--- In [email protected], "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > But if (perhaps an extensions of) the turq hypothesis is correct -- > > they are all stories -- and one story is as valid as another. There is > > no known truth, only various degrees of probable falseness. Richard's > > stories are thus just as valid as anyother post. Or so the (perhaps > > extended)hypothesis goes. > > > Read though a compendium of WillyTex's past posts. You'll change your > mind. On second thought, don't. Life's too short. Hopefully it's a > nice day where you live. Go out and enjoy it. >
You are missing my point. I did not say I beleive the above, I am simply applying the logic found in some posts, or extensions of it. I have no (stated) opinion to be changed by reading his past posts. I have read enough to draw my own (perhaps quite erroneous and hollow) conclusions about them -- my own "stories". And that you cannot gladly and eagerly hold in your mind the contradictions between your view of truth and Richard's implies you are like "totally not spiritual" :) (All contradictions being like really spiritual. Haven't you even read Jaiami dude!?) :)
