Corpuscles Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi PB
>
But you really
> should watch part 4 and 5 of the youtubes
> to clear up what you have deceived into believing
> is a "subjective" analysis. It changes into the
> bizarre "Objective" certainty as you picked me on
> in the beginning of the month
>
> 1/ 140 million chance he is wrong! All others tell
> "nonsense"
>

Hi Corpuscles. I'm pretty sure that it was the 4th video that I saw, and I'm sorry but I just don't agree that Martin is being purely subjective, at least on that portion. He went out of his way to state that his starting point was subjective. Then he proposed a test based on the subjective presumption that the GT art at 43 might be celestial. Because we are dealing with a finite set in that regard, he is able to determine the total number of possible interpretive combinations. I found his prediction, that others would generally agree with his interpretation, to be reasonable based on the ranking alternatives. That doesn't make his starting point necessarily correct, but it lends a level of objectivity to his basic argument, if others are quite inclined to agree with his rankings.

I found Martin to be quite clear on these things, and give him full credit for saying, again and again, that his starting point is subjective. My impression is that he feels that he must say this, again and again, because for some odd reason it just isn't coming across clearly.