Re: Choices & Free Will
You seem to have changed the premise of the debate along the way. Yes, I think it is time we review the premise of the debate that you put forward, and where we have been with addressing these statements:
I changed the premise along the way? Yes, let's review how I did.
I believe I have established that #1 is not unique to time travel, and that it likely applies to virtually any technology advancement. The example I gave was the Amish, and one can see how the development of several technologies (motors, telephones, etc.) impacted both their spiritual and human advancement. Recall from the rules of logic that I only need to cite one example to show that your alleged uniqueness of time travel is untrue. Furthermore, we cannot know if it DOES have a greater impact until we have quantified how TT can be possible within a universe that obeys certain scientific relationsips.
Yes, how appropriate. Though the premise did not change from this point on. And at best, the example you put forth was a generalization of the TTA's arguments in comparison to the Amish's stance on technology. Which was also shown to be false.
The technology and the advancement was specific, the relevance to New Age doctrines vs. that of standard traditional beliefs was to be made. The TTA even went as far as to let you know what my approach to this debate would be.
As for the unknown quantified impact, and how we could not go further in answering the debate in logical terms; if you knew this before hand and understood it's limits to answer more questions then there would be, why was a debate even considered with the TTA vs. just a discussion?
The phrasing for premise #2 implies a global assertion. IOW, it implies that this is ALWAYS true. You did not use the words "could be by unethical means." So as in any debate, I was addressing your premise, as stated, not a modified premise. You have agreed (and I assume modified your premise along the way) that use of TT may not ALWAYS be unethical, and therefore if there are cases where TT can be used ethically, one could find scenarios where it could possibly be used ethically for both spiritual and human advancement. Furthermore, again I must point out that you have no hope of properly establishing objective support for these statements unless and until you can point to quantified laws for how TT can, and cannot, be used. Just like Newton's law of F=ma restricts what we can do with bodies and forces, there will no doubt be limits on how TT can be used.
So this debate was a waste of time RMT. Really, you've asserted nothing new, but the obvious limits to seeing ethics in TT thus far.
Yes, you assume, but the premise was never modified along the way; you however adding an exaggerated interpretation & meaning to it not otherwise intended or reiterated by the TTA is the only change. If you wanted specifics and therefore made your own interpretation as result of not having any, you could have just asked.
The factor we both could agree on was on the 'good' & 'bad' uses of the technology. I believe the scenario was specific but limited to only this.
Based on the above explanation for the premises you laid out, and how I addressed them, then I believe either the debate is over, or you are trying to change the premises. If the latter is the case then certainly the original debtate is over because you have not been able to support these premises as they were originally stated.
I am not trying to change anything RMT. Really, if anyone here is showing any effort regarding the interpretation of the premise is you. I merely wanted to continue on the spiritual advancement aspect of the premise and look at this comprehensively. But as we have seen, according to the logical terms, it's just not easily quantifiable.
I suggested a formal debate because this has long been a valid format for people to engage each other in discussions of what can be validated as true, and what is mere propaganda and unsubstantiated information.
Yes, but this place is only an Institute by name, not an actual university or place to have a formal debate. And as I have stated to you, that the TTA is not a scientifically based individual. Most of the time, one can't expect to have a formal debate with the common lay-man who doesn't know the rules of following a formal debate. You're an engineer for goodness sakes, and I believe you do your job right, so it's probably only a given that you'd be quite good at logical debates.
But for everything else, there's discussions, meetings, PTA's. Not everything needs a formal format for discussion. And not every discussion needs to be taken to an extreme by experts. I believe some people reading over the posts of the TTI right now, may have ideas of their own that they wish to express, but may be intimidate if the forum is full of sharks, who are waiting for fresh meat to tear apart.
This approach strikes me as very inhuman and radical. But we may disagree on this as well.
As such, I hope you would agree that a debate does rely on being able to substantiate ones claims. We can start another thread if you like, and discuss under any rules you wish. However, you should know me well enough by now that I am not going to give you a "free pass" to use your subjective beliefs as some sort of "evidence" that TT is being used on you to subjugate your will.
