"So, Erin, at last we meet..."

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Canadians!!!!!!!!!

Gary Heaslip

I am curious as to why Erin made the comments about Canadians thinking they are perfect ( a couple of nights ago ). If a group of people are financially responsible and hardworking and caring, shouldn't they be praised and not put down?Like · · 5 hours ago 4 people like this.


Thomas Vincent A'Hearn Can't you just be happy you were mentioned?
3 hours ago · Like


Gary Heaslip Even my Grandson (pictured above) was shocked at the comment! Look at that face!
3 hours ago · Like · 2

Carly Aitchison-Ferris I think Thomas is angry because he isn't perfect
3 hours ago via mobile · Like


Thomas Vincent A'Hearn Well, I'm not perfect but at least I'm not Canadian. My ex-wife was Canadian, a women of such deep imperfection that even I couldn't fix her, which is a damn shame 'cause she was smokin' hot! So, I tend to take it out on Canada whenever I can, does that make me a bad man? How dare you judge me! You're not perfect which I think is the point Erin was trying to make... (I kid 'cause I love...)
3 hours ago · Like



AND...


 
Marcella Blais
I am an offended Canadian!!! Perhaps you should give some thought to the fact that you have many cable watchers in Canada, before you go off on Canadians! The fact that I heard your ridiculous rant about Canadians thinking they are better than everyone else - night before last is an indication of the interest we have in the American scene. I have no idea what prompted your rant and it made absolutely no sense to me!!!! Americans are hated around the world; you might want to give a thought to the impact that journalists have in contributing to your image. Perhaps if you treated your friends with a little respect - your position in the world of public opinion might improve. Oh by the way - your advertisers talking about the wealth of the oil sands and that being the future solution to your energy problems seem to forget that there is a border with Canada between them and the oil sands!!!!
Like · · 3 hours ago


  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn Is there any other kind of Canadian than a "offended Canadian"? As far as American's being hated, I just think we're misunderstood, kind of like your boss that you're just hoping to get alone someday so you can kick his ass. What you don't see is how needy your boss is, how he has to have ALL the money because he lives an empty, spiritually deficient lifestyle. Where is your compassion for this pathetic creature? Show some mercy for crissakes-and keep sending us your oil, bitches!!

  • Marcella Blais I think you need anger management dude!! Who has compassion for a bully who has access to an international television show. Get upset about bullying in the schools and then question what TV commentators contribute to bad attitudes!!!!

  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn First of all, Erin is not a bully, she's a pretty, pretty princess, get it right. As far as anger management, I used one exclamation point in my post, you used SIX. Yeah, and don't just "dude" me like that, out of the blue. That would be like me going all "sister-girl" on you: do you think you'd like that? By the way, nobody's contributing to my bad attitude, I've already got plenty.

  • Marcella Blais Pretty princesses are some of the worst bullies.

  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn What, did they finally get "Mean Girls" up in Canada? Pretty, pretty princesses need our love and compassion too!!! Why do Canadians insist on perpetuating this cycle of hatred? Can't we all just agree that I'm right and you're wrong, so very wrong? Princesses will outgrow their bullying and, yet, still be so pretty, pretty. So the glass is half-full, if you see it that way. I'm sure she's sorry she said you think you're all perfect: we can all see from these posts how wrong, so very wrong, she was...

  • Marcella Blais LOL yeah it took a while for "Mean Girls" to get up here by dog sled and then we had to build a really big igloo to watch it in.

  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn That's why we love you, the sense of humor...

  • Marcella Blais Most of us can be loveable.! Let Erin know.

  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn Well, I happen to know she was only speaking to the unloveable ones. Baby seal are loveable, too, but that doesn't mean you don't want to just club one every now and then, right? (That's right, I went there.) I'll let Erin know about our conversation when she comes home tonight, just after our several hours of lovemaking, you know, pillowtalk. That's when she's the most easily manipulated, and I"ll suggest to her, "Kitten, let me handle the Canadians from now on: you know how much I enjoy it." She'll look up to me with tears brimming in her eyes, "Whatever you think is best, Thomas, just never leave me!!!!" Oh, yeah, I got it like that.....



Posted by at

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

An Interesting String with an Intelligent Man.

