Wind god

António Pedro Marques · 05 Nov 2010, 20:17 · from 2010-November.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW50w7NuaW8gUGVkcm8gTWFycXVlcw==?=)
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 20:17:21 +0000
Subject: (urth) Wind god
In-Reply-To: <4CD461F2.5040004 at gmail.com>
References: <SNT123-W1A8203753DA49C7A4C19FCF4C0 at phx.gbl>	<1c7a7817449d26dbf9f66f408d6dd2bd.squirrel at webmail.prismnet.com>	<4CD448C1.8030002 at gmail.com>	<4CD44DB5.20103 at gmail.com>	<4CD4590B.5030104 at gmail.com>
	<4CD461F2.5040004 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CD46651.8020107 at gmail.com>

James Wynn wrote (05-11-2010 19:58):
> (...) "people" regularly, and irritatingly, declare things "proved" or
> proved false that have not in fact been proven.

Everyone's entitled to their opinions. Not to their facts. If the word
'green' isn't there, it isn't there, and repeatedly discussing why it *is*
there is inconsiderate.

> I don't find Lee's GUT compelling, but (...)

I'm not criticising his GUT (I'm all for everyone developing their own 
contradictory and wild ideas - honest - what I'm not for is people making up 
their facts and not even acknowledging that).

Except of course for what made the acronym pop up in the first place: 1) 
it's a scheme that tramples evidence and as such tells us more about its 
proponent than about the books, 2) it posits that the books follow a scheme, 
which is unwarranted (and detracting, in my opinion).

> (...) people have made false jumps only to land serendipitously on some
> unlooked for fact

Could happen, but it's not a method.

> (such as the "red monkey" connections Lee brought up earlier --it was
> Lee right?).

Hard to tell when few respect the mingboggingly simple way of attributing
and replying to messages, but I think so, spurred by Ryan.

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net