“Revolution in Thought: A new look at determinism and free will"

[bilby]

I contacted Clark, but he quickly cut me off and said to go to his thread and post there. He had no desire to hear what I had to say. It's so sad because the ego gets in the way people keep realizing that I am a crank with nothing useful (or even coherent) to contribute.

FTFY.

Your problems in getting your ideas accepted are not problems with other people or their egos; They are problems with your ideas, which are observably and obviously not true.

 

[bilby]

Actually, his last book was called This is An Urgent Message From a Visitor To Your Planet, because he thought it might go over better by being an alien who came to help the Earthlings.

And he was wrong about that, too, we observe.

 

[bilby]

In our present world of free will, it is not difficult to imagine what would happen if suddenly all laws, government, and forms of punishment were withdrawn. Every potential thief and even those who never thought about stealing would have a field day, and nobody would be safe. Sectarian violence would increase, causing extreme chaos and destruction. We can only begin to imagine what an aggressive country would do if there were no other powers to control the desire to spread whatever that country desired to spread. But the moment mankind understands what it means that will is not free, which prevents the very things for which government came into existence, it proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, the reality of God — this amazing mathematical power. Everything was timed so perfectly that you must catch your breath in absolute amazement when you contemplate the magnificence of this mathematical equation, which includes not only the solar system and the exquisite relationship that exists between the planets, but man himself and all the evil and ignorance that ever existed.

In our present world of free will...

OK, I agree for the sake of argument, will is presently free. What can we conclude, starting with this premise?

...will is not free,

CONTRADICTION DETECTED - LOGIC FAIL - WRITER CANNOT BE CORRECT

Oh well. That wraps up the thread then.

 

[bilby]

harsh punishment stops crime in some countries

No, it doesn't. All countries have crime, and always have had. This claim is authoritarian claptrap, and Steve should be ashamed of himself for believing it.

 

[peacegirl]

Also, remember! Boys will fall in love with girls’ sex organs only after, and not before, sexual intercourse.

Peacegirl, your writer wrote this stuff. Do you disown it? Is that why you took it out of the book?

Just be honest. Because of course you should disown it. It is insane.

It isn't insane. You just didn't understand it because you didn't read the chapters leading up to it. What he meant by that is when two people are ready to get married (in the new world, marriage is not what you think), and when the words that hurt those who fall below the standard of what is judged pretty are removed, it will be much easier to find a person who is attracted to them because the word that creates the conditioning has become obsolete. More importantly, looks become secondary when no one criticizes one's choice of a partner. He also said that romantic love will play the biggest part in finding happiness, not money, and not education. You understood nothing at all. That's what happens when you open the book in the middle to exploit it. You did this book a terrible injustice.

The basis of a sound marriage in the new world will be this physical attraction and satisfaction both experience in the presence of each other, nothing else, not money (although the possibility of marrying someone with a greater purchasing power will be somewhat of a factor but not for long, as the poor must, out of necessity, soon become materially wealthy (this will be explained in the economic chapter); education (which is another farce that came into existence out of necessity and will surprise everybody, especially those who consider themselves educated); social position, religion, race, or anything else. Physical attraction will always be the main event, and from this foundation, the greatest happiness imaginable will be in store for our posterity, which is only ourselves, as you will soon have mathematically verified.

“That I have to see! You are going to prove that I, me, am going to be born again after I die, right?”

“I didn’t say that. I said that our posterity is only ourselves, which I am prepared to prove in a mathematical manner. When you die, you are dead, but there is something we never understood, which will make you feel wonderful when it is properly explained.”

“Do you mean there is nothing to fear in death?”

“That’s right.”

“Do you also mean there is nothing to cry over when a loved person is lost?”

“Don’t be ridiculous. I cried my eyes out when I lost my father, and tears still dim my eyes when I think of him.”

“Then I’m confused about what you mean.”

The whole world is confused, so don’t feel too bad. I’ll explain everything shortly.

 

[bilby]

The whole world is confused, so don’t feel too bad. I’ll explain everything shortly.

Ah. There it is. The refrain of every cult leader and wannabe cult leader since the dawn of mankind.

