A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

It's not "nitpicking" to point out that the Sun is not a ball of fire. You're just upset because -- once again -- it has been pointed out that Lessans didn't know what he was talking about.


And your source is "Yahoo Answers"? And even your source points out that the Sun is "burning" only if you use inaccurate and incorrect definitions of the words "fire" and "burning."

Burning is a chemical reaction; the Sun is powered by nuclear fusion and is "burning" only if you define "burning" to mean something entirely different from its actual meaning.

Not that making up new definitions to avoid admitting error is anything new to either your or your father.


Calling the Sun a "ball of fire" just makes Lessans sound ignorant.

You are looking for something to criticize, which is your goal (and people will listen to an authority figure due to their position in academia) that has nothing WHATSOEVER to do with the essence of this revolutionary discovery. You're doing this in an effort to discredit my father with the stupidest of reasons. Admit it TLR, because that is exactly what you're doing. If you can't bring him down directly, you will pick on his writing style to try to get people to discount any value in his content. The unsuspecting individual will take what you say at face value and give up on this knowledge. How sad!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by GdB

The purpose of definitions is to assure that we are talking about the same thing. Your 'we have no free will, whatever the definition' shows you have not even understood this simple fact.

Your mindset is set in the stone of your oracle.

You are in oblivion. Definitions mean nothing if they don't reflect what is real. REALITY!! We have no free will regardless of what definitions you are trying to prove this fact wrong. You are in such denial there's no use carrying on a productive conversation, so let's end it.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You won't know who is right if you don't hear the explanation. How can you?

Originally Posted by GdB

You won't understand anything as long as you do not see what the function of definitions is, and how they relate to reality. Your father's remark 'Definitions mean absolutely nothing where reality is concerned.' is BS. Yes, definitions are not reality, but they have a relationship with reality. How else could we ever talk about reality??

You're wrong and you're defensive to the point where there IS no chance of a meaningful conversation. You refuse to temporarily give up the notion that we have free will of the compatibilist kind or any kind in order for me to move forward. Being able to choose between alternatives does not mean our choices are FREE, not even when there is no external pressure; not even when there is no obsessive compulsive component in making that choice; and not even when there is reasoning involved. But you won't let me continue, so we're done GdB. Go back to your faulty thought system and be happy.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

...not even when there is no obsessive compulsive component in making that choice...

Is there an obsessive compulsive component in your repeatedly choosing to lie when refusing to answer my questions?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Is there an obsessive compulsive component in your repeatedly choosing to lie when refusing to answer my questions?

No, but there is a definite obsessive compulsive component when you can't stop harrassing me.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No, but there is a definite obsessive compulsive component when you can't stop harrassing me.

How is it harassment to point out your lies? And why do you choose to lie when refusing to answer my questions?

[GdB]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are in oblivion. Definitions mean nothing if they don't reflect what is real. REALITY!! We have no free will regardless of what definitions you are trying to prove this fact wrong. You are in such denial there's no use carrying on a productive conversation, so let's end it.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Go back to your faulty thought system and be happy.

And you, live the unhappy life of the daughter of the unrecognised genius. Unrecognised, for ever. We all know why.

But, you, you understand nothing, Peacegirl.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by GdB

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Go back to your faulty thought system and be happy.

Originally Posted by GdB

You're very vindictive. I should hold you accountable for not choosing a better option than this silliness. You could have chosen differently given your free options.

Originally Posted by GdB

And you, live the unhappy life of the daughter of the unrecognised genius. Unrecognised, for ever. We all know why.

But, you, you understand nothing, Peacegirl.

You seem to be convinced that he has nothing of importance to offer. How much sense does that make when you can't even identify what his discovery is? Even though I see your ignorance, I can't blame you for it since you don't know any better and could not have chosen another alternative than the one you chose.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

How is it harassment to point out your lies? And why do you choose to lie when refusing to answer my questions?

If you know Lessans has nothing of value to offer, then your constant harrassment is just another form of obsessive compulsive disorder.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If you know Lessans has nothing of value to offer, then your constant harrassment is just another form of obsessive compulsive disorder.

Again, what harassment? How does any of this explain your constant lying?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Again, what harassment? How does any of this explain your constant lying?

Refusing to answer the same questions is not lying Spacemonkey. Read the definition.

lie
noun

a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
Synonyms: prevarication, falsification.
Antonyms: truth.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Refusing to answer the same questions is not lying Spacemonkey. Read the definition.

I didn't say that was lying. However, dishonestly claiming to have already answered them when you haven't, as an excuse for refusing to answer them, is LYING. And you've been caught doing exactly that countless times already. So what explains your constant lying?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

I didn't say that was lying. However, dishonestly claiming to have already answered them when you haven't, as an excuse for refusing to answer them, is LYING. And you've been caught doing exactly that countless times already. So what explains your constant lying?

BS Spacemonkey. You know you're the one lying. Stop projecting. I have answered your question over the course of many weeks. You're just not happy with my answers and you want to pin me down. I'm sure the conversation can be found using keywords. You are on a different wavelength than I am (no pun intended ). There is no way in hell you will be able to make sense of this claim given your present beliefs.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

False Spacemonkey and you know you're the one lying. Stop projecting. I have answered your questions many times over. You are on a different wavelength than me (no pun intended :laugh) and there is no way you will be able to make sense of this claim given your present ideas.

I am not lying at all. YOU ARE. You have never once answered the five questions I have been posting, and you damn well know it. Every time you've been called out on this LIE and challenged to quote a post where you have allegedly answered these questions you have weaseled out and refused to even try. You know it's a LIE, so why do you repeat it?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

I am not lying at all. YOU ARE. You have never once answered the five questions I have been posting, and you damn well know it. Every time you've been called out on this LIE and challenged to quote a post where you have allegedly answered these questions you have weaseled out and refused to even try. You know it's a LIE, so why do you repeat it?

