Whats is your secret talent?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Ecthy


What nonsense, he's never started a discussion on it on this thread in the first place. He stated an opinion of his, offered a piece of his own POV. The only one discussing things here are you, and Wezil. If you don't care for his POV, why not just ignore him?

You know that I wasn't talking about religion? So he did start the discussion on it in this thread.

JM

[Ecthy]

"You need to broaden your mind" was not a proper reply to his enquiry on your belief-based non-proof of god.

[Elok]

I don't have a problem with being religious, obviously, or I wouldn't be so myself. Nor do I object to Buddhism (though his particular brand isn't among my favorite examples of the faith). I have a problem with condescending missionary-work disguised as "just giving my perspective on things." I don't want to hear Thomas Aquinas's POV from BK, tenth-century Rabbi Whoever's from LOTM, or self-actualization seminars from some hippie in California. If you've found peace, enlightenment, etc., fine, I'm happy for you, but if I want it I'll ask for it. Don't assume I'm one of the wretched masses miserably waiting for the serenity only you can give me.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Ecthy
"You need to broaden your mind" was not a proper reply to his enquiry on your belief-based non-proof of god.

I never gave a beleif-based non-proof of god. I wasn't talking about that subject. He posted completely ignoring the subject matter of my post, and I pointed that out to him.

Apparently you also completely ignored what my post was saying.

Once more, I never gave or tried to give a proof of god in my post. I wasn't talking about religion, it's proofs, or properties other then referencing the possibility that it lies outside of the natural world, as defined by my first definition.

He, and yourself, completely missed the point of my post and the subject matter of my and Kuciwalker's discussion.

I suggest that you both reread my and Kuciwalker's posts in this thread, and try to look at it from a broader perspective.

JM

[Alinestra Covelia]

Not so much a talent as an affliction but...

My eyes are really sensitive to light. I suspect there may be something up with either my retina or my iris.

Sitting at a traffic light, I only need to glance at the red light and then for a good 10 seconds or so afterwards there will be a cyan afterimage of that light in my field of vision. If the light is very bright, like a desklamp with yellow light, the afterimages are green when I close my eyes and purple when I open them and they usually last for upwards of three or four minutes.

On an overcast day, driving around, I'll get an inverted triangle of slightly reddish afterimages floating in my field of vision (usually the sky, bounded with lines of buildings or trees to the sides, hence making an inverted triangle shape). On bright days it becomes a massive blob of crimson that hangs there, making the entire sky appear pink after a while even when it's really blue.

Sometimes I "lose" entire fields of my vision, usually when it's very hot. I put this down to minor heat stroke. My vision is perfect, except for a random portion which will be filled with nothing but nonsensical shimmering, like boiling water. It's only happened a handful of times, and most times it's on the peripheries, but one time I got it particularly bad, and the center of my vision blotted out with this shimmering. I could look directly at my father's nose and see his mouth, his eyebrows, and his cheeks and ears, but not be able to make out his eyes or nose at all.

Less drastically, I can look into a light and see two types of artifacts, which my optician says is two different types of cells:

There's the "frogspawn" type, which manifests either in large, circular silhouettes that float gently around, sometimes even in lines with a membrane connecting them. They called these "floaters", and said these were just cells that had detached from the inside of the eyeball and were floating around in the vitreous humor inside the eye.

Then there's the "Brownian motion" type which are far smaller and which move extremely quickly in wormlike patterns. They're so small it's hard to tell if they have a color, or if they're just points of light. My optician said this is a far rarer phenomenon and may be the white blood cells passing through blood vessels physically in the lens of the eye or in the cornea.

My brother, mother, and father have never reported anything like this.

[Ecthy]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
I never gave a beleif-based non-proof of god. I wasn't talking about that subject. He posted completely ignoring the subject matter of my post, and I pointed that out to him.

Apparently you also completely ignored what my post was saying.

Once more, I never gave or tried to give a proof of god in my post. I wasn't talking about religion, it's proofs, or properties other then referencing the possibility that it lies outside of the natural world, as defined by my first definition.

He, and yourself, completely missed the point of my post and the subject matter of my and Kuciwalker's discussion.

I suggest that you both reread my and Kuciwalker's posts in this thread, and try to look at it from a broader perspective.

JM

Wow.

I just looked at it from a broader perspective and now I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU MEAN.

You know, if you want people to change their perspective on some opinion piece you might actually try and give an idea about how they should change their perspective. I don't even care if he replied to oyur post properly or not, your comeback was just dumb. This post of yours says basically the same, just more verbose.

[-Jrabbit]

AliCo --

How often do you see your optometrist? Have you reported these things? Next time through, I strongly suggest that you do. I'm not suggesting there's a problem, but your sense of sight is not to be taken lightly. Annual checkups.
Word.

[Jon Miller]

I and Kuciwalker were talking about the possibility of something existing beyond the natural world. I gave a definition of natural which Kuci agreed with. I then gave examples of ways in which doubt about the natural world being all that exists could arise. I was discussing the beleif that everything could be modeled and experimented on within reality.

Now this beleif is valid (that is to say, it is possible to have this beleif and be internally consistent in ones beleifs), but it is by no means the only beleif that one may have. And a lot of people don't have it, including scientists/mathematicians.

Note that this discussion is entirely divorced from some discussion about God or His nature, or 'proofs' of His existence, which Blake (and yourself) in your limited perspective took it to be. In fact, many of the physicists who I know who don't have the beleif that everything that is in this universe can be probed/modeled are atheists.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
AliCo --

How often do you see your optometrist? Have you reported these things? Next time through, I strongly suggest that you do. I'm not suggesting there's a problem, but your sense of sight is not to be taken lightly. Annual checkups.
Word.

I know some peopel whoa re light sensative and wear sunglasses during the day.

JM

[Ecthy]

A note like "That has nothing to do with my post" would have been more to the point than "broaden your mind" which just makes you look like a hippie.

[Jon Miller]

In my defense, Blakes posts are a bit hippy and I was trying to be funny.

JM

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


I know some peopel whoa re light sensative and wear sunglasses during the day.

JM

Really? Most people I know only wear sunglasses at night, so they can so they can

[Heresson]

I can touch teh tip of my nose with my tongue

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by snoopy369


Keep making one smiley posts and I'll take care of the first half of that...

[Darius871]

Wait wait wait, LotC is totally full of it, correct? Is there a doctor in the house?