A Revolution in Thought: Part Two

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really think you're gonna miss me when I leave. After all, who will you have to degrade and make fun of when I'm no longer here?

Says the woman who just got through calling us "peons," including actual scientists who know all about the stuff that Lesans and you only think you know about, whereas in fact you know nothing.

I actually feel sorry for you, and in a way regret insulting you. Although I do think you are dishonest, you probably can't help yourself. There has to be some degree of mental dysfunction associated with this campaign of yours. What you don't realize, and probably can't realize, is that what you are espousing is as nutty as spending 1,300 pages arguing for a flat earth. You a flat earther.

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Do you have a favorite recipe?

I like the Baby Ruth bars made with real baby Ruth's.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist

I like the Baby Ruth bars made with real baby Ruth's.

How do you feel about 'Lady Fingers'? Are They as good as 'Hot Wings'?

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

AynMisesLibertarian isn't going anywhere for the foreseeable future.

Also, there is always Iacchus as a back-up.

[ceptimus]

We can be hopeful that some new nutball will turn up to amuse us. However, most of them don't have the staying power of peacegirl.

[Angakuk]

Lamentably, this is true.

[thedoc]

Aren't you all being a bit premature? it has only been 4 hours. She may just be doing the laundry after all these weeks. You can always create a new nutball or lure one from another forum, just don't anounce it like some other goofs on another forum.

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That was unexpected. Are you actually trying to help me? If you are, I thank you. I don't have a website yet, as you well know, but I just finished going over the final version, and I'm sending it in to the publisher. You can always find the book at trafford.com. Hopefully, I will be able to get people a discount if they buy the book from me, but what difference does a few dollars make if this is a genuine discovery. Not much.

Write your customer reviews early and often...

http://bookstore.trafford.com/Produc...-All-Evil.aspx

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Says the woman who just got through calling us "peons," including actual scientists who know all about the stuff that Lesans and you only think you know about, whereas in fact you know nothing.

It takes a lot for me to strike back, but I am completely justified.

Originally Posted by davidm

I actually feel sorry for you, and in a way regret insulting you. Although I do think you are dishonest, you probably can't help yourself. There has to be some degree of mental dysfunction associated with this campaign of yours. What you don't realize, and probably can't realize, is that what you are espousing is as nutty as spending 1,300 pages arguing for a flat earth. You a flat earther.

Nope, not true. You cannot compare the two.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist

Write your customer reviews early and often...

http://bookstore.trafford.com/Produc...-All-Evil.aspx

For anyone who is thinking of buying the book, please wait another couple of weeks. I'm resubmitting the book on Monday (I've made quite a few changes) and it will take another couple of weeks for it to be ready for sale.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Also, there is always Iacchus as a back-up.

Well, I'm glad you won't be without a replacement.

[davidm]

Time to write those reviews.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It takes a lot for me to strike back, but I am completely justified.

You should practice what you preach, but honestly you have been striking back at the least provocation. So much for you demonstrating your 'blame free' society.

[thedoc]

No one could ever replace Peacegirl, and it only took her 5 and a half hours to come back after leaving.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Time to write those reviews.

First you have to read the book, remember?

[naturalist.atheist]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

First you have to read the book, remember?

The most authoritative is the first edition. All subsequent editions have been heavily edited by a schizophrenic.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

First you have to read the book, remember?

Of course I read the book, you lying sack of shit. How else would I have been able to comment even on the chapter that you kept hidden?

How else would I have known about Monday night spaghetti and meatballs, to wake a child is to blame it for sleeping, and how in the future if one wants to be a doctor, one need merely hang out a shingle and announce that one is a doctor?

If I hadn't read the book, how else would I have known that in the New World, gays will go away, and that it is a mathematical certainty that husbands and wives won't share the same bed? How could I have know about how having rumpy-pumpy at the dinner table is OK, provided that little ones are not present? If I had not read the book, how else would I have known that in Tomorrowland, people will fall in love with each other's genitals? How could I have known, if I had not read the book, about the Great Man's astonishing insight that we see in real time, even though we don't?

Do you really think you do yourself any good with such lies? Seriously, who do you think you are kidding? Lurkers? You really believe anyone is lurking over this trainwreck? The only people you have are your current tiny band of interlocutors, all of whom correctly think you are nuts.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are obnoxious Spacemonkey, that's all I have to say.

Well, thanks for proving my point.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Before I leave, I am asking those who are still wondering if this book is worth reading, to please come forward and ask questions...

*crickets*

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by thedoc

No one could ever replace Peacegirl, and it only took her 5 and a half hours to come back after leaving.

And you can be sure that if she ever does manage to leave here, she'll just start up all over again as soon as she can find a new forum.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

And you can be sure that if she ever does manage to leave here, she'll just start up all over again as soon as she can find a new forum.

