We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air is g

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:10 pm

Is your thinking on H2O rigorously reductive and explicit? Or is is vague, evasive, harboring invisible assumptions?

Answer the freekin question or kindly go away.

Are you making an honest attempt to understand water based on the evidence? Or are you fitting observation to what you and others have already assumed? Both of you (Seasick and Bin-Ra) along with Pollack and many others who have dabbled in water theory (ie. structure of bulk water) believe yourselves among the latter, but you are all among the former in my estimation. Inability to comprehend (and/or stubborness to put in the extra work necessary to comprehend) the extreme variability of the force of H2O polarity--itself an artifact of incidental symmetry that is associated with hydrogen bonding (see link below)--is the reason you are all so confused.

It is the extreme variability of the H2O molecule's polar forces that makes bonding between water molecules uniquely different from any other form of bonding. Hydrogen bonding between water molecules is categorically different from either covalent bonding or ionic bonding in that these bond have no variability. And hydrogen bonding between water molecules is relatively different from other forms of hydrogen bonding in that only in H2O can hydrogen bonds reduce polarity all the way to zero. Unless and until all of you accept this you cannot really understand water and its anomalies. All you can do is pretend you understand water and pretend not to notice the anomalies.

Moreover, unless and until you understand the quantum mechanical factors (symmetry and incidental symmetry) that cause H2O polarity to be highly variable you have zero chance of reconciling the mysteries of H2O evidenced in its numerous (over 70 at last count) anomalies. Instead you will continue to make the error of submitting your thinking to the widespread and highly seductive superstition that water is simple and well understood.

clip

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes[/quote]

I can feel what you are saying James. You are welcome to your private war.
Is anyone else involved or just your own shadows?

What the F is your problem. If you can't carry on a normal conversation then don't respond.

"Water is simple and well understood?"

You are attributing this to me???!!! Surreal. I'm saying the opposite. Water is complex and poorly understood.

You said that but do you get that from what is being said here?

I do not say this. Pay attention to the context.

Feeling denied of your dues can make a man bitter and mean hearted.

Piss off you whiny simpleton. If you don't want to discuss the subject then don't respond.

If you truly believe what you have is worth sharing - treat those you want to share it with, with respect for their worthiness to learn it and in ways that invite rather than dictate, belittle and set yourself above everyone else.

LOL. You fool. All I did was make a statement. You interpretted it with your heart on your sleeve. Go find another hobby you simple soul.

The greatest ignorance is not those who don't know but those who believe they already know. They do not even look, let alone question. that is the nature of the 'matrix' of a mind-managed world.

Just because what we disagree

Do we? How so. Do you even have a point?

with or oppose is plain wrong in our sight - does not make us right.
But that temptation is the wish to be right over the willingness for truth.

In calling (smearing) Pollack a 'dabbler' - you have lost my interest.

Too bad. Pollack's thinking is vague, convoluted and, in some cases, plainly fictional.

"Structure of bulk water";
Why presume to criticise what you reveal yourself to not be acquainted with?

I'm an expert in the subject. You are vague and convoluted. You got nothing but hurt feelings to add to this discussion.

You haven't studied his experimentally tested and verified work.

Don't come here an attack me in a thread I started. Do you have a point or are you just here to whine?

Whatever his 'theory' his observations are reproducible and relevant, including every way he and his team could imagine trying to prove it wrong.

Feel free to make a detailed argument to that effect (fat chance that).

Self-specialness is in everyones toolkit - but that doesn't mean its true - but it can mean you have a special part to play as has everyone else theirs. Putting others down does you a disservice.

Good learners make good teachers.
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby Bin-Ra » Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:30 am

James, I do not accept your framing for my own thought.
That is not a real question at all - but a trick 'question' that asks nothing but only 'tells' the fool who enters its framing that you dictate terms in which an 'answer' can be accepted.

I write into the theme of the thread of everyone's interest and their freedom.
I respect your and everyone's right to open a thread, and others to contribute as they are moved.
But to open it is not to own it.
"You have not, because you ask not".

Pollack's thinking is matched with demonstrable experimental results.
He is also honouring to his readership and larger community.
I again recommend his books AND his attitude.

Your thinking is couched in ad hom rant - regardless whether there is a baby in the bathwater.
I simply don't engage with that which is hateful in intent, but I am willing to engage with hateful or emotionally charged content as a shared willingness to restore communication.

I hold this to be a true and fair feedback to your decision to engage combat instead of open communication.

The vibrational or energetic context of any situation is that which truly informs it - and not asserted or stuck-on meanings, identified in or against.

Who can discern the true nature of any situation while demanding it fit their self-imaged concept and reality?
You have your reward, (result), but do not recognize your framing in 'invisible assumptions'.

If you have dedication and devotion to a field of interest and endeavour than you may be entitled to mine. But as a self-crowned expert you simply attempt to pull rank and bully the uninitiated.

Are you not barking up the wrong tree?

I have specific meaning and intention in the words and phrasing I choose - regardless 'norms' of behaviour in your mind or group-thought. I didn't fully spell out where I felt you could recognize by context.

It was you who wrote:
"Instead you will continue to make the error of submitting your thinking to the widespread and highly seductive superstition that water is simple and well understood".

You could see I agreed with the core nature of your insight when I said that the deepest ignorance is the belief we already know - because then we do not even look, relate or engage in anything but a model usurping the true.

Life in personae is tragi-comic. I don't laugh at you - but in releasing the masking errors, we may laugh together at what seemed and was taken as real but was mistaken. Not at the living.

Different approaches can align in unified purpose.
Seeing them as rivals, threats, lack of support, rejection, adversity, unworthiness etc is not a result of unifying purpose. So when conflicted results come in, use that as an alarm to revisit purpose - instead of running on forms of past association with right or power or life or truth.

Truth is recognised in stillness. But substitutes can spin a mind without ever pausing to check in.
Bin-Ra
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:20 am

Bin-Ra:
James, I do not accept your framing for my own thought.
That is not a real question at all - but a trick 'question' that asks nothing but only 'tells' the fool who enters its framing that you dictate terms in which an 'answer' can be accepted.

James McGinn:
I don't accept your vague, whishy-whashy approach to discussion. This is the same problem I have swith Pollack. He is a scattered thinker who refuses to be reductive, rigorous, and specific, just like you.

Bin-Ra:
I write into the theme of the thread of everyone's interest and their freedom.

James McGinn:
Who cares. Answer the questions I ask or kindly go away. Convoluted thinkers are not welcome in the threads I start.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
https://www.quora.com/Do-the-anomalies- ... udius-Denk
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby Bin-Ra » Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:41 am

I don't deny your freedom to ask questions, that I don't accept as genuine desire for answer so much as for argument - and on your terms.
Neither do I accept denial of my freedom to share into a forum that is multidisciplinary in scope when I do so respectfully to the topic you invited. We are in full agreement that the nature of water is erroneously presumed by almost everyone to be simple and well understood. Perhaps you erroneously believed I was asserting otherwise - but then there are these 'invisible assumptions' that are much more systemically pervasive than the nature and role of water in a living Universe.

I have nothing further to say to you that has not already been said. Persisting in futility is ... futile.
So anything else I write here will not be addressed to you personally unless I specifically state by name.

You have made your position clear and I am glad to have helped clarify your thinking by your willingness to restate it over and again.
Bin-Ra
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby nick c » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:11 am

Note:
Forum Rules and Guidelines:
Personal or ad hominem attacks will not be tolerated, under any circumstances. If you disagree with something which has been posted, address the post, not the poster.

Put another way, if you disagree with an idea presented, attack the idea. There is no need to insult or attack the integrity or intellectual abilities of the poster.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2464
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:21 pm

Bin-Ra wrote:I don't deny your freedom to ask questions, that I don't accept as genuine desire for answer so much as for argument - and on your terms.
Neither do I accept denial of my freedom to share into a forum that is multidisciplinary in scope when I do so respectfully to the topic you invited. We are in full agreement that the nature of water is erroneously presumed by almost everyone to be simple and well understood. Perhaps you erroneously believed I was asserting otherwise - but then there are these 'invisible assumptions' that are much more systemically pervasive than the nature and role of water in a living Universe.

I have nothing further to say to you that has not already been said. Persisting in futility is ... futile.
So anything else I write here will not be addressed to you personally unless I specifically state by name.

You have made your position clear and I am glad to have helped clarify your thinking by your willingness to restate it over and again.


Your own thinking is so convoluted that you don't understand the significance of what I am asserting. And that is frustrating. (BTW, this is the same problem I have with Pollack. His thinking is too convoluted. We will never know where he stands on such issues as the anomalies of H2O because his thinking is so convoluted that he himself doesn't know where he stands.)

