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

[peacegirl]

Yes , that is true! You are not the end all of truth Pood Face it! All your put downs mean nothing until they are examined by others in the field who hopefully will give this author the time of day!

I never said I was the “end of truth.” This is in keeping with your weird belief that “truth” is decided by authority.

Thats how you come off.

His claims have been examined, for hundreds of years. They are false.

Do you have any references I can check out?

The eye is a sense organ. We seen in delayed time. Story over.

The story is not over.

It’s not because I say it, or Bilby says it, or because anyone says it. It’s because reality says it. Reality is the arbiter of truth, not any person.

Reality IS the arbiter of truth, not you, not Bilby, or not even Lessans for that matter. The truth is what we all want, which, in this case, has not yet been established beyond any doubt.

 

[pood]

Yes , that is true! You are not the end all of truth Pood Face it! All your put downs mean nothing until they are examined by others in the field who hopefully will give this author the time of day!

I never said I was the “end of truth.” This is in keeping with your weird belief that “truth” is decided by authority.

Thats how you come off.

Not to anyone but you.

His claims have been examined, for hundreds of years. They are false.

Do you have any references I can check out?

Are you kidding me?? There are some 2,000 pages of references back at FF that you ignored. Get real.

The eye is a sense organ. We seen in delayed time. Story over.

The story is not over.

This one is.

It’s not because I say it, or Bilby says it, or because anyone says it. It’s because reality says it. Reality is the arbiter of truth, not any person.

Reality IS the arbiter of truth, not you, not Bilby, or not even Lessans for that matter. The truth is what we all want, which, in this case, has not yet been established beyond any doubt.

Yes, it has, and Lessans is wrong.

 

[peacegirl]

Yes , that is true! You are not the end all of truth Pood Face it! All your put downs mean nothing until they are examined by others in the field who hopefully will give this author the time of day!

I never said I was the “end of truth.” This is in keeping with your weird belief that “truth” is decided by authority.

Thats how you come off.

Not to anyone but you.

Because no one has been through what I've been through.

His claims have been examined, for hundreds of years. They are false.

Do you have any references I can check out?

Are you kidding me?? There are some 2,000 pages of references back at FF that you ignored. Get real.

I'm talking about scientific references that prove we see in delayed time. It appears logical that light travels through space/time and reaches the eye, but there is nothing that has proven this. It's an assumption.

The eye is a sense organ. We seen in delayed time. Story over.

The story is not over.

This one is.

Far from it.

It’s not because I say it, or Bilby says it, or because anyone says it. It’s because reality says it. Reality is the arbiter of truth, not any person.

Reality IS the arbiter of truth, not you, not Bilby, or not even Lessans for that matter. The truth is what we all want, which, in this case, has not yet been established beyond any doubt.

Yes, it has, and Lessans is wrong.

You don't get to just say Lessans is wrong. Show me something to prove it.

 

[pood]

Yes , that is true! You are not the end all of truth Pood Face it! All your put downs mean nothing until they are examined by others in the field who hopefully will give this author the time of day!

I never said I was the “end of truth.” This is in keeping with your weird belief that “truth” is decided by authority.

Thats how you come off.

Not to anyone but you.

Because no one has been through what I've been through.

His claims have been examined, for hundreds of years. They are false.

Do you have any references I can check out?

Are you kidding me?? There are some 2,000 pages of references back at FF that you ignored. Get real.

I'm talking about scientific references that prove we see in delayed time. It appears logical that light travels through space/time and reaches the eye, but there is nothing that has proven this. It's an assumption.

Been given to you hundreds of times over 2,000 pages at FF.

The eye is a sense organ. We seen in delayed time. Story over.

The story is not over.

This one is.

Far from it.

Dream on.

It’s not because I say it, or Bilby says it, or because anyone says it. It’s because reality says it. Reality is the arbiter of truth, not any person.

