If daylight is right to be opposed, can it be opposed using the conflict between Russia and Ukraine?

This sentence is linguistically impossible. The only objective reality of daylight is that it exists. You cannot, in the English language, ascribe human attributes to it as reality. As a metaphor yes, as a literal interpretation (ie. objective reality) - no.

Wrong is either a mathematical, chemical, engineering, or in most cases (like how you used it) - a word related to morals. Your quote doesn't explain why you think it is wrong.

By the way, this is the last time I'm pointing out problems with your writing. Your issue with the use of the English language has been pointed out often enough, not just by me, but by everyone. If you choose not to address it (which is the only way you'll become understood), then there's little conversationsal direction left to go for readers of your posts.

Light Filtering vs Room Darkening vs Blackout Shades

Oswald Bates - In Living Color

White Guy Speaks Rare Native American Language, Shocks Locals

Thanks for the response.

I'll take focus away, from the element of daylight itself, and explore just the concept of reboot: it's a fact, that life has to repeatedly consume food . .

After somebody finishes day 92, it's a reality that they have to eat food on day 93. Body-clock is a fact of existence, which is my concern, relative to the infinity of the universe.

If the universe possesses an infinity, and each day reflects this infinity, why does life have to repeat its means. Moreover, why does life have to use time to begin with?

Time is the creator of Ukraine v Russia, as people create nationalism as a response to time. Thus, my desire to address time, and daylight with it.

In terms of why daylight with it, I guess that the visual nature of daylight is an iconic nature, and therefore is a logical inclusion.


What are your thoughts?

mark

This life is not a dress rehearsal.
THIS is your chance to get it right.

My thoughts are that you ascribe meaning where there does not need to be meaning, and then based on your need to ascribe meaning - ask others for their thoughts on your meaning. I don't ascribe meaning to any of the 'concepts/meanings' you raised, so I don't feel the need to have thoughts on them.

Groundhog Day (1993) Trailer #1
Movieclips Classic Trailers

Thank you, for the encouragement.

In terms of that theme, of taking the initiative, that's where I defer to news media. News media exempts people from having to defy symmetry. By symmetry, I just mean the innate condition of reality, wherein people don't enact left-wing politics due to it meaning that they defy symmetry, ironically.

To clarify:
News media is a system of convenience of sound, of the enactment of sound. In live reality, people have to speak carefully, but, the news media system means that this inconvenience is balanced out, because the condescension of stage to audience using seriousness is accounted for.

In theory, I have perhaps up to 10,000 days to get it right, as in, help prevent further instances of Ukraine v Russia, through helping news media air "the difference".

In that context, of Ukraine v Russia being stopped through "the difference" being aired - namely, the difference being to stop daylight via Ukraine v Russia, and vice versa - symmetry is then the namesake of the problem, by having become a verified solution.

To get it right, indeed, I won't be creating any other threads on this site, but am determined to just try to protect this single thread.

Daylight?

It's really about infinity and time, and the source (life and humanity) of both using both simultaneously as a consequence of each other.

What I mean by this, is that there is the universe, on one hand, with its inevitable climax. Then there is humanity, which is the source of the universe, having to use inevitability to reach only the possibility of means.

It's a very precarious sequence and composition of nature.

I'll try to clarify even more:
Why is the means (the universe) of a source (humanity) more protected than the source, especially when the means is inherently the nature of inevitable collapse?


In terms of why daylight, as being part of the topic; it's a sexxing up of the topic, to a reasonable degree, whilst also being about the logic, of its visual chronology being in sync with humanity's reboot.

Ah it finally made sense to me:
- the sun revolves around the earth
- because humans are the reason for the existence of the universe
- hence why all things, time and daylight included, have meaning that revolves around humans
- and the consumption of them has dire consequences to us humans as we approach the climax of the universe
- so we've got to change the meaning...

...wait...I'm still stuck on the sun revolving around the earth. I'm sure there was a problem with that pointed out somewhere...

With regards to the second part, about humans being the reason for the universe; consumption is the logic of reality, with consumption meaning whole to part, and consumption needs the human body structure, which is intrinsically about placing things from whole to part.

The living psychology will have the macro, at the origin, and that macro will be turned into part over time, however long the time is.

Gobekli Tepe has risen to the sixth degree. Daylight pauses in the aquamarine which will cause an effect in Ukraine. If one can - leave tomorrow now; there will be dire consequences on Tack.

The fish flies at midnight. A mongoose is living in Philadelphia. Be ready for your next instructions tomorrow.