.
.
S i t e  S e a r c h

A_B_C_D_E_F_G_H_I_J_K_L_M_N_O_P_Q_R_S_T_U_V_W_XYZ

List of Topics__Ask Suby__Free Stuff__Questions Lists
Terms of Use__________________Privacy Policy

Interlinked Dictionary© based on 
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate® Dictionary (m-w.com)
and Star Dictionary
Use the BACK button on your browser to return

sanctification.noun,.plural.sanctifications
set apart for a particular.purpose, ready for a holy use (to do with Creator-God); consecrated; purified, cleansed
sanctify, sanctified, sanctifying, sanctifies.transitive verbs
to set apart for sacred use (in the Old Testament when they got ready to do sacrifice to God, they washed, changed clothes and prepared by praying, contemplation and meditation, in order to be acceptable in God's presence); consecrate; to make holy; purify; to invoke.sanction to, as with an oath or a vow (sanctify a relationship such as what is called marriage; to give social or moral.sanction to)
sanctifier.noun,.plural.sanctifiers
sanctity.noun,.plural.sanctities
holiness of life or disposition; saintliness; the quality or condition of being.considered.sacred; inviolability; something considered sacred

so.adverb
that way; in the same way; in the condition or manner.expressed or indicated; thus (hold the brush so); to the amount or degree expressed or understood to such an extent (she was so tired that she fell asleep; in the amount so certified); to a great extent; to such an evident.degree (but the idea is so obvious); afterward; well then; then (to the gas station and so home); likewise (you were on time and so was I); apparently; used in expressing astonishment, disapproval or sarcasm (so you think you've got troubles?) 
so.adjective
true; factual (I wouldn't have told you this if it weren't so); in good order (everything on his desk must be exactly so)
so.conjunction
with the result or consequence that (he failed to appear, so we went on without him); in order that (I stayed so I could see you) so.pronomial
such as has already been suggested or specified; the same (she became a loyal friend and remained so)
so.interjection
used to express surprise or comprehension (So! You've finished your work at last)
so-and-so.noun, plural.so-and-sos
an unnamed or unspecified person or thing
and so on.or.and so forth.idiom
and similarly; and continuing in a like manner
so what.idiom
it may be true but what does it matter (she's late for work, so what! she brought us all coffee; so what he's stressed out! don't we all get that way at times?)
so to speak.idiom
as if it were really so (she lives here, as it were; in a manner of speaking (the feeling is, as we say, quite honored); as if; as it were; just as; in a manner of speaking (can't see the forest for the trees, so to speak)
so as to.idiom
in order to (mail your package early so as to ensure its timely arrival)
so that.idiom
in order that (I stopped so that you could catch up); with the result or consequence that

so-called.adjective
incorrectly or falsely.termed (a so-called document purporting itself as genuine; instant food implying the term means it's food) you use so-called to indicate that you think a word or expression used to describe someone or something is in fact wrong (the so-called experts couldn't figure out what was wrong and how it could be fixed; these are the facts that explode their so-called economic miracle; these are the so-called facts used by those espousing the theory of evolution); you use so-called to indicate that something is generally.referred to by the name that you are about to use (a summit of the world's seven leading market economies, the so-called G-7); so-called is used to show that something or someone is usually called a particular name (the health threats posed by so-called 'mad cow disease')

scientific.adjective
of, relating.to.or.employing the methodology of science
scientifically.adverb
scientist.noun,.plural.scientists
a person having up to date knowledge of one or more sciences, especially a natural or physical science

science.noun,.plural.sciences
such as.behavioral science, creation science, exact science;
the state of knowing, which implies the consciousness of the knower."Even in science, an outstanding scientist having an ordinary consciousness sees reality totally differently compared to one in higher states of consciousness.(for example). This is because ordinary wakeful consciousness views the world through the prism of three-dimensional.space and time. The weapons of mass destruction have been made exactly based on this consciousness. Higher consciousness can control the reality in that it has an entirely different view of the world; that of love and success for all. Your own consciousness must control reality and this is the basis which any science must be built upon, as this allows to neutralize destructive technologies and becomes man's true protection."....page 96 in book by Grigori Grabovoi.

"Science is a process, a systematic means of exploring possibilities, not a dogmatic, stagnant set of beliefs."....Dr Kelly Brogan, MD,.Vaccines and Brain Health.

Science means 'we know'; science is mostly the study of effects (how something works is analyzed) leaving out reporting on why is it things are made to work as they do and producing 'dumb down' textbooks to 'educate' others; science is the study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world and society, mostly through observing and experimenting using methods to discover information towards development of something, however conventional science falls short."Conventional science with its reasoning can't enter the world of the unseen"....Masaru Emoto;."Science has yet to weld the fields of subjectivity and objectivity."....Deepak.

Science classically separates the observer from the observed, not so in quantum mechanics; orthodox science is systematic thinking directed toward the seeking of connections between our corporeal world, assembling knowledge gained with exactness based upon three-dimensional observation techniques and here it misses the big picture as we all know now that there are more than three dimensions of existence, for example, this science has told us that the body bleeds if cut and that we are held on the Earth by gravity and that we can't survive without food for more than a few weeks, missing that all these 'law's, though true on the three dimensional level, are completely superseded at higher levels, where the control of bleeding occurs, where people can levitate and where some people are able to simply feed off the Sun's energy for years, all as well documented in the movie What If? The Movie; some scientists argue that western science is 'a dead body of science', for it does not observe the living invisible connections between measurable matter, nor does it take into account how the invisible reality affects the third dimensional, so called physical world. Dr. John Hagelin, Dr. Fred Alan Wolf, Nassim Haramein and many others then can be called true scientists, as they hold higher consciousness views.

"True science requires testing of explanations against the natural world..."....Eugenie Scott, Executive Director of the National Centre for Science Education, Inc., El Cerrito, California. 
"Any science is associated with the concepts of research and implementation of research results. The true science at the stage of research should not destroy anything and at the stage of implementation it must ensure the improvement for all aspects of the world. The kind of science a scientist creates is in principle determined by the level of his state of consciousness. The principles of resurrection are the example of true science. Real science does not limit itself to a plain statement of reality because it sees that reality is changeable, for example I can materialize and dematerialize objects."....Grigori Grabovoi. Matthew 7:20 "Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them."

The scientific method:
1) Recognizing a new idea or problem that needs solving.
2) Use of logical reasoning to create a hypothesis (such as, 'what if we tried this?'
3) Testing of that hypothesis in the physical world through observation.

Logical thinking/reasoning is our cognitive ability to think out solutions to problems from a cause and effect standpoint and is entirely a technical process, based on the amount of information we have at any one time, information restricted soley on things working and observed with the third dimension, the physical world. For example, the reason modern medicine 'misses the boat' and ends up 'killing' people is that doctors can only mentally reference what they look at with what they have been taught.

According to the Oxford dictionary, science is."the study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world and society.(especially through observation and experiment)". In these terms, one named Umashankar-ji from India, is therefore a scientist, for he has dedicated his life to studying the physical and natural world through the observation of his own spiritual practice and self-experimentation.

Through his discoveries, Umashankar-ji now argues that western science is."the dead body of science".for it does not observe the living invisible connections between measurable matter. Western scientists observe and measure the dead cells of living creatures, not the soul that is the life within them. They leave out components of other dimensions affecting functioning of what we.can.see, that we call physical.

Experimenters have not found a way of measuring the soul, so they claim that it does not exist, failing to realize that the soul is beyond measurement and is that within which all things measureable exist, such as birds, rocks, air, etc. They claim that the Creator is nowhere, but Umashankar-ji prefers to explain that the Creator is."now-here".existing within every living being, in fact, since all is vibration of frequencies, everything is 'living' and subject to improvement. Everything that is, apart from the ordinary consciousness of mankind, also known as the ego level, the low level of mankind' thinking; for to 'improve' on it would be to make it more vile than it already is.

