PDA

View Full Version : reply to locked topic: real science discovers life on Mars



MAP
2004-Feb-14, 11:17 PM
+ my final comment... posted after my first thread was locked...
in which, I request that the thread be locked, though not
for the reasons the board operator seems to insinuate.

Here is what I wrote, before my attempt to post to the
locked topic failed:

+ The doctor himself writes:
"You can see a figure of a man in a few pixels of an image from
Mars, but haven't noticed that I replied not just once but twice
to you, both times on the first page of this thread?
* I must assume the replier is referring again to some other
photo than those which I presented... this is not a matter of
any few pixels, but is a fully visible image of the same person
I described.
And yes, although I did reply to those posts, I was unaware
they were from the bulletin board operator.

This is the first hint the bulletin board operator is favoring
some irate complaint against this topic. In principle, I would
not have wasted the effort required to post, knowing it was
the operator themself who was encouraging this bashing and
ignoring of topic so prevalent here.

...and the replier continues: "I was the one who said the burden
of proof is on you"...
* and I answered to this, there is yet no such "burden of proof"...
I have only posted here to initially share my discovery... in any
case, I have no difficulty proving any of the statements made
in my presentation. I cannot be more specific than to say, again,
IF any viewer feels they have any PROOF my statements on
this subject are non-valid, they are welcome to share such.

...and they continue: "Sorry, but that's not how science works".
* It was "science" who recorded this photograph... this image
may be scientifically demonstrated to contain the same image I
discovered therein, and describe... science will indeed verify
what it's own initial scientific recording indicates. Nothing is
missing on science' account.

...more, then, repeating the complaint so many have voiced:
"If you want us to listen to you, you have to do better than simply
assert that what you found is irrefutable".
* I will now have already [asserted] considerably more... however,
this comment apparently means, while I personally am certain
it IS such irrefutable image in itself, the replier, again, simply
does not yet agree... but what point in constantly repeating
"no, I dont see it yet" ? The "assertions" made in objection
to my comments here have failed completely... repliers post
images they have compiled... draw little shapes on a picture...
throw data at the argument irrelevant to the discussion, and
clearly errant... but to these I have patiently offered answers,
not assertions... and I did not, again, assert... only remarked
"I see a small person on Mars"... and then showed the picture
showing this. What [claim] may this be mistaken for ?! We
do not "claim or assert" we see something which is visible...
but perhaps only, as I have, remark on this... isn't it an
interesting thing to see in this setting.

What I present is in earnest... reflects what I see... no - IF
you do not see this yet, I do not expect your affirmation...
and if you affirmed what I stated, would there be more cause
to remark so ? I am not here seeking supporters, but only,
again, to share this first information on the discovery.

...the reply added: "If it's so clear, then why do we not see
it right away?".
* but I had commented previously... I myself did not see this
immediately... however, after finding it, I could only more
affirm it's presence in the photograph... this has represented
the brunt of my forthcoming updates and confirmation.
Also, I repeatedly answered as to possible reasons this
image might be considerably difficult to identify.

...and, they say: "What we have here is an extraordinary
claim with little or no evidence, a claim that it is easy to
see, a claim that it is not easy to see, and clear and direct
evidence against it that has been politely offered, and ignored".
* this is the "claim" complaint again... no, I do not "claim" to
see this, but DO see it - hence have reported thus.
The evidence, again, in such instance of direct observation
is itself found in the same images I have presented... we
can view these images, and either we will see the described
figure, or will not. Why is this cause for any arguing ?

"This behavior is decidedly troll-like".
* this woud be funny in any context but that of a serious forum :-)

"You have been thoroughly shown that what you are seeing is a
case of pareidolia, and not anything real on the martian surface".
* We agree, if only in your error :-) No... I do not purport
this figure to be on the surface... but somewhat above it...
that is an important point overlooked by many of the repliers.
But I have heard this "potato chip / ink blot" excuse for fact
too many times... since this cited effect cannot in fact be
demonstrated to be in effect here, I have not accepted those
claims, and have continued to refute all, though by solid
arguments.

"This thread has gone on quite long enough, I think, with no real
evidence from you".
* I will correct this once... ALL the evidence presented has been
from me... all else has been weakly stated, incorrect - at best,
irrelevant mis-statements of what I have offered... and the best
of these I have disproven already.
I agree, however, the thread has become largely unproductive.

