F. Frank LeFever wrote:
> In <371E4E72.A4355779 at banet.net> ken collins <kenpc at banet.net> writes:
> >"of course", the school shootings in Littleton, CO, yesterday, are
> >more of the Same-Stuff... more of the prediction being confirmed.
>> - - - - - -(snip) - - - - - - - - -
>> In other words, WHATEVER happens, you predicted it (secretly). As
> Eric points out, prediction is impressive if announced BEFORE the e
> vent (n.b.: this is the basic method of science, which still seems to
> elude you).
the prediction is in AoK. it's generalized with respect to TD E/I.
allpossibilities are predicted in AoK. given specific TD E/I, that which
is described in AoK will occur within behavioral dynamics. if i'm
granted an in-person presentation opportunity, i'll gladly demonstrate
such by accepting any published Neuroscience papers as test of
this assertion. the same stuff is right in every proven neural dynamic,
right in every Neuro experimental result that can be duplicated.
> - - - - - -(snip) - - - - - - - - -
>> >in the face of such, the only thing i can do is continue to ask that
> >folks in Neuroscience allow me to meet with them, in person, so
> >that the transfer of the understanding can occur without further
>> - - - - - -(snip) - - - - - - - - - - -
>> >but, for now, i ask that folks in Neuroscience meet with me, in a
> >quiet, no-recriminations place, having complete Neuroscience
> >stacks close at hand, to grasp the understanding.
> >the future depends upon the Courage of folks in Neuroscience.
> >what will folks in Neuroscience choose?
>> As I've pointed out before, members of Society for Neuroscience have
> heard what you have to say, and are impressed--but not favorably.
if you wish, i'll re-post prior discussions. everything i've posted hasbeen
interferred with so much that the context of NDT could not be
communicated... so to accomplish what you've asserted, folks'd have
to be "mind readers".
> Given your obvious errors when you make a flat statement of "fact"
> contrast to your usual nebulous and solipsistic rumination), most of us
it seems to me that you speak only for yourself, Frank.
> doubt that a bigger investment of time is likely to be fruitful;
i only have what you've posted to me, and with respect to such,i sadly tend
what you're leaving out, Frank, is that NDT puts all of Neuroscience
on a new foundation... it doesn't do to say, "Because it's different
from what I know, there mustn't be anything to it."
the difference between NDT and what was in the books is the
whole thing, Frank.
> however, one card-carrying SFN member (Dag) may yet read your monograph
> or whatever, and report to the rest of us.
i will continue until folks have at it with me, in-person, in a settingin
which nothing goes unresolved, and everything is reduced to
the experimental results (why there needs to be complete Neuro
stacks close at hand, if the presentation ever happens... i'll not
"move away from" anyone's challenge... just the opposite, and
the answer to any challenge will come in the form of proven and
published experimental results, not any "nebulousness" that
results from preempted discussion).
what am i doing here, after all?
I'm only upholding the principle that Scientists must do Science.
i'm juxtaposing that plain-as-day =must= against the slaughter
i'm holding, in the light of day, the absurdity of the imbalance
and i'll continue to do so until the fundamental principles of
Science are honored, or life goes out of me.
with sorrow, i understand folks "fear", but that stuff is only
analogous to the sideways motion of the bubbles
in the frying pan of the other thread in which i'm working...
...it is to be understood, and transformed from its blind
dictatorship... ("Let the slaughter continue. Nothing can be
done about it anyway. Indeed, actively choose the slaughter
by "moving away from" doing anything with respect to it.")
to usefulness within Human interactive dynamics.
there is one only thing that needs to be slain... the Ignorance
which has mercilessly preyed upon Humanity since the
K. P. Collins