17-11-2010, 05:22 PM
Peter Dawson Wrote:Peter Presland Wrote:For Peter D and Jim F
I was not endorsing Peter D's two substantive points, I was simply flagging them as valid pieces of technical/scientific evidence that can be debated on their merits.
What I was objecting to - a bit too soto-voce perhaps but objecting nonetheless - was the personal attack disguised in a (too) clever rhetorical device that comprised the last sentence.
FWIW I have reposted the entire Metapedia article on WikiSpooks here. I haven't tested all 476 footnote links so there may well be a few broken ones. Those I have tested work fine though.
BTW - I intend to incorporate all Jack Whites stuff (duly credited and linked) into the article today - or as and when I get time.
I wasn't intending what I wrote to be a personal attack on JW and JF, though given the way I inserted myself into this discussion, I can't blame you for thinking that it was exactly that. What I was attacking was the moon hoax proponent's position in-general, not any particular moon hoax proponent.
I should take this opportunity to apologise for my initial rudeness:
Jim, sorry for my rude words - my social skills are often found wanting, to my chagrin.
Peter, my sense is that you genuinely wish to probe and analyze any weaknesses in the moon hoax theory. Good. No, actually that's great. Objective and independently minded people are the keystones to this forum - and yes, we all get a little carried away from time to time.
I'm enjoying the thrust and counter-thrust and learning more about this story all the time.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14