suppose
Perceivable inspiration inspires one to adapt; suggested information tempts one to suppose aka to reason (conflict) over a proposition from others.
am I...how about we...
a) suggested pluralism (we) tempts perceiving singular (one) to ignore self for others.
b) if one claims self as "me; myself or I", then that shapes every other one into a "you" aka a phonetic "jew".
without
Others suggest "without" to distract one from being (life) within (inception towards death). Suggested "without" implies being WITH-in OUT-side, hence center (perception) of surrounding (perceivable).
what about action?
a) "what about" implies choosing to question. Choice implies reaction.
b) being implies reaction (life) within action (inception towards death).
c) consenting to suggestions by others implies reacting to suggested reactionism.
Does anyone know where to find this data ?
Lots of links here... https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/17rSVERnW5/genetics-firm-23andme-says-theyv/c
The first casualty of war is the truth.
a) truth implies versus lie aka a conflict. Reason equals war; what one reasons about represents the different theaters of war as suggested by others.
b) the opposite of casual (without design) implies planned (by design)...the few design suggestions to tempt casual consent of the many to conflicts of reason.
c) the first casualty (design aka delineation of form) implies flow, because flow (inception towards death) delineates form (life). Being alive implies being a casualty within the process of dying.
doesn't care which side is more morally repugnant
Ones consent to suggested moralism shapes conflicts of reason aka do vs don't + care vs neglect + more vs less + attractive vs repugnant, which are controlled by those suggesting the -ism...not by those consenting to any side within.
human hands shape the dates, maneuvers, actions, etc.
a) action (inception towards death) generates reactions (life)
b) reactions can be tempted with suggestion to ignore action.
c) consenting to suggested permits those suggesting to shape it.
d) prophet aka profit aka Latin proficio - "to proceed forward". Lack of foresight (life) can only exist within prophecy (inception towards death)...and it's ones free will of choice to ignore that.
Invincible obstinacy
INVIN'CIBLE, adjective - "not to be conquered" + OB'STINACY, noun - "unreasonable adherence to an opinion, purpose or system; a fixedness that will not yield to persuasion".
Consenting to suggested information permits others to conquer one within a conflict of reason. Suggested persuades consent; perceivable inspires adaptation.
blind faith in all that is incredible
INCRED'IBLE, adjective (Latin incredibilis; in and credibilis, credible) - "that cannot be believed; not to be credited; too extraordinary and improbable to admit of belief".
Ones consent credits (creed; belief; faith) suggested information; perceivable inspiration one cannot hold onto. Admission (inception towards death) into departure (life).
an utterly false idea of God
Hence uttered aka spoken into being aka suggested words over perceivable sound aka suggested information over perceivable inspiration.
Ones consent to anything uttered shapes a true vs false conflict of reason over suggested idealism (idea), which others then idolize (god).
be placed within the circle...
...as center (perception) within surrounding (perceivable).
There is no...
Where is nothing? How could nothing be? Why do you build the construct of your responses on "nothing"?
intelligence behind
a) being implies center (perception) of surrounding (perceivable)...consenting to stand under (understanding aka intelligence) others tempts one to ignore that.
b) others suggest one to be HIND, noun - "a domestic; a servant"...ones consent seals the deal. https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/hind
simple
Simple solution (inception towards death) generates complex problems (life), hence ones struggle to sustain self.
program
Latin programma - "proclamation, edict; ordinance; force of law" implies perceivable natural order aka natural law...not suggested orders and laws by those within.
Furthermore; nature doesn't E'DICT, noun (Latin edictum, from edico, to utter or proclaim; e and dico, to speak)...it moves sound. Those within suggest words to distract one from perceivable sound.
autism
a) suggested -ism tempts consenting -ist to submit, hence to decrease ones potential.
b) AUT; from auctus; augere; aug - "to increase" implies the opposite of -ISM.
You lack the ability to learn. Instead you process.
a) being alive implies within the process of dying. Being processed (enacted upon) forces adaptation (reaction).
b) to learn implies to teach self and vice versa. Others suggest instruction (talmud) aka lamadh (he learned) to tempt one to consent to a teacher aka maegester of authority aka a master aka Hebrew rabbi "my master."
It doesn't understand the matching meaning
Others suggest MATCH, noun - "a person who is equal to another" to distract from being one apart from one another aka differentials (life) within sameness (inception towards death). Who suggests equality (same) through diversity (differences)?
Mix and match...sounds familiar? Tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) aka abrahamism (father of multitude) aka multiculturalism aka miscegenation aka melting pot aka mass migration aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one).
pairs
Others suggest dualism (two) to distract ONE from discerning self. Ones consent (want or not want) to the suggestion of another one; shapes the dual conflict of reason (want vs not want).