Reality IS the arbiter of truth, not you, not Bilby, or not even Lessans for that matter. The truth is what we all want, which, in this case, has not yet been established beyond any doubt.

Yes, it has, and Lessans is wrong.

You don't get to just say Lessans is wrong. Show me something to prove it.

Been there, done that.

 

[peacegirl]

Yes , that is true! You are not the end all of truth Pood Face it! All your put downs mean nothing until they are examined by others in the field who hopefully will give this author the time of day!

I never said I was the “end of truth.” This is in keeping with your weird belief that “truth” is decided by authority.

Thats how you come off.

Not to anyone but you.

Because no one has been through what I've been through.

His claims have been examined, for hundreds of years. They are false.

Do you have any references I can check out?

Are you kidding me?? There are some 2,000 pages of references back at FF that you ignored. Get real.

I'm talking about scientific references that prove we see in delayed time. It appears logical that light travels through space/time and reaches the eye, but there is nothing that has proven this. It's an assumption.

Been given to you hundreds of times over 2,000 pages at FF.

The eye is a sense organ. We seen in delayed time. Story over.

The story is not over.

This one is.

Far from it.

Dream on.

It’s not because I say it, or Bilby says it, or because anyone says it. It’s because reality says it. Reality is the arbiter of truth, not any person.

Reality IS the arbiter of truth, not you, not Bilby, or not even Lessans for that matter. The truth is what we all want, which, in this case, has not yet been established beyond any doubt.

Yes, it has, and Lessans is wrong.

You don't get to just say Lessans is wrong. Show me something to prove it.

Been there, done that.

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

 

[pood]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

 

[peacegirl]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

It's a good thing that science says there is no absolute proof because it allows a space for alternate possibilities. But given that science keeps the door open (which ironically you haven't done), some things are absolutely true, and some things are absolutely false, like compatibilist free will. Where did anyone show an adjustment for seeing in delayed time due to light not arriving yet? Maybe I missed something.

 

[pood]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

It's a good thing that science says there is no absolute proof because it allows a space for alternate possibilities. But given that science keeps the door open (which ironically you haven't done),

Yes, I have.

some things are absolutely true, and some things are absolutely false, like compatibilist free will.

Wrong.

Where did anyone show an adjustment for seeing in delayed time due to light not arriving yet? Maybe I missed something.

Maybe you MISSED something?

Here is a partial list of all the refutations given to you of real-time seeing at FF:

The moons of Jupiter demonstration of finite light speed and delayed seeing

The Fizeau Wheel

The special and general theories of relativity

GPS in your phone

The solution to Olber’s paradox

How NASA plots navigation to celestial bodies

Delay in radio signals and lasers bounced off the moon

Radar

Gravitational lensing

Delayed transmissions in space flight (radio is light, btw)

Hubble deep space photos of the universe as it was in the past, including toward the era of the big bang some 14 billion years ago, at a time when the universe looked very different than it does today

The physical and logical impossibility of light both being at the eye, and not at the eye, at the same time

These are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Every single one of them demonstrate that we see in delayed time, and are all in agreement with one another. All would be impossible if Lessans were right. Indeed, if Lessans were right, the solution to Olber’s Paradox demonstrates that none of us would be alive, because the temperature of the earth would be about that of the sun. And btw, if Lessans were right, the GPS in your phone and car would spectacularly fail.

Moreover, we discussed all of these IN DETAIL with you at FF. And do you recall what you always said when you were backed into a scientific and logical corner?

“Something else must be going on there.”

 

[DBT]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

It's a good thing that science says there is no absolute proof because it allows a space for alternate possibilities. But given that science keeps the door open (which ironically you haven't done), some things are absolutely true, and some things are absolutely false, like compatibilist free will. Where did anyone show an adjustment for seeing in delayed time due to light not arriving yet? Maybe I missed something.

When we look at the stars, we are seeing what they looked like in the past. The further away the star, the longer the past state, years, decades, centuries....

