A revolution in thought

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by thedoc

From the other thread I thought she was a sincere human being, just misguided. Now, and for some time, I have found it amusing, from both sides.

Also on the other thread / forum we were talking grandchildren, and some other unrelated subjects, that led me to believe that she is a rational human being and not the fanatic 'fundamentalist' she is projecting on this site. Her apparent sanity on that site, is what is giving me pause to question her apparent insanity here. I can easily understand her leaving the other forum as the thread had wandered very far off the subject of the book, in fact the other thead went on for another page without her. Also one of the members there, thought the goal was so noble that we should give it serious consideration. Here she has cleverly kept the topic on the book with the help of posters who are determined to try to reach her with the truth and to have the truth posted for others to see as a counter to Peacegirl. Here there seems to be much more hostility and conflict than on the other site, that might be part of it?

[davidm]

Originally Posted by thedoc

At risk of upsetting several people posting on this thread I must disagree with many of the assesments of Peacegirl. Contrary to what many have stated she is not willfully ignorant, she knows full well how the eye works and does not work. She is not stupid as she has consistantly replied to every objection to Lessans Book in a rather clever and creative manner, abet usually by being evasive and non-committal. I believe that she has not, in fact, rejected any of the empherical evidence presented, but was fully aware of it before commencing with this effort to promote the Book. It has been stated that she has a degree (college?) which would imply a certain level of education, and a certain body of knowledge. She has consistantly demonstrated her proir knowledge by knowing just what to disagree with, what to ignore, and just how to state and restate the book to keep everyone else posting in the attempt to convince her where she is wrong. Peacegirl has demonstrated a unique ability to keep everyone else posting in the hopes of some kind of realization on her part that what they are posting is true, but the joke is that she already knows, it's possable that she's just not done playing yet. Given the criticism of education in the book Peacegirls education would seem to be a contradiction unless Lessans actually had a high regard for education, lending credence to the idea that this was some kind of joke. I must agree with the opinion that she is dishonest, in that she has known all along the truth and the falacy of the book and the true intent of her father in writing it. She has been compelled to move in the direction of greater monitary satisfaction by maintaining the charade of believing that the book is real, in the hopes of attracting the gullible and easily impressed to spend an excessive amount of money on a book of no value, except for the entertainment of those in the know. The only thing that I cannot explain, at this time, is why she is continuing on this particular thread, that is something known only to Peacegirl.

IOW, she's a con artist. Fortunately she's not very good at it, and the buncombe she's trying to fob off on the gullible is so bad that very few will be swindled by it.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by thedoc

The hypothisis is that the universe is much larger than we can observe and we are in the center of the limit of our 'observable universe'. And the belief is that the universe is finite but unbounded, according to current cosmology.

Actually, this is not correct. The latest empirical data from sky surveys is that the universe is infinite, and not finite but unbounded. The infinitesimal part of it that we see is, contra Lessans' claims, a function of the finite speed of light and the fact that we do indeed need to wait for the light to arrive in order to see anything, destroying the concept of real-time seeing (as if the stupid concept had not been destroyed in a myriad ways already).

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by davidm

Actually, this is not correct. The latest empirical data from sky surveys is that the universe is infinite, and not finite but unbounded. The infinitesimal part of it that we see is, contra Lessans' claims, a function of the finite speed of light and the fact that we do indeed need to wait for the light to arrive in order to see anything, destroying the concept of real-time seeing (as if the stupid concept had not been destroyed in a myriad ways already).

I have not seen this, I guess I should try to keep up better. Do you have a link to something I can look at?

[thedoc]

Here is a link to the other forum, the thread went for 4 pages but Peacegirl left on page 3, also there is some repeat of posts from one page to the next, not sure why. The last page wanders off onto another topic.

A revolution in thought

Quite a bit different than this thread.

[davidm]

Delete. Scrwed up, try again (replying to wrong quoted material).

[davidm]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I have not seen this, I guess I should try to keep up better. Do you have a link to something I can look at?

Discussion here.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by davidm

IOW, she's a con artist. Fortunately she's not very good at it, and the buncombe she's trying to fob off on the gullible is so bad that very few will be swindled by it.

It would only take about a million suckers to make her a nice pile of money, I would guess that there are more than that in the world.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by davidm

Discussion here.

Thats all well and good 'but' - - - are you ready? - - - "Its only a theory". - - - Muahahahaha.... I just pulled a 'Peacegirl on you.

