comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Talk about noise music. Reviews, rants, whatever.

Moderator: xome

Post Reply
User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 2010
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by WhiteWarlock » Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:03 pm

in all honesty the word "Jews" is mistranslation
from the second revised king james babble in the late 18th cntury
from the word Iudaeus
yet the actual word in hebrew is IBRI
have had some good friends that are Askenazi
if they go against "the tribe" they will be ostracized/punished
they don't agree with the treatment of the Palistinians
yet they dare not say it publicly
plus they are ashamed of the scams & crimes committed by their tribe
yet don't tell anybody
some people just assume so fucking much
and wholeheartedly buy into the PC lies/indoctrination
to make their illusion of reality work for their personal advancement
plus not risk their fucking comfort zones,cash flow, & Social climbing circles
so they lie to themselves and attack others not going with the PC system
for winning brownie points
~shrug~

puddysjacket
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 11:42 am

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by puddysjacket » Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:12 pm

MIND YOUR WHITE PRIVILEGE GUYS :lmao:

User avatar
WhiteWarlock
Posts: 2010
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:58 am

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by WhiteWarlock » Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:22 pm

how goes the script writing?

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by jliat » Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:26 pm

melkobukva wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 12:06 pm
jliat wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:31 am
melkobukva thinks Warlock isnt serious, i get the feeling from his posts and vitriol this might not be true, but IDK for sure.
no, what I actually think is that many have a flawed frame of reference
as if people's views come in pre-defined packages
you don't share a particular viewpoint
or you hold a particular viewpoint
then you are automatically assumed to also subscribe to the rest of the associated package
for example, if you don't trust vaccines or the official 9/11 story, you must also believe in UFOs and vote for Bad Orange Man
bullshit package deals peddled by the establishment to prevent people from thinking straight
"never question the party line, or you're literally hitler" :club:
You seem to be saying that there is a frame of reference which isn't flawed... and given
bullshit package deals peddled by the establishment to prevent people from thinking straight
and

fallen into the same conclusion. That is there is some associated package of the "establishment" and some "party line".

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by melkobukva » Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:25 am

jliat wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:26 pm
You seem to be saying that there is a frame of reference which isn't flawed... and given
Berlin and Kay posit seven levels in which cultures fall, with Stage I languages having only the colors black (dark–cool) and white (light–warm). Languages in Stage VII have eight or more basic color terms. This includes English, which has eleven basic color terms. The authors theorize that as languages evolve, they acquire new basic color terms in a strict chronological sequence; if a basic color term is found in a language, then the colors of all earlier stages should also be present. The sequence is as follows:

Stage I: Dark-cool and light-warm (this covers a larger set of colors than English "black" and "white".)
Stage II: Red
Stage III: Either green or yellow
Stage IV: Both green and yellow
Stage V: Blue
Stage VI: Brown
Stage VII: Purple, pink, orange, or gray

Every stage is flawed, because there are way more colors than color terms in all languages combined. But it sure helps to have more terms than two or three. What do you think?

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by jliat » Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:10 am

melkobukva wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:25 am
jliat wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:26 pm
You seem to be saying that there is a frame of reference which isn't flawed... and given
Berlin and Kay posit seven levels in which cultures fall, with Stage I languages having only the colors black (dark–cool) and white (light–warm). Languages in Stage VII have eight or more basic color terms. This includes English, which has eleven basic color terms. The authors theorize that as languages evolve, they acquire new basic color terms in a strict chronological sequence; if a basic color term is found in a language, then the colors of all earlier stages should also be present. The sequence is as follows:

Stage I: Dark-cool and light-warm (this covers a larger set of colors than English "black" and "white".)
Stage II: Red
Stage III: Either green or yellow
Stage IV: Both green and yellow
Stage V: Blue
Stage VI: Brown
Stage VII: Purple, pink, orange, or gray

Every stage is flawed, because there are way more colors than color terms in all languages combined. But it sure helps to have more terms than two or three. What do you think?
What do I think.

I wasn't aware of work of Berlin and Kay and I must admit I don't understand it. I must be missing something... but from memory the number of identified colours way back was always very many. Including things like the rainbow, but much more, things like brown, ochre, - pigments, if you paint, but also stuff like mushroom, mustard, navy blue, lilac, magnolia, ... and then all the range of house paints, sea mist, coral etc.
So as I said I must have this wrong. I mean these days there are hundreds of house paint colours, and people know and use them, likewise women's lipsticks.... knitting wools... ???

And as above if one paints, Naples yellow, cadmium yellow... various earth colours... raw Siena, Burnt Siena... terms in use from the renaissance, ultra marine (blue from over the sea) originally lapis lazuli …
early pigments were mostly earth colours, but gradually more were introduced, culminating in the industrial revolution were chemical colours could be made – ergo the bright colours of impressionism.

