the return of pianistimo; the battle for middle earth rages on

[thalbergmad]

What's the biggie! I haven't been on the board for over a month and nobody gives a sh*t.

BTW, I am well and this evening alone spent in "The Elephant and Castle" and "Goat Tavern" in London.

1. You are not irritating enought to be missed.

2. You should have rung me, I am 15 miles from there.

Thal

[arensky]

Ha,

What's the biggie! I haven't been on the board for over a month and nobody gives a sh*t.
In any case, I highly doubt anybody would want to call me to check if I am OK, and frankly, I don't blame you for that...

BTW, I am well and this evening alone spent in "The Elephant and Castle" and "Goat Tavern" in London.

Day after tomorrow I am gonna check some pubs in Zurich and then in Bern.

P.S. Please don't call her. I am sure she is well. The only thing I am afraid she would feel she is needed here and will come back to keep spaming here with her BS. I feel there is way too little space for both of us to be on the same board.

Aren't you on tour?  I recall you mentioning that you would be in a post last summer. How's it going? Any interesting stories, any exceptionally good or bad pianos?

[m]

2. You should have rung me, I am 15 miles from there.

I am afraid, then our entire conversation would be built around " Pianistimo sucks".

P.S. In any case, my evening ended up in "Prince of Wales". After some beer I even was able to forgive Pianistimo for SOME of her crap. Now it is her call.

[gilad]

Be quite funny if bumped into Pianstimo is one of those pubs.

Odds unlikely!

]I think PS needs a pub.

[pianowolfi]

Day after tomorrow I am gonna check some pubs in Zurich and then in Bern.

Wow you coming to my country? Why do you skip Basel? Nice pubs here too:)

Do you give concerts here? I would be interested

[jlh]

Ha,

What's the biggie! I haven't been on the board for over a month and nobody gives a sh*t.
In any case, I highly doubt anybody would want to call me to check if I am OK, and frankly, I don't blame you for that...

I've wondered where you were... how are things?  I've been too busy to post much the past month -- school and everything getting too busy. 

I just listened to a couple of your recordings made in a hall where staff is reluctant to turn down the noisy AC (according to the CD notes).  Great stuff, and I didn't realize it was you until I started listening and reading the notes.

Josh

[m]

I've wondered where you were... how are things? 

Just coming back from a Russia tour. Had to play two different programs...   

I just listened to a couple of your recordings made in a hall where staff is reluctant to turn down the noisy AC (according to the CD notes).  Great stuff, and I didn't realize it was you until I started listening and reading the notes.

The Ravel on that disk is actually pretty good, isn't it?

Do you give concerts here? I would be interested

No, just visiting some friends. In any case, the rule would've been before the concerts "no pubs" for at least a couple weeks.
OK, I am off for "The Churchill's arms"  .

[jlh]

The Ravel on that disk is actually pretty good, isn't it?

Yes it is!  Admittedly, though, I actually listened to the CD based on the performer more than the rep on the CD...    Although having played a few of the Rach's, I was curious what they would sound like on your CD.

Two different programs?  Sounds exhausting!

[gerry]

...and all this has what to do with pianistimo being gone 

[pianowolfi]

Pianistimo is ok, she's taking a break.

[m]

...and all this has what to do with pianistimo being gone 

Well, virtually ANY thread she is posting in detracts from original topic in a matter of lightspeed, and noone asks about that.

Pianistimo is ok, she's taking a break.

Hopefully, she is not in rush and taking a quality break--good and most of all, loooooong one... 

[ganymed]

i dont understand why so many ppl have a problem with her faith and religion.

[thalberg]

i dont understand why so many ppl have a problem with her faith and religion.

I don't have a problem with her religion.  My problem is that her posts are so long I just don't have time to finish them.

[gilad]

Advice thalberg. Don't start on them

I hardly ever read anyones posts around here if they're over 10 lines.

I guess cause i really dont have time at the moment.

[quantum]

I guess you won't bother to read this text 

10___________________________________________
9_________________________________________
8__________________________________________
7_________________________________________
6__________________________________________
5_________________________________________
4__________________________________________
3_________________________________________
2__________________________________________
1_________________________________________

[thalbergmad]

He said over 10 lines, that post should be OK.

Thal

[counterpoint]

He said over 10 lines, that post should be OK.

Thal

I count 11 lines 

[ahinton]

I count 11 lines 

I feel like giving someone (not quite sure who, but so what?) 100 lines right now...

Bestistimo,

Alistimo

[gilad]

12 lines including the blank. Sorry, my time is valuable

[ada]

i dont understand why so many ppl have a problem with her faith and religion.

I have a problem, a big problem, with creationsim and people who espouse it.

I actually think creationism is sinister and dangerous. Blind faith and ignorance are always sinister and dangerous. Creationism is the antithesis of everything that stands for rationality and enlightenment, and a society made complacent by ignorance and lies is a society at risk.

Negating science harks back to book burning and heretic hunting, and history should have taught us how that ends up.

I object to creationists wanting to teach their lies and misinformation to children, I object to their agenda to infiltrate schools and places of learning with their nonsense.

I think it's the duty of every rational person to fight against this cultural and intellectual virus and as far as I'm concerned, people who place any value on learning, thinking and the pursuit of knowledge are duty bound to do the same.

I don't object to people having faith but I do object to them trying to foist their faith onto others, whether it's in the form of undermining school science curricula or posting incessantly on internet forums.

I hope that explains things.

For an interesting perspective on where creationism is leading us I suggest you read Ben Elton's new book, Blind Faith.

[thalberg]

Creationism is not sinister and dangerous.

Evolution is not scientific.  For something to be scientific, it needs to be observable and repeatable, which evolution is not.

Plus evolution flies in the face of two scientific laws--the law of entropy and the law of biogenesis.  Both are laws.  The theory of evolution breaks them both.

There is no "scientific" account of how the world began.  Every theory, whether creationism, evolution, or something else----EVERY THEORY is faith-based because you're trusting in something you can't prove.

[wotgoplunk]

I believe the entropy one doesn't apply, I think it has something to do with whether evolution is a closed or open system, but don't take my word for it, check elsewhere.

[thalberg]

I'll have to check into that.

Meanwhile, let's consider the effects of each belief system on our lives--

With evolution, we came about by accident, evolved from lower life forms, and are responsible to no one.

With creationism, we were created with a purpose by a higher life form and are responsible to the creator.

Creationism in my opinion lends us more human dignity, hope, and purpose.  So, as long as neither position is provable, I say creationism is the more optimistic stance to take--not the sinister one.

[ahinton]

I'll have to check into that.

Meanwhile, let's consider the effects of each belief system on our lives--

With evolution, we came about by accident, evolved from lower life forms, and are responsible to no one.

With creationism, we were created with a purpose by a higher life form and are responsible to the creator.

Creationism in my opinion lends us more human dignity, hope, and purpose.  So, as long as neither position is provable, I say creationism is the more optimistic stance to take--not the sinister one.

On the face of it that might seem to be a reasonable and pragmatic stance to adopt, as far as it goes; where I cannot help but part company with it, however, is in its inherent pessimism that appears to embrace the notion that greater "human dignity, hope and purpose" are possible only as a consequence of creationism itself and a belief therein - this sounds to me to be a rather jaded view of those things of which humanity is capable and to which it can seek to aspire.

So do I therefore accept ada's stance instead? Well, not quite. To put about the notion that creationism is "sinister and dangerous" itself strikes me as lending to it a kind of credibility it does not and cannot realistically deserve. I agree that, until we know and can prove everything about the origins of life, the universe and everything (sorry!), we will not be in a position to determine that one belief is shown to be correct and others shown to be incorrect, but our knowledge is already sufficient to undermine a substantial proportion of the tenets of creationism. I would accordingly say of the notion of creationism that it has many substantial and demonstrable shortcomings, rather than that it is "sinister and dangerous" and that it risks becoming discredited entirely as a consequence of future scientific discoveries.

That said, I do entirely agree with ada that it is deplorable - OK, perhaps even potentially "sinister and dangerous" - to teach creationism to unsuspecting children (are there any of these left, though?!) in schools as some kind of incontrovertible and inviolable truth rather than merely drawing attention in the classroom to its existence as a belief system that happens to attract some people and exposing its fundamental flaws according to current scientific understanding.

Whatever anyone might say about evolutionism, there is nothing inherent in it of which I am aware that specifically determines that all creatures "are responsible to no one". I assume that, when referring to such responsibility, you had humans in mind more than any other life form, since what you say about creationism appears to centre on humankind (if I read you correctly); why would humans who have "evolved" be somehow inferior in nature to those whose existence emerged from creationism? Surely the very idea of "evolving" can reasonably be seen as analogous to a desire and a capability for greater "human dignity, hope, and purpose"?