This is neither to diminsh what the conscientious repliers have
said, nor to prevent further such useful comments... but I
would like to request that this topic now be locked... I consider
all challenges which may be offered from the limited readership
here have been covered already.

"So, as we say in the US, it's time to put up or shut up".
* Terrific... rude... but encouraging nonetheless :-)
In fact, as stated, I am completing work on a more
formal presentation of this discovery.

On a scientific level, we have little reason for real
disagreement... any of those who have taken time to make
responsible comments here will further be shown every
reasonable proof of this discovery's authenticity and validity.
This, however, will have to wait temporarilly, as I still
prepare this final work. It will require as well some intent
to accept facts presented.

"Show us clear and direct evidence that your claims about this
figure is more than a coincidental alignment".
* Yes certainly... and to anyone interested, I will again present
such facts in the coming weeks, elsewhere.

I'd like to thank this replier in particular for their comments...
unfortunately, as they locked the topic, just previous to this
reply in progress being posted, they were repeating largely
irate and uncertain complaints of "not being listened to", being
ignored, being a "troll"... I feel the replier has simply not
read my comments or understood what was being written...
or, again, that they automatically responded to my topic as
something from the "never went to the Moon" genre... too
bad... but, the information is available.

They present themselves currently as a staunch critic of
what I have presented, and have no more than repeated this
... hopefully, they will retract this view after considering
what has been presented.

Thanks to the board, nonetheless, for providing me the
opportunity to post here.

MAP

TheAtomium
2004-Feb-15, 02:02 AM
Look at these two pictures:
http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/p/007/2P126991536EFF0205P2530R2M1-BR.JPG http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/p/007/2P126991781EFF0205P2530R4M1-BR.JPG

The first was taken at ~536 seconds (look at the filename), the second at ~781 seconds. These photos were taken 245 seconds, or 4 minutes and 5 seconds, apart. How do you explain the fact that 'the researcher' has not moved?

Sever
2004-Feb-15, 02:27 AM
I see...rocks, just alot of rocks. What am I supposed to be seeing?

Gmann
2004-Feb-15, 02:33 AM
You are supposed to be seeing a little man in about the center of the picture just on the edge of the large "seahorse" looking rock. Map is insisting that this is a Martian Researcher standing there looking at the rover. In the past thread (just locked), several folks have tried to explain what is being seen, but the post author disagrees with everyone (including the BA 8) ) the last post got locked, I see this one suffering the same fate.

etLux
2004-Feb-15, 03:34 AM
You are supposed to be seeing a little man.

I often see little men (usually green) after a bit too much tequila. However, hard as I look, I'm just not seeing one in those pictures (above). Perhaps you could do a bit of slice and zoom and highlight the little fella for us?

Wingnut Ninja
2004-Feb-15, 05:17 AM
Look at these two pictures:
These photos were taken 245 seconds, or 4 minutes and 5 seconds, apart. How do you explain the fact that 'the researcher' has not moved?

He's very patient.

As is MAP, apparently.

majic
2004-Feb-15, 05:22 AM
Map,

I truely believe you need to show more conclusive evidence, either in the form of a picture that needs no endless streams of words to explain, or by scientific means, or by purely statistical means. If you would be able to find the same or very similar depressesions on both rover sites, and not find just 1 but say a dozen of them, I bet that would get a lot of peoples interests going.

Right now it is a single photo showing a muddy depression having the outlines of a cartoon caracter, next to something that VERY clearly resembles a sock.

Now to your standards, the following image would indicate that martians are a bunch of tree hugging hippies, sending us love and best regards in the form of huge heart-shaped craters and hills. And we're not just talking a single image here, but a dozen....I am curious to your opinion on their meaning, since you seem to be able to talk for many many pages about just a single bad photo, and here we have many many crystal clear hearts outlined, all visible for everyone to see - no mind games.

http://majic.gamepoint.net/valentine.jpg

Awaiting your knowledgeable reply on the above image I remain,
- Michael

Kaptain K
2004-Feb-15, 06:50 AM
majic,
In the locked thread, MAP said he wasn't interested in any other photos. If he comes back, he will tell you "Other photos are irrelevant. Please confine your discussion to the photo on my website."

Unbunker
2004-Feb-15, 09:19 AM
Look at these two pictures:
http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/p/007/2P126991536EFF0205P2530R2M1-BR.JPG http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/p/007/2P126991781EFF0205P2530R4M1-BR.JPG

The first was taken at ~536 seconds (look at the filename), the second at ~781 seconds. These photos were taken 245 seconds, or 4 minutes and 5 seconds, apart. How do you explain the fact that 'the researcher' has not moved?

After reading the other locked thread... I still don't see anything other than a cartoonish little man. Is that the infamous traveler?

What I see in this photo is martian soil that looks to be almost damp or moist. Even though I know it's way too cold for the soil to hold this moisture, it still looks to be saturated with some kind of brine making this particular dirt look damp.

Other than that, I honestly don't see any man... sorry

PS Majic's heart/crator pictures really neat! thanks!

jokergirl
2004-Feb-15, 10:18 AM
Argh!

I can't see it! Where? WHERE???

:evil:

R.A.F.
2004-Feb-15, 01:18 PM
IF any viewer feels they have any PROOF my statements on this subject are non-valid, they are welcome to share such.

As noted be the BA, (on the locked thread), that's not how science works!

You have made this "observation" and now you must convince us that there is some reality to your statement, something that you haven't done. As evidenced in these threads, absolutely no one here agrees with you're observation...we can agree on that, right?

Gmann
2004-Feb-15, 01:32 PM
You are supposed to be seeing a little man.

I often see little men (usually green) after a bit too much tequila. However, hard as I look, I'm just not seeing one in those pictures (above). Perhaps you could do a bit of slice and zoom and highlight the little fella for us?

I wish I could, but the picture does not want to cooperate. What you need to do is center either picture (provided by The Atomonium) on your screen, place your cursor in the center of the picture, and look to the 8 o'clock position 1 inch from the tip of the cursor (down left for you digital clock fans) and you will see him. You can also read the now locked "real science finds life on Mars" or whatever it is called thread and you will see all of the attempts made at telling "the poster..." that this is not what he thinks it is. The BA 8) addressed this one four times, and locked the thread. If you read the original thread, you will understand why. IMHO, Map's days are numbered, he will eventually violate the rules and get blown to bytes, I've seen this happen many times in the past.

N C More
2004-Feb-15, 01:35 PM
I would suggest that everyone read the locked thread in order to understand exactly what has transpired here. The dynamic between MAP and the folks who try to explain why the "little man" isn't proof of life on Mars is quite extensive.

This is simply a case of pareidolia. MAP's belief that this photograph serves to prove that there are "little people" living on Mars is not (for him) amenable to any form of scientific or rational reasoning....period. In other words, nothing regarding photographic analysis, examples of pareidolia (BTW, nice hearts majic!) or sheer logical reasoning will change his mind. Nothing that anyone can say has that power.

I was on another board when something very similar happened. In this case it was in regard to the moon hoax. JayUtah had the facts down cold, his argument was flawless but the "true believer" would not budge from his irrational position!

This is, in my opinion, a psychological issue and can not be properly addressed on a forum such as this. I'm starting to feel like the "Borg".... "To continue is futile"!

Amadeus
2004-Feb-15, 01:35 PM
I just hope MAP relises the error before he invests to much of his time into it.

[EDIT] Just noticed that the link says "discovery2" what was discovery1?

Maksutov
2004-Feb-15, 01:49 PM
We are attempting to convince a person that a hallucination they are experiencing is not real. Time and its added evidence will make the hallucination, or the person, go away. :wink:

Daffy
2004-Feb-15, 04:52 PM
We are attempting to convince a person that a hallucination they are experiencing is not real. Time and its added evidence will make the hallucination, or the person, go away. :wink:

Somebody please help me here!?!?

Are we talking about that rock that looks a little like a worm standing up?

:roll:

Rc2000
2004-Feb-15, 05:40 PM
This might help.

http://www.monsters4u.com/rc2000art/bb/noman.jpg

Daffy
2004-Feb-15, 05:45 PM
This might help.

http://www.monsters4u.com/rc2000art/bb/noman.jpg

Thanks; that's the one, all right.

Hey, it looks like Klaatu!

Sever
2004-Feb-15, 06:02 PM
Looks like a peanut to me...

JimTKirk
2004-Feb-15, 06:09 PM
This might help.

http://www.monsters4u.com/rc2000art/bb/noman.jpg

Thanks; that's the one, all right.

Hey, it looks like Klaatu!