So how different will this new thread be again from this debate, I missed your point.
As I have pointed out, and you have not addressed, the "diagnosis" for what you have experienced could have one of many other explanations. You have simply fixed it in your mind that you "know" it was TT being used against you. That is a subjective belief, not an objective fact. Just like I could claim a subjective belief that aliens come and party with me every Friday night at my house (they are really lousy pool players).
What comes out of this belief if they do come over to play pool with you? Possibly nothing? However, experiences with actual real manifestation that can be seen and tested, if some are willing to investigate and examine them is another.
No, I am afraid science adheres to a much higher standard than this, TTA. Again I use the alien example with respect to UFOs: If several (untrained) people observed what they THOUGHT were UFOs in the night sky over Phoenix, they certainly all experienced the same thing. They could even convince themselves that they are CERTAIN they saw real UFOs. Just because they convince themselves that this is what they experienced does not mean this is what actually happened. An interesting side note: I happened to be in the Phoenix area on the evening I refer to (and I am sure many folks who listen to C2CAM know what I am referring to). As it happens, I was doing some aircraft flight testings at Williams Air Force Base that is in Mesa, not far at all from where the pattern of descending lights was seen. We were in the air at the time, and our flight crew pointed out the lights. We knew they were flares dropped from military aircraft just because we are all trained aviation observers. When we looked at our computer navigation display in the cockpit we saw the aircraft that had dropped these flares on our air traffic display, and they were headed back to their home base at the Yuma Marine Corps Air Station.
Your describing something that can easily be misconstrued over a large distance during vs. what I am suggesting is actual face-to-face examination. Please use a different example.
OK, so you are admitting you do not have evidence to support your claim right now.
I believe that's what I have always stated.
Fine. And you are even saying "we can collect data in an attempt to show it". Who gets to interpret that data in an effort to define what is going on? TTA? Or perhaps specialists in neurobiology?
Anyone and everyone. No bias.
Just because we collect data does not mean your conclusion as to what is going on will be proven. We need a scientific/mathematical theory that we can use to quantify the data AND possibly test predictions. Not only would we need a quantified theory/model for how YOU think TT manifests in order to correlate the data, but we would also have to permit other, valid theories/models which also have a chance to explain what the data is telling us.
Ok, let's do this.
It may be a simple experiment, but even a simple experiment has to be RIGOROUSLY laid out in terms of reference, and what specific things you are testing in the experiment (and holding constant in the control group). Your second sentence in the above quote is VERY subjective as to what SPECIFIC data you are trying to collect. That would have to be seriously nailed-down.
Then it's not a simple experiment after all. You can always upgrade to anything you wish, if given the choice. But if your only option is a small soft drink, will you still demand to have large?
If you do a simple experiment consisting of just a small group, you can vary it as many times as you'd like, attempt trial and errors tests and control tests.
As for specifics, confirming the double-digit numbers, psychic visions & voices is a sign to this manifestation, so it kind of goes without saying.
I asked you a question, yet you didn't answer it but instead asked a question of me. I think if you answer my original question, you may have part of the answer to the question you posed to me. i.e. if coincidences are a "sign" (and I am one who believes they are signs of something, perhaps not what you think they are signs of) then we must view all coincidences for the data they could deliver to us... and just becuase TTA dismisses some signs does not mean they are not relevant.
The TTA asked you a question that answered your question, confirming it in an obvious manner. If my only option was to get a small soft drink and I knew it, and you asked me anyway's and I said; 'what size do you think I want?' What do you think the obvious answer would be?
Yes, your suggestion works in reverse too, but refusing the obvious example first posed to you by the TTA in a question is simply more convenient, and much easier to follow then the one you engineered.
In your mind this may be true. Yet in the minds of others (God knows how many) we can at least say that there is no hard-fast objective evidence that either positively indicts you nor positively clears you on this issue. Yet there are an awful lot of coincidences... especially as they relate to your love of double-digits.
Well according to the consensus, there are only a few who believe in this connection.
