A Revolution in Thought: Part Two

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

More people are heterosexual. So what? Why should Daddy's bogus utopia mean that the people who are gay, will stop being gay? You have no idea, do you? All you have is his idiotic say so. He gave no reason why this should be so -- just that it would be so! So sayeth Seymour!

Nobody said that people would stop being gay. You missed the point. Anyway, I took that sentence out. We're calling it close. I'm resubmitting it on Monday.

Originally Posted by davidm

And yes, he DID say that light is static when it arrives at earth. This is a thoroughly idiotic claim, but unlike you, at least he posited that light does something when it arrives at earth. According to you, it is not absorbed, it is not reflected, it does not travel and it does not cease to exist! Apparently you have failed to notice that there are no other options for the behavior of photons, other than all the options that you have ruled out!

He did not say that light is static anywhere in the book. Light is reflected but it does not have the pattern of the object in it.

Originally Posted by davidm

Just go check back where he says that the SAME light that falls on the earth while we sleep, "smiles" on us when we wake up! What does that mean, other than that he thought that light stopped and hung around when it arrived on earth? What, peacegirl? Once again, you have no idea, am I right?

Don't you know what a metaphor is? This is what he said and there was no implication that photons just hang around, unless you want to make it appear that way, which you are obviously trying to do.

Decline and Fall of All Evil: Chapter Four: Words, Not Reality pp. 116-118

To paraphrase this another way; if you could sit upon the star
Rigel with a telescope powerful enough to see me writing this very
moment, you would see me at the exact same time that a person
sitting right next to me would — which brings us to another very
interesting point. If I couldn’t see you standing right next to me
because we were living in total darkness since the sun had not yet been
turned on but God was scheduled to flip the switch at 12 noon, we
would be able to see the sun instantly — at that very moment —
although we would not be able to see each other for 8 minutes
afterwards. The sun at 12 noon would look exactly like a large star;
the only difference being that in 8 minutes we would have light with
which to see each other, but the stars are so far away that their light
diminishes before it gets to us. Upon hearing this explanation,
someone asked, “If we don’t need light around us to see the stars,
would we need light around us to see the sun turned on at 12 noon?”
Once the light is here it remains here because the photons of light
emitted by the constant energy of the sun surround us. When the
earth rotates on its axis so the section on which we live is in darkness,
this only means the photons of light are on the other side. When our
rotation allows the sun to smile on us again this does not mean that
it takes another eight minutes for this light to reach us because these
photons are already present.

If the sun were to explode while we were
looking at it we would see it the instant it happened, not 8 minutes
later. We are able to see the moon, the sun, the distant stars, etc., not
because the one is 3 seconds away, the other 8 minutes away, and the
last many light years away, but simply because these objects are large
enough to be seen at their great distance when enough light is present.
This fallacy has come into existence because the eyes were considered
a sense organ, like the ears. Since it takes less time for the sound
from an airplane to reach our ears when it is one thousand feet away
than when five thousand, it was assumed that the same thing occurred
with the object sending a picture of itself on the waves of light.

If it
was possible to transmit a television picture from the earth to a planet
as far away as the star Rigel, it is true that the people living there
would be seeing the ships of Columbus coming into America for the
first time because the picture would be in the process of being
transmitted through space at a certain rate of speed. But objects do
not send out pictures that travel through space and impinge on the
optic nerve. We see objects directly by looking at them and it takes
the same length of time to see an airplane, the moon, the sun, or
distant stars. To sum this up — just as we have often observed that
a marching band is out of step to the beat when seen from a distance
because the sound reaches our ears after a step has been taken, so
likewise, if we could see someone talking on the moon via a telescope
and hear his voice on radio we would see his lips move instantly but
not hear the corresponding sound for approximately 3 seconds later
due to the fact that the sound of his voice is traveling 186,000 miles
a second, but our gaze is not, nor is it an electric image of his lips
impinging on our optic nerve after traversing this distance. Because
Aristotle assumed the eyes functioned like the other four and the
scientific community assumed he was right, it made all their reasoning
fit what appeared to be undeniable. According to their thinking, how
else was it possible for knowledge to reach us through our eyes when
they were compelled to believe that man had five senses? Were they
given any choice? Let me prove in still another way that the eyes are
not a sense organ.

Line up 50 people who will not move, and a dog, from a slight
distance away cannot identify his master. If the eyes were a sense; if
an image was traveling on the waves of light and striking the optic
nerve then he would recognize his master instantly as he can from
sound and smell. In fact, if he was vicious and accustomed to
attacking any stranger entering the back gate at night, and if his sense
of hearing and smell were disconnected, he would have no way of
identifying his master’s face even if every feature was lit up like a
Christmas tree, and would attack. This is why he cannot recognize his
master from a picture or statue because nothing from the external
world is striking the optic nerve. The question as to how man is able
to accomplish this continues to confound our scientists. The answer
will be given shortly however let me make one thing absolutely clear.

The knowledge revealed thus far although also hidden behind the door
marked ‘Man Does Not Have Five Senses’ is not what I referred to as
being of significance. Frankly, it makes no difference to me that the
eyes are not a sense organ, that our scientists got confused because of
it, and that a dog cannot identify his master from a picture. What
does mean a great deal to me — when the purpose of my discovery is
to remove all evil from the world (which word is symbolic of any kind
of hurt that exists in human relation) — is to demonstrate how
certain words have absolutely no foundation in reality, yet they have
caused more suffering and unhappiness than can be readily imagined.
Let me explain.

Originally Posted by davidm

And, as to his claim that it is a mathematical certainty that married couples will no longer share the same bed: since this is a mathematical claim, would you care to show the equation that describes and predicts this amazing phenomenon? Because Seymour sure didn't show it! And if there is no equation, there is no math.

I guess Seymour just didn't grok that fact!

He didn't claim that all couples will not share a bed. Why can't you read? I swear I don't know how in the world you are an editor. You don't need math per se for something to be mathematical or undeniable through sound reasoning, which Lessans clarified on page 3. I changed the sentence that was giving you problems:

Decline and Fall of All Evil: Chapter Eight: Until Death Do They Part p. 360

However, there is one change
about to take place where sex and marriage are concerned that will
absolutely amaze everybody and reveal in an infallible manner the
great wisdom that directs every aspect of this universe, for you are
about to see how it will be mathematically impossible henceforth
for a husband and wife to ever desire one bed for the two of them.
That’s right! Sleeping together except as part of the sexual act will
no longer be a requirement of marriage. This is no different than
other mathematical problems. If you understand what it means that
man’s will is not free and are able to perceive and extend the
mathematical relations thus far, you will easily see the reason for
this. Take note.
If after making love our partner wishes to sleep alone, this
desire has the right-of-way over our desire to have our partner
sleep by our side since this is a judgment of what is right for the
other.