“A phaham yr wyt yn edrych ar y brycheyn sydd yn llygad dy frawd, ac nad ydwyt yn ystyried y trawst sydd yn dy lygaid dy hun”
As usual this was translated by Dr William Morgan in 1588 from the Greek and Hebrew. I translate it into modern English as follows:
“And why do you look at the flaw in your brother’s eye, and do not realize the violence that is in your own eyes?”
I think it is clear now to all that there is only one person, who was traced originally by the police to Barry near Cardiff under the pseudonym “Arthur Dent”. The real Arthur Dent was a Puritan of the seventeenth century, and a Puritan seeks to keep the word of physics unchanged. “Yn y dechreuad yr oedd y gair … ” – “In the beginning there was the word ….” So, radical new thought and discoveries such as those at AIAS would shatter his world. I think he should just be left alone with his blog unless he does something really bad like threatening violence. The police know who he is and where he lives. If they had a warrant they might find a camera in his possession. Although I never agreed with the Higgs thing my arguments are always scientific. To cheer things up I leave the last word to the great Oscar Wilde
However, to some it is frightening. So what is going to happen now is that everything I post on my blog will be subjected to unconvincing vulgarity, and all of it will be irrelevant to science. Let us therefore get on with science. I will leave Mr Dent to contemplate his own destiny, the one that awaits us all.
My less extensive experience of such attitude is nevertheless enough to affirm the emptiness of such vitriolic lives. Whilst the AIAS works and produces, it seems that these anonymous folk devils just work to besmirch. At some point, Matthew 7:3 cuts in with the inevitable questioning of the beam owners motivation but remains unheard. I would stress here that I too, have no god but a respect for godliness or non arch piety. There is much wisdom in religious writing when it is based on the honest human experience of ages. On a bridge of persuasion, Matthew may as well be Buddha as far as I’m concerned – in his universal words of wisdom. The verse calls for self analysis.
I have copied all the “crackpotwatch” text and imported it to word. I did this to exploit an ordinarily irritating feature of my Word program; That of it’s dictionary language. Whilst I have it set to UK English, it still highlights all but American spellings as erroneous so I use it very infrequently. As a result, the fault now highlights all UK English spellings as errors and underlines them in red waves. All spellings here [in crackpots text] are UK English. I found only two of the word “mathematics” but my eye and “find” feature is not always as diligent as could be hoped. “…..ising” is always with an “s” and not “z”; just as colour, humour favour etc. is always UK English
On further analysis, the tone of all text carries the same superiority complex of the last abuser assessment I made some months ago (I cannot find my copy). The inconsistent addition is the use of the 1st person plural in all but one reference where “I advise” has been used but once against the set norm (many examples) which would be “we advise”. This offers three immediate possibilities;
1. There are two authors. I personally doubt this as the general, overly superior style seems consistent with one authors outscape.
2. In my opinion, this language is often used to bolster the idea of plurality in authority, self importance or royal capacity. These are the blatant signs of delusion if there is no second or subsequent author or partner(s).
i.e. What is the purpose of saying “we” and “our” other than to describe a group response or dictat (see M.Thatcher – “We are a grandmother”. ….. “we” are also a megalomaniac).
3. Due to the one inconsistency of “I advise….” I suspect that deceitful facades have been emplaced and that one “I advise…” was a slip-up in an otherwise perfect consistency of disguise, marred by just one moment of lapse.
I sense too that this person has an extremely high opinion of himself and has lightly peppered his text with red herrings. In one “aside” he refers to a boyfriend or ex “b/f”.
Notwithstanding homosexuality, I believe he is getting a thrill from “being an anonymous woman” from time to time. This may even be a transvestite who is aroused by his own sense of deceptive concealment rather than a “run of the mill” transvestism that cries out for exposure of practice – the paradoxical, well dressed woman with the 5 oclock shadow.
Once again we see the same savage dismissal of all but his own opinions and beliefs in the same way as before. That too, to now include all the works and discoveries of Nikola Tesla.
“However, historians of science know better and pay no attention to mere inventors since – with very few exceptions – they never discover anything and – moreover – are usually out-of-touch with, and antagonistic towards, proven science. UNESCO’s honouring Tesla with a ‘year’ was on a par with the UN making the unspeakable Mugabe a representative for tourism.”
Non sequiteurs abound in his suspect philosophies (as above – can rational science say, “mere inventors”?) He is also selectively and inconsistently hypocritical in that it is his word alone as to who are the good, and who are the “bad boys”.
Unless I miss my mark, anonymity is crucial since I believe it is not outlandish to suggest he inhabits something of a double life – one side being mundane and suburban perhaps, whilst the other side can shout out his anonymous and ineffectual authority to a hapless internet audience. To be exposed as just another “nutter on the bus” is not so intolerable in isolation and a new ID can be quickly put up or shut down.
However I suspect he has people in his acquaintance who may be shocked by his abuses and may drift away from him if his ID is openly exposed. He knows this and I believe his problems are born of many years of some disgruntlement before the end of his viable, working life. Note the permanent obsession with his own righteousness. You’ll not find the humility that Mathew would seek except after exposure.
I would suggest that this is the same person who was warned off last time but I cannot find that earlier assessment for comparison….so links are by my memory only.
The thrill may also be gotten from “living dangerously” by dropping little clues to his true identity that we lesser and stupid mortals would not even notice as his cleverness is so all encompassing – in his own mind.
His hatred of you, Myron is driving him mad and he must have dominance in any quarter. His internal avatar is a scientist of unimpeachable diligence and acumen. Everyone is beneath him in his disguise.
Remove the disguise and you’ll probably find a yes man who was sacked or made redundant and is surplus to any known requirement.
All of the above is not a statement of facts but instinctual gleanings. But I believe Lizzie Boredom lives in the wardrobe and is occasionally brought out of the closet and skittishly aired under an excited rush from childish but insidious mischief. I have referred to it as “him” but won’t mind being proven wrong if I get to see this very disturbed woman……man……..deceiver.
Best regards,
Robert
