chat with carrie and alan on dimensions, beauty, and love

vashtari15: the dimension thing
vashtari15: ok- so the first dimension is a line right?
CrackerBabe707: btw julie, my head is actually hurting rite now...
vashtari15: , and the second dimension is aline perpendicular to that
vashtari15: hehe
kineticascetic: a plane
vashtari15: anyway- and the third dimension is a line perpendicular to those two- depth
kineticascetic: alot of planes
vashtari15: ok, the fourth dimension is supposedly time
vashtari15: right?
kineticascetic: time yeah
CrackerBabe707: so continue
vashtari15: ok- but there is no time- it's all a figment of our imaginations: it's a way to rationalize and measure that we came up with as human beings bc we like order. it doesn't exist, and yet they have 9 dimensions figured out-
vashtari15: but if each dimension is dependent on the previous one...
vashtari15: *lightbulb*
kineticascetic: one event lined up from the next is what we've dubbed time
vashtari15: but what is "after" after all?
vashtari15: what is "before"?
vashtari15: what is anything?
kineticascetic: hard to determine
kineticascetic: i know one thing
CrackerBabe707: brb...
kineticascetic: people blame their deaths on time when it is oxygen that kills them
kineticascetic: brb
vashtari15: and if you are going to go religiously, we have proof of thousands of years before humans came into existance: you say what is a day to god? exactly: who are we to say what is a day in any case? thus we have 6 dimensions named...
vashtari15: that aren't real
vashtari15: ... *waits*...
CrackerBabe707: im back
vashtari15: now we just have to wait for alan
CrackerBabe707: hehe
vashtari15: so- your opinion?
vashtari15: from your throbbing head?
vashtari15: lol
CrackerBabe707: i'll ponder on it when i'm feeling sane
CrackerBabe707: and able
vashtari15: yeah
kineticascetic: back
vashtari15: i think i will bring up "beautiful" ... blog entry next.
vashtari15: ok
vashtari15: so- your opinion on the time crap?
kineticascetic: i agree with the day thing
kineticascetic: actually yeah i agree
kineticascetic: i think time is our substitute for another idea
kineticascetic: just like an atom doesnt really exist
CrackerBabe707: but it's the concept that counts.. god shouldnt complain with what our minds can contemplate... we're only people
vashtari15: nobody said god was complaining
CrackerBabe707: so... even if it doesnt exist it keeps us from totally giong senile
CrackerBabe707: going*
CrackerBabe707: i know
CrackerBabe707: but still
vashtari15: and people lived for a long time without the concept of minutes or hours, or days, weeks, etc.
CrackerBabe707: if we spent time wondering about that then we wouldnt have great minds to figure out how to make our lives better
kineticascetic: i dont guess they needed it
vashtari15: all they knew was that they got older, died, animals moved, things grew, died, grew , died.
kineticascetic: but its just like capitalism
vashtari15: nobody NEEDS time.
kineticascetic: putting order into it added a new level of control
vashtari15: it's all a cycle that we are moving through: and there is no new level of control: just imagined control
vashtari15: which is basically the idea
kineticascetic: right
CrackerBabe707: that makes sence
kineticascetic: but without that imagined control we'd have serious limitations
kineticascetic: your entire day at school is based on a schedule
vashtari15: but it still doesn't mean that time exists: therefore none of the other dimensions which ppl are observing so studiously exists either
vashtari15: and?
kineticascetic: so a schedule alllows a certain amount of info to be given to you in certain intervals of time
vashtari15: ppls lives for thousands of years were based on schedules of how the land grew, died, prospered, perished: but they never necessarily needed time to live
kineticascetic: doing this effectively promotes learning
vashtari15: so does sticking you out in the wild where if you don't learn, you die.
