This, to Ryan

This, to Ryan

Postby wetsystems » Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:07 pm

ryguy wrote:
wetsystems wrote:I bet 'george' follows in there too. she loves it there, always has. maybe max von schickelgruber will show up too. and if we all get a little beat up and bloody i'm sure dr. dankk will help us out.


There's only one problem, and I'm afraid if we continue you'll make a fool out of yourself. Well actually two problems. George isn't Shawnna. He's too careful and holds his tongue too much. Shawnna could never do that, her emotions always got the best of her. And Dankk did have medical credentials. Verified, cross-referenced, and confirmed. Absolutely no doubt about it. We can continue, but those two points are already moot so it would be a virtual bloodbath.

-Ry


The 'George' style, I'm convinced, has "Shawnna" written all over it. Go back and read her posts as "Jon" (at OM, I think) and her first few posts as the 'Goddess'. And here's my take on Dankk- at OM he implied that he was an MD. If he has an EMT certificate, that doesn't count. After all- Rick Doty has a few law classes but that doesn't make him a lawyer. Actually, I've taken some courses in medicine (CPR, OSHA construction related stuff)- and I have certifications in those areas. But I'd never use that to imply that I have Medical Credentials. But this is precisely what Dankk did.

Incidentally, I've signed back up at OM as RC (Dick) Hertz. I did this for the sole purpose of continuing my philosophical debate with Dan Smith. It may (or may not) be interesting. My main thrust will be to develop an argument against the irrational aspects of the BPW hypothesis. Dan had asked me, here, to continue the dialogue and I've decided to accommodate his request.

As far as IPF is concerned- he has served as a useful whipping boy here for years. I believe that he merits respect. He's thoughtful and consistent. He never intended to indicate that he buys into the Serpo cult- only that he retains an open mind towards the realm of the 'high strange'. It pisses me off to see his ideas trivialized by sophistic marginalization. I admit that I'd love to sneak into his house some night and pluck the semi-colon key from his keyboard. Quirks and all- he's genuine and deserves better treatment here.

And as to AD- he's an amateur debunker. When it suited him to use Brad Sparks to justify his debunkery he was a Sparks fan. When Sparks stated that he was about to reveal that his research into Roswell would vindicate the 'cover-up' theory he became a Sparks antagonist (and all the posters on the Virtually Strange List - a virtual 'who's who' of Ufology- morphed into 'dinosaurs'!)- all within the period of less than a week. Springer had this character pegged early on. And now you've made him a Mod??

I reserve the right to post this PM on the Latrine even though it may result in a new banning at OM.

Best,

Kim
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain


Postby ScaRZ » Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:45 pm

I must admit TOON as soon as I saw George post I was thinking I know this person. As soon as I made the below post George went silent and nobody else said a word.

ScaRZ wrote:

Do i know you George by another screen name?
Something tells me I do.
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Postby wetsystems » Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:50 pm

We're on the same page here, Scarz. But what about the rest of my post?
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain

Re: This, to Ryan

Postby Access Denied » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:50 pm

wetsystems wrote:And as to AD- he's an amateur debunker.

For once you’re almost right, I don’t get paid for sharing my opinions and research.

wetsystems wrote:When it suited him to use Brad Sparks to justify his debunkery he was a Sparks fan.

I still think it's a well written paper and valuable piece of research, I just don’t agree with his conclusion… and the alleged subversion of somebody else’s work to further his own agenda… if true.

wetsystems wrote:Sparks stated that he was about to reveal that his research into Roswell would vindicate the 'cover-up' theory he became a Sparks antagonist (and all the posters on the Virtually Strange List - a virtual 'who's who' of Ufology- morphed into 'dinosaurs'!)- all within the period of less than a week.

Actually, judging by this recent post of his…

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/upd ... -010.shtml

…Sparks’ seems perfectly capable of defending himself without your help and in fact I got the idea for my “dinosaur” comment from his criticism of the last 30 years of Roswell “research” which he correctly points out have all ended up in a dead end… right back in Roswell.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby I.P.Freely » Sat Aug 25, 2007 11:03 pm

Whats a semi colon? I,ll mail it to you.lol
"You can either trust people or not. I choose to trust what people say and sometimes I get lied to. If I were to trust no one I would never hear the truth." - James (IPF) Martell
I.P.Freely
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:48 pm

Postby ryguy » Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:31 am

My response to Toon was as follows:

-----

I'd look forward to seeing Dan try to keep up with you - but I doubt he has, as Shawnna would say, the "intestinal fortitude". And I don't intend on reading OM, so I guess I'll miss out on it. It's unfortunate Dan is so terrified to face up to you on RU, but it's understandable - he doesn't have the same kind of "safe-haven" here.