Another scientific fallacy: You cannot prove a negative. Unfalsifiability and plausible deniability have large parts to play in the whole Titor thing, and these would be perfect tools for a Group Titor to rely upon. But before we go too far astray from this thread's topic, all of this is unfounded data... including "coincidences". So either we agree to use ALL coincidences or we agree they all mean nothing. Can't have it both ways.
Who said I would be using denials as a means to prove it. I have no problem with showing all coincidences; I merely stated that I can prove one of them objectively. How this goes with not being able to 'unfalsifiability' show anything, I disagree. I can easily drive over to any one's home within a 50 mile radius and prove that I cannot be Titor. What then? What do you say about that RMT?
Opinion. You have NOT "made that connection" anywhere but in your own mind. I see a lot of energy expended by the TTA (both here/now as well as here/then) to try to convince people of what you believe. But I just don't see much objective evidence (or anything that aligns with "good science") to support your opinions.
Yes, it is your opinion RMT. But again, I never said it was only me who believed this and is expriencing these manifestations. Others are also experiencing this, and know in their heart what is going on, they don't need me to tell them how this has impacted their lives.
However, if anyone is attempting to prove to anyone anything what they believe, it's you RMT. They can plainly tell you that they are not part of Group Titor again and again, and you can keep on insisting in a harassing "scientific" manner that they are.
I'll tell you what I told Scannell the other day, 'leave them po' people alone.'
OK, but then we have the kind of statement you made above in my previous quote. Sure does sound like you are convinced it IS going on... and I keep coming back to this... but THIS is the premise you laid out and claimed you were going to show (in the form of a debate).
It truly is difficult for you to accept blame for misquoting me (again) isn't it RMT? After all, I would apologize to you, if I did .
I am satisfied that you have not been able to support your original statements, at least as far as they imply that it is always unethical to use TT for human or spiritual advancement. In that regard, it seems you have conceded you cannot show this to be true.
RMT, I was trying to be courteous and end the debate on that and on some friendly terms between us. But you continuously want to rub it in my face that I have not been able to prove my original statements. Obviously, they are subjective, I told you this. You also knew this before it even started. Really, you have no one further to convince of this. There is no need to continue to be so brash.
I'd suggest you start familiarizing yourself with science and scientific method, as you will need it to define an airtight experimental design if you ever hope to show this... and I think it is questionable that you could show this (my opinion).
Ouch. Though, I'm still being nice to you RMT, I will not be for long if you continue this subtle disrespect of the TTA.
Question: Were your FORICBLY prevented from considering the consequences? Or were you simply careless in your posting and not considering what may be pieced together in your then-future?
I believe you mean, question(s) the pleural. There's more then one.
Personally, I only offered 1 example. Showing that regardless of my 'freewill' and lack of restraints that I had, I was able to come to multiple connections in the future. That's all.
One reason I continue these discussions is because I believe that trying to get people to believe that their free will can be TOTALLY subjugated is a dangerous idea in and of itself... it provides an all-too-convenient reason for irresponsible people to avoid taking responsibilities for their actions, and the consequences that come along with them. There is already WAY too much of that in our world today, thanks, I don't need any more "poor me's".
And this would not settle the argument that this cannot be the case either. As long as there is much unknown in the universe, so will the answers be.
ALL systems use algorithms... it is merely a question of how those algorithms are implemented. DNA and RNA, of course, implement algorithms. There is a thead I started here on the system domains of Operational, Functional, and Physical and how these three "dimensions of information" are the ones we use when designing a system...any system. It is an expansive subject, but rest assured it is a science... one I practice and teach. You also might be interested to know that the Operational domain of information is the one that is directly linked to both TIME and FREQUENCY effects in any system.
Great, I look forward to reading it. Also, I hope you offer exit course surveys to your students. Might be a good measure for self improvement.
Who's frustrated? I am simply pointing out one area where the TTA is duplicitous in his nature. Why do you need to project frustration on me? Defense mechanism?
Your asking me who's frustrated? I don't know, maybe it was the emoticon and the statement that preceded it that gave it away. But like I stated before, anyone can go back and read the posts and determine the quality of our characters.
