Chapter 8
From Kitten
Mon Jan 05, 2004 10:31 pm:
I think analog is right, Alpha=Omega, and David needs a lesson in
logic. Maybe we should give him a lesson in logistics guys, but he
does seem to be a lost cause. *turns to David* If you need such a
lesson, you only need to ask, and any one of us could post such a
lesson. I believe it was my lesson to pre-adolescent children on this
very subject, on bookrags.com, which caught Coyote’s attention.
*laughs*
“To pronounce the consequent of a true
conditional as being true or false indifferently is tantamount to
saying modally that where the antecedent of a true conditional is
notoriously false, then the consequent can, or could be, or is,
possibly true or false.” Think about what he’s saying
here David, think it over carefully…and write more than "well
put."
Maddox, yes he is a brilliant man. I saw him speak
at McGill two years ago about the direction of science, and where
it’s leading us. However, as to the list...I see one chemist,
one biologist…*looks* a geneticist, a physiologist, and the
rest are physicists. Honestly, this answer was given to a question at
the lecture I attended: “If you had to choose your personal
favourites, out of all available scientists, who would they be?”
Hmmm…a little different than the question you claimed he
answered. And you said previously that he “was asked to list
what he thought was the top 50 scientists,” back-track some
more Dave…
Truly women are not as appreciated in
science as they should be, and there have, as you said, been
notoriously few in the field.
“The list by Maddox
indicates that the woman's movement has failed thus far to produce
female scientific geniuses of any note,” HELLO!?: Rosalyn
Sussman, Christiane Nusslein-Volhard, Marie Curie, Ada Byron
Lovelace, Maud Menton, Sophie Germain, Florence Allen, Maria Goeppert
Mayer, Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin, Gertrude Elion…did you miss
them the last time David? Because there they are in print again…look
them up, you can find most of them in books describing women who won
the Nobel Prize for science or math!!!
“I compared my
dispassionate attitude towards dogs with my dispassionate attitude
towards women.” *shakes her head* you’re an idiot!
Personally, I’d like to see you answer with some accuracy
on what Avalon is saying without quoting another, or cutting and
pasting from someone else’s website. He’s suggesting a
logical conversation on the topic you desire to speak so gallantly
of! Perhaps you, a male, know little of logic, math, or science?
*giggles*
Lastly:
Get the fuck off our site…to
which you posted a reply,
No REALLY, shut up and get the fuck off
our site…to which you replied again…
One more time,
extended version:
You are an egotistically dense, (that means in
simple terms: neurologically equivalent to a flea), pitiful excuse
for a human being…not pitiful excuse for a man, but the entire
human race David.
Shut up, go home to mommy, and never come
back…or do us the favour and jump off a cliff. *rolls her
eyes* I’m not wasting time on this anymore, I said what I need
to say under an entire post dedicated to your flawed person, you can
find it under “Politics,” I’m going to bed…so
enjoy the last word. Quite frankly I don’t care, and I refuse
to respond to a person with obvious stunted emotional, spiritual, and
mental growth…and that says a lot coming from a 19 year old.
So, does it hurt to get beat up by a girl? *laughs* Let’s
compare cock size, I bet mine’s bigger than yours! *cracks up*
You're a moron.
Get the fuck off our site.
*grins*
From Andrew Beckwith
Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:00 am:
David,
I will put a challenge to you right here. I have
toured your Genius site extensively. Now, I will propose the
following:
Make me a contributor to that site for a one
week period. IF you are not afraid of debate there, I will gladly
turn that place upside down. And at the least I will help you cease
putting up such abortions as what you did below. I doubt you could
stand it. Coyote is a brilliant man but he does not have my devil
take care credo and my willingness to go for broke. Warning, if
you take me up on this, I will blow the joint apart. I am
QUITE capable of it, too. You have never seen me in action in a flame
war. I am quite restrained in High IQ land sites. It is quite another
matter when I let my inner ape show and go wild.
|
Quote: |
|
I couldn't agree more. Very well put. |
As I said, David, you really outdid yourself today. You blindly
agreed to Russell when if you read what he said, it demolished you.
Gads, this is getting WEIRD.
And, I have been though
discussions about Feminine contributions to science already in other
lists I am part of. You support science in THIS situation in order to
put Kelly down, but you also TRASH the importance of Science itself.
|
Quote: |
|
And when you consider that scientific genius is actually a far weaker and more diluted form of genius than philosophical genius, it also illustrates just how far away women are from enlightenment. |
Yeah, right. And how is it, Mastermind, that Einsteins relativity had
more oomph in terms of re adjustment of BASIC dermininistic
philosophical crack pot thesis's like yours than any counter veiling
ranting by a bogus 'philosopher' like yourself ? You really screwed
up, David.
David, you cannot win. Saying something is so when
people need to sleep will not preforce dominate what is said in a
journal abstract. Remember, David, it is not the person who talks the
loudest or who stays up all hours of the night as you do to shout
down others in a cult style who is remembered for posterity. I had my
encounter with Moonies and It is really easy for me to predict what
you will do .
1) Write realms of nonsense so as to tire out
opponets
2) When put with your back against the wall, tepidly
agree to what you think an ally says, even if it demolishes your
premises
3) Use false analogies in order to tie up debaters
with trivial details in order to go to :
4) The big
lie to wow the masses, which you ironically openly despise.
Joseph
Gobbels and Joe McCarthy used these four principles , David. Relax
though, you are neither of these two historical examples. You are
merely pathetic.
Your buddy, Drowden, put in the following
rant in on your misnamed 'genius' site
|
Quote: |
|
The feminine/masculine debate is all about consciousness. The
path to enlightenment is explicity about heightening of
consciousness. The feminine dimension of mind represents the
unconscious part of ourselves - the spontaneous, the immediate
and emotional, the unreflective. The fact of it being a barrier
to the pursuit and attainment of enlightenment seems prima facie
obvious to me. |
And, my wife who works in Proton source in Fermi laboratory will
laugh at your sites sorry tautological put down of women. Sorry ,
David, but she is both feminine and also ON THE FRONT LINES creating
something very new and vital.
And, now what about your reply
in your sites Genius forum thread "I dare you "? :
|
Quote: |
|
Basically, you make the mistake confusing the flowy, all-over-the-place consciousness found in very feminine people with the freedom and non-duality of enlightenment. You haven't conquered your ignorance via profound reasoning. Instead, you've cunningly developed a habit of evading it by reducing your consciousness to that of a feminine person. By plunging yourself into extreme changeability and inconsistency you are able to succeed in driving all awareness of your ignorance out of your mind, together with its attendent sufferings. But alas, the ignorance can still be perceived by others |
Oh, so all fault comes from the feminine side of life ? Yeah,
rocket scientist! This is great.
You are hopeless. Get a life.
You need it. If you have any guts, let me see if I can , with Coyote,
kick a little LIFE into your site. If not, well then we know what
closed minds can do . Sensory deprivation makes people go insane you
know.
From analog57
Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:11 am:
|
Andrew Beckwith wrote: |
|
Warning, if you take me up on this, I will blow the joint apart. I am QUITE capable of it, too. |
I agree, yes, Dr. Beckwith has the talent and the knowledge, to
back it up...
From Andrew Beckwith
Tue Jan 06, 2004 7:25 am:
Lets do it together, Russell. Make it a JOINT proposition to David and see if the coward is man enough to allow a bit of non standard thinking to come to the fore.
From analog57
Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:28 am:
If your goal is to "change minds" at the genius forum, it
could be a very difficult task Dr. Beckwith.
But your, and
others, exposition of the dangers of tautological thinking has been
very helpful, to me at least.
|
David Quinn wrote: |
|
I regard most of you to be quite, quite mad. And no doubt, in turn, most of you will come to see me as an ignorant simpleton. |
Is this prophesy coming true?
David, I salute you...
Diversity is the rule, not the exception... Genius is more than
inventing "ultimate truths"
From Andrew Beckwith
Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:37 am:
Let him have his delusions, Russell. Madness is ALWAYS in the eyes of the beholder.
From analog57
Tue Jan 06, 2004 8:47 am:
The world views a person as being "mad" and the person views the world as the same. Relativity, though not in the Einsteinian sense
From Andrew Beckwith
Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:00 am:
Damn right, Russell. This is right on the money.
From M
Tue Jan 06, 2004 11:00 am:
|
analog57 wrote: |
|
The world views a person as being "mad" and the person views the world as the same. Relativity, though not in the Einsteinian sense |
I see most as insane. Better word is irrational. Perhaps more
than a matter of uncontrollable emotions...let's not enter into
gender inequality debates.
From David Quinn
Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:46 pm:
Andrew Beckwith wrote:
|
Quote: |
|
David, |
I'm not interested in having a flame war with you. A
down-to-earth rational discussion with a fellow human being would do
me.
You are welcome onto the Genius Forum, but I should warn
you that any attempt to sabotage it with realms of mindless rantings
won't be tolerated for every long.
|
Quote: |
|
DQ: I couldn't agree more. Very well put. |
You're forgetting that my quotes from Sir Humphery Appleby
answered his points with remarkable lucidity.
|
Quote: |
|
You support science in THIS situation in order to put Kelly down, but you also TRASH the importance of Science itself. |
It's all relative. Science probably requires a bit more genius
than, say, born-again Christianity, at least in its higher echelons,
but it is nothing compared to the levels of genius that are requird
for top-level philosophical work.
Richard Dawkins is a great
genius compared to a Billy Graham, but a mere insect compared to a
Chuang Tzu or a Soren Kierkegaard.
|
Quote: |
|
DQ: And when you consider that scientific genius is actually a
far weaker and more diluted form of genius than philosophical
genius, it also illustrates just how far away women are from
enlightenment. |
Einstein's work made no impact at all on philosophy. Not
even a little bit. You're dreaming if you think that a scientist can
make any contribution or dent to the philosophical knowledge of a
wise man.
A Buddha looks upon the theorizing of scientists as
he does upon the chirpings of grasshoppers - with laughter and kindly
benevolence.
|
Quote: |
|
David, you cannot win. Saying something is so when people need to sleep will not preforce dominate what is said in a journal abstract. Remember, David, it is not the person who talks the loudest or who stays up all hours of the night as you do to shout down others in a cult style who is remembered for posterity. |
I'm sure it doesn't require a massive IQ to work out that, living
in Australia, my time zone is very different to yours.
In any
case, you could always wait untill morning before reading my posts.
They won't run away.
|
Quote: |
|
And, my wife who works in Proton source in Fermi laboratory will laugh at your sites sorry tautological put down of women. Sorry , David, but she is both feminine and also ON THE FRONT LINES creating something very new and vital. |
Good for her. I've already acknowledged that women can be
compentent scientists and can even make significant breakthroughs on
occasion. They'll never reach the heights of genius, though, not
without significant genetic modification.
From Kitten
Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:59 pm:
*walks into the library to grab a book off the shelf, and overhears the comment* *mumbles: You refuse to get into a cock fight with anyone, for obvious reasons* *Finds the book and passes the group to head into the math forum* *whispers to Andy: "I can think of at least one person in this room needing gene therapy" *giggles* "and a cock transplant."* *Andy whispers something about him not needing gene therapy but a lobotomy, and she giggles* *exits the room, then pokes her head back in* "Oh and Andy, don't forget to mention that we don't put up with mindless rantings either...which is why he was asked to leave politely, then bluntly, then slowly, then had it spelt out on a chalkboard for his benifit! *sighs* And, he still cannot get it through his head! *she laughs and closes the door*
From Andrew Beckwith
Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:08 pm:
|
Quote: |
|
You are welcome onto the Genius Forum, but I should warn you that any attempt to sabotage it with realms of mindless rantings won't be tolerated for every long. |
I don't rant. I tell the truth. That will serve my purposes .
Nothing else needs to be done.
End of Chapter 8