Without the soul, the body cannot live and without the body the soul cannot exist (for it will then gradually return to the 'super-soul', the Great Infinite Intelligence). Like a wave which rolls up onto the beach and then back again, the person in the soul of existence will come and may then again also go. So, if scientists claim that there is no soul, then surely this is proof that they are studying the dead body of science, since the soul is the 'groundbase' of all we see and know of, even that which we don't see, but realize does exist, such as all the invisible things. It's the Soul that animates man and all things.

In order to gain true knowledge, scientists first need to study their own feelings and discover their own soul (why?). Only in this way will they understand the life of science rather than its dead body.

"To do science is to search for repeated patterns, not simply to accumulate facts.".Robert Helmer MacArthur, Geographical Ecology, 1972, New York, Harper and Row. One such fact for which a Nobel prize was given, is that the universe is expanding. Well, so what? What is that supposed to mean? How is that to affect mankind, if at all and when it may again contract, what then is the purpose of this cycle? Getting a Nobel prize for stating a fact proven from observance is ludicrous. I could state a fact that a bicycle goes faster downhill and even faster there when the wind is behind me. Like, so what? I get to where I was going in less time. Wow!

Only in this way, the way they have attained to now look at things from, the way of a higher consciousness of understanding, will they understand the life of science rather than its dead body. As Umashankar-ji says."one drop of practice is better than an ocean of books and theory".

Through the practice of meditation we can feel and through feeling we can discover the soul.."Theory which can help beginners make their first step is created based on the best pieces of practice. The underlying aspect of a true science is practice, that is, obtaining a necessary result and that necessary result must always be arrived at by actions toward the betterment of all."....Grigori Grabovoi..Not being toward the betterment of all, scientific practices are then of the destructive side, which is the way of death.."World processes are out of control because people are lacking the higher consciousness necessary to take it from the negatives now produced and toward a world where people receive and deliver benefit."....from page 101 Grigori Grabovoi's book.

Science:-for kids on the Net, clear explanations for kids or adults madsci.org and for others sciencedaily.com; type Nassim Haramein into YouTube (world reknown physicist with proven new information apart from classical physics)

creation science.noun, plural.creation sciences
scientific.evidence or arguments.put forth in support of creationism

exact science-(physical sciences)
a science (as physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, engineering, mathematics, etc.) whose laws are capable of accurate and reliably repeatable quantitative expression as often defined using numbers; however as is often the case, in any 'exact science' the postulates are often unprovable and simply accepted at the time by many whose reputations we have trusted in;-"Postulates just cannot be proved. If any postulate can be proved, it means it is not original. This indicates that the provision (what they are putting forth) is not basic, is not fundamental. Fundamental provisions in every science are the provisions that serve as a foundation on which the entire building of this science is constructed upon. These are the provisions or the laws, from which the rest can be deduced. But they themselves cannot be deduced. They are just declared and that's it."....Grigori Grabovoi.

behavioral science.noun
a quasi body of knowledge often passed off as science (psychology {good merit}, audiology {unbelievable amount of  errors}, biology {high merit}, sociology {of some value}, anthropology {learning of information from past actions}, etc.) that deals with the study of human beings, animals, climate, etc. through observational and experimental methods and generalizes about how these things operate (actions and reactions) in society, such as, 'in 6 out of 10 cases this is true', as compared to an exact science which interprets experience on a higher than purely descriptive level, e.g. 'this has to be true all the time (2 plus two must always equal 4) or the skyscraper won't stay up, the astronauts won't hit the two foot window to reenter Earth's atmosphere and the submarine won't work as it should.

It would be correct to rename this misnomer of behaviorial 'science' to behavioral analysis.

Some persons trained in sciences, such as evolution, often take comfort that some future discovery is certain to confirm their quest for verification of nature minus a Creator. They continue looking for a hopeful monster. Other more respectable evolutionists conclude that this great Creator could have any of many ways to start life, perhaps even the big bang. After all look what one tiny cell can become, a baby with a hundred trillion different cells, with each cell having also a hundred trillion atoms, all communicating with each other and.each doing.over a million things.every second.just to keep you going.

"Evolution is not an idea. It's a fact.".says James McCarthy, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science said at the launch of a conference whose theme celebrated Darwin's work.

Many of evolutionist's highest gums (because they were speaking in Chicago as they presented papers) showed how evolution can be witnessed in everything from the genetic similarities between humans and Neanderthals to the way planets form and crows use tools to catch bugs.
....Wow, really! And what one thing that is true about evolution came out of it. Absolutely zilch! They banged about ideas and opinions they had accepted as being true and what benefit for mankind came of it all? Religiously embracing what has been proven to be still a theory they shared such opinions and ideas.

True scientists, have long since rejected the 'religiots' (religious idiots {evolution is really a religion to those closed-minded to further research on the subject}) who fervently.embrace the theory of evolution.

They said at the conference that the public is skeptical (and they should be) of these US scientists (the behavioral/pseudo ones that is) who continue to believe in the commonly indoctrinating theory of evolution.

No, folks they are not crazy, they are just adhering to that which they learned (were brainwashed) in school about. These are the unsane. They failed to put it all together which would evidence something way beyond evolution and they are sometimes not nice to those who hold a different opinion on the subject of creation.

What matters is the soul exists and we should learn about it and how it can affect us in the present.

At the conference it was also said."It's impossible to deny evolution: the development of drug resistant microbes, pesticide resistant insects, there are abundant examples in ordinary life."
And this is supposed to prove the commonly taught theory of evolution? The abundant examples are examples of man's attempts at poisonings those things he deems should not be around.

Microbes and insects, in fact living organisms of any type deal with poisons that drugs, pesticides, etc. threaten their lives with, by an unfolding from within them of programming the Creator established to ensure their continuance.

Evolution is not well taught in US schools, it was said and thankfully this is so. There are some smart teachers out there who refuse to be hoodwinked by the unfounded plethora of errors obviously used to abuse the development of intelligent children. The ego in those considering themselves masters of others is bent on control. These are the ones trying every trick they can muster, to propagate false knowledge for their own purposes.

Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education, in part of the Nazi like push to shove commonly taught evolutionary teachings onto others, while neglecting the vastly more important information of the soul, said, that there are many more working behind the scenes to challenge or limit the teaching of evolution in the classroom.

In 1968 the Supreme Court struck down an Arkansas law making it a crime to teach evolution and ruled that it was unconstitutional to ban the teaching of evolution under the powers of the separation of religion and state.
...That's good, let's teach evolution. It really is a wonderful subject for exercise of analytical abilities and children need to learn how to pick it apart piece by piece, as they do other things that develop thinking.

Hey, it is the men and women's country. If they don't want evolution, then why should it be forced upon their children, unless of course you believe in totalitarianism, which it is obvious many espousers of evolution do, such as some who were at this conference; you can tell by their stance on the subject, 'me right, you wrong, let's get rid of your beliefs'.

"The latest strategy is not to promote the frank teaching of intelligent design, but to sneak it in through the back door." Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education, said in a telephone interview.
...Now here's a person in a respectable position, but acting like a fool, as she accuses those who do not believe in the evolutionary fable, as being surreptitious sneaks. Sure says a lot for her credibility. What on Earth is she doing in a position bespeaking science education. It sure is not true science and it is not at all education, but more of indoctrination. What's her real agenda? Who's pulling her strings?

She continues and wouldn't you like her to be teaching your kids what she holds to be true:."In the biology business we'd call that adaptation, if nothing else evolves, the creationists do. They're always coming up with ways to subvert evolution."
...She fails to say what ways; were they just questions? At any rate, she calls creationists 'subversives'. How did this close-minded woman every get into the job she is in? No open mind on her part for anything to be wrong with the evolutionary theory and really, maybe nothing is; after all, it's just a theory, but she seems to have progressed from it being a theory, to it now being fact to believe in, a fact she feels others must accept as true. All this crap simply fuels division over something not really that important at all. Instead, knowing what the soul can do is important for children and all of us to know.

Barry Palevitz, professor in the Department of Botany, University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia, states dogmatically, that which he obviously understands so little:."supernatural explanations are unnecessary and counterproductive...No natural phenomenon, not one, has ever been shown to have a supernatural cause based on objective, material evidence... Evolution is the accepted scientific explanation for how life arrived and it's supported by a mountain of data...the supernatural cannot be tested by the material methods of science and we should force creationists to admit it...scientists do not believe in evolution, they believe it...Scientists believe evolution because overwhelming data support it...the data since Darwin's time support evolution; it's not a matter of faith."....ibid., "...everything science says is couched in probabilities, certainty isn't in our vocabulary."....'Science and the Versus of Religion, A Conversation with My Students', Skeptical Inquirer, July/August, 199, page 33.

Thank God Barry isn't a aerospace engineer/rocket scientist in charge of bringing astronauts back to Earth. One can't rely on probabilities in trying to convince astronauts how safe they'll be as they exit from and return to Earth from space. Thank God Barry didn't become an architectural or aeronautical engineer and design the buildings or airplanes many of us rely on as being state of the art engineering. Consider the crucially constituent certainty evident in mathematics is its particular connection to the physical sciences, in fact to any science which interprets life on a higher than qualitative level.

Hey Barry! You confirm my belief that die hard evolutionism leads to Nazi like tendencies. And Barry, your credibility is excessively diminished by your vacuous statements (hey! did you and Ken Miller come out of the same school?), which imply unanimity of support by all scientists toward the hairbrained.sophistic. concoction commonly taught evolution has proven itself to be; that is, once one examines its plethora of inconsistencies with meticulous research methodology.

In addition, you appear to fatuously.contradict colleagues who believe that science is knowledge of the laws (laws Barry) of nature, which enable modern technology through their application toward the manufacture of material products and devices; example and Barry, if you're sure the theory of evolution should preempt the Bible, perhaps you should consider why so many intelligent persons believe what the Bible and other spiritual writings explain concerning the world of the invisible. What does evolution say about the world of the invisible? You haven't told us?

Learn about both sides and make up your own mind.

Shintoism.noun
the indigenous.religion of Japan consisting chiefly in the cultic devotion to deities of natural forces and veneration of the Emperor as a descendant of the sun goddess 
Shintoist.noun-or.adjective
Shinto, Shintoistic.adjectives

suffice, sufficed, sufficing, suffices.verbs
intransitive verb use.to meet present needs or requirements; be sufficient.(these rations will suffice until next week); to be equal to a specified task; be capable (no words will suffice to convey my grief)
transitive verb use.to satisfy the needs or requirements of; be enough for
sufficer.noun

sufficient.adjective
being as much as is needed
sufficiently.adverb

sufficiency.noun, plural.sufficiencies
the condition or quality of being sufficient; an adequate amount or quantity; adequate means to live in modestcomfort

Slavonian Grebe.noun.(scientific name, Podiceps auritus)
From an original Watercolor by Robert Gillmor

sop, sopped, sopping, sops.verbs
transitive verb use.to dip, soak or drench in a liquid; saturate; to take up by absorption (sop up water with a paper towel)
intransitive verb use.to be or become thoroughly soaked or saturated
sop.noun
something yielded to placate or soothe; a piece of food soaked or dipped in a liquid

subterfuge.noun
a deceptive.stratagem or device

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.