Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > Lifestyle

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #651  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:03 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XXCDXXX
Images: 2
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

peacegirl, publicly apologize for what? Fidelity to the Authentic Text as written by the author and published in his lifetime? I won't apologize for that. I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text, and I will certainly not take orders from a corruptor of the Authentic Text!
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), Stephen Maturin (11-07-2016), The Man (11-06-2016), thedoc (11-06-2016), Vivisectus (11-06-2016)
  #652  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:05 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XXCDXXX
Images: 2
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
That was an earlier book. In his later book, Beyond the Framework of Modern Thought, he wrote this:

If I couldn't see you standing right next to me because we were living in total darkness since the sun had not yet been turned on, but God was scheduled to flip the switch at 12 noon, we would be able to see the sun instantly, at that very moment, although we would not be able to see each other for 8 minutes afterwards. You're wrong Chuck. Can you admit your error or quickly pass over your mistake so nobody notices?
In his later book, Beyond the Framework of Modern Thought, he also wrote this:



peacegirl, you corrupted the text and the tapes to suppress this passage.
He didn't write such a terrible thing as you seem to think.
peacegirl, you seem to be the only person who thinks the author's words are so terrible - terrible enough for you to corrupt the Authentic Text and the tapes, and suppress them entirely!

As the True Steward of the Authentic Text, I've never said they were terrible. I've simply asked you what the factual basis for them is, and what data support them. You've given conflicting responses on that topic.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), But (11-26-2017), Dragar (11-06-2016), Stephen Maturin (11-07-2016), The Man (11-06-2016), thedoc (11-06-2016), Vivisectus (11-06-2016)
  #653  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:19 PM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMCCCLVI
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

At least the Original Text gives a less muddled account:

t=0 and photons leave the sun
t=0 and there are no photons at the retina, we cannot see the sun.
t=8 and the photons reach earth, hit the retina, and we use them to see the sun as it is now.

The corrupted version gives an account that is completely different. How could one person write both? They contradict one another!

I think this is another example of Peacegirl meddling with and corrupting the text. An astute observer would never be so stupid as to flatly contradict himself without any sort of explanation.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), But (11-06-2016), The Man (11-06-2016), thedoc (11-06-2016)
  #654  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:43 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDXXXII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
At least the Original Text gives a less muddled account:

t=0 and photons leave the sun
t=0 and there are no photons at the retina, we cannot see the sun.
t=8 and the photons reach earth, hit the retina, and we use them to see the sun as it is now.

The corrupted version gives an account that is completely different. How could one person write both? They contradict one another!

I think this is another example of Peacegirl meddling with and corrupting the text. An astute observer would never be so stupid as to flatly contradict himself without any sort of explanation.
I think after analyzing it more carefully, he changed it to what he believed to be more accurate based on the efferent account. You can attack him all you want for not doing this right, or not doing that right; and you can all find things to joke about so as to make the book look completely different than it's intended purpose. That's why I am going to search for a better way to share this knowledge. It certainly isn't here.
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #655  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:47 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDXXXII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
That was an earlier book. In his later book, Beyond the Framework of Modern Thought, he wrote this:

If I couldn't see you standing right next to me because we were living in total darkness since the sun had not yet been turned on, but God was scheduled to flip the switch at 12 noon, we would be able to see the sun instantly, at that very moment, although we would not be able to see each other for 8 minutes afterwards. You're wrong Chuck. Can you admit your error or quickly pass over your mistake so nobody notices?
In his later book, Beyond the Framework of Modern Thought, he also wrote this:

[img]http://i.imgur.com/xs9yyQo.jpg[/

peacegirl, you corrupted the text and the tapes to suppress this passage.
He didn't write such a terrible thing as you seem to think.
peacegirl, you seem to be the only person who thinks the author's words are so terrible - terrible enough for you to corrupt the Authentic Text and the tapes, and suppress them entirely!

As the True Steward of the Authentic Text, I've never said they were terrible. I've simply asked you what the factual basis for them is, and what data support them. You've given conflicting responses on that topic.
You don't know what you're talking about Chuck. You have pulled pages out of complete context to make him look ridiculous. You know this as well as I. And stop saying my name more than once. It's condescending, which is why you do it.
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #656  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:48 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDXXXII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
peacegirl, publicly apologize for what? Fidelity to the Authentic Text as written by the author and published in his lifetime? I won't apologize for that. I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text, and I will certainly not take orders from a corruptor of the Authentic Text!
You're a jerk! I am not discussing the book anymore with you.
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill

Last edited by peacegirl; 11-07-2016 at 12:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #657  
Old 11-06-2016, 09:57 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XXCDXXX
Images: 2
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
peacegirl, publicly apologize for what? Fidelity to the Authentic Text as written by the author and published in his lifetime? I won't apologize for that. I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text, and I will certainly not take orders from a corruptor of the Authentic Text!
You're a jerk! I am not discussing the book anymore in this thread.
peacegirl, I understand if you do not wish to discuss the book any further - I can see how the topic of your corruptions could be uncomfortable for you.

