Posted by: Brian () on Thu Dec 16 20:01:56 2004

I have said before that I am a realist, not an idealist.
> Truth and reality is my code.
> Anyone who has ever lied, knows how easy it is as compared to telling truths.
> Likewise someone who runs away or sticks his head in the sand when confronted with a distasteful reality.
> Truth and reality can be very harsh.
>
> You have wagged a finger at me, when in REALITY I have only spoken the TRUTH.
>
> The statement that you made was (in every sense of the word) ridiculous. Nothing can be obvious if you cannot see it. That is the truth. That is the reality
>
> You should thank me for pointing that out. Instead, you vilify me for telling it as it is.
>
> Your quote:
> “…your condescending attitude makes having a discussion with you very ‘uncomfortable’, regardless of whether your comments have merit or not.”
>
> Meaning I should sacrifice truth and reality to make you comfortable? Never.
>

ray:

I cannot imagine that I am the only one perplexed by the anger in your tone. Somehow Jack makes a post noting that in frame #1 on the Swing Mechanics page, "The hands are closer than 6 to 10 inches away from the shoulder," and that sets you off, suggesting that there must be "mirrors," Jack is "absolutely ridiculous," using numerous caps (generally indicates yelling), and that Jack's post was "very unscientific;" but amazingly you feel that you responded to Jack with "truth and reality." Please.

As a side note, you oddly stated, "Nothing can be obvious if you cannot see it." Where to being with that one, but frankly I'm not interested in wasting my time by giving you thousands of examples to disprove such a sophomoric statement nor am I interested in discussing with you the principles of deductive reasoning, the laws of physics, circumstantial evidence, and so on, all of which can demonstratively show that the "obvious" does not have to be visually seen to be true.

Getting back to the point of my post, I just don't understand why you couldn't have said something to the effect of, "Jack, I cannot agree with you because it is impossible for me to see the hands and tell how far they are away from the shoulder. Can you either explain how you came to your conclusion or agree with me that it is not possible to tell the actual distance?" Would that have been "sacrificing truth and reality?" Never (as you suggest), and it may have stimulated a discussion rather than this mess.

Brian