the L, on 09 December 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:
I joined later so I didnt see all his posts. I did go back but that miss me.Nevertheless read my post above. If you dont like conversation partner-simply ignore thread.
Hi L
It might pay to take into account that Zoser has claimed:
Roswell Rods are real enigmas, and the camera experiments you can do at home to reproduce your own "Rods" is "Sci Fi" nonsense. Apparently it is simply not "common sense" to consider shutter speeds vs wingbeat speeds, and how that is recorded on film.
People who quote textbooks have no objectivity and need to open their minds and use instinct.
Evolution and Darwinism is nonsense, and then himself quoted things like transitional fossils, which he
then claims is just ridiculous.
Insisted that Buzz Aldrin saw a possible Alien spacecraft on his way to the moon on Apollo 11. Buzz himself says he was taken out of context, and is very unhappy about it and that he never considered the debris to be anything more than Apollo 11 debris.
Insisted the Aztec UFO hoax remains unresolved and that it is more likely a real visitation, despite the confessions to the contrary.
Insisted mass hallucination is impossible, and when the Fatima event, which is a documented event was presented he claimed it was "religious" and does not apply to the ETH, why nobody knows, but really we all do.
Insisted Von Daniken and Stitichin are pioneers who do not receive enough due credit for their claims.
Just of the top of my head, but a quick search I am sure will trun up many more examples wehere known explanations have been fobbed of as "sci Fi" despite evidence presented with the explanations. As such, how can this be seen as anything more than a deliberate attempt to annoy others with deliberate lies?
the L, on 09 December 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:
And yes Im for debate. Dialogues. What else we have. To read books alone or wrote them alone. Why Socrates didnt want to wrote anything down? (Beside that he said that he doesnt know anything so why would I wrote a book, and beside he knew that Xenophon and Plato will wrote what he said)
He didnt wrote it down because he also said that you can ask book a question. So dialogues.
Me too, and with the exception of two people I find this place is indeed excellent for such.
Also, the above seems to more support the ideal of man, perhaps being bold enough to claim he does not need books. Regardless we can see why some men did not keep records.
the L, on 09 December 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:
Im sure he will understand what people have to tell him. He is now probaby confused as Hypatia was when mob wanted her blood. All tensions must disapear. I was in his skin several time on UM. And some things still see different then others in those debate. They didnt convinced me. So?
In the end he has right to choose.
I do not tink Hypatia was at all confused, she knew what the problem was, and why she was killed. And the way she died saddens my heart every-time I even think about it. I agree completely with Stephen Greenblatt who said that her murder "effectively marked the downfall of Alexandrian intellectual life". And she was beautiful as the day is long. Just nothing good about that chapter in history at all.
Do you offer a decent argument? Do you refuse valid information? If so, than I might consider that you having never been in his skin. People have give to great lengths to provide structured debate only to be told to "throw your textbook away" or That's just Sci Fi.
I mean, seriously? I feel he would not get the attention he does if not deliberately assaulting logic and fact on a constant basis.I strongly suspect it is on purpose. Right here you are showing reason and structured argument, the likes of which I am yet to see in one of those credulous claims.
Edited by psyche101, 10 December 2012 - 12:10 AM.
Maybe it isnt hard at all but it is mystery to me. And why?
