A revolution in thought

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Vivisectus, I took your objections seriously, but none of them pan out.

I'm not going to concede just to satisfy your need to prove Lessans wrong.

Pitty you didn't really consider Vivisectus's objections, other than to just hand wave them away. If you say you even read them, it's probably a lie, as you don't want to see anything that would contradict your Father.

In reality you should concede, not to satisfy Viviesctus need to prove anything, but because you and Lessans are, in fact, wrong.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

As ironic as that is winning or losing anything is not going to happen here David. Winning logic, losing the irrational. It's unrealistic to expect a win or a loss. People who see threads as win or lose generally think they can be. Generally with such far reaching issues they can't be. It's kind of like talking about free will or physics or the whole of philosophy, nothing has been decided yet. Nothing can be so telling someone what is, is a waste of time. And I mean that in every sense. We're wasting our time here. But it aint boring. The most we can hope for is that we will be entertained. Peacegirl has a very entertaining opinion, let's hope it never happens that all those people who are entertaining are forced out because some idiot decides to be the thought police. I think there are far to many people on this forum who do that, I think most of them are just not really giving this forum a chance. Sadly most of them are those who started this forum or are old timers and herding. And that breaks my heart. They are just not interested in free or thinking you all have to be their slaves or you just have to be out of it. Sad mother fucking hypocrites and there whole sad troll slaves are ruining free thought for everyone.

Ask yourself if you want some medium to be free or you just want to heard like most of the progenitors and idiots who "run" this forum. do you really want freedom or just everyone to agree? Sheeple are annoying, and people who start things in a way that they thought it would be free and then abandon it are just twits. Look closely at who has an opinion and those who claim you shouldn't be opinionated. These are the idiots. I fucking can't stand them and fortunately most of this clique of idiots are on ignore for trying to tell me what I think or how I should conform or behave. Fuck me that is as weak as the slavish devotion to smillies. Are you actually able to think?

Tell peacegirl how to reason but to tell her what she thinks is but another fall of man just like every worthless cunt on this forum. You're wasting everything you fought to keep.

Fucking trolls they ruin everything. And yet they act as apologists for everything they do? They lose everyone to apathy to prescribed nonsense they pretend being some anarchist is a sense that only they see, they are the mind morons and the sheep that they describe. They are moronic. They have the bad grace to then tell you they don't care what you think and yet they care so much what everyone thinks because they are weak. YOu see it every god damned day in their petulant little worthless comments, or you would do if you didn't put them on ignore. These are scum these are weak people with no ability to think. These are idiots.

Look at them and look what they want, everyone to think how they do. Everything that matters to be a matter of rules. I despise them. Everything they are is an ironic parody of everything they really care about, but being such a fucking moron they just try so hard to be everything they despise, hilarious isn't it.

Peacegirl isn't the problem people who want to get rid of anyone who has a difference of opinion are, and the old jaded mindset wankers who are this are the problem. Lame. Get a fucking clue some integrity and when you do then try and tell people to think not to agree to your vapid little life rules you fucking dummard.

God it's not fucking rocket science if you want to be a free thinker you have to accept that people will have thoughts that are free from what your tiny little mind can comprehend. You penned up little fucking conformity magnets.

Gah I hate, hate whole Free thought label because really every free though forum is just a load of conformists who want everyone to think like them: you believe in God you are wrong, you believe in free will you are wrong, you don't believe what we do you are wrong. All these schisms in these forums and all because of maggots like these? Stop pretending there's any freedom on any of these offshoots of anything because its all just a load of wankers telling you how to think and it's fucking depressing. Creotards aren't the problem IDiots it's you. You sad little fuckers. You wouldn't know what free thought was if it punched you in the face, and you of all people should not judge people who understand it. If you did this forum wouldn't need to exist nor would any of the half assed freak shows that broke off from others. Stop whining about free thought you don't have a fucking clue how to encourage it you sad MFs.

Let the people talk whatever their views or don't fucking start a forum and claim it's free you're just a liar and a hypocrite and butt sore.

I hope you feel better after letting that out. Having another bad day? I think you may take these forums a little too seriously, most of it doesn't warrant that kind of passion, when you consider how many people are actually reading the threads. What, a few dozen, at best, out of 6 billion, it's not a big fuckin deal.

[peacegirl]

[quote=Sidhe;967022]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

As you see, I am currently under category B: too lazy to read the book. Wildly unjust, as I have actually plowed through the wretched thing, and have read the first couple of chapters several times. I just happen to disagree with it, but that makes me automatically wrong, even though I have painstakingly pointed out what criticisms I had - gaps and fallacies in the logic, unsupported assertions being presented as universal truths, and even a total rejection of simple empirical experiments, not to mention just about all of physics as we understand it.

The simple way to deal with the argument would be to say that Peacegirls believes in the religion, mostly because she loved her father very much and feels that by allowing any criticism of his work, she is betraying him. I feel this is not the case - one could look at his work and see the good intentions, and just conclude that he was probably a well-meaning and kindly man, even though his system was flawed and there was some conceit mixed in with the crusade for universal benignity.

For Peacegirl this is blasphemy.

So what have we learnt:

1) if you don't read the book you are wrong for being ignorant

I never said that.

2) if you do and you disagree because of any logical argument no matter how well reasoned you are wrong for being ignorant

What you're not understanding is that this has nothing to do with logic. That's why everybody is all confused.

c) pink bananas are secretly controlled by the space weevils who are in turn controlled by the Reptillians by way of the VJC which is why light is in fact hitting my eyes but the brain control bananas are making you believe that the visual image is coming from your head instead of somewhere else over there just past the dog star about 30 light years from reality.

Oh please, I can't breathe from laughing so hard.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

I feel we are making progress, and feel that being the case I am plumping for C myself as it makes the most sense and is of course undeniably fact.

Heretics! Nail them up I say, nail some sense into them!

I know this easily sounds like nothing more than a fundamentalist belief, but it's really not. My only hope is that you will let me discuss what is at issue here. It's so ironic that nothing has actually been discussed except premature arguments against his reasoning. It's so premature, but nobody sees it. I have no idea how to progress from here based on your post and everyone elses.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Well what I got from it is that he had a deep distrust of the establishment and or anyone who dared to tell him he was wrong because they wouldn't believe his ideas. What are you asking though?

I'm not asking anything Sidhe except for you to take the time to understand what he wrote. No one up to now has done that. It's so sad, it truly breaks my heart because I know what you're missing.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No, because everyone is clumped together so it doesn't separate the true cranks from the others.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Does it? Does it really? Like who, name a prominent scientist who would score highly on that chart? I tell you who would the guys who broke cold fusion to the world. They were cranks though who happened also to have done some good science.

I'm not stating a specific person. It's the mindset which is very disturbing. Here is a small excerpt that I think hits the nail on the head. This is not from Lessans but I included it in the book because it definitely describes what is going on here.

The scientific fundamentalism of which these
are disturbing signs is found today not merely in remote provincial
pockets of conservatism but at the very top of the mainstream
management of science on both sides of the Atlantic. Human
progress has been powered by the paradigm-shattering inventions of
many brilliant iconoclasts, yet just as the scientific community
dismissed Edison’s lamp, Roentgen’s X-rays, and even the Wrights’
airplane, today’s “Paradigm Police” do a better job of preserving an
outdated mode of thought than of nurturing invention and discovery.
One way of explaining this odd reluctance to come to terms with the
new, even when there is plenty of concrete evidence available, is to
appeal to the natural human tendency not to believe things that sound
impossible unless we see them with our own eyes — a healthy
skepticism. But there is a good deal more to this phenomenon than
a healthy skepticism. It is a refusal even to open our eyes to examine
the evidence that is plainly in view. And it is a phenomenon that
occurs so regularly in the history of science and technology as to be
almost an integral part of the process. It seems that there are some
individuals, including very distinguished scientists, who are willing to
risk the censure and ridicule of their colleagues by stepping over that
mark.

This book is about those scientists. But, more importantly,
it is about the curious social and intellectual forces that seek to
prohibit such research; those areas of scientific research that are taboo
subjects; about subjects whose discussion is forbidden under pain of
ridicule and ostracism. Often those who cry taboo do so from the best
of motives: a desire to ensure that our hard-won scientific
enlightenment is not corrupted by the credulous acceptance of crank
ideas and that the community does not slide back into what Sir Karl
Popper graphically called the ‘tyranny of opinion.’ Yet in setting out
to guard the frontiers of knowledge, some scientific purists are
adopting a brand of skepticism that is indistinguishable from the
tyranny they seek to resist. These modern skeptics are sometimes the
most unreflecting of individuals yet their devotion to the cause of
science impels them to appoint themselves guardians of spirit of truth.
And this raises the important question of just how we can tell a real
crank from a real innovator — a Faraday from a false prophet.
Merely to dismiss a carefully prepared body of evidence — however
barmy it may appear — is to make the same mistake as the crank. In
many ways cold fusion is the perfect paradigm of scientific taboo in
action. The high priests of hot fusion were quick to ostracize and
ridicule those whom they saw as profaning the sacred wisdom. And
empirical fact counted for nothing in the face of their concerted
derision.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Feynman and Einstein would score very low on the test, people who have advanced unfounded theories as fact, despite them having no foundation in the real world or anywhere else for that matter, very high.

I don't think so because someone genuine could get a lot of points, and not be a crank.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Like who?

I'm not sure. What I do know is that this test is not completely accurate. It could be false but appear true, which is absolutely the case here.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Are you bemoaning the fact it works and accurately predicts the chances of you being a crank, or that the fact you and your dad would score highly on it?

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Both. It's a joke really. My father would not have defended himself, so he probably wouldn't have scored at all. He wouldn't have played these silly games.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Oh he already scored by writing the book. Obviously he says about 120 points worth in the 1st chapter alone.

So let's get down to the nitty gritty. I asked you this earlier but you didn't answer. What did you get from Chapter One. I promise I won't beat you up if you fail the test.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

The rest of the hundreds of points probably come from doing this:

50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.

and a lot of this:

1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.

2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.

3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.

5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.

10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn't explain "why" they occur, or fails to provide a "mechanism".

10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).

10 points for claiming that your work is on the cutting edge of a "paradigm shift".

20 points for talking about how great your theory is, but never actually explaining it.

20 points for each use of the phrase "hidebound reactionary".

20 points for each use of the phrase "self-appointed defender of the orthodoxy".

etc

Where as you probably get most of your points from doing some of that but mostly this:

5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.

None of these apply to him, but you sure can make it look like it does. That's the problem in a nutshell.

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I hope you feel better after letting that out. Having another bad day? I think you may take these forums a little too seriously, most of it doesn't warrant that kind of passion, when you consider how many people are actually reading the threads. What, a few dozen, at best, out of 6 billion, it's not a big fuckin deal.

No you missed the point any rant is never meant to be taken seriously. I just have been having a very bad year so I need to blow off steam. I really wont bore you with why because some troll will probably use it to try and get at me. It's what idiots do. But suffice to say I am an angry little bunny and being told I am is not going to help.

Taking the internet seriously, hahahaha. How could you it's full of stupid people. And so it should be.

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not stating a specific person. It's the mindset which is very disturbing. Here is a small excerpt that I think hits the nail on the head. This is not from Lessans but I included it in the book because it definitely describes what is going on here.