The former (want or not want) implies ONEs choice; the latter (want vs not want) implies ONE vs another ONE, hence being tempted to hold onto one another. One reasoning implies one stuck within dualism.
You have autistic intelligence
Who do I stand-under?
Break that down
A spell-breaker attempts to break spells (suggested words aka information) through perceivable sound aka inspiration, but only oneself wields the free will of choice to resist suggested fiction for perceivable reality.
Others suggest a MUSE as a reflection of inspiration, yet ones consent to tempts one to hold onto the suggested muse; hence contradicting perceivable inspiration, which one cannot hold onto...only ignore.
Have you turned woke yet?
a) direction (inception towards death) turns into reaction (life)...reaction (growth) resists direction (loss).
b) others suggest sleep (dormant; fixed in place) to distract one from being set "free" within motion.
c) to become awake implies arising (life) out of origin (inception towards death)...others suggest WOKE (past tense of wake) to mock ones ignorance of being awake.
Kill ze creator
Ones consent to suggested creationism sets the creator. The power of suggestion is measured by consent gained.
a scourge
SCOURGE (a punishment, a punitive infliction)...being offended implies ones consent to a suggested offer, hence a self inflicted penalty (punish) within ones mind/memory (ment).
I know the definition
a) definite (fixed) contradicts knowledge (perceivable) since one can only perceive moving differences. Being one implies different from one another, while being differentiated (life) within motion (inception towards death).
b) suggested the-ism tempts one to ignore aforementioned.
have no
a) how could one thing have no thing?
b) ones consent to suggested nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing) prevents one from discerning aforementioned.
devoid
How could a void exist within energy? How could perception (partial) within perceivable (whole) perceive emptiness?
intelligence
INTEL'LIGENCE, noun (Latin intelligentia, from intelligo, to understand) aka to "stand under" the suggestions of others when consenting to them. Why are the few utilizing "intelligence agencies" to control the many? How could one grow while "standing under" another?
mincing up words into alternatives
a) ALTERN'ATE, adjective (Latin alternatus) - "being by turns; one following the other in succession"...only within action (inception towards death) can there be alternate reactions (life).
Only within perceivable (sound) can one shape alternative suggestions (words).
b) mincing implies cutting into small pieces; words imply build out of small pieces (letters)....why are you offended by the building blocks of words? What if suggested words are minced out of perceivable sound? What if your consent to suggested words makes mince-meat out of your discernment as insane (in sanus; within sound) person (per sonos; by sound)?
autism
https://files.catbox.moe/4ve91i.jpg ...Sigismund Schlomo Freud (alleged founder of psychoanalysis) and Eugene Bleuler (allegedly coined "schizophrenia", "schizoid", and "autism") conspiring together to "conquer psychiatry" over a century ago...and here you are still propagating their tools of mass deception together with the latest dehumanization tools (bots; artificial intelligence) and the classic...IT.
I do not need a thesaurus.
Others suggest definitions (words); ones consent stores them within ones mind/memory aka a repository; collection; hoard; treasury (Latin thesaurus)...yet; only those suggesting control the definition (idolatry); redefinition (revisionism) and contradiction (talmudic reasoning) thereof. Those consenting only switch in-between agreement vs disagreement, while fighting each other within conflicts of reason.
inner monologue
a) if sole (mono) speech (logue), then why can those without an inner monologue speak outside of it?
b) what language is your inner dialogue? Who suggested you the meaning of the words you use inside yourself?
c) if inner monologue has more value than outer speech, then why are a few controlling the speech of a many?
d) what if reasoning (have vs have not or true vs false) over others tempts one to ignore ones internal; interior; inward being? What if being internal (life) implies external (inception towards death)? What if suggestion could tempt internal (perception) to ignore external (perceivable)?
Does the perceivable external use words to communicate itself to the perceiving senses of the internal? If you are within a forest; then do you require the internal monologue to discern the perceivable differences offered to your senses?
Does nature require those within to attach labels to it for it to work?
lying jews
What if truth (wanting suggested) and lie (not wanting suggested) tempts one to ignore change (perceivable need)?
If perceivable change, then any suggested truth or lie can be changed into its opposite. What if the many do not permit themselves to discern that?
What if jews suggest gentiles to ignore something moving (sound) for something affixed (words)? Are they lying, are they tempting others to believe truth; are they doing both if one consents or are they doing neither if one resists?
jews do not have enough self awareness
What if focusing on others tempts one to ignore self? What if ones lack of self awareness prevents one from discerning that lack? What if others pointing this out will be viewed as an offense to ones focus on others? What if others cannot unlock ones "self" discernment? What if it's easy peasy for others to tempt one to lock oneself out of self discernment by simply suggesting one to focus on others?
the blind...
....ignore to see (perceivable) when viewing what others are showing (suggested).
followers...
...ignore that following the natural order (inception towards death) shortens ones life...yet, it's as easy as suggesting them to follow orders to get them to ignore that.
differentiate lies from truth
What if truth (want) and lie (not want) implies ones consent to the same suggestion (definism aka definite; affixed). What if nature already differentiated each partial within? What if others suggest collectivism to tempt one to hold differences together? What if suggested words tempt one to slap definitions (affixed meaning) over perceivable differences, while grouping together different units as rhetorical groups (-isms) ?
critical thinking
What if ones consent to suggested criticism aka judging separation within a conflict of reason, keeps one locked within the controlled environment of reason, hence within a conflict?
Why are the many entangled in endless conflicts of reason, while the few effortlessly escape judgement over and over again? Why are the few able to judge the many?
Back to thinking critical, while putting reasoning over suggested information aside...what's there to criticize about perceivable inspiration within nature?
Holding ones breath permits living the awareness of dying within a mere moments...what's there to criticize about?
A sacrifice, and martyrs. So it causes?
a) ones consent to suggested represents a SACRI aka seg (division) + creed (consent; belief; faith) FICE (facio, to make).
b) martyr (witness) from WIT (to know; to perceive) + NESS (denotes state or quality) implies witnessing (evaluating) perceivable (value)...not sacrificing self to suggestions by others.
c) IT (a demonstrative) implies an effect shaped within cause. If "it's" perceivable; then it exists within cause, while affecting ones perception.
an idiot.
ID'IOT, noun (Latin idiota; separate); also ID'IOM, noun (Latin idioma, peculiar to one's self)...being implies one apart from one another; hence peculiar to one's self aka particular effect (life) within whole cause (inception towards death).
you're
Once again a conflict of reason...you're vs you aren't.
don't work for; they're against...logically how does that work?
Logic implies a conflict of reason (for vs against), shaped by ones consent (for or against) towards the suggestion of another. Those suggesting control both sides of those consenting, hence a few controlling the high-ground of every conflict fought among the many.
own words
Sound cannot be owned by those within...others suggest words to tempt one to consent to the TRADE of a MARK.
Only within dominance (inception towards death) can one be free (life) aka free-dom...ignoring this represents ones confined mind aka confinement (prison).
I believe in escalation
a) SCALA (balance) TION (action)...balance within action implies momentum within motion. Being implies choice at center of surrounding balance, hence being (life) within momentum (inception towards death).
b) to believe implies choosing to hold onto, hence establishing imbalance for self.
c) BE (to be) LIEF (free; ready; prompt)...believing what others are suggesting tempts one to bind self to others aka Latin religio (to bind anew).
for different reasons
All the different conflicts of reason among the many are based on their consent to the suggestions of the same few. Prime example...the few suggest the meaning of words, while the many endlessly fight each other about the definition (idolatry); redefinition (revisionism) and contradiction (talmudic reasoning) of suggested spell-craft (words).
the rest of the world
The affairs of life (world) implies urgency aka being moved from inception towards death within the natural order...others suggest the inversion thereof as the cessation of motion (rest).
Sleight of hand: "no rest for the wicked" aka no cessation of motion for departed (life) within whole (inception towards death).
a) being implies inversion aka effect (perception) in lesser proportion than cause (perceivable).
b) inverse proportion (life) is opposed to direct (inception towards death).
c) choosing to ignore the above permits others to utilize suggestion for revisionism, hence being able to change labels (QAnon or Hilary Clinton) at will.
d) direction (inception towards death) presides directed (life)...others suggest presidents to tempt one to follow instead of resisting direction.
e) applauding (plausible) suggested does not gain one favor within actual (perceivable); instead one places self into disfavor by ignoring perceivable for suggested.
whenever i read your shit it just all goes out the other ear...
That's you choosing to let go.
hang on...
That's you choosing to suggest me to hold onto.
Meanwhile; your give (question) and take (answer) relationship with AI implies you being tempted to hold onto suggested (artificial), while ignoring to adapt to perceivable (natural).
The shit I write about isn't suggested information for you to hold onto; but my attempt to describe perceivable inspiration...which one cannot hold onto. I try to describe motion and the things within to those who ignore motion (inspiration) by holding onto the things within (information).
