₦airaland Forum

DaddyCoool:
YES!! If you are able to honestly see yourself as totally already that. But it doesn't go by comparison (richest), but that may happen by default. It's a power we just don't use because our brain is wired to believe things have to make sense when in fact the universe is NOT logical at all!😆. Quantum mechanics has proven it!

DaddyCoool:
Can you believe in a million years that something can be in more than one place at once or that something will not exist until YOU look at it?

In quantum mechanics there are infinite possibilities. A particle will be everywhere but will only materialise where you happen to look. Your attention makes it real at that spot. So also real life.

LoLz. Any time you see someone try to use quantum mechanics to prove magic ,there's no need to bother, you know the person has gotten lost in some internet rabbit hole of kookie jargons.

DaddyCoool:
This is not true. I never said "anything". I said "something". Which of course implies something within reason - otherwise you'd have dead people walking around all.over the place because people believe, or Santa Clause walking around because children totally believe he exists!😆

Naa you wanted to sound like I was the unreasonable one who can't see your magic. What something can your magic get that I can't get without it? Can you magic yourself to become the richest man in the world? Or is your magic limited to what anybody can achieve anyway?

frank317:
How may dead people have told you how God punished them for their crimes while on earth? Or u just sit down in ur house and make up stories to make u feel good.

LoLz. He is afraid of dealing with the powerlessness he feels about certain injustices, so he needs the comfort of this yeye fantasy.

Speaklove:
Then an atheistic world will be full of people who would live there lives in despair and hopelessness , because the system of believes posit that the end of physical is the end of man .

The perpetrators of 911 who died by suicide would never be never be judged .

The leaders of Isis and bokoharam : shekau ,and the other guy both of whom committed suicide wouldn't get punished for their crimes against humanity .

Even you lordreed ; there are some people who if they should hurt you ;you would have nothing to do to them or you might not be able to avenge yourself in equal to your hurt .

Your atheism is insufficient in addressing injustice even in your own very life .

So because we don't have some stupìd heaven fantasy it means we are hopeless. LoLz. That is brainwashed thinking. We focus on the here and now and what we can do to have justice. No need for useless fantasies.

Exactly why we strive to pursue justice here and now.

Feeling powerless against people who hurt you is no reason to believe in a fantasy of justice after death.

Do what you can now and stop dreaming of a tomorrow that never will be.

DaddyCoool:
Human beings don't have wings. Of course it is possible but as humans God didn't give us the ability to muster enough faith to make that happen. Just as I can't turn Sahara into a rain forest. But there are a million other things you can do by just believing, without doing much - because it is not really you doing it. That it's you doing it is the illusion

But you said you can use your magic to make anything happen, why are you now changing it up?

DaddyCoool:
Magic is everywhere around you but you don't know how to access it. Infact the whole universe is magic
If you somehow totally believe something has happened the universe will make it happen!
As Christ said, if you have faith enough, you will tell a mountain to move and the universe will make it do just that. It's all magic

Great! Believe you have wings and take a picture of your wings to show us.

Speaklove:
You're wrong !

How would atheist provide or strive for justice for the cause of a group of ladies who were sexualy abused by a certain man who had managed to conceal the matter while he was alive only for the secret to leak out after his death ?

How would atheists judge such a man for his crime if there is no afterlife or a God who has authority beyond the sphere and influence of men ?

The society atheists dream to build will end up empowering injustice ,would create more tyrants ,beasts and evil men who would get away with their creams if there is no god

No atheist will tell you they can extend justice to reach into the death of the perpetrators because it's obvious that death ends all. You who claim your god can, can show no evidence so it is merely a fantasy of yours.

We who know nothing comes after death will strive in this one life we have to ensure justice is upheld as best as we can. We will not rely on a fantasy judge who never was.

FiveFootNinja:
🌚
😂😂😂

I saw the username and was like "hol' up!" 🧐.

Yep, that was me. Just as carried away in the fantasy as the rest of them.

DaddyCoool:
Doesn't mean it didn't happen though.
There's a lot we don't know and will never know.
As the quote below says: The universe is stranger than we can ever imagine

Except magic cannot be seen anywhere. Reality may be strange but it isn't like a fantasy tale.

FiveFootNinja:
Bump. Interesting conversation.

Guy why you go revive this thread? You just want to remind me of my silliness those days bah. LoLz.

DaddyCoool:
1. How can they know eating the fruit was bad if they didn't know bad from good

2. Why didn't they eat the tree of life all that time - and they were NOT forbidden from it. It said clearly they were banished so they won't eat it (NOT so they won't continue eating it)

3. Why was the Serpent created wise and tricky but not them, and then allowed access to them, knowing he can easily deceive them

4. Eve, who was the one deceived, was not yet created when God gave Adam the instruction

5. Omniscient God already knew they'd eat the fruit even before they were created

6. Life also became difficult for animals even though they didn't eat any fruit

7. The Serpent's punishment was crawling on the ground, but that's what Serpents do, that's just their nature, and they do it effortlessly, and they're not the only ones who crawl.

Add yours

**Added:

8. What was Adam supposed to do, his wife now knew he was a slowpoke who did not even know he was naked. If he didn't eat the fruit, if you were his wife, would you stay married to a slowpoke with no self-awareness?🤣

The story has more plot holes than a sieve.

Speaklove:
Atheism can't handle the crimes of the secret places .
Even CCTV cameras can be manipulated .

At least atheists do not claim to have an omni present and all knowing god. How has your omni everything god provided justice for the crimes taking place in secret? Nothing. Your god is as silent as a stone. It is us humans regardless of religious affiliation that strive for justice.

Gabrielshow24:
You can disagree all you want, that's the consensus of sociologists, although not all.

Some equate God to society, I have been through this already.

There is no such consensus.

Good for the some, I disagree with them.
----------------

Fine tuning doesn't necessarily mean that the same 'God' or 'process'👀 can't fine tune 'others'.

Fine tune other what?

It doesn't also mean that 99.99% percent ended as a failure.
That's a bad argument, there's no way to determine such!!!

I said waste not failure.

You mean a god wasting 99.99999999% of the universe is a good argument?
-----------------

You seem not to have gone through the miracle of the sun's documentation.

It's a story, there is no documentation.

That's just one basis.
The same can't be said for other miracles found in the bible as it will be subject to great scrutiny.
Thus they do not fit scientific materialism!

Whether or not it fits scientific materialism is irrelevant. What matters is neither you or any other believer can demonstrate the reality of those miracles.
----------------

Based on the Scientific approach the miracles if at all they occurred will be just one time events.

One that the repeatability factor depends on the will of God to perform such act!!!

I mentioned 'physical processes' because they are the laws initialized with the universe 👀.
It's when He has to prove something that He 'suspends' the laws he has set down!!!

Then get your god to repeat it. Have the god's powers been exhausted?
----------------

We will keep going back and forth without any head way!

The scientific principles leans greatly into "materialism".

Which has it's own flaws!!!

While materialism will be suitable for all "materials" it will fail for other non concrete concepts!!!

Keep that in mind!

Then give me the tools that are just as reliable as the scientific method. Simple.
-------------------

Most of those things there are not relatively new.
Since the time of the early Jews they believed that God was a spirit. He was all powerful and everywhere!!!

And they believed spirits could eat and be touched.

Thus the believe of the Jews, was that God transcended all!!!

Irrelevant. The so called transcendent god came to eat with his friend so he might as well do something special once again.
---------------------

The bible provides context for spirits suggesting that they can take up physical forms at will!!!

Great, let them come let's see them.

It doesn't negate their original nature!!!
Thus from the biblical principle, God transcends all!!!

Again irrelevant. They should demonstrate their being and/or powers or remain stories from an ancient compendium.

Emusan:
It is not. The fact that there are giant on earth is a proof.

Very much is.

This is the definition of evolution you were given:

Evolution is the change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. It occurs when evolutionary processes such as natural selection and genetic drift act on genetic variation, resulting in certain characteristics becoming more or less common within a population over successive generations. The more these changes occur and accumulate the more diversity you get.

Exactly what is happening with the change in average height I gave as example.


