A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Yes, these Physicists will manipulate the equations to figure out what the physical world is like but then they conduct experiments that often confirm the math of those equations. If the experimental results match the predictions of the equations the concepts have been verified, but if the results do not match what is predicted the idea is abandon and they continue to search for answers.

Manipulate the equations? That's not how it works. You don't make an equation and say, Umm, this is how it could be, and then try to make the equation fit reality.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Please explain the difference between "born again" and "reborn". There is no difference in the English language. Perhaps you have your own definitions of words once again?

Take out the word reborn. Think of it this way: We're always here.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

"We will be born again and again..." that implies rebirth, and that implies a connection between this life and future lives, just as much as "passage" implies a connection. You haven't read either Clark's or Stewart's work, to understand the terms in context, have you? You are dismissing it without even understanding it. Isn't that what you keep saying we shouldn't do to Lessans.

I am not dismissing their work; I'm just not interested in pursuing it at this point. The knowledge that we will always be here (don't get confused in how it's expressed due to the difficulty in the concept itself) is wonderful and very comforting but it is still not what I am trying first and foremost to bring to light, which is the discovery that can actually bring global peace to our world. That is number ONE on my priority list.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

I'm bumping this in case you missed it or didn't read it closely because you figure that David's posts are going to be confrontational. I hope that you don't ignore it just because you're unhappy with him because it's really very good IMO. Having a professional whip that out for you just saved you (and me) a good deal of work. I'm not trying at all to push you to send it to anyone right now but it would be nice to have it all ready to go when you are. Is there anything in there that you object to or don't think is accurate?

It's okay but it doesn't give people the real magnitude of what this work is about. Lessans' synopsis was a lot better and I may put it on the flap.

In his book, Decline and Fall of All Evil: The Most Important Discovery of Our Times, Seymour Lessans reveals that the solution to our world's most pressing problems is nothing other than a natural, psychological law of man’s ultimate nature which has remained hidden until now. This law prevents man from striking the first blow, which eliminates the need to blame, punish, to retaliate or to turn the other cheek.

Two other natural laws are also revealed in later chapters. It is demonstrated that because we never understood a projecting function of the brain, words developed that allowed us to see, as on a screen, that half the human race is an inferior physiognomic production — homely, bad-looking, etc. But these words do not symbolize reality because people are not ugly or beautiful, just different, and when the truth is learned — WHY THE EYES ARE NOT A SENSE ORGAN, the use of these words, and this kind of unjust, hurtful discrimination, must come to an end.

The other law asks this question: With the Earth billions of years old, and with millions and millions of babies coming into the world since time immemorial, doesn’t it seem a strange coincidence and unbelievable phenomenon that YOU, OF ALL PEOPLE, were born and are alive at this infinitesimal fraction of time? The undeniable answer will make you very happy by removing any fears you might have regarding your own death.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Take out the word reborn. Think of it this way: We're always here.

We're always here? As who? Ourselves?

That's not what Lessans wrote. He specifically wrote that the Jews who were killed by Hitler should not be unhappy, because today they are here as different people. How do you explain that? There are only two possible conceptions to explain this remarkable claim: first, that something like a "soul" is reincarnated. Second, that something like what Clark and Stewart wrote is true, and of course Lessans views are in accordance with those of Clark and Stewart and not with reincarnation.

The only other possibility for "we are always here" is Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrrence; but the ER is NOT what Lessans was writing about, sorry.

[ChristinaM]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's okay but it doesn't give people the real magnitude of what this work is about. Lessans' synopsis was a lot better and I may put it on the flap.

OK but right now we aren't talking about a jacket cover, just a very brief letter to someone asking them to take a look at the book. That letter should be in your own words and not your father's.

Because it will be very difficult to believe or even conceive how a natural law, acting as a catalyst, can change the entire world of human relations for the benefit of all mankind; and because it is imperative that this fantastic BREAKTHROUGH be brought to light, you can now listen to the author as he reads and elaborates on the first chapter of his book, “Beyond the Framework of Modern Thought. The author reveals the actual discovery in Chapter Two, which is nothing other than a natural, psychological law of man’s ultimate nature which remained hidden until now. This law prevents man from striking the first blow, which eliminates the need to blame, punish, to retaliate or to turn the other cheek.

