of each within a joined consensus.
Most people's perception does not align with reality.
Because a) suggestion shapes a circle (logic) within ones mind if consented to, and b) perception implies singular analysis (person), which plural synthesis (people) inverts.
electricity from the air
What if each ones free will of choice represents the elect within natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater)?
What if choice (matter) comes into being within balance (momentum) of motion, and what if from/fra - "forward" implies the whole process of internal division?
What if electric/elect (choice) + magnetic/magh (to be able) represents a mislabeling of the status quo of being aka towards (inception towards death) being (life) able to choose?
discovered
Dis (to divide) + cover (to conceal)...the former implies analysis; the latter synthesis. COVER contradicts DIS...there's an inversion afoot.
Ones perception within all perceivable implies DIS (to divide); ones consent to any suggestion of another implies COVER (to conceal).
element
Aka all (el) within (e) mind (ment)...an inversion of each ones mind within all. Only within all can each body have a mind...body/mind implying an internal division of all for each one in-between.
teleport
a) Tele (over a distance) port (recess of a large body of water where vessels can load and unload).
The vessel (life) represents the recess being moved over a distance (inception towards death) as solid within fluid. Loading implies the want to hold onto solid; unloading implies the need to let go of solid within fluid...each vessel comes into being in-between need/want aka as want (free will of choice) within need (balance).
b) One cannot teleport body without exchange of position...yet ex-change implies each one out of (ex) all (change) aka the status quo of being. It's the suggested word "exchange" and ones consent to it which represents mental teleportation. It's any suggested word which can be teleported by suggestion into the mind of a consenting body.
c) Any suggested words represents mental teleportation, while sound generating instrument (mind structured within) implies the tele of body enabling the port of mind aka inspiration moved over distance through a body enabling the import and export of information held within mind.
A being needs to adapt to TELE while resisting the wanted temptation to PORT.
fifth element Aether
There can be only one...natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater). A singular analytical process. Fire represents a synthesis during the analytical process, while aether represents the division of all (nature) moving through each (native).
Tricks used to deceive a being from discerning this...
a) Suggesting words to establish all (el) within (e) mind (ment) aka to shape a mental consensus by synthesis distracting from the analytical process which divides body from mind.
b) Counting aka distracting ONE from discerning self by suggesting ONE to count others as two; three; four; five etc. Dis (to divide) cern (to perceive) implies analysis, while counting/count/co (together) implies a synthesis.
c) The word aether from aithēr (upper air) as opposed to aēr (lower air) tempts one to ignore being IN-BETWEEN aka as above/so below, hence air passing through one spiritually (spira; to breathe).
d) Being implies in-between Land; Air and Water, hence being able to balance as choice on land; being spiritually animated by inhaling and exhaling of air, and coming into being as solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) of water.
Being implies native medium within the natural process implying L(and) A(ir) W(ater), hence nature representing the law giver.
same man
Man implies division from woman...nothing can be the same during division. The origin of division implies motion, which implies the same animation for each diverse being within.
periodic table
a) Period aka peri (around) hodos (a way)...the latter implies the natural way; the former represents an artificial shape. Only within a line can a circle be shaped.
Being implies in-between anode and cathode aka ana hodos (up the way) and cata hodos (down the way) aka up (inception towards life) and down (life towards death) the way.
b) Table/tabula - "a flat surface" implies the way for each up-righteous wander being moved down it. Few suggest periodic (suggested circle) as the inversion of apparent (perceivable line).
Inversion aka within (in) turn (vers) implies the flipping of the table.
The flat earth (apparent) vs round earth (periodic) conflict continues the inversion (versus/verto; to turn)...no matter which side one chooses to hold onto. This versus conflict represents reason (turning against one another); which is based on logic (circular thinking within self).
that's word salad that only confuses
Con (together) fuse (to melt)...I take words apart (analysis) to dispel confusion (synthesis). It's the want to put understanding and words together which makes it look like word salad.
no offense
Nature offers all (perceivable) to each being (perception)...suggested offers tempt one to withhold perception.
what was written which was quite simple.
Sound implies simplicity; words represent complexity aka letter > word > meaning > exchange....
The word satan
God implies sound/sanus - "entire; whole; all"...words represent the articulation of natural sound, which tempts each consenting being into adversary to one another.
Only within sound can an instrument (mind structured within) shape words...
satanists
-ist (satanist) implies ones consent to suggested -ism (satanism) aka the synthesis of consent (singular) into consensus (plural).
that's their job
Job implies a piece (effect) of work (cause) aka the internal division of singularity (energy) into each single unit (power).
All energy implies the cause for each empowered effect within. Using words to label that process represents a synthesis turning effect into affect.
nonsensical
Can one sense nothing (non)? If non implies the absence of; then how could there be any absence within God?
What if absence implies ones "abstaining sense" when denying perception for suggestion? And what if de-nial/nihilo implies "nothing"?
You vs me + do vs don't + standing under vs standing over implies a continues circle under the label "flat and stationary"...a contradiction.
It's holding onto any contradiction which fills one with sorrow (sorry)...