Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Where Bel-Shamharoth Says Hello to kathleen - and Good Bye to me


1) [comments on] Testing Geocentrism, Part 2 · 2) Debate under one of my comments to previous · 3) Debate under three other of my remarks on previous to previous, part a · part b · part c · 4) Where Bel-Shamharoth Says Hello to kathleen - and Good Bye to me · 5) Where Booth the Grey Continues the Debate · 6) Where Tolland Proves Himself a Jerk

Continued
from 3 part a.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
"I'm toying with the idea of blocking you and you ill-thought-out arguments altogether. Please don't influence me to do so."

Not sure whether my saying so will influence you, but do. However, first, take a look at my blog where these debates are being mirrored.

[links to previous three]

A notification is sooner or later due, and if you had already blocked me, it would be hard to make one.

Bel-Shamharoth
+Hans-Georg Lundahl Good. Now I can let all your viewers know that you are a sham. You have no citations other than yourself, no evidence for anything you say except for some snippets of text and a two thousand year old tome about an angry, unjust, unloving and unforgiving god, and no reason for anyone outside your circle to believe you. If you insist on continuing your belief, then fine. In my experiences, online forums are the worst places to convince people of anything. But I will say that the only the ones who will believe you are the ones who are already convinced that you are correct. So hello to all your subscribers. Believe what you want, but don't expect to be vindicated any time soon.

+Hans-Georg Lundahl Incidentally, I would like to say that I am rather upset that you recorded our conversations without my permission. While There is not much that can be done about it, and in the long run it really isn't a big deal, I fear that all you have accomplished is worsening my already bad mood. I do not like being recorded at all, let alone without my knowledge or permission, but as I mentioned, I have been in a bad mood lately, so what you have posted online is essentially me at my worst. Had the circumstances been different, perhaps I could have put up a better fight, but as it stands, I simply don't find it worth the effort. So I would also like to tell your viewers that I am far from an exemplar of the scientific viewpoint. I am just an asshole on YouTube that stupidly got himself into a fight that should never have happened. So if this is going on record, I would like to officially apologize for my behavior, and retire from this debate. I would also like to encourage people to do the research on their own and find out for themselves, and not to just believe the first thing they see on the internet.

P.S. I realize after the fact that this message is drastically different in tone to my previous one. Consider this one my true response. Again, I have been in a bad mood lately, so I have been irritable as a result.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
"Now I can let all your viewers know that you are a sham."

Readers.

"You have no citations other than yourself"

Linking to Riccioli. But you already said that.

"no evidence for anything you say"

Some things I say are not so much factual claims as logical observations, therefore do not need to be backed up by evidence - other than the one provided by my opponents.

"except for some snippets of text"

Which is evidence enough for what Riccioli thought. I am btw not referring to any by myself known original research on his part, he was in the cited volume simply an author of a standard work - Almagestum Novum being the last standard work of Geocentric Astronomy (not even Sungenis can take its place, since that is not a work "teaching astronomy" in all aspects, but a polemic about a limited number of contested points in it).

"and a two thousand year old tome about an angry, unjust, unloving and unforgiving god,"

Unforgiving is blatantly false, He forgave Peter's denial and Thomas' doubt and Mary Magdalen's sins against chastity and Matthew's and Zacchaeus' against economic honesty and the to us secret sins of the lame man.

Two thousand years old is a few decades too many for books of NT and millennia too few for oldest ones of OT.

"and no reason for anyone outside your circle to believe you."

Except the reasons I give by logical deductions from points raised by opponents, or commonly known.

Or in very few cases, shown to be historically accurate by some snippets of text. I linked to a work where the context of those snippets can be verified.

"If you insist on continuing your belief, then fine. In my experiences, online forums are the worst places to convince people of anything."

To convince opponents of anything.

We argue not just or even not mainly for each other, but to convince one or other silent person among readers.

"But I will say that the only the ones who will believe you"

But I am not asking people to "believe me" as some expert on little known fact or some key witness to sth seen by a few. I am asking my readers to reason - about points I raise.

"are the ones who are already convinced that you are correct."

If believing were the main issue, perhaps.

"So hello to all your subscribers."

On this blog it's myself and kathleen, I suppose kathleen will appreciate your politesse.

However, judging from stats, my daily readers are more than she and myself.

"Believe what you want, but don't expect to be vindicated any time soon."

Might depend on how much our arguments become known to the public.

Btw, I felt I was mainly vindicated when I saw the video with Don Petit's experiment. Perhaps not for the last time.

"Incidentally, I would like to say that I am rather upset that you recorded our conversations without my permission."

I did so with quite a few.

"While There is not much that can be done about it, and in the long run it really isn't a big deal, I fear that all you have accomplished is worsening my already bad mood."

Read sth you like then.

Like my opponents on other posts of same blog - or like sth not at all related to me.

"So I would also like to tell your viewers that I am far from an exemplar of the scientific viewpoint. I am just an asshole on YouTube that stupidly got himself into a fight that should never have happened."

I am reminded of Tom Trinko. A Catholic but a Heliocentric.

On top of the posts of our correspondence, I have published his statement:

I Tom Trinko have not really been spending too much effort refuting Hans for the simple reason that life is too short to spend the time necessary to refute every point raised by someone who knows nothing of what they are talking about.

As such I apologize for not having spent the time to explain in detail why Hans is wrong.


He and you believe if you had only been in a better mood or less tired or less irritated at myself, you could have won.

I am homeless. I have toothache, scabies, too little sleep, too irregular meals (not just too little, sometimes opposite), people who spit when passing me mornings and evenings beyond library opening hours when I beg.

And somehow I never felt the need to take this into any apology for my own show.

"So if this is going on record,"

It is.

"I would like to officially apologize for my behavior, and retire from this debate."

Both accepted.

"I would also like to encourage people to do the research on their own and find out for themselves, and not to just believe the first thing they see on the internet."

My sentiments too, except I would add classrooms and text books to "first things they see on etc.".

After all, on your view Almagestum Novum, a standard textbook of astronomy back from geocentric days, decides for a view which you consider absurd.

Angelic movers is a thing you consider absurd.

"P.S. I realize after the fact that this message is drastically different in tone to my previous one. Consider this one my true response. Again, I have been in a bad mood lately, so I have been irritable as a result."

I have not suffered much, except a few moments of irritation, considerably less than some such provoked in my other main up to now situation.

[The one on the streets]

[plus link with notification.]

Bel-Shamharoth
+Hans-Georg Lundahl I read the post. Thank you for accepting my apology. And with that, I believe our business is concluded. Have a nice day.


On to next.

No comments: