Arnold

Burke Chester, your presentations are not easy to follow, as it seems you are having a conversation with yourself. Why don't you use the reply or quote feature so that we know who or what you are responding to. You are sidestepping the normal format convention.

A pretty drastic cure for longevity; to stop breathing and eating.

Not even Rolls Royce is likely to have as much hand crafting.

Not consciousness, just patterns on a scope. Love is just patterns.

The technology of the turbine blades grown from crystals is amazing. I wish they explained a bit more on that.

As I said, imagine what he could have done for Saab. With innovations as sensible as this he is an asset to any company..

The fundamental cause is failure to think in principle. Epistemology. Only yesterday I was reading an editors column praising the virtue of uncertainty and the evils of judgment (which implies certainty). She had basically thrown in the towel in the battle to make sense of the world. Now it was a virtue to claim your lack of understanding as some kind of wisdom. One mustn't be too fanatical. I keep pointing out that if an idea is good, why is it wrong to be extremely committed to it.

My understanding is that one pulls up alongside the rock, and uses enough power to keep from 'sticking' to it. As you slowly pull away, you drag the rock with you.

His point that there are no evil ideas, only evil people implies that the ideas have no connection with the evil people do. I would almost say the opposite; that one cannot be evil without choosing accepting evil ideas. If an idea is irrational, is it not evil by its very nature, a denial of the place of reason for survival?

Well, what about this Forum? I belong to the Pentax Forum as well because of a common interest. Many special interest forums exist already.

Well it's worth every penny. The format is like a book, so you end up with both pages open as in real life. I then double tap to bring up the selected page to fill the screen. This is fine, although a dedicated version for the iPad which scrolled the pictures independent of the book format might be a consideration.

You should not discount the extra dollar. If a dollar turns people off, they were not interested anyway. I ordered the ebook on the Australian site. For your interest the AUD price is $12.52. (about $13 US) I paid with a Canadian visa currency so quite a few exchange rates conversions involved.

Well that takes me back. Good to see this and it shows that intellect rather than a Tom Cruise Top-Gun mentality dominates. You can certainly see the technology is from the sixties apart from the INS which we had on the DC8 in the seventies. Speaking of the DC8, this one belonged to our company, (was one I crewed in the sixties and seventies) and was the first airliner ever to break the sound barrier. What modern aircraft offer over the old ones is efficiency, not speed. http://www.dc-8jet.com/0-dc8-sst-flight.htm The work load on these old airplanes is way higher than the computer filled late generation airliners. The whole atmosphere has changed as the tasks you see them actively engage in are now done silently by the computers. That is why only two pilots are now sufficient to manage. Sadly, while the technology has improved safety, basic flying skills have suffered as a result of engagement with the computers at the expense of awareness of the airplane's situation. Witness Air France losing control of a flight in cruise out of Rio, and several other similar examples.

Asking for evidence of Objectivism is both vague and rather meaningless. That the philosophy exists is obvious - see any book written on it, see this Forum. Objectivism is basically the recognition of reality; not a theory. It is a philosophy that is objective in the sense that what is, is, and just wishing doesn't change that. Every concept you use, must have a connection to reality, if it is to be objective or make sense. It is Objectivism that explains the systematic thinking required to make that connection. Reality is the final arbitrator on whether your thinking is correct, and that is where you should look. Playing around with a jumble of words unconnected and ill defined and expecting to arrive at an understanding, isn't going to work.

Intelligent test driver. No wonder these cars cost so much.

I seem to have messed up the quote line. My answer to the above is this following: I believe you evade because you have ignored questions I put to you. You also evade that when saw your brain functioning and producing consciousness, you were viewing it with that consciousness which is the mind. The mind is your consciousness, and if you are aware you are conscious, then you are aware you have a mind. Go ahead and evade some more, but don't call yourself rational in this regard.

Consciousness IS the mind. If you accept one, you must accept the other.

I wish everyone was as fussy as this. A true dedication to the value of standards.

I wish his well.

Asking where someone or thing is, always implies a given time even if it is not explicitly stated. For something in motion, there is no fixed "period" that a location is occupied, but only a point in time that can be narrowed to an infinetly small length, likewise narrowing the accuracy of position. Thus, the car covered 'this distance' in one second, therefore one thousandth the distance in one thousandth of a second and so on. A moving object cannot be stationary for any length of time by definition.

Please help me find the information in Morse code, because then you will find the mind.

When you ask where he is, you must at least give a time. The more precisely you fix the time, the more precisely you fix the position.

For the third time you refuse to answer my question. I assume you have no answer. Once again, where is the manifestation of something that exists, in this case, the information carried by Morse code?

I asked you at least once before. Where is the information contained in Morse Code. You see only dots and dashes which are the physical manifestation. Please don't dodge this again; what is the form of the information? Pretend a Martian asks you to show a scan of the information, and is not satisfied with dots and dashes. He will tell you that all he sees is facts and the facts are dots and dashes. He demands you show him the information, not the dots and dashes. Please answer this time.