Provide evidence of these giants.

You that can't provide a single proof of Evolution transition is talking about tale and PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

You're still looking for magic tricks. I have given you an example of an evolutionary change. Speciation and branch off events can also be evidenced. Read: https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evo-news/speciation-in-real-time/

Pure lie.

There's no gene that could make human have wings, if there's, human will have wings.

LoLz. It's a hypothetical. I never said there's a gene in human's that can make them grow wings. I said it is possible given the right set of evolutionary conditions for it to happen but what we see now makes it unlikely.

Just another lie, do ape brains also getting bigger?

LoLz. You just keep shouting lie, lie with nothing to back it up. Meanwhile read: https://health.ucdavis.edu/news/headlines/human-brains-are-getting-larger-that-may-be-good-news-for-dementia-risk/2024/03#:~:text=A%20new%20study%20by%20researchers%20at%20UC%20Davis,surface%20area%20than%20those%20born%20in%20the%201930s.

The pattern in human has remained the same, if human will be 100 millions years, human will continue to give birth to human and nothing like transition to another thing will ever occur.

The pattern in humans has not remained the same. Anatomical modern human emerged about 200,000 years ago. Other forms of humans were present at some point also in the past, like Neanderthals.

And you believe it.
Attached picture by just your imagination not what not anyone can observed.

LoLz. You want pictures of fishes that lived before cameras were invented? You must be a joker.

Does the ancestor of the common ancestor of your ancestors started with 2 eyes, four limbs, 1 nose, have brain or no brain?

Yes it had a brain.

Speaking so confidently as if he saw them with tails

No need, we have vestigal tails. In fact some times children are born with tails poking out, read: https://scientificorigin.com/why-are-some-babies-born-with-a-tail

When you don't even know how anything was like in just 500 thousand years ago.

We do know what things were like 500,000 years ago because of both geologic and fossil evidence.

How does evolution happened within Tree to living beings?

Which first came up?

I don't understand this question. Are you asking if trees evolved into humans? If that is the question then no.

Like human begin to born a baby with a finger like wing or rock or instead of hair on the head we should be seen grasses which will show human are evolving at least human have being on earth for over 300,000 years.

But as long as human will give birth to another human, it shows that's how the Creator designed them to be.

You keep asking for magic tricks and fail to understand what is being explained to you. I have no magic tricks to show you.

Gabrielshow24:
I'm satisfied with "indirect observational proofs" because I have proofs that are rather more subjective than objective.

Of course you do, the challenge is out here in the open your subjective "indirect observational proofs" have no weight. Which is why we need objective evidences that anybody can interact with.

Also, not everything in this world has direct observational proof, a lot of concepts rely on indirect evidences!!!

All the things that matter do.
-------------------

As touching the miracles we are saying similar things. I'm saying it can be dismissed because there's no eye witness account, save the bible, while you are asking for its repeatability.

As I said we need objective demonstrations because then we can interact with it. Asking someone to go off of a story in an ancient compendium doesn't cut it in this day and age.

Of course, that all depends on God if he wills to show but if not he will most likely use "physical processes".

LoLz. So the all powerful god is bound by the rules of this universe? Doesn't sound all powerful or even like a god at all.

-------------------

The assumption of God stems from an higher abstraction of morality.

I disagree. More likely it seems from an abstraction of parent or guardian figures. Most of the ancient conceptions of gods was tied to the environment of the ancient in question because their lives were tied to their immediate environment.

Some sociologist argue that 'God is society' but this falls short as different societies have different values and so and so forth until we reach the edges of the known universe.

Thus, God is the universal abstraction for morality that is above all.

Like I already stated I strongly disagree. Morality is a concept that got elucidated as populations began to grow larger while god concepts arose before that.

But even if the your god was a universal abstraction for morality, it still of no consequence if it cannot be demonstrated to be real. Besides leaping from universal abstraction for morality to created the universe is a very mighty leap indeed.

To answer, your retort to assumptions.
The first assumption of God states he is immaterial!!!
Hence this discourse should be more related to the philosophical sciences!!!

