I took this questionnaire and I came up with...

Unitarian Universalist

1.
Hinduism (100%) Click here for info

2.
Jainism (92%) Click here for info

3.
Mahayana Buddhism (74%) Click here for info

4.
Sikhism (70%) Click here for info

5.
Bahá'í Faith (66%) Click here for info

6.
Orthodox Judaism (66%) Click here for info

7.
Theravada Buddhism (60%) Click here for info

8.
Islam (59%) Click here for info

9.
Neo-Pagan (54%) Click here for info

10.
Jehovah's Witness (53%) Click here for info

11.
Unitarian Universalism (52%) Click here for info

12.
Orthodox Quaker (48%) Click here for info

13.
Seventh Day Adventist (48%) Click here for info

14.
Liberal Quakers (46%) Click here for info

15.
Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (46%) Click here for info

16.
New Age (46%) Click here for info

17.
Scientology (45%) Click here for info

18.
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (44%) Click here for info

19.
Reform Judaism (43%) Click here for info

20.
Eastern Orthodox (42%) Click here for info

21.
Roman Catholic (42%) Click here for info

22.
New Thought (39%) Click here for info

23.
Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (36%) Click here for info

24.
Taoism (33%) Click here for info

25.
Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (31%) Click here for info

26.
Secular Humanism (19%) Click here for info

27.
Nontheist (17%) Click here for info

Ah man, I just took that test a few hours ago. And I also allready wrote down the results.

Utitarian Universalism 100
Neo Pagan 92
secular humanitism 90
liberal quakers 86
new age 76
some t word budhism 76
libral christ protestants 73
some m word budhism 69
taoism 66
new though 65

wow, you're more Chathlic than me!!!!

And you're almost not secular at all.

1. Secular Humanism (100%) Click here for info
2. Unitarian Universalism (89%) Click here for info
3. Nontheist (86%) Click here for info
4. Theravada Buddhism (74%) Click here for info
5. Liberal Quakers (70%) Click here for info
6. Neo-Pagan (63%) Click here for info
7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (54%) Click here for info
8. Taoism (48%) Click here for info
9. New Age (44%) Click here for info
10. Reform Judaism (36%) Click here for info
11. Orthodox Quaker (36%) Click here for info
12. Mahayana Buddhism (34%) Click here for info
13. Sikhism (24%) Click here for info
14. Scientology (23%) Click here for info
15. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (21%) Click here for info
16. Bahá'í Faith (21%) Click here for info
17. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (21%) Click here for info
18. New Thought (21%) Click here for info
19. Seventh Day Adventist (20%) Click here for info
20. Jainism (19%) Click here for info
21. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (15%) Click here for info
22. Eastern Orthodox (9%) Click here for info
23. Islam (9%) Click here for info
24. Orthodox Judaism (9%) Click here for info
25. Roman Catholic (9%) Click here for info
26. Hinduism (9%) Click here for info
27. Jehovah's Witness (3%) Click here for info

1. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (100%)
2. Eastern Orthodox (90%)
3. Roman Catholic (90%)
4. Seventh Day Adventist (86%)
5. Orthodox Quaker (81%)
6. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (74%)
7. Islam (63%)
8. Orthodox Judaism (63%)
9. Liberal Quakers (48%)
10. Unitarian Universalism (43%)
11. Hinduism (41%)
12. Reform Judaism (40%)
13. Bahá'í Faith (39%)
14. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (36%)
15. Sikhism (35%)
16. Jehovah's Witness (33%)
17. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (30%)
18. Nontheist (30%)
19. Jainism (27%)
20. Mahayana Buddhism (23%)
21. Theravada Buddhism (23%)
22. New Thought (21%)
23. Scientology (21%)
24. Neo-Pagan (17%)
25. Secular Humanism (16%)
26. New Age (14%)
27. Taoism (13%)


Hasn't this been done before??

Secular humanist.

I can't find a questionnaire. I clicked on a link and got bombarded with a bunch of stuff that I supposedly "won" that I could care less about. Yech. I want MONEY, not a bunch of other junk that I probably either already have, do not have any interest in, or do not want to pay the postage for! I did not see anything regarding a regular questionnaire.

Reform Judaism (100%), Unitarian Universalism (94%) and Liberal Quakers (91%), my God.

I can't believe I just spent seven minutes out of my life DOING A QUESTIONNAIRE TO FIND OUT WHAT MY RELIGIOUS BELIEFS ARE.

1. Secular Humanism (100%)
2. Nontheist (92%)
3. Unitarian Universalism (92%)

ie atheist. But I new that anyway. Religion, spiritualism, ghosts, whichcraft, various sorts of mumbo-jumbo etc etc. Its all just crap. A prop for the weak-minded. Roll on the day when its ALL consigned to the dustbin we know as history.

Secular Humanist (100%)
.
.
.
Jehovah's Witness (13%)

Same as last time.

According to the SelectSmart.com Belief System Selector, my #1 belief match is Reform Judaism. What do you believe? Visit SelectSmart.com/RELIGION

1. Reform Judaism (100%)
2. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (98%)
3. Unitarian Universalism (96%)
4. Liberal Quakers (92%)
5. Neo-Pagan (78%)
6. Mahayana Buddhism (77%)
7. Theravada Buddhism (76%)
8. Orthodox Judaism (73%)
9. New Age (72%)
10. New Thought (72%)
11. Sikhism (72%)
12. Bahá'í Faith (71%)
13. Hinduism (68%)
14. Islam (66%)
15. Scientology (64%)
16. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (63%)
17. Orthodox Quaker (60%)
18. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (59%)
19. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (57%)
20. Eastern Orthodox (52%)
21. Roman Catholic (52%)
22. Secular Humanism (51%)
23. Jainism (50%)
24. Jehovah's Witness (46%)
25. Taoism (45%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (40%)
27. Nontheist (38%)

I was born and raised Roman Catholic. Now I have grown to formulate my own beliefs. Go figure.

