There are only so many thing to [color=a36209]worry[/color] about, to [color=aba000]believe[/color], to [color=598527]contemplate[/color],
as [color=a0410d]one [/color]of 7 billion mortals on this planet, I have adopted my share.

Allow yourself to broaden your perspective by immersing yourself in my world,

[color=0054a6]Immortality in the Flesh[/color]: should one only be aware of the effects of sothenliness - inclusive of excessive work, and improper work techniques - , intoxication, sex hormones - such as that from the hormone saturated animal blood which s never drained prior to being sold to you on the market - , and depression & delusion which impair the overall wellbeing of the body ~ Then and only then, one can attain Immortality in the Flesh. This is the general clause of the existence of God, and when contemplated, no other cause of old age is scientifically factual. These are the causes of cellular degeneration. 
To elaborate on the clause of Immortality in the Flesh, one would immerse themselves naturally in all of the world religious, excluding none and therein only find wisdom, and see that which is not for it's intended purposes unbiasedly towards scientific principal.

[color=a0410d]Gravity[/color]: If all the observed effects of "gravitational pull" 'studied' within our atmosphere were in fact caused by another solution entirely contrary to the modern theory, then we would not have conflicts such as Binary star systems (the closet star to our solar system), the Moon's of Jupiter and the anomaly of Mar's relationship with said Gas-Giant, mag-levs, Mercury & even our moon, and the annual meteor showers. Without the accepted theory of Gravity we lose none of our scientific observations, but acquire liberty and scientific method.

Applying observed effects to a theory, is not scientific. And when using patterns of said observations to predict 
continued patterns, that does not indicate the theory is logical, only that the observations are at least semi-factual. In order to prove a theory to be logical, one must use the theory to present a method of finding facts, and then proving the facts afterwards. This is not how "Gravity" was 'discovered' nor 'proven', as well ass carbon dating, evolution and other ridiculous notions which are not products of scientific method.

[color=9e0039]Nibiru[/color]: The only description of Nibiru in ancient text indicates that Pluto is very capably, and potentially plausibly Nibiru. I have been unable to find a model of the solar system with accurate and dated movements of the celestial bodies. Potentially the crossing of Nibiru was in fact Pluto passing the earth at it's nearest proximity in orbit, And potentially this may happen again.

Nibiru was described to be a "solar system", and it has 3-4 satellites. Furthermore, if it is aa giant ice-ball, it may shine when in proximity to the sun and the earth. This indicates Pluto is a suitable candidate to be labelled the mystical planet, Nibiru which was spoken of by the ancestors of India & Sri Lanka.

Moreover, as a Creationist, I believe that it is Pluto's destiny to collide with Mercury or Mar's, and even potentially but unlikely on of the moons of Jupiter or even or own. As a Miraculous event prepared by the Creator.

[color=8882be]Dwarves[/color]: 
[hider=High-class Spoiler, which is a truth that has been hidden, and it is your privilege to not know it & keep it hidden.]
Dwarves are in fact married to and are the children of Mermaids. It is most plausible that they are born of eggs, but they can be born of many elements according to the myth, and none is specifically, factually the truth, it can be any of a number of mysteries: fire, shadow, stone. Dwarves are narrow-minded, but sharp - this is partly to do with the fact that they have no maternal parent figure. presumably, the underground chambers of the Dwarven realm links to the sea, indicating that Dwarves have mastered the unfathomable and impossible engineering feat of preventing water from going where the air can likewise release/escape.
[/hider]


