No, don't twist my words. I said how can YOU call someone crazy (as one of you called Mr. Meier crazy in this case which is saying that they think he is confused and mad in the mind) when it is YOU who are confused and don't understand or fail to even investigate, disregarding it before you even know the facts?
I didn't really bother reading the whole thing, so I won't comment on it really.
Yes, I think it's important to give someone a fair shake.
However, you can't just assume the other guy is crazy and doesn't understand, you're pushing back unfairly even as you claim your opponent is being unfair.
And frankly, not all claims are equal.
To whit, is there something unfair or wrong about me if I hear someone say that the moon is made of green cheese and I laugh or think he's a kook right away? Do I need to entertain the thought that perhaps just this once, this person might actually be correct, in order to show myself open-minded?
To me, there seems to be a path of diminishing returns, and once the percentage of probable truthfulness drops far enough, you can probably choose not to invest in something that you've already concluded earlier is liable to not be true.
(Note: I think there's a better chance that aliens visited Meier than that the moon is made of green cheese... but not much better.)
This comment confirms your ignorant thinking. Why does the appearance concern you when it is what he has to say is the important thing. Haha would you trust him more if he wore a suit and a clean haircut? You are foolish to assume his value based on the fact that he has grown a beard... 'judge not lest you be judged.'
Let's discuss probabilities then.
Which man is more apt to be crazy: The one who can take care of his appearance and is AWARE of his appearance enough to care for it? Or the one who doesn't shower, is unkempt, looks like he slept in his clothes for two weeks straight, etc? There's a reason why the people in the asylums are usually messed up, appearance-wise; they aren't coherent enough to care for themselves.
We're not talking certainties. We're talking probabilities. If you look more sane, chances are you probably are more sane. That sort of "probability assessment" helps us conserve our energy to focus our thinking on the cases that truly deserve it. We do this all the time.
I don't think Meier's appearance means 100% he's nuts.
But there's more chance of it, using his appearance as one reference point.
Do not insult me with your false pity, you are the one in need of help and guidance, but it is all in the path of learning. My condolences for you are the amount of circles you will run in before you realise truth.
I like circles. They take me to familiar places.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/82880/828807233588ced49b45f83304c2fe508f861712" alt=":D :D :D"