That is an assumption that is a relatively recent development. The ancients didn't write about their gods as though they were immaterial. Even the bible indicates that the god ate food, has bodily parts and so on.

Physical methods fail woefully to prove or disprove immaterial things.
Thus in order to reconcile such a nature to materialism we have to use 'abstractions'.

The problem being these are all conceptual stuff. You are saying the god is responsible for tangible things. You cannot seriously be implying that a concept is responsible for everything we see.

This by far is a direct Implication of God's nature!!!
God is a spirit, whose effects are seen!!!

Again this is a relatively new concept. The bible depicts spirits as being visible and tangible.

This is why we mostly use indirect evidences for God as most direct evidences can be subject to great scrutiny.

Well then, it remains insufficient and I dunno what you want us to do with it.

Mind you, there are some miracles that are documented such as the "miracle of the sun" with their repeatability entirely subject to God.

LoLz. The god who never responds?[/quote]This above isn't a direct observational proof, it just leans more into those "display of Glory" narrative.[/quote]So basically just a story.

Hence,the christian argument has always been that "materialism" is a good view but it fails to answer loads of question.

As a methodological naturalist the only tools I know are all material or at least materially accessible. I welcome some new tools to investigate the immaterial, you just have to demonstrate that they are reliable.

And at best, you can only use it to determine processes and laws which were set from the very "beginning" implying , permit me to say, the predation of mathematical laws.

Which have so far have provided very reliable results. Produce your tools which can investigate the immaterial with the same reliability.

Although some people argue against the predation of mathematical laws, that's a different story.

My point is that the very laws break down when we reach the beginning suggesting an insufficient framework, co-beginning with the universe or one that philosophically predates the universe 👀.

Doesn't matter since you insist that the god is real here and now. Therefore what came before is not as important as here and now.

Irrespective of whatsoever stance you choose, there are reasons to suggest that cosmological fine tuning occurred in our universe 👀.

I don't believe there was any fine tuning. Even if there was it would not suggest an all powerful god at work since it implies there are constraints that cannot be overcome even by a god. If the god could create any universe it liked why would it create one in which it needs to fine tune it for life and thereby waste 99.9999999999999999999999% of the universe? It makes no sense given what we know of the universe. Back when we didn't know how large the universe is it would have seemed like a good answer. Now that we know I don't see any reason to hold on to a primitive idea.

Lucifyre:
I admire your patience, seriously cause...

Sometimes my brother, we dey try.

Gabrielshow24:
Again, a straw man.
That's not my position.

My position is to exemplify that your allusion of physical "days" stemming from the 'literal' interpretation of Gen1 is not sufficient and it's a misrepresentation of christian theology.

There is no straw man. This is what you yourself wrote:

At best, Moses used "physical understanding/processes" to relate his message.

Which means the author was using language of things he did understand to describe things he didn't understand. So how can we tell apart the imprecise language describing this, from the imprecise language describing or attributing events to a god. As you say: what's good for the goose is good for the gander!!! If the author is not describing a physical night and day here then he is not describing a god elsewhere.

As there must be a time measurement(or perspective) to determine "a day" except if the "day", he(Moses) meant was based on the Lord's POV.

How do we know the author was describing it from a god's POV since he does not use first person perspective in any passage? As a matter of fact the whole book is written in 3rd person perspective so where did you get that from?

We can't substantiate its earthly(physical ) equivalence.

Exactly! Your god stands unsubstantiated just like the words of this passage.

Secondly, I have answered your rhetoric for you!
That's why we use indirect observational evidences because anyone can cry "foul" in the same way you are doing now.

What?! In any of our discussions have you requested direct or indirect observational evidences? You have always asked for direct observational evidences but now for this case you are satisfied with indirect observational evidences. Obviously, your methodology is incongruent and skewed.

All direct physical evidences can be disproved with the simple question, were you there?🤔

Incorrect and a straw man. I didn't ask you were you there to observe these miracles, I said they cannot be demonstrated to be real. Most direct observational evidences can be repeated with the same result given the same set of factors. Even the ones that cannot be repeated leave loads of data that can be observed. Where is either of these for these miracles?

We have to make assumptions or have a foundational basis of truth inorder to call something reliable and true.

Yes but the assumptions have to be congruent with reality, not based on some fairytale. Fairy godmothers have not been demonstrated to turn pumpkins into carriages therefore there is no reason to believe it is possible or do you believe the Cinderella story by faith? If those miracles cannot be demonstrated or showed to have left any physical trace then there is no reason to assume they are real.

Hence what's good for the goose is good for the gander!!!

Yes indeed, plenty of good for goose and gander.

Gabrielshow24:
One thing is certain.
The earth isn't the absolute point.

At best, Moses used "physical understanding/processes" to relate his message.

Day(light) existed before the 🌞 sun and the night(darkness) existed before the 🌕 moon based on biblical accounts

This two are what forms the basis of calendar years along with the stars.
Ancient Egyptians used 24 stars to depict the passage of time before 24-hour-day became standardized.
My point being that existence of day or night depends on movement as it relates to a source — measurement of time!

Some ancients used the stars at some point, some used the sun while others used the moon and if you want you can use another frame of reference to measure your own perception of time.

Hence it can't be physical "days", it has to be a measurement based on some source🤔.
------------------
Indirect evidences are not called conjectures.
Like I said above, in some fields, indirect evidence is a 'credible' source of truth.
------------------
One thing is certain, when God made all things he set certain "rules", one being repetitive pattern and the other being change to name a few.

Science can easily make theories based on these two but they are not 'direct evidences' to support his existence because from the scientific dogmas, you need to infer their conclusions from their observations!!!

The other direct evidence will certainly be the gospels, even this is subject to interpretation and scrutiny; as a lot of people do not believe in the existence of Jesus like our beloved friend, somvayina, while some believe he existed but he was just a man🤔 etc

The other 'direct evidences' will be subjective not objective 👀.

While 'direct evidences' which are based on biblical miracles can 'easily' be thrown away as works of fiction👀 or textual corruption or worse plagiarism🤕. Which is the beloved sentiment of our in-house atheist👀 that loves bringing out similarities between the bible and the enuma elish/atrahasis.

Dude do you understand you are saying the exact argument people give for why a god doesn't exist? That it was merely the authors understanding of physical processes.

One thing is certain you are attributing what we now understand of the universe to a god. You are actually regressing in understanding if you look at it.

The ancient authors attributed to a god some things they did not understand about the world which we now understand and can definitely say no god is behind them. You on the other hand have regressed to the ancient authors position to say this thing I don't properly understand therefore it was a god that did it.

Miracle in the bible is not direct evidence. Those are stories which have no practical demonstrability. Has anyone demonstrated praying and stopping the apparent motion of the sun? No. Has anyone demonstrated turning a stick into a snake? No. Has anyone demonstrated walking on water without aid? No. Has anyone demonstrated the ability to multiply food just by praying over it and dividing it? NO! You have to ASSUME those were real in other to consider them evidence, which just means any written fantastical story should be considered evidence.

Gabrielshow24:
We believe God made everything.
There are indirect evidences to support our belief🙃.

Also, He was asking for direct "evidence".
Even from the term "spirit" we can definitely conclude that it(spirit) can not seen but its effects are seen.

You also misrepresented what I was talking about.
I was answering the scientific plausibility of "seven days".

There should be CLEAR AND DIRECT evidence. How can a god make something and you are unsure, you simply believe. Wow.

Indirect evidence is what is called conjecture.

Maybe I did but I wonder how you interpret the statement "And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day", a statement repeated for each day and say naa it wasn't an actual day and night period.

Gabrielshow24:
In conclusion, while yet empirically there is no storehouse for "humans" or even hail and
there is insufficient physical evidence to back biblical claims🤔 but it doesn't negate its plausibility.

Can you not hear yourself? The god made everything yet there is insufficient evidence?! An oxymoron if I've ever heard one.

Emusan:
Not a proof.

For instance, many ancient tribes have giants in their storyline.

It is. Read again the definition of evolution you were given.

So what if they had tales of giants? Where is the physical evidence?

Of course everyone knows that's what evolutionists mean but what right thinking people are saying is that, for such to happen, there must be a change to human gene like what will make human to develop wings or something else which was never be part of our gene.

Yes there could be a gene develop that could make us grow wings but it won't happen tomorrow and the environment has to favour that change for it to propagate into the population. The kind of changes that are more likely are to the shape our skulls, bone density, limb length, lung capacity, thoracic size and so on. This is because we can see things already happening like our brains becoming bigger, changes in nutrient availability, changes in air quality and so on. Its not magic. Nobody is telling you humans will become flying monkeys tomorrow.

If one to be around during the evolution of fish, what will the people see?

No single person would have seen it happen all at once but if they had been keeping records of the changes they would see something like the attached picture.

Where you're missing it is, between the transition, what will people observed?

For instance, your ancestors who continue to change, they are not human and whatever they are at that time started from something. Do they start with having two legs, one eye or even no nose at a time or just one leg, two ears e.t.c

If evolution is true, transition from those things that evolved million years before human would have been taken place by now and be observed.

That's is my point.

The common ancestor of humans, apes and monkeys was a mammal that already had four limbs, 2 eyes, 1 nose, 1 mouth, 2 ears, a tail and other anatomical features you can see on any mammal. If there were people to observe and record the changes they would have see the tail get shorter and shorter till it is no longer visible. The spine will change curvature as bipedal motions becomes more and more used rather than going on all fours. Skull shape will be changing because the brain is getting bigger and diet is changing. Fingers, thumbs and toes change shape because of more terrestrial dwelling than arboreal. And so on and so forth. These changes will be observed over several million years not at once like a magic show.

What transition do you think we should have observed by now?

Emusan:
Good!

Why those things that evolved millions years(as the lies evolutionists always tell) before human evolved aren't observed to have evolved to another thing?

Because evolution is not goal oriented. We aren't evolving toward a predefined goal. We evolve as a result of environmental pressures, so when a specie evolves into its environmental niche and that niche remains largely unchanged then you don’t see drastic changes. We see this happen over and over again.

I heard of a specie of lizard that was an insect feeder that was taken to an environment that was very insect poor. The lizard start developing into a plant feeder. The jaws and teeth developed more in line with that of a herbivore. You can read more about that here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepidosaur_herbivory

Emusan:
Growth has been part of living things, it's not a proof for evolution.

The same part of Europe that are getting taller can be grown smaller in few years time.

Have you recorded transition of one animal to another thing as you claim about living things evolution on earth?

It is proof of evolution. The problem is you folk think evolution is a magic show where a person will suddenly sprout wings. We have hammered it over and over again it is the gene characteristics of the population of a species that changes and accumulates over successive generations. You will never see a monkey give birth to a human and no one who understands evolution will ever tell you that that is what happens. Our common ancestor continued to change and speciate to give rise to the branches of the clade that includes humans, apes, monkeys, etc. There is no magical leap from monkey to human or anything of the sort.

Emusan:
What I meant by "at the same time" is if human and tree evolution started at the same time.

If it's not. For instance; it means, either trees evolved first then human or human evolved first before trees.

Do you understand?

Ok I understand.

Yes trees evolved before humans so yeah some species will emerge before others even though all living things are evolving.

Emusan:
Good!

Do all living things on earth go through the process of evolution?

Do all living things evolve at the same time?

Yes all living things evolve. I don't know what you mean by "at the same time" but they are all evolving, some more rapidly than others.

Emusan:
How does evolution work?

Evolution is the change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. It occurs when evolutionary processes such as natural selection and genetic drift act on genetic variation, resulting in certain characteristics becoming more or less common within a population over successive generations. The more these changes occur and accumulate the more diversity you get.

Emusan:
So you can't provide just a single evidence where one animal has evolved to another.

That is not how evolution works, you've been told this over and over again.

Emusan:
What is ToE?

Theory of Evolution.

Emusan:
This lie has already expired.

Evolution takes millions years yet there's no single proof to support that and you believe it.

Also, there are millions of animals in our world today, we can then ask:

Do they evolve at the same time? If the answer is No!

Then we should be seen real evolution in various animals today not that only human.

