Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonbe It is my interpretation that your responses have a degree of conclusiveness – one that suggests to me that you do not expect a response to your statements. If you would like one, then you’ll have to be more specific about what type of person you are referring to when you write wacko. |
It's all very subjective. To me, the idea of some guy going out in the woods and coming back with a story of having talked directly with the religious trinity
and John the Baptist (who, it was reported did have his head) is pretty whacko. To a devout Mormon, it seems perfectly natural and normal. In fact, the Mormons believe that the president of their church, even today, can speak directly with God.
I have a general rule. If it looks like a whacko, quacks like a whacko and waddles like a whacko...it's most likely a whacko. So, if my analyses seem a bit direct, it comes from a lifetime of repeatedly being proven right when it comes to whackos.
Here's a quickie. Let's say that some guy decides that there's technical merit in some terminology that was dreamed up in the mind of a science fiction writer and tries to make sense of how it might work in the real world. Just for argument's sake, let's use a term like, "di-lithium crystals" (a critical component of United Federation star ship warp drives and the object leading to many a fist fight with alien beings by one Capt. James T. Kirk). Someone who would treat that sort of science fiction as being real is...well...pretty much a whacko.
Are you seeing a trend develop here?
The world is full of whackos. I'm just a little surprised that you don't seem more enthusiastic about sharing your ideas with them.