Re: The [Not] Most Obvious Thing About Space....


glbrad01 wrote:
> "Mark Martin" <qed100@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1135456043.114063.108760@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > glbrad01 wrote:
> >
> >> And it is 'Christmas', not "Xmas." Here you [offensively] made and
> >> practiced total war upon Christians, not peace.
> >
> > Lighten up, ***. What? You think you own a language? If he says
> > "Xmas", he means "Christmas". Only a tight-assed Christian would
> > interpret Xmas as an agression against all Xians.
> >
> > -Mark Martin
> >
>
> I've done no more than made my alliance with Christianity because at long
> last it's adherents increasingly refuse anymore compromising that
> compromises Christianity substantially -- among many other like clarities --
> to the texture of a Big Brother state conformed watery gray mud slime blob
> of Everything (Nothingness).

When have Christians ever compromised?

>
> He did not mean 'Christmas' with use of "Xmas." It is very well understood
> now by a vast majority of Christians -- plus a lot of the rest of us -- from
> a long experience now, that it insidiously stands for, and has always
> insidiously stood for, "anti-."

Christmas has nothing to do with shopping, and nothing to with Jesus,
the Christians just renamed the winter solstice. Just like Easter,
which is a corruption of Eoster.
These so called 'Christians' were nothing but a bunch of thieves

Maybe this will ring a bell,
Give or your money,
Or go to hell

Hell by the way, is the name of a Norse goddess, which once again they
stole.

>
> You aren't talking to a Christian here, but you are talking to a lifelong
> student of history (among many other things such as 'cosmology' and 'general
> semantics' for two), including history's panoramic ways, its shapes, its
> forms taken.

Then you will be aware of all the knowledge that Christians have
destroyed over the past 2 millenia, setting science and technology back
by about 1000 years.

>
> "You think you own a language?" Now we are circling back to what I was
> dealing with with when I started this thread. The answer is a qualified YES.
> Largely 'yes' now when it comes down to the study of usage and meanings to
> help penetrate through to the 'what', 'why', and even the 'who', in and
> behind writing and the spoken word, developing quicker, broader, deeper and
> clearer perceptions of the realities, especially quicker getting to clearer
> big picture realities. And before you attack again, I've already been twice
> tested in my first career to have natural abilities for this....stuff above.
> That plus high marks many times in proven performance in a long experience
> in differing applications of those abilities.

Tested for what, insanity?

>
> So, I expect such men, such so-called professionals and experts, as
> Stephen Hawking to know that telescopes can do no such thing as "probe deep
> into space" (meaning to "probe deep" into the Universe as it really is). I
> expect such men [with such brains as Stephen Hawking is known to have] to
> know better than to say or write anything like, "we can plot the positions
> of distant galaxies." The problem is they don't know any better, nor do they
> want to know better because even to begin to know better would begin to blow
> certain [religiously held to] premises to hell and gone -- blowing an entire
> [long in the building upon sand] cosmological edifice to hell and gone.
>

I guess the tests were positive!

> Addendum:
>
> I've long thought that -- possibly -- the more you work with 'light
> images' (to magnify or enhance the image as much as possible) striking
> lenses like the Hubble telescope's lenses, the more you [do to] the 'light'
> context itself of those "light images." The light itself isn't anything
> fixed. It isn't anything static. It isn't anything 'frozen' in any way,
> shape or form. It is quantum dynamic property. So the light is being
> manipulated as well. Two and possibly all three of the dimensions of the
> [quantum dynamic property] of the light itself are being changed in what
> they are from what they were before: changed as to [shape and/or form]
> skewing out of all reality -- after some ever longer and/or greater
> manipulation -- the "context."
>
> GLB

.

Quantcast