Hi, Alan
Some of what I said was in the method of
inviting your comment. Even the best minds
tend to gloss over a matter sometimes unless
there is a specific misconception they feel
there is good hope of clearing up. I say this
after the fact, as I did not set out consciously
to manipulate, with bad manners, the tone of our
correspondence.
The "branding" I mentioned was almost not there,
as you have been a gentle correspondent.
You exchange ideas for real...great example.
What "branding" there was, you did not trumpet.
But I was convinced by subtleties
that you had reserved a negative private opinion about my position on a matter we agree is paramount -- the ethical treatment of souls and
mortal beings in absence of any threat from them.
That opinion seemed to be based on either hasty
reading or simple disdain, without refutation,
for what I wrote. If it is not so, then I believe this note remedies my neglect for explaining better.
Regarding the Buddha Idol thing...
I am convinced that Dr. Dick and Chris Langan
are far from a compelling, comprehensive theory
of the link between consciousness and the universe
or whatever we call their topic area.
What they are doing is a discussion of the topic.
I've found that their assertions need refutation
and on both fronts, I've found either they or their defenders are not "with it."

Mike

• Thank you Mike - dolphin - September 15, 2002 - 08:36 UTC