On Jul 24, 6:56 pm, RichardM <r.menda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> At least at the quantum level, you could speak of Schroedinger's
> Apple, in which, until the wave function is collapsed, the apple is
> there and is not there. This was probably the apple that Eve handed
> to Adam--and the rest is (questionable) history.
I suppose the serpent was the probability wave itself. ;-)
Which is why we can never see that serpent, as it only works in
thought experiements.
> On Jul 24, 12:59 pm, Vamadevananda <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can
> > recognise.
> > So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example
> > of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is
> > not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an
> > indispensable one !
> > On Jul 24, 5:03 pm, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 24 Jul, 12:48, Peter <peterdaltoni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the
> > > > ages.
> > > > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> > > By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract
> > > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss
> > > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical
> > > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you
> > > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > > > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest
> > > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that
> > > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and
> > > > on....
> > > > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them
> > > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We
> > > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing
> > > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum.
> > > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is
> > > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes
> > > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But
> > > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence
> > > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not
> > > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is
> > > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous,
> > > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of
> > > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced
> > > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a
> > > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag
> > > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came
> > > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH
> > > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever
> > > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not
> > > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> After I'd read it, I was so impressed I made contact with one of > the scientists (Hal Puthoff) mentioned in the book. We exchanged a > couple or three emails back about a couple of years ago. He's a very > approachable guy and certainly open to new ways of thinking about > things.
(Vis) Hal Puthoff! I am sure Pat knows him well and is happy to accept him at face value.This is meant for others who may not have cared to check about this person. See the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6Hz1DDCMOQ To the interviewer's question regarding Uri Geller's ability to reproduce hidden materials, Hal Puthoff answers: "there is no doubt in my mind that Geller can do it"
(Pottsie)
I'm not an apologist for Putoff, but a 2 minute YouTube video is hardly an indictment. YouTubes are a great way to libel an individual. The video
(Vis)
I personally think that Uri Geller is just another magician.
(Pottsie) Geller was shown as a fraud in the matter of spoons. I remember seeing the Tonight Show episode with The Amazing Randi that exposed him.
(Vis)
Whatever may be the academic qualifications of Hal Puthoff, I would never consider him as a reliable authority on scientific matters.He looks pathetically Gullible, at the least. Viswanathan. India.
(Pottsie)
LOOKS condemn an individual?????? come on.
I agree that Researchers need to be skeptical, but saying someone's research is unacceptable based on a YouTube Video is a bit much. This video is obviously an out-take of a larger production and to make any inference from it alone about the credentials or believability of Puthoff is a bit much.
Though I'm not a scientist, I would think that what is needed to be a top notch scientist is a healthy balance between scepticism and open-mindedness. The question about Puthoff's open-mindedness is apparently not in question. What the question should be is whether he has enough health scepticism. I'm swayed in neither direction. Certainly this video wouldn't do it.
Namaste
Pottsie
At 15, I thought I was crazy an everyone else was sane. At 22, I thought I was sane and everyone else was crazy. At 55, on an Insanity Scale of 1-10... I'm a 20, and everyone else is a 19! - Pottsie
Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can recognise.
So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an indispensable one !
> > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the > > ages.
> > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and > > on....
> > On Jul 23, 6:39 am, Pottsie wrote:
> > > Pat,
> > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum. > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous, > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> > > Namaste
> > > Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
At 15, I thought I was crazy an everyone else was sane. At 22, I thought I was sane and everyone else was crazy. At 55, on an Insanity Scale of 1-10... I'm a 20, and everyone else is a 19! - Pottsie
> Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can
> recognise.
> So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example
> of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is
> not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an
> indispensable one !
> On Jul 24, 5:03 pm, Pat
> wrote:
> > On 24 Jul, 12:48, Peter
> wrote:
> > > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the
> > > ages.
> > > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> > By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract
> > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss
> > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical
> > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you
> > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest
> > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that
> > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and
> > > on....
> > > On Jul 23, 6:39 am, Pottsie
> wrote:
> > > > Pat,
> > > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them
> > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We
> > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing
> > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum.
> > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is
> > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes
> > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But
> > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence
> > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not
> > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is
> > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous,
> > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of
> > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced
> > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a
> > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag
> > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came
> > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH
> > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever
> > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not
> > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> > > > Namaste
> > > > Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> At 15, I thought I was crazy an everyone else was sane. At 22, I thought I was sane and everyone else was crazy. At 55, on an Insanity Scale of 1-10... I'm a 20, and everyone else is a 19! - Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
> At least at the quantum level, you could speak of Schroedinger's
> Apple, in which, until the wave function is collapsed, the apple is
> there and is not there. This was probably the apple that Eve handed
> to Adam--and the rest is (questionable) history.
> On Jul 24, 12:59 pm, Vamadevananda <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can
> > recognise.
> > So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example
> > of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is
> > not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an
> > indispensable one !
> > On Jul 24, 5:03 pm, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 24 Jul, 12:48, Peter <peterdaltoni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the
> > > > ages.
> > > > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> > > By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract
> > > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss
> > > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical
> > > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you
> > > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > > > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest
> > > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that
> > > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and
> > > > on....
> > > > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them
> > > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We
> > > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing
> > > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum.
> > > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is
> > > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes
> > > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But
> > > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence
> > > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not
> > > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is
> > > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous,
> > > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of
> > > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced
> > > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a
> > > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag
> > > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came
> > > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH
> > > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever
> > > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not
> > > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> On 24 Jul, 18:56, RichardM <r.menda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > At least at the quantum level, you could speak of Schroedinger's
> > Apple, in which, until the wave function is collapsed, the apple is
> > there and is not there. This was probably the apple that Eve handed
> > to Adam--and the rest is (questionable) history.
> > On Jul 24, 12:59 pm, Vamadevananda <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can
> > > recognise.
> > > So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example
> > > of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is
> > > not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an
> > > indispensable one !
> > > On Jul 24, 5:03 pm, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 24 Jul, 12:48, Peter <peterdaltoni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the
> > > > > ages.
> > > > > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> > > > By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract
> > > > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss
> > > > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical
> > > > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you
> > > > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > > > > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest
> > > > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that
> > > > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and
> > > > > on....
> > > > > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > > > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > > > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > > > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them
> > > > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We
> > > > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing
> > > > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > > > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum.
> > > > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is
> > > > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes
> > > > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But
> > > > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence
> > > > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not
> > > > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > > > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is
> > > > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous,
> > > > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of
> > > > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced
> > > > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > > > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a
> > > > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > > > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > > > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag
> > > > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came
> > > > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH
> > > > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > > > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever
> > > > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not
> > > > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> > > > > > Namaste
> > > > > > Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can
> > recognise.
> > So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example
> > of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is
> > not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an
> > indispensable one !
> > On Jul 24, 5:03 pm, Pat
> > wrote:
> > > On 24 Jul, 12:48, Peter
> > wrote:
> > > > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the
> > > > ages.
> > > > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> > > By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract
> > > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss
> > > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical
> > > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you
> > > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > > > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest
> > > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that
> > > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and
> > > > on....
> > > > On Jul 23, 6:39 am, Pottsie
> > wrote:
> > > > > Pat,
> > > > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them
> > > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We
> > > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing
> > > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum.
> > > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is
> > > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes
> > > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But
> > > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence
> > > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not
> > > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is
> > > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous,
> > > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of
> > > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced
> > > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a
> > > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag
> > > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came
> > > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH
> > > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever
> > > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not
> > > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> > > > > Namaste
> > > > > Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > - Show quoted text -
> > At 15, I thought I was crazy an everyone else was sane. At 22, I thought I was sane and everyone else was crazy. At 55, on an Insanity Scale of 1-10... I'm a 20, and everyone else is a 19! - Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
Molly, when we are experiencing the finite, we too are finite ! It
would be untrue to believe that we are infinite while we are hankering
after something finite, like an icecream, or are lost in the pleasure
of the finite experience anchored to, say, the taste of icecream.
We ( know we ) are infinite when we are not identified with our
( finite ) ego - identity ; are not identified and attached with our
own ( finite ) idea or knowledge ; are not focussed and attached with
our own ( finite ) experience ... the taste, and the object of our
sense of taste, nor even with the past impressions of such experiences
in the mind ; are not anchored to, supported by or attached to our
own name, body, form, or life - force ; and, are not attached or
identified in the least with the ( finite ) names and forms of the
objects in the universe.
It was difficult for me to express my thoughts accurately, though I've
tried. But, that doesn't mean the concept itself is difficult or
complex. To appreciate that, we only need to ' observe ' our being in
the state of deep sleep !
When the finite is present, the infinite is ( apparently ) not ; when
the infinite is present ( in our experience ), the finite is known to
be not.
On Jul 25, 1:57 pm, Molly Brogan <mbro...@mollybroganenterprises.com>
wrote:
> > > Absence and nothingness pertains to objects we know of, we can
> > > recognise.
> > > So, we can say, " there are no apples on the ground." It's an example
> > > of the absence or nothingness that has been spoken of. Hence, zero is
> > > not only a very understandable and acceptable concept, it is an
> > > indispensable one !
> > > On Jul 24, 5:03 pm, Pat
> > > wrote:
> > > > On 24 Jul, 12:48, Peter
> > > wrote:
> > > > > This brings to mind something that has been pondered throughout the
> > > > > ages.
> > > > > "Can absence be present and nothingness exist?"
> > > > By definition, not in a material sense, only in an abstract
> > > > sense. They exist as abstract concepts, which is why we can discuss
> > > > them insofar as writing them down. But, as they represent logical
> > > > impossibilities, you will not find any 'absence' present, nor will you
> > > > discover the existence of 'nothingness'.
> > > > > So with the study of matter, even when we break down to the smallest
> > > > > particle that our instruments of today can measure, somehow that
> > > > > particle just but its nature can be split in half, and on and on and
> > > > > on....
> > > > > > I think I just thought of something that may help (hinder) your quest
> > > > > > to find out what connects quanta, albeit it a philosophical point
> > > > > > rather than a physical one.
> > > > > > You have two objects. Two of anything. Quanta or Sardines. For them
> > > > > > to communicate or interact there MUST be a medium between them. We
> > > > > > look at the two objects and see nothing, and say there is nothing
> > > > > > there. But that is a trick of the mind.
> > > > > > The Universe abhors a vacuum. And Nothing is the ultimate vacuum.
> > > > > > There is no such thing as Nothing. Nothingness DOESN'T exist! It is
> > > > > > the true figment of our imagination. We think of Existence sometimes
> > > > > > as this great big "Thing" floating on a background of Nothingness. But
> > > > > > it's not. Existence doesn't end and Non-existence
> > > > > > begins. Existence goes on forever. If "Nothing" is not
> > > > > > there....there has to be SOMETHING....even if we can't see it.
> > > > > > The problem with this is is that once you define what it is that is
> > > > > > there, you will have to prove that THAT substance is continuous,
> > > > > > reaching from object to object. In my rudimentary understanding of
> > > > > > Physics, that is what happened to Atomic Theory when it was replaced
> > > > > > by Quantum Theory.
> > > > > > Another way of looking at it is: Sound Waves don't travel through a
> > > > > > vacuum. There must be something to wave.
> > > > > > There is a Zen mondo that goes:
> > > > > > Two monks were arguing over a flag. One monk claimed it was the flag
> > > > > > that was waving. The other claimed it was the wind. The Master came
> > > > > > along, rapped them both with his stick, and said, "You are BOTH
> > > > > > wrong. It is your mind that waves!"
> > > > > > The medium between the quanta is Mind. No-Thing. Spirit. Whatever
> > > > > > is there will not appear until we observe it. The "object" will not
> > > > > > appear until the Observer shows up! :D
> > > > > > Namaste
> > > > > > Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > At 15, I thought I was crazy an everyone else was sane. At 22, I thought I was sane and everyone else was crazy. At 55, on an Insanity Scale of 1-10... I'm a 20, and everyone else is a 19! - Pottsie- Hide quoted text -