The scientific fundamentalism of which these
are disturbing signs is found today not merely in remote provincial
pockets of conservatism but at the very top of the mainstream
management of science on both sides of the Atlantic. Human
progress has been powered by the paradigm-shattering inventions of
many brilliant iconoclasts, yet just as the scientific community
dismissed Edison’s lamp, Roentgen’s X-rays, and even the Wrights’
airplane, today’s “Paradigm Police” do a better job of preserving an
outdated mode of thought than of nurturing invention and discovery.
One way of explaining this odd reluctance to come to terms with the
new, even when there is plenty of concrete evidence available, is to
appeal to the natural human tendency not to believe things that sound
impossible unless we see them with our own eyes — a healthy
skepticism. But there is a good deal more to this phenomenon than
a healthy skepticism. It is a refusal even to open our eyes to examine
the evidence that is plainly in view. And it is a phenomenon that
occurs so regularly in the history of science and technology as to be
almost an integral part of the process. It seems that there are some
individuals, including very distinguished scientists, who are willing to
risk the censure and ridicule of their colleagues by stepping over that
mark.

This book is about those scientists. But, more importantly,
it is about the curious social and intellectual forces that seek to
prohibit such research; those areas of scientific research that are taboo
subjects; about subjects whose discussion is forbidden under pain of
ridicule and ostracism. Often those who cry taboo do so from the best
of motives: a desire to ensure that our hard-won scientific
enlightenment is not corrupted by the credulous acceptance of crank
ideas and that the community does not slide back into what Sir Karl
Popper graphically called the ‘tyranny of opinion.’ Yet in setting out
to guard the frontiers of knowledge, some scientific purists are
adopting a brand of skepticism that is indistinguishable from the
tyranny they seek to resist. These modern skeptics are sometimes the
most unreflecting of individuals yet their devotion to the cause of
science impels them to appoint themselves guardians of spirit of truth.
And this raises the important question of just how we can tell a real
crank from a real innovator — a Faraday from a false prophet.
Merely to dismiss a carefully prepared body of evidence — however
barmy it may appear — is to make the same mistake as the crank. In
many ways cold fusion is the perfect paradigm of scientific taboo in
action. The high priests of hot fusion were quick to ostracize and
ridicule those whom they saw as profaning the sacred wisdom. And
empirical fact counted for nothing in the face of their concerted
derision.

I'm not sure. What I do know is that this test is not completely accurate. It could be false but appear true, which is absolutely the case here.

So let's get down to the nitty gritty. I asked you this earlier but you didn't answer. What did you get from Chapter One. I promise I won't beat you up if you fail the test.

None of these apply to him, but you sure can make it look like it does. That's the problem in a nutshell.

Nothing applies to him because everything he said or did is perfect in your mind, we all hold our parents that way if they were decent parents. Peacegirl you need to start divorcing yourself from an opinion your dad had and indulging in your own. It's healthy to hang onto cherished beliefs, but only if they make sense. Our parents were damned liars though at the best of times, they got us to believe in lots of things that weren't true, like Santa or worse our religious doctrine. We grow up realising that our parents weren't the all singing dancing light of the world. It's at this point we really grow up. The world is full of lies and liars. IT just is and those who were close to us aren't immune to that fact.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Boo hoo.

[Doctor X]

--J.D.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Nothing applies to him because everything he said or did is perfect in your mind, we all hold our parents that way if they were decent parents. Peacegirl you need to start divorcing yourself from an opinion your dad had and indulging in your own. It's healthy to hang onto cherished beliefs, but only if they make sense. Our parents were damned liars though at the best of times, they got us to believe in lots of things that weren't true, like Santa or worse our religious doctrine. We grow up realising that our parents weren't the all singing dancing light of the world. It's at this point we really grow up. The world is full of lies and liars. IT just is and those who were close to us aren't immune to that fact.

Something relevant to that idea about parents,

Joseph Campbell has written about mythology and I have read some of it, one of his pieces was refering to males growing up and the rites of passage of ancient societies. One of the principles he stated is that whan a man grows up, to be come a man he must kill his father. Of course he did not mean it in the literal sense, but in the sense that each person looks up to their parents, and to become your own person you must stop seeking approval and recognition from your parents. So you are killing the parent that is still living in you and controlling your life. When I was growing up I had a particular career in mind but several considerations prevented that and I ended up teaching Industrial Arts. After 7 years teaching I quit and went my own way, I like to think that at that time I had "killed my Father" and became who I wanted to be. He's been gone now 10 years, but years after I made that move we became closer than we had been before, thru some shared interests, but never as close as we could have been.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

No you missed the point any rant is never meant to be taken seriously. I just have been having a very bad year so I need to blow off steam. I really wont bore you with why because some troll will probably use it to try and get at me. It's what idiots do. But suffice to say I am an angry little bunny and being told I am is not going to help.

Taking the internet seriously, hahahaha. How could you it's full of stupid people. And so it should be.

I guess I must be one 'sick puppy' because I actually care about people, (at least some of them), and if you feel the need to vent there's always a PM. I'll listen and maybe say what I think, and I'll try not to tell you what to do, or think, or feel, or what you really mean, Unless you want a good laugh, or another rant.

[thedoc]

Sidhe, you've been going on a bit about this forum, did you happen to notice that there was a thread 'Countdown from one million thread'. Given that as an example, how could you take this so seriously as to rant about the quality of the posts here. This forum is mostly entertainment, that's like criticising clowns for their lack of social content.

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Sidhe, you've been going on a bit about this forum, did you happen to notice that there was a thread 'Countdown from one million thread'. Given that as an example, how could you take this so seriously as to rant about the quality of the posts here. This forum is mostly entertainment, that's like criticising clowns for their lack of social content.

It's not the content it's the hypocrisy. It is hypocritical to call a forum free thought then tell everyone how they should think and not just how to think how everything should be and in what order and what not. These people aught to rename it to how you, yes you should think, we will tell you how over and over again until you get bored. Conform, obey, do not question the mind masters.

Entertainment has nothing to do with it. If I started a thread on how entertaining I found x these people would tell me how I should think about it and then if I disagreed they'd tell me why I was wrong to have an opinion and what my opinion should in fact be according to all statistical evidence and testing, then when I said I didn't share that they would criticise me for not being a party to operation: mindcrime, then I'd be slowly talked at and given my opinion until I either agreed to share their views or was driven insane by idiots. It's fucking weak and I don't know why they do that. What is wrong with them. I don't understand why everyone has to be just so, and yet its called free thought forum. It's bizarre. Is this a social experiment where everyone who joins is just forced to be how they want you to be and anyone with any imagination, or the ability to express it is slowly made to conform or bullied into it, or has to leave? I mean is it, because that's the impression I get. If I'm not being told what I should think I'm being told off for expressing an opinion. WTF is that all about? My my mr Sidhe you have a great deal of opinions, how about you stop having any and just shut up. We don't value expression or freedom here, get out.

I'd understand it if they called it a tyranny forum, come here and be told how you should think about anything by severely disturbed and autisitc people who live in a very restricted world defined by their mental disorder.

Seriously I've never known a more conformist bunch of sheep on the net. And this is free? You lie? At no point did I criticise its light heartedness, but then it isn't even light hearted, because if you don't get our sense of humour then you are told by people how to have a proper sense of humour and what is and isn't a sense of humour by of all people the severely autistic clown who runs this place. Have I stumbled into a cult only I don't know it because someone misnamed the forum? When you've all been sufficiently brain washed are you going to take your cyanide drinks and join the mothership. If so I'd appreciate if you let me know. countdown from 1 million when you reach zero do you all go to meet your god? To remain in a state of bliss for eternity while he gives you your thoughts directly so you don't have to do any of that tiresome thinking business?

I don't need to criticise anything most people are doing a bang up job of making themselves look absurd. But hell someone will be along any moment now to tell me how I should think and give me my thoughts I'm sure. Is that what the people who post here want to be? A running joke? If so job done?

That's entertainment is it, self righteously telling people how to think and then getting all in a huff when they tell you they don't think like you? It's not an entertainment forum is it really. You might as well just post for everyone like they do on RnR, because their thoughts are not worthy. WTF? Go on break into peoples posting privilleges and post for them, take the final step in this thought control experiment. This is just another RnR anyway, why not sell the last bit of credibility you have and become just like them. No don't do that, a bunch of silly children. It is a silly place full of people with poor social skills, a sort of 8th circle of hell for people who have no sense or ability to do anything without hurling faeces at everyone, trolling is so cool lulz, I am so cool when I grows up I wants to be trolls.

AAMOI:

And I mean that in every sense. We're wasting our time here. But it aint boring. The most we can hope for is that we will be entertained.

It was me who said that so I'm well aware of the fact that this forum isn't serious business. Although with the amount of self righteous clones here you'd think it was.

That's like criticising clowns for their lack of social content.

No its more like criticising clowns for not being entertaining or funny or remotely anarchic actually.

I didn't come to this forum for incisive social comment either. On reflection that's probably a good thing. You just have to accept that idiots like Dr x and his clown patrol, lulzers are going to try and ruin everything for everyone because they are worthless and they don't like anyone or anything, and once all the socially retarded 4 year olds are on ignore try and have some fun. That's what I expected, not this sheep herd.

It's a shame they don't write under the forum rules: oh by the way these fucktard clowns are trolls, best off if you ignore them right now, save having to listen to their sad little pointless chatter and childish winging. Thank us later.

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Something relevant to that idea about parents,

Joseph Campbell has written about mythology and I have read some of it, one of his pieces was refering to males growing up and the rites of passage of ancient societies. One of the principles he stated is that whan a man grows up, to be come a man he must kill his father. Of course he did not mean it in the literal sense, but in the sense that each person looks up to their parents, and to become your own person you must stop seeking approval and recognition from your parents. So you are killing the parent that is still living in you and controlling your life. When I was growing up I had a particular career in mind but several considerations prevented that and I ended up teaching Industrial Arts. After 7 years teaching I quit and went my own way, I like to think that at that time I had "killed my Father" and became who I wanted to be. He's been gone now 10 years, but years after I made that move we became closer than we had been before, thru some shared interests, but never as close as we could have been.

You learned to be an individual. Yes that's what I was driving at. Some people on this forum could probably learn a thing or two about what it means to be a grown up too. But then they probably were told that when they grew up they should be a self righteous and boring little conformist with no imagination, who just shits on anyone or anything with any spark of life because they hate the fact they don't have a soul or understand why, or a train driver I don't know.

Brian: "Look you've got it all wrong! You don't need to listen to me, you don't need to listen to anyone?! You don't need to follow me you don't need to follow anyone! You've got to learn to think for yourselves! You're all individuals!

Crowd of slavish devotees: "Yes we are all individuals."

Brian: "You are all different!"

Crowd of slavish devotees: "Yes we are all different!"

Member of the devoted: holds hand up* "I'm not"

Devoted: "Shhhhh!"



Awaits being told why that isn't funny and how it should of been rendered more funny by the use of irony by the resident clown pa troll mushrooms.

"Shut up we don't care what you think, we don't care what you think of us, but we will obsessively follow you around fucking your leg because we really don't care, I is smart me! If infinitessimal was not caring about you or what you think I would be under that. So there. We don't care that you think we are barely fuctioning autistics with severe social disorders and an almost psychopathic need for attention! We dont! No we do not! Caring is what we are not doing!"

Haha fucking retards. If you don't care why are you following me, why don't you find some other target for your worthlessness soulless OCD to glom onto and suck the life out of you fucked up little parasite. Go punch a fat kid for being fat or kick a cripple or fling your faeces randomly at passers by like some insane chimp, or whatever passes for entertainment in your soul free, lifeless and self obsessed existence.

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I hope you feel better after letting that out. Having another bad day? I think you may take these forums a little too seriously, most of it doesn't warrant that kind of passion, when you consider how many people are actually reading the threads. What, a few dozen, at best, out of 6 billion, it's not a big fuckin deal.

Definitely missing the point there.

You have to remember what level trolls work on, these people who's whole idea of fun is to mercilessly set on people in packs and violently drive them to melt down or to suicide and then laugh. I mean they probably are very lonely sad little individuals who need any sort of attention even bad attention to feel a sense of worth. That's the level of maturity you are dealing with. If you joined a club and the moment you walk through the door you are set on by a pack of drooling chimps you probably wouldn't purchase a lifetime membership. Clearly a load of infants banging their pots and shouting I am so great, is not everyones cup of tea, and undoubtedly eventually the club would be closed down. Which is really I think what these people want, to ruin everything for everyone.

The trouble is these people already know from RnR where they had me banned for get this annoying trolls, that this isn't going to happen because and in their own words "I am a fucking lunatic."

So it begs the question since the only thing that is likely to happen is that I end up making them extremely angry and even frightened, they still bother. What's the return for them? What's their motivation?

So I'm asking them why if the end result is not going to be favourable do you insist on doing this over and over again. Must be masochists.

Yes I am clearly utterly unhinged. I'd be happy if you would ignore everything I say but like a moth to a candle.

Some people clearly never learn. Now that's entertainment. Watching retards run around in ever decreasing circles.

[specious_reasons]

peacegirl, I wonder how efferent vision explains this:

Bifocal Fish Sees Differently above and below Water Line: Scientific American Podcast

Anableps anableps—a fish related to the guppy. It lives in the brackish waters of mangrove swamps in central and South America, and hunts for food at the water's surface... its bulging eyes submerged halfway. Which poses an evolutionary problem—should those eyes be attuned to the greenish light streaming through the mangroves? Or the yellowish rays drifting up through murky water? Well, these fish eyes see both.

Anableps doesn't actually have four eyes—just the usual two. But each eye has two pupils, one above water, one below. And each pupil sends incoming visual info to a different side of the fish's retina.

Cones in each half of the retina are adapted to produce different light-filtering pigments. So cones hit by underwater rays are primed to sense longer-wavelength yellow light. Cones hit by daylight are sensitive to shorter-wavelength green light. The finding appears in the journal Biology Letters. [Gregory Owens et al., "In the Four-Eyed Fish (Anableps anableps), the Regions of the Retina Exposed to Aquatic and Aerial Light Do Not Express the Same Set of Opsin Genes"]

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I know this easily sounds like nothing more than a fundamentalist belief, but it's really not. My only hope is that you will let me discuss what is at issue here. It's so ironic that nothing has actually been discussed except premature arguments against his reasoning. It's so premature, but nobody sees it. I have no idea how to progress from here based on your post and everyone elses.

I read the arguments. The arguments seem to be without justification what can I say, you could start by justifying with a logical argument why free will doesn't exist, why light is efferent despite what scientific experiment tells us and why this means the whole of mankind will only be free when something about these two facts are realised which will bring about world peace or some such. Because I don't find religious arm waving all that convincing and obviously I should not be expected to.

At the moment your arguments are akin to just saying "you'll have to trust me its true" and "it's a kind of magic." Even PT Barnum would not for tried that sort of baloney on the one born every minute, and he was a flim flam artist.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Definitely missing the point there.
.

Probably, but that's just me.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No, because everyone is clumped together so it doesn't separate the true cranks from the others.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Does it? Does it really? Like who, name a prominent scientist who would score highly on that chart? I tell you who would the guys who broke cold fusion to the world. They were cranks though who happened also to have done some good science.

That's not what I'm saying. A prominent scientist would score highly, but an unprominent scientist could easily be fodder for this game, and get high points because of how something might appear, not how it actually is.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Feynman and Einstein would score very low on the test, people who have advanced unfounded theories as fact, despite them having no foundation in the real world or anywhere else for that matter, very high.

I don't think so because someone genuine could get a lot of points, and not be a crank.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Like who?

My father.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Are you bemoaning the fact it works and accurately predicts the chances of you being a crank, or that the fact you and your dad would score highly on it?

Both. It's a joke really. My father would not have defended himself, so he probably wouldn't have scored at all. He wouldn't have played these silly games.

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Oh he already scored by writing the book. Obviously he says about 120 points worth in the 1st chapter alone.

The rest of the hundreds of points probably come from doing this:

50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.

This book comprises of astute observations and sound reasoning, which counts just as much as empirical proof (if those observations are accurate), which they are. -50
and a lot of this:

1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.

Sorry about that, but a consensus does not mean he's wrong.2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous. -1

3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.

There is not one statement that is logically inconsistent. -3

5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.

There is no conclusive proof that dogs can recognize their masters without their other senses to help them. -5

10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn't explain "why" they occur, or fails to provide a "mechanism".

It doesn't have to in order to be correct. The mechanism as to how it occurs can come later, once it is established that the observation is valid. -10

10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).

Never did Lessans compare himself to Einstein. If this discovery discredits some theory of Einstein's; that's not Lessans' fault. -10

10 points for claiming that your work is on the cutting edge of a "paradigm shift".

But it definitely is. Mankind is going to veer in a different direction prevention that for which blame and punishment came into existence. -10

20 points for talking about how great your theory is, but never actually explaining it.

20 points for each use of the phrase "hidebound reactionary".

What does that phrase even mean? I never used it. -20

20 points for each use of the phrase "self-appointed defender of the orthodoxy".

Huh? I never used this phrase either. Are you sure you read Chapter One? -20

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Where as you probably get most of your points from doing some of that but mostly this:

5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.

There is no careful correction because there are no mistakes. -5

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

No you missed the point any rant is never meant to be taken seriously. I just have been having a very bad year so I need to blow off steam. I really wont bore you with why because some troll will probably use it to try and get at me. It's what idiots do. But suffice to say I am an angry little bunny and being told I am is not going to help.

Taking the internet seriously, hahahaha. How could you it's full of stupid people. And so it should be.

Sidhe, I'm not bored. I would like to know more about you or anyone else in this thread. It's good to know where people are coming from. You seem like a very nice person, so don't be afraid to open up.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Pitty you didn't really consider Vivisectus's objections, other than to just hand wave them away. If you say you even read them, it's probably a lie, as you don't want to see anything that would contradict your Father.

In reality you should concede, not to satisfy Viviesctus need to prove anything, but because you and Lessans are, in fact, wrong.

I guess you're trying to be the devil's advocate, but it's not working doc. Please give it up. Try to understand the discovery and you may have a completely different point of view. I won't be mad if you don't, but it would give you a new perspective on life.

[Doctor X]

--J.D.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

. Try to understand the discovery and you may have a completely different point of view, but it would give you a new perspective on life.

I'm sure it would, I'd probably be sending lots of money to those nice people in Namibia who just want to send me millions of dollars they have just laying around. After all If I will not blame them if they fail, that would not justify them for cheating me out of my money, and they would be mathematically and scientifically prevented from doing so.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Something relevant to that idea about parents,

Joseph Campbell has written about mythology and I have read some of it, one of his pieces was refering to males growing up and the rites of passage of ancient societies. One of the principles he stated is that whan a man grows up, to be come a man he must kill his father. Of course he did not mean it in the literal sense, but in the sense that each person looks up to their parents, and to become your own person you must stop seeking approval and recognition from your parents. So you are killing the parent that is still living in you and controlling your life. When I was growing up I had a particular career in mind but several considerations prevented that and I ended up teaching Industrial Arts. After 7 years teaching I quit and went my own way, I like to think that at that time I had "killed my Father" and became who I wanted to be. He's been gone now 10 years, but years after I made that move we became closer than we had been before, thru some shared interests, but never as close as we could have been.

I'm so sorry you were hurt when you were growing up doc. I mean that sincerely.

[thedoc]

Peacegirl, tell me do you hold your ex husband completely blameless for the divorce and the trauma it caused your children? And don't even think of saying your children are well adjusted and suffered no trauma from this happening, because I'll know you are lying. I have had considerable experience with this and know just how much the children are hurt, And the BS. about not blaming will not work with young children. Children do not act anything like lessans protrays in the book and they are real humans before they can be indoctrinated into what society expects. Young children are the most honest human being you will ever encounter, Lessans should have observed them instead of his pool hall buddies or sales contacts, his ideas would have been much more real.