Science is a great poetic topic, almost as mysterious and wonderful as love. Good reply to Zodiac, I'm anxious to see his response.

Zank you verry mutchen keepen read ing the limericks

You know, I think you nailed it. Today, I feel like a baby infant.

I don't think I've felt this way before, either. It's rather disconcerting. I actually really don't mean awestruck in that manner. No awe is involved. I suspect it may have to do with my sleep cycle and my caffeine cycle.

zodiac...Yes, I would like to hear more but first, some omments on yours. In a time/space continuum, time does flow freely at its outer limits as there exists nothing to impede its flow. Time is being created, not in a conventional sense but in accordance with quantum theory and a four dimensional time/space. Light is indeed impeded by gravity and other things such as mass but that is not what is happening as time becomes extant. What is so silly about comparing the small craters created by a raindrop (yes, they do cause craters to form but on the waters surface, not on a flower.) or the unfolding of a flower petal? Like the universe, they expand from within and are indeed a sort of miniature likeness in their expansion. "exploding stars creating reycled stardust" is what, "silly to the max?" In fact, we and every element in the universe were created either in the bowels of a star or by the explosion of a supernova. And these stars are currently second generation which makes them recycled. This "stardust" is a shared common bond and links us all in a physical as well as a mystical way. "random destination" is not an "enormous contradiction",(better called an oxymoron). Random is defined as "chance" or "not determined" So if I said "undetermined destination", would that still be a source of irritation to you?

Stranger than -=Zamzara=-?

Is -= Zamzara =- the "zany", "clever", "wildly imaginative" username you were referring to earlier?

I'm afraid I'm dead serious, Quarton. And it is yourself, not myself, which is making unsupportable 'blanket statements' (or, alternately, 'meaningless indictments') all over the place and fancying yourself clever. So check out this hook, cool: 1) Time does not "flow unimpeded through space", as any scientist since at least the great Dr Carawax can tell you, but is in fact impeded by practically every object with mass (or energy) everywhere. (BONUS: It's not "ever expanding" either!) 2) Raindrops probably don't form "tiny craters" on what I imagine you mean to be flowers. And even if they do, they are not a "microcosm of the universe", which is a silly expression anyway. 3) "exploding stars creating recycled stardust" is also silly to the max; but the wrong part is probably "random destination", which would be untrue even if it weren't an enormous contradiction. Would you like to hear more?

Thanks, I don't think anyone other than, perhaps horus8 or darkie, has read all of my stuff.. I've amassed a pretty large bundle of work on this site. I also go by other pen-names such as DreamerSupreme, Don-Quixote, Y2kSlamPoet, and Shit-Crumpets. Multi-internet-personalities are fun... and evil, so thats why I have them, plus the extra posting abilities are pretty nice. You'll find though, in time, that my work is varied in style, technique and quality.. I'm sure one piece or another will piss you off or fall short of being pleasurable.. :) Your starting out pretty well, and you seem to have grasped, somewhat, your sense of style-- more than what I had when I first landed here at rankerville. Peace be the reading, murderous be your vengeful loathing.

No. I couldn't. At any rate, you've got this whole conversation horribly wrong - to say nothing of your ideas about the universe, insect life, or what good poetry is 'about'. I never said this poem was about believing all animals are equally deserving of life; I just assumed you'd think something like that - and you do. What's more, saying a poem, story, or nearly anything else is 'about' one thing or other is silly to the max. The only context I could imagine in which two people might reasonably be talking about what something is 'about' is some casual conversation, most likely simply for the purposes of identification, i.e.: Chad: Have you read "Center of the Universe" by Dovina? Brad: I don't remember. What's it about? Chad: It's about a person stepping on a bug. Brad: Oh, right. No. In short, I'm afraid I'm going to have to cut you off here. No hard feelings. -zodiac PS-What's with saying "I knew a poet who..." all the time? Is that a... JIBE???!?