"Thanks Joer1, yes I hadn't looked around good enough, and yes I thought the slide show was a good interpretation in fact I sent John a note. Thanks Bill"

"In a presentation I gave at IC05, I speculated that dark energy might be the effect of space respiration. Since the universe has to slow down, stop, reverse direction and then and speed up as space respiration changes direction, and since we may be in (or just passed) an accelerating phase of space respiration, astronomers may be observing that phenomenon when they see that distant galaxies are moving faster than they should be."

"No Joer1, I'm really regreened, I put the book down about 10-12 years ago after not being able to reconcile the UBook's astronomy, but I'm delighted to see it resembling in some ways our current paradigm. This speaks of my faith, yes. I'll feed them to you as I get them."

"Actually I was referencing my lack of faith led by science. I admit I was a "cut and runner". Yes, I did remember reading the disclaimer but thought it no way reconsilable, also I had been hounded by a purist on a daily basis that provided me the impetus to shelve it. No, but I'll look up Block. Thanks Joer1"

"I hope there are no purists in this forum; they might be a bit upset by my article on Square Circles, A Tale of Two Orvontons. Purists are not comfortable with ambiguity. But it wouldn't be the first time that they were upset with me; I don't mind saying that the king has no clothes : ) I started out as somewhat of a purist, but as I discovered a few problems in the science of the book, I had to think about what the authors said in Paper 101: "Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time. Accordingly, future students of such a revelation are tempted to discard any element of genuine religious truth it may contain because they discover errors on the face of the associated cosmologies therein presented.""

"Ambiguity is am excellent word to discuss. In societal evolution my experience in this country anyway has been a swing from dichotomous thinking to ambiguity. This all within say 20 years? My take. I remember the this theory or that theory mentality which was a logical fallacy as well as dichotimous, or false dichotimies. E.g. There was a nature nurture war in the 1970's when the obvious (in hindsight) was both. And many more. Large subject. Does anyone out there like to respond to this as this because of course could very well have been my own mindset. How can we function in ambiguity? To me it is uncomfortable yet I have to follow what to me feels natural. How far should we go in splitting hairs? Or is it splitting hairs? Split some hairs with me."

"Well, I think I confused us both. How about we take it from what Amadon wrote about ambiguity. Again, maybe it's my own distorted world view and my experience only but I do see a cultural move towards ambiguity. This to me seems to have occurred over the say last 30 years or so. And to me anyway it represents an uncomfortable willingness? Is so, the willingness to accept this discomfort seems to me an indication of what? I don't know, but I do think that it may be an indication that we're socially evolving quicker? "