Serously there is much that is still in question and they did leave an 'out' in the accuracy of the measurements. I actually had seen some of this before, just hadn't seen that conclusion. The updates and sequiles should be interesting. I still like my idea of continuous creation better than negative energy or gravity. I also noticed the last line gave them a bit of a fudge factor.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's true. There is usually an interaction between both environment and genetics, therefore if the environmental component is removed from the equation, the gene expression will not occur.

Unfortunately for you, the "environmental" factors involved in homosexuality (and left handedness as well) appear to be the prenatal environment.

I don't think Lessans New World will affect hormone/chemical levels during gestation.

[thedoc]

[quote=LadyShea;950831
Or gene expression determined by environmental factors[/quote]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's true. There is usually an interaction between both environment and genetics, therefore if the environmental component is removed from the equation, the gene expression will not occur.

No, there is no reason to believe that eliminating the environmental factors will mean that gene expression will not occur. The interaction may not be complementary, It may be that environment is suppressing homosexual gene expression, and there may be more, not less in the 'Golden age'.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It is very much related because if sight is afferent, it should not be difficult for a dog to recognize his master by his features alone, without involving his other senses and without any other clues to help him identify such as a familiar hat, or his master's gait which is more about movement than sight recognition.

You'll have to explain this, because what you said makes no sense.

According to Lessen's, dogs can't recognize people by only their facial features, and humans can. For the sake of this explanation let's assume he was correct.

If vision is efferent: dogs cannot do what humans do (recognize someone by facial features alone) even though humans also have efferent vision.

If vision is afferent: dogs cannot do what humans do (recognize someone by facial features alone) even though humans also have afferent vision.

So if the premise "Dogs cannot recognize people by only their facial features" is true, and the premise "Humans can recognize people by only their facial features" is also true, then whether sight is afferent or efferent doesn't seem to be the cause of the difference.

In both cases the difference would be seem to be related to differences in how the brain processes information, not in how they see.

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by thedoc

It has been stated that she has a degree (college?) which would imply a certain level of education, and a certain body of knowledge.

Plenty of people are well educated and intelligent, yet fail to grasp even simple concepts when they contradict with their world view. Her act is entirely compatible with Creationists, Flat-Earthers, 9/11 Truthers and Birthers.

I don't know what anyone else is here for, but I find peacegirl interesting because I have an unhealthy fascination with crap, and I'm interested in seeing how she handles the different approaches to get her to think about what she's saying....

Unfortunately, she hasn't picked up a new shtick in a while, and it's getting boring.

[Vivisectus]

As I don my translucent robe and special sex-hat, hoping the missus will chant the sex-word in return so we can retire for our primal love-struggle and play hide-the-bratwurst, refreshing the romantic love we bear for each others genitals, I cannot help but feel that some sort of final summation is required, a final word of appreciation for this earth-shattering work of mathematical undeniable-ness. A fitting salute made of my own unfree will, which I am bound to give because it leads towards my greater satisfaction. A last recognition of the 30 years of hard work that got us the amazing observer on Rigel who will, any day now, send us the answer to a question we have not even asked yet. A great and resounding shoutout to the man who showed us that what has happened must have needed to happen, because it happened. Some fitting words to describe this mighty fallacy-sundae topped with the cherry of idiotic paradox, and that should be inserted as a byline to the title:

"Loose Stool Water - Arse-Gravy of the Worst Kind"

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

As I don my translucent robe and special sex-hat, hoping the missus will chant the sex-word in return so we can retire for our primal love-struggle and play hide-the-bratwurst, refreshing the romantic love we bear for each others genitals, I cannot help but feel that some sort of final summation is required, a final word of appreciation for this earth-shattering work of mathematical undeniable-ness. A fitting salute made of my own unfree will, which I am bound to give because it leads towards my greater satisfaction. A last recognition of the 30 years of hard work that got us the amazing observer on Rigel who will, any day now, send us the answer to a question we have not even asked yet. A great and resounding shoutout to the man who showed us that what has happened must have needed to happen, because it happened. Some fitting words to describe this mighty fallacy-sundae topped with the cherry of idiotic paradox, and that should be inserted as a byline to the title:

"Loose Stool Water - Arse-Gravy of the Worst Kind"

How very shallow you are Vivisectus. This mirrors who you are in your self-importance, not Lessans. It makes me sad. I'm sure you will all say, "Then be sad, you idiot." The phrase, "You idiot," is your proof that he has nothing, but it fails over and over again. Answer me sincerely, is this the kind of response that comes from someone who is truly unbiased, or more importantly, professional? It allows me to see (when a bright light shines on this thread for all to see), that this is nothing more than people who don't want to be wrong no matter what the cost. They don't like it when the tables turn and the spotlight is on them, so they strike back in angry defiance. Does this seem like an objective discourse to any rational mind, if, by chance, there is any rationality left?

