A revolution in thought

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

This part of YOUR account is what these questions are asking you about. They are not based on the afferent account, and do not make any afferent assumptions. Please answer them from the efferent perspective based only on your own account.

Surely it is better to just answer them than to continue lying about having already done so. Seriously, they are just Yes/No questions, so five words and you're done. Just try not to contradict yourself this time, and make sure you only answer with respect to the photons the questions are asking about.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm sure someone in here can find it.

No, they cannot, because it never happened. You are simply lying to claim you ever even tried to answer this set of questions. Never happened. Not even once.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Noooo GdB. Stop using reasons why I must be wrong. It's as simple as I've never used this, so I don't know how to access it. I admit that I am ignorant on this subject. Does that mean that I'm wrong on everything else (which is how you people try to dismiss very intelligent individuals ), and my answer is a big fat NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

What the hell was this? It doesn't make a word of sense.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by But

You're changing your story again. Before, it was "the light is instantly at the retina, and everything else remains the same".

What do you think the optic nerve does?

The optic nerve relays impulses to the brain but these impulses are not turned into images.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The optic nerve relays impulses to the brain but these impulses are not turned into images.

What does the brain do with them?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

What does the brain do with them?

L.O.L. The same thing that Peacegirl does with information that contradicts her father's holy book. L.O.L.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

What does the brain do with them?

It processes the impulses into resentment for Seymour Lessans, of course.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The optic nerve relays impulses to the brain but these impulses are not turned into images.

They’re not? Then what are they turned into, you little fool? Cheddar cheese?

Let’s review. You are arguing against your father, in addition to arguing against reality. Your father wrote that NOTHING strikes the optic nerve. You later CHANGED the text, to add, “nothing strikes the optic nerve, except light." Bold mine.

We have the pre-edited text, without your insertion. Your lies are futile. You are caught out.

In point of fact, since the optic nerve lies behind the eye, light does not strike it. The retina converts light into electrical impulses, and it is these impulses that the optic nerve relays to the brain to be interpreted as images. Not to be interpreted as cheddar cheese!

It is plain to me now what this moronic crusade of yours is really about. Upthread you admitted that you have no money. You know that your father wrote a bunch of shit, which is why you have repeatedly changed the text in a (futile) effort to make it minimally presentable, in the hope that somehow, some way, people will buy the book so that you can profit from the sales. All you care about is conning people into buying a book that you yourself know is a piece of shit. Money is your motive.

You game will never work among intelligent people. I suggest you take your con job to anti-vaxxer nutjob sites. Those loonies are so far gone that they night actually like Daddy Dum Dum’s book and buy it. Just be sure to highlight for them that anti-vax stuff that you inserted in the book along with the other changes in a desperate effort to transform pig shit into diamonds.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by Peacegirl

My camera would detect light as it arrives 8 minutes after the Sun is turned on at noon, but I would be able to take a picture of the Sun instantly before the light from the Sun gets here.

A camera is designed to do nothing but record light. It is just a sophisticated light-sensor. How does it "take a picture" before light arrives? Have we accidentally designed something completely different from a device for photography, or light-recording?

You do not seem to get that "Taking a picture" and "Detecting light" is the same thing... certainly for a camera.

Cameras certainly cannot work instantly: we know that much. If sight DOES work instantly, there should be a difference between what we see, and what we can record with a camera.

This is not the case, however. How do you explain that?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

No, they cannot, because it never happened. You are simply lying to claim you ever even tried to answer this set of questions. Never happened. Not even once.

You have amnesia big time. I didn't answer your questions to your satisfaction, but I did answer your questions.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

They’re not? Then what are they turned into, you little fool? Cheddar cheese?

Let’s review. You are arguing against your father, in addition to arguing against reality. Your father wrote that NOTHING strikes the optic nerve. You later CHANGED the text, to add, “nothing strikes the optic nerve, except light." Bold mine.

We have the pre-edited text, without your insertion. Your lies are futile. You are caught out.

In point of fact, since the optic nerve lies behind the eye, light does not strike it. The retina converts light into electrical impulses, and it is these impulses that the optic nerve relays to the brain to be interpreted as images. Not to be interpreted as cheddar cheese!

It is plain to me now what this moronic crusade of yours is really about. Upthread you admitted that you have no money. You know that your father wrote a bunch of shit, which is why you have repeatedly changed the text in a (futile) effort to make it minimally presentable, in the hope that somehow, some way, people will buy the book so that you can profit from the sales. All you care about is conning people into buying a book that you yourself know is a piece of shit. Money is your motive.

You game will never work among intelligent people. I suggest you take your con job to anti-vaxxer nutjob sites. Those loonies are so far gone that they night actually like Daddy Dum Dum’s book and buy it. Just be sure to highlight for them that anti-vax stuff that you inserted in the book along with the other changes in a desperate effort to transform pig shit into diamonds.

The fact that you always have to degrade me and my father shows me that your position is weak. This is your problem not mine. Deal with it!!! BTW, you're not that intelligent.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

It processes the impulses into resentment for Seymour Lessans, of course.

Resent all you want. Say horrible things which you're good at, all you want. Doesn't change the truth one bit.

[peacegirl]

Great infographic.

Compatibilist Free Will Machine - Fake Ad

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

What does the brain do with them?

According to Peacegirl and Lessans it doesn't do anything with them, which fits perfectly with Peacegirl's actions on this and other forums, she does nothing with the information that is presented to her. Occasionally she will edit her fathers book according to the information she has been given, but then will deny that the book has been edited. But the overall effect is that the information, like the nerve impulses to the brain, have no effect at all. The pity is that with a little education, as opposed to sleeping in school, Peacegirl and Lessans could have avoided all this nonsense.

[The Lone Ranger]

Originally Posted by Peacegirl

My camera would detect light as it arrives 8 minutes after the Sun is turned on at noon, but I would be able to take a picture of the Sun instantly before the light from the Sun gets here.

The cameras of the Hubble Space Telescope and the cameras of the Galileo Space Probe (separated by millions of miles at the time) took pictures of the same event and did not see the event happening at the same time.

Thus demonstrating that cameras do not see "instantly."

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

According to Peacegirl and Lessans it doesn't do anything with them, which fits perfectly with Peacegirl's actions on this and other forums, she does nothing with the information that is presented to her. Occasionally she will edit her fathers book according to the information she has been given, but then will deny that the book has been edited. But the overall effect is that the information, like the nerve impulses to the brain, have no effect at all. The pity is that with a little education, as opposed to sleeping in school, Peacegirl and Lessans could have avoided all this nonsense.

It's amazing that anyone with a brain would listen to this person. He is a troll of the worst kind because he is given a platform which fulfills his fantasy of feeling important which he needs because he doesn't think too much of himself. Poor guy!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

The cameras of the Hubble Space Telescope and the cameras of the Galileo Space Probe (separated by millions of miles at the time) took pictures of the same event and did not see the event happening at the same time.

Thus demonstrating that cameras do not see "instantly."

I would like to see where these pictures are taken at the same time but show a different image when it comes to matter. I understand that light will arrive at different times. Stop confusing people.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

The cameras of the Hubble Space Telescope and the cameras of the Galileo Space Probe (separated by millions of miles at the time) took pictures of the same event and did not see the event happening at the same time.

Thus demonstrating that cameras do not see "instantly."

I would like to see where these pictures are taken at the same time but show a different image when it comes to matter. I understand that light will arrive at different times. Stop confusing people TLR.

[The Lone Ranger]

You are the one who claims that cameras see in "real time." Are you now altering that position -- again?


And just what the hell do you think an ejection plume is if not matter? You can easily see photographs of the ejection plumes from the cometary impacts, taken by probes in different parts of the Solar System, and see that they are different.


And yes, you can easily go to the NASA website you were linked to earlier and find two different images of an object (Jupiter, for example) taken at the same time from probes in different parts of the Solar System. It's not that hard to do.

