death of the mind.
johnh at faraway.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk
Sat Jul 10 19:12:53 EST 2004
Yes, I missed the catch all in your last sentence.
"Peter F." <effectivespamblock at ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:bhXHc.500$QT.17328 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> "John Hasenkam" <johnh at faraway.> wrote in message
> news:40efc9eb at dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> > Hey Peter,
> > Not true to say seeing red is a photoelectric effect, we see red even
> > the frequencies are not those we think of as designating red. With age
> > frequencies hitting the retina change because of change in the vitreous
> > matter, but we still see the same colours. Seeing colours is not just a
> > product of the visual system, clearly other types of information modify
> > colours we see.
> You simply plucked your disagreement out of context (you obviously did not
> consider what I wrote in the sentence that followed).
> Anyway, I can easily put up with the fact you did not get what I was
> Have gotten used to that most people don't.
> However, I have to exert some self-control not to rip the head off the
> simultaneously genuinely vile and intellectually oh so stale Glen
> Luckily I remember these wise words: "If one argues with a fool the chance
> is he is doing just the same."
More information about the Neur-sci