Will do!
On Aug 25, 2010 8:42 AM, "DarkwaterBlight" <[email protected]> wrote: > Chris, please email me some links to your other projects! > > On Aug 24, 4:50 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> *laughing* Indeed, sir, although I have not plugged that project here, given >> that it's not really the right venue for it. >> >> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:17 PM, ornamentalmind >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> >> >> > DamnYummy! >> >> > On Aug 24, 12:11 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > *laughing* >> >> > > +1 for you, maam. >> >> > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > yummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm >> >> > > > On Aug 24, 2:29 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > The only thing transcendent about me is my cooking. :) >> >> > > > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > > Our interior back and forth can be much like that - oppositional - >> > non >> > > > > > dual - oppositional - non dual - EGO - transcendent... >> >> > > > > > The bigger picture eventually allows us the smile. We did >> > establish >> > > > > > the fact in this group long ago that the battle of the fallacies >> > was >> > > > > > more a distraction than any real exchange of ideas. And yet, like >> > our >> > > > > > interior dialog, we fall back to it now and again. If the workings >> > of >> > > > > > the group actually are merely a reflection of our individual >> > interior >> > > > > > workings, we can all smile with this exchange, and keep hope alive >> > for >> > > > > > mutual evolution. >> >> > > > > > On Aug 24, 8:18 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > > > On 20 Aug, 22:31, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> > > >http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#weaselhttp :. >> > > > > > .. >> >> > > > > > > I can only think to respond with: >> > > > > > http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#hominem >> >> > > > > > > But, after a little more thought, I simply think you decided to >> > not >> > > > > > > think about what I wrote. Which is a bit: >> > > > > >http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#dogged >> >> > > > > > > Or, were you actually responding to me? You may have been >> > responding >> > > > > > > to DWB, in which case your response here is: >> > > > > >http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#state >> >> > > > > > > All with a big ;-) of course. >> >> > > > > > > > On Aug 20, 6:28 am, Pat <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > On 18 Aug, 20:59, ornamentalmind < [email protected] >> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > Gabby...I have and continue to listen. So far as admirable >> > as >> > > > his >> > > > > > > > > > intentions are, they fail. >> >> > > > > > > > > As long as you realise that it wasn't me who stated that “all >> > of >> > > > our >> > > > > > > > > reality must be defined mathematically”. I use mathematics >> > to >> > > > > > > > > describe those things that CAN be described by it, but I >> > wouldn't >> > > > > > know >> > > > > > > > > where to begin if you asked me for the 'formula' for such >> > > > concepts as >> > > > > > > > > 'today'. Firstly, in order to stand a chance, you'd have to >> > know >> > > > the >> > > > > > > > > full quantum state of the universe, which I've stated, time >> > and >> > > > time >> > > > > > > > > again, no human will ever have. My intentions don't fail, >> > BTW. >> > > > They >> > > > > > > > > may not 'convince' but how can my intentions 'fail'? One >> > would >> > > > have >> > > > > > > > > to be fully conversant with everything I know in order to >> > make >> > > > that >> > > > > > > > > judgement and there is no one other than myself who is so >> > > > qualified. >> > > > > > > > > So, I'm afraid that, logically, no one but ME can state, as >> > fact, >> > > > > > that >> > > > > > > > > my intentions have 'failed'. Although, almost anyone can >> > presume >> > > > it. >> > > > > > > > > But that, by definition, is presumptive, and prone to >> > failure. >> > > > ;-) >> >> > > > > > > > > > On Aug 18, 12:35 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Try to listen to what Pat is saying, orn. Cause that's >> > what >> > > > his >> > > > > > maths >> > > > > > > > > > > is all about. Bringing it from the plain inaccurate >> > flatworld >> > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > > vertical and other dimensions. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > On 18 Aug., 19:18, ornamentalmind < >> > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > As useful as math is for humans, the notion that “all >> > of >> > > > our >> > > > > > reality >> > > > > > > > > > > > must be defined mathematically” is outdated and just >> > plain >> > > > > > inaccurate >> > > > > > > > > > > > … at least based upon our current level of mathematics. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 18, 8:50 am, DarkwaterBlight < >> > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I see what you're saying here Ash and can't help but >> > > > think >> > > > > > that all of >> > > > > > > > > > > > > our reality must be defined mathematically. If I fart >> > in >> > > > a >> > > > > > public >> > > > > > > > > > > > > place and call the guy next me a nasty bastard, he'll >> > > > denie >> > > > > > that he >> > > > > > > > > > > > > passed gas. If I just shrug my shoulders and imply >> > that >> > > > I'm >> > > > > > in fact >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the nasty basard who done the deed the effect is the >> > > > same... >> > > > > > everyone >> > > > > > > > > > > > > smells my stench and I'm still the nasty bastard. If >> > you >> > > > come >> > > > > > to my >> > > > > > > > > > > > > house for dinner and lick the plate I would't think >> > any >> > > > less >> > > > > > of you >> > > > > > > > > > > > > but please excuse yourself before passing gas or you >> > will >> > > > not >> > > > > > be >> > > > > > > > > > > > > reinvited. No one wants to smell ass at the dinner >> > table. >> > > > The >> > > > > > point is >> > > > > > > > > > > > > that we each have our own formula for relationships >> > and >> > > > when >> > > > > > we >> > > > > > > > > > > > > process the information correctly the result comes >> > out >> > > > within >> > > > > > > > > > > > > reasonable tolerances. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 2:48 am, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8/9/2010 9:52 AM, Pat wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that usage is not particularly scientific >> > but >> > > > > > more >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colloquial. Deane answer, below, is more the >> > > > scientific >> > > > > > view. Also, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we must remember that "good person" couldn't >> > possibly >> > > > > > apply to those >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that are not "Homo Sapiens", yet evolution >> > applies to >> > > > ALL >> > > > > > species. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, even if I train my dog to have perfect >> > > > "Western" >> > > > > > table manners, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's still not a 'good person'--might be a great >> > dog >> > > > and >> > > > > > a helluva >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > canine, but not a good person. And, of course, >> > table >> > > > > > manners are no >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > show of evolution despite the fact that there are >> > > > people >> > > > > > who display >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them who feel that they are "a product of better >> > > > > > breeding"; whereas, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in truth, it might just be better 'training' >> > (i.e., >> > > > table >> > > > > > manners is >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > little more than 'stupid human tricks' and >> > certainly >> > > > > > doesn't >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > demonstrate whether or not a person is 'good' or >> > have >> > > > any >> > > > > > bearing on >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their evolution). As an aside to this and to >> > link >> > > > them >> > > > > > together in a >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sideways kind of way, I suppose the habit that >> > > > Englishmen >> > > > > > have of >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'holding the knife with the right hand' whether >> > or >> > > > not >> > > > > > the individual >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is using it, MAY actually BE good evolution, as >> > it >> > > > > > affords them a >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > better chance at defending themselves if attacked >> > > > whilst >> > > > > > eating!! >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this thread has covered habit, habitat and >> > now >> > > > > > habituation :), >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and I agree often walking and talking like one may >> > be a >> > > > > > sign, but then >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > what is this 'duck' anyways? >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surprise a southpaw might keep the knife in the >> > right >> > > > for >> > > > > > more practical >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > reasons, one might want to reserve the greatest >> > asset >> > > > to >> > > > > > flexible use, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in a split second how many people will drop a knife >> > for >> > > > one >> > > > > > of the >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > dozens of other effective weapons at a dinner >> > table. >> > > > Well >> > > > > > the thought >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > crossed my mind recently when I wondered why I was >> > > > cutting >> > > > > > awkwardly >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > with my right. I switched for ease but was annoyed >> > at >> > > > the >> > > > > > fact this gave >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > away tactical information. After consideration I >> > > > decided it >> > > > > > is best to >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > keep a hot cup of coffee at the table, glass >> > plates, >> > > > and >> > > > > > preferably a >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > table/chairs with wooden legs and not bolted to the >> > > > floor. >> > > > > > There's large >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > numbers of people around, all pretending to be >> > caught >> > > > up in >> > > > > > little >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > table-worlds, conspicuous consumption at it's best. >> > > > Worst >> > > > > > of all, I >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't lick my plate. :( I should stand up before >> > > > leaving >> > > > > > and do that >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > sometime just to see what it feels like, would I >> > feel >> > > > the >> > > > > > cruching >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > anxiety of people judging me or would I feel free? >> > I >> > > > could >> > > > > > think to >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > myself I feel free of judgement, while the >> > onlookers >> > > > would >> > > > > > say look what >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > society is devolving into. My secret is while most >> > > > people >> > > > > > would think >> >> ... >> >> read more »- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text -
