stick with the points at hand, GT - PLEASE?
Sam F: firstly - human beings are really, really not best understood as corresponding to critters 'behaving' under some supposedly disinterested scientist's scrutiny (yet the word continues to intrude) - human beings are sign-bearing creatures of _intention_ ..and all the multifarious levels of same that this entails.. so when you combine 'significant' with 'behaviour' i have to _wonder_ what you can possibly, possibly have in mind! (THINK about that for a second!)
so you, Sam F, really believe you have justified Islander's quoted blurting...? (oh no, you chaps just never blurt, now doooo you...)
i do thank you for the link back to that warmest broth of a time when many here were willing to kick, it seemed, the most gentle and humorous of ass..
..reading through those earlier comments i am struck by the manifest presence OF no less than a sweetly purring respect, running as it clearly was through all of them - even though the real point-of-contention was never directly addressed or confronted - the point that HIV science has never, to this day, met the established criteria for isolation of its prize 'exhibit'..
Mr Brown - MR BROWN! (how close you came to ending up as a lovable T-Shirt!) your disingenuousness above takes me by terrific surprise!
as you will (i hope) recall, in our 'personal contact' i asked you, repeatedly, for a good working definition of this idea most cherished by PA - the "post which is made in good faith" This definition you elected never to supply me with; and so did i have to continue with my blind experimentation! And assume that so many fiendish shibboleths may be what comprise its real meaning!!!
what is religious in its nature can never, ever be examined too closely. Sam F's sentiment that what is 'religious' is merely so much shop talk for 'closed-mindedness' ensures that, for the time being that PA has got its work cut out for it..
it is all very well to be asked to "leave a party" but a party in progress do i perceive here NOT - 'tis more like trying to crack open a Gemeinschaft with a fake ID - even when i used my real name once and was roundly rejected!!!
this just to begin... for i do not rest easy with the notion that one 'belongs' in such and such a blog or not - taking, as a 'renegade christian hellraiser' as i do the world as one single scene, curiously wanting forever for a new scapegoat, i can only refuse at every point to rest my 'case'
well, bypassing the rather unbelievable "what abuse?" followed straight away by an issuance of stiock version of same ("troll" ad nauseam) - the least islander could do is come up with some inventive abuse fr criminey's sake - and now s/he be claiming to have been 'baited' by someone with a 'history of baiting', heck, it's all just waaaaay too paranoid for me - all i wanted to do was have a free discussion with you about how you understand, in what exactly you think consists, this animal 'awareness' of mortality.. for it seems to me you are talking about simple reaction to a threat coming from an animal's environment ( i realise of course that the slaughterhouse is somewhat of a departure from environment, but..heh ) is there anywhere to be found "evidence" (and iwhat representational form would this take precisely?) that any of these cited creatures comprise in themselves a subjective brick wall by which their very finitude is conceived? By which they attempt in vain contemplate the loss of all body and context on an absolutely unknowable horizon? ie that they are "aware" of death???? Islander's typically glib talk of 'species' and 'behaviours' sounds to me like nothing so much a person desperate to deny, semiotically at the very least, the awesome burden of her humanity at any - or possibly the least - cost, and grabbing at the lightest scientific straws available to he/r at every moment..
pollywog sounds like real fun - tech got us into it tech gets us out of it - seems plain as day aye, ah, but PA personnel are a whole lot more religious than they know/care to let on! Christian belief depends however not nearly so much on the "conservative" as faith in the utterl;y unprecedented - who is here to prove otherwise?
best from Mr Whitebait, the littlest p pill of all..
"...I have no idea whether other species are aware of their incipient mortality - though many many species are aware of death/proximity of death"
i think its too much whisky!
awfully sorry chaps, but Islander's recent assertions can't really be overlooked: how the hell does s/he know that "many many species" are in possession of mortal knowledge? No more abuse please Islander, just state yer case clearly and forthrightly...
The thought being, the quicker we use up the 'cheap' fuel the quicker renewables will come on board
precisely the same applies to our language hereupon..
(to denialise, or be denialised, that is the active/passive binary always retrojecting the series of bifurcations it has emerged out of, requiring us to always create another scene 'pon which the terms of the ((initiallly) right choice will not have been violated..)
my request i hope is a modest one:
may the discussion proceed further minus the noisy
- and methinks somewhat superfluous - references to "deniers"
and how "delusional" they may (or may not) be?
i mean, are we a coven of psychologists at work here or what?
for there still exist out here those of us who are still wholly undecided, and for whom the barrage of new information remains a virtual spinning-jenny in the side, and who do not really need to be reminded again and again how despicable is 'the other side' and possibly also, by implication, how deep appears to have been buried the event of initial CC-consent on the part/in the minds of so many avid PA'ers..
let's just get with the hottest Anecdata... okay?
(& yeah yeah so i happen to i write weirdlywiddly style o' prose so deal with it, what are ya)
(i fail to see in what sense the shit you actually end up doing constitutes any kind of service whatsoever to the community - when in nz i was zapped for brazenly trying to liberate certain library books from the biblioteques's balcony, and my destiny turned out to be daily schlepping on down to a place called 'Youthtown'. there to watch newborn breakdancers frantically doing boot camp for the imminent arrival of Missy Elliot, and that, my frenz, was ALL i did, so help me godzone..) luv frm mr.on-topic
it may or may not be apposite for the community present-to-itself at this time to compare the idea that (in this instance) 'celebrity is exploited, it doesn't exploit itself' with the idea of internet 'trolls', and in this respect i offer up the following comment
"I am not trying to troll anyone, but the more people think I am, the more it becomes a natural response" (which was found midst commentary on the musician Bon Iver, and made by a fellow who has very poignant questions to ask about the formation-of-opinion about music(s) indeed, yet is roundly resisted or ignored by persons who just wanna go BLAAAH all the time), and i even had the thought that you chaps may well find it nourishing to issue me with parking tickets - in whatever form you conceive the issuance of these to manifest itself properly - for every minute 'beyond my welcome' i do spend signifrying here in your pan..
..in hopes of complexifying the convo as always