I asserted the following:
1) The current paradigm erronieously assumes that the polarity of the H2O molecule is static (fixed) and therefore the polar force that is associated with hydrogen bonding between H2O molecules is constant.
2) This erroneous assumption is the reason what there are upwards of 70 observations that are inexplicable by the current paradigm. These observations are generally referrred to as the "anomalies" of H2O.
3) Because of incidental symmetry (my discovery--see my videos for details) the polarity of the H2O molecule is highly variable. With the inclusion of variable polarity, as I explicated in my videos and many posts, the anomalies of H2O hare easily resolved.

If you have an argument or opinion in regard to 1, 2 or 3 above then please present it. If not then kindly go away.

Fair enough?

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
International Skeptics Fail to Dispute "Paulings Omission"
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17185
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby Bin-Ra » Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:24 pm

nick c wrote:Note:
Forum Rules and Guidelines:
Personal or ad hominem attacks will not be tolerated, under any circumstances. If you disagree with something which has been posted, address the post, not the poster.

Put another way, if you disagree with an idea presented, attack the idea. There is no need to insult or attack the integrity or intellectual abilities of the poster.


Not only is it needless - but works against communication like noise to a signal - where the temptation or habit can be to join the noise. I feel fine with leaking - and working through a little mess, but not with establishing a false currency of exchange that costs us our capacity to communicate OUTSIDE the narrative dictates. The latter is my primary sense of how the 'world became insane' as normality - ie 'The Fall' - and so restoring communication is the undoing or healing of mutually reinforcing error made real in minds that are reacting as if true. (IE If I believe I am attacked I will react as if I have been and generate a response that will confirm the belief).

This dynamic is also a strange kind of bonding - where victim and victimiser are entangled in quarky ways!
( I like to also note 'charge' relations in our human world as well as resonances).
And from saying this I recall that the recombination of charged ions results in release of 'burden' to radiant energy. Whereas 'divide and rule' operates the binding of energy into systems of structured instability.
Bin-Ra
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby Bin-Ra » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:25 am

[quote="jimmcginn"

I asserted the following:
1) The current paradigm erronieously assumes that the polarity of the H2O molecule is static (fixed) and therefore the polar force that is associated with hydrogen bonding between H2O molecules is constant.
2) This erroneous assumption is the reason what there are upwards of 70 observations that are inexplicable by the current paradigm. These observations are generally referrred to as the "anomalies" of H2O.
3) Because of incidental symmetry (my discovery--see my videos for details) the polarity of the H2O molecule is highly variable. With the inclusion of variable polarity, as I explicated in my videos and many posts, the anomalies of H2O hare easily resolved.

If you have an argument or opinion in regard to 1, 2 or 3 above then please present it. If not then kindly go away.

Fair enough?

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
International Skeptics Fail to Dispute "Paulings Omission"
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17185[/quote]

In regrouping and clarifying your position rather than attacking that of another, you have extended communication that can be received as such.
Thankyou for that.

I hold that thinking always extends its predicate, and error in thought will lead to conflicts and self-conflicted assertions as a result. Complexity CAN be also used as obfuscation and the assertions of conflict ascribed to others, rendered your own specific question obscure making it 'easy' to see only attack on others rather than something positive extended and invited for legitimate challenge.
Bin-Ra
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby jimmcginn » Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:53 am

Bin-Ra wrote:In regrouping and clarifying your position rather than attacking that of another, you have extended communication that can be received as such.
Thankyou for that.

I hold that thinking always extends its predicate, and error in thought will lead to conflicts and self-conflicted assertions as a result. Complexity CAN be also used as obfuscation and the assertions of conflict ascribed to others, rendered your own specific question obscure making it 'easy' to see only attack on others rather than something positive extended and invited for legitimate challenge.


Blah, blah, blah, who cares?
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air

Unread postby Bin-Ra » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:15 am

jimmcginn wrote:
Bin-Ra wrote:In regrouping and clarifying your position rather than attacking that of another, you have extended communication that can be received as such.
Thankyou for that.

I hold that thinking always extends its predicate, and error in thought will lead to conflicts and self-conflicted assertions as a result. Complexity CAN be also used as obfuscation and the assertions of conflict ascribed to others, rendered your own specific question obscure making it 'easy' to see only attack on others rather than something positive extended and invited for legitimate challenge.


Blah, blah, blah, who cares?


By your own actions you generate decades of social exclusion and non-acceptance of your thinking - rail and rant at the 'unworthy' and feel exonerated or even sanctified in doing so.

Your web-blog site links are all dead btw.
I thought you had something to say.
Bin-Ra
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:20 pm

Previous

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests