@spendius,
spendius wrote:
[But that is not the way a scientific mind looks at these things fm. They are simple physical manifestations like everything else in the last analysis.
And if you stop short of the last analysis you have a subjective reason for doing so and are per se not possessed of a scientific mind.
Are you faulting Farmerman for not living up to your preconceptions of how he should behave? Perhaps it is your labels that are insufficient.
spendius wrote:
And they are not great descriptions anyway. "Breath-taking" is hopeless. It's a gush of emotion. And what's the difference between seeing the boundaries of the Gulf Stream in the texture of the surface of the sea off the Canaries from seeing the boundaries of the oil on the surface of a puddle in the street.
Would this statement of yours qualify as a "gush of emotion" as well?
spendius wrote:I think the sea is horrible. I have ridden on two ferries. Across the Channel and to the Isle of Islay. And back. I watched the sea go by for long stretches. It was ghastly.
I think that, by the same standard, it would. The difference, of course, is in the emotions expressed. While, in your imaginings there may not be much difference visually between the boundary of an oil sheen in a sidewalk puddle and that presented by the Gulf Stream boundary in the Atlantic, in fact they are very different. I'm sure it is sometimes a challenge staying in character Spendi, but you do manage.
spendius wrote:We are having another "who is the biggest deal" discussion. George is justifiably fond of that sort of thing.
I am fond of the topics, but the big deal aspect of it it is mostly in your perception, not mine However, it's no longer a surprise that you do this and now OK by me.