Leaderboard

As someone who's still a Christian, I found nothing in your posts to draw my interest-which is why I found nothing worth commenting on. What I found was some link-dumping (just a link with no real commentary), and some cheerful blurbing (boy howdy, this is some great stuff!) Since this is a DISCUSSION forum, I expect to actually DISCUSS things. People who show up with just links usually are members of an ex-twi group who are posting links to their ex-twi group....and sometimes they pretend they're not a member of the group. (On an unrelated Christian board, I once ran into a drive-by post by Jeff of CES who said, in effect, "Gee, I found this website with some unusual stuff on it. What do you guys think?" with a link to his own content from the CES website. I responded immediately and called him on it. He never replied. Either it was a true drive-by and he never visited again, or he cut his losses when he realized he was caught. So, your posts. They were vague comments about someone's content on YouTube. They didn't even have the direct links to the content. So, I would have had to look them up to find out about what you WEREN'T saying about it. On message-boards, playing coy (being vague and indirect) usually backfires in either the short or long-term. I don't know WHY you posted that way. I just know that it's a formula for keeping me DISinterested.

Who? What? Where? When? How? And beware those articles that give you information overload - only it's not information, it's just words, words, words. I like to read articles with a mental red pen to cross out all the "filler" words and pseudo or irrelevant information. Sometimes there's not much left! And when I'm reading a news report, I mentally substitute loaded verbs with more neutral ones. "Admit" is a good one for that: try using a word like "acknowledge" or "concur" or even just "said."

Ran across a series titled "The Eighties" and it was pretty good. While watching, this thought came into me head - "Too bad I missed it." Realized once again that we were divorced from normal life and thought that was normal. Like not being part of the human race or something.

A topic I find most fascinating and have for years. Earlier Wednesday evening, I read an article about The 14 Fake Olive Oil Companies. The lede: "It was found that even 7 of the biggest olive oil makers in the USA, mix their items with cheap oils to get more profits. Namely, one of the products we regard as healthiest and a remedy for longevity has been corrupted." The good news -- at the bottom of the page, a source for the data and the claims was cited. The bad news -- at the linked page, there was NO source cited for the data or the claims. No scientific or academic analysis or study was given to provide credibility for the claims. About 15 years ago, I took a newswriting class. The veteran journalist who instructed the class drove home to me that I must never (when writing a news story) use the passive voice. So, I now always ask, when I read "It was found that..." BY WHOM? And how did they find it? The source website, Natural Cures House, apparently makes all sorts of health and diet related claims but I didn't find ANY source citations for any of them that I read. (Note that I did not claim they never include citations. I didn't read all of the articles they have, so I don't know if they ever cite their sources) Harry Frankfurt, a retired Princeton professor, a few years ago wrote an essay "On Bull*hit" Natural Cures House struck me as a classic example of the kind of thing Prof Frankfurt wrote. NCH doesn't seem to care at all whether what they publish is true or false. Then, as I browsed on Amazon, a link came up to a book by Maria Konnikova titled Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes. I read some of the sample content. Konnikova begins with the story of a man convicted of mutilating livestock in England in 1903 and how later (after the man was out of prison) author Arthur Conan Doyle figured out that the guy could not have committed the crime. Then Konnikova writes, "What Sherlock Holmes offers is not just a way of solving a crime. It is an entire way of thinking, a mindset that can be applied to countless enterprises far removed from the foggy streets of the London underworld. ... Holmes recommends that we start with the basics. As he says in our first meeting with him, "Before turning to those moral and mental aspects of the matter which present the greatest difficulties, let the enquirer begin by mastering more elementary problems." The scientific method begins with the most mundane seeming of things: observation..." It's been roughly 40 years since I took Wierwille's Advance Class on PFLAP. And I long ago got rid of the syllabus. So, details are not razor sharp in my mind. But I seem to recall Wierwille, in that class labeling Conan Doyle as a spiritualist. Would it be any wonder that a cult programmer like Wierwille would have an interest in discouraging his students from developing critical thinking skill by reading and emulating Sherlock Holmes? It's also not surprising at all (to me) that we have a political figure in a position of power today who is discouraging people from exercising critical thinking, which is what happens when he laments "fake news" that seeks to hold him to account for his words and actions.

boy isn't that the truth...after we left in '86 there were times we'd immerse ourselves in "worldly" music, TV shows, and music. Steve Winwood's song Back in the High Life Again became our theme.

Rocky you’ve got to stop bringing up books that are on my reading list! Now I have to take a break from The Guns of August…just kidding …but I do have Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes on my Kindle…it’s gonna be awhile before I get to it -I have a lot of reading material on WWI. Seriously, I really do appreciate hearing about interesting books. You mentioning Frankfurt’s book On Bull$hit got me to check it out on Amazon – and you know the spot where they suggest other books “to buy all three” or put on your wish list – I put on my wish list that and another of Frankfurt’s books along with a third that looked real interesting by Aaron James A$$holes: A Theory – I think that one is right up my…hmmmm….alley – yeah that’s it. Anything that encourages critical thinking is interesting to me. I get your point of seeing similarities - wierwille’s mind-numbing techniques and a current trend by some to promote “alternative facts”. Oh I love that! (love how the bull$hit is so unabashedly thrown out there - said with a straight face...if it was me, i would be squirming, eyes darting around, nervous - i mean anyone with that kind of "talent" could start their own cult). I just started the fourth season of Fringe and by now have gotten used to keeping track of what happens in our universe and what happens in the alternate universe…is this life imitating art?.... If my theory is right – this breakthrough on understanding bull$hit is going to be huge folks!

For a year now I've been taking rock & roll songs from the 50's thru 70's & making them about the Lord instead of the heartbreak & lost loves alot of them are negatively about....well hey..I recently discovered a group called the "Steel City Quartet" on youtue who have a group of songs..re-works of alot of the Platters & Righteous bros. hits....this may really "float your boat"..it does mine..as they're a tad corney but fn IMHO..enjoy enjoy.JJ