And guess what? The image show different things happening.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by davidm

I suggest you take your con job to anti-vaxxer nutjob sites. Those loonies are so far gone that they night actually like Daddy Dum Dum’s book and buy it. Just be sure to highlight for them that anti-vax stuff that you inserted in the book along with the other changes in a desperate effort to transform pig shit into diamonds.

The Sacred Text would sell like hotcakes among the anti-vaxxers if peacegirl adds some stuff regarding how the Jews have been suppressing the truth about determinism, efferent vision and eternal life by murdering white people with vaccines.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

You are the one who claims that cameras see in "real time." Are you now altering that position -- again?


And just what the hell do you think an ejection plume is if not matter? You can easily see photographs of the ejection plumes from the cometary impacts, taken by probes in different parts of the Solar System, and see that they are different.

And yes, you can easily go to the NASA website you were linked to earlier and find two different images of an object (Jupiter, for example) taken at the same time from probes in different parts of the Solar System. It's not that hard to do.

And guess what? The image show different things happening.

If the explosion puts out enough light, our telescopes would be able to see the plume in real time. The only link you gave was a reference to the time the probes picked up a sighting, but not actually a video of its occurrence. Why can't NASA to show a side by side comparison in video form so we can see exactly when the image comes into focus?

[The Lone Ranger]

So you're saying those pictures -- which clearly show that the probes saw the (to them, easily visible) explosions occurring at different times -- were faked?




You know, there are times when it's really difficult to believe that you're as stupid as you pretend to be.

Here's a hint: What do you think a video IS? It's a series of pictures taken in quick succession, and then played back at high speed. You know, kind of like the time-stamped picture sequences which are freely available on the NASA website you were linked to and obviously didn't bother to examine.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

You know, there are times when it's really difficult to believe that you're as stupid as you pretend to be.

Here's a hint: What do you think a video IS? It's a series of pictures taken in quick succession, and then played back at high speed. You know, kind of like the time-stamped picture sequences which are freely available on the NASA website you were linked to and obviously didn't bother to examine.

I did examine it. I'd like to see it again. Do you have the link? What it does not show is what is seen by the probe before the image comes into view. Is it blank? What does it show? That's what I mean by a side by side comparison. I want to see the moment the image is taken by probes that are closer to the object, and what is seen by probes that are farther away. What's so stupid about that question? I hope you don't talk to your students that way. That would stop them from ever asking another question.

[The Lone Ranger]

I speak to you that way when you say things so brain-meltingly stupid that it's difficult to believe you're serious. If you are serious, then I can only say that it's easier to describe calculus to a moderately intelligent chimpanzee than it is to get you to comprehend even the simplest concept when it contradicts your prejudices.

Between that and your breath-taking hypocrisy, and your frequent lying, you have thoroughly earned every bit of disrespect that you get.


And SERIOUSLY, have you not been paying ANY attention?

You can go to the links yourself and view the pictures. The Hubble Space Telescope and the Galileo probe were millions of miles apart, as the Galileo was near Jupiter while the HST was at Earth during the impacts.

The picture sequences very clearly show Jupiter before the impacts, then Jupiter and the impact flashes during the impacts, then Jupiter and the impact plumes after the impacts. And the Galileo probe saw it happen more than 30 minutes before the HST did.

All of this was explained to you, and shown to you. Go look at the pictures for yourself.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If the explosion puts out enough light, our telescopes would be able to see the plume in real time. The only link you gave was a reference to the time the probes picked up a sighting, but not actually a video of its occurrence. Why can't NASA to show a side by side comparison in video form so we can see exactly when the image comes into focus?

NASA has already posted photos of the events with the time stamp of when the photos were taken. There is no need for them to Kowtow to your demands for explanations of events that everyone else understands and knows to be true. You are the one claiming that the current description is inaccurate, so it's up to you to find the error and point it out. So far you have not found any error because you refuse to look at the data, you just want to whine and cry that you can't see it just the way you want it to be. The data is there, do something for yourself and get some real education, instead of the fantasy book your father wrote.