Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Would Rather Not!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on April 1, 2002 16:43:52 UTC

Hi Alan,

At 30 years of age, I think you need to seriously think about getting yourself into a better financial state. Life is surprisingly short. Something the young fail to appreciate. "Youth is wasted on the young!"
*****


***** Alan:
I do not have a computer. It costs me terribly to participate, and I am quite poor. Today I am fortunate to use someone's computer, so no fee this time. But given that the exercise usually comes at a cost, I need to progress very, very, fast in understanding your work. It is frustrating to see you go around in endless circles.
*****


You have a copy of what I wrote. I am of the opinion that the attack you have chosen can not be expected to lead to fast understanding of my work. I would suggest that, if you want to understand it very quickly, take it one line at a time and don't skip ahead at all. Don't move to the next line until the line you are on makes perfect sense.


***** Alan:
Here is a complaint: why be so narrow minded? Why be like a horse with blinkers on, when many others have done work which connects with your work?
*****

Because I do not want to include anything which might be false!

***** Alan:
One may claim that any information can be 'viewed' from any perspective; but some perspectives may be more interesting than others.
*****


I am trying to explain what I have done. Let us understand that before one goes to other perspectives. Whether or not it is interesting is beside the point.

***** Alan:
Above, have you not stated as FACT, something which is not part of your paper, and which is actually a personal THEORY (which you may have arrived at because of your paper)?
*****


No, what you refer to is not put forward as a fact, it is an opinion, and it existed long before I made the discovery discussed in my paper.

***** Alan:
This is a major complaint: that personal theories are being presented as facts! Fair comment?
*****


No, I do not believe it is a "Fair comment" as the comment does not go to the point at issue.

***** Alan:
I believe that I can know, once did know, to a large extent once again do know, and in another dimension you might say 'do know'; what it is all about.
*****


Yes, I am well aware that you claim much "knowledge". That's nice Alan, but it does not bear at all on what I am saying.

***** Alan:
Fair enough?

I broke that barrier. Anyone can break it, as far as I can figure. Main ingredients: do not deny or repress in yourself anything you ever felt, thought, experienced or did; be open to the awareness of even tiny, fleeting phenomena (that may even have no name); what counts is Existence, notice what exists, thus "every voice gets a hearing" i.e. no repression; it helps if you are loved (let be) by others.
*****


No, Alan, your position is a religious position and I have no time or desire to discuss religious positions of any kind. I will leave such issues to my subconscious which is far more brilliant than I (through rational thought) can ever hope to be. And my subconscious says to ignore you. Sorry about that!

***** Alan:
I am rational about being emotional!
*****


No one is rational about being emotional! That is what is commonly called an oxymoron!

***** Alan:

"As I say, I know a little math. It is clear to me that being finite, the concepts to be defined can be numbered."

Why cannot there be an infinity of concepts?
*****


No difficulty! The problem is that I can not rationally examine an infinite number (by definition by the way, talk to Paul); therefore, any conclusion I come to must be based on a finite number of concepts.

***** Alan:
Why make dogmatic claims that go beyond the necessary purpose of the paper?
*****


It keeps people honest! Drives off the riffraff so to speak; anyone with an open mind can comprehend that it is possible for the "dogmatic claim" to be correct and lays belief aside in favor of thought!

I think your best bet would be to alter your financial state a bit. At your age, it is time to establish your comfort, you will need it before long! If you chose not to, then don't complain. I do not believe a little money will hurt your ability to think at all. In fact, for the most part, thinking can be done in the background anyway. A little effort towards raising your situation might even get you a little more organized too.

Have fun -- Dick

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins