10-10-2006, 12:00 AM
OK, since the fact that Abe's link to this thread was allowed to remain over at the Evidence thread, it's de facto 'permission' from God (reversed spelling 'Dog') to print it. Copied to Word. Will be sent to Abe, the Council and Lilly if needed. Rejecting it based on redundancy is a ruse. Ghost Dog himself starts about two threads a week on the same topic: How no one can prove sorcery is real.. in a hundred different names...so I'm starting this thread as a rebuttal..
Quote:The rigid thinker in this debate is clearly the one that is stuck on their fantastic representation of their own self: YOU.
Because you ignore fact, science,
opinion of others and common sense in order to uphold your fantasies as real~"Wu"
(This is a quote)
OK, I'm going to point out, just in case others missed the obvious, how you lumped "science, opinion of others and common sense" into one sentence. Do you equate science = opinion of (certain select) others and therefore that common (con)sense(sus)?
Your definition of 'science' is taking on a religious flavor...be careful...
Once again I need to point out that you have no evidence whatsoever to prove that I'm lying. So your conclusion is based on your assumption. Now that we see you lumping 'science' into a religious category, your assumptions have dropped a bit in merit.
True scientists keep an open mind with feet planted in method. They do not reject new information; but on the contrary seek new information (un usual) to add to their inventory in a constant state of exploration.
In fact, I would say that sorcery, the quest to explore, map and experience the vast sea of the unknown, is the very description of science at its core. To reject new or 'unusual' or 'weird' concepts would be to hamstring the horse of science itself.
Quote:Your tales of the double and your neighbors have been shown to be surrounded by layer upon layer of lies."Wu"
No, no they haven't. You've only formed that opinion and then shouted from the mountaintops, substituting volume for veracity.
Once again we have an example of you calling opinion 'fact'. And also a demonstration of your religious, cultish nature.
Why should anyone give what you have to say any merit when you are guilty of the very crimes you accuse me of: that of asserting as fact, something without proof?
Quote:A person who never outgrows the need to be the center of attention is a case of arrested development. [He] acts like a little child because [he] thinks like a little child. And truth has no objective reality to a little child. To a child's way of thinking (Magical Thinking) yelling down any assertion to the contrary makes whatever [he] says true. So, the bigger the truth to deny, the louder [he] yells.
Quote:Oh come on sil... the physical impossibility is evidence. You just want to say it's not certain evidence.~GD
Sweeping statement alert:
DEFINE 'physical impossibility'
We have debunkers at this site trying to force opinion, and loud opinion at that, as a substitute for proof.
Science demands more than to be a slave to consensus or opinion as "Wu"/GD has asserted. Science is an UNBIASED looksie into unusual phenomenon...and an attempt to map that phenomenon and try to figure out how it works.
That, as I said, is also the essence of sorcery.
The Power of Silence
Quote:"The world of daily life consists of two points of reference," he said. "We have for example, here and there, in and out, up and down, good and evil, and so on and so forth. So, properly speaking, our perception of our lives is two-dimensional. None of what we perceive ourselves doing has depth."..
.."A sorcerer perceives his actions with depth," he said. "His actions are tri-dimensional for him. They have a third point of reference."..
.."Our points of reference are obtained primarily from our sense perception," he said. "Our senses percieve and differentiate what is immediate to us from what is not. Using that basic distinction we derive the rest.
"In order to reach the third point of reference one must percieve two places at once."..
..Don Juan explained that normal perception had an axis. "Here and there" were the perimeters of that axis, and we were partial to the clarity of "here." He said that in normal perception, only "here" was perceived completely, instantaneously, and directly. Its twin referent, "there", lacked immediacy. It was inferred, deduced, expected, even assumed, but is was not apprehended directly with all the senses. When we perceived two places at once, total clarity was lost, but the immediate perception of "there" was gained...
..he said that being in two places at once was a milestone sorcerers used to mark the moment the assemblage point reached the place of silent knowledge. Split perception, if accomplished by one's own means, was called the free movement of the assemblage point.
-Silhoutte
Quote:The rigid thinker in this debate is clearly the one that is stuck on their fantastic representation of their own self: YOU.
Because you ignore fact, science,
opinion of others and common sense in order to uphold your fantasies as real~"Wu"
(This is a quote)
OK, I'm going to point out, just in case others missed the obvious, how you lumped "science, opinion of others and common sense" into one sentence. Do you equate science = opinion of (certain select) others and therefore that common (con)sense(sus)?
Your definition of 'science' is taking on a religious flavor...be careful...
Once again I need to point out that you have no evidence whatsoever to prove that I'm lying. So your conclusion is based on your assumption. Now that we see you lumping 'science' into a religious category, your assumptions have dropped a bit in merit.
True scientists keep an open mind with feet planted in method. They do not reject new information; but on the contrary seek new information (un usual) to add to their inventory in a constant state of exploration.
In fact, I would say that sorcery, the quest to explore, map and experience the vast sea of the unknown, is the very description of science at its core. To reject new or 'unusual' or 'weird' concepts would be to hamstring the horse of science itself.
Quote:Your tales of the double and your neighbors have been shown to be surrounded by layer upon layer of lies."Wu"
No, no they haven't. You've only formed that opinion and then shouted from the mountaintops, substituting volume for veracity.
Once again we have an example of you calling opinion 'fact'. And also a demonstration of your religious, cultish nature.
Why should anyone give what you have to say any merit when you are guilty of the very crimes you accuse me of: that of asserting as fact, something without proof?
Quote:A person who never outgrows the need to be the center of attention is a case of arrested development. [He] acts like a little child because [he] thinks like a little child. And truth has no objective reality to a little child. To a child's way of thinking (Magical Thinking) yelling down any assertion to the contrary makes whatever [he] says true. So, the bigger the truth to deny, the louder [he] yells.
Quote:Oh come on sil... the physical impossibility is evidence. You just want to say it's not certain evidence.~GD
Sweeping statement alert:
DEFINE 'physical impossibility'
We have debunkers at this site trying to force opinion, and loud opinion at that, as a substitute for proof.
Science demands more than to be a slave to consensus or opinion as "Wu"/GD has asserted. Science is an UNBIASED looksie into unusual phenomenon...and an attempt to map that phenomenon and try to figure out how it works.
That, as I said, is also the essence of sorcery.
The Power of Silence
Quote:"The world of daily life consists of two points of reference," he said. "We have for example, here and there, in and out, up and down, good and evil, and so on and so forth. So, properly speaking, our perception of our lives is two-dimensional. None of what we perceive ourselves doing has depth."..
.."A sorcerer perceives his actions with depth," he said. "His actions are tri-dimensional for him. They have a third point of reference."..
.."Our points of reference are obtained primarily from our sense perception," he said. "Our senses percieve and differentiate what is immediate to us from what is not. Using that basic distinction we derive the rest.
"In order to reach the third point of reference one must percieve two places at once."..
..Don Juan explained that normal perception had an axis. "Here and there" were the perimeters of that axis, and we were partial to the clarity of "here." He said that in normal perception, only "here" was perceived completely, instantaneously, and directly. Its twin referent, "there", lacked immediacy. It was inferred, deduced, expected, even assumed, but is was not apprehended directly with all the senses. When we perceived two places at once, total clarity was lost, but the immediate perception of "there" was gained...
..he said that being in two places at once was a milestone sorcerers used to mark the moment the assemblage point reached the place of silent knowledge. Split perception, if accomplished by one's own means, was called the free movement of the assemblage point.
-Silhoutte