CrackerBabe707: well if we think it exists and we base our lives and scheduals on time and wild people would be really weird
kineticascetic: once again i shout a huge amen
kineticascetic: but anyways
CrackerBabe707: wow that was a big typo on my thing...
kineticascetic: about the being thrown in the wild thing i mean
CrackerBabe707: no, i meant to say 'everything can move accordingly and we wont have to worry about it so much' in between those two thoughts, or something along those lines
CrackerBabe707: which makes a lot better sence
vashtari15: we simply have become accustomed to this supposed control that we have over our lives, over "time"
vashtari15: and everything esle due first to our want of order out of the chaos before we named a nonexistant item to be used to our advantage
kineticascetic: but you have to admit, its been pretty effective
kineticascetic: now personally its a different story
vashtari15: so? many pointless things have been effective: still: whether it is affective or not has no bearing on its reality
kineticascetic: thses industrial people that use time aren't like me
CrackerBabe707: it's better then letting ur life slip pass you by... personally IS a whole nother topic
vashtari15: but you can't lose time if it doesn't exist
kineticascetic: my point is
kineticascetic: time does exist but time is not what makes plants grow or people die
kineticascetic: its just a thought about that general area
kineticascetic: and dangit i just said something i didnt wanna say
kineticascetic: fine, it doesnt exist
vashtari15: time does not exist; not as our concept of time would will it to, in any case
vashtari15: our denotation and connotation of time have gotten seriously scrambled
CrackerBabe707: well humans have tampered with a lot of concepts
CrackerBabe707: it tends to be our nature dont you think
vashtari15: yes- and that's the problem
kineticascetic: you got that right
vashtari15: but this isn't tampering
kineticascetic: alot of times i get mad at myself for wasting what doesnt exist
kineticascetic: that being time
vashtari15: this is just... in a way: stupidity
vashtari15: not what you just said alan
CrackerBabe707: once again a trait of humanity
vashtari15: yes
kineticascetic: i dont know..i think its ignorance
vashtari15: sigh... we could go on forever... lets not
kineticascetic: heres a thought
vashtari15: go ahead
vashtari15: then thats it
kineticascetic: what would the world be like if we had not invented time
CrackerBabe707: aloof
vashtari15: there wouldn't be clocks... not necessarily aloof- you have to remember we lived for hundreds if not thousands of year before the concept of time came to be
kineticascetic: well true, you'd get a sense of constantly walking in the dark but it may be interesting
CrackerBabe707: without time there wouldnt really be a good way to define age either
CrackerBabe707: not like there is now
vashtari15: what is age anyway?
CrackerBabe707: i mean, generally sure, but still
vashtari15: ppl in other societies are considered grown up at carrie's age?
CrackerBabe707: yes
vashtari15: getting married possibly at nine
vashtari15: depending
vashtari15: on... stuff...
vashtari15: yeah
vashtari15: and its ridiculous
kineticascetic: age is the current amount of oxygen youve consumed
vashtari15: age isn't that important
CrackerBabe707: thank you julie
kineticascetic: as far as mental development i think it is
CrackerBabe707: well am i ur typical 13 year old?
CrackerBabe707: mentally in ne cas
CrackerBabe707: e
vashtari15: not necessarily: ppl can be more mentally developed at the age of 13 than some are at 23
kineticascetic: but imagine how much stable the world might be if people had a way of determining "readiness" instead of relying on age
vashtari15: it depends on the person
CrackerBabe707: yeah, but not many people understand that and look down at some of the young but great minds
CrackerBabe707: i mean, i have friends younger and smarter then me
kineticascetic: i see 30 year olds that act like they are 9
vashtari15: exactly- our twisted sense of perception and need for order have caused more distress than necessary due to the incorrect denotations and connotations we derive when we learn a person's age
vashtari15: relying upon that rather than their specific personal make-up
kineticascetic: right
kineticascetic: it should be based on stages of development
CrackerBabe707: in a lot of aspects
kineticascetic: like most african tribes have a way of determining adulthood
kineticascetic: umm...
vashtari15: and, there are 6 yr olds in college, while there are 31 yr olds not past the maturity level of the average 3 yr old... who is to say that the 31 yr old should have a say in our government, or should be given higher precedence than..
vashtari15: the 6 yr old
kineticascetic: right
vashtari15: the 6 yr old is certainly more worldly and informed than the 31 yr old, yet is he/she that would be more likely taken seriously, even handicap in mind, bc ppl are so brainwashed to the ridiculous expectations of society...
CrackerBabe707: and what about older people who havent experienced what would be necessary for making decissions considering that topic
vashtari15: as to not take into account the genius of the 6 yr old, simply due to their age
CrackerBabe707: if they weren't appreciated or taken into consideration then what would be their motivation to continue
CrackerBabe707: intellectually and otherwise
vashtari15: ok
vashtari15: ... are we done?
vashtari15: maybe?
CrackerBabe707: i have no idea
CrackerBabe707: ask alan
kineticascetic: i'd suggest that we change around all those ideas
kineticascetic: but no one would listen
CrackerBabe707: we could find a way to make them
kineticascetic: this world already based on industrialization so there's little hope of it turning around
vashtari15: yeah... ok- here is what i decided- i am posting the first part of this chat on insanereasoning, the second part on my thoughts
CrackerBabe707: how successfull that would be is... well, yeah, what u just said
kineticascetic: we could attempt i suppose
CrackerBabe707: but how in the world could we
CrackerBabe707: and who would listen
kineticascetic: time is an invention geared toward industry just like capitalism
kineticascetic: however its so deep in what we are told that denouncing it sounds immediately ridiculous
CrackerBabe707: but how many people normally consider the way they've lived since birth is nonexistant?
CrackerBabe707: it wouldnt HARM anyone to say... but...
kineticascetic: it'd require some explaining
CrackerBabe707: if no1 would accept it in ne case...
vashtari15: how can we make the whole world listen to us when we are denouncing something we have been taught from the cradle- that time doesn't exist and is there fore irrelevant to the way of life they are living
CrackerBabe707: some?
kineticascetic: well its not irrelevant to their means but it certainly is to one thats more useful to richer, happier lives
vashtari15: and we ourselves are young- so how many ppl would take young ppl seriously talking about something that would in the end benefit us if they were to come to the idea we are spreading
CrackerBabe707: especailly considering we're already socailly considered insane... atleast julie and me to my knowledge...
CrackerBabe707: only other youthfull ppl MIGHT listen
CrackerBabe707: and they'd have to be pretty out there
vashtari15: and how many of them would get it???
vashtari15: how many of them would truly care?
CrackerBabe707: depending
CrackerBabe707: not many
CrackerBabe707: except the people tired of being treated like less then they are
vashtari15: most of my other friends that i have tried to have this conversation with tell me i'm insane, i think too much, and eventually to shut the hell up
CrackerBabe707: all those that;ve always been called too young and not sane and all that stuff....
kineticascetic: wait
vashtari15: and they are tired of being treated the way they are
kineticascetic: that baffles me
kineticascetic: how is any of this insane
CrackerBabe707: which part>?
kineticascetic: any of it
CrackerBabe707: i suggest u re read it
vashtari15: first off- the fact that we are denouncing something everybody knows about, believes in, and lives by would seem insane to most ppl
kineticascetic: why?kineticascetic: to most ppl
kineticascetic: and just like tiem, that doesnt make it a reality
vashtari15: bc you take away something someon has grown up with it disconcerts them- they reject it
vashtari15: no one wants to hear that
CrackerBabe707: becuase they cling to what they know. especailly in a time like these when people are confused about issues ...
kineticascetic: no one with money that is
CrackerBabe707: and the people with money have gotten rich the way things are so why change it>
vashtari15: do you remember how christians reacted at first when we discovered dinosaurs existed thousands of years b4 humans ever developed
vashtari15: or how jewish, muslim, and christians would have to change many things if we found out extraterrestral beings lived?
kineticascetic: not much
CrackerBabe707: enough to make some people break
vashtari15: yes
CrackerBabe707: depending on their faith and emotional security
vashtari15: it sort of defies a bit in the bible, torah, quran.
vashtari15: there was a scramble when they had to change and said what is a day to god?
kineticascetic: the word "mankind" is used alot in the bible tho
vashtari15: you still have to say it upsets things a bit
CrackerBabe707: a bit?!?
vashtari15: if something tries to wreck or change things ppl have known, or thought they knew were in existence for hundreds of years, they will take a while to adjust, if they do
vashtari15: that has to be understood
vashtari15: and i hope we can wrap this up in the next... 10 min
kineticascetic: well it might sense "all of creation" hadn't been thought to be small marine lifeforms on mars
vashtari15: cuz i have to get off then
CrackerBabe707: poor julie.
vashtari15: yeah
vashtari15: so can we work on the wrapping up ?
kineticascetic: but i blame that on an example for that situation not being present
vashtari15: yeah
CrackerBabe707: well, julie, are u posting this?
vashtari15: definitely
CrackerBabe707: we can always go over it later then
CrackerBabe707: since you and i both have to go
kineticascetic: when moses was writting, for example, he couldve had the amoutn of time it wouldve taken to list possibilities
vashtari15: but still- you know i hate loose ends
CrackerBabe707: yeah
vashtari15: "time"
kineticascetic: so generalities work
vashtari15: lol
kineticascetic: lol
kineticascetic: space between him sitting down and becaming irritated from carpal tunnel syndrome
kineticascetic: there
vashtari15: also- i hate to do this... but... *sigh; shrug* oh well....
