A Revolution in Thought: Part Two

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Chicken ...


Come on, if he wasn't lying, it should be easy for you to prove it ...

I'm not taking the bait and stooping to your level.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's very easy to make someone into something they're not, especially when others are jumping on the same bandwagon. Just throw in a couple of nasty words, a little jeer, a touch of vindictiveness, and a splash of hatred and you've got the perfect concoction. The only thing is, it's a big fat lie.

Why are you even here? Boredom doesn't explain it.

You're now avoiding both conclusive evidence against Lessans and conclusive evidence of your own mental illness.

[The Lone Ranger]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not taking the bait and stooping to your level.

Ah, so you're admitting that you can't prove that Lessans wasn't a liar.


A pity. It'd be easy to do -- if he wasn't a big fat liar, that is.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Well timed and well understood does not prove that the light had to return for us to see the moon. This is extremely subjective because there is no way to stop the light in mid-stream to see what the person sees, nor has it been tested because it's assumed that the eyes are afferent.

Well-timed and well understood DOES mean that the light has to return for us to see it. There is nothing subjective about it at all, and this IS a test of afferent vision - one that it passes and one that efferent vision clearly fails.

If Lessans were right we would see the laser light hitting the moon as soon as it has had time to get there. But instead we only see it later, after that light has had time to both travel there AND travel back to our eyes.

I think I can guess your response: Something else must be going on there!

Lessans was wrong, but your faith-based delusion will prevent you from ever being able to acknowledge it. You should be seeking professional help for your mental condition, before you sink any more time, effort, or money into this hopeless nonsense.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Why are you even here? Boredom doesn't explain it.

You're now avoiding both conclusive evidence against Lessans and conclusive evidence of your own mental illness.

This is a joke. There is no conclusive evidence against Lessans. I really don't care what you think about me Spacemonkey, it doesn't make Lessans wrong. There is no proof whatsoever.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Well-timed and well understood DOES mean that the light has to return for us to see it. There is nothing subjective about it at all, and this IS a test of afferent vision - one that it passes and one that efferent vision clearly fails.

Show me the evidence that this test is iron-clad. Show me that the stop-watch at the moment the light reaches the spot on the moon can't be seen until the light circles back 1.3 seconds later.

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

If Lessans were right we would see the laser light hitting the moon as soon as it has had time to get there. But instead we only see it later, after that light has had time to both travel there AND travel back to our eyes.

I think I can guess your response: Something else must be going on there!

I don't believe that they entertained the question, so how could they prove it?

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Lessans was wrong, but your faith-based delusion will prevent you from ever being able to acknowledge it. You should be seeking professional help for your mental condition, before you sink any more time, effort, or money into this hopeless nonsense.

If you believe Lessans is wrong, then believe it. I'm not telling what to believe. I really don't know why you're here. Don't worry about me. I'll do what I feel is appropriate which is to market this book. What's it to you anyway? Even if Lessans was wrong, there are plenty books on the market that are wrong, so why make a big deal about what I choose to do with my life? Are you upset that I would make money on something you don't believe is true? What is driving you to come here day after day? I don't trust your motives Spacemonkey.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Show me the evidence that this test is iron-clad. Show me that the stop-watch at the moment the light reaches the spot on the moon can't be seen until the light circles back 1.3 seconds later.

Don't be ridiculous. Are you telling me you'll admit Lessans is wrong if I post a photograph of the stopwatch? The experiment has been done and proves Lessans wrong. If you don't trust those who have done the experiment - if you think there's some kind of global conspiracy concerning the moon and lasers, or if you think professional scientists can't be trusted to operate a simple stopwatch - then you can DO IT FOR YOURSELF. It is an observable fact that you won't be able to see the light on the moon until it has had time to travel both there and back again. Denying this fact won't make it go away.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I don't believe that they entertained the question, so how could they prove it?

They prove it by measuring the time it takes to see the light. It takes twice as long as it would if Lessans were right.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If you believe Lessans is wrong, then believe it.

We all do. Everyone here. The evidence is quite conclusive. The only question is why you don't believe the irrefutable evidence right in front of your face. The most plausible answer is that you are quite clearly delusional.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really don't know why you're here... What is driving you to come here day after day? I don't trust your motives Spacemonkey.

You've asked me why I'm here, and I've told you. So if you still don't know it's because you're either not paying any attention, or you have no memory of what you've read.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Don't worry about me. ...why make a big deal about what I choose to do with my life? Are you upset that I would make money on something you don't believe is true?

I do worry about you. I am very concerned for your well-being given your obvious mental health issues. You are not going to make any money on this. You will almost certainly spend more on marketing than you will ever make back in sales. You are wasting your time and energy, as well as money, on nothing but fantasy and delusion. Your family ought to be stepping in to get you the treatment you need.

You are mentally ill, Peacegirl. You need professional help.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Well timed and well understood does not prove that the light had to return for us to see the moon. This is extremely subjective because there is no way to stop the light in mid-stream to see what the person sees, nor has it been tested because it's assumed that the eyes are afferent.

Laugh Out Loud. You shameless, weaseling little liar.

There is NO ambiguity here, and NOTHING is subjective, "extremely" or otherwise. And NO assumptions are being made, because they don't need to be made.

We know EXACTLY how far away the moon is, we know EXACTLY how fast light travels. And we have ways of measuring the passage of time with the uttermost of precision (have you ever heard of atomic clocks?)

We have here a CLEAR TEST of Lessans' claims (of course, all the OTHER tests that you have been given are equally clear).

You stated that according to Lessans, we would see the light here on earth, when it arrived on the surface of the moon. That means we would see the light 1.25 seconds after we sent it out.

BUT WE DON'T.

It takes twice as long for us to see it -- which means it had to make the reutrn trip to our eyes, and THAT means we are seeing that illuminated spot of moon as it was 1.25 seconds in the past, and NOT in real time.

There is no more weaseling left for you to do. Lessans was wrong, and you have no reply.

Oh, and very nice work, Maturin.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This is a joke. There is no conclusive evidence against Lessans. I really don't care what you think about me Spacemonkey, it doesn't make Lessans wrong. There is no proof whatsoever.

This very thread stands as conclusive evidence both that Lessans was wrong and that you are mentally ill. The evidence on both counts is overwhelmingly conclusive and you've never been able to refute or even properly address so much as an ounce of it. Get help Peacegirl. You are addicted to this. Note how you are not ceasing to reply to these posts. You WANT to feel persecuted. This is exactly what you are coming here for.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's very easy to make someone into something they're not, especially when others are jumping on the same bandwagon. Just throw in a couple of nasty words, a little jeer, a touch of vindictiveness, and a splash of hatred and you've got the perfect concoction. The only thing is, it's a big fat lie.

Nope, you're a big fat liar. Deal with the issue of the laser and the moon. It proves we see in delayed time, not in real time, and that Lessans was wrong, and you know it.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not taking the bait and stooping to your level.

Caught out in another lie, so she changes the subject. Do you really think you're fooling anyone, yourself included, with your transparent evasions?

You know perfectly well that all of Lessans' claims on light and sight have been exposed to be utter buncombe.

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Never would I say any such thing about my father. He wasn't a liar, and I'm tired of dealing with people who have the gall to even suggest something like that. You didn't even know this man. Be careful what you say because it will come back to bite you, even if you're here anonymously.

You'll never get tired of it. Just wait a little while and you will have forgotten all about it. Then you get get shocked all over again.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This is a joke. There is no conclusive evidence against Lessans. I really don't care what you think about me Spacemonkey, it doesn't make Lessans wrong. There is no proof whatsoever.

Moon + laser = Lessans wrong. Of course, so do several hundred other experiments we've explained to you as well!

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Show me the evidence that this test is iron-clad. Show me that the stop-watch at the moment the light reaches the spot on the moon can't be seen until the light circles back 1.3 seconds later.

Holy fuck! You actually think they use stop-watches?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by davidm

Holy fuck! You actually think they use stop-watches?

No, she thinks they use egg timers, much more accurate. You know the little hour glass thingies.

[The Lone Ranger]

That was my thought. I get the distinct impression that peacegirl has no idea at all of the difference between, say, astrology and astronomy -- and why one is science and the other is not.

It would seem that to her, "science" just means "some stuff a bunch of guys made up."

[davidm]

Stooge scientists at Mt. Palomar Observatory try to see the moon through makeshift telescopes made out of rolled-up wallpaper.

SCIENCE IN THE NEWS
LOL! Stooge Scientists Fuck Up Laser/Moon Projects!

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM.COM (Internet News Service) LOL! For the last fifty years, stooge scientists have been firing lasers at the moon and measuring the time it takes to make the round trip -- but it was revealed on Sunday that they fucked it all up.

According to the stooge scientists, a laser fired at the moon will not be seen hitting its target until about two and half seconds have passed -- the time it takes for the light to reach the moon, and then be reflected back to the earth.

But an Internet message board poster, peacegirl, maintains that we would see the light as soon as it hit the moon, about 1.25 seconds after leaving earth. As to the findings that flatly contradict this claim, peacegirl said, “Something else must be going on there.”

And how! A recent visit to Mt. Palomar Observatory revealed stooge scientist running wildly about in slapstick fashion, bopping and boinking one another, and sticking their fingers in each other’s eyes!

As stooge scientist Moe Howard prepared to press a Big Red Button that would go WHOOSH! and send a big-ass laser flash to the moon, another stooge scientist, Curly Howard, kept his thumb on a stopwatch, hoping to click it at the EXACT moment that Moe pressed the Big Red Button! But unbeknownst to either, a third stooge scientist, Larry Fine, was sneaking up behind with a paper bag that he had inflated.

Just as Moe started to press the button, Larry CLOBBERED the paper sack with the flats of both hands, making a Big BANG! that not only fucked up the whole experiment but created a new, expanding universe in its own spacetime continuum!

“OOOH! Wise guy, eh?” Moe said to Larry. And then he put Larry’s head in a meat grinder that happened to be conveniently lying about.

“This episode proves that we see efferently, and thousands of years of scientific endeavor have been for naught,” Stephen Hawking said in a written statement. Speaking of the scientific community in general, Hawking added sadly: “OMGUS.”


Stooge scientists try to determine whether hearing is efferent or afferent.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by thedoc

No, she thinks they use egg timers, much more accurate. You know the little hour glass thingies.

Especially if they're synced to the NIST-F1 Cesium Fountain Hourglass Egg Timer Thingie in Colorado.

[thedoc]

Peacegirl's theme song?

Funiculi, Funiculá - 3 Tenores - YouTube

&feature=related

[Vivisectus]

Show me the evidence that this test is iron-clad. Show me that the stop-watch at the moment the light reaches the spot on the moon can't be seen until the light circles back 1.3 seconds later.

But then, we also need proof that the test to test the test was iron-clad. And the test to test the test that tests the test that tested the test! But that STILL isn't proof, because we can in fact demand an infinite regression of tests!

Now, Lessans saying it is so, THAT is ironclad. Because as you pointed out in one of your more typical displays of Lessanese Logic, he was a very clever man and he spent a lot of time thinking about it, so if he had been wrong, he would have spotted it and corrected it, so he was not. QED!

The possibility that perhaps he was not particularly clever, and actually rather dense is simply unthinkable, because Peacegirl knows a clever man when she sees one and that is just that.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Ah, so you're admitting that you can't prove that Lessans wasn't a liar.


A pity. It'd be easy to do -- if he wasn't a big fat liar, that is.

I'm not playing this game with you. This has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of this discovery. You're doing everything you can to discredit him on trivial points. Even if this particular example was not actually stated in an encyclopedia, the point he was making still stands.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He did not lie LadyShea. I will continue to use this example. I could use any past event and it would mean the same thing. I could say this:

Our scientists made the statement LIE. no they didn't

and still exists in our encyclopedias LIE no it doesn't

that if we could sit on the star Rigel Rigel is 800+ light years away, so absolutely false based on his misunderstanding of the principles of optics

with a very powerful telescope focused on the earth we would be able to see President Kennedy at the moment he was assassinated. Rigel is 800+ light years away so this is your misunderstanding of the principles of optics

I could care less if it was or wasn't in the encyclopedia. This does not change ANYTHING.

It speaks directly to Lessans honesty and now yours. HE LIED. You said he didn't lie.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

Peacegirl knows a clever man when she sees one.

Yes, and I'm quite sure Peacegirl can see theough all the 'Pretend Clever' on this thread.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

But then, we also need proof that the test to test the test was iron-clad. And the test to test the test that tests the test that tested the test! But that STILL isn't proof, because we can in fact demand an infinite regression of tests!

Now, Lessans saying it is so, THAT is ironclad. Because as you pointed out in one of your more typical displays of Lessanese Logic, he was a very clever man and he spent a lot of time thinking about it, so if he had been wrong, he would have spotted it and corrected it, so he was not. QED!

The possibility that perhaps he was not particularly clever, and actually rather dense is simply unthinkable, because Peacegirl knows a clever man when she sees one and that is just that.

If this is the kind of junk I'm going to get in here, and there's no one else who wants to come forward except to repeat the same junk over and over again, then I'm not wasting my breath in here.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

[I]Our scientists made the statement[i] LIE. no they didn't

and still exists in our encyclopedias LIEno it doesn't

that if we could sit on the star Rigel Rigel is 800 light years away, so absolutely false based on his misunderstanding of the principles of optics

with a very powerful telescope focused on the earth we would be able to see President Kennedy at the moment he was assassinated. Rigel is 800 light years away so this is your misunderstanding of the principles of optics

You are splitting hairs until there's no hair left to split. I have no idea why you're doing this. Maybe you just can't stand the thought that you might not be right regarding this discovery. Who knows?