<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Growth</title>
	<atom:link href="http://secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/</link>
	<description>by Patrick Edwards-Daugherty</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 11:01:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rainshadow</title>
		<link>http://secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-4593</link>
		<dc:creator>rainshadow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comicpress.secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-4593</guid>
		<description>i like this image a lot...it could be the weed, or it could be the tar-filled cracks...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i like this image a lot&#8230;it could be the weed, or it could be the tar-filled cracks&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ritz</title>
		<link>http://secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-3112</link>
		<dc:creator>ritz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 22:49:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comicpress.secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-3112</guid>
		<description>That which one might see as growth might actually be a decline.

The splits might have just let one see what’s REALLY inside but would one have any idea if what used to be there was gold and now it’s only repair tar?

Are the curves designed by nature to be there or are they there because of the vantage point with which we’re looking?

Would the splits and the curves be there with or without the weeds?

&lt;i&gt;So much in nature resembles or describes itself at different scales, from different angles.&lt;/i&gt;

One’s vantage point doesn’t define the real essence of what it sees.

&lt;i&gt;So much in nature&lt;/i&gt; might have been better before &quot;we&quot; first came to see it. &lt;i&gt;So much in nature&lt;/i&gt; might have actually changed because &quot;we&quot; came to see it.

You see, even if we do not know it, nature always notices every teeny-weeny imbalance in its &lt;i&gt;nature &lt;/i&gt;(punny?…. not!).

It’s just that some of &quot;us&quot; do not know how to respect &lt;i&gt;the natural law &lt;/i&gt; of just letting the natural order of things go. (redundancy required!).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That which one might see as growth might actually be a decline.</p>
<p>The splits might have just let one see what’s REALLY inside but would one have any idea if what used to be there was gold and now it’s only repair tar?</p>
<p>Are the curves designed by nature to be there or are they there because of the vantage point with which we’re looking?</p>
<p>Would the splits and the curves be there with or without the weeds?</p>
<p><i>So much in nature resembles or describes itself at different scales, from different angles.</i></p>
<p>One’s vantage point doesn’t define the real essence of what it sees.</p>
<p><i>So much in nature</i> might have been better before &#8220;we&#8221; first came to see it. <i>So much in nature</i> might have actually changed because &#8220;we&#8221; came to see it.</p>
<p>You see, even if we do not know it, nature always notices every teeny-weeny imbalance in its <i>nature </i>(punny?…. not!).</p>
<p>It’s just that some of &#8220;us&#8221; do not know how to respect <i>the natural law </i> of just letting the natural order of things go. (redundancy required!).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ritz</title>
		<link>http://secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-3111</link>
		<dc:creator>ritz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 22:43:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comicpress.secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-3111</guid>
		<description>That which one might see as growth might actually be a decline.

The splits might have just let one see what&#039;s REALLY inside but would one have any idea if what used to be there was gold and now  it&#039;s only repair tar?

Are the curves designed by nature to be there or are they there because of the vantage point with which we&#039;re looking?

Would the splits and the curves be there with or without the weeds?




&lt;i&gt;So much in nature resembles or describes itself at different scales, from different angles. &lt;/i&gt;

One&#039;s vantage point doesn&#039;t define the real essence of what it sees.

&lt;i&gt;So much in nature &lt;/i&gt; might have been better before &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt; first &lt;i&gt;came to see it. &lt;i&gt; So much in nature &lt;/i&gt; might have actually changed because &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt; came to see it.

You see, even if &lt;strong&gt;we&lt;/strong&gt; do not know it, nature always notices every teeny-weeny imbalance in its nature (&lt;i&gt;punny....&lt;/i&gt; not!).

&lt;i&gt;It&#039;s just that some of &lt;strong&gt;us&lt;/strong&gt; do not know how to respect the natural law of just letting the natural order of things go. &lt;/i&gt; (redundancy required :)).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That which one might see as growth might actually be a decline.</p>
<p>The splits might have just let one see what&#8217;s REALLY inside but would one have any idea if what used to be there was gold and now  it&#8217;s only repair tar?</p>
<p>Are the curves designed by nature to be there or are they there because of the vantage point with which we&#8217;re looking?</p>
<p>Would the splits and the curves be there with or without the weeds?</p>
<p><i>So much in nature resembles or describes itself at different scales, from different angles. </i></p>
<p>One&#8217;s vantage point doesn&#8217;t define the real essence of what it sees.</p>
<p><i>So much in nature </i> might have been better before <strong>we</strong> first <i>came to see it. </i><i> So much in nature </i> might have actually changed because <strong>we</strong> came to see it.</p>
<p>You see, even if <strong>we</strong> do not know it, nature always notices every teeny-weeny imbalance in its nature (<i>punny&#8230;.</i> not!).</p>
<p><i>It&#8217;s just that some of <strong>us</strong> do not know how to respect the natural law of just letting the natural order of things go. </i> (redundancy required :)).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: charlie</title>
		<link>http://secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 02:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://comicpress.secretvespers.com/2007/08/06/growth/#comment-34</guid>
		<description>I follow the repair tar, black against thegrey, and it never leads me anywhere.  One day I will abandon the line that would have; then I will be an adult.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I follow the repair tar, black against thegrey, and it never leads me anywhere.  One day I will abandon the line that would have; then I will be an adult.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

