s13ep

Icarus and Daedalus In this thesis I have written how the Obama administration terrorized the United States psychologically, and how Hillary Clinton, and support, are corrupted by Barrack Obama's legacy. The Forgotten White Children Barack Obama wants to, and has used race against Americans, but he has hidden his agenda behind stern expressions. The political power of Barrack Obama has caused a silent revolution; not only in the United States, but worldwide. This revolution, henceforth referred to as Obama's revolution, is against the white race, and continues to progress. Barrack Obama has expressed to the world that non-white races deserve apologies for racist crimes of the past; to suppress racist crimes of the present and sanctify the future for non-whites. In this process, the Obama administration has neglected the past, present and future of the white race. The white race, under Barrack Obama, have low racial cohesion, and primarily white nations are plagued by anti-white, whites. Anti-whites are an enmity between whites. and prevent racial re-cohesion. Evil anti-whites, are apologetic to non-whites, but ignorant of whites. An anti-white will support non-white races, but then claim that whites are non-existent, or insignificant. The main problem is that this atrocity has been committed in primarily white nations. The nature of anti-whites, and their actions, has had a harsh effect on the cultures and wisdom of all primarily white nations. Metaphorically, a piece of the puzzle is missing, but the puzzle is regarded as complete. Here is a list of adverse effects of anti-whites in society: accepted misbehaviour; pseudo-intellectual socially accepted 'intellectuals'; immature media coverage of politics; neglect of police and armed forces; weakened or corrupted alliances; and more. This is a result of anti-whites because anti-whites stemmed from a primarily white nation under non-white leadership, the United States. Hillary Clinton; Obama's Legacy Hillary Clinton, in the current presidential election, is a pundit for Obama's policies. Hillary is unaware that she has been manipulated by the Obama administration, and through her, the Obama administration will prosper. Hillary Clinton bares all the traits of an anti-white, as described earlier, and her support in this election are non-whites and anti-whites. Hillary Clinton is also corrupt, and with Obama's help, she has seduced powerful people to create a subversive political deadlock. The Dreamer's Nightmare Members of congress were overcome by negativity that spurred from Obama's revolution. Congressional decisions are often stupidity. Members of congress will use abstract terms, such as “evil”, but have no real understanding of the abstract. Members of congress are unwise of the adverse effects of anti-whites in society, but are effected themselves; their decisions will ultimately be negative for the white race and positive for non-whites. Conclusion Vote Trump.

Okay I see where you going You not talking about " normal " communication, you are suggesting this communication could be about a form of empathy or consciousness that theoretically connects everything living or inanimate It reminds of the very interesting theory about the holographic paradigm, you should enjoy this link, its a deep concept http://itotd.com/articles/227/the-holographic-paradigm/ Get stoned before you read this, I find some good weed always makes these perspectives more interesting and believable Sort of. In theory, we can't think in cohesion with the universe because we have a tongue-wise teachers. Knowing everything in mind isn't so hard, but with the tongue, it would take billions of years!

With the same scientific method, but sense and not word based, there are grounds for agreement over the subject of a direct relation to the [entire] universe, and we can test it with our senses.

Communication is between the cohesive human and the cohesive universe. All factors that sum up to the cohesive human communicate. The heart communicates to the universe, the mind communicates to the universe, and the human communicates to the universe.(all other factors included). Communication is of the numerous factors that sum up to the cohesive human, who communicates as the product of these numerous factors. The universe, metaphorically, mirrors the cohesive human or vice versa.

The universe and humanity are equal, their only difference is age. The human mind can comprehend the universe, as humans are a universal species. To think, we need a heartbeat; to survive, we need numerous things. Humanity is an entirety of numerous things, and the universe is an entirety of numerous things. The cohesive human communicates with the entirety of the universe.

Thank you. My apologies that I can't fill in what's blank, I'd need the additional graphics.

FINALE The story is of a war of good light and evil light. Good light and evil light are dual concepts, The good of the matter is the sensory aspect, and evil is what's against it. The cover art would be the antagonist in cutting-edge black crossing the calm blue face of protagonist in two places, with dual handguns. The protagonist's temple and mouth are crossed. The protagonist's expression is to depict knowledge of the antagonist. The protagonist must cross the antagonist with forethought – the antagonist is to be depicted wrathful. This shows the antagonist's knowledge of the protagonist. On the protagonist's expression, because of his knowledge of the antagonist, he is depicted to counter the crossings naturally. The protagonist's eyes are to register the antagonist, and his mouth is to react to the entirety. He looks focused on the thought of the antagonist, his mouth straightened. A mark on the antagonist's gun draws half a sad expression. To conclude on the cover art, the visual side has the capacity for a story, fine details of the crossing are symbolic of the cohesive art. It explains the concept, but not the story. The antagonist, evil light, has harnessed the speed of light, but the technology is for himself. Nature, in turn, becomes abstracted and diseased by the antagonist's power, but some nature is apt enough to fight it. The speed of light is the theme to all stylistic aspects, and is the source of the super-natural. The protagonist, good light, is at the forefront of war. He is not diseased or abstracted, but he is aware of the danger. The protagonist is sad, but his sadness is a mystery. Magic artists are those who had an alternate reaction to the antagonist's power. A magic artist is stricken by nature, and is immune to evil light. Magic artists are unstable, but great in war. The protagonist is a tactician and marksman, with one handgun. He commands six characters all symbolic of colours: a super-solider symbolic of Sepia, a spy symbolic of Grey, a duo of magic artists symbolic of Red and Blue, and an abstract character and a diseased character symbolic of Black. The super-solider and spy are in a relationship; the super-solider is the strengths, and the spy, the weaknesses. There is duality, and they support each other. The super-solider is fatherly and the spy is motherly. The duo of magic artists are opposed in character, and they are related on this basis. The Blue magic artist is defensive, and stricken by water. The Red magic artist is offensive, and stricken by fire. The dual personalities reflect their art, and the instability of magic. The abstract and diseased characters, are an alternate super-solider and spy. The way that they differentiate is the absolution of their personality. Their strengths are stronger, and weaknesses, weaker, but overall less strengths and weaknesses. The seven heroes can win the war, but only in unity. The antagonist is the depiction of war, and the heroes reflect the antagonist – they are the depiction of peace, together. The story revolves around the antagonist, and the protagonist is a symbol of this revolution. The story is the protagonist's revolution of the antagonist, therefore, the protagonist is the story. Worldly events are to depict aspects of the protagonist's revolution. In reference to the conceptual cover art, the details symbolic of the cohesive concept define the limits of these events. Remember the protagonist's expression, the antagonist's crossing and more, but forget not the protagonist, nor antagonist. The 'thought of the antagonist', that's depicted by the protagonist, can be expressed again and again. Where the cover art shows the protagonist's thought of the antagonist, there could be an event that is symbolic – this event is one of numerous key events. The thought of the antagonist was stimulated by the crossing at the temple. A scene: the protagonist crosses the temple of the antagonist, to pacify his own thoughts. Another scene: the antagonist first crosses the protagonist's temple, leading to his thought of the antagonist. These are key beginning and end events, and are scarce; however, the passage from beginning to end is worldly. Any normal event is limited by key events, and is symbolic of the story. The world is divided into places that symbolize key events of the concept. A place that's like the crossed temple, and a place like the crossed mouth; a good climate and a bad climate, are the most significant environments, and then the additional transitional environments. There are four types of magic: white, black, dimension and evil. White and black are unchanged. Dimension magic is swirling and is a sign of good. Evil magic is singular, and is a sign of evil. A black substance. The finale is when dimension magic conquers the evil magic, and the universe becomes heavenly.

These are questions we all face because of the concept. I treat good as the sensory aspects of the game, and evil as the other aspects of a human. Whatever you treat good as, it doesn't matter, the questions we faced earlier are still present. You can have your own philosophy, but the visual aspects are surely good. They were made by someone wise, they were expressed wisely. The most you could do is look like the antagonist, to the creator of the story.

Again, many things can be imagined in a blank page. Symbolism is an interesting design element, but just it and vague concepts aren't enough. I told you it's not a blank page and I'm contesting your metaphor with my own artistic aptitude that I have earned. My imagery, is different to the imagery of a blank page. To think the two are the same, is to have little creative aptitude. Blank Page versus Good Light & Evil Light - both influence our imagination in different ways. Let's say we both create a story, mine is about Good Light & Evil Light, and yours is about Blank Page; does our writing differ in the end? What I do like about this 'story setting' is that the protagonist is unable to defeat the antagonist on his own... Perhaps he enters, hunted by the antagonist, and sepia and greyscale characters save him, or are already in the process of war. He has to be a tactician, and give orders that are good for battle ( in every sense of the word ). To build on that idea, there is an tactics system, and there is an active system. there would be the part of the battle you control and part of the battle you do not, but the latter you prepare beforehand. An order of his may even be made to cause a reaction from other heroes. Another idea is that he is a critical hit character, like the gunblade in Final Fantasy X, but more complex.

The cover art doesn't fulfill the story, but it has the capacity to contain an entire story. There are many events and characters that can be imagined in reference to just the cover art.

It's not a blank page mate,

There is a lot of meaning to be extracted here. For example. The antagonist's weapons are symbolic of the antagonist's character in the story. The antagonist's dual handguns symbolize 'his ego', and 'his promise'. The antagonist crosses the protagonist with his handguns in the conceptual cover art. This is to show how his ego and his promise disrupt the forethought of the protagonist. The cover art, if designed fluently, may show an expression of the protagonist in way that depicts his reception. His countenance is not to be lowered, but contested by the literal ego of the antagonist. The higher handgun in the cover art is 'his ego', and it's position is across the temple of the protagonist. The antagonist's promise, makes the protagonist cross. This is an emotional effect, and it's where an artistic eye is required. The calm blue of the protagonist must be the absolution of his overall expression, and the protagonist must be fulfilled by the colour, enough to show promise of his own. The lower handgun of the antagonist is across the protagonist's mouth, and is symbolic of the antagonist's promise directly effecting the protagonist's own. All in all, what's depicted is the protagonist knowing the antagonist, and the antagonist knowing the protagonist; this knowledge is repented by the protagonist. The protagonist's knowledge of the antagonist, is also knowledge of the antagonist's knowledge. The knowledge of the antagonist is over the protagonist's mind ( depicted in the cover art ); the further knowledge, is under the protagonist's heart ( depicted in the cover art ). The protagonist's heart is what is against the ego of the antagonist, and the protagonist's mind is what is against the promise of the antagonist; though, in the cover art, his ego is across the temple and his promise is across the mouth. Again, an artistic eye is required to depict this; the heart of the protagonist is power, and the mind of the protagonist is speed. To conclude, the protagonist is the depiction of good light, and the antagonist is the depiction of evil light, and the two are at war. Good light and evil light have opposite reactions to war; evil light, wants war, good light, needs war.

Concepts help greatly in creating design, but point was that you tittled this thread as "Design for Final Fantasy Style Game", but you offered only bit detailed concept of an idea for a game. The concept is so finely tuned, that the final design would be easy to imagine. I have not filled in each and every small detail, but doing so would be like colouring in a picture. Think of it as a masterpiece; it's a work of art, and it's very influential. You haven't done anything that comes even close to that. It is even hard to tell what is your actual concept for the game as whole. There is general sense of idea like red house, but that is quite little to go forward in building actual house. That is absolute egoism. It's another case of man who is not apt enough to see a certain potential, and man treats his own ineptitude as a reason to say no-one can see it's potential. I'm not being mean, but creatively, I'm more apt. I see the potential in most things! At least my egoism is spread among the characters in my concept, whereas yours is based on your own ineptitude to do the same.

Concepts help greatly in creating design, but point was that you tittled this thread as "Design for Final Fantasy Style Game", but you offered only bit detailed concept of an idea for a game. The concept is so finely tuned, that the final design would be easy to imagine. I have not filled in each and every small detail, but doing so would be like colouring in a picture. Think of it as a masterpiece; it's a work of art, and it's very influential.

All designs should start with a good concept.

Any criticism? Or just jealousy grunts ? That is YOUR question.

I do not partake as I once did.

Man is the wisest man, cannot get top job. I think not. Man moves with the times...

The concept wasn't explained sufficiently, in my opinion, or else I wouldn't have bothered to ask questions (and I say that while ignoring the backhanded attempt to insult me with a variation of the "Oh you don't get it, you must not be intelligent enough to see my genius!" defense). I had some sympathy for you - having had philosophical posts get derailed myself in the past - but its difficult to have a discussion if it is going to consist of you making statements/pronouncements and then refusing to clarify them. Or...discuss them at all. What's there to clarify? In your argument, you have essentially tried to overtake me, not contest me; you've presented your knowledge in a more advanced worded format. It's impossible to argue against, hence why I found a neutral point. You're the only one insulting here or you have drawn an incorrect conclusion and it has caused hostility - it doesn't bother me, however, if we can move on from this sub-argument I'd be much happier. Given you understand what I mean by 'memory of abyss', then, let's move on to the depth of the concept. Now, I'm representing the wordless here, therefore, abstraction is my best friend; multiple abstractions must be used to communicate what is wordless, or above words. The 'universal abyss', is another concept - representing what we would, as I would put it, 'become attuned with', if we were wordless creatures ( communication and so forth are still factors of wordless life ). However, it's my argument that our 'eyes are crossed ( in all formats )'; that's, like being pinned to a cross, having our eyes crossed, crossed out eyes and whatever else you can think of. Our focus is pinned to one side of the 'memory of an abyss', by repetitive bodily motion of primarily the tongue, and our understanding of our tongues motion ( we're essentially tongue moreover a person ). The resolution is that, we cannot focus on the 'universal abyss', because our 'memory of an abyss' is abstracted through the focusing of senses to a side, or 'wave' of many. Further, given we speak words, surely this would abstract our memory of an abyss ( the focusing on a side or wave, is how it is abstracted ). The beauty of this is that there are so many possible meanings for a single; and we spend our lives focusing on one as it progresses, rather than trying to focus on the entirety. No wonder why people are depressed and commit suicide, no wonder why war happens - there's so many 'no wonder why's', or is there?