Two other natural laws are also revealed in later chapters. It is demonstrated that because we never understood a projecting function of the brain, words developed that allowed us to see, as on a screen, that half the human race is an inferior physiognomic production — homely, bad-looking, etc. But these words do not symbolize reality because people are not ugly or beautiful, just different, and when the truth is learned — WHY THE EYES ARE NOT A SENSE ORGAN, the use of these words, and this kind of unjust, hurtful discrimination, must come to an end.

The other law asks this question: With the Earth billions of years old, and with millions and millions of babies coming into the world since time immemorial, doesn’t it seem a strange coincidence and unbelievable phenomenon that YOU, OF ALL PEOPLE, were born and are alive at this infinitesimal fraction of time? The undeniable answer will make you very happy by removing any fears you might have regarding your own death.

I don't think that I understand why you would want this all in your cover letter because it seems to me that it provides the opportunity for the same kind of dismissal that you get in these forums because out of context none of it makes much sense to me and there are a whole lot more people like me than there are philosophers, scientists and mathematicians. We aren't stupid or uneducated but we also aren't fluent in the language of philosophy. (Lots of lay people think of philosophy as akin to the weird shit some of us think up in the middle of the night on acid. I had a great idea about consciousness soup one night but it didn't make a whole lot of sense in the morning.) If you use your dad's summary you're risking hitting some scientific/philosophical backlash that you feel is distracting and wasting your time so it might be best to just give them a bit of a teaser to engage their interest.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

I don't think that I understand why you would want this all in your cover letter because it seems to me that it provides the opportunity for the same kind of dismissal that you get in these forums because out of context none of it makes much sense to me...

The problem is that it doesn't make sense in context either, and so any effort to promote this stuff is hopeless. The eye IS a sense organ; we DO NOT see in real time, etc. The whole book is shot through with utter absurdities and provably false claims, and no one will ever publish it. She will have to self-publish, but it appears she has tried this and the effort has gone nowhere. It was reviewed at Amazon, and quite accurately summarized and panned as the nonsense that it is.

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Manipulate the equations? That's not how it works. You don't make an equation and say, Umm, this is how it could be, and then try to make the equation fit reality.

Yes Lessans does a have a different approach. The majority of the scientific community would change their equations to better fit what was found in reality however Lessans has taken the opposite approach and used "keen observations" to make reality fit his "equations". And even though just about everyone else has very different observations, Lessans observations should be taken over all because he read a few out of data books, tried to convince a few university professors of his "discoveries", spent a lot of time thinking in an easy chair and wrote a few books that only his daughter finds convincing.

No, that is not crazy at all.

[ChristinaM]

Originally Posted by davidm

The problem is that it doesn't make sense in context either, and so any effort to promote this stuff is hopeless. The eye IS a sense organ; we DO NOT see in real time, etc. The whole book is shot through with utter absurdities and provably false claims, and no one will ever publish it. She will have to self-publish, but it appears she has tried this and the effort has gone nowhere. It was reviewed at Amazon, and quite accurately summarized and panned as the nonsense that it is.

Yeah. That's why I think that if the point of the first contact is to get them to read it then the brief summary in the letter shouldn't contain a bunch of things to disagree with before they've even opened the book. If peacegirl is convinced that people would get it if they would only be quiet and read it in order then I think that the best thing to do is not to give away the conclusions so that their curiosity might get the better of them.

I know that she doesn't seem to think that talking to non-scientists and philosophers is worth her time and that the catch-all "new age" label is an insult so if she's absolutely determined that the only people worthy of discussing this with her are the ones that will never, ever agree then I'm pretty much out of ideas. She just doesn't do the strategic thinking thing and if it can't be 100% her way then she'd rather fail. Maybe this is harder than trying to follow pub med articles about neuroscience after all.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

We're always here? As who? Ourselves?

That's not what Lessans wrote. He specifically wrote that the Jews who were killed by Hitler should not be unhappy, because today they are here as different people. How do you explain that?

He never said that Jews shouldn't be unhappy. You have twisted his words once again.

Originally Posted by davidm

There are only two possible conceptions to explain this remarkable claim: first, that something like a "soul" is reincarnated. Second, that something like what Clark and Stewart wrote is true, and of course Lessans views are in accordance with those of Clark and Stewart and not with reincarnation.

