Dr Dick wrote:
"Thus you display exactly the bias I complained about when I said,"

Hi Dr. Dick. I greatly respect your ability to
write about physics (even if some of what you write is not confirmed by others) and to some extent, your observations about human psychology.

Still, I cannot take you seriously on the topic
above when you are using no scientific procedure.
The terms "display," "exactly," and "bias" suggest methodology but there is nothing to back
up the suggestion.

Dr. Dick wrote:
"I do not believe you have any concept of exactly how much you allow your mind to run the same way as your body runs.

What part does "believe" play in your
science? Why should I care what you believe
about a subject, my mind, about which you have
very little knowledge?

Dr. Dick:
"You underestimate the abilities of your subconscious so much as to paint the idea as insignificant."

I do "believe" in the phenomenon you describe.
It is an important idea. It is a caution to me,
and very useful. I am indeed an organic being with the same general wiring as other mammals
-- with sometimes the ability to simply compute
rather than only be self-seeking.
It is perhaps not entirely a coincidence that
the super-robot in the movie "Alien" was named "Bishop.
Btw, how do you know what my estimate is, concerning that matter? If you do not know my
estimate, how can you say I underestimate?

Cordillarianally,
Mike

• Most of what I said is only opinion! - doctordick - April 25, 2003 - 18:12 UTC
  • How about? - harvey1 - April 25, 2003 - 18:26 UTC
  • And rather foolish, too, if you refuse to refine it with science - something - April 25, 2003 - 21:02 UTC