Fair enough, I retract "repeatedly posted links to his personal website"... 

I guess, in my mind, it just seemed like you repeatedly posted links to 
your website, because it always seems like you end up talking about 
yourself and your book, and not about the ideas you have, and when you do 
talk about the ideas you have, you provide such flimsy justifications for 
them and they are repeatedly and decisively refuted by people on this list, 
but you don't ever seem to acknowledge this or engage debate honestly or in 
good faith. 

So, ya, it only seemed like you posted to your personal blog repeatedly 
because you do very frequently talk about yourself and how your ideas are 
so very important, all the while failing to engage the many (very 
justified) criticisms of them on their own terms, and also frequently 
resorting to calling people dumb or stupid for not "getting" what you are 
saying, all the while receiving what appears to me to be very compassionate 
and patient explanations of why your ideas are either a) irrelevant (i.e. 
they don't solve any problems or anomalies that GR and SR can't already 
handle or b) provably wrong (i.e. the assumption of absolute simultaneity). 


On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:48:09 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
> Dan,
> First, thanks for the apology which I gratefully accept.
> However you have your facts completely wrong.
> It was NOT ME that posted a link to my personal blog, not a single one. It 
> was Terren that did that as I recall, but it most certainly was NOT ME. 
> I did post a SINGLE link to my company site later in response to questions 
> why I was late in responding to some posts what I was busy doing...(Liz and 
> others criticized my lack of immediate response on several occasions but I 
> at least do have a real life apart from this group!)
> So your claim that "Edgar REPEATEDLY posted links to both his business and 
> personal website" is simply FALSE. I posted only one link period.
> Edgar
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:20:29 PM UTC-5, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
>> Hey everyone,
>> I'm starting a new topic here so as not to derail any conversations on 
>> other threads -- the original thread I am commenting on seems to have some 
>> interesting stuff about computer simulations etc. and I don't want to 
>> bother others about it. 
>> Edgar has repeatedly posted links to both his business and personal 
>> website, and his "life companion" request is there right on the front page, 
>> so I'm not sure how that constitutes snooping. 
>> For Edgar, if it is true that you did lose your wife to cancer recently, 
>> I am very sorry for your loss. My father died of cancer when I was young, 
>> and I lost a close friend last Christmas to cancer as well, so I know how 
>> that feels. 
>> Just digging down to nuts and bolts for a second, though, for those 
>> members on the list that subscribe to some version of "Everything Theory," 
>> (Bruno's UD, various forms of "computer simulation universe," Craig's 
>> multisense realism), I'd like to ask a serious and honest question in good 
>> faith: what is the place of grief and mourning given belief in one of these 
>> theories? Is it even appropriate to grieve in a universe where "Everything 
>> exists" and the self is simply a computation on a deeper eternal substrate 
>> and where time is an illusion? Indeed, isn't the whole humanistic, 
>> existentialist "point" of these theories to offer us a bit of succor in the 
>> face of inevitable death? 
>> That is why I am interested in this stuff -- not simply for the 
>> intellectual fun and games of it all, but because I am truly terrified of 
>> oblivion and of losing everything I love to that oblivion, and yet 
>> everything in my observed world tells me that when we die, we are basically 
>> "broken machines" and our world completely and permanently disappears for 
>> us. That is why I desperately want to be convinced of any of the Everything 
>> theories that are discussed here, although I admit that the degree to which 
>> any of them offer any comfort at all is relative to how one is able to 
>> interpret the consequences of such theories to find a place for your 
>> personality in "the Everything." 
>>  I didn't think pasting quite publicly available text from Edgar's 
>> website constitutes a "personal attack." Edgar seems quite happy to keep 
>> that information up on the web for anyone to see, so I hardly think it 
>> constitutes snooping to cite it in a different forum. And my original 
>> observation that I could understand why he was alone was motivated by his 
>> continued truculence and seeming inability to incorporate and respond to 
>> the many pieces of feedback he had been given about his "theory"... I 
>> wouldn't want to be around somebody in real life who demonstrated such 
>> regular and fatuous disregard for what I was saying. 
>> So, just to sum up, I apologize, Edgar, for any pain that my copying and 
>> pasting of the text on your website caused you, and I apologize for 
>> suggesting that the reason you are alone is because you are probably a 
>> difficult person to live with in real life. I don't know anything about you 
>> in real life (aside from what you've put on your website, assuming it is 
>> all true), and I realize that this forum is not the place to engage in 
>> personal attacks. 
>> I'll be more thoughtful in the future. 
>> Best regards,
>> Dan Menon

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to