If you find one please post a link, even without registering it might be fun to watch.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Of course I read the book, you lying sack of shit. How else would I have been able to comment even on the chapter that you kept hidden?

You did not read the book in its entirety chapter by chapter. You skimmed it, and you have pulled everything out of context to misinform the public.

Originally Posted by davidm

How else would I have known about Monday night spaghetti and meatballs, to wake a child is to blame it for sleeping, and how in the future if one wants to be a doctor, one need merely hang out a shingle and announce that one is a doctor?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I hope people in here have the sense to know that this is a total sham on your part. Face it, you don't like Lessans because he says the eyes are not a sense organ, and it is messing up your worldview. I had no idea that this would cause so much angst in someone.

Originally Posted by davidm

If I hadn't read the book, how else would I have known that in the New World, gays will go away, and that it is a mathematical certainty that husbands and wives won't share the same bed? How could I have know about how having rumpy-pumpy at the dinner table is OK, provided that little ones are not present? If I had not read the book, how else would I have known that in Tomorrowland, people will fall in love with each other's genitals? How could I have known, if I had not read the book, about the Great Man's astonishing insight that we see in real time, even though we don't?

Where in the world did he say gays would go away? All he said was that if the environment was the cause of someone becoming gay, then he might not move in this direction, but in either case, there will be no more judgment.

Decline and Fall of All Evil: Chapter Five: Premarital Relations p. 160

Why do you think so many jokes
are made about marriage if not because it is a sadly humorous
situation as we know it. However, it will be changed in a manner
marvelous to behold while jealousy is removed from the world not
because it is a form of blame but because no one will ever again have
the desire to make another jealous, as this motion will render less
satisfaction under the new conditions. Consequently, every single boy
and girl are compelled to desire learning the secret of how to prevent
this great hurt to each other because their own happiness is at stake.
The same holds true for same sex relationships although these unions
will naturally decline when all blame is removed from the
environment. If there are a certain number of homosexual
relationships that remain, no one will judge or criticize these unions
since this is a first blow which can no longer be justified.

Originally Posted by davidm

Do you really think you do yourself any good with such lies? Seriously, who do you think you are kidding? Lurkers? You really believe anyone is lurking over this trainwreck? The only people you have are your current tiny band of interlocutors, all of whom correctly think you are nuts.

Oh well, I can't worry about what other people think. I know that I'm not nuts and when Lessans is proven right, it will only make my vindication that much sweeter! Got it!!

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Where in the world did he say gays would go away? All he said was that if the environment was the cause of someone becoming gay, then he might not move in this direction

Can you not read?

The same holds true for same sex relationships although these unions
will naturally decline when all blame is removed from the
environment. If there are a certain number of homosexual
relationships that remain, no one will judge or criticize these unions
since this is a first blow which can no longer be justified.

Why would removing blame from the environment "naturally" bring about a decline in homosexuality, to the point where there might not be any homosexuals left at all (which is implied by the next sentence "If there are....")?

Why did Lessans make that assumption?

ETA: I would assume the opposite. In a no blame, no judgement environment, I think same sex unions would naturally increase as there would be no need for homosexuals to closet themselves or hide their orientation in any way.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Can you not read?

Why would removing blame from the environment "naturally" bring about a decline in homosexuality, to the point where there might not be any homosexuals left at all (which is implied by the next sentence "If there are....")?

Why did Lessans make that assumption?

There was no assumption. He was stating IF...the environment had something to do with some people turning to the gay world, then that would not be a factor. Why are you making this a false attack on Lessans? He was the opposite of you're trying to make him out to be. He was not a homophobe. He was actually for gay rights. Just goes to show how a book can be misinterpreted, especially if you want to prove the book wrong. And you don't think you are prejudice? You are the worst, I hate to say.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

ETA: I would assume the opposite. In a no blame, no judgement environment, I think same sex unions would naturally increase as there would be no need for homosexuals to closet themselves or hide their orientation in any way.

Hello??? Are you there LadyShea? You obviously are not even getting the point of what Lessans was making because you jumped to the conclusion that he was trying to eliminate gays. THAT IS NOT WHAT HE WAS DOING. Do you get that? No, you don't, because you want to be right and make Lessans wrong, AT ALL COSTS.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He was stating IF...the environment had something to do with some people turning to the gay world, then that would not be a factor.

Where did he say that? And what the hell do you mean "turning to the gay world"? You believe homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, don't you? Did Lessans also believe that? Nobody who understands that homosexuality is a natural biological variance like left handedness would ever use that wording.

Originally Posted by Lessans

these unions will naturally decline when all blame is removed from the environment.

This is not an "if" statement. It's a positive assertion.

Is there some context you left out of your quoted passage?