“Revolution in Thought: A new look at determinism and free will"

[peacegirl]

"real time" isn't actually a thing; Time is dependent on the reference frame of the observer.

But as all humans share damn close to the exact same reference frame, dragging this discussion kicking and screaming into the twentieth century probably isn't necessary or helpful.

Seeing in delayed time would apply if time was dependent on the reference frame of the observer, but that is exactly the thing being refuted. It all seems so logical, and the pieces fit together so well, that it’s hard for anyone to believe this could be wrong. Hey, even Einstein’s theory was based on relativity, so who was Lessans to have the nerve to question it he sacred? 🫩

 

[peacegirl]

"real time" isn't actually a thing; Time is dependent on the reference frame of the observer.

But as all humans share damn close to the exact same reference frame, dragging this discussion kicking and screaming into the twentieth century probably isn't necessary or helpful.

Seeing in delayed time would apply if time was dependent on the reference frame of the observer, but that is exactly the thing being refuted. It all seems so logical, and the pieces fit together so well, that it’s hard for anyone to believe this could be wrong. Hey, even Einstein’s theory was based on relativity, so who was Lessans to have the nerve to question it he sacred? 🫩

Fixed: To question the sacrosanct?

 

[pood]

It makes no sense, there is no real time mirror image of objects in the retina. In a dark room you can flip the light switch on and off, you see, you can't t see, you see, you can't see.....where this is true because the eyes are detecting the light reflecting off the objects in the room when the light is on, but not when it is off, where there are no mirror images in the retina, just whatever light the eyes detect.

What does this example have to do with the negation of seeing in real time? He made a distinction as to why we would see the sun turned on before we would see each other until 81/2 minutes later for a reason. Maybe you missed that part. It is obvious we need light to see. But to say that light is reflecting (or bouncing) off of objects and traveling with the image embedded in the light (the object’s wavelength) remains a scientific “theory.”

Honestly, do you even read what people write? Have you ever?

Scientists DO NOT SAY that light travels with an image “embedded” in it. The image is made in the brain!

And light does not carry an “an object’s wavelength” whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. It HAS a wavelength. (So do objects, for that matter, but light does not “carry” those wavelengths.)

Your ignorance is just embarrassing and astounding.

You know exactly what I meant Pood!

I have no clue what you mean, and, more important, you don’t either. Like your writer, who thought light was made of molecules, you are totally ignorant of what science actually says about light and sight, despite the fact that at FF, two (!) astrophysicists and a biologist explained stuff to you over and over again, not to mention educated lay people like myself and many others. Yet you still regurgitate the same old stupid babble.

 

[peacegirl]

It makes no sense, there is no real time mirror image of objects in the retina. In a dark room you can flip the light switch on and off, you see, you can't t see, you see, you can't see.....where this is true because the eyes are detecting the light reflecting off the objects in the room when the light is on, but not when it is off, where there are no mirror images in the retina, just whatever light the eyes detect.

What does this example have to do with the negation of seeing in real time? He made a distinction as to why we would see the sun turned on before we would see each other until 81/2 minutes later for a reason. Maybe you missed that part. It is obvious we need light to see. But to say that light is reflecting (or bouncing) off of objects and traveling with the image embedded in the light (the object’s wavelength) remains a scientific “theory.”

Honestly, do you even read what people write? Have you ever?

Scientists DO NOT SAY that light travels with an image “embedded” in it. The image is made in the brain!

And light does not carry an “an object’s wavelength” whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. It HAS a wavelength. (So do objects, for that matter, but light does not “carry” those wavelengths.)

Your ignorance is just embarrassing and astounding.

You know exactly what I meant Pood!

I have no clue what you mean, and, more important, you don’t either. Like your writer, who thought light was made of molecules, you are totally ignorant of what science actually says about light and sight, despite the fact that at FF, two (!) astrophysicists and a biologist explained stuff to you over and over again, not to mention educated lay people like myself and many others. Yet you still regurgitate the same old stupid babble.

You’re just pissed. Using words like lay people as if to say only certain people with labels can be right, is really bad logic. It doesn’t automatically give them a free pass. Your house may be crumbling at the very foundation. I feel bad to challenge your beloved worldview, but the only thing that matters is reality. 🫩

 

[pood]

It makes no sense, there is no real time mirror image of objects in the retina. In a dark room you can flip the light switch on and off, you see, you can't t see, you see, you can't see.....where this is true because the eyes are detecting the light reflecting off the objects in the room when the light is on, but not when it is off, where there are no mirror images in the retina, just whatever light the eyes detect.

