A revolution in thought

[But]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

They work because they track light. I don't see any conflict.

You just don't want to understand it.

Using radio tracking they can pinpoint the spacecraft's location to within a few meters. How is it possible that they don't notice this discrepancy of tens of thousands of kilometers?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by But

You just don't want to understand it.

Using radio tracking they can pinpoint the spacecraft's location to within a few meters. How is it possible that they don't notice this discrepancy of tens of thousands of kilometers?

That's fine because they're using the speed of light which tracks the exact location when the spacecraft arrives, but this is not the purpose of real time vision. The two can both be right.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Hey, Peacegirl Fucktard (you're welcome), have you worked out coherent answers yet to any of the following?

How did you go about distinguishing between Lessans' errors that needed removing from the text, and his 100% accurate astute observations that couldn't possibly be wrong?

How will the changed conditions prevent harms resulting from the unaddressed justification of rational self-interest?

What traveling have your magical photons (at the retina at 12:00) done, and when could they ever have been located at the Sun, where you claim they came from?

Bump.

[But]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's fine because they're using the speed of light which tracks the exact location when the spacecraft arrives, but this is not the purpose of real time vision. The two can both be right.

No, they can't both be right because they give two completely different answers!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

Forget it Soacemonky. Anyway, you're on hiatus until tomorrow. Sleep well!

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The two can both be right.

No, they can't both be right, because they give two different answers.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Forget it Soacemonky. Anyway, you're on hiatus until tomorrow. Sleep well!

Who's Soacemonky? Are you posting drunk again? And "sleep well"? It's midday here, dumbass.

And what will change tomorrow? A different excuse for not even attempting to answer these questions?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Who's Soacemonky? Are you posting drunk again? And "sleep well"? It's midday here, dumbass.

And what will change tomorrow? A different excuse for not even attempting to answer these questions?

You're being a sore loser and you know it. Youll be benched for a week if you keep these shenanigans up. The ball is in your court.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You're being a sore loser and you know it. Youll be benched for a week if you keep these shenanigans up. The ball is in your court.

Again, are you posting drunk? Why did you get my name wrong and assume we were in the same timezone? And what will change tomorrow if I am polite to you? I tried it for a while and it appeared to make no difference whatsoever. You still refused to answer questions. You still lied. So what incentive do I have to be nice to you?

[Spacemonkey]

I apologize. If only I could stop posting relevant questions about Lessans alleged discoveries, and start paying more attention to the real issues—like how often Peacegirl's name is getting used in each post—maybe we could make some real progress up in here.

[davidm]

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Oh be quiet Vivisectus. There are environmental causes. Stop turning this important work into a joke or you're next in line to be ignored. If you don't care then just ignore my warning. My father was a flawed human being like all of us. Even Einstein was a flawed human being but it didn't prevent him from making some important discoveries. Just keep that in mind next time you rush to judgement.

Hey, these are all things you said, not me. It is not my fault that you seem to positively enjoy cognitive dissonance and actively seek it out.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

peacegirl, it is astounding to see how the Authentic Text agitates you. Why will you not discuss the factual basis of the claims written by the author and made in his lifetime - to the point that you corrupt the text and even the tapes through crude deletion?

peacegirl, how will refusing to discuss the factual basis of claims help the discovery "be found scientifically sound after a thorough investigation?" A "thorough investigation" must begin with an examination of facts and data. If you refuse even that, your refusal dooms the author to obscurity more severely even than your corruption of the Authentic Text. This is the very worst form of paradigm policing - placing certain claims outside of the limits of inquiry. The penalty associated with this form of tabooism is that you permanently fence off this area of scientific investigation of these claims.

peacegirl, why do you do that? peacegirl, why do you declare a taboo and insist that only you are qualified to discuss and reach conclusions on these matters that you have made their own property; that only you are privy to the immense body of knowledge and subtlety of argument necessary fully to understand the complexities of the subject and to reach the ‘right’ conclusion?

We have seen in other fields that this can happen when someone's occupation is to be a specialist in a certain field of inquiry. They cannot abide non-specialists trying to contribute to their field because it makes them seem less relevant and authoritative, and sometimes they even perceive it as a threat to their job security.

These specialists then start acting as a sort of gate-keeper for the truth, making it hard for non-specialists to contribute, and potentially stifling fresh new research that is uninhibited by the accumulated biases of people educated within the field.

I vaguely remember reading something recently about someone who complained about that very thing.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Again, are you posting drunk? Why did you get my name wrong and assume we were in the same timezone? And what will change tomorrow if I am polite to you? I tried it for a while and it appeared to make no difference whatsoever. You still refused to answer questions. You still lied. So what incentive do I have to be nice to you?

I am typing on my iPhone and it's easier to make typos. I know we're not in the same time zone but it doesn't matter. I still won't answer any of your posts. That should be your incentive.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I still won't answer any of your posts. That should be your incentive.

I don't understand. How is that an incentive? Do you understand what 'incentive' means?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

I don't understand. How is that an incentive? Do you understand what 'incentive' means?

The fact that I won't respond to any of your posts if you keep up the name calling should be incentive enough not to name call, that is, if you want to converse with me. I am not interested in discussing photons.

[Vivisectus]

So photons is another area of this knowledge that you will not even discuss with people who are trying to see if the text is true, just like the factual basis for the claim that 98% of gay people are just frustrated heteros?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

I don't understand. How is that an incentive? Do you understand what 'incentive' means?

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

So photons is another area of this knowledge that you will not even discuss with people who are trying to see if the text is true, just like the factual basis for the claim that 98% of gay people are just frustrated heteros?

Deflect all you want. I refuse to engage with you when you're so off topic. Ugh, perception is such a lie.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's fine because they're using the speed of light which tracks the exact location when the spacecraft arrives, but this is not the purpose of real time vision. The two can both be right.

Are you saying that sometimes we see things instantly and other times we see objects in delayed vision? How do the photons know which situation applies and whether they should get to the eyes instantly, or travel in the usual manner at c?

Are you now admitting that sometimes we see afferently?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Ugh, perception is such a lie.

You're right, most people don't see what is really there, they see what they want to see, and you only see what your father wrote in his book. Even when it is laid out in front of you you refuse to see reality, it's to bad that you are so wrapped up in your fathers fantasy. I had a customer in my hobby shop once, that was so wrapped up in the D&D fantasy world, that it was controlling his life in the real world.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

So photons is another area of this knowledge that you will not even discuss with people who are trying to see if the text is true, just like the factual basis for the claim that 98% of gay people are just frustrated heteros?

"Photons" is a heterodox corruption. "Molecules of light" is correct.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Deflect all you want. I refuse to engage with you when you're so off topic. Ugh, perception is such a lie.

Ermmm, which one of us are you responding to?

Also, was your dad not always perceiving relations? Where they lies, or are perceptions only lies when it is someone else doing it?

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

"Photons" is a heterodox corruption. "Molecules of light" is correct.

It is so easy to be led astray when there are heretical works around. Fortunately we now have the voice of orthodoxy to set us straight again.

[Stephen Maturin]

The Authentic Text is authentic. The Corrupted Text is corrupt and therefore unreliable. We know this as surely as we know that the British royal family is comprised exclusively of shape-shifting lizards.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The fact that I won't respond to any of your posts if you keep up the name calling should be incentive enough not to name call, that is, if you want to converse with me. I am not interested in discussing photons.

It's not any kind of incentive when you refuse to answer anything I ask regardless of how polite I am. Dumbass.