Paul Gill
Are you excited for the 200th episode of Family Guy yet? http://www.fox.com/familyguy/ Reversibility of time.
Family Guy on FOX - Official Site
www.fox.com
Family Guy TV Show - Enter the world of FOX's Family Guy TV series and learn more about characters, episodes, and cast.
Like · · · Saturday at 9:05am

  • Paul Gill ha, it is all about the time symmetry. In other words, the allowance of time to reverse. This is allowed in physics.
  • Paul Gill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_reversibility
    Time reversibility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    en.wikipedia.org
    If astochastic processis time reversible, then it is not possible to determine, ...
    given the states at a number of points in time after running the stochastic process, which state came first and which state arrived later.
    See More
  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn Sure, if you also accept that evolution may or may not have occured, there is no basis for cause and effect and many other basic scientific assumptions. May I recomend you read this chapter from my book: http://thestoicbytva.blogspot.com/2012/10/chapter-2-limits.html
  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn The point I go on to make later in the book is that Einstein's special releativity is correct but the application of it as a the parameters of our universe, as he does in general relativity, doesn't match the results of sub-particle reearch that has happened since. Einstein is correct with regard to the temporal plane of existence but at odds with all science as a general principle. Any theory that challenges causality is inherently illogical and must be questioned on that basis. You seem like a smart guy, Paul: don't accept what scientists say, stand up and ask why they believe this illogic.
  • Paul Gill I do not accept all the mainstream science. If you go into APS submissions, you will find 2 of mine. Both are frontier pushing and use elements that standard physicists would avoid. So, what is your profession if I may ask?
  • Paul Gill Tom, it is easier to explain when you take the red pill and step into the rabbit hole. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE7PKRjrid4
    Blue Pill or Red Pill - The Matrix (2/9) Movie CLIP (1999) HD
    www.youtube.com
    The Matrix Movie Clip - watch all clips http://j.mp/ymuU6s Buy Movie: http://j.m...
    p/t4Wpfz
    click to subscribe http://j.mp/sNDUs5 Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) ...
    See More
  • Paul Gill Not about the matrix, but how dynamic and strange our reality is that goes unknown...
  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn The interesting thing about the Matrix is how similar it is to the epistomology of Hume, upon whom most of modern philospohy rests- to its detriment. Reality is not strange or unknowable if approached as I recommend in my book. You really should read it, you would enjoy it. I am a writer/ poet and a stoic, philosophically.
  • Paul Gill How would your views push my frontiers, as you do not know what they currently are? Do you believe time travel is possible? That and crossing spatial dimensions. The real nature of what is going on in a sprite. The cause of the Electric field setup before an aurora occurs, SAMA generation...
  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn No, I don't believe in time travel, "wormholes" and the like. Time must be linear or causality is denied. You're close in your consideration of the "electric field" which, if you accept my reversal of Eintein's General relativity, becomes the nature of space itself as the conduit of wave energies.
  • Paul Gill that is just it. Time is definitely not linear. Just appears so as our perception configures it.
  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn Again, I refer you to Hume, who said the same thing about perception, ultimately undone by Russell and Wittgenstein. Logic dictates the primacy of causality, which Wittgenstein's reversal of Russell supports, leaving mathematics and sciences as a supporting, refining ABSTRACTION for logic. If something is illogical, it is incumbent on science to redefine and reevaluate the theory until the underlying logical process is revealed. General Realitivity APPEARS to be true TO OUR SENSES but is illogical, therefore, is an illusion over a logical process. That is the problem with Hume, epistomology, Einstein and General Realitivity: they appear to be true to our senses. There are a great many things that appear to be true, but are illogical, and are eventually revealed to be illusions. Well, ask yourself, does the sun rise in the East? No, the Earth revolves under the sun, giving that illusion. That is where we are with regards to the nature of time: from our nature on the temporal plane we are attempting to look back into the spatial planes at sub-particle energies, which fleshes out the argument: if all things appearing on the temporal plane are OF the temporal plane (a basic tenant of General Relativity) where are the "FREE QUARKS" and "NEUTRINOS" that should readily appear? In 30 years of testing and searching for these particle, none have been found. Looks like something's wrong somewhere and all indications point at General Relativity. Sorry, there goes time travel, but you can still enjoy SCIENCE FICTION if you like, so long as you don't think it's SCIENCE FACT. I enjoy talking with you Paul, you ask really good questions.
  • Thomas Vincent A'Hearn BTW, this is the question that compelled Hawkins to reverse his position in "A brief history of time" in his latest book.

Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)