Quite interesting - Mayan day/nights and earth periods

[zenmaster]

no reasoning at all, still, yet you are continually dubbing an approach/relation someone else established with reasoning and references, as 'imaginary'.

where is the reasoning.

But basically, I do not read anything with which to 'argue'. I see the usual gut feelings, intuitions, convenient correlations, and other vagaries of the imagination. This is mingled in with personal hopes, etc. It's like poetry. You don't 'argue' with poetry - you 'resonate' with it. You don't argue with someone that says they see a unicorn in a cloud formation. You might nod your head and think, 'yeah, I can see how that may appear that way'. Rather, you might 'argue' with things that have some philosophical foundation for example, and only then if someone wasn't personally invested in their ideas. If someone says 'that is God', who am I to 'argue'. Just doesn't work that way. Like ramen and his Dewey Larson / mainstream science dichotomy - you just know there is nothing there with which to debate (also rather non sequitur to this topic). But there is a 'vacuum of expectation created and maintained' for an argumentative reaction, for some reason.