Hmmm must be missing something obvious here...

Anyway The Virgin wears blue, as it was once the most expensive pigment, the Pope the purple of Ceaser... Tyrian purple... cardinals wear scarlet not cardinal red it seems... though kitchen tiles were painted cardinal red, whilst carpets could be turkey red...

anyway wiki says “questioned the methodologies of data collection and the cultural assumptions underpinning the research”

Yes- Lipstick counter in Boots, Wool shop, Art Shop or shop selling house paints...would reveal very many colours...

So what do I think, i'm confused....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rainbow_Codes

Only the British could call Brown Bunny - original, unofficial name for Blue Peacock = ten-kiloton nuclear land mine...

killing raven sun
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by killing raven sun » Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:39 am

jliat wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:26 pm
You seem to be saying that there is a frame of reference which isn't flawed... and given
i think he is referring to expectations, where people act on what they think rather than what they experience, in your case you have preconceived notions of "science" and largely ignore facts to the contrary, your expectations become your reality, even when they are just delusion

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by jliat » Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am

killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:39 am
jliat wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:26 pm
You seem to be saying that there is a frame of reference which isn't flawed... and given
i think he is referring to expectations, where people act on what they think rather than what they experience, in your case you have preconceived notions of "science" and largely ignore facts to the contrary, your expectations become your reality, even when they are just delusion
I use the term "science" in various ways. And it depends on the context. i.e. The German idealists used the term, but very few now would regard what they undertook to be science. I suspect you use it to describe what you perceive to be reality.

The general - lets say - dictionary definition of the sciences, i do not think represents reality.


If you think i act on what i think and not experience, maybe in everyday, but not when making these 'things' called 'swans'. They arrive and are worked on without thought, reason or use.

killing raven sun
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by killing raven sun » Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am

jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
I use the term "science" in various ways.
yes, you personalize it, creating your expectations
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
I suspect you use it to describe what you perceive to be reality.
do you see how your expectations creep in here?
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
The general - lets say - dictionary definition of the sciences, i do not think represents reality.
of course not, its just a tool of understanding, or in your case misunderstanding
Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
If you think i act on what i think and not experience, maybe in everyday, but not when making these 'things' called 'swans'. They arrive and are worked on without thought, reason or use.
gibberish

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by jliat » Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am

killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
I use the term "science" in various ways.
yes, you personalize it, creating your expectations
Sometimes - others not. You use the term "STUPID SCIENTISTS " and cite "The reason they died out has been a matter of considerable scientific debate." Then at other times say that the electric universe guys are doing science.. and when I came across this without expectation
nn.JPG
nn.JPG (35.37 KiB) Viewed 531 times
One needs to read the introduction at least to get the idea of the title...
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
I suspect you use it to describe what you perceive to be reality.
do you see how your expectations creep in here?
Yes - and so if that is not what you think science is then it might be useful to know. As above you've used it to indicate stupidity, elsewhere some new insight into cosmology...
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
The general - lets say - dictionary definition of the sciences, i do not think represents reality.
of course not, its just a tool of understanding, or in your case misunderstanding
Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
I don't use science to understand the world or not to. I don't think the world is amenable to human understanding in its totality.. so in a sense an understanding without misunderstanding is not the whole world.
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
If you think i act on what i think and not experience, maybe in everyday, but not when making these 'things' called 'swans'. They arrive and are worked on without thought, reason or use.
gibberish
Yes - there is gibberish in the world - and science cant understand it, but its in the world...


sw.jpg
sw.jpg (11.99 KiB) Viewed 531 times

killing raven sun
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by killing raven sun » Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:47 am

jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:02 am
I use the term "science" in various ways.
yes, you personalize it, creating your expectations
Sometimes - others not.
its not up for debate, either you do or you dont, in your case you do
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
You use the term "STUPID SCIENTISTS " and cite "The reason they died out has been a matter of considerable scientific debate."
gibberish
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
Then at other times say that the electric universe guys are doing science.. and when I came across this without expectation
gibberish
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
One needs to read the introduction at least to get the idea of the title...
gibberish
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
As above you've used it to indicate stupidity, elsewhere some new insight into cosmology...
your misunderstanding of words is your problem alone, your opinion is irrelevant
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
I don't use science to understand the world or not to. I don't think the world is amenable to human understanding in its totality.. so in a sense an understanding without misunderstanding is not the whole world.
ok, but thats just empty philosophy, not science, your personal feelings are irrelevant
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
Yes - there is gibberish in the world - and science cant understand it, but its in the world..
no, you purposely manufacture nonsense to obfuscate your ignorance, nothing to do with science, just you being self important

