Once again it's hope. I'm hoping that something will cause her to 'snap out of it', you never know what that might be, the mind is a funny thing.

Sakura:
Only in as much as life itself is a game. One assumes you have ascertained the point being made by this time but if not Walker can explain it. No, I do not use deamons in that manner.

James Meehan:
Of course they're ignorant, Prodigy, but as you can see the light dawns for some of them. More interesting will be when the most obstinant confront their ignorance by trying to squeeze the mushroom cloud back into the shiny little sphere of plutonium.

On the other matters; it is pleasure to finally find a man with equal enthusiasm for foreplay without requiring training or the sting of leather first.

Walker:
Now the light begins to shine through. As you've begun to realize speciation exist and continues regardless of social conventions or contracts.

Prodigy, how do you do it? Everytime I try to use people as chess pieces they run off the board screaming something about kidnapping. Weird.

Uh, hello, Zeddy boy.
Earth to walking toon!

You DID kidnap them.

On the subject of Taint...

..Unlike those who follow the philosophy of the Teragen, I do not see Taint as any form of evolution. In fact, in many cases, it seems to actually detract from the abilities of the Nova. I have witnessed Novas losing an entire physical sense due to their 'armor' growing plates over their eyes and/or ears, others developing biological quirks where they must subsist on uncommon materials to survive and even Novas who lose their judgement as a chemical imbalance causes them to suspend their reason at the drop of a hat. These hardly seem to be any sort of improvements.

I, myself, am not entirely untouched by Taint. I've developed the archetypical 'energy aura' that many Novas manifest when they channel vast amounts of quantum forces and I also have had a change in the colour of my eyes, which often times manifest jade energies that seem to almost flow from my eye sockets. These changes seem to have unnerved me more than others around me, specifically some of my baseline companions who seem to think it's remarkable to look at.

Investigations into the nature of quantum backlash disorder would be of great interest in me and I would be more than happy to contribute to anyone's research if possible.

You know, that's what the police said. Ah well, I've given up on chess anyways. You should see the Chutes And Ladders game I've got set up.

But you aren't a follower of Teras, and therefore cannot see it as we do.

You are contributing to my research already although its always pleasant to keep dealings on a consensual basis.

Not to limit your self expression but there are three points you should consider.

(1) You may soon find yourself reevaluating what is or is not taint as this discussion proceeds. As previous discussions here have made evident many speak on the subject only to find themselves thrashing just to keep their head above water when the questions begin. For that reason;

(2) You may wish to exercise a certain sense of caution when tempted to claim taint is or is not 'X'. Along with that, I think you will soon find that terms such as quantum backlash disorder are of no real value despite there being a subset of phenomena often associated with 'the taint' that clearly are a backlash of quantum. The reasons I say this will become evident as we proceed.

(3) As Ashnod pointed out it becomes problematic when stating a group, especially one that is a so only in the loosest sense of the term, has view 'X' regarding the taint. Again, the reasons for this will become clear in time.

Thank you for joining again after long absence. It is always pleasurable to find minds open to possibilities.

Reading this made me think that actually taint could be a sign of some form of evolution, seeing as evolution in a biological sense pretty much gaurentees randomness and mutation. But then again, evolution also implies a gradual change over generations. It's not a step up so much as a branching out, it's something that only really shows up in the fossil record, it isn't something you see over night. It's seeming to me that evolution is rather a funny term to aply to what happens with novas.

Sure, no-one has ever seen the emergence of a seperate species before so the sudden apperance of a fully functioning organ might be the way evolution happens. And sure, you can argue about whether to label novas as Human, sub-species or seperate species, but I'm thinking now that that's missing the point entirely. I've had my supiscions before, but everything seems to confirm them at the moment. I think what happens with novas is as big a leap as what happened when life first arose out of simple chemical reactions. It may have it's roots in evolution and genetics but there's a whole lot more to it than just that.

You have experienced epiphany, Walker.

Human language is sometimes a clumsy tool but still the best choice for the moment. Those possessing more subtle tools of communication are not wide spread and as you can see even an imperfect tool has its uses.

Well done.

Why do people keep congratulating me lately?

Stop it, it's making me paranoid

Hm.

There seem to be a couple of research scientiests out there (not really my field). Has anybody checked for genetic changes in novas as a result of aberration? That is, does the Syndrome alter the body at the DNA level, or are we just looking at cosmetic changes?

You realize of course you're implying there are only two possibilities and by inference indicating anything other than a change to DNA is cosmetic. Have you ever seen a nova reduce themselves to a self-propagating wave pattern or take on the characteristics of a substance normally thought to be inert or incapable of sustaining life?

Are you sure those are the only two possibilities?

Can we cut past all the chatter and get to the explanations Ms. Cassady? It's looking like a good start and your pissing off all the right folks but I want to get to the heart of the matter.

Well, I was deliberately limiting myself to physical, non-powered aberration.

But yes, I have seen such manifestations - I would hazard that such novas' conciousness is sustaining itself as an energy matrix a step removed from normal space-time, while they maintain artificial forms (rock, light, giant beast-man, whatever) through quantum manipulation.

The point of the question was that it could throw out Darwinian evolution (at least with respect to novas). If changes to my physical form are expressed at a genetic level, then any aberrations I develop can be passed on to my children - meaning that learned traits can be passed down, and suddenly evolution can be directed.

Which would be kinda cool.

Less stick. More carrot.

I've checked myself. Interesting results I must say. In fact I've been keeping track of my DNA for the last four years. It would make an interesting paper.

In all the years I have been keeping track of my DNA, it hasn't changed a bit. My EEG, though, has "improved" remarkably, though.

Again, looking at just one aspect of an alteration is ignoring the bigger picture.

Ashnod;
But you aren't a follower of Teras, and therefore cannot see it as we do.
The same could be said for the 'insight' of any group of cultists.

Arek, look at it from this perspective:
What does that aberration teach us about that person, and what does it teach that person about themselves?
My theory is that aberrations push novas in a certain direction. Make them explore aspects of themselves that are new, or under-utilized.
Even the "funky" eyes or those "Kewl" auras can be milestones in understanding ourselves as novas.
Now, decoding that message can be the tough part.

Cody, so far it is alot of blab and not enough substance. Pretty standard stuff, really.

Paris, think about what you are asking for. The ability to shape the body, soul, and mind of another nova. Sounds cool, unless you happen to be the child who is being limited by their parent's worldview.
I would hope you would want better for any offspring you chose to have.

My words were not intended to say that followers of Teras have a "correct" view of things, Jager. I said what I said because Arek stated "unlike those who follow the philosophy of the Teragen, I don't see Taint as."

Ergo, Jager, he can't see it as we do because he doesn't know why we see it that way. His words lended with them the aura of experience, that he knew as we do and with that knowledge chose not to see it as we do.

Whether or not we are right or wrong wasn't something I was trying to say.

Thank you for the clarification, Ashnod. I would rather have novas look for their own answers than go looking for them from someone else.
I don't feel that Teras is wrong, only that it isn't always right.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking to breed a bunch of supermen or somesuch. If I ever have kids, I'm going to want to keep things as normal as possible - if only to avoid unexpected complications.

Just pointing out possibilities.

1) You're welcome.
2) Often the path of self-discovery leads one to seek out a teacher. Don't be too quick to dismiss this path, for it is just as valid as the one you espouse.

Why darling, I am everso sorry this has failed to reach the high water marks of previous conversations here that, when distilled down for information content, can be summarized as:

"... self-admittedly having no real information on the topic but expect to be heeded regardless soley by virtue of possessing an opinion..."

Such a pity that apparently the only worth while conversations on the subject are known only to you personally and took place off line with novas also known only to yourself. Such a deep meaningful existence.

Just slip the dollar in, Stud. It tickles when you rub it around that way.

No, lover, we can't. The proverbs regarding mules, water and pieces of 2" by 4" lumber apply here. Otherwise I'd have posted the entire argument in toto, spared myself the effort of explaining light to the blind and put the saved energy to use perfecting the quantum rarefractor.

Paris, darling, there are other methods of information transferral not requiring the haphazard exchange of sperm and egg.

To acknowledge the old means are irrelevant to these special cases is not the same as assuming there is no other means to procreate. Or more simply; you are looking at a subset of phenomena not the entire range of possibilities.

Paris, darling...

Pardon? You seem to be repeatedly assuming that I am blind to the full range of possibilities. I am simply looking at a the situation from a practical point of view. Most of us do not have the ability to exchange genetic information (or an analog of it) without sex or technology - and will not develop it in the near future.

Therefore, most of us will find this kind of information more useful than the more theoretical fields which you seem to be focusing on.

Now, I am perfectly willing to acknowledge the significance of deep theory - particularly with our limited knowledge of...well, how we work. But you have been attacking a more immediate topic simply because it does not worry about unnecessarily arcane matters.

You may want to consider your own limitations.

Anyway, on a somewhat less confrontational note, this question sounds like it's right up your alley, Widget:

Novas often produce effects that they do not understand. All that is really necessary is for us to desire something to happen - knowledge often helps develop new abilities, but that is probably more a way of convincing your subconscious that something is possible than anything else.

So, the question is: why? or, more precisely, how?

A fairly clever woman I know suggests that we produce effects from top down, so to speak. Her theory is that our subconscious mind simply tells the universe what it is supposed to be like - imprinting a quantum state (remember schrodinger's cat?). The universe then assumes the imprinted state, doing so in whatever manner is most efficient.

This would also explain why we see such variation among expressions of similar effects.

Not blind, dear one. Nor am I willfully attacking a minor point to exclusion of the over-arcing subject.