1. Reform Judaism (surprise; that's what I am)
2. Unitarian Universalism (I've studied UU and I can see the fit)
3. Liberal Quakers
etc.

Roman Catholicism and Jehovah's witness are rock bottom on my list.

I get slightly different results every time I take this The list is always roughly the same as this one though - the top few always come out as the top few even though they often come out in a slightly different order. Either Liberal Quakers or Universal Unitarianism tend to come out on top for me. Jehovah's Witness *always* comes out at the bottom

Here are my full results:

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (98%)
3. Nontheist (94%)
4. Liberal Quakers (87%)
5. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (79%)
6. Neo-Pagan (78%)
7. Theravada Buddhism (76%)
8. New Age (68%)
9. Mahayana Buddhism (58%)
10. Taoism (58%)
11. Reform Judaism (58%)
12. Scientology (56%)
13. New Thought (55%)
14. Bahá'í Faith (49%)
15. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (47%)
16. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (39%)
17. Sikhism (38%)
18. Islam (37%)
19. Orthodox Judaism (37%)
20. Orthodox Quaker (35%)
21. Jainism (31%)
22. Eastern Orthodox (23%)
23. Hinduism (23%)
24. Roman Catholic (23%)
25. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (20%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (14%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (5%)

I decided to take the nontheist test too and got scientific pantheism as my best match. There was no description but that sounds vaguely right.

I did the nontheist test too and I had:

1)Atheistic paganism
2)Pantheism
3)Agnostic church


on the bottom I have Confucianism and Randaism (Objectivism) which I don't know what is supposed to be.I have to check it somewhere.I guess that the 3 first options are always pretty accurate,and maybe so are the ones at the bottom of the list.On the middle it seems much more confused.Anyway it's interesting.

I did a Google search for my top one and it's actually pretty close to what I believe. The people who run sites about it go about saying it in a hippier way than I would though!

100% Secular Humanist.
"Most secular humanists are atheists or agnostics."
I'm a deist, is that close enough?

"MainLine to Conservative Christian/Protestant (100%), Jehovah Witness (92%)

Try to do the non-theist test too.It's pretty interesting and more accurate (at least for me).It's more non-religious than non-theist since I guess that deist is one of the options included.

Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (100%)

Sure those liberal quakers are great!!

This time around, I got this result:

1. Hinduism (100%)
2. Jainism (85%)
3. Mahayana Buddhism (81%)
4. Sikhism (68%)
5. Neo-Pagan (64%)
6. Theravada Buddhism (60%)
7. Unitarian Universalism (58%)
8. Orthodox Judaism (57%)
9. Bahá'í Faith (53%)
10. Islam (48%)
11. Liberal Quakers (47%)
12. Reform Judaism (46%)
13. Scientology (45%)
14. New Age (43%)
15. Orthodox Quaker (42%)
16. New Thought (42%)
17. Taoism (37%)
18. Seventh Day Adventist (37%)
19. Christian Science (35%)
20. Liberal Protestants (32%)
21. Conservative Protestant (29%)
22. Mormons (27%)
23. Jehovah's Witness (27%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (25%)
25. Roman Catholic (25%)
26. Secular Humanism (19%)
27. Atheist (12%)

I always get the "Hinduism (100%)" result, but how things come out after that seems to be subject to variations. Possibly based on what I choose to be high, medium, or low priority...

Our results are pretty similar!

unitarian universalism

Hare Krishna!
http://richardwyndham.tripod.com/

Hare Krishna!
http://richardwyndham.tripod.com/

I just signed your guestbook.

Orthodox Quaker

I answered this several times. This was the top one 2 out 3 times. It surprises me. I'd have never put myself in this catagory.

Ah, this one again:
(I doubt it's changed much, so here are the results)
#1: New Age (100)
#2: Unitarian Universalist (95)
#3: Hindu (92)
#4: New Thought (90)
#5: Neo-Pagan (82)
#6: Liberal Quaker (81)
#7: Mainline to Liberal Protestant (78)
#8: Christian Science (66)
#9: Scientology (66)
#10: Mahayana Buddhist (58)
#11: Reform Judaism (55)
#12: Baháí (53)
#13: Sikhism (53)
#14: Orthodox Judaism (50)
#15: Jainism (38)
#16: Islam (33)
#17: Theravada Buddhist (25)
#18: Eastern Orthodox (20)
#19: Jehovahs Witness (20)
#20: Latter Day Saints (20)
#21: Orthodox Quaker (20)
#22: Roman Catholic (20)
#23: Seventh Day Adventist (20)
#24: Atheist/Agnostic (12)
#25: Humanist (12)

I'm agnostic and I don't need a questionnaire to tell me that.

Yes, but it is an amazingly accurate tool, and it might be fun to find you are 38% agnostic, 24% secular humanist, and 7% church of waiting for space aliens.

The top one was 100% Reform Judaism.

Frankly I don't want to be bothered taking a questionnaire.

Sorry. That damn site threw me everywhere except where I was supposed to be, I'm sure. Nothing ever pointed me to some questionnaire. Only link after link and poop-up ad after poop-up ad.
Instructions, to help the idiot here (me)?

Strange.When I click on the link I give in the explanation it takes me directly to the questionnaire.

Galomorro had the same problem I'm having. Hmmmm.

Were you ever able to take the questionnaire? I wasn't. Had the same problem you did.

Thank you!

Hare Krishna!

Oh. I totally forgot about it after the first time not being able to take it!

Oh! And I totally forgot about it until just now! Ha! It looks like they had fun, though. Look at them all, would you? Comparing notes, excitedly sharing their grades with one another...
Ok, now I'm starting to feel left out, how about y -- ...
Galomorro?
*sigh*

Fair enough then.

I got a CULT! I always knew that was my destiny.. but I wanted to be the leader.

Or maybe they all just look like cults to me...

I took that one- interesting. My top 5 were:

#1 Scientific Pantheism

#2 Atheistic Paganism

#3 Taoism

#4 Agnostic Church

#5 Deism

Scientific pantheism? the survey must have evolved since I last saw it.

We were one apart on the Unitarian Universalism. Wonder what the slight difference was?
Very interesting test! I liked it! (I finally figured out that you have to wait out the poop-up ads, then go forward, must be an actual exit from the page and a return from the ad.)

I really liked the description to Neo-Pagan, which begins:

A community of faiths bringing ancient pagan and magickal traditions to the modern age -- including mostly Wicca but also Druidism, Asatru, Shamanism, neo-Native American, etc. Neo-Pagan...umbrella term for various and diverse beliefs with many elements in common. [Some] find no incongruence practicing Neo-Paganism [with] adherence to another faith, such as Christianity or Judaism.

Thanks, Dora - very interesting!

'A++' if you can tell me what I'm comparing and calculating here (formed a quick table in Excel, pretty interesting the results):

Name in Comparison...Score
HareKrishnadasa.............06
Dora...............................07
Oscar..............................07
Wolfchik9.......................17
Biggles............................13
Zang...............................06
Kristal_Rose...................09

I just dumped the data into the table, calculated (1) point per commonality of -isms that were over 50% each (easily acquired with VLookups). Look at Wolfchik and me! Biggles!
I think ours would have been more common, but I may not have caught all the data changes you apparently did yourself...(And what were you up to, may I ask?)

Brains are such superior computers. Before reading your explanation, I saw that the higher numbers indeed had rougher equivalence, and went into a half dozen method speculations. That wolfchic scored so high was the giveaway that you were using some fixed cut off and not a sum or product of proportions of variance by category. You started bottom up looking for steps towards common denominators, I started top down looking for shifts in the entire collective. Start with intuition in these things instead of grasping for the concrete first. That bottom up thinking is why you score higher in neo-paganism, reform judaism, and quakers, and I score higher in new-age and hindu.

You have time to migrate this data to spreadsheets but not to call me?

I've redone it, didn't take much - same data, just eliminated the 'discussion' for commonalities all together. Now I'm arriving at results that have to be called extrapolations, with a possible 2% error margin up (so far).
I left the either/or situation and now have assigned a rank to each of the percentages on my side of the equation, and rounded them up to the nearest 10, then divided by ten. Is this a fair point system? Can I analyze? (My training keeps me a 'bottom line' feeder - I love learning other ways to think though!)

Have you called?! Sorry, I don't have DSL, my line is the one and I haven't seen the cell since I made an attempt to clean this place after a week of Chris being gone, ha! Are you still there?

mainline to conservative/christian protestant

OK, I can't believe I just wasted so much time on this, but here you go.. per person, these are the averages of valid ratios between us and others.

Sorted by similarity to me..
Kristal_Rose, 1.00, 1.51
Lex, 1.03, 1.90
Grmbrand, 1.30, 1.11
Confetti, 1.32, 1.11
Southernyankee, 1.45, 1.20
NthenSome, 1.51, 1.00
Icurok, 1.54, 1.64
Biggles, 1.57, 1.67
Zang, 1.58, 1.44
wolfchik9, 1.74, 1.29
Jemmy, 1.82, 1.28
Harekrishnadasa, 1.87, 1.59
Oscar, 2.77, 2.44
dora, 2.94, 3.00
RayB, 4.60, 4.84
Spidertea, 7.92, 1.83
Dora, #DIV/0!, #DIV/0!
spidertea, #DIV/0!, 1.82
Cuteasabutton, #DIV/0!, #DIV/0!

and similarity to you..
NthenSome, 1.51, 1.00
Grmbrand, 1.30, 1.11
Confetti, 1.32, 1.11
Southernyankee, 1.45, 1.20
Jemmy, 1.82, 1.28
wolfchik9, 1.74, 1.29
Zang, 1.58, 1.44
Kristal_Rose, 1.00, 1.51
Harekrishnadasa, 1.87, 1.59
Icurok, 1.54, 1.64
Biggles, 1.57, 1.67
spidertea, #DIV/0!, 1.82
Spidertea, 7.92, 1.83
Lex, 1.03, 1.90
Oscar, 2.77, 2.44
dora, 2.94, 3.00
RayB, 4.60, 4.84
Dora, #DIV/0!, #DIV/0!
Cuteasabutton, #DIV/0!, #DIV/0!

This took me 3 1/2 hours (but I haven't used excel in a couple years (useful practice I guess)). I forgot how much I enjoy it. It's dangerous for the obsessive. I used to create project prioritization charts that rate and weight tasks by 20 categories of importance like educcational value and entertainment. never got anything done, just made lists trying to figure out what to do.

This is how I campared your mormon to HK's mormon: =MAX($E8,H8)/MIN($E8,H8) (=1.83) and then i averaged all 40 of those faith differences for HK to get the 1.59 you see. If his (or your) % was zero on something, that wasn't counted in the average (division by zero). Strategic statistics can make anything true. Today may have the highest temperature climb over a period of five minutes this century, or possibly the highest 6:10am temperature of any August this century. Doesn't mean the day won't be dismal and overcast though. I stayed up all night to go to the beach, but I'm open for other possibilities.
We're freakin nuts calculating this stuff you know?

I'm surprised to see Wolfchik9 so low on both totems there. I'm going to compare your ratios to my results (3 1/2 hours ago - haha. I surely didn't get as sophisticated).
Looks like your paste created a division by zero - shudda pasted vaaaaluuuues! (haha) If I knew the formula, I'd guess a -1 at each final close-parenthesis would remedy that. Plus, I have a new rule with myself to always revisit my formulas at completion (not until complete), and preface each with | =IF(ISERROR( ... ),""[or 0], ... ) |.
Hey, I've never compared work with anyone before! Cool!

The divO's you see there are for their results in the non-theist survey, in which we share not a single category. Wolfchic confirms what I saw intuitively.She does not share our top contenders at all. Her whole distribution is off. All our group A stuff is her group B stuff, and vice versa. Our 90's do not equate to her 70's which shifted her other stuff. She centers on Eastern Non-theism, I center on New-Age Sciences, and you center on New-World Faith. There are some major fundamental source of understanding differences going on there.
I did plenty of paste values, text to table & back, sorts on faith (to align my rows of comparisons). I wanted to do products of faith ratios but I couldn't unless I also multiplied the average faith ration to the 'missing number of comparison tests' power. Doing a simple average of valid tets didn't go askew because of missing multipliers. If someone were just like me, their variance product would be 1^40, or 1. It would have been 100 if they were 100% slaughterer of kali (while I was a 1%), and 10000 if they were also 100% divinity of cartoons (while I was a 1%). So, I've been tying up the phone. Do you sleep? I know I surrendered the notion tonight.

The divO's you see there are for their results in the non-theist survey, in which we share not a single category. Wolfchic confirms what I saw intuitively.She does not share our top contenders at all. Her whole distribution is off. All our group A stuff is her group B stuff, and vice versa. Our 90's do not equate to her 70's which shifted her other stuff. She centers on Eastern Non-theism, I center on New-Age Sciences, and you center on New-World Faith. There are some major fundamental source of understanding differences going on there.
I did plenty of paste values, text to table & back, sorts on faith (to align my rows of comparisons). I wanted to do products of faith ratios but I couldn't unless I also multiplied the average faith ration to the 'missing number of comparison tests' power. Doing a simple average of valid tets didn't go askew because of missing multipliers. If someone were just like me, their variance product would be 1^40, or 1. It would have been 100 if they were 100% slaughterer of kali (while I was a 1%), and 10000 if they were also 100% divinity of cartoons (while I was a 1%). So, I've been tying up the phone. Do you sleep? I know I surrendered the notion tonight.

I didn't understand a single thing of the conversation going on between you and Kristal_Rose.Can you explain for a mathematically (and maybe mentally ) challenged person?

I don't recall how it started, but we've been taking the information (the answers) people have posted here and tried something fun. We're putting the people alongside their data into a spreadsheet. I originally wanted to see who matched closest to me as far as these statistics reported.
When I showed Kristal, very astutely, she pointed out how - by analyzing it the way I did - I left out half the analysis really. So we both came up with different versions of what she was explaining. Mine doesn't quite tick-n'-tie exactly, but when I looked at it earlier (my version) and compared some of the results she came up with, they're actually tying in to one another!
Bottom line is we became tempted by the abundance of data in this survey available for analysis - because in another survey, we've got a conversation going about programming databases. (Kristal is the pro, I'll add.)

I like this SelectSmart thing.It's interesting and funny.I took almost every selector they have,these last 2 nights.
So it seems like I'm a secular humanist atheistic pagan,a anarcho-capitalist or a liberal or just an anarchist,my philosopher is Sartre,my horror author Matheson,my science fiction author Vonnegut,my art is Realist Art (Rembrandt, Van Eyck, Ash Can School, etc.),I drink Manhattan cocktail or whisky&coke or cheap champagne and my drug of choice has to be Dexedrine.The historical character that's more like me is Jesus Christ,my emotion is hope,my MBTI is INFP,my Enneagram type is 4w5,my flower is the rose,my sign has to be Aquarius.
The ones that where simply for fun (like the drink/drug selectors) are good too.And the religious/political/philosophic are pretty interesting.

where?? were!

There are as many different programmer types as their are religious types. network programmers need to be keen on protocal and passwords. You seem to be keen on the data analysis. I like to see it as kinetic sculpture and archetypal manifestation of thought patterns into matter. Things like infinite dimensional LISP arrays born fractally from analog spectral archetype seed patterns and working their way down to metaphoric data processing excite me.
I once had a landlord who got kicked off the lunar orbit module team for insisting they use his impulse generator instead of retro-rockets. His system involved a rotary engine that turned a carousel with a ball. The ball was forced into a tight radius (with a cam like wall) then released to fly at the wall of the device creating an impact. He had a phonebook thick print out of the data showing how all the rotary motion was converted into a unidirectional force that could be aimed to propel things like helicopters in any direction without requiring a force against an outside environment. As a spiritual metaphor, it was great, but as an invention, he forgot to calculate the other phone book of data showing how the force of bringing that ball back to center during its rotaion around the hub would be identical to the force it exerted upon it's release against the wall. I'm not sure what would be worse, him finding his dream was a delusion, or living his days bitter that his buddies at jpl conspired against his brilliance. He didn't leave one much choice in the matter. 20 years later he still had business cards and was dreaming of the day political borders ceased because everyone had their own helicopter. Around the same time I was friends with a machinist during a vast public art project. He forewarned his client that the plans for the perpetual motion machine couldn't worked. Afterwards, the client blamed the failure on poor craftsmanship and set out to have another built. One day there will be a pill for perpetual motion obsession disorder. It's claimed a few victims already. There actually is a working perpetual motion machine though. Einstein pointed it out: e=mc^2. The universe will perpetually be some non-diminishing actively flowing constant of energy, light, or matter.

