I think this is important

[Dave Bagwill]

I read the book 20 years ago it seems. I just went online to buy the book used when this summary popped up. This is a synopsis, 8 pages long, the uh....Weight..of the argument makes it necessary reading. It is more important today than last year, or last decade, or last century.
If you take time to read it closely, I'd really like your comments.
http://www.onthewing.org/user/Ev_Four%2 ... vision.pdf

[Tim Benware]

Sorry Dave I got half way through it then realized the evening news was coming on - had to run!

[Dave Bagwill]

Yeah, I was watching Fox when I was doing that post...I have no character whatsoever..

[David L]

Okay Dave, I'll bite! Firstly I find the article to be very biased, something that it bashes TV for being. Secondly, I don't find it to be as relavent today as it was twenty or more years ago as there are so many more channels to choose from, one doesn't have to get hypnotized by fictional drama or situation comedies. The article ends by saying to read more instead of watching TV and while I'm not opposed to reading at all (btw I read the entire article) some of the same arguements could be thrown at certain reading material as for watching TV. Lastly I'd like to say that while I feel that it did make some valid points, it also delved into some subject matter that is so specialized one would either just have to go with it on blind faith or do some extensive and expensive studying for oneself to corraborate, example; different colored lights causing cancer in rats and our brains going into overload because we can't process the amount of information being thrown at us. That's how I feel about it unless my brain has been fried from getting too much blue light from watching too much TV and I completely mis-read the article!

David L

[Dave Bagwill]

Dave, I disagree heartily with almost every single point you make. I'm just gonna let folks read it or not, and make up their own minds. :-) Or let someone on TV tell them what to think about it...

[David L]

Dave, I am okay with that. I think it's healthy for people to have different points of views, if we all agreed with everyone about everything the world would be a very boring place. Of course it was not meant to be a personal attack on you and I don't think you took it that way (at least I hope you didn't). I'm quite sure that more than a few folks might not share the same views about the article (if they actually read it in it's entirety) as I do. I sometimes have an odd way of looking at things (and that's putting it politely). When people disagree about something I look at it from the position as an opportunity for me to learn something whether I'm involved in the disagreement or not. When I was a kid in school, learning was the last thing I was interested in and now I find that at this point of my life I can't learn enough. I'm like some kind of information junkie, yes, I'm full of all kinds of trivial crap that ain't worth a single red cent.
Anyway, although my ranting may have come across as cynical to some, I hope that no one took it as disrespectful!

David L

[Dave Bagwill]

We have a lot of personality traits in common, David, so of course I think you're a fine fellow! :-)
The article took a strong stand, and backed up the stand with reasoning. I admire that as being the sort of thing that at least draws the old 'line in the sand' and provokes people to think a little, whether they agree with the reasoning or not.