I have come to realize why people are scared to share their ideas; that's why these forums are nothing more than sheep following the herd. The members don't want to be condemned for their thoughts like I have been condemned, so they shut their mouths like good little boys and girls. And I don't blame them one bit. This is like the third Reich. You better agree, or you will be eaten up alive. Does anyone with any brain left recogize the dynamic going on in here? This format is nothing more than a big lie because it doesn't allow for open discussion, and will ruin it for those who might actually have something of value to say.

[LadyShea]

So put up a website or blog to disseminate the info on your terms peacegirl. You can set up a PayPal for free and even charge for the full .pdf and only offer snippets for free.

Unfortunately, by choosing critical thinkers instead of woomeisters as you do, making the terrible arguments/defenses you make, presenting Lessans info as you present it, you set yourself up for ridicule from the get go. That doesn't even include the various insanities and impossibilities in the book itself.

Comparing your readers and critics to Nazis and lynch mobs, calling them elitist, close minded, and egotistical, and making yourself some martyr for THE TRUTH is just icing on the crazy cake.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

So put up a website or blog to disseminate the info on your terms peacegirl. You can set up a PayPal for free and even charge for the full .pdf and only offer snippets for free.

Unfortunately, by choosing critical thinkers instead of woomeisters as you do, making the terrible arguments/defenses you make, presenting Lessans info as you present it, you set yourself up for ridicule from the get go. That doesn't even include the various insanities and impossibilities in the book itself.

Comparing your readers and critics to Nazis and lynch mobs, calling them elitist, close minded, and egotistical, and making yourself some martyr for THE TRUTH is just icing on the crazy cake and reduces the whole thing to religious proselytizing.

But LadyShea, don't you see that they're no better than lynch mobs, elitist, close minded individuals who think they can say whatever they want because they are the elitest? That's just as bad as any lynch mob, because they think they are justified in what they are saying. It's a poor excuse for someone we would call a "critical thinker." They are all invested in their own version of truth, and can't see beyond their own noses. They couldn't see the truth if it was right in front of them, especially if it was not the truth they expected. They can call me whatever they want; it doesn't change a thing except for the length of time it will take for this new world to become a reality. That's not up to me. It's in God's hands.

I know the direction I have to take LadyShea because of how this thread has been misinterpreted, misconstrued, and misrepresented. If we are still alive when this discovery is brought to light, all that I hope for is that the nastiest people (Stephen Marturin [who was worst of the bunch], the Editor, davidm, thedoc), have regret. I know that they couldn't help themselves, because their will is not free, but it doesn't take away from the hurt that they inflicted. Get real LadyShea, they are not critical thinkers, for if they were, they would never have attacked me in this way. They want to be the guardians of truth and if they are threatened, they will go on the attack. They never studied this work, so they have nothing to offer.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I hope people read when the discovery is validated to see how difficult it was to break through the ignorance that existed, and the vitriol that took place. This would never reflect on Lessans. It would reflect on those who couldn't stand that I was discussing a genuine discovery that they were blind to see.

Keep going peacegirl, the more you talk the more you discredit yourself. You have put yourself in the category of the flat Earthers, 9/11 Truthers, Creationsists, Scientologists, and Birthers, because your behavior is indistinguishable from the assorted nuts.

[Vivisectus]

How very shallow you are Vivisectus. This mirrors who you are in your self-importance, not Lessans. It makes me sad. I'm sure you will all say, "Then be sad, you idiot." The phrase, "You idiot," is your proof that he has nothing, but it fails over and over again. Answer me sincerely, is this the kind of response that comes from someone who is truly unbiased, or more importantly, professional? No, it isn't, and it allows me to see (with a bright light shown on it), that this is nothing more than people who don't want to be wrong, no matter what it takes. They will keep anybody who threatens them under wraps, no matter how they do it; even if the means they attack with full force like Martin, David, The Editor, Doctor X, thedoc, and others, what they cannot understand because they did not read the book. Does that seem a little bit nuts to anyone in here?

I have come to realize why people are scared straight from sharing their truth. They don't want to be condemned for their thoughts like I have been condemned. And I don't blame them one bit. This is the third Reich. You better agree, or you will be eaten up alive. Does anyone with any brain left recogize the dynamic going on in here? This thread is nothing more than a big lie (I feel sorry for you people who think you are god's gift to humanity), and will ruin it for others if they are depending on these people to determine what is true.

Barely coherent, with a VERY idiosyncratic idea of "proof", and always claiming persecution - you rant just like your father writes, did you know that?

But I am of course utterly baffled by your invoking of the nazis - everyone knows that when you call your opponent a nazi, that makes you about 7 more right. You have beaten the thought-police with this cunning and novel strategy. Bravo!

Thank goodness that we have you, the only person in his entire board who can think for herself and does not mindlessly parrot authority! A plucky little fighter who doggedly pursues the truth, even if the evidence that surfaces goes right against everything she was raised to believe. Someone who is willing to look the truth in the face and stand up to the hypocrites who claim that their "rational thinking" and "scientific method" gives them a better standard of truth than those who simply say "My daddy said so, and he was a very clever fellow who spent a lot of time thinking about stuff, so if he thought stuff that was wrong, he would notice and think something else in stead!".

How dare we all criticize this epic work that you so graciously allowed us to celebrate! Why, we don't even know what is written in it, because none of us have read a page. We are just incredibly lucky to guess that it features such gems of wisdom as love of a persons genitals, the sexy jacket and the translucent robe! How we ever divined that there was a man on Rigel who can send messages back in time is beyond me.

And the mocking! Just because it features the marvel of efferent, instant sight we quibble about such minor problems as physics, causality and the inevitable paradox of time-travel. We mope and whine about a complete lack of mechanism by which sight is supposed to work. Who the hell was Einstein anyway? Did he ever devise a system to save the world? No Ma'am!

It must be because this awesome epic of epic epicness so threatens us, somewhere deep inside, that we must suppress it. We just cannot bear the idea of our treasured preconceptions being taken away from us, as we are all deeply and emotionally invested in it. I myself have cried myself to sleep many a night, rocking back and forth, murmuring "No! It cannot be true that the optic nerve is not afferent! I must think something up, find some way to shut her up!"

Why, I would not be a bit surprised of government agents in black suits are on their way to your house as we speak, to silence the awesome wisdom of your father before it takes root and begins to threaten the power of the political establishment. No wonder those presidents never wrote your father back!

Keep up the good fight, peacegirl! Surely, your day will come. Oh wait - you have already conveniently moved the revolution to a time after we are all dead, even though the book says otherwise. So your day will come, but none of us will notice, and for all intents and purposes the world will go on exactly as if your time will in fact not come. Hey if it works for religions, why not for you?

[LadyShea]

Thread winning post right above

< --- Vivisectus

[thedoc]

Peacegirl you could try here, they might be more receptive.

ILoveOpinions.com - Index

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Thread winning post right above

< --- Vivisectus

Did someone just cancel the party?

[LadyShea]

Parties are never canceled. And the trophy can be taken away...though that would be a tough one to beat.

Oh and also, that's just MY trophy, there are as many up for grabs as there are posters

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

...what they cannot understand because they did not read the book. Does that seem a little bit nuts to anyone in here?

Actually, liar, many of us DID read the steaming pile of crap, and have been quoting from it extensively. Is there no end to your fucking dishonesty?

Oh, and by the way, peacegirl, did you ever read The Lone Ranger's 35-page-long discussion on vision and sigh? No, huh? And you've got the gall to attack others for not reading your father's 589-page pile of crap?

[Vivisectus]

I would like to thank the academy, and DoctorX's mom, (She was right. Once you go wooden leg, you never go back) and the awesome influencing mindpower of Ladyshea because let's not forget that she influences everyone here into agreeing with her all the time, and Maturin for the Mathematical Discovery that Scientists in the New World Are Always Right, and theDoc for never letting a paragraph get in the way of a good story, and DavidM for the amazing tricks he can do with a big jar of lube and a dozen ping-pong balls... Thanks to the little people, even though Lisarea never posted here, which is odd as she kind of represents them here on this board... oh my I am all flustered now! Thanks to Peacegirl for never ever figuring out that the editor is not a seperate person at all, and to ChuckF for being too strange to live, but too weird to die, and to dee because she likes rumpy-pumpy a lot, and to wildy because she can actually say in 3 sentences what takes me a hundred pages....