The only other possibility for "we are always here" is Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrrence; but the ER is NOT what Lessans was writing about, sorry.

Maybe if you read the chapter in its entirety will you eventually understand the concept instead of guessing, which is all you're doing.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

OK but right now we aren't talking about a jacket cover, just a very brief letter to someone asking them to take a look at the book. That letter should be in your own words and not your father's.

I understand it needs to be in my own words, but my words flunked the last time. I want to create an interest that will spur them to get the book, or to read the first three chapters. I know that wording is important, but I don't think there is one size fits all. I could say something that might turn one person off and another may be interested due to that very comment. I appreciate your effort in trying to help me though.

Because it will be very difficult to believe or even conceive how a natural law, acting as a catalyst, can change the entire world of human relations for the benefit of all mankind; and because it is imperative that this fantastic BREAKTHROUGH be brought to light, you can now listen to the author as he reads and elaborates on the first chapter of his book, “Beyond the Framework of Modern Thought. The author reveals the actual discovery in Chapter Two, which is nothing other than a natural, psychological law of man’s ultimate nature which remained hidden until now. This law prevents man from striking the first blow, which eliminates the need to blame, punish, to retaliate or to turn the other cheek.

Two other natural laws are also revealed in later chapters. It is demonstrated that because we never understood a projecting function of the brain, words developed that allowed us to see, as on a screen, that half the human race is an inferior physiognomic production — homely, bad-looking, etc. But these words do not symbolize reality because people are not ugly or beautiful, just different, and when the truth is learned — WHY THE EYES ARE NOT A SENSE ORGAN, the use of these words, and this kind of unjust, hurtful discrimination, must come to an end.

The other law asks this question: With the Earth billions of years old, and with millions and millions of babies coming into the world since time immemorial, doesn’t it seem a strange coincidence and unbelievable phenomenon that YOU, OF ALL PEOPLE, were born and are alive at this infinitesimal fraction of time? The undeniable answer will make you very happy by removing any fears you might have regarding your own death.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

I don't think that I understand why you would want this all in your cover letter because it seems to me that it provides the opportunity for the same kind of dismissal that you get in these forums because out of context none of it makes much sense to me and there are a whole lot more people like me than there are philosophers, scientists and mathematicians. We aren't stupid or uneducated but we also aren't fluent in the language of philosophy. (Lots of lay people think of philosophy as akin to the weird shit some of us think up in the middle of the night on acid. I had a great idea about consciousness soup one night but it didn't make a whole lot of sense in the morning.) If you use your dad's summary you're risking hitting some scientific/philosophical backlash that you feel is distracting and wasting your time so it might be best to just give them a bit of a teaser to engage their interest.

Like what? The chapters headings?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Manipulate the equations? That's not how it works. You don't make an equation and say, Umm, this is how it could be, and then try to make the equation fit reality.

This is rich, Peacegirl you know nothing about science or how it works, as demonstrated by your many posts that illustrate your ignorance, and now you presume to tell us how science works? This is exactly how it works, physicists make an equation to try to describe reality, do an experiment based on the predictions of that equation, and then adjust the equation to fit the observed results. Scientists do not do what Lessans tried to do by making up some ideas and then claiming reality fit the ideas he made up. Scientists fit their theories to the observations of reality that they have made, not what they would like to see.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

The problem is that it doesn't make sense in context either, and so any effort to promote this stuff is hopeless. The eye IS a sense organ; we DO NOT see in real time, etc. The whole book is shot through with utter absurdities and provably false claims, and no one will ever publish it. She will have to self-publish, but it appears she has tried this and the effort has gone nowhere. It was reviewed at Amazon, and quite accurately summarized and panned as the nonsense that it is.

You're so full of it David. My effort at distributing this book hasn't even begun, so you're talking nonsense as usual.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

This is rich, Peacegirl you know nothing about science or how it works, as demonstrated by your many posts that illustrate your ignorance, and now you presume to tell us how science works? This is exactly how it works, physicists make an equation to try to describe reality, do an experiment based on the predictions of that equation, and then adjust the equation to fit the observed results. Scientists do not do what Lessans tried to do by making up some ideas and then claiming reality fit the ideas he made up. Scientists fit their theories to the observations of reality that they have made, not what they would like to see.

They are doing exactly that. They are fitting their calculations into an observation that has become their first premise. A premise is a statement that an argument claims will induce or justify a conclusion. In other words: a premise is an assumption that something is true. This is voodoo science.

This site is an alternative to voodoo science, the sort of science that coats itself with a veneer of legitimacy while being not much more valid than the crackpot science that its practitioners love to disparage. Truth is, voodoo science is much more detrimental to our understanding of nature than crackpot science because society is easily fooled by its authoritative mask and may, as a result, spend huge sums of money and decades (if not centuries) chasing after fantasies. Voodoo science regularly gets sold as legitimate science because its champions are adept at making a name for themselves through careful propaganda. They are very skilled at convincing the public (who ultimately pays for it all) that it is too stupid to know the difference between good science and bad science.

There is a foolproof way to spot a voodoo scientist. If a scientist claims to have a theory about a natural phenomenon but is unable to explain the theory in a simple language that the average layman can understand, one can be absolutely certain that he is as clueless about the nature of the phenomenon in question as anybody else. Voodoo science is not about understanding nature but about working at being so incomprehensible or so arcane to one's fellow human beings as to be regarded as brilliant. The weapon of choice of a voodoo scientist is mathematics. The truth is that a scientist's understanding of a phenomenon is inversely proportional to the number of math equations he uses to describe it. Neither Newton's gravity equation nor the equations of General Relativity explain why things fall. But what better way is there to hide one's cluelessness while presenting a façade of erudition than to use obscure equations to erect an impregnable mountain of obfuscation? Voodoo science is guru science.

A voodoo scientist can always count on other voodoo scientists to jump on his bandwagon and act as if they do understand his theory even though they are equally clueless. Vanity is not to be underrated. This creates a sort of tacit collusion among a group of voodoo scientists who may decide to specialize in the theory and build their careers around it. The idea seems to be to spend a great deal of time to learn the complex and carefully constructed rules of the game and hang in there long enough until one can be safely retired. I must say that many do sincerely believe in the importance and correctness of the theories they espouse but sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between a true believer and a hanger-on who merely decides to go along for the ride.

Examples of voodoo science masquerading as legitimate science are all around us: time travel, wormholes, black holes, dimensions curled up into little balls so tiny as to be undetectable, parallel universes, continuum physics, quantum computing, symbolic intelligence, machine consciousness, etc... It is all worthless crackpottery. Yet a few voodoo scientists have managed to amass small fortunes selling some of this stuff to an unsuspecting public, a public that continually thirsts for mysterious things to worship. Hopefully this site will wake a few people up.

Domain Not Valid

[thedoc]

Samuel Ramey / The Impossible Dream - YouTube

And just like Don Quixote, Peacegirl is wrong about just about everything. She has dedicated herself to tilting at windmills, the big difference is that there are no wrongs to be righted in Peacegirls quest.

[peacegirl]

Intermission: This is a sincere and moving expression by Dustin Hoffman of how easy it is to dismiss a woman who doesn't fit into society's version of beautiful.

Dustin Hoffman Breaks Down Crying Explaining Something That Every Woman Sadly Already Experienced

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by thedoc

This is rich, Peacegirl you know nothing about science or how it works, as demonstrated by your many posts that illustrate your ignorance, and now you presume to tell us how science works? This is exactly how it works, physicists make an equation to try to describe reality, do an experiment based on the predictions of that equation, and then adjust the equation to fit the observed results. Scientists do not do what Lessans tried to do by making up some ideas and then claiming reality fit the ideas he made up. Scientists fit their theories to the observations of reality that they have made, not what they would like to see.

You have to understand that peacegirl is talking about schizophrenic science, AKA Lessans science.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He never said that Jews shouldn't be unhappy. You have twisted his words once again.

No, that is EXACTLY what he said, you little liar. You seem to forget that people COPIES of the book. Shall we throw his words back at you yet again?

Maybe if you read the chapter in its entirety will you eventually understand the concept instead of guessing, which is all you're doing.

I have read the chapter in its entirely. It is you who does not understand the chapter, and you are desperately flailing about, unsuccessfully, to explain it. There are three possibilities:

1. Reincarnation of a soul. Lessans is not talking about this.

2. Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence. Lessans' own example of Jews killed by Hitler later being other people is at variance with ER.