In order to have a meaningful discourse it is sometimes necessary to ascertain both the capability of the the person whom is being conversed with and also the nature or boundaries of the discussion desired. To use an example the more militant simple minded can follow let us assume you said you wished to speak about weapons. My response is going to ascertain whether you are indicating a desire to engage on projectile or non-projectile weapons. Assuming you indicated that guns were your intent then I must to ascertain whether we're speaking of single or multi-volley devices, hand guns (pistols and/or automatics), rifles, payload specific devices including or excluding grenade launchers, manpads, energy esoterics, etc. It might speed things up a little to point out that often the difference between deep theory and immediate relevance is less determined by background and preference than which novas are familiar to you.

So in light of this elaboration what exactly did you view with anticipation as a discourse on the procreation topic? Or did you want to maintain the segue to the nature of quantum manipulation and manifestation? As there is a relevance between the two we could discuss both but I recommend against it if you desire to keep the dicussion open. While you seem, at least on a cursory inspection, capable of handing multiple simultaneous and branching discussions most here are not.

Usually it works best to give them a single fact at a time and even then you must correct their factual misconceptions as they crop up.

Not blind...

The point of the gene topic was simply to find the answer to the initial question. It seemed reasonable to go ahead and ask around about such research rather than to personally go and attempt to convince a few novas to get their DNA checked.

Procreation just kind of came up, but if you want to keep it in play, that's fine by me. Quantum manipulation, on the other hand, is something that interests me greatly. Such research is not my specialty, but it is hard to ignore - given that it is the reason I am as I am.

Also, it has more than a little bearing on the topic at hand ('Why are they staring at me?'), so it would seem apropos. (c;

While I am still monitoring the progress of my response to the Prodigy's gesture of interest in me the time available is somewhat limited but there are answers for your questions.

DNA structure; there are many novas that exhibit definite and proveable changes to their DNA structure although the current data pool suggests it occurs over time following eruption rather than at the eruption event itself. There are a greater number that show no signs of change, significant or otherwise. So that you are aware; the difficulty of conveying this to those incapable of perceiving it on their own lies in the complexity of the proofs as well as lacking sufficient groundwork to interpret the changes compounded by the fact that there are multiple interrelated factors at work. Each nova is an individual though it is possible to generalize certain traits and factors as relevant to a particular nova.

Procreation; as you inferred from my questions and comments, as well as those fact relevant to this entire topic, there is no single circumstance or set of phenomena rather a panopoly though many are interrelated.

Quantum manipulation and manifestation; your friend is correct though the language is imprecise. The universe is energy given structure and the MR Node controls the flow, probability and manifestation of that energy thereby creating new structure. This is why a nova can shoot green flame from her eyes that ceases brownian motion and effectively reduces temperature dramatically in the target.

On an indirectly related note you should see some of my proofs on the projected capabilities of the node itself as it relates to change in reality.

I notice that this thread started with alienation - that is, humans seeing us as alien.

Until very recently I was professionally involved in human-nova relations (mediator for a couple of Rashoud facilities), and I can say from personal experience that humans aren't the only ones thinking like this. A number of novas I've worked with have - on varying levels - found baselines just as alien and incomprehensible as the baselines find them.

In point of fact, this tends to be particularly pronounced in Teragen novas (not trying to throw mud at any Terats out there - just sayin'). In general, I think that the nova mentality changes more subtly than most folks notice - it isn't just having mental disorders. Older novas (again, particularly Terats) seem to have an easier time understanding each other than they have understanding humans.

Just to say - because it is a pretty obvious counter point - this doesn't look to be an intelligence issue. Granted, some of us are pretty bright and often see others as childlike in that respect (easy joke here, but I won't say it). However, there still remains a relative empathy between the big brains and those of us who are, quite frankly, dumb as bricks.

Just wanted you back on track, Widget-dear.

As for the dollar comment, I refer to the magic ramblings of Vile Bill:
"If you can't pull out the clip of 'hundreds, get your sad ass back to the sandbox."
I am afraid that is a nasty habit I have retained from my Elite days. But, those girls and guys work it real hard. I still see no harm in sharing some of the blood money with those who earn it.
Now, if you can lick the back of your knee, I will give you a 'spangler'.

Or, how about we just sit back and talk about Taint?

Ashnod, always a pleasure. I rarely get tired of talking to terats about their viewpoints and there own interpretaions of the way. Having some of them trying to kill me just spices up the conversations.

Ah, good ol' Bill, God rest his soul...

Quite frankly, if ANYONE looks under the skirt, I might have to show them my skills in Thai Kickboxing.

Of course, if it's the usual suspects hyped up on Ampwells and Ambrosia, well, I might forgive it.

Hino... kick boxing is fun, but do I have to lookup your skirt to test your skills?

Meh.
You're a girl, I don't think that's a prob. I just don't like lechers looking up my skirt, that's all. ~.^
Oh, and that was a rhetorical comment I made. A joke if you will. ^.^

So, that 'up the skirt' OpNet site I came across wasn't your idea?

Bummer.


Ya got cute panties.

Tonight... I hunt.

It's been a while since I've wore a black hat, but tonight fells like a good day to come out of retirement...