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Liberal Quakers (98%)
3. Secular Humanism (93%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (86%)
5. Neo-Pagan (85%)
6. Theravada Buddhism (81%)
7. Mahayana Buddhism (75%)
8. New Age (71%)
9. Orthodox Quaker (70%)
10. Reform Judaism (70%)
11. Nontheist (67%)
12. Sikhism (66%)
13. Bahá'í Faith (58%)
14. Taoism (56%)
15. Jainism (49%)
16. Hinduism (48%)
17. Orthodox Judaism (46%)
18. New Thought (45%)
19. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (40%)
20. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (40%)
21. Seventh Day Adventist (39%)
22. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (36%)
23. Scientology (36%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (34%)
25. Islam (34%)
26. Roman Catholic (34%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (28%)

I watched each shuttle launch in 1985-1988 from only miles away. I could actually feel the push of the air from the lift. Each and every time (aside from the Challenger that terrible day), I would watch "us" push away from the ground like we do, and think to myself how utterly primitive this technique is to me.
I was in El Salvador, I think, when I was up all night the day we had set up. I was bored to tears, doing anything to keep myself awake. I worked in the command post - the hub of the campsite. One of the things I was responsible for was seeing to it all the first satellites, trunks and circuits were all up on schedule and to report it.
Well, I did this (reporting it) with a magnetic board, where I listed the circuits as you might in a spreadsheet format, and to "peg" each I used little colored magnetic circles. This night, all communications up, I'm freezing and bored. I had some of those circle magnets and I began fiddling with them, and - for this one night - I'm telling you I wish like hell I worked somewhere in JPL.
I think I successfully demonstrated to myself how spacecrafts - if they exist - might work as it seems they appear to...and if I'm right, it's not antigravity, it's the employment of gravity. I'm so sure of this, why aren't the scientists? (Or, is that a tad simplifying the matter, or maybe just a tad obnoxious?) But it brings me back to...we're not mooooviiiing ahead.
"I'm certain we're farther than I'm certain we are." I say that to myself to know that we're not as slow-paced as I think we are. I just wish there were more evidence of that.
This may just be my own ignorance, but I think the term "anti-gravity", in itself, is at least adjacent to being an oxymoron. As far as I know, we don't know what exists in our universe past gravity. It certainly would be difficult to explain what we are seeing if we're theorizing we're anywhere past Einstein's theory on gravity waves - we haven't even reached his notions in that area yet, I don't think.
So (here I go again) why are we so "far behind", or why the hell do I see it that way?
"I'm certain we're farther than I'm certain we are." (Actually, Wayne Wyler, The Suntown Event - a character of mine who rambles, quite like I'm rambling now.)
That's my comfort, I guess.

Perpetual motion! Ugh! Don't get me started.
Work?
Picture winding a watch - the coil that passes through gears to move the hands, is released. Why not, as that coil is unwinding, have gears at the far end of the "loose" end push gears so that - while it is unwinding one end, it's winding up the other end? When it reaches a notch in the coil, that flips a toggle switch, and the process is reversed...all the while moving the hands of the watch?
Plausible?

Hare Krishna, dude!

Okay

My father-in-law wired launch pads, then went on to fly hercules (you could park 747's under their wings) before retiring again as an alaskan bush pilot (you know, duct tape the wings and know how to carve a prop, outsmart a bear, etc.) (I had a couple pilot step dads too). I have a mariner project engineering stats bbok that tells back in 64 how they were able to measure cosmic particle flux and such.
Speaking of camping, I'm dying for a camping trip, haven't been on one in years, in case you had a agenda and could use more company.
There are beings that transcend time and space. I tell you, top down thinking does it every time. I've been improving my astral flight skills, now i can focus better on the stars better from my meditation than I can through the LA sky. I'd stopped doing for nearly a year because it felt like I was being jolted with 40000 volts, but that doesn't seem to be the case lately. I mentioned that angel faced lion riding on the sphere of white light?
Wow, how awesome! I just spent several minutes conversing with a neighbors parrot in parrot whistle.
Oh, anyhow, the lion - of judah, ezekiel, set, thoth, ireland, etc etc. Did you ever read my plans for a physical science based teleportation device? Did I mentionI invented the self flipping hourglass a few days ago? Far simpler than I imagined. You realise we already employ gravity as a great part of our extra-planetary launches? I did telekenesis once recently. If mankind united in that sort of knowledge we could move our whole solar system from galaxy to galaxy. Did I ever refer you to the nanotech newsletter I get. We are moments away from turning sand into gold, and perhaps a few years away from turning jupiter into a directional atomic rocket booster. I had one trivial speculation of matter appearing from nothing, existing by virtue of splitting into e=mc^2 and an anti-matter e=mc^2 such that the world could exist because an anti-world was created on the other side of a dimensional mirror. In that system, matter resides in one universe, and corresponding anti-matter resides in the anti-universe. just a kid type notion though. have you heard the one about the entire universe growing two twice it's size every second? every electron, molecule, galaxy, growing. Of course we can't tell because we and our tools of comparison all grow at the same rate. If I squat down then extend my legs quickly I can get the earth and even the entire universe to move away from me a couple feet for a second before my gravity snaps them all back. Likewise, time is constantly accellerating while matter slows down. We live twice as long and crystals chirp half as much in a given time when time doubles it's rate. (there's actually a metaphysical truth in that one critical to some of the physics I've been discussing.) and yes, I just got back from an antique store with T where I bought a couple ring watches. Don't tell me we have to get you a prescription for PMMOD. The energy at the loose end of the watch is the same as that required to wind it minus all the frictional loss. In the vacuum of space with bearisgs less frictional than magnetic suspension, the watch could keep going. Just bumping it would create angular momentum losses (or add some) akin to steering a gyroscope that would rob it of energy though. The basic model of a perpetual motion machine is the spinning top. The momentum of any part of the gyrosope is pushing upon its neighboring slice of the circumference. Tops spinning on magnetic suspension spin some time, but you can only get as much energy out of a flywheel as it took to accelerate it before it slows to a stop. I knew this when i was 8. (actually I had read most of the libraries physics section by then on topics like tv repair, player piano restoration (great beginners primer to computer programming), steam vehicles, etc.) I used to rebuild the 250 year old cuckoo clock I had inherited back then. My self flipping hourglass uses a weight and chain and will run out until rewound. Ah, I just invented one for you this second - a solar (or lunar) hourglass. Instead of sand, it uses a fine near frictionless, magnetic fluid, and there is a magnet on the ceiling almost identically as strong as the comparative weight (compared to sg. of the support fluid) of this fluid. At night the hourglass runs down like a normal hourglass, but at day the sun is overhead, not below, and gives just enough gravity for the fluid to flow back up toward the magnet. Wait, no magnet required even, just two imicible fluids almost identical in specific gravity, differenig only by a suns gravity influence amount. Ancient monks had this stuff figured out. Have you seen the clocks at the Santa Barbara Mission or Griffith observatory where a huge weight swings from a 30' chain? The earth spins, but the ball swings back and forth in the same path, so it appears to make a full daily rotation of its swing endpoints. It's possible to make a digital sundial such that the right combination of pinholes line up at at any time of day with the sun to create a numeric display like a modern lcd clock. There artifacts of recent technology back in BC, like the battery, presumably used for electroplating. They knew of steam pistons andturbines back in ancient greece, so the roman expansion nearly added the industrial revoliution to it's history two millenium earlier. You can read for more intense accounts of things like the arc of the covenant or kaballistic gollums. Get a book on king solomons technology. Keep in mind, societies have been known to evaporate, vanish, decay, etc. If you think about, if we get that sort of nanotechnology that appears just a few years away (and exists already to the metaphysicist), matter will be our paint which our consciousness will flow though. With that ability, we might take our merged consciousness, wipe the planet clean, and become volcanos, ice ages, etc. perhaps over seven days, and sprout some oblivious life forms on our surface, totally unaware that they are already made of a single conscious colective sub-atomic identity. The clock comes full circle. My second survey here years ago was asking the public if we should re-eden, or venture space. No one was ready for the question I was facing then, but things have evolved quickly since then. There are people here aware of terraforming, but I don't think they've considered the possibility that we be both creative directors, and the matter substrate itself. Voyager and Deep Space writers seemed to be aware of what's been in the works though; Conscious morphing quicksilver pools, Odo, nanoprobe viruses as a primitive start. Keep in mind the industrial revolution took centuries, the info age took decades, when nano launches, and it almost has, the launch pads are ready, the next age of man (and final age as man) could occur in months. That's the bottom up story. The top down story looks much the same with matter being an incidental by-product of the whole dream. And that, my friend, is the clock rewinding itself.

1. Universal Uterus lovers(100%)
2. Lickable Queers(98%)
3. Suckable Homosexuals (93%)
4. Mainline to Libelous Curmudgeon Prophylactics (86%)
5. Neo-tribal (85%)
6. Tarara Booomdeeyayism (81%)
7. Maharaja Baptism (75%)
8. No Age (71%)
9. Orthopedic Quacks (70%)
10. Reaffirmed Jesuits (70%)
11. Nontreeist (67%)
12. Sickism (66%)
13. But I have Faith (58%)
14. Tao of pooism (56%)
15. Jerkoffism(49%)
16. Hospitalizationism (48%)
17. Orthodox Junkyards (46%)
18. Nude Thought (45%)
19. Church of Jebus Christ of fatter-gay Sinners (Morons) (40%)
20. Mainline to Conservative Crackhouse/Prostitute (40%)
21. Seventh Day Adventurist (39%)
22. Christian Science Fiction (Church of Curie, Scientist) (36%)
23. Biologytology (36%)
24. Eastern Orthodontist (34%)
25. Ilsam (34%)
26. Roman Catharsis (34%)
27. Jehovah's Bizniss (28%)

Hare Krishna 2U2!

I don't know what Scientific Pantheism even means!

*lick*

I haven't heard the term before, but I'll venture to guess that it means humans are randomly evolving from mud to become independent gods. Some day we'll each fly into space and start our own planets, i suppose. It might mean people who see god like forces at work, but won't accept a notion of a preexisting god-force creator greater than man or monkeys. You were there. Didn't they have a description you could paste for us. We're probably not the only ones curious.

ok, we got new numbers
Kirsty>K=1.567825129
Kirsty>N=1.31113
Mandy>K=1.563722565
Mandy>N=1.319595608
.. which puts them halfway to me, and a lot like you.

btw, those were brilliant. you got them to match an purport and as homonyms (it would be prudent of me not to mention which ones had me laughing my head off). I may not say hi much lately, but i still think of you.

I know you feel me

I feel you
even when we never reply to each other

I'm glad you liked those, I had fun doing it.
Biologytology was my favorite...for so many reasons!
It's so orangesporanges!

I found this. It seems to be the original scientific pantheist's site.

http://members.aol.com/Heraklit1

I mapped that one to dianetics when I ran you through my computer. The morons, curie, orthodoxes, nude, no age, catharsis. all great caricatures. You always picked up on the comments I intended you to eavesdrop on, and I haven't been doing that lately. It occured to me that my (now ancient) website never got attention because I was just leaving the book on a bus bench, not on a conference table, meaning I just wrote it, I didn't write it 'to' people.

I painted this back in 88: The hovering shell is done with melted flouescent crayola's that look wild under blacklight.

I haven't successfully interpreted your quotients to my ratio-type math, but Kirsty rated pretty close to me, with Taoism and Unitarian Universalism being the closest resemblances between us and Secular Humanism and

CORRECTION TO ABOVE
I haven't successfully interpreted your quotients to my ratio-type math, but Kirsty rated pretty close to me, with Unitarian Universalism, New Age, Liberal Quakers, and Neo-Pagan being the closest resemblances in the higher bracket and Islam and Orthodox Judaism being our widest differences over all.
In the lower bracket, I scored very closely with her in Protestant (dead-on), Seventh Day Faith, Sikhism, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Taoism and Orthodox Quaker. A lot of similarities matched there.
You know, we did analyze these differently. I'm sure when I take the time, I'll learn something valuable from your method.
I like the way my results present themselves as well though. I not only produce results that display similarities across the board (higher-to-higher, lower-to-lower), but the tables are arranged in a way so they show facts about the person I'm comparing as well.
For instance, with Kirsty, it's revealed how she must have some sort of educational background in her religion - or she is very active in her religion, or one to which she is stringently faithful. Her percentages show how she is strong in her strong beliefs and - with little transition - becomes weak in all others. It's very deliniated with her.
(I think I'll ask instead of rudely talking about "her" as if she were a lab rat, forgive me.)
[Back to you in a moment regarding your incredible timepiece you provided above!]

But, to interject myself here (now there's someone who doesn't blab too much, huh?) What made you decide on "Kristal"? Originally, when you did, I mean. I'm compelled to ask at this point.

You know, looking at your scores, I'm supposing you are either very active in your faith, or very educated to the faith you practice, is that true?

► I haven't heard of that particular manner in growth of the universe - where it's said that all matter cubes its size every two seconds. If true, there truly exists a technology I can't even fathom (or haven't tried enough) because my perception is naught that we've been able to provide even an indication that this is true. I'd love to read what you might have on that. I imagine I would be doing more reading into than surface reading words on that material. I want pointed in that direction - that the technology and subsequent information is in fact there. For some reason, that's the sigh - the breath of, really - of relief I'm in search of all too often.
► I like the way you (subliminally?) point out my choice of using the watch as the device for perpetual motion. I certainly picked up on coming 'full circle' with all that, in case you were wondering.
► The spinning top, the flywheel, the gyroscope, my watch and even your hourglass with its liquid content (to which you considerately critiqued yourself): It all seems to have one compelling adversary to its purpose - friction. I realized this about my watch too. This is why I related to your impatience with the scientific effort to produce such a "machine". My answer to pursuing 'the perpetual motion machine' might match yours: Easily conceived, might never be man-made.
► I have read (recently, in fact) of these lost periods in time of ancient human civilizations (see Forum, one of my "Interesting Stuff" posts). Maybe this is Nature's way to slow humankind's flow of progress to correspond to the planet's age. If not slowed like this, we might be leaving too soon...? Which, to me, poses the question "Does Nature depend on humankind - at this late stage of her planet - on the destruction we inherently cause. In some weird way, maybe we're part of the process for the planet to remain inhabitable as long as it's able - or needs to be, for the balance of things...?
► 'Player piano restoration'? 'Great beginner for programmers'? Please share! I just can't see it, but can't wait to make the connection!

Are you sure you don't belong in the marketing demographics department? Anyhow, more nutso analysis response:

Those most like Kristal by Faith: (our own names appear first when no comparative data exists on this category, and of course our own names are not listed for all other categories where ours would naturally be most like our own)
Agnostic Church, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Atheist, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Atheist/Agnostic, Kirsty, Mandy, Spidertea
Atheistic paganism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Bahá'í Faith, Zang, Biggles, Kirsty
Christian Science Church of Christ, Scientist, wolfchik9, Biggles, NthenSome
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Mormons, Biggles, dora, NthenSome
Conservative Christian/Protestant, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Conservative Protestant, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Deism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Eastern Orthodox, Biggles, Zang, NthenSome
Hinduism, Harekrishnadasa, Zang, NthenSome
Humanist, Kirsty, Mandy, NthenSome
Islam, Kirsty, Mandy, Biggles
Jainism, Biggles, Kirsty, Mandy
Jehovah's Witness, NthenSome, Zang, Kirsty
Liberal Protestants, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Liberal Quakers, Southernyankee, Biggles, NthenSome
libral christ protestants, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Mahayana Buddhism, Biggles, Southernyankee, Harekrishnadasa
Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Mainline to Liberal Protestant, Mandy, Kirsty, NthenSome
Neo-Pagan, Kirsty, Mandy, wolfchik9
New Age, NthenSome, Southernyankee, wolfchik9
New Thought, wolfchik9, NthenSome, Southernyankee
Nontheist, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Orthodox Judaism, Kirsty, Mandy, Zang
Orthodox Quaker, Biggles, dora, Zang
Pantheism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Reform Judaism, Biggles, Zang, Kirsty
Roman Catholic, Biggles, Zang, NthenSome
Scientific Pantheism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Scientology, wolfchik9, Biggles, NthenSome
Secular Humanism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Seventh Day Adventist, dora, Biggles, Zang
Sikhism, NthenSome, Kirsty, Mandy
Taoism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Theravada Buddhism, Oscar, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa
Unitarian Universalism, Grmbrand, wolfchik9, Confetti

Those most like NThenSome by Faith:
Agnostic Church, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Atheist, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Atheist/Agnostic, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Atheistic paganism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Bahá'í Faith, wolfchik9, Harekrishnadasa, Kirsty
Christian Science Church of Christ, Scientist, Biggles, Kirsty, Mandy
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Mormons, Zang, dora, Kristal_Rose
Conservative Christian/Protestant, Kirsty, Mandy, Kristal_Rose
Conservative Protestant, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Deism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Eastern Orthodox, Kirsty, Mandy, Zang
Hinduism, wolfchik9, Kristal_Rose, Kirsty
Humanist, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Islam, Oscar, wolfchik9, Harekrishnadasa
Jainism, Zang, wolfchik9, Kirsty
Jehovah's Witness, Kristal_Rose, Zang, Icurok
Liberal Protestants, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Liberal Quakers, Confetti, Biggles, wolfchik9
libral christ protestants, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Mahayana Buddhism, Zang, wolfchik9, Kirsty
Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants, Kirsty, Oscar, Biggles
Mainline to Liberal Protestant, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Neo-Pagan, Southernyankee, Kirsty, Mandy
New Age, Southernyankee, Kristal_Rose, wolfchik9
New Thought, Southernyankee, wolfchik9, Biggles
Nontheist, Oscar, wolfchik9, Harekrishnadasa
Orthodox Judaism, wolfchik9, Harekrishnadasa, Oscar
Orthodox Quaker, Kirsty, Mandy, wolfchik9
Pantheism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Reform Judaism, Kirsty, Mandy, Grmbrand
Roman Catholic, Kirsty, Mandy, Zang
Scientific Pantheism, NthenSome, Harekrishnadasa, Southernyankee
Scientology, Biggles, wolfchik9, Kristal_Rose
Secular Humanism, wolfchik9, Southernyankee, Kirsty
Seventh Day Adventist, Kirsty, Mandy, Zang
Sikhism, Kirsty, Mandy, Zang
Taoism, Kirsty, Mandy, dora
Theravada Buddhism, Harekrishnadasa, Zang, dora
Unitarian Universalism, Lex, dora, Confetti

(See my new response, above yours here. I've noticed that timing sometimes has people miss the 'new' status. If I happen to be editing my 'new', you'll miss it if you post something in the meantime. See above.)

Looking at your analyses results: It is obvious to me now that, before placing them into my tables, I didn't catch all your data changes to the categories you had made to your own before posting your results here.
[And, by the way, you never answered when I asked a couple of nights ago: What were you doing with your own data (and possibly others'?) long before I showed you that I had placed all ours into analysis?]

Another strange dictionary thing: "Analyses" not in there. Imagine that: "ValEastMemori4thWeen" is in the dictionary, but "analyses" isn't. Strange.

My name was selected by almost the same methods we are using now, using spreadsheet functions from a long list of scores like symbolic importance, friendliness, etc. Certain ones got ruled out because I had already used the names on my daughter or dog, for instance aurora and safari were already taken. I had no idea for a few years though just how symbolic Kristal Rose Phoenix was. Oh yes, mom would have named me Crystal, had I been born female. The german spelling is in honor of my dad, since I dropped Clemens and took my moms maiden and current last name, McKinstry (all my known relatives are on her side). 'Kristal Rose' and Phoenix, mean the same thing, that evolutionary terraforming back to eden I just mentioned.

I don't know what analysis you are using to suggest Kirsty is any more religious educated than anyone else here. In the academic sense, Enheduanna probably has us all beat, though she's basically non-theist (she probably scores high on reform judaism). I have a feeling Kirsty's smart enough to recognise when a person meant to comment to someone else though. I recently spotted your response to my comments on job security, groveling angels, and such. Sometimes the reply system misses replies I guess.

If you really cared, we could email each other each others spread-sheets. I wonder if you've picked up this bug from contact with me. This morning I had a typo. I meant to type "I think I'll get to some work today." and instead typed "I think I'll get to Nsome work today."

Back when I was reading about Player Pianos, the IBM 370 and DEC machines with their punch-card readers were probably getting popular. A player piano has similarities, a punchcard scroll controlling all those vacuum actuated piano keys. The hollerith loom they mention in programming classes is probably a better primer on scripting instructional sets though.

Life, as I see it is a perpetual motion machine, no need to invent one. On the other transportaion devices interest me, and as you say, I think they will be something a hair beyond 'man-made'.

One of my coolor spread-sheets was my main to-to list. It had rows of categorical priorities that were sorted by formula. Each of those rows displayed the top three projects for each category from data on other pages. At a glance I could see that painting was a low priority, down on the list, but the top three painting projects in that row were tarot paintings, pyramid paintings, and antique postcard painted driftwood. With 1200 or so projects it gave me a birds eye view of my priorities. The closer to top left on the list, the better. I had far more cumbersome prioritizers though. I gave it up when I discovered that changing my priority factors from 40%fun, 60%educational, 90%income... to 50%,30%,85%... would totally arrange everything on the list. That my indesion was really because the differences were too subtle for calculation, so instead I opted for intuition and the basic formula must/should/want/unlikely (honorable mention).

Actually i don't 'practise' any faith at all. I went to church for years, and fell out of it, believing it all to be a waste of time, i have since 'made up my own'

It's interesting to note that confetti scored close to me overall, yet appears seldom as a top relationship on a per faith basis, in fact she's typically around 8th in rank on that list, HK & SouthYank do show up often, so chances are we have some very similar beliefs, yet more greatly disismilar beliefs. This is why computing moved to fuzzy logic and pattern matching instead of statistical reporting which depends more on precisesly how you phrase the question.
"ValEastMemori4thWeen" and "ThankChristmas" are what happened to my relationship with T.

Before this, I was basically uploading my consciousness into my computer. I would record hours of thought into a microcasette during the day, then have speech software and macros distribute all my data to corresponding spread-sheets. It got to a point where I had a psychic computer telepathically completing my journal entries and creating process shortcuts on the fly through bug-like apparitions. Did you see that tan scintillating pyramid with the crystal ball on top? It's made of a melted CD from that project. It represents Horus and nanotechnology Does that answer your question on what I was doing with my data?

Then I guess your scores - if anything along these lines - suggest that when you 'made up your mind', you really made it up, specific to a certain set of beliefs. I only say that because your strong resemblances to certain faiths are very strong, then there's a gap, then to those faiths you are dissimilar, you are strongly dissimilar to them.
It was interesting to me, is all.

What a consistently useful tool that had to be to make (your sorted-by to-do list)!
Off to watch a movie and eat lunch with Chris - he's back, yay!
Be back tonight, I suppose.

They didn't give any description. but check out the site Biggles showed me.
It described me quite well!

Thanks for the link.
I was impressed by how much it described me!

I thought that it described me pretty well too

Turnipism - the worship of turnips.

My mind is so full
word games are fun
I need you

ballism - the worship of balls.