[hider=My Preferable Fantasy Archtypes]
[b][u]Gnomes + Goblins [/u][/b]: the most sinister elements of a fantasy realm by my discursion.
[u]Draconian [/u]: the pestilence race. Wreckers of cities. The uncivil hierarchy of imps. A race that I am confident is thievery to attribute to any fantasy realm, as they are the not mythical creatures but are in fact personal property of living authors. Very intriguing and easily categorized villains, who will traitor their own for profit. 
[u][b][i]Trolls [/i][/b][/u]: Trolls are one of my favorites, as so I will not elaborate extensively. I do however, allude to my fantasy by suggesting Colossals are in fact Trolls. They are stubborn, but not close-minded.
[u][b]Orcs [/b][/u]: I am very proud of the Warcraft variety of orc, and when comparing it to [u]Lord of the Rings[/u], Forgotten Realms & Elderscrolls, I find that it none the less (*"regardless of it's physic") reflects the general archtype of the Orc most prominently ~ and I think that means that the Orc has an ideal mentality for personal physical growth. 
[hider=The Orc secret to success]
[u]Endless "rage"[/u] causes the orc to heave it's mass and always flex it's muscles building, toning and mastering them. This over exertion can be honed to mastery his will, or allow his savage instincts to master his will.
[/hider]
Furthermore, I [color=f26522][i][b]like [/b][/i][/color] (When I 'like' something, that is call for a spoiler alert, because I am pompous and obnoxious) [color=a0410d][b]Satyrs[/b][/color], "who are excellent in all affairs", but proud, and so disliked and only exceed (or in my case, 'satisfy') expectations when they are credited the right to be "right." They are so careless that their advice and wisdom is often seen for what it is, Nonchalant {"Abandon all, let us simply party." }. ~ I categorize Fauns and satyrs separately, and not as male and female. I make Faun (Playing [u]Spyro the dragon, Ripto's Rage[/u], the satyr was called a 'Faun') more whimsical, and less proud - therefor less opinionated and not as "heretically-entitled".

I am 26 years old, and in grade 6 I thought the best Centaur was a halfcat-centaur. Now I realize something,
Centaurs cannot effectively garden, the effort is much greater, and the psychological strain is much ~ despite their strength. A centaur raises feud over every matter, but is cheerful, as though only raised your blood and the hairs on your back for fun. They are however very intelligent, but only in vanity. This is my perspective of them from a fantasy genre and basic stereotyping of analytical values.
[i][b]Halfcats[/b][/i], can only be stereotyped by analytical practice - as the thing has been mutually created, and is free-source property of the world.
[/hider]



[color=a0410d]WereWolves[/color], [color=f26522]Werecats[/color], and the [color=f7941d]Werebear[/color].
I preference Werewolves over werecats. I have had a drawn out discussion about it here already, where I find I best elaborate on my emotions.
1.)The werewolf is a pack animal. The werecat is not.
2.)The werewolf is aware of it's surroundings. A werecat must watch them.
3.)The werewolf, orders its pact seniority with simple disputes, and is satisfied knowing it's sub ordinance. The wereCat fight's werecats for its territorial claim, and even more so to breed (this must be reflected in the psychological politic affairs of the beast).
[hider=Politics]
The werewolve Does rule North America and Europe, and much of eastern Asia and much of Turkey. (this can be historically accounted for by human political movements.)
The werecat may have, May, south America, and does have a dominant presence in India and Africa. It's asian presence as least as distinguished as werewolves. Its Turkish presence is limited. This general-standard for a political map can be verified and debated through analytic evaluation. [/hider]
The werebear, can presumable fight a pack of wolves. And to it's satisfaction win with it's life. Though it needs to limit the fighting environment to it's preferences. Shockingly, it takes less werecats to kill a werebear than wolves. 
A werecat is [u]not[/u] superior to a werewolf, BUT his catlike reflexes account for his success. The first strike wins = end of story; regardless of the damage suffered on the winners end.
Werecats are often much higher on a political scale, because they do not carry baggage (their pack) which can impair networking & negotiation, but they is just common not rule. Werebears, often climb to very satisfactory seats of authority, and their so rare, and so variably distressed a werewolf might not even recognize the odor.
~~~
As for other werecreatures - lizards, rodents/"apes"/or marsupials**or birds{harpes}, critters(hooved), amphibians or other mammals... The archtypes are to be discovered in due time. Analytically, not by an author's insubordinate preference.


~
 ~

[color=fff79a]I will return in due time, promptly, to add more to this list. I suppose I will add it as a comment, so please withhold your responses and remarks.[/color]
If you have anything you would like me to reveal concerning what you might want to know about me or my opinion, or something I mentioned above, please message me, or give me a moment to finish my entry, and I'll indulge in your curious contribution.