OK - I therefore award ada 8 out of 10; sorry, Thalbergsane!

Whether remarks such as those I have just made are likely to encourage pianistimo to return or to stay away or neither, I have less than no idea...

Best,

Alistair

[bob3.1415926]

Why on earth does everyone seem to think that creationism and evolution are incompatible? Evolution does NOT explain how it all started, it just takes it from there.

In the 7 days explanation God points out a progression which leads to humans.
Do you honestly think when He was appearing in burning bushes and the like to dictate the ol' testament do you think He would have got anywhere, if he said
"Right then, your body is made up of millions of cells, these cells are partially composed of amino acids, a type of protein. Inside these amino acids are rolled chains of DNA. These are the sequencers of life, when you reproduce, mutations can occur........, oh and you won't be able to see any of this for thousands of years until you invent really good microscopes."
He simplified it massively, so it made sense to the people at the time.

I'm glad you didn't use the term intelligent design though. That really annoys me.
Bob (Christian/Agnostic/Not-Really-Sure/Free-Thinker)

[prometheus]

thalberg, stop lying.


You KNOW those are lies. It's the stuff that gets repeated all the time. It's the fallacies that were made up in the times of Darwin and they were pointed out to be fallacies in the time of Darwin. And now you are still using them.

You MUST know they are wrong.


Why are you a liar?

[ahinton]

thalberg, stop lying.


You KNOW those are lies. It's the stuff that gets repeated all the time. It's the fallacies that were made up in the times of Darwin and they were pointed out to be fallacies in the time of Darwin. And now you are still using them.

You MUST know they are wrong.


Why are you a liar?

Whilst I have made my position on this as clear as I think I can and whilst I am of course well aware that your post above is not directed at me, I wish to point out that there is no need for the use of intemperate language such as yours here; Thalberg is not a "liar" - he just seems to believe something in which you and ada and I and many others have little or no faith.

Best,

Alistair

[prometheus]

No. He must know that his arguments are false.


Maybe I shouldn't call him a liar, but he is lying when he says the stuff he does about 'theory' and 'entropy'. And I think that in this case that certainly justifies calling him a liar.


I just want to know WHY he is doing it. He just proved Ada's point about how sinister and depressing the behavior and methods of creationism are.


Now, he could be one of their victims. If so, that's really sad.

[bob3.1415926]

Thalberg, I really don't understand your attempted distinction between laws and theories. 'Laws' are just scientific theories with a different title. They are not immovable.

For example, take the (now defunct) Law of conservation of mass. This was thrown out when Einstein discovered relativity, and replaced with the Law of conservation of energy.

Besides, evolution definitely does not break the law of biogenesis. It simply doesn't answer that question. Evolution is not a theory of how life began. Evolution only takes place once life exists.

I really don't understand why you claim that evolution breaks the law of entropy, care to elaborate?

[jlh]

Well it seems that no matter who's gone the thread still gets hijacked into a faith discussion...

[wotgoplunk]

Holy crap, someone lock this thread already. 

[pianistimo]

hello again.  what do you know.  just like marik - i find this funny. 

mum's the word.  let's talk about flowers.  gardening.  landscape architecture.  haven't we beat the previous stuff into the ground already?

i happen to have also picked up a collection of leroy anderson's medleys and have been practicing just in case my 'play at the mall' idea goes thru.  they opened this huge outlet mall in limerick.  people are flocking there from places like new jersey (a lot of those license plates last weekend).  i could set up shop and get some business.  you know - in 47 degree weather.  hmm.  maybe not.  well, they do have a macy's outlet there, too.  if i play indoors, the temperature would be ok. 

[wotgoplunk]

hello again.  what do you know.  just like marik - i find this funny. 

mum's the word.  let's talk about flowers.  gardening.  landscape architecture.  haven't we beat the previous stuff into the ground already?

...I must be dreaming.

[ramithediv]

No. Ahh!!!!!!

Go away again. 

lol

[thalberg]

I really don't understand why you claim that evolution breaks the law of entropy, care to elaborate?

Because with evolution, things move from disorder to order.  The law of entropy states that things always go from order to disorder unless acted upon by an outside force.

And thanks, Alistair, for addressing prometheus.  As for your point about it representing a jaded view of what humans are capable of, I must say I had not seen it that way and you have a very valid point.

[pianistimo]

what have i ever done to you?  just not subscribe to you piano methodology.  i don't even know what it is - so i never said anything about it.  why do you care what my religious beliefs are.  i could make it into a method and sell it, i suppose, but i think people are individuals and need individual treatment.  do they get that with ramithediv instruction?

why the 'go away?'  do you give a reason? or is it ada typical:  'she doesn't agree with my worldview- therefore she should disappear.'  what about both sides of an issue.  don't people want that anymores.  or is all going the way that imslp went?  you know - make free things look saleable.

[wotgoplunk]

Because with evolution, things move from disorder to order.  The law of entropy states that things always go from order to disorder unless acted upon by an outside force.

And thanks, Alistair, for addressing prometheus.  As for your point about it representing a jaded view of what humans are capable of, I must say I had not seen it that way and you have a very valid point.

Ah, but matter can escape the evolutionary system, so the second law of thermodynamics doesn't apply. 

[thalbergmad]

i could make it into a method and sell it

I am sure you could.

Try this place first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampton_Hospital

Thal

[ramithediv]

what have i ever done to you?  just not subscribe to you piano methodology.  i don't even know what it is - so i never said anything about it.  why do you care what my religious beliefs are.  i could make it into a method and sell it, i suppose, but i think people are individuals and need individual treatment.  do they get that with ramithediv instruction?

why the 'go away?'  do you give a reason?

Dear Susan,

Please understand that "I" am not "ramibarniv" the jewish piano camp salesman.

Best

Rami

[pianistimo]

have you ever seen a mammal give birth to nothing.  no warm blooded creature.  maybe lay an egg because childbirth was too painful.  or grow more bacteria in their noses  - and claim they are progressing.  actually, anything that is changing - is deteriorating.  this is proof that evolution is bunk.

the number of seriously deformed and degenerated genes and cells that are produced are a result of widespread pollution and contamination.  many birds have recently died to an oil spill in san francisco bay.  but, the ones that survive may have some kind of genetic problem we don't know about - or sometimes complete sterilization from bad caretaking of the environment.

when things are put together in cages - they can progenate into whatever morphed mouse/rabbit you want.  put them in the wild - they go for their own kind. 

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Did anyone notice that marik and pianistimo both disappeared several weeks ago,  and have returned at almost the same time?

Perhaps they were working in depth on the

'twaa twaa twaa' part

of the Spanish Rhapsody.

Welcome back to both of them..

[thalbergmad]

maybe lay an egg because childbirth was too painful. 

I wish the human females could lay eggs. All of this childbirth is just an excuse to laze around all day, stuffing choccies and having loads of time off work, whilst some poor bugger like me has to do 2 jobs at once.

Thal

[pianistimo]

i had to get the score.  where can one find one of those nowdays?  anyways, at the time - the spanish rhapsody was not on pf - and i couldn't find it elsewhere.

thal, have you ever even changed just ONE dirty diaper?

[thalbergmad]

Done a couple of nappy changes, no diapers.

It is womens work and i have to deal with enough crap at work.

Thal

[pianistimo]

soooo....what is the topic again?

[ramithediv]

soooo....what is the topic again?

You're supposed to be gone. 

[thalberg]

Ah, but matter can escape the evolutionary system, so the second law of thermodynamics doesn't apply. 

Not quite sure if I agree with that....if you consider the system to be the whole world, then nothing can really escape. 

Regardless, my position is that evolution claims to be scientific when really it is something people believe and take on faith without real evidence.

[prometheus]

Ah, but matter can escape the evolutionary system, so the second law of thermodynamics doesn't apply. 

He knows evolution doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics. It's such a stupid argument. I don't even know where to begin. It's wrong on like 5 different levels.

Order and disorder have nothing to do with entropy.
How the heck is entropy able to change genes and thus prevent evolution? How does it know which genes to change back?
And what about energy? Don't just read half the law.
And even if it violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. If the law is correct then how can evolution happen? We know it happens. But it shouldn't. That would mean either reality has got it wrong, or we humans have got it wrong.


So yeah, he is just trying to piss us off, as so many other creationists. And he is pretty good at it.

[thalberg]

 If the law is correct then how can evolution happen? We know it happens. But it shouldn't. That would mean either reality has got it wrong, or we humans have got it wrong.

Deep Thoughts, by prometheus.

[prometheus]

Why don't you try explain why a law that states that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one will prevent you or me from reproducing, our offspring having a mutation, and one of our offspring reproducing more often than the other?