It is ok though. As the True Steward of the Authentic Text, I am here to guide the discussion.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), Dragar (11-06-2016), Stephen Maturin (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016), thedoc (11-06-2016), Vivisectus (11-07-2016)
  #658  
Old 11-06-2016, 10:34 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCVI
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
peacegirl, publicly apologize for what? Fidelity to the Authentic Text as written by the author and published in his lifetime? I won't apologize for that. I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text, and I will certainly not take orders from a corruptor of the Authentic Text!
You're a jerk! I am not discussing the book anymore in this thread.
peacegirl, I understand if you do not wish to discuss the book any further - I can see how the topic of your corruptions could be uncomfortable for you.

It is ok though. As the True Steward of the Authentic Text, I am here to guide the discussion.
Good, now perhaps we can get somewhere without Peacegirl to obstruct the flow of conversation.
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don’t know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016)
  #659  
Old 11-07-2016, 07:54 AM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMCCCLVI
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
t=0 and God turns on the sun. Photons appear.
t=0 and photons are at the lens. They act as if they have traveled from the sun and are redirected.
t=0 and photons are at the retina, acting for all intents and purposes as if they started at the sun, traveled, and have passed through a lens.

The ones that appear at the sun have no time to travel to earth. Nor is there time for them to re redirected, or even to cross the comparatively minute distance between the lens and the retina.

So you say
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
the same photons that we would use to see a distant object could not be the same photons that have just arrived at Earth
As the text says, we are living in total darkness because God has not yet turned on the sun. There are no photons on earth... and yet somehow there are photons at the retina?

If the object is large and bright enough to be seen, then photons are at the retina because the conditions for sight have been met and the object is within visual range.

But where do these photons comes from, if all light come from the sun?
Meanwhile this is still what is happening in your version of the book. Where do the photons at the retina come from, Peacegirl?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), But (11-07-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016)
  #660  
Old 11-07-2016, 10:55 AM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMCCCLVI
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
At least the Original Text gives a less muddled account:

t=0 and photons leave the sun
t=0 and there are no photons at the retina, we cannot see the sun.
t=8 and the photons reach earth, hit the retina, and we use them to see the sun as it is now.

The corrupted version gives an account that is completely different. How could one person write both? They contradict one another!

I think this is another example of Peacegirl meddling with and corrupting the text. An astute observer would never be so stupid as to flatly contradict himself without any sort of explanation.
I think after analyzing it more carefully, he changed it to what he believed to be more accurate based on the efferent account. You can attack him all you want for not doing this right, or not doing that right; and you can all find things to joke about so as to make the book look completely different than it's intended purpose. That's why I am going to search for a better way to share this knowledge. It certainly isn't here.
Well in this case, the version you ended up putting in the book leads to the situation I described in my previous post, so that definitely needs some clearing up before anyone could even attempt to believe it. Where do those photons come from?

Then there is also the fact that he stated the opposite in the previous version. Of course it is fine to change your mind about something, but if you change your mind about any published claim, especially something like this where you are challenging accepted scientific theories, it is foolish in the extreme to do so without explaining how your point of view evolved.

Would someone who is an astute enough observer to discover the next stage in human development be that much of an idiot? Are we to believe he could detect patterns in human history that no-one else could see, and still not predict that contradicting himself without any explanation would be a silly thing to do?

And let us not forget that the only reason we are to believe conscience works as he describes is that very astuteness: it is not supported in any other way. If we do not believe that he is an exceedingly clever man, then there is no reason left to believe the book is correct at all.

But all is not lost: there is a third possibility. The possibility that you simply misunderstood him and ended up putting the wrong stuff in the book.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), But (11-07-2016), Crumb (11-07-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016)
  #661  
Old 11-07-2016, 12:26 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDXXXII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
At least the Original Text gives a less muddled account:

t=0 and photons leave the sun
t=0 and there are no photons at the retina, we cannot see the sun.
t=8 and the photons reach earth, hit the retina, and we use them to see the sun as it is now.

The corrupted version gives an account that is completely different. How could one person write both? They contradict one another!