I HAVE ANSWERED YOU. You don't like my answer, is all. You want to force some kind of concession out of me and that's not going to happen.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I HAVE ANSWERED YOU. You don't like my answer, is all. You want to force some kind of concession out of me and that's not going to happen.

There's that LIE again. You have NEVER answered these questions, so why do you keep claiming you have? It is a bald-faced LIE and everyone here knows it. You still won't even try to show us where you think you've answered them, so who do you think you're fooling? Why repeat a LIE like this that everyone here knows to be completely false? Have you actually repeated the LIE so many times now that it has become part of your delusional psychosis?

If you've answered them before, then in which post did you answer them?

If I didn't like your answers, then what were these answers that I allegedly don't like?

If you weren't LYING, you'd have answers to these two questions.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm sure the conversation can be found using keywords.

What a crock of shit. Besides, of what value are these mythical past answers of yours if YOU CAN'T FIND THEM, and neither of us even KNOW WHAT THEY WERE???

That alone is enough reason for you to spend the 30 seconds it would take to actually answer them now instead of continuing to lie and evade.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I HAVE ANSWERED YOU.

Who do you think you're fooling with this bullshit? Every single person here who has interacted with you knows you have NEVER answered the questions that has repeatedly posted, and everyone here knows why: You CAN"T answer them because no matter what answer you give, it destroys your claims!

So who do you think you're fooling? No one here. Why don't you just fuck off?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

There's that LIE again. You have NEVER answered these questions, so why do you keep claiming you have? It is a bald-faced LIE and everyone here knows it. You still won't even try to show us where you think you've answered them, so who do you think you're fooling? Why repeat a LIE like this that everyone here knows to be completely false? Have you actually repeated the LIE so many times now that it has become part of your delusional psychosis?

If you've answered them before, then in which post did you answer them?

If I didn't like your answers, then what were these answers that I allegedly don't like?

If you weren't LYING, you'd have answers to these two questions.

I have spoken to you for 5 years. I know what you're going to say. Light bounces off of objects and the information is reflected over large distances until it reaches the eye or film. This is all in delayed time. There is no other way of looking at it. Case closed.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I have spoken to you for 5 years. I know what you're going to say. Light bounces off of objects and the information is reflected over large distances until it reaches the eye or film. This is all in delayed time. There is no other way of looking at it. Case closed.

You are dodging the issue again.

WHY. DO. YOU. KEEP. LYING. ABOUT. HAVING. ANSWERED. THESE. QUESTIONS???

[Spacemonkey]

Either ANSWER these questions, or quote me your alleged previous answers.

You need photons at the camera film or retina when the Sun is first ignited.
Are they traveling photons?
Did they come from the Sun?
Did they get to the film/retina by traveling?
Did they travel at the speed of light?
Can they leave the Sun before it is ignited?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Who do you think you're fooling with this bullshit? Every single person here who has interacted with you knows you have NEVER answered the questions that has repeatedly posted, and everyone here knows why: You CAN"T answer them because no matter what answer you give, it destroys your claims!

So who do you think you're fooling? No one here. Why don't you just fuck off?

I can't talk to people who believe in wormholes, time machines and free will.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Either ANSWER these questions, or quote me your alleged previous answers.

You need photons at the camera film or retina when the Sun is first ignited.
Are they traveling photons?
Did they come from the Sun?
Did they get to the film/retina by traveling?
Did they travel at the speed of light?
Can they leave the Sun before it is ignited?

I answered these already. I will answer one more time and that's it. Your logic will always tell you it's impossible to see in real time based on your questions. But your questions are problematic.

Yes, the light is traveling.

Light is at the film but not due to travel time. You know this already.

Light travels at the speed of light. That was never disputed.

Light cannot leave the Sun before it is ignited.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I answered these already. I will answer one more time and that's it. Your logic will always tell you it's impossible to see in real time based on your questions. But your questions are problematic.

Yes, the light is traveling.

Light is at the film but not due to travel time. You know this already.

Light travels at the speed of light. That was never disputed.

Light cannot leave the Sun before it is ignited.

You still haven't answered the questions I asked. Crucially, you appear to have completely skipped the second question. You need to put a Yes or a No after each question, and answer specifically about the photons I am asking about. I will number the questions so you can number your responses to make it clear which answers go with which questions.

You need photons at the camera film or retina when the Sun is first ignited.
1. Are they traveling photons?
2. Did they come from the Sun?
3. Did they get to the film/retina by traveling?
4. Did they travel at the speed of light?
5. Can they leave the Sun before it is ignited?

Don't answer about different photons, and don't answer about photons in general. Answer (at least) Yes or No to the (five!) questions actually asked!

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I can't talk to people who believe in wormholes, time machines and free will.

Says the ignorant hag who doesn't know anything about standard science no matter how many times we have educated you; who still doesn't understand the difference between libertarian and compatibilist free will, no matter how many times we have educated you; and who thinks that NASA is poisoning the minds of children by posting a page explaining time dilation to them (which topic you still don't grasp, either, no matter how many times we have educated you.)

How many followers have you won over during your 15 years on the Internet, hmm?

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by But

Sorry, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

I think my explanation was pretty clear. Read it again and tell me what part you don't understand.

Hmmm - we could work out an earth-centric universe where light curves, and the curvature gets more pronounced the further away from earth things are.

That way, you look at a star that is far away, and the light coming in from that star has actually traveled a curved path.

But I am thinking those lines might get pretty squiggly if you remember that the earth both moves and spins.