3. The Stewart/Clark notion of existential passage/generic subjective continuity.

There are no other options.

Why don't explain your own words what Lessans meant? Because you can't. You have NO IDEA what he was talking about. All you care about is that he wrote it, so you think it must be true. You are both dishonest and crazy.

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Samuel Ramey / The Impossible Dream - YouTube

And just like Don Quixote, Peacegirl is wrong about just about everything. She has dedicated herself to tilting at windmills, the big difference is that there are no wrongs to be righted in Peacegirls quest.

Even sadder is that in peacegirls universe of mental illness, it doesn't matter what she does, which makes her obsession doubly pointless.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You're so full of it David. My effort at distributing this book hasn't even begun, so you're talking nonsense as usual.

Lying again. Remember how, six years ago, at iidb, you told people that the book was going to press? Are you denying that there is a review of the book at Amazon?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

There is a foolproof way to spot a voodoo scientist. If a scientist claims to have a theory about a natural phenomenon but is unable to explain the theory in a simple language that the average layman can understand, one can be absolutely certain that he is as clueless about the nature of the phenomenon in question as anybody else. Voodoo science is not about understanding nature but about working at being so incomprehensible or so arcane to one's fellow human beings as to be regarded as brilliant. The weapon of choice of a voodoo scientist is mathematics. The truth is that a scientist's understanding of a phenomenon is inversely proportional to the number of math equations he uses to describe it. Neither Newton's gravity equation nor the equations of General Relativity explain why things fall. But what better way is there to hide one's cluelessness while presenting a façade of erudition than to use obscure equations to erect an impregnable mountain of obfuscation? Voodoo science is guru science.

I must say that many do sincerely believe in the importance and correctness of the theories they espouse.

I must say that I haven't seen a more accurate description of Lessans for some time, Whoever wrote this must have known Lessans hiself.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

Yeah. That's why I think that if the point of the first contact is to get them to read it then the brief summary in the letter shouldn't contain a bunch of things to disagree with before they've even opened the book. If peacegirl is convinced that people would get it if they would only be quiet and read it in order then I think that the best thing to do is not to give away the conclusions so that their curiosity might get the better of them.

I know that she doesn't seem to think that talking to non-scientists and philosophers is worth her time and that the catch-all "new age" label is an insult so if she's absolutely determined that the only people worthy of discussing this with her are the ones that will never, ever agree then I'm pretty much out of ideas. She just doesn't do the strategic thinking thing and if it can't be 100% her way then she'd rather fail. Maybe this is harder than trying to follow pub med articles about neuroscience after all.

New age is not an insult. I might even start there. I think scientists are the wrong group because they are the most egotistical and will reject the book before opening the cover (and I am not willing to go through this all over again as I did in here) because he didn't use the scientific method.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Examples of voodoo science masquerading as legitimate science are all around us: time travel, wormholes, black holes, dimensions curled up into little balls so tiny as to be undetectable, parallel universes, continuum physics, quantum computing, symbolic intelligence, machine consciousness, etc... It is all worthless crackpottery. Yet a few voodoo scientists have managed to amass small fortunes selling some of this stuff to an unsuspecting public, a public that continually thirsts for mysterious things to worship. Hopefully this site will wake a few people up.

These areas of physics are sometimes refered to as 'speculative' and are not usually pretending to represent observed reality but just exploring what 'could be' not necessarily what actually is.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Lying again. Remember how, six years ago, at iidb, you told people that the book was going to press? Are you denying that there is a review of the book at Amazon?

I'm not denying that there is a review, but because I resubmitted it there is no book that one can order until I give the okay for it to go live, which I have not done yet. It has taken me quite a number of times to get it the way I wanted it. Remember, I am doing this alone and I have no back-up proof readers or anyone to give me help. Actually, this group helped me in quite a few instances. I thank Spacemonkey, LadyShea, and Ceptimus for their contributions. If I forgot anybody, please let me know so I can thank you.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

These areas of physics are sometimes refered to as 'speculative' and are not usually pretending to represent observed reality but just exploring what 'could be' not necessarily what actually is.

Then why do they act like it is? They act like time travel is possible, when it's not. They should call it science-fiction, not science.