What does this example have to do with the negation of seeing in real time? He made a distinction as to why we would see the sun turned on before we would see each other until 81/2 minutes later for a reason. Maybe you missed that part. It is obvious we need light to see. But to say that light is reflecting (or bouncing) off of objects and traveling with the image embedded in the light (the object’s wavelength) remains a scientific “theory.”

Honestly, do you even read what people write? Have you ever?

Scientists DO NOT SAY that light travels with an image “embedded” in it. The image is made in the brain!

And light does not carry an “an object’s wavelength” whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. It HAS a wavelength. (So do objects, for that matter, but light does not “carry” those wavelengths.)

Your ignorance is just embarrassing and astounding.

You know exactly what I meant Pood!

I have no clue what you mean, and, more important, you don’t either. Like your writer, who thought light was made of molecules, you are totally ignorant of what science actually says about light and sight, despite the fact that at FF, two (!) astrophysicists and a biologist explained stuff to you over and over again, not to mention educated lay people like myself and many others. Yet you still regurgitate the same old stupid babble.

You’re just pissed. Using words like lay people as if to say only certain people with labels can be right, is really bad logic. It doesn’t automatically give them a free pass. Your house may be crumbling at the very foundation. I feel bad to challenge your beloved worldview, but the only thing that matters is reality. 🫩

You and reality are on opposite sides of the Milky Way galaxy!

You come here and tell us that images are embedded in light (they are not) that light carries the wavelength of an object (it does not) AND you tell us that light does not bounce off of stuff — it is not reflected! You call that reality??

Peacegirl, how does a mirror work? Remember we tried to explain that to you at FF? You must be the only person on earth who does not know how a mirror works!

How a mirror works.

 

[peacegirl]

It makes no sense, there is no real time mirror image of objects in the retina. In a dark room you can flip the light switch on and off, you see, you can't t see, you see, you can't see.....where this is true because the eyes are detecting the light reflecting off the objects in the room when the light is on, but not when it is off, where there are no mirror images in the retina, just whatever light the eyes detect.

What does this example have to do with the negation of seeing in real time? He made a distinction as to why we would see the sun turned on before we would see each other until 81/2 minutes later for a reason. Maybe you missed that part. It is obvious we need light to see. But to say that light is reflecting (or bouncing) off of objects and traveling with the image embedded in the light (the object’s wavelength) remains a scientific “theory.”

Honestly, do you even read what people write? Have you ever?

Scientists DO NOT SAY that light travels with an image “embedded” in it. The image is made in the brain!

And light does not carry an “an object’s wavelength” whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. It HAS a wavelength. (So do objects, for that matter, but light does not “carry” those wavelengths.)

Your ignorance is just embarrassing and astounding.

You know exactly what I meant Pood!

I have no clue what you mean, and, more important, you don’t either. Like your writer, who thought light was made of molecules, you are totally ignorant of what science actually says about light and sight, despite the fact that at FF, two (!) astrophysicists and a biologist explained stuff to you over and over again, not to mention educated lay people like myself and many others. Yet you still regurgitate the same old stupid babble.

You’re just pissed. Using words like lay people as if to say only certain people with labels can be right, is really bad logic. It doesn’t automatically give them a free pass. Your house may be crumbling at the very foundation. I feel bad to challenge your beloved worldview, but the only thing that matters is reality. 🫩

You and reality are on opposite sides of the Milky Way galaxy!

You come here and tell us that images are embedded in light (they are not) that light carries the wavelength of an object (it does not) AND you tell us that light does not bounce off of stuff — it is not reflected! You call that reality??

Yes, that is reality. You've heard this already, but I'll repeat it as a refresher.

They reasoned that since it takes longer for the sound from an airplane to reach us when 15,000 feet away than when 5000; and since it takes longer for light to reach us the farther it is away when starting its journey, light and sound must function alike in other respects, which is false, although it is true that the farther away we are from the source of sound, the fainter it becomes, as light becomes dimmer when its source is farther away. If the sound from a plane, even though we can’t see it on a clear day, tells us it is in the sky, why can’t we see the plane if an image is being reflected towards the eye on the waves of light? The answer is very simple. An image is not being reflected. We cannot see the plane simply because the distance reduced its size to where it was impossible to see it with the naked eye, but we could see it with a telescope. We can’t see bacteria either with the naked eye, but we can through a microscope. The actual reason we are able to see the moon is because there is enough light present, and it is large enough to be seen. The explanation as to why the sun looks to be the size of the moon, although much larger, is because it is much much farther away, which is the reason it would look like a star to someone living on a planet the distance of Rigel. This proves conclusively that the distance between someone looking, and the object seen, has no relation to time because the images are not traveling toward the optic nerve on waves of light; therefore, it takes no time to see the moon, the sun, and the distant stars.

Peacegirl, how does a mirror work? Remember we tried to explain that to you at FF? You must be the only person on earth who does not know how a mirror works!

How a mirror works.

I know you believe mirror images still involve the speed of light, but I'm trying to help people visualize seeing an object in real time because the object's wavelength is there instantly, without any travel time necessary.

 

[pood]

You said LIGHT IS NOT REFLECTED.

Then how does a mirror work??? This has got nothing to do with the speed of light, but rather with your claim that light is not reflected.

 

[DBT]

It makes no sense, there is no real time mirror image of objects in the retina. In a dark room you can flip the light switch on and off, you see, you can't t see, you see, you can't see.....where this is true because the eyes are detecting the light reflecting off the objects in the room when the light is on, but not when it is off, where there are no mirror images in the retina, just whatever light the eyes detect.

What does this example have to do with the negation of seeing in real time? He made a distinction as to why we would see the sun turned on before we would see each other until 81/2 minutes later for a reason. Maybe you missed that part. It is obvious we need light to see. But to say that light is reflecting (or bouncing) off of objects and traveling with the image embedded in the light (the object’s wavelength) remains a scientific “theory.”

Honestly, do you even read what people write? Have you ever?

Scientists DO NOT SAY that light travels with an image “embedded” in it. The image is made in the brain!

And light does not carry an “an object’s wavelength” whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. It HAS a wavelength. (So do objects, for that matter, but light does not “carry” those wavelengths.)

Your ignorance is just embarrassing and astounding.

You know exactly what I meant Pood!

I have no clue what you mean, and, more important, you don’t either. Like your writer, who thought light was made of molecules, you are totally ignorant of what science actually says about light and sight, despite the fact that at FF, two (!) astrophysicists and a biologist explained stuff to you over and over again, not to mention educated lay people like myself and many others. Yet you still regurgitate the same old stupid babble.

You’re just pissed. Using words like lay people as if to say only certain people with labels can be right, is really bad logic. It doesn’t automatically give them a free pass. Your house may be crumbling at the very foundation. I feel bad to challenge your beloved worldview, but the only thing that matters is reality. 🫩

You and reality are on opposite sides of the Milky Way galaxy!

You come here and tell us that images are embedded in light (they are not) that light carries the wavelength of an object (it does not) AND you tell us that light does not bounce off of stuff — it is not reflected! You call that reality??

Yes, that is reality. You've heard this already, but I'll repeat it as a refresher.

They reasoned that since it takes longer for the sound from an airplane to reach us when 15,000 feet away than when 5000; and since it takes longer for light to reach us the farther it is away when starting its journey, light and sound must function alike in other respects, which is false, although it is true that the farther away we are from the source of sound, the fainter it becomes, as light becomes dimmer when its source is farther away. If the sound from a plane, even though we can’t see it on a clear day, tells us it is in the sky, why can’t we see the plane if an image is being reflected towards the eye on the waves of light? The answer is very simple. An image is not being reflected. We cannot see the plane simply because the distance reduced its size to where it was impossible to see it with the naked eye, but we could see it with a telescope. We can’t see bacteria either with the naked eye, but we can through a microscope. The actual reason we are able to see the moon is because there is enough light present, and it is large enough to be seen. The explanation as to why the sun looks to be the size of the moon, although much larger, is because it is much much farther away, which is the reason it would look like a star to someone living on a planet the distance of Rigel. This proves conclusively that the distance between someone looking, and the object seen, has no relation to time because the images are not traveling toward the optic nerve on waves of light; therefore, it takes no time to see the moon, the sun, and the distant stars.

Peacegirl, how does a mirror work? Remember we tried to explain that to you at FF? You must be the only person on earth who does not know how a mirror works!

How a mirror works.

I know you believe mirror images still involve the speed of light, but I'm trying to help people visualize seeing an object in real time because the object's wavelength is there instantly, without any travel time necessary.

View attachment 51931

It's just a matter of speed and travel distance, as light is a lot faster than sound, for example, you see someone in the distance hammering a nail before the sound arrives, the sight and the sound of the hammering is out of synch.

 

[peacegirl]

Mirrors function by reflecting light, allowing us to see images of ourselves and our surroundings through the principles of reflection and the properties of light.

The Basics of Reflection​

When light hits a mirror, it reflects off the surface according to the law of reflection, which states that the angle of incidence (the angle at which the incoming light strikes the surface) is equal to the angle of reflection (the angle at which the light bounces off). This predictable behavior allows mirrors to form clear images.

Britannica+1

Structure of a Mirror​

A typical mirror consists of a smooth, reflective surface made from a thin layer of metal, usually silver or aluminum, applied to the back of a glass sheet. The smoothness of the reflective surface is crucial; it must be extremely smooth on a microscopic level to ensure that light rays reflect without scattering, which is essential for creating clear images.

ScienceAlert

 

[peacegirl]

You said LIGHT IS NOT REFLECTED.

Then how does a mirror work??? This has got nothing to do with the speed of light, but rather with your claim that light is not reflected.

It obviously works. We see ourselves in the mirror due to the physics of light, but it still doesn't prove that light bounces and brings the image of ourselves to us rather than seeing ourselves due to light's presence.

 

[pood]

So, what, the light sticks to the mirror???

 

[pood]

What a ludicrous waste of time this is.

 

[DBT]

You said LIGHT IS NOT REFLECTED.

Then how does a mirror work??? This has got nothing to do with the speed of light, but rather with your claim that light is not reflected.

It obviously works. We see ourselves in the mirror due to the physics of light, but it still doesn't prove that light bounces and brings the image of ourselves to us rather than seeing ourselves due to light's presence.

You can't be serious, you can shine a torch or laser at a mirror and see the beam reflected at whatever angle you direct the beam. You can see that for yourself, aim full on it comes straight back, or at angle you want, the light is obviously being reflected by the mirror.

 

[peacegirl]

So, what, the light sticks to the mirror???

Nothing sticks to the mirror. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Mirrors work the way they say they work, but when you talk about bouncing off of and seeing in delayed time, we're back to square one.

Mirror Image: Reflection and Refraction of Light

A mirror image is the result of light rays bounding off a reflective surface. Reflection and refraction are the two main aspects of geometric optics.

www.livescience.com

 

[peacegirl]

What a ludicrous waste of time this is.

 

[peacegirl]

You said LIGHT IS NOT REFLECTED.

Then how does a mirror work??? This has got nothing to do with the speed of light, but rather with your claim that light is not reflected.

It obviously works. We see ourselves in the mirror due to the physics of light, but it still doesn't prove that light bounces and brings the image of ourselves to us rather than seeing ourselves due to light's presence.

You can't be serious, you can shine a torch or laser at a mirror and see the beam reflected at whatever angle you direct the beam. You can see that for yourself, aim full on it comes straight back, or at angle you want, the light is obviously being reflected by the mirror.

Following a beam doesn't prove that we don't see in real time. In fact, it just shows we are following the beam that is traveling. But again, from this observation, scientists have concluded that because light travels (which it does), we are therefore interpreting the image in the light itself, which does not automatically follow.

 

[southernhybrid]

Janis, I've been scanning some of these posts but I still haven't seen anything that explains how the speed of light reaching our eyes has anything to do with world peace. Plus I'll trust Neil deGrasse Tyson when it comes to physics as he knows what he's talking about and I'm not educated in physics. Neil is a brilliant person.

I've also found your Facebook page and I found out that you have posted a lot of nonsense about vaccines, so I assume you don't understand the science behind the effectiveness and importance of vaccines. I will never understand why so many people believe such bullshit. To give you credit, you've also posted some nice, positive things. Maybe you should make your page private. I don't post on mine but I check FB once in awhile to view restaurant menus or see how a few friends are doing. Your page has a photo of your late father on it as well as the name Lessons, so I'm quite sure it must be yours.

An acquaintance of mine wrote on FB that Bill Gates in planning the next pandemic. All she had to do is take 2 minutes to do a search and she would realize that this was a rumor based on the fact that Gates said he is worried that the world won't be ready for the next pandemic, which he believes might happen within the next 25 years. I'm not a fan of Gates, but I don't like anyone being charged with making false claims. I prefer the truth. I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the nurse I know because she was against the COVID vaccine and other precautions, despite losing her fiancé due to COVID and almost dying herself due to COVID. I try not to contact her any longer, but of course I would be polite if she were to contact me. Of course she voted for the felon in chief. My many COVID vaccines did me no harm.

The only reason that I know your real name is because you showed us a link to your father's book, which you organized and I was a curious about what other nonsense you might believe is true. Please dear, go find a better use of your time. You've said you aren't obsessed over this book, but your posts are strong evidence that you are obsessed. Please get some help and stop repeating the same thing over and over again. Don't encourage these guys. Don't worry. I'm not trying to stalk you or harm you in any way. I'm just concerned about your mental health, as any good nurse would be.

I think you mean well and you're a good person, but there are many things you could do to improve the world in small ways instead of continuing this mindless argument here.

And yes, This is a waste of time so why are so many of you still engaging her? You're not helping her obsession. I know I said I wouldn't post in this thread again but since I have no free will, I guess I couldn't help myself. Oh wait. None of you have free will or you'd be doing something more productive. Amirite?

I'll leave it at that and hope that Janis, aka Peacegirl stops preaching this nonsense and finds something better to do with her time.

 

[peacegirl]

Janis, I've been scanning some of these posts but I still haven't seen anything that explains how the speed of light reaching our eyes has anything to do with world peace. Plus I'll trust Neil deGrasse Tyson when it comes to physics as he knows what he's talking about and I'm not educated in physics. Neil is a brilliant person.

These are two different discoveries. Please think before you speak and know what you're talking about. It doesn't reflect well (no pun intended) on you.

I've also found your Facebook page and I found out that you have posted a lot of nonsense about vaccines, so I assume you don't understand the science behind the effectiveness and importance of vaccines. I will never understand why so many people believe such bullshit. To give you credit, you've also posted some nice, positive things. Maybe you should make your page private. I don't post on mine but I check FB once in awhile to view restaurant menus or see how a few friends are doing. Your page has a photo of your late father on it as well as the name Lessons, so I'm quite sure it must be yours.

I'm not going to make anything private.

An acquaintance of mine wrote on FB that Bill Gates in planning the next pandemic. All she had to do is take 2 minutes to do a search and she would realize that this was a rumor based on the fact that Gates said he is worried that the world won't be ready for the next pandemic, which he believes might happen within the next 25 years. I'm not a fan of Gates, but I don't like anyone being charged with making false claims. I prefer the truth. I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the nurse I know because she was against the COVID vaccine and other precautions, despite losing her fiancé due to COVID and almost dying herself due to COVID. I try not to contact her any longer, but of course I would be polite if she were to contact me. Of course she voted for the felon in chief. My many COVID vaccines did me no harm.

I prefer truth too, but you have already decided that I don't have any. That is called coming to a premature conclusion. As far as vaccines, there are people that have been hurt by the Covid vaccine and also by Covid. So much is driven by money that it's hard to know whether enough testing was done to guarantee safety for everyone. Young people are dropping dead at an alarming rate. My son-in-law got myocarditis, which is known to be caused by the vaccine. We live in a free country and mandatory vaccines, without the ability to make one's own decision, is undemocratic and is not what America and other democratic countries stand for.

Myocarditis, Pericarditis and Cardiomyopathy After COVID-19 Vaccination - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The only reason that I know your real name is because you showed us a link to your father's book, which you organized and I was a curious about what other nonsense you might believe is true. Please dear, go find a better use of your time. You've said you aren't obsessed over this book, but your posts are strong evidence that you are obsessed.

It's not an obsession. It's a mission. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem.

Please get some help and stop repeating the same thing over and over again. Don't encourage these guys. Don't worry. I'm not trying to stalk you or harm you in any way. I'm just concerned about your mental health, as any good nurse would be.

You're not concerned about me. You are looking at this thread with the absolute conviction that he must have been wrong, and therefore I must be mentally off. What can I say?

I think you mean well and you're a good person, but there are many things you could do to improve the world in small ways instead of continuing this mindless argument here.

Why are you so invested in giving me advice? Don't worry about me, worry about yourself. It's none of your business what I do.

And yes, This is a waste of time so why are so many of you still engaging her? You're not helping her obsession. I know I said I wouldn't post in this thread again but since I have no free will, I guess I couldn't help myself. Oh wait. None of you have free will or you'd be doing something more productive. Amirite?

That is true. You couldn't resist giving your unsolicited advice that doesn't help me and doesn't actually show your sincerity for my wellbeing.

I'll leave it at that and hope that Janis, aka Peacegirl stops preaching this nonsense and finds something better to do with her time.

You already expressed yourself and left, so why did you come back? I must be irresistable.

 

[bilby]

It's not an obsession. It's a mission. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem.

A mission is an obsession that you want to inflict on others.

That's the only difference between the two.

 

[DBT]

Janis, I've been scanning some of these posts but I still haven't seen anything that explains how the speed of light reaching our eyes has anything to do with world peace. Plus I'll trust Neil deGrasse Tyson when it comes to physics as he knows what he's talking about and I'm not educated in physics. Neil is a brilliant person.

These are two different discoveries. Please think before you speak and know what you're talking about. It doesn't reflect well (no pun intended) on you.

I've also found your Facebook page and I found out that you have posted a lot of nonsense about vaccines, so I assume you don't understand the science behind the effectiveness and importance of vaccines. I will never understand why so many people believe such bullshit. To give you credit, you've also posted some nice, positive things. Maybe you should make your page private. I don't post on mine but I check FB once in awhile to view restaurant menus or see how a few friends are doing. Your page has a photo of your late father on it as well as the name Lessons, so I'm quite sure it must be yours.

I'm not going to make anything private.

An acquaintance of mine wrote on FB that Bill Gates in planning the next pandemic. All she had to do is take 2 minutes to do a search and she would realize that this was a rumor based on the fact that Gates said he is worried that the world won't be ready for the next pandemic, which he believes might happen within the next 25 years. I'm not a fan of Gates, but I don't like anyone being charged with making false claims. I prefer the truth. I guess I shouldn't be surprised about the nurse I know because she was against the COVID vaccine and other precautions, despite losing her fiancé due to COVID and almost dying herself due to COVID. I try not to contact her any longer, but of course I would be polite if she were to contact me. Of course she voted for the felon in chief. My many COVID vaccines did me no harm.

I prefer truth too, but you have already decided that I don't have any. That is called coming to a premature conclusion. As far as vaccines, there are people that have been hurt by the Covid vaccine and also by Covid. So much is driven by money that it's hard to know whether enough testing was done to guarantee safety for everyone. Young people are dropping dead at an alarming rate. My son-in-law got myocarditis, which is known to be caused by the vaccine. We live in a free country and mandatory vaccines, without the ability to make one's own decision, is undemocratic and is not what America and other democratic countries stand for.

Myocarditis, Pericarditis and Cardiomyopathy After COVID-19 Vaccination - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The only reason that I know your real name is because you showed us a link to your father's book, which you organized and I was a curious about what other nonsense you might believe is true. Please dear, go find a better use of your time. You've said you aren't obsessed over this book, but your posts are strong evidence that you are obsessed.

It's not an obsession. It's a mission. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem.

Please get some help and stop repeating the same thing over and over again. Don't encourage these guys. Don't worry. I'm not trying to stalk you or harm you in any way. I'm just concerned about your mental health, as any good nurse would be.

You're not concerned about me. You are looking at this thread with the absolute conviction that he must have been wrong, and therefore I must be mentally off. What can I say?

I think you mean well and you're a good person, but there are many things you could do to improve the world in small ways instead of continuing this mindless argument here.

Why are you so invested in giving me advice? Don't worry about me, worry about yourself. It's none of your business what I do.

And yes, This is a waste of time so why are so many of you still engaging her? You're not helping her obsession. I know I said I wouldn't post in this thread again but since I have no free will, I guess I couldn't help myself. Oh wait. None of you have free will or you'd be doing something more productive. Amirite?

That is true. You couldn't resist giving your unsolicited advice that doesn't help me and doesn't actually show your sincerity for my wellbeing.

I'll leave it at that and hope that Janis, aka Peacegirl stops preaching this nonsense and finds something better to do with her time.

You already expressed yourself and left, so why did you come back? I must be irresistable.

I know that I should have stopped responding, but the notions being peddled are so absurd that it like picking at a scab. You know you shouldn't but the itch is there.

There are no discoveries, the idea of seing objects independently of light cannot be supported, it has no merit. It's not how the system works, not according to the physics of light, the structure of the eyes or the function of a brain in relation to generating vision.

And how any of this is supposed to relate to achieving world peace is anyone's guess.

Why persist? It's not going to convince anyone. There is no shame in being wrong, just accept that there was error and learn from it.