As far as AD - it only appears in the public forum that since Ray has quit arguing with you, that you've chosen a new enemy of the week - and now that's AD. We made him a mod, because he offered to help when we mentioned that our workload on the report makes it difficult to keep up with everything. And he's level-headed and doesn't fly off the handle easily, nor is he overly-emotional. He'll make a good moderator.

As far as IPF - talking to him gives me the same "I feel like puking" sensations as when I attempted to hold a debate with Bren at OM. He throws in little snippets of words in his "replay" of recent history that are incorrect, and borderline manipulative. He can be spoon-fed an entire chain-of-custody of documents proving who is distributing Serpo, and he's one of those folks who would simply stand there with their fingers in their ears yelling "la-la-la-la"... No....people like him are the reason UFOlogy is in the state of low-IQ analysis that it is in. You're right...he's often a target of my frustration because every time he decides to write something, it is invalid and incorrect on so many levels it's impossible not to get overwhelmed with frustration at the obvious blindness of most "wanna-"believers, who "wanna" believe so bad that they ignore the obvious evidence that suggests what they "wanna" believe ain't so.

Good luck at OM...if you plan on going head-to-head against Dan, I'm not sure you'll last more than 3 days before they kick you.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby ScaRZ » Sun Aug 26, 2007 2:47 pm

wetsystems wrote:We're on the same page here, Scarz. But what about the rest of my post?


Well Toon I get nothing out of picking fights or just plain arguing. To be honest this is the main reason I post as little as I do. I like the word respect, and many times I see a huge lack of respect coming from not only you but others as well.

I don't have to agree with a person to show respect and would love to know that others feel the same. I'm a Christian who won't try and push myself off on someone. But many atheist and or non-believers push just the same as many Christian people do. I see no love or goodness in neither one of them. I just want to be up front with you Toon and everybody about how I feel.

I've noticed in many of your post that you Toon seem to not care for Christian people. This is the main reason I never get in many conversations with you. I don't care for arguing on my beliefs. I get nothing out of putting others down for their beliefs. If someone is an atheist or has little use for religion I try and respect them and can only hope they will do the same to me.

I'm not here or anywhere trying to make someone believe something. I'm here only to learn from others and hope when I choose to speak maybe someone might learn something from me. I don't claim to have all the answers, but neither does anyone else. We should all be here to share information,learn from each other and be heard with respect.
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Postby wetsystems » Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:17 pm

Consider everything, believe nothing.

Beware of the man of one book. Saint Thomas Aquinas
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain

Postby Access Denied » Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:42 pm

ScaRZ wrote:I'm not here or anywhere trying to make someone believe something. I'm here only to learn from others and hope when I choose to speak maybe someone might learn something from me. I don't claim to have all the answers, but neither does anyone else.

Hence the phrase "Searching for the answers" in the tag line at the top of this forum. (not sure who came up with that but it's brilliant) I believe everyone has a small piece of the puzzle (assuming their motives are pure) and finding out what that is, sharing it, and learning from it is how we grow as human beings.

ScaRZ wrote:We should all be here to share information, learn from each other and be heard with respect.

To that end if anyone ever thinks something I've said here is disrespectful I would appreciate knowing about it, preferably in a PM, so that I can learn and grow from it… and if necessary retract it and publicly apologize.

Excellent post ScaRZ, you should post more often. :)
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby Access Denied » Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:07 pm

wetsystems wrote:Consider everything, believe nothing.

Beware of the man of one book. Saint Thomas Aquinas


Homo unius libri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_unius_libri

According to a literary tradition at least three centuries old, Saint Thomas Aquinas is reputed to have employed the phrase "hominem unius libri timeo"— "I fear the man of a single book". The Russian writer Yuri Olesha has written,

"His words are generally quoted today in disparagement of the man whose mental horizons are limited to a single book. Aquinas, however, meant that a man who has thoroughly mastered one good book can be dangerous as an opponent. The Greek poet Archilochus meant something like this when he said that the fox knows many things but the hedgehog knows one big thing."

Joseph Needham, in the general conclusions to his masterwork, the series Science and Civilisation in China, observed of the familiar tag:

"It could mean that this man has only read one book, has only written one book, does not possess more than one book, or puts his faith in one book only. The fear that is felt may be on behalf of the man himself. Having read so little he is quite at at the mercy of his one book!"

The poet Robert Southey recalled the tradition in which the quotation became embedded:

"When St Thomas Aquinas was asked in what manner a man might best become learned, he answered, 'By reading one book'; 'meaning,' says Bishop Taylor, 'that an understanding entertained with several objects is intent upon neither, and profits not.' The homo unius libri is indeed proverbially formidable to all conversational figurantes. Like your sharp-shooter, he knows his piece perfectly, and is sure of his shot." — Robert Southey, The Doctor, p. 164.