I think this is another example of Peacegirl meddling with and corrupting the text. An astute observer would never be so stupid as to flatly contradict himself without any sort of explanation.
I think after analyzing it more carefully, he changed it to what he believed to be more accurate based on the efferent account. You can attack him all you want for not doing this right, or not doing that right; and you can all find things to joke about so as to make the book look completely different than it's intended purpose. That's why I am going to search for a better way to share this knowledge. It certainly isn't here.
Well in this case, the version you ended up putting in the book leads to the situation I described in my previous post, so that definitely needs some clearing up before anyone could even attempt to believe it. Where do those photons come from?

Then there is also the fact that he stated the opposite in the previous version. Of course it is fine to change your mind about something, but if you change your mind about any published claim, especially something like this where you are challenging accepted scientific theories, it is foolish in the extreme to do so without explaining how your point of view evolved.

Would someone who is an astute enough observer to discover the next stage in human development be that much of an idiot? Are we to believe he could detect patterns in human history that no-one else could see, and still not predict that contradicting himself without any explanation would be a silly thing to do?
Stop namecalling Vivisectus. You didn't know the man. You didn't know what he was up against. You have no idea why he did any of the things he did, just as I wouldn't know why you do certain things. He wasn't hiding anything. It is true that he detected patterns in human history that no one else could see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
And let us not forget that the only reason we are to believe conscience works as he describes is that very astuteness: it is not supported in any other way. If we do not believe that he is an exceedingly clever man, then there is no reason left to believe the book is correct at all.
There are plenty reasons to believe the book is correct but you're too quick to tear it to shreds. You can follow the reasoning for yourself if you have the capacity. His knowledge came from his astute observations, yes. And they CAN be verifiedl

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
But all is not lost: there is a third possibility. The possibility that you simply misunderstood him and ended up putting the wrong stuff in the book.
He was a human being. He made mistakes, but the central claims are irrefutable. Just because he corrected his reasoning that we would see the Sun instantly rather than have to wait for light to arrive to see the Sun turned on doesn't falsify his original claim that the eyes are efferent. There is no first, second, or third possibility. I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill

Last edited by peacegirl; 11-07-2016 at 12:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #662  
Old 11-07-2016, 02:06 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: MVDCCCLXXIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
There are plenty reasons to believe the book is correct but you're too quick to tear it to shreds.
:lol:

Yes, people have only been discussing the book in two threads that are a lot longer than all of the books together.

Quote:
You can follow the reasoning for yourself if you have the capacity. His knowledge came from his astute observations, yes. And they CAN be verifiedl
They can also be falsified, which they have. We do not see in real time, end of story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
But all is not lost: there is a third possibility. The possibility that you simply misunderstood him and ended up putting the wrong stuff in the book.
Quote:
He was a human being. He made mistakes, but the central claims are irrefutable. Just because he corrected his reasoning that we would see the Sun instantly rather than have to wait for light to arrive to see the Sun turned on doesn't falsify his original claim that the eyes are efferent. There is no first, second, or third possibility. I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
It's not a correction, now it's even more wrong than before.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016), Vivisectus (11-07-2016)
  #663  
Old 11-07-2016, 02:33 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDXXXII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
There are plenty reasons to believe the book is correct but you're too quick to tear it to shreds.
:lol:

Yes, people have only been discussing the book in two threads that are a lot longer than all of the books together.
And guess what? Not a single person read the book in sequence at least two times. Any book that is as deep as this one deserves that.

Quote:
You can follow the reasoning for yourself if you have the capacity. His knowledge came from his astute observations, yes. And they CAN be verifiedl
Quote:
Originally Posted by But
They can also be falsified, which they have. We do not see in real time, end of story.
It's not that simple. I am sorry to make you question your beliefs, but I must. In sorry! :sad:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
But all is not lost: there is a third possibility. The possibility that you simply misunderstood him and ended up putting the wrong stuff in the book.
Quote:
He was a human being. He made mistakes, but the central claims are irrefutable. Just because he corrected his reasoning that we would see the Sun instantly rather than have to wait for light to arrive to see the Sun turned on doesn't falsify his original claim that the eyes are efferent. There is no first, second, or third possibility. I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by But
It's not a correction, now it's even more wrong than before.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you purposely doing this?
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016)
  #664  
Old 11-07-2016, 03:02 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: MVDCCCLXXIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
It's not a correction, now it's even more wrong than before.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you purposely doing this?
First he said we have to wait for the light to arrive to see the Sun. That part of it is correct. Then he changed it to say we see the Sun immediately, which is wrong.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), Dragar (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016)
  #665  
Old 11-07-2016, 03:26 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: MVDCCCLXXIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
They can also be falsified, which they have. We do not see in real time, end of story.
It's not that simple. I am sorry to make you question your beliefs, but I must. In sorry! :sad:
Yes, it is that simple.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), Dragar (11-07-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016)
  #666  
Old 11-07-2016, 05:10 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCVI
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
He was a human being.

