I'm rather disappointed in this community.

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

Re: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by Poppa Tom » Thu Feb 23, 2023 1:28 pm

Should have just left a link. It may just be a copyright or liability of some sort. A publication in pdf form just may be a virus too. I've listed these things and I'm stupid. There are certainly other aspects too.

Re: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by Arcmode » Fri Dec 02, 2022 7:32 pm

There's also a complaint form at the psychiatric ward

Re: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by nick c » Fri Dec 02, 2022 7:18 pm

I'm rather disappointed in this community......
....I just got expunged from the Facebook Thunderbolts Project forum for posting a pdf of a book titled *Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars*. I made it clear that I wasn't interested in proving that the conspiracy in the book was genuine, but rather that the thesis of it was interesting.
hi Demosophist,
And yet here you are on a sponsored Thunderbolts Project site, with the freedom to criticize the TBP.....That sounds very reasonable to me!

Re: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by Demosophist » Fri Dec 02, 2022 5:46 am

The notion that digital AI will bypass humans in intelligence in now rather the accepted wisdom
"is" not "in". Why can't I edit my own post. Utter nonsense.

Re: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by Demosophist » Fri Dec 02, 2022 3:59 am

You must be careful when walking your dogma in this neighborhood that it doesn't pee on the wrong gnome.
I appreciate the warning, but I'm simply not going to do that. There's too much at stake. Moreover, things are going my direction, though perhaps not as quickly as I'd prefer. The notion that digital AI will bypass humans in intelligence in now rather the accepted wisdom, but plasmas don't follow binary logic... or anything like it. It would be a *form* but not the *formal cause*. And formal cause is what's on our side, as humans... an advantage that we're going to need to learn to tap... and soon.

Re: I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by Maol » Thu Dec 01, 2022 3:14 pm

You must be careful when walking your dogma in this neighborhood that it doesn't pee on the wrong gnome.

I'm rather disappointed in this community.

by Demosophist » Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:17 am

I just got expunged from the Facebook Thunderbolts Project forum for posting a pdf of a book titled *Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars*. I made it clear that I wasn't interested in proving that the conspiracy in the book was genuine, but rather that the thesis of it was interesting. I'm a sociologist, and the notion that human populations and institutions follow the same laws of electromagnetism as plasmas, which was more or less the thesis of the book (although it was more about constructed circuits and doesn't mention plasmas), was an idea worth considering. I still do. I never guessed that in posing such a question I was transgressive. It seems to me quite natural.

I was immediately attacked for proposing some sort of space alien theory (because, apparently, a version of the paper/book was published by a man who subscribed to such a theory in the past). To my mind the reaction was pretty much motivated by the same fear of transgressing uniformitarian beliefs that motivated the attack on Velikovsy back when I was in knickers. (Actually, I never work knickers, but I did wear corduroys). "Don't tread on this sacred ground" (although I have no idea what is supposedly sacred about it). Are we just about done with censorship yet? What a travesty of sense-making that is!

But since in the same vein of "the sacred" I just watched a documentary on the Shroud of Turin by one of the original team that investigated it back in the '70s (a certain Barrie Schwortz). Of course, he admits that his niche in the team was as a professional photographer, and not as a scientist, but his opinion was that it was genuine. However, although the research team was able to falsify various theses about how the image was made, including camera obscura, a heat scorch, and a clever painted forgery, they did not discover a convincing explanation for how the image was produced. So, in light of that is it possible that the image was created by some sort of plasma discharge, and if that's possible is there a way to tell by looking carefully at the available evidence... for instance in the way that Anthony Hall explains geologic phenomena on the Colorado plateau?

Top