CrackerBabe707: the last thing i have to say is this: it wouldnt be so very opposing if there was an alternative
CrackerBabe707: but that gets into a whole nother issue
vashtari15: ok-the whole 7 days thing: why would the ppl who wrote the bbl say 7 days in gods terms when they were writing the bible for humans. and if so, why not say "in god's terms"???
CrackerBabe707: and finding one would be a bit immpossible
vashtari15: and if not, why would god have told them a lie
vashtari15: just me being me and questioning absolutely everything...
vashtari15: again
kineticascetic: i must say im guilty of the "what is a day?" thing, but i've been forced to denounce that arguement since im very criticle of our scientific analysis up to this pint
CrackerBabe707: point
vashtari15: lol
vashtari15: carrie- mini-moi
vashtari15: lol
kineticascetic: lol
CrackerBabe707: shh
kineticascetic: pint
CrackerBabe707: lol
CrackerBabe707: that was a smart one
kineticascetic: because i think many of them are drunk
kineticascetic: lol jk
CrackerBabe707: nice
CrackerBabe707: yall do realize it's 10:00
vashtari15: carrie? your views in the next 4 min?
vashtari15: nope
CrackerBabe707: yes
vashtari15: 956
CrackerBabe707: *shakes fist*
CrackerBabe707: well, my views are kinda hazed rite now...
CrackerBabe707: iono
kineticascetic: i feel like im sharpening mine by being in this discussion
kineticascetic: and its time that always brings them to a close
vashtari15: yeah, don't you?
kineticascetic: *shakes fist*
vashtari15: lol
vashtari15: stupid time
kineticascetic: dont i what?
vashtari15: which doesn't exist
CrackerBabe707: gosh
vashtari15: sharpen your views by being in these discussions
kineticascetic: i do
vashtari15: rhetorical question
CrackerBabe707: i never really thought of this topic before now
kineticascetic: and i look forward to more
vashtari15: hell yes!
CrackerBabe707: Julie... always making me think
kineticascetic: me neither
vashtari15: next topic- the stereotypical beauty
vashtari15: hehe- don't i tho?
CrackerBabe707: grr
CrackerBabe707: dude... i gots to get off
CrackerBabe707: *tears*
kineticascetic: aww
vashtari15: oh- read up on my "beautiful" post on mythoughts
vashtari15: for pointers
CrackerBabe707: maybe i wont have to tho
kineticascetic: i have already
vashtari15: i do
vashtari15: in like 1.5 min
vashtari15: i think...
CrackerBabe707: lets not go into time
vashtari15: yeah
CrackerBabe707: lol
kineticascetic: uhhh... beauty is related to fondness i think
vashtari15: crap
CrackerBabe707: what
vashtari15: this chat is 32 pgs long
vashtari15: lol
kineticascetic: lol
CrackerBabe707: lol
kineticascetic: dang
CrackerBabe707: thats hilarious
vashtari15: oops
vashtari15: g2g
CrackerBabe707: k
vashtari15: bye!!! much love
CrackerBabe707: ttyl
kineticascetic: oh ok
kineticascetic: *hug*
kineticascetic: bye!
vashtari15: *hug!
You have just entered room "oompaloompateletubbie."
CrackerBabe707 has entered the room.
kineticascetic has entered the room.
vashtari15: stereotypical beauty anyone?
kineticascetic: so uhh
kineticascetic: yeah sure
CrackerBabe707: do u really wanna get me started on that./
vashtari15: yes
CrackerBabe707: hehehe
vashtari15: ok... first, who has read my post on that?
CrackerBabe707: are we gonna be the only
CrackerBabe707: nvm that
CrackerBabe707: i havent
kineticascetic: based on sex ---> shouldn't be
CrackerBabe707: huh>?
kineticascetic: i think i have
CrackerBabe707: i havent
CrackerBabe707: *sighs*
CrackerBabe707: if its recent i havent neway
vashtari15: not for a while
vashtari15: like- sept
vashtari15: 28
vashtari15: something
CrackerBabe707: i think i remember
kineticascetic: ok
kineticascetic: thoughts?
vashtari15: you can go skim it
CrackerBabe707: i cant check right now ... *glares at mom* ,,,
vashtari15: urgh
vashtari15: um... one sec
CrackerBabe707: ok
vashtari15: Beautiful- Definition as by The Merriam Webster Dictionary: characterized by beauty; lovely.
vashtari15: I have to admit, many people tell me that I am in some way physically attractive, or appealing to the eyes. But they have phrased it in so many ways. Hot, sexy, pretty, cute, beautiful, attractive, gorgeous, etc.
vashtari15: The list goes on and on. Frankly, some of these I find a bit degrading. I still accept it as a compliment, because that is how (I suppose) it was meant, but the words many people use are certainly not my preference.
vashtari15: For instance- hot/sexy. Both of these words sound like the person saying them is attracted to your body in a sexual manner. Which is not exactly what I want to hear.
kineticascetic: oh, THAT
kineticascetic: yes i know this one
vashtari15: yeah
vashtari15: ok
CrackerBabe707: i've heard this one too
kineticascetic: and i have a distinct opinion on it
CrackerBabe707: and we talked about it after a vocal lesson
vashtari15: yeah
vashtari15: so... shall we all toss our opinions into the crazy thought pot that is oompaloompateletubbie?
kineticascetic: i think it can be applied in layers
CrackerBabe707: the rest of your distinct opinion?
kineticascetic: like a person can be cute in certain ways, beautiful in certain ways, hot in others
CrackerBabe707: yeah
CrackerBabe707: that makes sence
vashtari15: yeah
vashtari15: sense
vashtari15: not sence
CrackerBabe707: u know what i mean ok
CrackerBabe707: in ne case
vashtari15: yes
kineticascetic: althought beautiful is a term with a certain amoutn of power behind it and represends a general understanding
vashtari15: i really don't know how long i have on here...
kineticascetic: goes best with radiance
CrackerBabe707: get over it
vashtari15: i think thats what i said in mine
CrackerBabe707: (directed at julie)
kineticascetic: yeah
kineticascetic: it works
vashtari15: In any case, beautiful just seems more respectful, and more awe-inspiring, and just more... encompassing. It's like- you're drawn to them because of their looks, but not in a sexual way- just because they look... amazing.
vashtari15: I guess, it's like saying that they're ... radiant... for lack of a better term.
kineticascetic: exactly
vashtari15: "from blog"
vashtari15: so yeah
CrackerBabe707: well, it would really depend on how you say the word... like those guys who say 'ur beautiful' just because they know it works
kineticascetic: its got alot of respect behind it
vashtari15: yeah
vashtari15: but the word in itself minus the false meanings guys may put it to use for
kineticascetic: i hold back the word for the most part
vashtari15: or girls for that part
vashtari15: you seem like the type of person who would
CrackerBabe707: and if you keep saying a word because of what ppl will take it as, then ppl will say it in a diffrent sense and that would change the view on the word completely
kineticascetic: just like i hold back the word "love"
CrackerBabe707: gosh how many guys are like that
CrackerBabe707: no offense
kineticascetic: thus the whole time thing
kineticascetic: lol anyways wrong subject
CrackerBabe707: hehe
kineticascetic: not many? i know
kineticascetic: wait..nvm
vashtari15: ...is that the word "love" has been worn out from centuries of use: I don't say it lightly, but it scares me to trust it too much. "blog on dreamless slumber: what you don't know about me"
CrackerBabe707: but hey, whats worse is the guys spilling out the big word when they dont even know you...
kineticascetic: i read that
kineticascetic: yeah
vashtari15: that was... wait...
vashtari15: oh wow... that was august...
kineticascetic: lol ....umm
vashtari15: hm...
kineticascetic: i was gonan refer to someone
vashtari15: i didn't remember that being so short a time ago
kineticascetic: she's going out with steward...
CrackerBabe707: i think i might have read up on that
vashtari15: hm... yeah
kineticascetic: i forgot her name
vashtari15: stewart
kineticascetic: sara
kineticascetic: sara doesnt understand that word
CrackerBabe707: tyler ... remember him
vashtari15: yeah
CrackerBabe707: well theres those people who think that love at first sight is all pure and everything
vashtari15: hehe... it's not
CrackerBabe707: but when people wont show the real thems how can you love them
kineticascetic: the sole reason for sara begrudging david strohm is because he understands what the word means and she doesnt
vashtari15: yup
vashtari15: to both of you
CrackerBabe707: but if you never try to love then how will you know when theres the true emotion
CrackerBabe707: it would take a few mistakes
CrackerBabe707: once again depending on the person
kineticascetic: i think appearance and love can go hand in hand based on perception
kineticascetic: ah
kineticascetic: well heres another thing
kineticascetic: i dont think its an emotion
CrackerBabe707: really
CrackerBabe707: why not
kineticascetic: its a choice
CrackerBabe707: not necessarily
vashtari15: i have to agree with alan
vashtari15: bc
kineticascetic: affection is an emotion, love is different
CrackerBabe707: it can be avoided by unwillingness
CrackerBabe707: and theres the whole 'chemical thingy' explaining love
vashtari15: emotions are simply chemical reactions in the brain- love has to be something stronger than that.
vashtari15: affection=emotion
CrackerBabe707: it would all depend on your defenition of love
kineticascetic: love is about committment and trust
vashtari15: love=subconscious choice
kineticascetic: and mutuality
CrackerBabe707: you dont always trust the person your convinced you love
CrackerBabe707: *caughs the word parents*
vashtari15: then you aren't loving them at that point in time
kineticascetic: i once thought of what i would say if sanna wanted to leave me
kineticascetic: my very, very first thought was "ok"
vashtari15: and how many times have you convinced yourself of something that isn't true
kineticascetic: i cant explain that
CrackerBabe707: who really can
CrackerBabe707: but about the convincing part... if you didnt truly believe you loved the person then it would it matter how much trust you had for a replacable person
kineticascetic: but i think ive bonded with her enough to be concerned with her interests over mine
vashtari15: time for example... not true... but we convince ourselves it is- the same way that we convince ourselves that affection has matured into love, or that we "can't live without them" whoever they are
kineticascetic: "can't live without them" means we use them to validate us
vashtari15: yeah

kineticascetic: and that road nearly always ends in failure
vashtari15: sorta what i mean
CrackerBabe707: give someone your everything and have nothing if they leave... as for convincing (again) you could live without them... although it wouldnt be the same...
kineticascetic: the same? i think love is being greatful for the other person's very existance
kineticascetic: *existence
vashtari15: if it shuts me off in 3 min, i'm sorry
CrackerBabe707: it would be changed... first you were him with her (or w/e the gender) and then you were jsut you
kineticascetic: oh ok
CrackerBabe707: poor julie
kineticascetic: it was always you
vashtari15: but when you say him with her, you are putting two together, which isn't really practical or safe for that matter
CrackerBabe707: but it wouldnt seem like that
vashtari15: again- basing existence on other person
kineticascetic: but with real love you would have bonded with them to the point where seperation wouldn't make you lose that bond
CrackerBabe707: because if you believe you love them then you in some ways become one... and some seperations, like death of one, are unavoidable to a certain extent
vashtari15: and yet this bond doesn't necessarily make you him with her it just... crap- can't explain
vashtari15: it's a concept of two together, not one and one coming together to make one
CrackerBabe707: well if your in love would it not seem like you become just one
kineticascetic: thats a marriage concept, the two making one thing
vashtari15: it's the concept that you can be yourself with them being themselves, and still being together and connected, and being happy for the other person being themself.
CrackerBabe707: yeah, that makes sence
CrackerBabe707: sense
CrackerBabe707: scuse me
kineticascetic: but of course, from our divorce rate its obvious that we can never in love become one
CrackerBabe707: neways
vashtari15: and if you become one, then when you split or whatever, you are left only with a half, and half's can't support itself
CrackerBabe707: you need something to fill up the empty space
vashtari15: no- divorce rate shows ppl jump in too quickly and dont have a sense
vashtari15: *of "love'
kineticascetic: right
CrackerBabe707: whether religion or another partner... right (divorce rate thing)
kineticascetic: its something i hope sara learns before that time
vashtari15: yeah
CrackerBabe707: well if it's something you yourself havent experienced then how would you know that it was wrong
kineticascetic: ignorance is a potent force i guess
vashtari15: that and sometimes you can just feel that something is off
vashtari15: gut feeling, ya know?
CrackerBabe707: well if you want to believe all is well it's perfectly possible to believe untill you're proved wrong
kineticascetic: and alot of people ignore that apparently