Absolutely not. There's nothing good about words. Hmmm, but there's no quod erat demonstrandum by merely stating that its logical to think something. You have to show why it'd be logical to think such a thing. In this case, why is it logical to think that prolonged focus on our eyes in motion would make us more attuned to it rather than, say, self-consciously aware that we were focusing our eyes in motions to the exclusion of other things we expect from visual sensory input? Why would we naturally draw the conclusion that the motion would appear understandable rather than conclude that the was an autonomic response to internal/external stimuli? A memory of an abyss can be explained more precisely, however, this isn't a spelling or English language contest; the concept was explained vividly enough for anyone intellectual to understand. Your more precise counter an effect of the original post, therefore, in the original post was a sufficient explanation. What I mean and what I'm apt enough to tell you in words, are sometimes different.

You haven't defined what you mean by "crossed eye" nor how this relates to humans being "educated stupid" which you also haven't defined Your use of the word "lucid" doesn't appear to make sense in the context of the sentence; I can't tell if you're implying control (as in lucid dreaming but that's a specific phrase definition) or implying "easy to understand" You tell us the pictures mean something and then argue that the meaning proves your theory. You can't define something and use that definition to prove something else in any sort of logic I'm aware of without first proving the definition is correct (at least for that instance if not universally) 1. "Our eyes are crossed in the sense of being pinned to a single side of the, hypothetical. memory of an abyss." 2. Easy to see, and thus understand. 3. My pictures aren't the evidence, the evidence is the logic I had outlined in the paragraphs prior to the pictures. "It's logical to think that after prolonged focus on our eyes motion, we would become attuned with it, so much so, the motion would appear lucid. As if we were one step ahead of ourselves."

If you're talking about the universal abyss, you are missing out on a lot of fun; it's so much better than our current pseudo-reality. The feeling, the understanding, are so much greater. Theoretically, as we use words and not images, our intelligence is the lowest; it's number 1 (as opposed to infinity; shapes, numbers, symbols, scenes, and more). In essence, your senses and emotions would be better off with imagery, and you would understand things in your own way, with greater precision. At this moment in time, our minds are very restricted. It's very hard to imagine 'a greater intelligence', but now and again you'll get a highlight of the 'real world', and this is what's possible consistently. On a brighter note, as we can understand the concept of a personal 'memory of an abyss', I'm sure that if we learned to adapt to the universal abyss, our adaptation would be stronger.

I'm the only one that's replied...besides TrueNeutral, whose reply was only in a moderator capacity, sans the little jab. But anyways, I know what I'm posting, so it's a moot point. Whoa, whoa, whoa, now. I only did that once, my very first reply. The rest of my posts have been all snark. He's the one that's been saying stuff about me, not the other way around. You've come into my thread and have been destructive; you don't want discussion or debate to emerge for reasons you have hidden from us; you have made not one point, yet you're the star of the show. Your fame, in the short-term, is based on an insult; what you're dragging along in the thread is your first insult and your own encore of it - as if it was correct - as if it had contested the points I made; it didn't. What it did do was interfere with everyone's senses and emotions. We're focused on you and your ego, now, which could have just been reversed on to me, and my ego, at the first of the moderator interventions. What I want people to do is focus on the thread, and discuss or debate what I had outlined in the original post. I know you think it's nonsense, this isn't an argument unless you present a resolution to your claim. I'll think forward here, and assume you'll disregard honor; therefore, I ask other members to ignore this guy in this thread, and contribute themselves.

Hmm...making snarky comments about posters, then saying "let's focus on the posts, not the posters" because of somebody else (i.e. me) doing that exact same thing, and then saying nothing about the actual posts. I mean, I can't blame you, but it's still pretty funny. Alright, let's get down to brass tacks... Uh, never mind. dips Same trip, different phase. Well anyway, logic was outlined, if anyone can counter it, I'd be impressed.