What happens to us when we die?

[Jan Sand]

Well, I will be 92 next week, and I have not even started to live a full life. There are lots and lots of things I am interested to getting involved with and whatever little you might think of your life, mine is still quite enjoyable and precious and the complete idiots that seem to be anxious to kill off all of us in the next few decades for no sensible purpose whatsoever do not strike me as very bright creatures. Any penguin or grasshopper has better instinct and a more intelligent view of the nature of life on the planet. Whatever their particular skills humanity at present is exhibiting only vicious stupidity inferior to any mosquito or clam.

[Sy Borg]

Any penguin or grasshopper has better instinct and a more intelligent view of the nature of life on the planet. Whatever their particular skills humanity at present is exhibiting only vicious stupidity inferior to any mosquito or clam.

There is one reason why humans are supposedly "out of touch with nature" (an laughable notion in itself since we are part of it). That is because humanity runs at a different tempo to other animals, in the same way as other animals operate at a higher tempo than plants, and plants are faster than geology. So, when we make changes, the slower running animals and plants often don't have time to adapt. The Earth is changing form, which it does from time to time.

There is nothing wrong with humans; this is just a dark delusion. Misanthropy is rife today and is a mindset that is profoundly out of touch with reality. People are filling their heads with poisonous species self-hatred without good reason. It's ironic since, without humans, the biosphere is utterly doomed, with humans and the species they can take with them its only hope of any persistence in the long term. Alas, it seems that in nature, as in society, restructuring today to assist tomorrow's survival creates collateral damage.

There is nothing wrong with any living or non living thing on Earth - they are each just small parts of the planet. However, human intelligence is so far beyond that of other animals that your claims are rendered simply flippant. To claim that humans are less intelligent than other species is akin to claiming black is white - like saying dogs are stronger than elephants or slugs have stronger body armour than beetles.

The issue is, rather, that intelligence is not the only valuable quality, hence the free well being currently "lead" by an ignoramus.

The question now is, what happens to the Earth's life when the Sun is dying? I do not think "preserve nature until we all die out" is a good option. I prefer the idea of humans doing whatever it takes, including impinging on the environment, to save as much of the Earth's information and biology as possible. This is akin to humans leaving the savannah that was turning into desert when the climate changed. One difference is that this time humans caused the climate to change, and that aspect is more akin to the blue-green algae did 250 million years ago. Most things died, but those that survived were mostly the very most extraordinary, and extraordinarily lucky, organisms that quickly created a far more sophisticated world.

[Jan Sand]

Most amusing. Intellect can easily be measured by results, not IQ tests. And the goals of current humanity is to protect the the world by two major activities since it must be protected or we all die. The first powerful measure is to burn up as much fossil fuel as possible in order to make the rich as rich as possible and heat up the atmosphere so we all fry. The second result of our immense intellect is to build up human fear of each other so that we climax at bombing the bejesus out of each other with hugely wonderful devices to make the world so radioactive nothing can survive. Who could deny that marvelous intellect? the obvious fantastic intellectual goal is to celebrate the end result by moving to Mars with a small bunch of rich idiots who want to suffocate on a huge desert planet without breathable air and with most of its water buried as ice deep inside the surface. Obviously there is no creature living on this planet with the mental brilliance to compare with that or could match those marvelous goals. Human genius has never been appropriately appreciated and probably never will.

[Maxcady10001]

Obviously there is no creature living on this planet with the mental brilliance to compare with that or could match those marvelous goals.

I once saw a large black ant kill a smaller red ant over a bread crumb. Then I stepped on it.

[Sy Borg]

Yes, that's true if humans are divine beings that are beyond nature. I do not believe this.

I see humanity as part of the Earth, part of nature, and controlled by the planet and its star. So I don't see humans as divine beings that have transcended nature and now are controlling the Earth and its fate as you do. Rather, I see humans as agents and expressions of the Earth like any other species. Thus, like the blue-green algae 250m years ago, we are showing ourselves to be agents of change and we, in turn, are being manipulated by the environment/Earth to effect changes, and change in this context is painful and destructive in the short term.

[Jan Sand]

A marvelous technique for getting breadcrumbs. I hope it was delicious. I have heard that ants can be tasty as well.

[Maxcady10001]

That was a good one.

[Jan Sand]

I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Aside from an extreme pride in what they call human intellect, a large number of humans have an amazing delight in exhibiting cruelty to no purpose. I granted you the possibility that you might have been hungry.

[Maxcady10001]

Well you were only able to give me the benefit of the doubt because of your human intellect. So perhaps you should be a bit more understanding of the prideful nature of people and their unique position.

[Jan Sand]

Evidently you have more respect for my intellect than I do. Admirations for humans in view of how they treat each other and the wonderful planet we delight in destroying has always been beyond my comprehension.

[Sy Borg]

Jan, do you believe that humans are an inherently flawed species?

If bears came to evolve a human intellect and started building civilisations do you believe they would be more sensitive environmental denizens than we descendants of apes? Note that, "It would hard to be worse" would be too pat an answer and an avoidance of really thinking about it.

[Jan Sand]

Any animal. from bears to mosquitoes to paramecia have the potential to be considerate and creative and wise in their future development and understanding of the fundamentals of maintaining a living environment. The stupidity of one does not indicate that any other becoming very powerful might be just as clumsy. I cannot judge the possible future of bears but can only respond to the end point that the monkey people have attained.

[Maxcady10001]

What about when an alpha lion takes over a pack, killing the resident male, and subsequently all cubs, that does not seem very considerate or creative. I mean if he really tried he could sell the resident male lion a few zebras for his pride, right? That's within the creative capacity of a lion.

[Jan Sand]

Admittedly, lions are in a relatively primitive state but when they develop a bit and learn to raise people and pigs for food they will become more civilized, Lions raising lions for food seems somewhat uncivil. Better they should teach their fellows to spend time in factories making shoes or telephones where they can be merely miserable and not dead. Nevertheless, I sincerely doubt (to get back on topic) that lions worry much about what happens when they are dead. Since they eat each other they don't even make cemeteries to keep the dead bodies and it's bloody hell trying to fit a dead lion into the average refrigerator leaving no room for ther ice tray.

[Barry Sears]

If you stumbled across a tree, never seen before. A new discovery. Lets call this Greta after the discoverer. The tree grows and grows for a thousand years and was able to produce seeds that were carried by the wind. Unseen for hundreds of years the seeds spread and flourished around the entire globe, springing to life many Greta trees. One day a mighty storm uplifted the first found Greta and it lay over the soil, with time returned to the Earth and organically transformed through other life forms.

Now Greta's live scattered around the globe each exposed to different conditions and each altering and adapting slightly differently, hotter conditions, colder conditions and cross pollination wow.

At this point of time for a tree would it be considered that death has occurred? Within a forest in New Zealand a Greta has produced an almost unrecognizable tree, a new discovery lets call it Scott after it's discoverer.

From a slightly alternative perspective, when considering time on a different scale, from when Earth was naked of life, when just the blue print existed, awaiting the moment when conditions allowed the surface to flourish. Organics, elements warmed up and were allowed to dance and sing and express life. At this point of time you could say life began on Earth but also it was a transition between the awaiting blueprint and the appropriate conditions allowing and resulting in a point of expression of life. Growing spreading developing and changing to the conditions.

The Earth became too wet for the continued survival of the original Greta but the new Scott flourished and spread. Although no Greta's exist anymore Scott is everywhere. Did Greta die or has she altered her state of expression.

The planet reached a point in it's life where all was as big and strong as possible and then the reverse process began where water shifted as the planets position changed with time. Life on the surface was still plentiful, just once again altered and changed to the changing conditions. Smaller versions, warmer conditions, faster. Until after millions more relative years the planet dries and is cremated as part of the planetary life cycle.

Did all of life on this planet "die" or did the planet itself pass through a phase of expression. Through this phase "life" (surface forms) began, altered and changed and then faded through time. You could say individually they lived and died, you could say collectively over time all live on the surface lived and died but more sensibly it is all an expression, allowed to flourish because of it's condition and position in time.

Exists there does a magical zone, a Goldilocks zone. A spherical band where water is present in a liquid form. To close to the sun and evaporation occurs, too far away and it is frozen. This magical zone is where the phase of expression occurs on the planet, due to the state of water. The organic planetary evolutionary process defined by the "New Perspective" explains how planets pass through this zone in their life-cycle. This micro expression of life occurs within this zone and has and will do so again as other planets pass through this phase. Within this zone is a growing collectiveness of life experiences like a soup or record of life that has been, all combining to produce a growing personality of it's own.

A planet itself moves through this zone, surface life begins millions of years pass and the planet dries and life on the surface too. This memory is not lost though as the energy, the collective history remains within the magical zone. This memory or collective energy awaits the next planet to absorb it's history of life. The planet returns to dust and stone but life continues.

I suggest this collectiveness is much older than just the life on Earth. Any microscopic moment is never lost. I do feel that our life experiences occur on our level of terrestrial life. Combined with all life experiences from all forms of life, they merge and grow as a collective energy that produces an overall characteristic of the next level of life or size step, the planetary life.

http://thenewperspective21.wix.com/anewworld