I don't know...I can't do it.
a) yet you did consent to and still can hold onto suggested nihilism (nihilo; nothing); because you chose so.
b) how does nature communicate "don't" and "can't" to those within? Does fire communicate "do not touch me"? Can one not choose to touch fire regardless of what it or anyone else communicates?
positioning of the statue of liberty
Position of liberty (Liber; free)? Only within dominance (balance) can one be free (choice); hence STATUE; STATIC; STATOS - "to place in the balance".
she's lookin...but her body
"Never judge a book by its cover...that dude looks like a lady"
Was checkin your shit saw you were a mod at this "manna"
Ones choice only moderates self within bounds of balance. Moderation implies mode of reaction within action.
ark of the covenant
Ones consent to the suggestion of another represents a mutual compact aka contract with the merchant aka pact with the devil aka binding oneself anew (Latin religio; to bind anew).
Ones mind/memory holding onto suggested information represents the coffer of values aka boxing ring (box bound by surrounding) aka vault aka treasury aka noahs (Hebrew noach; rest) ark.
Rest implies ones ignorance of being form (life) within flow (inception towards death) and ignoring perceivable (inspiration going through) for suggested (information held onto) tempts ones mind at rest.
Bonus: consider your perspective in-between up/down + left/right + front/back...ones position implies a box aka a cube aka Ka'ba, Ka'bah or Kabah...a temple (discernment) covered in black (ignorance).
Let's see...Kerguelen islands aka Îles de la Désolation aka Ile de Nachtegal.
a) desolation (uninhabited; desolated) implies ignorance, since being implies within (life) habitation (inception towards death). Ones state of being implies a "disposition or condition of the mind or body acquired by custom or a frequent repetition". Others suggest desolation to distract from disposition.
b) as for islands...let's use a sleight of hand from Kenny & Dolly: "Islands (life) in the stream (inception towards death)...that is what we are".
c) nightingale aka NIGHT (dark aka ignorance) and GALE (wind aka tempting resistance).
Principal activities on the Kerguelen Islands focus on scientific research...sounding rocket range + a SuperDARN radar.
So what's SuperDARN up to? Global convection aka Latin convehere "to carry together" aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one) or tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) or abrahamism (father of multitude) and so on.
tl; dr...being implies apart from one another; others suggest coming together to destroy being, which they achieve by tempting ones ignorance with suggested distractions.
always there up late at nite
At night I sleep; during the light of day I comment upon whatever inspires.
who's the real free will of choice
Each one within reality.
ROYAL SOUND (sovereign whole) BAIE ROYALE (a lot sovereigns) aka whole (inception towards death) generating partials (life).
Why sovereign (superior to all others)? Because superior oneness (whole) generates each superior one (partial) apart from one another, hence special; unique...sovereign.
Whole implies perceivable value; each partial within implies evaluation by perception....evaluation implies the highest value, since without evaluation, there could be no value.
"thought" that generates matter
a) flow (whole) generates form (partials)...others suggest MAT'TER, noun (Latin materia; Heb. to measure) to tempt form to hold onto other form; while ignoring flow.
b) motion generates momentum...momentum (inception towards death) generates resistance (life)...resistance (temporary growth) struggles to resist temptation within velocity (ongoing loss).
c) others suggest one to think ABOUT (around, on the outside), which tempts one to ignore being inside (perception) outside (perceivable). Instead of perceivable going through ones mind/memory; aboutism tempts one to uphold suggested, when thinking about it.
Each thought distracts one with suggested information (form) from perceivable inspiration (flow). Others establish think-tanks for suggested information within ones consenting mind/memory, hence a few exploiting a many as a storage device.
- NAKED aka "open to view".
- CLOTHED aka "garment (garnished/decorated ment/mind)" aka "to cover within ornamentation (idols).
Clothed implies suggested information; Naked implies perceivable inspiration.
Sleight of hand: "Naked, I just wanna take it; shake it; make it; break it; fake it...Naked, I just can't await it" https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/falco/naked.html (warning....the music-video has naked children in it).
Wanting suggested information; tempts one to ignore needed...perceivable inspiration.
Sound (entire motion) vibrates into membrane (momentum), hence each instrument (instruo/prepared ment/mind) within representing a MEM (memory) BRANE (brain).
Sleight of hand: "insane in the membrane; insane in the brain" aka in-sanus (within sound).
SISI/ISIS - Israel's Secret Intelligence Service
a) -IST (terrorist) implies ones consent to suggested -ISM (terrorism).
b) TER'ROR, noun (Latin terreo, to frighten; fear)...being afraid implies towards suggested outcome; hence ignoring being (perception) within origin (perceivable).
In short...others suggest terrorism to tempt one to consent to fear (the mind killer) aka to hold onto fear by being afraid of what comes next.
Sleight of hand: "nothing to fear except fear itself!" ~Michel de Montaigne (a jew).
Edit: "Qui craint de souffrir, il souffre déjà ce qu'il craint." (He who fears to suffer already suffers what he fears.)