Could you perhaps elaborate a little on your interpretation of this?
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby wetsystems » Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:20 pm

I vote for this one:


"It could mean that this man has only read one book, has only written one book, does not possess more than one book, or puts his faith in one book only. The fear that is felt may be on behalf of the man himself. Having read so little he is quite at at the mercy of his one book!"

Aquinas was a man of many books- hence his wisdom.

In fact it was my 9th grade Latin master who introduced me to this adage as a reason to study Latin- which I hated. Many books, many languages and many ideas... That is the garden of wisdom.

Is that hard?
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain

Postby Access Denied » Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:46 pm

“I don’t want to believe. I want to know.”
-- Carl Sagan
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby wetsystems » Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:56 pm

I'm with Carl on that.

Consider everything, believe nothing.
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain

Postby Access Denied » Sun Aug 26, 2007 7:20 pm

Well, having "read all the books" claiming aliens are in our midst (combined with some additional input from those who's opinions I respect and consider more knowledgeable than myself in certain areas) I know there's not one shred of veritable evidence… call me skeptical but I refuse to buy into (“consider”) the mythology without proof… let me know if you find any.

Consider this…

A Skeptical Manifesto
http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/manifesto.html

[emphasis mine]

On the opening page of the splendid little book, To Know a Fly, biologist Vincent Dethier makes this humorous observation of how children grow up to become scientists:

Although small children have taboos against stepping on ants because such actions are said to bring on rain, there has never seemed to be a taboo against pulling off the legs or wings of flies. Most children eventually outgrow this behavior. Those who do not either come to a bad end or become biologists (1962, p. 2).

The same could be said of skepticism. In their early years children are knowledge junkies, questioning everything in their view, though exhibiting little skepticism. Most never learn to distinguish between inquisitiveness and credulity. Those who do either come to a bad end or become professional skeptics.

But what does it mean to be skeptical? Skepticism has a long historical tradition dating back to ancient Greece when Socrates observed: “All I know is that I know nothing.” But this is not a practical position to take. Modern skepticism is embodied in the scientific method, that involves gathering data to formulate and test naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena. A claim becomes factual when it is confirmed to such an extent it would be reasonable to offer temporary agreement. But all facts in science are provisional and subject to challenge, and therefore skepticism is a method leading to provisional conclusions. Some claims, such as water dowsing, ESP, and creationism, have been tested (and failed the tests) often enough that we can provisionally conclude that they are false. Other claims, such as hypnosis and chaos theory, have been tested but results are inconclusive so we must continue formulating and testing hypotheses and theories until we can reach a provisional conclusion. The key to skepticism is to continuously and vigorously apply the methods of science to navigate the treacherous straits between “know nothing” skepticism and “anything goes” credulity. This manifesto — a statement of purpose of sorts — explores these themes further.

[snip]

The Rational Skeptic

The second popular notion that skeptics are closed-minded to certain beliefs comes from a misunderstanding of skepticism and science. Skeptics and scientists are not necessarily “closed-minded” (though they may be since they are human). They may once have been open-minded to a belief, but when the evidence came up short they rejected it. There are already enough legitimate mysteries in the universe for which evidence provides scientists fodder for their research. To take the time to consider “unseen” or “unknown” mysteries is not always practical. When the non-skeptic says, “you’re just closed-minded to the unknown forces of the universe,” the skeptic responds: “We’re still trying to understand the known forces of the universe.”

At some you point I think you have to draw a line between what’s possible and what’s practical (useful)… so many rabbit holes, so little time.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby I.P.Freely » Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:33 pm

ryguy wrote:

As far as IPF - talking to him gives me the same "I feel like puking" sensations as when I attempted to hold a debate with Bren at OM. He throws in little snippets of words in his "replay" of recent history that are incorrect, and borderline manipulative. He can be spoon-fed an entire chain-of-custody of documents proving who is distributing Serpo, and he's one of those folks who would simply stand there with their fingers in their ears yelling "la-la-la-la"... No....people like him are the reason UFOlogy is in the state of low-IQ analysis that it is in. You're right...he's often a target of my frustration because every time he decides to write something, it is invalid and incorrect on so many levels it's impossible not to get overwhelmed with frustration at the obvious blindness of most "wanna-"believers, who "wanna" believe so bad that they ignore the obvious evidence that suggests what they "wanna" believe ain't so.

-Ry


Wow Ry your so kind and I use to have such a high opinion of you. But whatever if thats what you need to feel better about yourself I am glad to be of service. Must get real messy around your place you puking so much. Oh by the way my IQ is 165 not that it means anything. Have a nice day Ry.
"You can either trust people or not. I choose to trust what people say and sometimes I get lied to. If I were to trust no one I would never hear the truth." - James (IPF) Martell
I.P.Freely
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:48 pm

Next

Google

Return to The Latrine - Anything Else

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron