A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

I'm really glad that you said that because it helps me to see where we aren't quite connecting. You're absolutely right - it does sound a bit like a press release and I don't think that's a bad thing although it isn't a summary of the book in the way that the one that your dad wrote is. That's OK because you aren't going to be using it for the same purpose. I used to send out press releases for 2 different reasons. The first were the easy ones where I just wanted them to print it in the paper to announce a fundraising event. The others were a bit more complicated because what I really wanted was to get their attention enough that they would come and do a full-length glowing article but it's a little tacky to come right out and say that, especially since they can already tell anyway.

I don't want anything really. What I mean by that is that I am not looking for something specific that some agency will do for me.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

This time you won't be sending anything to the press but you're essentially going to want to do the same thing - make the recipient aware that something new exists, try to make it sound as intriguing as possible without over or underselling it and hopefully get them to take a closer look by reading the book. What you really want is for them to read the book and write a glowing endorsement but it's a little inappropriate to ask for it right up front. If we can get past this part we can start to talk about what it is that you want them to do if they read it and what's in it for them.

Given the magnitude of this knowledge, and the fact that it goes against the grain of the scientific establishment --- I would be happy if anyone in this field took an interest. But whatever the case may be, I'm not giving up Christina.

The bad part is that I do not want to do this again on any kind of social media like twitter, facebook, or even writing on a blog.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

I can't help you with that part because if there is a part of FB that isn't "buy my stuff", "share this prayer", "what I had for lunch" and a locked down private area to BS about nothing important with a few friends and some strangers that I accidentally said yes to then I don't know what it is. I took everything out of my feed but news and music.

I'm just like you; let's get down to brass tacks. I don't like extraneous stuff that serves to dilute the conversation. We're on the same page here.

Seriously, if I had the money to put you both on the payroll, I would.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

Thanks, but I don't want a job because retirement is just too great. If you aren't a homeless kid or animal then the chances are not good at all that you'll get me out of the garden.

You can still have a job and have retirement. You're not dead, are you?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Please don't respond to this video. I don't care if this man is religious or not, it's an interesting concept and I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE!

Is the big bang theory a scientific fact? - YouTube

What is wrong with this video, and others like it, is that they seem to be implying that the Earth was the target for life to exist from the begining. In a Universe as large as the one we are in it was only random chance that the Earth was "The Place" for life. Statisticly, in a Universe this size, there must have been, somewhere, a planet with just the right conditions for life. The Earth just happend to be the place. It could just as likely been anywhere else in the Universe, another solar system, or Galaxy, in fact it is very likely that there is life somewhere else in the Universe, but the distances defeat contact. The really scary thought is that there may be, out there, another Lessans trying to hawk his book.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Why are you so afraid to call a spade a spade?

You've been repeatedly criticizing LadyShea for doing just that.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

You've been repeatedly criticizing LadyShea for doing just that.

Of course I am, and I have every reason to do this.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

What is wrong with this video, and others like it, is that they seem to be implying that the Earth was the target for life to exist from the begining. In a Universe as large as the one we are in it was only random chance that the Earth was "The Place" for life. Statisticly, in a Universe this size, there must have been, somewhere, a planet with just the right conditions for life. The Earth just happend to be the place. It could just as likely been anywhere else in the Universe, another solar system, or Galaxy, in fact it is very likely that there is life somewhere else in the Universe, but the distances defeat contact. The really scary thought is that there may be, out there, another Lessans trying to hawk his book.

Good for you thedoc. Keep speculating like NA said. All science is the same whether you speculate or really have proven something. Why? Because science says so, and what science says GOES, and don't you dare refute it or you're going to time out.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Of course I am, and I have every reason to do this.

So why are you telling davidm to do it while telling LadyShea not to?

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

How can there be no gap in consciousness if there is no being reborn? How is my consciousness being continued after my death without any rebirth? Where is it being continued?

Bump.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Of course I am, and I have every reason to do this.

He meant that I have consistently "called a spade a spade", and that is what you have criticized me for.

Also, your love of little homilies and quaint phrasing never ceases to amuse me.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Liar.

Bump.

[ChristinaM]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I don't want anything really. What I mean by that is that I am not looking for something specific that some agency will do for me.

That's a pretty good attitude to have right now. I usually try to have my plan all together before I get to the part where I ask for something and I try not to do it until I'm pretty sure that I can talk them into saying yes. You can't ask twice but you can always wait until the time feels right to ask the first time.

Given the magnitude of this knowledge, and the fact that it goes against the grain of the scientific establishment --- I would be happy if anyone in this field took an interest. But whatever the case may be, I'm not giving up Christina.

I'm not suggesting that you give up because I know that you don't want to do that.

I'm just like you; let's get down to brass tacks. I don't like extraneous stuff that serves to dilute the conversation. We're on the same page here.

Theoretically I should be using that stuff for social marketing but I think that it's a waste of time and when I stopped my sales didn't change at all. FB has changed its rules for businesses and if you want more than 15% of the people that liked your page to see your posts you have to pay for it.

You can still have a job and have retirement. You're not dead, are you?

LOLOL

No, I'm not quite dead yet but I do have a small side business to earn extra money and I do a fair amount of pro bono work for nonprofits that I like and to help out young community activists that struggle with the political part of issues that I'd like to see addressed too. This is a whole other topic but it's easy to get mentally lazy and dumb after retirement if all you do is sit around and don't push yourself to keep learning and finding new challenges.

From here I think that there are 2 next steps that you could take, even at the same time. The first is to be open-minded to a discussion with the philosophers that David keeps mentioning to you if he really does get one to drop by. It doesn't sound like they're in complete agreement with your dad but it might be the closest that you've ever come so far. I wouldn't bother though unless you're truly interested in their opinions and will give thoughtful consideration to their ideas even when they don't agree with you. They aren't going to like being lectured to or told that they're wrong any more than you do. You don't have to change your mind based on it but it might help you to clarify your thinking on it and get prepared for what kind of opposition that concept might bring. It might be a good time to practice not rising to the bait and letting some negative comments just roll off of your back if they aren't substantive. I'm not suggesting that you ignore people's comments here but you don't have to respond to pure heckling. It annoys the shit out of people when they're rude and you respond politely and maturely so it can be kind of fun like lightweight trolling is. Message boards aren't about being polite but it counts a lot when you're working and not just talking casually like this. No one should ever be able to get you to lose your temper because if you do, you lose.

The other thing that you can start doing is to start looking for new age type forums and try to pick the one that feels the best to you by lurking a bit to see what kinds of reactions ideas get. If it seems like it might be promising we can work on an OP that suits the style of that board.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Please don't respond to this video. I don't care if this man is religious or not, it's an interesting concept and I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE!

Thanks for another great big dose of Teh Stupid, peacegirl. I thought you didn't believe in a personal God? I guess that was another one of your endless lies, eh?

From the video: "What is the anthropic principle?" "The idea that the universe was designed with human life in mind."

No, that is NOT the fucking anthropic principle!

The weak anthropic principle is the rather tautological idea that the conditions we observe in the universe are constrained to be consistent with our existence as observers. It has nothing to do with any design postulate.

Also, unfortunately for these bozos, we now have evidence that the universe is spatially infinite (the finitude of the observable universe is a function of the fact that most of the light from outside this volume, also known as the Hubble Volume, has not had time to reach our eyes and, because of the expansion of the universe, will never reach our eyes. Another disproof of real-time seeing, of course.)

In a spatially infinite universe, no matter how rare life is, here are the number of inhabited planets, where life arose, just like here, contingently:

The number is INFINITE

Many of those planets will be duplicates of earth. These means, alas, we shoud expect that there are an infinite number of Lessans/peacegirls scattered throughout the infinite universe!

Btw, peacegirl, no one cares what you "approve" of. Your seal of approval is utterly worthless.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

What is wrong with this video, and others like it, is that they seem to be implying that the Earth was the target for life to exist from the begining. In a Universe as large as the one we are in it was only random chance that the Earth was "The Place" for life. Statisticly, in a Universe this size, there must have been, somewhere, a planet with just the right conditions for life. The Earth just happend to be the place. It could just as likely been anywhere else in the Universe, another solar system, or Galaxy, in fact it is very likely that there is life somewhere else in the Universe, but the distances defeat contact. The really scary thought is that there may be, out there, another Lessans trying to hawk his book.

Why do you just blather away when I asked people politely not to answer? You are so ignorant you refuse to honor anyone's request.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Thanks for another great big dose of Teh Stupid, peacegirl. I thought you didn't believe in a personal God? I guess that was another one of your endless lies, eh?

From the video: "What is the anthropic principle?" "The idea that the universe was designed with human life in mind."

No, that is NOT the fucking anthropic principle!

The weak anthropic principle is the rather tautological idea that the conditions we observe in the universe are constrained to be consistent with our existence as observers. It has nothing to do with any design postulate.

Also, unfortunately for these bozos, we now have evidence that the universe is spatially infinite (the finitude of the observable universe is a function of the fact that most of the light from outside this volume, also known as the Hubble Volume, has not had time to reach our eyes and, because of the expansion of the universe, will never reach our eyes. Another disproof of real-time seeing, of course.)

In a spatially infinite universe, no matter how rare life is, here are the number of inhabited planets, where life arose, just like here, contingently:

The number is INFINITE

Many of those planets will be duplicates of earth. These means, alas, we shoud expect that there are an infinite number of Lessans/peacegirls scattered throughout the infinite universe!

Btw, peacegirl, no one cares what you "approve" of. Your seal of approval is utterly worthless.

You are so beyond bozoish, it is a waste of precious time to try to understand your distorted ideas on spacetime, light and sight, and all the rest. You think you have all the answers, but if you analyze your answers, they are hot air; they have no substance whatsoever. How can you lie to the public and say that you know the truth? You are not the last word on this subject even though you think you are. First on the list, you have zero comprehension of what I was even talking about because you have a one track mind which is to prove Lessans wrong. You twist every word I say to fit your worldview, and you think no one sees this? We're suppose to listen to your interpretation of how the world works without any rebuttal? Give it up already; just like the Witch of The West; be gone, you have no power here.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Give it up already; just like the Witch of The West; be gone, you have no power here.

1. Fuck off

2. Everything I'm telling you is standard science, well known and empirically confirmed, along with extrapolations from known science, like the idea of building wormholes traversing space and time is extrapolated from General Relativity.

3. Your attacks on standard science, which I and others are talking about, just shows that you don't know anything. You were probably home-schooled by your father and indoctrinated with his book, right?

4. Nobody here agrees with anything that you say, and in ten years on the Internet you've never found a single person to agree with any of this. On the contrary, everywhere you've gone, you have been told the same things that we are telling you here. That should tell you something important, but evidently you are too thick to understand it.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Why do you just blather away when I asked people politely not to answer? You are so ignorant you refuse to honor anyone's request.

If you didn't want people to respond to the video, then why did you post it?

This is typical of your chutzpah. You think people are going to silently view the nonsense in this video and wag their heads in agreement like bobble-head dolls, which is precisely what you expected people to do when you began peddling your father's tosh online. Unfortunately for you, things did not work out that way.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Why do you just blather away when I asked people politely not to answer? You are so ignorant you refuse to honor anyone's request.

Do you really believe you can tell people what to do as if you have some authority over this thread? I can just visualize you stamping your little feet and pouting because people aren't listening to you. After 1100 pages you should realize that these are free thinkers who will make their own decisions and not be told by some spoiled 'daddy's girl', what to do. You don't own the thread and there has been little here worthy of moderation, and untill they start moderating idiocy, you're safe.

And as long as you seem to expect other people to honor your requests, when are you going to honor everyone elses requests for honest, clear answers. So far you've done little to nothing in response to these questions. And you have refused to look at and learn from the many links that would teach much of what you just don't understand, yet see fit to criticise.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Good for you thedoc. Keep speculating like NA said. All science is the same whether you speculate or really have proven something. Why? Because science says so, and what science says GOES, and don't you dare refute it or you're going to time out.

Promise? What science says is what the evidence says and not what some respected scientist says from authority. In science the emperical evidence is the authority. Science has plenty of evidence for what it claims, you have none.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

I answered this earlier. Besides, if you have an argument with Lessans' proof of determinism, I have no confidence that you will ever understand or accept his proof of personal immortality.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Promise? What science says is what the evidence says and not what some respected scientist says from authority. In science the emperical evidence is the authority. Science has plenty of evidence for what it claims, you have none.

That is not true. Most of what science says outside of what they know to be true is pure science fiction, or speculation, whatever you want to call it. Authority has everything to do with it, which is why people are all agog when Stephen Hawkins says something (even though it is pure conjecture), but spit in my face when Lessans says something.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

OMG Spacemonkey! I know he wrote that we "die only to be born . . . again and again" but that's not what he meant. By now you should know that what a Lessans writes is no indication whatsoever of what s/he means. You should have been able to divine what Seymour meant, and your inability to do so is all your fault! Why do you hate world peace?

Also, lol John Ankerberg.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

That's a pretty good attitude to have right now. I usually try to have my plan all together before I get to the part where I ask for something and I try not to do it until I'm pretty sure that I can talk them into saying yes. You can't ask twice but you can always wait until the time feels right to ask the first time.

I'm not suggesting that you give up because I know that you don't want to do that.

Theoretically I should be using that stuff for social marketing but I think that it's a waste of time and when I stopped my sales didn't change at all. FB has changed its rules for businesses and if you want more than 15% of the people that liked your page to see your posts you have to pay for it.

LOLOL

No, I'm not quite dead yet but I do have a small side business to earn extra money and I do a fair amount of pro bono work for nonprofits that I like and to help out young community activists that struggle with the political part of issues that I'd like to see addressed too. This is a whole other topic but it's easy to get mentally lazy and dumb after retirement if all you do is sit around and don't push yourself to keep learning and finding new challenges.

I agree. You have to have goals that get you excited. What you're doing sounds interesting and a great way to keep you mind stimulated.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

From here I think that there are 2 next steps that you could take, even at the same time. The first is to be open-minded to a discussion with the philosophers that David keeps mentioning to you if he really does get one to drop by. It doesn't sound like they're in complete agreement with your dad but it might be the closest that you've ever come so far. I wouldn't bother though unless you're truly interested in their opinions and will give thoughtful consideration to their ideas even when they don't agree with you. They aren't going to like being lectured to or told that they're wrong any more than you do. You don't have to change your mind based on it but it might help you to clarify your thinking on it and get prepared for what kind of opposition that concept might bring. It might be a good time to practice not rising to the bait and letting some negative comments just roll off of your back if they aren't substantive. I'm not suggesting that you ignore people's comments here but you don't have to respond to pure heckling. It annoys the shit out of people when they're rude and you respond politely and maturely so it can be kind of fun like lightweight trolling is.

Lessans did not need a consensus to prove he was right. He knew what he had.

Foreword

If you are sincerely interested in seeing this fantastic transition to a
new way of life which must come about the moment this discovery is
thoroughly understood, all I ask is that you do not judge what you are
about to read in terms of your present knowledge but do everything in
your power to understand what is written by following the
mathematical relations implicitly expressed throughout. Please
remember that any truth revealed in a mathematical manner does not
require your approval for its validity, although it does necessitate your
understanding for recognition and development. And now my
friends, if you care to come along, let us embark...the hour is getting
late.

I already contacted Tom Clark, but there might be a conflict of interest since he is totally immersed in his activist activities with prisons, where this knowledge eliminates prisons altogether because there will be no need for them. Do you see the problem? As far as ignoring comments, I did that for a long long time (and I also answered politely to the people who were brash and didn't deserve it), until the comments got on my nerves so bad that I couldn't control myself. Now I'm told I'm the one being rude. Go figure.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

Message boards aren't about being polite but it counts a lot when you're working and not just talking casually like this. No one should ever be able to get you to lose your temper because if you do, you lose.

I agree that being even tempered is the best revenge, but boy is it hard when people are laughing in your face. I have to polish up on this.

Originally Posted by ChristinaM

The other thing that you can start doing is to start looking for new age type forums and try to pick the one that feels the best to you by lurking a bit to see what kinds of reactions ideas get. If it seems like it might be promising we can work on an OP that suits the style of that board.

I agree. This thread has lost its luster and it will remain stagnant. It's time I move on. If you find any interesting forums, please let me know privately. People will follow me and I will not stay at a forum where I am heckled by the same people again and again and again.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

OMG Spacemonkey! I know he wrote that we "die only to be born . . . again and again" but that's not what he meant. By now you should know that what a Lessans writes is no indication whatsoever of what s/he means. You should have been able to divine what Seymour meant, and your inability to do so is all your fault! Why do you hate world peace?

Also, lol John Ankerberg.

He meant exactly what he said. YOU are born a-gain and a-gain, but there is no connection to the present you. You don't get it of course, which is why you laugh. Ignorance is your forte.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I answered this earlier. Besides, if you have an argument with Lessans' proof of determinism, I have no confidence that you will ever understand or accept his proof of personal immortality.

Oh, so now it is personal immortality, is it? How many pages ago was it -- two, three? -- that you stated there was no personal connection between the people dying and those being born? This is yet another indication that you do not understand at all Lessans' "third discovery."

For some time, i have actually tried to do you a favor by pointing you in the direction of Tom Clark and Wayne Stewart, who agree with Lessans, and can help you elucidate what he was trying to say. Instead of thanking me for pointing you in the direction of allies, you throw hysterical hissy fits insisting that what they wrote has nothing to do with what Lessans wrote, when in fact what they wrote has everything to do with what he wrote.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He meant exactly what he said. YOU are born a-gain and a-gain, but there is no connection to the present you. You don't get it of course, which is why you laugh. Ignorance is your forte.

You are born again and again, but you are not born again and again. That is just what you got through saying.

Exactly on par with, "I know how difficult it is to understand how the light can be at the retina, even though it is not at the retina." Yup, that's difficult to understand, all right!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

He meant that I have consistently "called a spade a spade", and that is what you have criticized me for.

Also, your love of little homilies and quaint phrasing never ceases to amuse me.

All that means is be honest and tell it like it is.