--- In [email protected], nablusoss1008 <no_re...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], Duveyoung <no_reply@> wrote:
> > 
> > Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that 
> > penetrates the crop circle type of "mystery" enough to rule 
> > out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so 
> > is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting 
> > your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed.  Chicken shit!!!!!
> 
> Edg, Judy nailed you many posts ago on the Crop Circle issue. 
> Give it up.

Just as a question, is there *anyone* here on 
this forum who would like to see Nabby be their
only "supporter?"  :-)

The only thing more likely to class you irredeem-
ibly as a nutcase is to have Willytex on your side.

What *I* see in Judy's position is Classic "I-Want-
To-Believe-In-The-Woo-Woo." It's the very *opposite*
of the axiom that Rick chose for the FFL Home Page:

"What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the 
wish to find out, which is the exact opposite."  
~ Bertrand Russell

Who here believes that Judy really "wishes to find
out?" I, for one, do not. If she were as unattached
to non-Woo-Woo explanations for crop circles as she
was to Woo-Woo explanations for them, she wouldn't
be so defensive. Her ego would not be in play.

But it clearly is. So much so that she feels she
has to demonize anyone who isn't as "open" as she
is. BULLSHIT. She isn't the *least* bit "open."
She is *defending* the "right to believe in Woo-
Woo." JUST as she defends the right to believe that 
"TM is the most effective means of achieving enlight-
enment," even though she has never experienced it, 
and can point to *not a single person on the planet* 
whom the TM movement has ever acknowledged to be 
experiencing enlightenment.

Edg -- whom, as I think all of you know by now -- I
consider a nutcase in his own right, is Right On in
this case. It's not Judy's *ostensible* stance that
proves her a liar and devoid of self-awareness. It's 
the *intent* -- the sheer and utter *defensiveness* 
of her stance -- that shows how much she has *invested* 
in her "right to believe in Woo-Woo." 

By contrast, I don't much give a shit. Crop circles
have as little fascination for me as people who make
sculptures out of shit. Yeah, they call themselves
artists. Some of them even claim to be "inspired" 
during the creation of their shit-art. But in the 
end, their "creations" are piles of shit.

Crop circles are piles of matted grass. NONE of them
do much of anything for me aesthetically, and do even
less for me in terms of imagining the "great cosmic
minds" who created them. They're Folk Art. Period.
Ho fucking hum.

Me, I suspect that ALL of them are *human* Folk Art.

Me, I don't "know" either, but I don't really CARE.
They are not important enough *TO* care about, much
less to "defend" what I think about them.

Others prefer to believe that they are the result of
Forces That We Cannot Understand, and rail against
those who don't buy into the I-Want-To-Believe-In-
The-Woo-Woo mindset as somehow being "threatened" 
by the believers in it, or being "challenged" by 
them. 

I don't think we are. I think we are amused by those
who are so attached to believing in Woo-Woo that 
they perceive those who don't as "attacking" them,
so much so that their stance needs "defending."

THEY, after all, are the ones reacting defensively.

We are not.

Who in this scenario really has a "wish to find out,"
and who has a "will to believe?"



Reply via email to