He made mistakes,

but the central claims are irrefutable.

Just because he corrected his reasoning that we would see the Sun instantly rather than have to wait for light to arrive to see the Sun turned on doesn't falsify his original claim that the eyes are efferent.

There is no first, second, or third possibility. I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
The first is questionable.

No doubt about the 2nd.

Odd, but there has been a lot of refutation of all his claims.

Yes, he got some things wrong, the real question is which ideas are wrong, and is anything correct?

There are lots of possibilities but mostly Lessans was wrong, and you totally don't understand anything.
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don’t know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016)
  #667  
Old 11-07-2016, 06:30 PM
Stephen Maturin's Avatar
Stephen Maturin Stephen Maturin is offline
Flyover Hillbilly
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juggalonia
Posts: MXDXXVI
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text, and I will certainly not take orders from a corruptor of the Authentic Text!
If loving the Authentic Text and hating the Corrupted Text is wrong, I don't wanna be right.
__________________
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis D. Brandeis

"Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are." ~ S. Gecko

"What the fuck is a German muffin?" ~ R. Swanson
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), ChuckF (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016), Vivisectus (11-07-2016)
  #668  
Old 11-07-2016, 06:47 PM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMCCCLVI
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Stop namecalling Vivisectus. You didn't know the man. You didn't know what he was up against. You have no idea why he did any of the things he did, just as I wouldn't know why you do certain things. He wasn't hiding anything. It is true that he detected patterns in human history that no one else could see
.

In all fairness: He probably would not have avoided simply admitting he was wrong by avoiding the obvious in a weaselly, cowardly way the way you are doing now.

Quote:
There are plenty reasons to believe the book is correct but you're too quick to tear it to shreds. You can follow the reasoning for yourself if you have the capacity. His knowledge came from his astute observations, yes. And they CAN be verifiedl
You have yet to produce a single one.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
But all is not lost: there is a third possibility. The possibility that you simply misunderstood him and ended up putting the wrong stuff in the book.
He was a human being. He made mistakes, but the central claims are irrefutable. Just because he corrected his reasoning that we would see the Sun instantly rather than have to wait for light to arrive to see the Sun turned on doesn't falsify his original claim that the eyes are efferent. There is no first, second, or third possibility. I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
Yes? Then where do those photons at the retina the moment the sun is turned on come from, peacegirl?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-07-2016), But (11-07-2016), ChuckF (11-08-2016), Stephen Maturin (11-07-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-07-2016), The Man (11-07-2016)
  #669  
Old 11-07-2016, 07:43 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCVI
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
It is true that he detected patterns in human history that no one else could see.

There are plenty reasons to believe the book is correct.

His knowledge came from his astute observations, yes. And they CAN be verifiedl

I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
Lessans did have a good imagination.

But neither you nor Lessans have provided any good reason to believe what is in the book.

Lessans astute observations have never been revealed and until then they can't be verified.

Finally you have made a true statement, the wrong stuff was already in the book, but you do misunderstand almost everything.
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don’t know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
  #670  
Old 11-08-2016, 12:29 AM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XXCDXXX
Images: 2
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
There is no first, second, or third possibility. I didn't put any wrong stuff in the book and I didn't misunderstand him.
:sigh:

peacegirl, is it really difficult to conceive of that possibility that you misunderstand? (Perhaps your corruptions represent your attempt to understand.)

peacegirl, I think yours is most extreme form tabooism. It closely resembles the behavior of a priestly caste that is perceived to be the holy guardians of the sacred creed, the beliefs that are the object of the community’s worship. Such guardians feel themselves justified by their religious calling and long training in adopting any measures to repel and to discredit any member of the community who profanes the sacred places, words or rituals regarded as untouchable. Perhaps the most worrying aspect of the taboo reaction is that it tends to have a cumulative and permanent discriminatory effect: any idea that is ideologically suspect or counter to the current paradigm is permanently dismissed, and the very fact of its rejection forms the basis of its rejection on all future occasions.

peacegirl, as the True Steward of the Authentic Text, your repudiation of the Authentic Text is painful for me to witness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
And guess what? Not a single person read the book in sequence at least two times. Any book that is as deep as this one deserves that.
peacegirl, as True Steward of the Authentic Text, I must correct your distortion. Do you forget Chapter 9? Alice and Harry did not need to re-read the manuscript in sequence at least two times for its power to be evident. Do you reject Chapter 14, when Jim and Charlie comment that "a six year old could understand this?"
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-08-2016), But (11-08-2016), Dragar (11-08-2016), Stephen Maturin (11-08-2016), The Man (11-08-2016)
  #671  
Old 11-08-2016, 01:43 AM
Stephen Maturin's Avatar
Stephen Maturin Stephen Maturin is offline
Flyover Hillbilly
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juggalonia
Posts: MXDXXVI
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckF View Post
peacegirl, is it really difficult to conceive of that possibility that you misunderstand? (Perhaps your corruptions represent your attempt to understand.)
You're definitely onto something here. For well over five years, it was abundantly clear to us that peacegirl's understanding of the Corrupted Text - featuring extensive corruptions of her own making - was woefully incomplete and in many instances just flat-out incorrect. Developments subsequent to your discovery and sharing of the Authentic Text demonstrate quite conclusively that peacegirl's "understanding" of her father's work is even more tenuous than previously believed.

A desire to understand concepts far beyond her comprehension, coupled with an inability to see or unwillingness to admit her own severe limitations, render the assertion that peacegirl's corruptions constitute an inept effort to understand not just tenable but likely. The assertion is all the more likely given the probable psychological effects on peacegirl of the author's statement that any six-year-old could understand these principles.

Your suggestion that peacegirl's corruptions are her attempt at comprehension might also help explain her father's views on the importance of removing words such as "stupid" and "incompetent" from the language. One can imagine the author discussing his discoveries with peacegirl, and the heartbreak and empathy Lessans must have felt as his words sailed right over his dimwitted child's head. :sadcheer:
__________________
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis D. Brandeis

"Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are." ~ S. Gecko

"What the fuck is a German muffin?" ~ R. Swanson
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-08-2016), ChuckF (11-08-2016), Dragar (11-08-2016), The Man (11-08-2016), Vivisectus (11-08-2016)
  #672  
Old 11-08-2016, 04:14 PM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMCCCLVI
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Chuck, as the steward of the authentic text, can you perhaps tell us a little more about what the book actually says about sight? As we have seen Peacegirl is unwilling or unable to give straight answers on the subject.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (11-08-2016), ChuckF (11-08-2016), Stephen Maturin (11-08-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-08-2016), The Man (11-08-2016)
  #673  
Old 11-12-2016, 12:20 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDXXXII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Massive Corruption Revealed to be at the Core of Many Drug Approvals
May 03, 2012 | 53,292 views
By Dr. Mercola


Every day millions of people take medications, both prescription and over-the-counter, trusting that they not only work, but are safe because they've been reviewed and approved by government agencies like the FDA.

But now, yet another study has come out showing massive corruption behind FDA-approved drugs that are basically worthless and, too often, end up being dangerous to your health.

The latest study includes a review of the antiviral influenza drug Tamiflu (oseltamivir), which was pushed on the world during the 2009 influenza pandemic and heralded as THE intervention for the so-called deadly swine flu.

What researchers found in retrospect is that much information that regulators should have known about the efficacy and safety of this drug was either hidden or ignored, making it impossible for independent researchers to scrutinize the big picture.

You Can't Trust a Drug to be Safe and Effective Just Because it's "Approved"

cont. at: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...g-tamiflu.aspx
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #674  
Old 11-12-2016, 02:05 PM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMCCCLVI
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
Quote:
t=0 and God turns on the sun. Photons appear.
t=0 and photons are at the lens. They act as if they have traveled from the sun and are redirected.
t=0 and photons are at the retina, acting for all intents and purposes as if they started at the sun, traveled, and have passed through a lens.

The ones that appear at the sun have no time to travel to earth. Nor is there time for them to re redirected, or even to cross the comparatively minute distance between the lens and the retina.

So you say
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
the same photons that we would use to see a distant object could not be the same photons that have just arrived at Earth
As the text says, we are living in total darkness because God has not yet turned on the sun. There are no photons on earth... and yet somehow there are photons at the retina?

If the object is large and bright enough to be seen, then photons are at the retina because the conditions for sight have been met and the object is within visual range.

But where do these photons comes from, if all light come from the sun?
Meanwhile this is still what is happening in your version of the book. Where do the photons at the retina come from, Peacegirl?
Any update here?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
But (11-12-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-12-2016), The Man (11-13-2016)
  #675  
Old 11-12-2016, 04:19 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: MVDCCCLXXIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post

By Dr. Mercola
:haha::shit:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Stephen Maturin (11-13-2016), The Lone Ranger (11-12-2016), The Man (11-13-2016)
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > Lifestyle


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 05:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.83873 seconds with 13 queries