#14476  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:10 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
Have you thought up something about the moons of Jupiter yet?
I am not required to figure out what could be causing the apparent time difference. All I am required to do is prove that the eyes are efferent. If it takes more empirical evidence to prove that Lessans was not wrong, then so be it.
Any empirical observation that cannot be explained within your alternate model, stands as a disproof of your model. Accurate models, like optics, explain all empirical observations without inconsistency.
It actually doesn't Ladyshea. Optics supports efferent vision as much as you hate it.
Reply With Quote
  #14477  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:15 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXCCCXV
Images: 58
Default Re: A revolution in thought

LOL, you don't even understand the first thing about optics, otherwise you wouldn't be positing your crazy (P) light and (P) reflection.

Anyway, optics explains and predicts the Moons of Jupiter observation based on there being a speed of light delayed detection of light via any detector, eyes or instruments. Efferent vision isn't compatible with speed of light delayed light detection via eyes or instruments.

According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Optics 1
Efferent vision 0
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
But (02-19-2012)
  #14478  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:25 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
LOL, you don't even understand the first thing about optics, otherwise you wouldn't be positing your crazy (P) light and (P) reflection.

Anyway, optics explains and predicts the Moons of Jupiter observation based on there being a speed of light delayed detection of light via any detector, eyes or instruments. Efferent vision isn't compatible with speed of light delayed light detection via eyes or instruments.

According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Optics 1
Efferent vision 0
No no no. Optics does not contradict efferent vision. The only difference is that optics states that the light is the only thing we need for sight, which is being disputed. But it has no bearing on the inverse law whatsover, so please stop making it appear what it is not, just so LadyShea can be smarter than Lessans.
Reply With Quote
  #14479  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:27 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXCCCXV
Images: 58
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
But it has no bearing on the inverse law whatsover, so please stop making it appear what it is not, just so LadyShea can be smarter than Lessans.
What's the inverse square law got to do with this example?


According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
But (02-19-2012)
  #14480  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:35 PM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MMDLXXXIX
Images: 3
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
It actually doesn't Ladyshea. Optics supports efferent vision as much as you hate it.
No, it doesn't. In the established theory of optics, all light that is not absorbed is reflected or goes through. There is no (P) reflection there, or (P) "mirror images" or (P) light, or whatever you are making up. The standard theory explains perfectly well the moons of Jupiter and every other observation. Yours doesn't.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (02-19-2012), Spacemonkey (02-20-2012)
  #14481  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:44 PM
specious_reasons's Avatar
specious_reasons specious_reasons is offline
here to bore you with pictures
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: MCDLXV
Images: 8
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
No no no. Optics does not contradict efferent vision.
"Does not contradict" is inadequate. In order to supplant the current scientific theory, it must do a better job of explaining how vision works.

...and regardless of what you claim, optics does in fact contradict efferent vision. You're just too dysfunctional to understand why.
__________________
ta-
DAVE!!!
Reply With Quote
  #14482  
Old 02-19-2012, 05:58 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
But it has no bearing on the inverse law whatsover, so please stop making it appear what it is not, just so LadyShea can be smarter than Lessans.
What's the inverse square law got to do with this example?


According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
That is not proven LadyShea.
Reply With Quote
  #14483  
Old 02-19-2012, 06:01 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by specious_reasons View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
No no no. Optics does not contradict efferent vision.
"Does not contradict" is inadequate. In order to supplant the current scientific theory, it must do a better job of explaining how vision works.

...and regardless of what you claim, optics does in fact contradict efferent vision. You're just too dysfunctional to understand why.
Actually, I don't have to do anything more than what I've done. If no one wants to pursue it, then let it go. I offered Lessans' perception of what is really going on. I believe I expressed the model adequately. The eyes being efferent do not have to wait for the light to travel millions of miles to reach us in order to see the external world as long as there is enough light present and the object is large enough to be seen. And if you continue to take over where NA left off, just know that we won't be talking to each other much longer.