Do you mean Gort??? :D

TriangleMan
2004-Feb-15, 06:15 PM
That's what this is all about? That's the "man" on Mars?!

:roll: If you'll excuse me I believe I'll stop reading any more MAP threads . . .

Daffy
2004-Feb-15, 06:20 PM
Do you mean Gort??? :D

Oops! Yes that is exactly who I meant. Dang.

Amadeus
2004-Feb-15, 06:39 PM
That's what this is all about? That's the "man" on Mars?!

:roll: If you'll excuse me I believe I'll stop reading any more MAP threads . . .

You mean you're not convinced? :roll:

Spacewriter
2004-Feb-15, 06:46 PM
The pareidoliacs are out to get us!!!

I know because I received this geological interpretive map from the Martian Embassy (just down the road from me). They assure me that this is the true interpretation of this image and anyone else trying to prove otherwise is misinformed.

I suggest we listen to our little red friends, because they really do come in peace and want to watch more Earth TV. They say they are only eggs...

http://www.thespacewriter.com/mars_life_not.jpg

The Bad Astronomer
2004-Feb-15, 07:00 PM
Yes, despite many posts, MAP still remains completely in the dark about why he is utterly wrong about his post here. The OP in this thread makes that clear.

To make this as obvious as possible:

1) Coming here and making an extraordinary claim means you are asking for skeptic responses.

2) You cannot simply say "It is there, look!" and expect people -- especially me -- to be swayed.

3) You cannot avoid mounds (literally!) of evidence you are wrong and simply slough it off.

4) You cannot avoid direct questions from people -- especially me -- and expect to be welcome for very long.

MAP, if you are still reading this, then I will say this again (but not a third time): you are still welcome to post here, but have a care. I won't tolerate your non-scientific methods again.

etLux
2004-Feb-15, 07:37 PM
This might help.

http://www.monsters4u.com/rc2000art/bb/noman.jpg

Holy cow! It's true! And then even more anomalies, including Bette Davis Eyes, in subsequent posts!

Has anyone contacted CNN with these photos?

With their record of science reporting, I'm sure they'd snap them right up.

Spacewriter
2004-Feb-15, 09:12 PM
Gotta agree with BA here -- extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I posted my little humor-map to show how easily anyone can "see" things in a picture, but it would be up to me to provide proof better than "the Martians told me."

As for CNN, I'd cut them some slack. They don't get it wrong half as much as a few other outlets I could name...

(that does look like damning with faith praise... )

Musashi
2004-Feb-15, 09:42 PM
This is the first hint the bulletin board operator is favoring
some irate complaint against this topic. In principle, I would
not have wasted the effort required to post, knowing it was
the operator themself who was encouraging this bashing and
ignoring of topic so prevalent here.

The operator, who is know as The Bad Astronomer here, is not encouraging the bashing and ignoring (???) of your topic. In fact it is quite the opposite. Go back and read his last post. You may notice that he issued a blanket warning, with a specific notice to me. That would appear to be the opposite of what you are claiming he is doing. If you are going to keep complainging about mud-slinging, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw mud yourself.

I noticed that my posts in the last thread earned a reply. Let me clarify a little. The first post was sincere. If you ever get a legitimate presentation of this topic somewhere, I would like to see that. My second post was also sincere, although it was apparently too strong. I apologize to everyone (including the BA, even though he doesn't want apologies, he just wants us to cotrol ourselves) who was offended by my language. My point still stands. In fact, I will reinforce it with regards to the above quote. People may come in and view this topic, and decide they have nothing to say. From this, you are not allowed to draw support. I am also not allowed to draw support. I could not say, "this thread has 10,000 views and only 27 posts. Therefore, almost 10,000 people disagree with MAP." That is dishonest. Furthermore, I would like you to explain how 'the operator' is enouraging people to ignore your threads?

Also, although I doubt you care, it would be much easier to follow your comments if you would use people's handles instead of just calling them 'repliers' or 'responders.'

Ryback
2004-Feb-15, 10:02 PM
Guys, I think this MAP guy was just having a bit of fun with everyone. The best thing to do in cases like this is just ignore him. I'm sure the uproar encouraged him to continue his gag.

gimmie a break, it doesn't even look like a man or anything else alive!! It is silly to be arguing with someone about this.

etLux
2004-Feb-15, 10:12 PM
You mean - gasp! - we've been had?

Actually, to me it looked like a one-fingered alien hand expressing an obscene opinion; but being such a tactful person, I did not want to bring that up...

aporetic_r
2004-Feb-16, 12:58 AM
People may come in and view this topic, and decide they have nothing to say. From this, you are not allowed to draw support. I am also not allowed to draw support. I could not say, "this thread has 10,000 views and only 27 posts. Therefore, almost 10,000 people disagree with MAP." That is dishonest.

Since I have viewed this thread at least a dozen times and have not posted to it, I am one of the people both MAP and Musashi are talking about. I am almost positive that MAP won't read this, but I'll address it to him anyway.

MAP, I have viewed this thread (and the locked thread) at least 12 times, and I have not responded until now because your claim is so ludicrous that I couldn't even bring myself to write something about it. For a while I thought you were just joking, because your claim is so completely and obviously inaccurate. Then I started thinking that you might be serious, and I wasn't sure whether that was funny or frightening. Either way, I still didn't have anything to say, especially given that you do not appear to actually want to listen to reason. So there you have it. Now when you speak of all the people who have viewed this but not responded, please leave me out of that number.

By the way, I bet you haven't taken the 60 seconds required to click on the link that several people have posted. Here it is again:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/lenin.html

Aporetic

Postmortem
2004-Feb-16, 03:28 AM
kind of funny really, way back when someone (who was it?) posted the side by side crossed eye images, Well when I tried crossing my eyes to get the 3D image I did infact very clearly see a little man hovering just over the surface of Mars, I also saw something else surrounding him, no jokes here I really did see this image pop up, It looked oh so familier but took me a minute to remeber where I had seen it before but what I saw looked very much like "Bug Beings Of Zartron-9"
http://www.alloftheabove.net/cahr/spiff/aliensofspiff.htm
please don't misinterpurt this as being a snide smarty pants joke, I really did see something that looked like aliens from a Calvin and Hobbes comic

hmm well after skimming over this thread, and the much longer thread it refers to, I would just like to comment that this entire arguement is a good example of why they should be using the BA's book in schools, not so much for the informantion on astronomy in it, but rather for the critical and rational thinking skills it could promote in todays youth, two subjects that are not well covered in schools these days, the style of teaching today is more, "here are the facts they are true because we say they are"

anyway as has been stated before there is no real use in trying to change MAP's stance on this, he is either having a good laugh at us, or so utterly covinced that no rational argument will ever sway him, you might try presenting your findings to the people over at God Like Productions, I'm sure you will find support for your claims there

JimTKirk
2004-Feb-16, 03:39 AM
you might try presenting your findings to the people over at God Like Productions, I'm sure you will find support for your claims there

I suggested that in the other thread and MAP just ignored them. I feel he thought he could come here and get a bunch of followers just by saying "Here's my great pic, and my analysis is truth". He didn't expect people to not take his word for it, so I thought he'd like the reception better over there... :D

Rue
2004-Feb-16, 03:59 AM
you might try presenting your findings to the people over at God Like Productions, I'm sure you will find support for your claims there

I suggested that in the other thread and MAP just ignored them.

MAP has presented this theory on a few Google newsgroups with much the same results as here.

JimTKirk
2004-Feb-16, 04:09 AM
you might try presenting your findings to the people over at God Like Productions, I'm sure you will find support for your claims there

I suggested that in the other thread and MAP just ignored them.

MAP has presented this theory on a few Google newsgroups with much the same results as here.

I tend to stay away from the "GLP" crowd. Any idea if he went there too???

Rue
2004-Feb-16, 04:34 AM
I tend to stay away from the "GLP" crowd. Any idea if he went there too???

No, no sign of him there. He would not get much "serious discussion" from them. :)

Charlie in Dayton
2004-Feb-16, 06:25 AM
Oh, fer pestilence's sake...this is the same thing I referenced here -- it's a Martian film fan's tribute site! (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=10822). FFFast calls 'em footprints...I say...well, go there and read what I say...and don't forget, NFBSK...

...look closely, it's the same feature MAP has been attempting to expostulate on...

AstroSmurf
2004-Feb-16, 10:20 AM
Seems pretty clear to me. MAP originally stated (more or less) "Hey, look, there's a little man standing over there".

But, upon viewing stereo images, the difficulty spotting anything at all in the first place and so forth, it's pretty clear that while some people see the "little man", there isn't actually anything there.

Case closed.

Gmann
2004-Feb-16, 01:47 PM
I noticed something that I didn't mention before. The pictures posted on this thread show the "little Man" more clearly than any of the others I have seen. He sort of looks likes my 6th grade science teacher. I wonder why Mr. Crane has lowered himself to stealing hubcaps from space probes :-k

Edoltc
2004-Feb-16, 05:10 PM
Amadeus wrote: "...Just noticed that the link says "discovery 2" what was discovery 1?.

Ok fellows, want to know?. Be carefull. It doesn´t deserves another locked thread. This is the link to the first MAP (Michaell A. Perafonte) discovery. Maybe you can get a better picture of the guy.

http://krs4sure.2itb.com/DISCOVERY/ [/quote]

Amadeus
2004-Feb-16, 05:24 PM
Thanks for that. But I can now see that he might not be too happy with us seeing this other stuff. Least now we know he's got previous and not so likely to be a troll.

majic
2004-Feb-16, 06:45 PM
Amadeus wrote: "...Just noticed that the link says "discovery 2" what was discovery 1?.

Ok fellows, want to know?. Be carefull. It doesn´t deserves another locked thread. This is the link to the first MAP (Michaell A. Perafonte) discovery. Maybe you can get a better picture of the guy.

http://krs4sure.2itb.com/DISCOVERY/

Hehe..now *I* feel stupid..I tried DISCOVERY1 and DISCOVERY3 a few days ago, but they yielded nothing ..but I guess thats my computer mind (0, 1 , 2, 3 ..not _ 1 2 3 etc;-)

Anyways...scaring again, I can only HOPE this man is trying to get a good laugh from this and try to troll a bit...cant even expect the average conspirationalist to consider this sane ;-) Would be worth the go to post this stuff on the other forums (sorry, I forgot the name) and see what they say ..heh.

majic
2004-Feb-16, 06:51 PM
Thanks for that. But I can now see that he might not be too happy with us seeing this other stuff. Least now we know he's got previous and not so likely to be a troll.

This can mean two things

a) He's a persistant troll
b) He's seriously dillusional.

I'm sorry but he wrote a startrekstyle welcoming message for the aliens the size of golfballs waving with smokeflares. Something is very wrong.

foxd
2004-Feb-16, 07:15 PM
Thanks for that. But I can now see that he might not be too happy with us seeing this other stuff. Least now we know he's got previous and not so likely to be a troll.

This can mean two things

a) He's a persistant troll
b) He's seriously dillusional.

I'm sorry but he wrote a startrekstyle welcoming message for the aliens the size of golfballs waving with smokeflares. Something is very wrong.

I hope this doesn't get taken the wrong way, but I think MAP really needs to talk to a doctor immediately. I did some searching on the internet and found some postings by my exboss before he threatened to kill several people. The postings were about the little people he was seeing and how he was sure they were real. This cannot be good.

N C More
2004-Feb-16, 08:46 PM
I hope this doesn't get taken the wrong way, but I think MAP really needs to talk to a doctor immediately. I did some searching on the internet and found some postings by my exboss before he threatened to kill several people. The postings were about the little people he was seeing and how he was sure they were real. This cannot be good.

I don't think it sounds too good either. One of my cousins is schizophrenic. He's very bright (graduate of Cornell Univ.) and as long as he takes medication seems very normal. Without medication he is a different person....paranoid and delusional. Check out the Mayo Clinic's info site: http://www.mayoclinic.com/invoke.cfm?id=DS00196&si=2210&WT.srch Here's a snip:

"Schizophrenia is a debilitating kind of psychosis, which is an impairment of thinking in which your interpretation of reality can be severely abnormal.

Schizophrenia is often a chronic and debilitating mental illness. The disease can cause you to withdraw from the people and activities in the world around you and retreat into a world of delusions of thinking in which your interpretation of reality can be severely abnormal. "

Rift
2004-Feb-16, 10:21 PM
Wow, stay away for a few days, and look at the thread(s) I miss.

Almost (almost) make P*p*r look sorta semi rational.

But He Who Shall Not Be Named saw far FAR smaller things then MAP. He saw whole cities in a footprint... lol.

The Bad Astronomer
2004-Feb-16, 11:24 PM
At this point we are simply speculating about MAP's motivations. Without data, we cannot know if he is pulling our leg or not. I think therefore it's time to close this thread and let this chapter in the story of the BABB collect dust.