... 'official' Pythagoreans. One of the first comments was along the lines of "if you havnt already figured this out for yourself, you wont get much from here".Sure I read a couple of authers of numerology, even though there are many interpretations. I disagreed with many interpretations. As I have said many times, numbers are symbols in the same way as written music is. I already knew this,...
... right off the bat. Too subjective. Too poetical. Unreal. Bullshit. Childish. Came to the same conclusions as a teenager. Teenager? That figures. I read CosmicConspiracy in the 70's, was told the auther, Stan Deyo (ex CIA) was told to leave the US and go as far away as possible.. Perth WA,), the same week I finished it, I was talking, without knowing it, to his brother in law, ...
... etc, claims to be a writer, but has writers block. No, but I havent ever come across a dyed in the wool sceptic who would not claim that, in spite of the hard evidence of the auther. --------- That's the problem,"the author" has no evidence to show he/she's an author; they've never written a book. What about the book or books? How do you know it was really them? Would it ...
... a book etc, claims to be a writer, but has writers block. No, but I havent ever come across a dyed in the wool sceptic who would not claim that, in spite of the hard evidence of the auther. --------- That's the problem,"the author" has no evidence to show he/she's an author; they've never written a book. It's like me claiming to be an artist when I can't draw a straight line nor ...
... book etc, claims to be a writer, but has writers block. No, but I havent ever come across a dyed in the wool sceptic who would not claim that, in spite of the hard evidence of the auther. Sceptisicm is healthy. It is actually a 'bar' against second hand information. Problem is, one has to lift the bar to gain first hand knowledge, which is a real threat to a persons comfort zone. BOfL...
... your pov, you refer to the origin of words, and then put a localised interpretation of the word breath. You refer to God as "he", and then cross reference to a well known historical auther. You are actually displaying an interesting paradox. You say there is nothing more to this than your view. You know that others experiences are not valid. BOfL # All ...
... your pov, you refer to the origin of words, and then put a localised interpretation of the word breath. You refer to God as "he", and then cross reference to a well known historical auther. You are actually displaying an interesting paradox. You say there is nothing more to this than your view. You know that others experiences are not valid. BOfL # All experience may be valid to ...
...obvious flaws. To attempt to validate your pov, you refer to the origin of words, and then put a localised interpretation of the word breath. You refer to God as "he", and then cross reference to a well known historical auther. You are actually displaying an interesting paradox. You say there is nothing more to this than your view. You know that others experiences are not valid. BOfL
... results amay piss off an older biologist? Â Do you have any examples? By the way, peer review does not prevent publishing. Â It only keeps badly written papers out of certain journals. Â The auther can always self-publish and take his whining raod show to churchs like the creationsits/IDers have. What exactly do you think my "pre-conceived ideas" are? Â Do specify.- ...
... results amay piss off an older biologist? Â Do you have any examples? By the way, peer review does not prevent publishing. Â It only keeps badly written papers out of certain journals. Â The auther can always self-publish and take his whining raod show to churchs like the creationsits/IDers have. What exactly do you think my "pre-conceived ideas" are? Â Do specify.- ...