Last edited by peacegirl; 02-19-2012 at 10:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14484  
Old 02-19-2012, 06:14 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
It actually doesn't Ladyshea. Optics supports efferent vision as much as you hate it.
No, it doesn't. In the established theory of optics, all light that is not absorbed is reflected or goes through. There is no (P) reflection there, or (P) "mirror images" or (P) light, or whatever you are making up. The standard theory explains perfectly well the moons of Jupiter and every other observation. Yours doesn't.
I'm not making up anything. I was using P light at Spacemonkey's suggestion in order to try to distinguish white light that travels through space and time and light that is a condition of sight due to efferent vision, which is a perfectly plausible model. If you don't believe it, stick to the afferent model.
Reply With Quote
  #14485  
Old 02-19-2012, 07:01 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXCCCXV
Images: 58
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
But it has no bearing on the inverse law whatsover, so please stop making it appear what it is not, just so LadyShea can be smarter than Lessans.
What's the inverse square law got to do with this example?


According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
That is not proven LadyShea.
What's not proven? That on Earth we see the position of Jupiter's Moons as they were in the past, due to the speed of light? Sure it's proven....multiple space probes have actually reached Jupiter you know, and recorded the exact coordinates.
Reply With Quote
  #14486  
Old 02-19-2012, 07:18 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
But it has no bearing on the inverse law whatsover, so please stop making it appear what it is not, just so LadyShea can be smarter than Lessans.
What's the inverse square law got to do with this example?


According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
That is not proven LadyShea.
What's not proven? That on Earth we see the position of Jupiter's Moons as they were in the past, due to the speed of light? Sure it's proven....multiple space probes have actually reached Jupiter you know, and recorded the exact coordinates.
I never said there wasn't a time delay. I said there might be some other cause for it. If you believe science got it right, that's fine with me. If you don't think there's a possibility that Lessans' claims could be right, then you have every right to reject them.
Reply With Quote
  #14487  
Old 02-19-2012, 10:22 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXCCCXV
Images: 58
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
I never said there wasn't a time delay. I said there might be some other cause for it.
:clippy:


What you said was "That is not proven" without specifying what the word "that" referred to.

What were you claiming wasn't proven in my statement? Here it is again. Point out the unproven part

According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
But (02-20-2012), Dragar (02-19-2012), Spacemonkey (02-20-2012), Stephen Maturin (02-19-2012)
  #14488  
Old 02-19-2012, 10:25 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
B.O.F. with 0 credibility.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: MXCCCLIII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
I never said there wasn't a time delay. I said there might be some other cause for it. If you believe science got it right, that's fine with me. If you don't think there's a possibility that Lessans' claims could be right, then you have every right to reject them.
The time delay is relative to what we see, and we see the image of an object, as it was in the past, depending on how long it takes for the light to arrive from that object. Light that is reflected off of an object and traveles to our eyes is the only link, and the only means we have of seeing the object. Therefore Lessans claim that we see objects instantly is false, efferent vision is false, we see things as they were in the past, afferent vision is true as has been confirmed by observation, testing, and empherical knowledge. Lessans ideas about vision are rejected, and if he was wrong about this he could have been wrong about other ideas he had, and probably was wrong. That Lessans was wrong about this doesn't prove anything, but is a pretty good indication that he was wrong about other things.
Reply With Quote
  #14489  
Old 02-19-2012, 11:00 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
I never said there wasn't a time delay. I said there might be some other cause for it.
:clippy:


What you said was "That is not proven" without specifying what the word "that" referred to.

What were you claiming wasn't proven in my statement? Here it is again. Point out the unproven part

According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, the delay (which I do not dispute) may not be related to the time it takes for the light to reach us.
Reply With Quote
  #14490  
Old 02-19-2012, 11:55 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
B.O.F. with 0 credibility.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: MXCCCLIII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
I never said there wasn't a time delay. I said there might be some other cause for it.
:clippy:


What you said was "That is not proven" without specifying what the word "that" referred to.

What were you claiming wasn't proven in my statement? Here it is again. Point out the unproven part

According to optics, there should be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, there shouldn't be a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter

Empirical observation: there is a time delay when viewing the moons of Jupiter
According to efferent vision, the delay (which I do not dispute) may not be related to the time it takes for the light to reach us.
L.O.L. This is so hilariously ridiculous that it is difficult to know where to start, she does not dispute the delay, which flately refutes efferent vision, but is now grasping at some fantasy to incorporate it into efferent vision. Note, Delayed vision flately disproves efferent vision, end of story.

Stay tuned for the latest installment in the lessans/Peacegirl saga of fact vs. fiction. It has been said that 'truth is stranger than fiction', but peacegirl is doing her best to disprove that. L.O.L.
.
Peacegirl please stop displaying your ignorance, you are an embarrassment to humanity.
Reply With Quote
  #14491  
Old 02-20-2012, 12:09 AM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXCCCXV
Images: 58
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
According to efferent vision, the delay (which I do not dispute) may not be related to the time it takes for the light to reach us.
Voila we see!

Seriously what else could possibly explain a delay that exactly matches the time it takes light to traverse the difference?
Reply With Quote
  #14492  
Old 02-20-2012, 12:46 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm davidm is offline
Condemned to wander the corridors of a drivel maze
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: VMMDCCLXXXIV
Blog Entries: 3
Default Re: A revolution in thought

So you don't dispute the delay in seeing? :eek:

Great! So you admit Lessans was wrong.

Nothing more to see here, folks! :yawn: As if there was anything to see here in the first place.
__________________
Muahaha!



:muahaha:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (02-20-2012)
  #14493  
Old 02-20-2012, 01:21 AM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
B.O.F. with 0 credibility.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: MXCCCLIII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
So you don't dispute the delay in seeing? :eek:

Great! So you admit Lessans was wrong.

Nothing more to see here, folks! :yawn: As if there was anything to see here in the first place.
Ahh, did you miss the comic relief?
Reply With Quote
  #14494  
Old 02-20-2012, 02:00 AM
The Lone Ranger's Avatar
The Lone Ranger The Lone Ranger is offline
Jin, Gi, Rei, Ko, Chi, Shin, Tei
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: VMMCMXXV
Images: 516
Default Re: A revolution in thought

It's those pesky aliens.

Centuries ago, they surrounded the planet with a giant holographic array. It displays images of the sky, and is carefully calibrated so that whenever we look at any extraterrestrial object, the light that we think we're seeing from it is delayed by exactly the amount necessary to make us think that we're seeing it in delayed time. [This means that the aliens have gone to the extraordinary trouble of carefully adjusting every incoming photon, in order to ensure that the light we think we're seeing from every one of the moons, planets, nearby stars, space probes, and the 100,000,000,000 or so visible galaxies creates the illusion that we see in delayed time.]

They even intercept radio signals from our space probes and manned spacecraft, so as to create the same illusion. And they somehow undetectably manipulate the trajectories of all our space probes -- again, in order to create the illusion that we see in delayed time.


Pesky aliens. They like to mess with our minds.

Thank goodness Lessans saw through their nefarious schemes!
__________________
“The greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be.”
-- Socrates
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (02-21-2012), Kael (02-20-2012), LadyShea (02-20-2012), Stephen Maturin (02-20-2012), Vivisectus (02-20-2012)
  #14495  
Old 02-20-2012, 02:45 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm davidm is offline
Condemned to wander the corridors of a drivel maze
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: VMMDCCLXXXIV
Blog Entries: 3
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
It's those pesky aliens.

Centuries ago, they surrounded the planet with a giant holographic array. It displays images of the sky, and is carefully calibrated so that whenever we look at any extraterrestrial object, the light that we think we're seeing from it is delayed by exactly the amount necessary to make us think that we're seeing it in delayed time. [This means that the aliens have gone to the extraordinary trouble of carefully adjusting every incoming photon, in order to ensure that the light we think we're seeing from every one of the moons, planets, nearby stars, space probes, and the 100,000,000,000 or so visible galaxies creates the illusion that we see in delayed time.]

They even intercept radio signals from our space probes and manned spacecraft, so as to create the same illusion. And they somehow undetectably manipulate the trajectories of all our space probes -- again, in order to create the illusion that we see in delayed time.


Pesky aliens. They like to mess with our minds.

Thank goodness Lessans saw through their nefarious schemes!
Intelligent, condescending life discovered in distant galaxy.
__________________
Muahaha!



:muahaha:
Reply With Quote
  #14496  
Old 02-20-2012, 02:49 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm davidm is offline
Condemned to wander the corridors of a drivel maze
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: VMMDCCLXXXIV
Blog Entries: 3
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Don't know why that link doesn't work. I copied it exactly from Onion.com.

Oh, well! Just go to onion.com and search for the story, "Intelligent, condescending life found in distant galaxy." :)
__________________
Muahaha!



:muahaha:
Reply With Quote
  #14497  
Old 02-20-2012, 02:59 AM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MMDLXXXIX
Images: 3
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
It's those pesky aliens.

Centuries ago, they surrounded the planet with a giant holographic array. It displays images of the sky, and is carefully calibrated so that whenever we look at any extraterrestrial object, the light that we think we're seeing from it is delayed by exactly the amount necessary to make us think that we're seeing it in delayed time. [This means that the aliens have gone to the extraordinary trouble of carefully adjusting every incoming photon, in order to ensure that the light we think we're seeing from every one of the moons, planets, nearby stars, space probes, and the 100,000,000,000 or so visible galaxies creates the illusion that we see in delayed time.]

They even intercept radio signals from our space probes and manned spacecraft, so as to create the same illusion. And they somehow undetectably manipulate the trajectories of all our space probes -- again, in order to create the illusion that we see in delayed time.


Pesky aliens. They like to mess with our minds.

Thank goodness Lessans saw through their nefarious schemes!
Intelligent, Condescending Life Discovered In Distant Galaxy | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
:fixed: It's the [/url. You're the [/url.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
davidm (02-20-2012)
  #14498  
Old 02-20-2012, 12:25 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
It's those pesky aliens.

Centuries ago, they surrounded the planet with a giant holographic array. It displays images of the sky, and is carefully calibrated so that whenever we look at any extraterrestrial object, the light that we think we're seeing from it is delayed by exactly the amount necessary to make us think that we're seeing it in delayed time. [This means that the aliens have gone to the extraordinary trouble of carefully adjusting every incoming photon, in order to ensure that the light we think we're seeing from every one of the moons, planets, nearby stars, space probes, and the 100,000,000,000 or so visible galaxies creates the illusion that we see in delayed time.]
It's not the aliens that have gone to extraordinary trouble to fool us in any way; it's man that's doing this to himself because of his acceptance of afferent vision. It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to make an accepted theory that has graduated into fact (and why I'm getting all this backlash), fit the premise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
They even intercept radio signals from our space probes and manned spacecraft, so as to create the same illusion. And they somehow undetectably manipulate the trajectories of all our space probes -- again, in order to create the illusion that we see in delayed time.
Who said anything about radio signals not being real? Of course they're real, but that doesn't mean we see images that are traveling on the waves of light (you know what I mean, so don't tell me this is a strawman), in the same way. And who said anything abut the trajectories being inaccurate. The calculations could be based on a light-time correction, not even realizing that they were correcting an original error.
Reply With Quote
  #14499  
Old 02-20-2012, 12:33 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XVMMCCCLVII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
It's those pesky aliens.

Centuries ago, they surrounded the planet with a giant holographic array. It displays images of the sky, and is carefully calibrated so that whenever we look at any extraterrestrial object, the light that we think we're seeing from it is delayed by exactly the amount necessary to make us think that we're seeing it in delayed time. [This means that the aliens have gone to the extraordinary trouble of carefully adjusting every incoming photon, in order to ensure that the light we think we're seeing from every one of the moons, planets, nearby stars, space probes, and the 100,000,000,000 or so visible galaxies creates the illusion that we see in delayed time.]

They even intercept radio signals from our space probes and manned spacecraft, so as to create the same illusion. And they somehow undetectably manipulate the trajectories of all our space probes -- again, in order to create the illusion that we see in delayed time.


Pesky aliens. They like to mess with our minds.

Thank goodness Lessans saw through their nefarious schemes!
Intelligent, Condescending Life Discovered In Distant Galaxy | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
:fixed: It's the [/url. You're the [/url.
Interesting since my father's last book (which he thought might gain more attention and get people to actually listen to what was being said) was entitled, "THIS IS AN URGENT MESSAGE FROM A VISITOR TO YOUR PLANET."
Reply With Quote
  #14500  
Old 02-20-2012, 01:10 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXCCCXV
Images: 58
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to make an accepted theory that has graduated into fact (and why I'm getting all this backlash), fit the premise.
Which experiments, principles, and/or laws in the standard model of optics and vision has had to be stretched, bent, squeezed or otherwise modified to "fit the premise". Name any empirical observation that remains unexplained by this robust model, or one that required "lengths" being gone to fit "the premise".

You're getting backlash because you are positing an incoherent non working model, that explains nothing actually observed in reality, as competition for a robust model that works every time, and expecting people to accept yours for no reason.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Marketplace > Philosophy


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.24304 seconds with 15 queries