 

[peacegirl]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

It's a good thing that science says there is no absolute proof because it allows a space for alternate possibilities. But given that science keeps the door open (which ironically you haven't done), some things are absolutely true, and some things are absolutely false, like compatibilist free will. Where did anyone show an adjustment for seeing in delayed time due to light not arriving yet? Maybe I missed something.

When we look at the stars, we are seeing what they looked like in the past. The further away the star, the longer the past state, years, decades, centuries....

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

 

[pood]

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

Which are?

How hard is this for you to understand? When I look at a photo in a book of Abraham Lincoln, I am looking, in the present, at an image from the past.

When I look at a Hubble deep space image of the universe as it was shortly after the big bang, I am looking, in the present, at an image from the past.

When I look at the sun, I am seeing, in the present, an image whose light was generated 8.5 minutes in the past. Therefore I am seeing the sun as it was eight and a half minutes ago.

 

[DBT]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

It's a good thing that science says there is no absolute proof because it allows a space for alternate possibilities. But given that science keeps the door open (which ironically you haven't done), some things are absolutely true, and some things are absolutely false, like compatibilist free will. Where did anyone show an adjustment for seeing in delayed time due to light not arriving yet? Maybe I missed something.

When we look at the stars, we are seeing what they looked like in the past. The further away the star, the longer the past state, years, decades, centuries....

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

Yet there are multiple lines of evidence to support the speed of light, distance travelled, etc. And I still don't understand how Lassan's point of view on this point relates modifying human behaviour in order to make the world a better place.

Neuroscientists have already proposed a kind of no blame way of dealing with offenders in the law:


"For example, they predict major changes in our conception of human agency that transform “people's moral intuitions about free will and responsibility” (Greene & Cohen, 2004:1775) or in current ways of justifying punishment by leaving behind retributivist models and giving “way to consequentialist ones, thus radically transforming our approach to criminal justice” (Zeki & Goodenough, 2006:231).

How Law and Neuroscience became a new field of study

This paper is structured into five sections. Section 1 provides an overview of the nature of the

www.elsevier.es

 

[pood]

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

Yet there are multiple lines of evidence to support the speed of light, distance travelled, etc. And I still don't understand how Lassan's point of view on this point relates modifying human behaviour in order to make the world a better place.

It doesn’t.

 

[peacegirl]

You have not. Nothing was proven at FF. It was all the present-day theory based on light travel, but there was still no absolute proof. The overwhelming evidence that you believe is there doesn't show it either. Just more of the same.

As has been explained to you til the cows come home, “absolute proof” is not part of science. “Proof beyond any reasonable doubt” is. In dozens and dozens of ways at FF, we showed you proof beyond any reasonable doubt that we do not and cannot see in real time, and that the eye is a sense organ. Lessans was wrong.

It's a good thing that science says there is no absolute proof because it allows a space for alternate possibilities. But given that science keeps the door open (which ironically you haven't done),

Yes, I have.

some things are absolutely true, and some things are absolutely false, like compatibilist free will.

Wrong.

Where did anyone show an adjustment for seeing in delayed time due to light not arriving yet? Maybe I missed something.

Maybe you MISSED something?

You're just throwing out anything you can to prove real time vision is impossible, but you haven't proven it.

Here is a partial list of all the refutations given to you of real-time seeing at FF:

The moons of Jupiter demonstration of finite light speed and delayed seeing

Show me where finite light speed causes delayed seeing.

The Fizeau Wheel

Show me where this conflicts

The special and general theories of relativity

If real time vision is true, we would see the object at the same exact time because the image is not traveling through space.

GPS in your phone

Where does this relate?

The solution to Olber’s paradox

Where does this relate?

How NASA plots navigation to celestial bodies

Show me how they do this to show that what we are seeing is an image, not the real thing?

Delay in radio signals and lasers bounced off the moon

Again, where does this conflict?

Radar

Where does this prove delayed vision?

Gravitational lensing

How does this relate?

Delayed transmissions in space flight (radio is light, btw)

How does this prove we aren't seeing in real time?

Hubble deep space photos of the universe as it was in the past, including toward the era of the big bang some 14 billion years ago, at a time when the universe looked very different than it does today

You are just repeating what is being challenged.

The physical and logical impossibility of light both being at the eye, and not at the eye, at the same time

Light has to be at the eye, or we wouldn't be able to see what we are looking at.

These are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Every single one of them demonstrate that we see in delayed time, and are all in agreement with one another. All would be impossible if Lessans were right. Indeed, if Lessans were right, the solution to Olber’s Paradox demonstrates that none of us would be alive, because the temperature of the earth would be about that of the sun.

Why? Nothing changes other than how our brain and eyes work to allow us to see the real world, not an image of it.

And btw, if Lessans were right, the GPS in your phone and car would spectacularly fail.

No it wouldn't. You're taking this way out of proportion

Moreover, we discussed all of these IN DETAIL with you at FF. And do you recall what you always said when you were backed into a scientific and logical corner?

“Something else must be going on there.”

Actually, nothing else is going on because nothing changes in regard to light. We just see the object in real time instead of the image in delayed time.

 

[peacegirl]

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

Which are?

Are you kidding me?

How hard is this for you to understand? When I look at a photo in a book of Abraham Lincoln, I am looking, in the present, at an image from the past.

You are looking at an image from the past, yes, but you are looking at the image of Abraham Lincoln in real time.

When I look at a Hubble deep space image of the universe as it was shortly after the big bang, I am looking, in the present, at an image from the past.

This is where we differ. The telescope is viewing what is happening in the present, not the past.

When I look at the sun, I am seeing, in the present, an image whose light was generated 8.5 minutes in the past. Therefore I am seeing the sun as it was eight and a half minutes ago.

No. You are seeing the Sun as it is at this moment, not 81/2 minutes later. Again, you're not telling me anything new. You're just regurgitating what you think is true.

 

[pood]

@ peacegirl.

 

[peacegirl]

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

Yet there are multiple lines of evidence to support the speed of light, distance travelled, etc. And I still don't understand how Lassan's point of view on this point relates modifying human behaviour in order to make the world a better place.

It doesn’t.

Yes it does. Did you read post 1086? DBT, you are getting a small taste of what this knowledge can actually do. I offered the book to you as a gift. The offer still stands. Only then will you be able to see how this blueprint actually can change our world for the better. The belief that the eyes are a sense organ has to do with the hurt that words have caused. He explains how this occurs. I don't believe anyone read even the small excerpt that I painstakingly posted. I will not be posting it again.

 

[peacegirl]

@ peacegirl.

 

[Crumb]

That we see the image from delayed light and therefore we see the past is the present-day take on what is happening, but I still say that there are reasons that made Lessans say they got it wrong.

Yet there are multiple lines of evidence to support the speed of light, distance travelled, etc. And I still don't understand how Lassan's point of view on this point relates modifying human behaviour in order to make the world a better place.

It doesn’t.

Yes it does. Did you read post 1086? ...snip

Post 1086 (Which can be read here: https://iidb.org/threads/revolution...-determinism-and-free-will.28694/post-1229786) does not show or describe any connection between seeing objects in real time and any change in human behavior. Also, he spends a ridiculous number of words just explaining what "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" means, As if we don't already know. And then never really seems to get back to the supposed point.

 

[bilby]

The truth is what we all want, which, in this case, has not yet been established beyond any doubt.

The truth of anything other than statements in pure mathematics will never be established beyond any doubt.

Beyond a reasonable doubt is a perfectly good standard.

It has been established beyond a reasonable doubt that the eye is a sense organ.

It has further been established beyond a reasonable doubt that you are a woolly thinker - you discard accuracy and precision, both when attempting to comprehend what others say, and when attempting to express what you think.

This renders discussion with you, for any purpose other than the comedic, utterly futile.