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by jliat » Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:22 am

killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:47 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:19 am

yes, you personalize it, creating your expectations
Sometimes - others not.
its not up for debate, either you do or you dont, in your case you do
of course its up for debate... the first time one learns a word and apply it its not personal and there cannot be any expectation.
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:47 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
You use the term "STUPID SCIENTISTS " and cite "The reason they died out has been a matter of considerable scientific debate."
gibberish
Well they were your use of the term "science".
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:47 am

…..
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
As above you've used it to indicate stupidity, elsewhere some new insight into cosmology...
your misunderstanding of words is your problem alone, your opinion is irrelevant
actually no its those others involved =- like here you.
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:47 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
I don't use science to understand the world or not to. I don't think the world is amenable to human understanding in its totality.. so in a sense an understanding without misunderstanding is not the whole world.
ok, but thats just empty philosophy, not science, your personal feelings are irrelevant
But science has by many been considered philosophy... and natural philosophy is "natural philosophy - the science of matter and energy and their interactions" AKA physics... science. Or is philosophy to do with personal feelings in the main. And both are part of the world so any science which ignores them is lacking, only part knowledge.
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:47 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
Yes - there is gibberish in the world - and science cant understand it, but its in the world..
no, you purposely manufacture nonsense to obfuscate your ignorance, nothing to do with science, just you being self important
I've just said its nothing to do with science, and its in the world, ergo if you say its "nothing to do with science," then we have things in the world which are outside of science. So science cannot explain the world, only part, that part amenable to its disciplines and methods, whatever you consider them to be.

And if as you say science is from observation, then its very limited. If you watch the video you posted that is the very conclusion made by
Dr Michael Clarage wrote:... requires we change our perceptions also probably change the quality of our feelings... to overcome these limitations of perceptions more data alone will not lead us to a deeper understanding..."
(19.00 to end)

So maybe personal feelings are at least relleavent for Dr Clarage if not for yourself.

killing raven sun
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by killing raven sun » Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:08 am

jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:22 am
the first time one learns a word and apply it its not personal and there cannot be any expectation.
wrong. exactly the opposite is true, a word can only have meaning through personal relationship, over time less personal meanings may be gleaned, but in the beginning the understanding is pure expectation, you are really out of your element here
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
[bunch of gibberish]
:roll:
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:46 am
I've just said its nothing to do with science, and its in the world, ergo if you say its "nothing to do with science," then we have things in the world which are outside of science. So science cannot explain the world, only part, that part amenable to its disciplines and methods, whatever you consider them to be.
there is no reasonable misunderstanding of my words, you are simply making this about yourself again james, is your child porn getting boring?

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by jliat » Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:42 am

killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:08 am
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:22 am
the first time one learns a word and apply it its not personal and there cannot be any expectation.
wrong. exactly the opposite is true, a word can only have meaning through personal relationship, over time less personal meanings may be gleaned, but in the beginning the understanding is pure expectation, you are really out of your element here
Now you are contradicting yourself...
its not up for debate, either you do or you dont, in your case you do
in response to your
yes, you personalize it, creating your expectations
So here you are saying I personalize words but that is not always the case...
over time less personal meanings may be gleaned
So as an example someone uses a word I don't know, I look it up in a dictionary, no personal relationship, a given meaning.
In another I see a plant, look it up is a text book, now my experience is prior. As I said learning words and their use is dynamic, words can have their meanings changed over time and use, like 'science' and 'gay'. Examples I gave.
As for our element, we are both in a forum exchanging words. You now have contradicted yourself.


You also deleted the Dr Michael Clarage quote regarding feelings...
killing raven sun wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:08 am
your personal feelings are irrelevant
Dr Michael Clarage" wrote: requires we change our perceptions also probably change the quality of our feelings..
So you disagree with the lecture of his you posted.

killing raven sun
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: comp (no-one cares no-one will submit) idea!!?

Post by killing raven sun » Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:55 am

jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:42 am
Now you are contradicting yourself...
more obfuscation, why cant you debate without lying?
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:42 am
its not up for debate, either you do or you dont, in your case you do
in response to your
yes, you personalize it, creating your expectations
So here you are saying I personalize words but that is not always the case...
over time less personal meanings may be gleaned
once again, there is no reasonable misunderstanding of my words, you conflate two unrelated comments to distract from your pedophilia
jliat wrote:
Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:42 am
So as an example someone uses a word I don't know, I look it up in a dictionary, no personal relationship, a given meaning.
wrong. you have personalized every word in the definition, some may have less personal parameters, but all words are personal understanding of those parameters, as far as conflating that with science, which is a process outside words that we use words to describe, well thats just more obfuscation

you will always be my dog, how sad for you :lol:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 18 guests