Publish your findings in a scientific journal or win a Noble Prize for overturning the ToE.

Infotubia9ja:
Okay please I just want you all to please keep an open mind to this and I am as much as human as every one of you but this is my story and today I want to come out with this tell me what you think.
I don't know where this topic fits right so I just decided to put it here.

Ever since I was a child I will say I started taking note of this in my early age of 9 to 12 if I am correct. Every night I mean every single night, if I look up in the dark skies I am able to 100% tell the difference between starts and this entity i will call it. I see them every where in the sky.
It all started one night in kaduna state where I was born. You know as Nepa dey useless every night na as. So if room don hot my late mom may her soul rest in peace. She will tell my dad to take me and the rest of my siblings outside so she spray bug killer then lock door. So we all will be outside with my parent and my bro and sis. When ever I look up, I am able to see the shining moving object like they are able to transform and move their location like speed of light.
I.e it moves so fast like speeding bullet from point A to B but while it moves, I can see it's moment patters like fast.
Now when I ask any other person around me if they see what I see, they think am having a section of mental break down of some sort nobody believes me so I just stopped and ignored it thinking It was all in my head. Then finally during my 16th birthday immediately after my 16th birthday I noticed an even more advanced level of this thing I could feel more things as well.

I could now
1, I could feel their presence in the sky even when they are not visible.
2 I could summon them at will by just using my mind to call them and they show up some time one sometimes in buck at once scattered all around and I see them all at once.
3 I could tell them to go and come at will
4, when they feel I am not in a good mood they just come and chill and let me know their presence that they are there and they stay for hours before they go
Previously I could tell them to go but now sometimes even when I tell them to go they don't listen sometimes they just stay until they feel my calm before they go.

Now for the past five days I was so very sick I was thinking I was going to die because it was so strong it's a flu but very bad on me I have had it multiple times but this one was bad.
And I could fell them all alot of them hovering around my roof I knew they were there but I wasn't strong to get up to go look but I knew they were communicating with me.
5, I am able to astral project and leave my body to go see what my future is like and it has been like that how I see it when I astral project I didn't know it was what it's called because I was scared I was thinking I was a wizard but it is always only me and nobody else so I said to myself it's my coven. I can move my body from one timeliness to another to see my future for a day ahead.
But I cant do it as often anymore.
I can communicate with earth like I know what I need to do when I have issues like easy it just comes to me when I ask for it.
And so many more.

Now back to the topic at hand. I have been telling my wife and kids of lately that I have been seeing this objects more in the sky but they don't see when they look up it's just stars to them what I see they don't see.

So I had to prove to myself I am not mad. I saved up my money and bought myself a Samsung Galaxy ultra mainly to prove my madness and behold I am right.
I took videos and I am able to zoom if you look closely it looks like a door open door to a different location I see.
I have the videos but I don't know where to post for you all to see so I took picture and made a video and zoomed and took a short
What do you all think about this.
Abi I no be normal human I be...or I dey mad ni

The first one is the picture after I surmmond this one and I could tell the difference between him and the stars in the sky.

These are probably out of focus pictures of planetary bodies. Nothing special.

Maxymilliano:
https://dailytrust.com/angry-youths-loot-seyi-tinubus-ramadan-palliative-in-gombe/?fbclid=IwY2xjawJOV25leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHU6Bwrpk1uXDwo3vHP4wIh9jsRpgBxrvESGI395Ni01UaF6QiFJ42F6e3g_aem_DRDGucx_KX512ys4-pE3mA

Are they sure it wasn't hungry youths? LoLz

Gabrielshow24:
The example you cited of the aggregation of unicellular organisms is micro.

If you don't know, you don't know!!!
If indeed, a new specie or multicellular organism evolved then it will be a perfect example of macro😂😂😂 but since there's no direct observational proof for macro evolution, you can't help but to say rubbish 🤧!!!

Your first reply was perfect but your foolishness just couldn't help it!!! 😂😂😂

This is why it is pointless showing a phoney like you anything. You didn’t read it, you went instead to your creationist quacks to read junk. Go look at real scientists work and stop LARPing with junk put out by quacks.