Brian’s review of The Biggest Secret: The Book That Will Change the World > Likes and Comments
4 likes · Like
By the way, you have completely missed my point. You also should learn the difference between "it's" and "its". Also, I am an atheist, so if you are scared of them ... BOO!
So Brian haven't even read it but have lots to say. Eric you are so damn good in word fight that I would use you in more fights like this. Eric is completely right, and if you didn't see Idiocracy, believe me you didn't miss anything especially when you say that it happens to you every day because the movie is exactly about that and I believe it was made for very good reason. Im on the same page as you are and really hate stupid people, like Brian, but in the end it's not their fault. David Icke rocks !
Marian, I am a bit saddened by the way you use comments on other people's posts to indirectly insult me. It is perhaps debatable whether insults on the internet are in some way good--I would argue that my review was not trying to insult anyone, but to educate them as to the dangers of irrational thought; moreover, I did not single anyone in particular out in my comment--I made it a priority to be civil in replying to Eric's post.
You, on the other hand, not only have labelled me as "stupid," but have done so in a way that is roundabout, deceitful, and rather cowardly. There is no reason to be a coward on the internet; short of making death threats, I cannot think of any way in which anything one does in a comment thread can cause him to get hurt or punished in the real world.
Since you have been so uncivil, I shall proceed to pick apart your post.
1. "Word fight" does not mean anything. You are seeking the meaning of "argument", "debate" , or "rhetoric".
2. "I would use you in more fights like this..." That sounds wrong--it makes you sound like you view Eric in an instrumental sense. You also are talking as if admiring a flame war; I think this thread is a bit too civil to qualify as such.
3. The movie "Idiocracy" is an elitist, snobbish piece of dreck, which takes a hypothesis with limited support, adds in assumptions on links between intelligence and heredity that are far too reminiscent of eugenics arguments to be appetizing, and extrapolates it into a revolting of pseudo-plausible ideas and utter poppycock.
4. "...believe me you didn't miss anything especially when you say that it happens to you every day because the movie is exactly about that and I believe it was made for very good reason."
You managed to write two lines of text without the commas and omitted an indefinite article to boot? That is not good writing...
5. You assume I am stupid, though you know nothing about me. Let me describe my current standing in education--if I come off as arrogant, it is unintentionally so, I am merely trying to convince you that I am not stupid.
I currently attend a private college, where I am doing a double major in English and mathematics.
I am doing very well in both majors. The math courses I take are above both of my parents' heads. My father, who is a medical doctor of no mean skill, studied calculus in school, and no further; I now am acquainted with--and frequently do personal research for fun in--abstract algebra, linear algebra, graph theory, and set theory, among other topics. I aim to attend graduate school and become a researcher in mathematics, which to me seems like an ideal career.
In English classes, I consistently get A's on my essays and in courses; I enjoy writing many kinds of fiction, poetry, and nonfiction--if you are so inclined, I can even share with you a recent story I wrote; I was told by the professor for that class, who is very picky on these things, that it is very likely publishable.
I do not wish to go on now, as I await your response and its contents.
You did say you hadn't read the book... right?
Posted before the release of the Epstein files....says it all.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
By the way, you have completely missed my point. You also should learn the difference between "it's" and "its". Also, I am an atheist, so if you are scared of them ... BOO!
So Brian haven't even read it but have lots to say. Eric you are so damn good in word fight that I would use you in more fights like this. Eric is completely right, and if you didn't see Idiocracy, believe me you didn't miss anything especially when you say that it happens to you every day because the movie is exactly about that and I believe it was made for very good reason. Im on the same page as you are and really hate stupid people, like Brian, but in the end it's not their fault. David Icke rocks !
Marian, I am a bit saddened by the way you use comments on other people's posts to indirectly insult me. It is perhaps debatable whether insults on the internet are in some way good--I would argue that my review was not trying to insult anyone, but to educate them as to the dangers of irrational thought; moreover, I did not single anyone in particular out in my comment--I made it a priority to be civil in replying to Eric's post. You, on the other hand, not only have labelled me as "stupid," but have done so in a way that is roundabout, deceitful, and rather cowardly. There is no reason to be a coward on the internet; short of making death threats, I cannot think of any way in which anything one does in a comment thread can cause him to get hurt or punished in the real world.
Since you have been so uncivil, I shall proceed to pick apart your post.
1. "Word fight" does not mean anything. You are seeking the meaning of "argument", "debate" , or "rhetoric".
2. "I would use you in more fights like this..." That sounds wrong--it makes you sound like you view Eric in an instrumental sense. You also are talking as if admiring a flame war; I think this thread is a bit too civil to qualify as such.
3. The movie "Idiocracy" is an elitist, snobbish piece of dreck, which takes a hypothesis with limited support, adds in assumptions on links between intelligence and heredity that are far too reminiscent of eugenics arguments to be appetizing, and extrapolates it into a revolting of pseudo-plausible ideas and utter poppycock.
4. "...believe me you didn't miss anything especially when you say that it happens to you every day because the movie is exactly about that and I believe it was made for very good reason."
You managed to write two lines of text without the commas and omitted an indefinite article to boot? That is not good writing...
5. You assume I am stupid, though you know nothing about me. Let me describe my current standing in education--if I come off as arrogant, it is unintentionally so, I am merely trying to convince you that I am not stupid.
I currently attend a private college, where I am doing a double major in English and mathematics.
I am doing very well in both majors. The math courses I take are above both of my parents' heads. My father, who is a medical doctor of no mean skill, studied calculus in school, and no further; I now am acquainted with--and frequently do personal research for fun in--abstract algebra, linear algebra, graph theory, and set theory, among other topics. I aim to attend graduate school and become a researcher in mathematics, which to me seems like an ideal career.
In English classes, I consistently get A's on my essays and in courses; I enjoy writing many kinds of fiction, poetry, and nonfiction--if you are so inclined, I can even share with you a recent story I wrote; I was told by the professor for that class, who is very picky on these things, that it is very likely publishable.
I do not wish to go on now, as I await your response and its contents.
You did say you hadn't read the book... right?
Posted before the release of the Epstein files....says it all.
You know, you may be right about some things--just not in the ways you would expect.
If you are right about our age not being the most enlightened, please either name a more enlightened historical era and state why slavery, unchallenged misogyny, smallpox, witch-hunts, capital punishment for petty theft, and everything else are somehow "better", or prove that societal improvement or degeneration does not exist. Either way, you battle is entirely uphill.
"Nothing of substance and enlightenment?" I agree there is much that is still wrong with our society, but are you seriously saying that such things as near-universal literacy, free public education, codified human rights, massive increases in scientific knowledge, and sufficient medical advancement to double the life expectancy of a newborn child are completely unenlightened things?
"People getting exponentially dumber?" "Idiocracy", as funny and entertaining as it was, is not a documentary. The trend it describes is small and may be a statistical fluke. Besides, how would you solve this problem? Even if dumb people reproduced faster than intelligent people, and even if intelligence was predominantly genetic, that would still not make eugenics a moral idea in any way.
As for the "coincidence" line: CCTV is probably bad, but RFID is not overtly so, and even if practical, would most likely be completely unfeasible to implement on a truly wide scale. By the way, what is it with ostensibly non-religious conspiracy theorists believing in fundamentalist interpretations of Revelations? Global governance has not happened yet--the UN is pitiful at doing anything at all--and I still think the logic for why it would be bad is horribly shoddy. GMO foods do not cause cancer, and as the son of two medical doctors who know about this, I know for a fact that the modified DNA of GM organisms cannot alter the genes of those who consume it. It's not a coincidence--it's your paranoia.
I have not been called a sheep once in my life.--I actually have met only one or two conspiracy theorists--but I was considered very gullible when young because of the ease in which I believed the crap you still believe. I grew out of it, and I hope you can too. I do not think anyone who disagrees with me is wrong--I am willing to believe them right if they prove their arguments. I also am wise enough to know that there are some conspiracy theories that were true, with Watergate and MKULTRA being prominent among them. I am not arguing against not considering alternative views--I am arguing against accepting all of them as potentially true and none as probably false.
David Icke is nuts. His theories are almost certainly false in every way, and he seems to have many traits of someone with a schizoid personality disorder. I just want this to be noted here.