Celestino's Page

Well, you may have been taught that in school, which didn't take into account new studies and research done in the 21st century, by people like Christine Davis and her team from the University of Glasgow, and Dr. Steven Durr from Germany, who did experiments and computer calculations to show that, actually, the apparent solidity of matter is made possible by ''the fizzing away'' of quarks and gluons in the quantum vacuum, or as physicists call it, quantum fluctuations.

In other words, their VIBRATION or resonant frequency, determines the level of solidity for objects. Of course, the reality is far more complex than that, and solids really are solid, until the base vibrational frequency of the atom is changed. What we call solid is only the energetic structure of atoms, vibrating at a very slow frequency, making them ''bound together''. When we raise the frequency, the atoms start coming apart. And that's how it's possible to turn a solid into a liquid, or a solid into a gas. And, on a more esoteric level, that's how it's possible to put your hand through a wall, by manipulating the vibrational frequency of the atoms in your hand, and the wall!

Now I'm no expert on this, to be honest, science and math is not my real interest, but I do know enough about it to say that...I know enough about it lol If you really want a true in depth explanation of this, there is more than enough information on the web, or you can go read books like Michael Talbots ''The Holographic Universe''. Or go read Dr. Craig Hogans work where he describes the experiments he's done to show why he believes the universe is a giant hologram. Or you can go read about neurophysiologist Karl Pribram, whos research into how the brain stores memory has led him to conclude that the brain is really a complex hologram.

But that's what he said. Go read his essays, or go watch some of his videos on youtube, where he explains it in his own words. Time and space, which actually are the same thing, are illusory, relative to the observer. They are not linear and solid. And how can matter be solid, if it is made of atoms which are 99% empty space. Obviously that isn't what reality is, there is something more to it than that.

And this whole Big Bang theory, is just a theory. You state that Hubble ''discovered the Big Bang'' no he didn't. All he discovered was that galaxies move. That's it. And more recent discoveries of the 21st century have shown that like, atoms, and planets, and solar systems, galaxies move in an elliptical orbit, around what might be a central sun of the universe. I guess this is where the Big Bang happened, and it makes no sense. First there was nothing, a Big Bang happened, by itself, for no reason, and magically, the universe became, and life formed in primeval soup, by accident, and eventually led to 21st century human civilization. It's a complete ridiculous idea, but hey, scientists say that, it must be true. Scientists also said the world was flat, until it was proved otherwise.

And again, I ask you to address the premises I made about DNA, and extraterrestrial civilizations. Why are you refusing to respond to that, it's the whole reason I am here debating with you. I want you to tell me why I'm wrong, for assuming that the 20 strands of DNA which are labeled ''junk'' are really our magical and ''superhuman'' qualities lying dormant, which will be activated the more we evolve. I want you to prove why science fiction today won't be science fact tomorrow. I want you to tell me why extraterrestrial beings can't be here, despite the amazing amount of evidence supporting it. Stop dodging the issue, stop being a coward.

Well, how do you know the steady state theory is wrong. It's just as legitimate as the Big Bang theory. The only reason you think it's wrong, is because you have a belief, key word there BELIEF, in the ludicrous Big Bang theory because you honestly have no idea what the universe is, or how it was created. Oh, and the universe is a CREATING universe, not a CREATED one. The process of creation never stops, and it never had a beginning. To assume the universe started out, some date ago in 'linear time'', proves you are caught in the illusion of time, which Einstein proved was an illusion.

''The mass appetite for the spectacular''? Well why not, people everywhere, including you I bet, feel deep down in your intuitive knowing, that life is much more than what it appears to be, people everywhere yearn for a more ''spectacular'' and more ''magical'' existence, not because they can't appreciate their limitations, but because we intuitively KNOW that life really is ''magical'' and ''spectacular''.

No that's not what he was referring to. In his book, he made it clear that he believed ''an advanced civilization transported the seeds of life to Earth in a spacecraft.'' And he wasn't the only person in the scientific community to think that, Sir Fred Hoyle, who wrote a book ''Life From Space'' said basically the same thing. He said:

''The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it.... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."

I mean, even on the Discovery Channel, I remember watching a presentation on how life began in ''volcanic soup'' and even they said how the chances of that happening are ''almost impossible'', but, oh, it happened. Somehow, someway. It is more probable to believe what Crick and Hoyle believed. Life on Earth was seeded by a higher intelligence.

And, aside from that, there is all the proof in the world, literally mountains of it, to suggest that beings of higher intelligence from other worlds, what we call ''aliens'', are indeed here now. We can go over the evidence if you want, but it might take all night.

Well okay. I never read about Cricks LSD use. And look, I've used drugs in the past too, when I was a young kid in high school, and I understand that it can ''open windows of perception'' like Huxley said. But, even you have to admit that rampant drug use, over time, is damaging to the psyche. I mean, smoking weed isn't unhealthy, at first...but over time, it absolutely becomes an unhealthy thing. And ideally, you shouldn't need drugs to get to levels of perception or feelings of ''high'' that you should be getting naturally.

Obviously, with enough time, use of drugs does cloud your perception. I know, I did a lot of drugs in high school, until I finally had enough of it and quit. But, the issue here isn't the use of drugs, it is everything we have talked about. So, address some of the things I brought up, for once. I find it rather sad that of all the things, you chose to defend your usage of drugs. Why don't you tell me of Cricks book, ''Life Itself'' and say how he is wrong for believing in intelligent design, and extraterrestrial DNA in the human genome.

And forgive me if I'm being harsh with you, this isn't really my style, this is just my old warrior-defender spirit coming up to the surface. But I won't back down, not for one instant, because I know we have the truth, and I will defend the truth and the innocence of those on this site who believe the right things but can't necessarily back it up when challenged.

And I want you to address every single point I've made to you in our diatribes, every one of them. Because they all are important and paint a picture which shows the true reality of what we here believe in. I am even willing to debate more, about any of these subjects, ascension, ETs, the New World Order, the ''science of the new age'', and more. Clearly you need to be taught, and I know that you are not stupid, you just need to open your mind a bit. Because I'm telling you brother, these things are real! There is so much more to life and this universe than we ever imagined! And in the marrow of your bones, you know it!