That's fine, but my larger point in revealing the duplicity relates to how the TTA has often been noted to issue disparaging remarks about "New Age" (again, this is a tenuous umbrella term) philosophies. Here, in this thread, you seem to have done this again with the point that currently there is no science/math to back them. And I am only asking you to adhere to this same standard in your claims. That is all.
So you agree or disagree that New Agisms don't offer math? I acknowledged Chaos Math for example, and stated that I own the movie PI, didn't I?
As for stating disparaging remarks about New Agisms, I believe you stated you knew the types I was referring to.
Furthermore, adhering to the same standards in my claims? My claims are not following any New Agisms, but opposed to them for this very purpose for freewill subjugation. My agenda has always been about humanity and allowing them to see the possible pit falls and where we could go wrong by these means of unification that they preach. This will not justify their actions in the past. That's all I'm saying!
But as of today, it is not. So are "New Age" philosophies always "bad" in your opinion, or could they also have some "good" uses and purposes?
Again RMT, as I stated earlier:
Since we are showing the cards each of us will be playing with, I concur. The good and bad of the technology will be the main focus for this debate. However, my angle will not so much be on the 'doom & gloom' of the future that you may be accustomed to debating & debunking with others. But more on a system of unity, and justifications for spiritual salvation, and it's ramifications on the soul by use of this technology.
This technology is not limited to TT, but to New Agisms as well. Can anything good come out of it? Well LRH tech can be good in small quantities, but some of it's policies and practices, not always good. Wouldn't you agree?
This is the distinction the TTA wanted to make about New Agisms, that they could have the potential to disregard the human component, for the sake of addressing their end results. i.e. greater consciousness & awareness attainment, spiritual enlightenment. That's all fine and dandy, but their policy on how to deal with the rest of humanity that doesn't quite share in their approach, is unacceptable to a minority (in comparison to the future's culture). And their attempts to subjugate mankind to follow in place to find their patterns of truth to spiritual discovery, is not by our choice, but by their time table.
This again, is the concern the TTA has regarding TT, New Agisms & Alien abductions. It's exploitation and manipulation of a race that should have every right to choice regarding their own future, not to be assisted or coerced by others through these means.
You stated your self; you don't like other shoving their beliefs down your throat.
And for the record, the TTA is not either, but offering a 2nd view, an alternative to an approach that will eventually offer no way out, or at least a difficult severing.
Are you sure of this? Be careful, because this would again lead you down a path of trying to prove a negative. I think there are many who would claim that synchronizations (and "other" manifestions?) CAN occur naturally. This would also depend upon a deep definition of "natural".
Well like everything else you have pointed out about the TTA, it's subjective. Whether it's later discovered in the future that I was right on with at least 60% of what I have said, that's pretty darn good.
Thanks. But I must tell you that even in a discussion, I will continue to point out that time-honored statement from systems engineering about what we know and do not know:
"You don't know what you don't know. And not knowing what you don't know is a serious impediment to you knowing whether what you are doing is 'right'."
This will always entangle us in any discussion of both IF and HOW TT might be used for "evil" or for "good". If you ask me, this debate/discussion will always be ahead of its Time until we have equations (similar to Newton's and Einstein's) which tell us what is and is not possible with regard to TT.
With that said, I agree and believe this concludes the debate.
And since the TTA stated that this would be my last thread, and since I see no further reason to continue in a discussion given that we can both go on like this for as long as it takes, I see no reason to even go on with the discussion.
One can later look back on this thread and see that this idea was attempted to be debated and discussed. And if New Agisms truly offer any threat against humanity and open a gateway to TT someday as the TTA believes it will, I suppose this debate can then continue on with our ascendants to offer scientific evidence and mathematical models in discussion and debate.
At this time, I would appreciate if some of you could please take the TTA's exist survey.
Would you like to see the TTA stay on the TTI forum and continue to post?
Yes - I would like to have the TTA remain and offer his unique insights on TT and other subjects.
Alternative Yes - I'd like to see the old Classic TTA post again.
Maybe - I don't mind, as long as he can remain civil.
No - I do not want the TTA to stay, he should remain banned, his past behavior is unforgivable.