 

[peacegirl]

harsh punishment stops crime in some countries

No, it doesn't. All countries have crime, and always have had. This claim is authoritarian claptrap, and Steve should be ashamed of himself for believing it.

Harsh punishment works when the consequence could be death, but it's extremely restrictive and authoritarian.

10+ Countries That Are the Toughest on Criminals

In a world where different countries adopt varied approaches to law and order, some stand out for their particularly harsh treatment of criminals. This comprehensive guide explores over ten countries renowned for being exceptionally tough on crime. The article delves into the specific laws...

www.fightnomads.com

 

[peacegirl]

The whole world is confused, so don’t feel too bad. I’ll explain everything shortly.

Ah. There it is. The refrain of every cult leader and wannabe cult leader since the dawn of mankind.

You are misinterpreting everything he says. This book has nothing to do with being a cult leader. It's about the removal of all authority figures that tell anyone what to do. You've got it all wrong, bilby.

 

[peacegirl]

Eyes do not take photographs,

Dogs can recognize their human partners by sight alone, even on videos without any smell involved, as was shown to you years ago.

Now let’s get back to “Juicy Cunt.”

STFU Pood. I will report you if you keep this up.

Peacegirl, your father wrote this stuff. Those are his exact words. I am quoting him. You took all those passages out of the book. Why? Are you ashamed of them?

I personally found them great.

Of course you found them great because you wanted to turn this major work into a sleazy, sordid piece of garbage. You wanted to hurt him in the worst way because you hate his claim regarding the senses. I hope people can see through you.

Do you want me to post the published text? It is at FF.

So don’t get on your high horse with me. I am quoting your writer’s exact words.

But his words were taken out of context, or you would never have said this.

 

[peacegirl]

Uhhh...I debunked his example of seeing lips move on the moon frmo Earth versus voice by radio.

You would see his lips move before hearing his voice on a radio.

Nope. Wrong.

Do you not know that radio is light?

I know that radio waves are light. This wouldn't be a good experiment because no one can see astronauts that close where they could see their lips move. It was another hypothetical example.

If you are watching the Moon you see its position as it was about three seconds in the past.

Why are you repeating the very thing being disputed?

Cuz it is correct.

That's a non-answer.

Over three sends it takes reflected Sunlight to reach the Earth the Earth has rotated, the Moon has moved in its orbit, and the Earth has moved in its orbit.

Any objections?

If the image is not in the light, it doesn't matter if the Earth has rotated, or the Moon has moved in its orbit, because we are not seeing a delayed image in the light (if he is right).

Nobody ever said the “image is in the light.” This has been explained to you uncountable numbers of times.

I have explained countless times that the light is not bringing the image (the object's reflection) to the retina through space/time. There is no other way to explain the concept without using the word "image," or "lightwave," which anyone would understand if they wanted to.

 

[peacegirl]

Peacegirl, did your author not say that boys will fall in love with the sex organs of girls?

I already explained this.

Did he not say that 98 percent of all homosexuality is due to boys lacking access to girls?

No, he didn't say that. He just said environmental conditions could cause someone to become homosexual. Maybe they were hurt by a woman. I know some women who turned gay because of a bad marriage. He didn't mean anything by it, but of course you twisted what he said to make him look homophobic, which isn't true at all. I have gay family members.

Think further about this immense wisdom (these invariable laws of God). At the very moment it is revealed what love actually is… nothing other than a strong desire for sexual satisfaction (as if we really didn’t know), we are prevented from having more than one sexual partner all through life, while being allowed to fall in love with any number of people who could satisfy this passion, just by making us aware of what it means that our eyes are not a sense organ and that man’s will is not free. This entire knowledge compels a couple, when they realize that no more favors will ever be asked, to ask: ‘Honey, is there anything I can do for you?’ And the other, not wishing to take advantage of such a generous offer because to do so would not be an advantage, since this would not reveal their love, replies, in 99% of the cases, ‘No thank you,’ which means that this question never needs to be asked. If either one has something that cannot be done alone (excluding sex), they would simply request the assistance of the other, who would never object because no advantage was being taken. This would be the one percent.”

“This whole thing is simply fantastic, incredible!”

“I agree, Charlie, but what about the marriages that are already here? And what about homosexuals?”

“In a relatively short period of time, only the new marriages will be in existence. As for homosexuals, they are free to find a partner without blame. This is their business. However, all homosexuals that came into existence as a result of environmental conditions, not inherited or glandular, will be compelled to fall by the wayside — in due time.”

 

[pood]

I contacted Clark, but he quickly cut me off and said to go to his thread and post there. He had no desire to hear what I had to say. It's so sad because the ego gets in the way people keep realizing that I am a crank with nothing useful (or even coherent) to contribute.

FTFY.

Your problems in getting your ideas accepted are not problems with other people or their egos; They are problems with your ideas, which are observably and obviously not true.

Well, in this case, to be fair, Clark actually does claim that when we die we are born again as other people (though nothing like a soul reincarnates), and this is also what peacegirl’s author says. It was his “third discovery,” and it predated Clark.

So I would have thought Clark would have been interested in Lessan’s “third discovery.”

 

[pood]

Here is Clark’s essay at naturalism.org:

Death, Nothingness, and Subjectivity

Maybe someone else can read it and tell my why I should take it seriously.

IMO it runs off the rails in the fifth paragraph and never gets back on the rails. I think it’s easy to identify the error in the fifth graph.

As I have previously noted, I do take (somewhat, provisionally) seriously Nietzsche’s eternal recurrence, because if the block universe model is correct, it may imply (even entail?) eternal recurrence.

 

[steve_bank]

Pg

Not hypothetical you are making apologetics for the book. Expanding away the rblms.

If the Moon face voice claim is hypothetical what is not hypothetical in the book?

The image in that light is modified by reflection off an object is formed at the object.

'The light wave of the object' has no meaning. If I said the fritzenkoffer carries image to the eye you would ask what does that mean, right?.

Do you now understand that when you see an object as an image it is an image of the state of an object in what is to you is the past?

Yes or no.

'The image is in the light is semantics', the trouble with words and philosophical explanations for physical reality.

Geometric optics is ray tracing, a lot of work is doe with it. Physical optics explains how light interacts with objects by solving Maxwell's Equations. How light interacts with and passes through a lens. I have a general overview, I am familiar with geometric optics.

 

[DBT]

If people are born and die, how is being born as someone else any different? The someone else who is born can't remember being you in another life, you have no knowledge of being someone else before you were born, so where is the connection? How is it any different to 'people are born and die?'

 

[pood]

If people are born and die, how is being born as someone else any different? The someone else who is born can't remember being you in another life, you have no knowledge of being someone else before you were born, so where is the connection? How is it any different to 'people are born and die?'

It isn’t. That’s the point.

So maybe someone can explain what the hell Clark is on about. Maybe I missed something.

 

[peacegirl]

Pg
Objects reflect light, but not in the way you think. Light travels, there is no argument here, but if the eyes are a sense organ, they don't see the past. They see the present.

This gets into relativity. When you hear a distant gunshot, the sound of the gunshot to him is gone wen you hear it. When you hear the gunshot the bullet has left the gun barrel.

I understand that.

F0r a supersonic rifle bullet you may hear the bullet whiz past your ear before you hear the gunshot.

Makes sense.

A car is going down the road at 60 mph and honks the horn. By the time you hear it the car is not in the potion it was when the horn sounded. To the driver the sound of the horn is in the past, to you it is the present when you hear it.

Of course, because the car is driving at 60 mph. so obviously the car is not in the same position it was when the horn sounded.

Someone the Moon pulses a high power visible laser. When yiu see the flash on Eartyh te Moon is not in the same position it was when the laser flashed.

Here, you are assuming an image of the moon is what we see, so of course the position would not be the same if that were true, but I disagree. I do agree that we can learn a lot using high-powered lasers.

Likewise when we see light from a distant star we see the star as it was was in the past as we perceive it.

Yes, this is the present theory.

We are observing a star and it explodes going supernova. By the time we see it the event event has cone and gone.

Not if we see in real time.

When we look at the Sun though a telescope we constant changes. When a flare occurs we see it minutes later, we see the sun as it was minuted in the past for us.

Solar flares are hard to see, even with telescopes. This phenomenon does not prove that we see in delayed time.

Observing solar flares with a telescope is not hard, but it requires careful preparation and the use of the right equipment. Solar telescopes are specially designed to allow for safe observation of the Sun, providing stunning views while protecting your eyesight. These telescopes come equipped with filters and other safety features to protect the observer from harmful solar radiation.
cosmobc.com
To observe solar flares, you will need a telescope with a hydrogen-alpha filter, which allows you to see the chromosphere, the part of the Sun directly above the surface. This filter filters out all light except for a narrow band of red light at the hydrogen-alpha wavelength (656.3 nm), revealing solar prominences, filaments, and flares.
cosmobc.com
While observing solar flares, it is important to remember that the Sun's intense light and heat, as well as its harmful ultraviolet and infrared radiation, can be a serious hazard to your eyes and your skin. Therefore, it is crucial to use specialized equipment to protect your eyes when observing the Sun.
Sky & Telescope
In summary, while it may not be easy to see solar flares on the Sun using a telescope, with the right equipment and precautions, it is possible to observe these dynamic solar activities safely.
cosmobc.com
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=e389...wcm9taW5lbmNlcy1maWxhbWVudHMtZmxhcmVzLw&ntb=1

Then there is tie dilation. For people on space station and on Earth clocks run at different speeds. The inference being people age at different rates.

Time dilation is experimentally deom0stred with clocks. GPS does not work without compensating for time dilation.

Time dilation is the phenomenon where time passes at different rates for observers depending on their relative motion or position in a gravitational field, but some claim time dilation in relativity is a fallacy.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385203341_The_Fallacy_of_Time_Dilation_in_Relativity

Past and present are relative to the inertial frame of the observers.

The Earth and the Moon are different inertial frames. From theory and experiment the speed of light is the same in any inertial frame.

My point was visible light LIDAR and radio wave RADAR are the same phenomena. Radio waves and light waves are the same phenomena, act the same, and travel at the same speed.

So, the author's claim that if we see someone talking on the Moon through a telescope we see lips moving instantly before w hear vice sent by radio is false,.

There is no proof because telescopes are not powerful enough to see this kind of detail.

In the day Einstein's relativity showing space-tie was not constant and immutable was revolutionary and Earth shattering in both science and philosophy. He had rock star status.

There are individuals who say they got time dilation wrong.

When he worked on it he was not part of the academic community, his ideas were considered initially as too far out.

I'm sure it made it harder for him.

 

[peacegirl]

FOOD, FUN, LIFESTYLES

Efferent, or Instantaneous, Cooking Poised to Bring World Peace

IIDB (Internet News Service) — Linda Billingsly is a perky, effervescent mousewife and mother of 11 (Catholic) who each morning must get her brood of rug rats fed and kicked out the door in time for school. Yet it’s no problem at all.

What’s her secret?

”Efferent, or instantaneous, cooking,” she explains with a perky smile.

She throws some eggs and bacon and other crap onto the stove and voila! We eat! The crap is cooked, with no time delay.

She then serves the swill to her brood of mewling miscreants.

“People assume that afferent cooking is true, that it takes time to cook shit,” Linda explains with a perky smile. “They assume this because that is what they have been taught by sacred science, and they can’t stand to have their precious world view challenged, even though it would save them ever so much time to cook efferently and get the brats out the fucking door.”

“Mahh!” one of the brats bellows, “this crap ain’t cooked! What the actual fuck, Ma?”

“Shut up!” Linda snaps with a brittle yet somehow still perky smile.

Linda says that when leading cooks and chefs examine efferent cooking and confirm the truth of it, world peace will ensue, because everyone will be fed instantly and therefore be content.

Meantime, Linda is switching to birth control.

I have to say, that was funny!

 

[peacegirl]

There is a human being with feelings behind the posts, that is good to know.

And cumming full circle, what are the basic concepts? How in practice does determinism change the world?

By the way, low carb tomato soup is easy. Mix cans of plain tomato sauce and stewed tomatoes. Season with curry, garlic powder, and cumin. Add vegetables.

I wish people would let me explain by going over the first three chapters with you all. But no one listened before, so why would they listen now?

 

[Politesse]

I wish I would stop reading this thread, but somehow it just keeps drawing me back in..