Satan would kick Loki out of Hell | Forum

Here's the Wikipedia article: Norse Loki 

Loki's have their benefit. 

Look at Trump. Unified 70% of a major party under conspiracy bullshit with his thumbs alone. 

Inserts pretentious statement:

They are always carriers of change despite being unsavory or untrustworthy characters. They are of an ilk. The fire before new growth can be spread through trolling or socially admonishable behavior too. 

To my other post a Loki deviation is similar to a devil deviation. It varies from normative behavior to prevent stagnation in an ever-changing code. 

In fact, if there is one overreaching form of "life progression" it's dispurption/adaptation. And I still maintain its an illusion of indeterminate necessity. 

Here's more Clutch: 

As for Loki, yes, trickery and discord/distruption are often the catalyst for change, sometimes positive, sometimes negative, with the relative polarity in the eye of the beholder. But as the tornado twirls and the wreckage piles up, woe betide Loki if Thor gets his hands on him, for the bones of the trickster/troll will shatter and all onlookers everywhere will cheer! For as beloved as Balder was, just exactly as hated was Loki and still is.

Sure, what doesn't kill us leaves us smarter, and what doesn't kill us leaves us changed, but we don't have to like it and we certainly won't, and the best of us could probably have learned and grown just as much in a far gentler and more pleasant way.

I have to keep it all internally consistent and with respect to levels of development of the animal. 

Most animals don't have ideological abstraction in their environment. Humans do. God is literally part of our ecosystem and something to be considered for survival. 

Not only do humans have to assume their place in a social pecking order they have to assimilate to divergent ideas. I draw no separation between that and finding food as an environmental factor. 

Bottom up. 

All I need to form a complete world view (a view of life on earth) is this: 

Overwhelming evidence indicates that eukaryotic photosynthesis originated from endosymbiosis of cyanobacterial-like organisms, which ultimately became chloroplasts.

From there it's an organic garden of the antecedent and response to environment. 

For example sharks and ancestors of sharks even survived the Permian-Triasic Extinction, an 8 million year warming event 96% of life did not. 

Maybe this tendency to mutuate is something similar to phototropism is plants. Can you really argue a extra-material principle causes the seed 8 inches in the soil to grow towards light and not sideways? 

It's almost a pointless thing to consider. Like why the fundamental forces are the way they are. You are left with a set of priori statements that even have a nice cop out in string theory if you try hard enough. 

Consider this (for fun): 

According to higher-dimensional compactification there IS A REQUIREMENT FOR  EVERY possible universe with EVERY possible version of natural laws. It incorporates multiple priori as a necessity of higher dimensions existing. Everything exists how it does because it has to. This universe not considering that universe where amino acids don't do shit. 

Anyway.

That's not my current opinion for that, this is:  

I think it is futile to look to apply material law to something that is a product of the material. If it's emergent, the rules it will go by are emergent as well. Seeing a cause seems unnecessary, to me anyway. 

The OG element is Hydrogen. 

That's all the universe needed to fuse the first generation of stars, which needed to explode before there was even sulfur to be had. 

I also think you need work on your subversive pseudo-religious trolling. I mean, what is the "first sulphuric environment" if not that?

sulfur oxides can react with carbon and oxygen. simple chemistry.

It was an early universe joke. FFS. I was trolling you back. I figure if you're gonna give idiotic one line answers that acknowledge a concept without providing any insight. 

And yes, I know how and where the earliest life on earth formed. 

I'm just saying that the OG universe was transparent clouds of hydrogen only. 

It took awhile (many millions of years)  before even element 16 was created is what I'm saying.

But you are quite correct. Earliest life was hydrothermal sulfur-based extremophiles. I swear I mentioned that. 

** Strangely the "first sulfuric environment" on earth may have existed before Thea smashed into the proto-earth 4.5 billion years ago. But how could you prove that? The moon?  "First environment" is semantic and earth-centric. 

Are you sure your not a religious inclined troll? Can I just pretend you are and treat you like one? 

All together it demonstrates all universal complexity built upon itself. 

From only hydrogen to Moscovium and beyond. 

I feel this BOTTOM UP build completely demonstrates no need for an outside principle. Material genesis for all material organisms and their mutation and multiplication. 

If you wanted the reason for that reference, that's it, but I'm still sorta trolling you. 

talisman, yes, Thor would kick Loki out of anywhere. Kicking Loki is his favorite pastime. Except for hitting Loki over the head. There was that one weird time when the two of them went traveling together, but I blame that on the poets trying to up their ratings.

I wish beware was here. beware asks smarter questions.

Let's take this further.

The mitochondria is composed of proteins, proteins are made up of amino acids. 

And amino acids are almost all left handed in our biosphere. 

Although most amino acids can exist in both left and right handed forms, Life on Earth is made of left handed amino acids, almost exlusively. No one knows why this is the case. However, Drs. John Cronin and Sandra Pizzarello have shown that some of the amino acids that fall to earth from space are more left than right. 

Goddamnit, I need to know why before I can use it in an existential view. That might as well say magical omnipotent lizard moths from the 14th Universe of Saad said, "May left handed amino acids form better proteins that form better peptide bonds between carboxyl groups in biological life". 

Right handed amino acids are sugars. Neither can use the other. Sugars have no use form left handed amino acids. But still no one can answer why it is homochiral. 

There's a lot of shit that just happens that I can't commit to an undiscovered organizing principle just yet, despite there being "a lot of shit that just happens" like the above. 

Although it's the best form of "theism" I have ever come across. A satanic will to all biological life is still a hard sell when it could all just be an antecedent aberration (emergent rules for emergent material)