[003]
Westrim
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It\'s like we\'re pitching balls at each other and missing the catch. I never said you said that alchemy was legitimate- that was said as counterpoint to the \
to:
It\\\'s like we\\\'re pitching balls at each other and missing the catch. I never said you said that alchemy was legitimate- that was said as counterpoint to the \\\"what about other definitions?\\\" thing that was going on.
As for gold into lead- yes, but not at all in the way in which they intended- that is, not involving extremely large, complex, and precise machines but instead chemical formulas and such. By analogy, thinking that you can reach the moon by building an extremely tall pyramid is still extremely wrong, even if you later find that rockets do the trick, or that you later find that if you applied enormous amounts of force you could change the orbit and rig up a space elevator. The process is still extremely different, and alchemy was still extremely wrong to think that it could get gold its way. Period. The strawman did not have a point. I believe your error is ignoring the journey for the destination.
@Jordan: While I don\\\'t loathe it, the deficiencies you mention are why several times in the past I have gone through this trope and cleaned out a lot of it. It used to be several pages longer. It\\\'s been a month though, so perhaps I should whip out the broom again.
As for gold into lead- yes, but not at all in the way in which they intended- that is, not involving extremely large, complex, and precise machines but instead chemical formulas and such. By analogy, thinking that you can reach the moon by building an extremely tall pyramid is still extremely wrong, even if you later find that rockets do the trick, or that you later find that if you applied enormous amounts of force you could change the orbit and rig up a space elevator. The process is still extremely different, and alchemy was still extremely wrong to think that it could get gold its way. Period. The strawman did not have a point. I believe your error is ignoring the journey for the destination.
@Jordan: While I don\\\'t loathe it, the deficiencies you mention are why several times in the past I have gone through this trope and cleaned out a lot of it. It used to be several pages longer. It\\\'s been a month though, so perhaps I should whip out the broom again.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It\'s like we\'re pitching balls at each other and missing the catch. I never said you said that alchemy was legitimate- that was said as counterpoint to the \
to:
It\\\'s like we\\\'re pitching balls at each other and missing the catch. I never said you said that alchemy was legitimate- that was said as counterpoint to the \\\"what about other definitions?\\\" thing that was going on.
As for gold into lead- yes, but not at all in the way in which they intended- that is, not involving extremely large, complex, and precise machines but instead chemical formulas and such. By analogy, thinking that you can reach the moon by building an extremely tall pyramid is still extremely wrong, even if you later find that rockets do the trick, or that you later find that if you applied enormous amounts of force you could change the orbit and rig up a space elevator. The process is still extremely different, and alchemy was still extremely wrong to think that it could get gold its way. Period. The strawman did not have a point. I believe your error is ignoring the journey for the destination.
@Jordan: While I don\\\'t loathe it, the deficiencies you mention are why a couple of times in the past I have gone through this trope and cleaned out a lot of it. At one point it was several pages longer.
As for gold into lead- yes, but not at all in the way in which they intended- that is, not involving extremely large, complex, and precise machines but instead chemical formulas and such. By analogy, thinking that you can reach the moon by building an extremely tall pyramid is still extremely wrong, even if you later find that rockets do the trick, or that you later find that if you applied enormous amounts of force you could change the orbit and rig up a space elevator. The process is still extremely different, and alchemy was still extremely wrong to think that it could get gold its way. Period. The strawman did not have a point. I believe your error is ignoring the journey for the destination.
@Jordan: While I don\\\'t loathe it, the deficiencies you mention are why a couple of times in the past I have gone through this trope and cleaned out a lot of it. At one point it was several pages longer.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It\'s like we\'re pitching balls at each other and missing the catch. I never said you said that alchemy was legitimate- that was said as counterpoint to the \
to:
It\\\'s like we\\\'re pitching balls at each other and missing the catch. I never said you said that alchemy was legitimate- that was said as counterpoint to the \\\"what about other definitions?\\\" thing that was going on.
As for gold into lead- yes, but not at all in the way in which they intended- that is, not involving extremely large, complex, and precise machines but instead chemical formulas and such. By analogy, thinking that you can reach the moon by building an extremely tall pyramid is still extremely wrong, even if you later find that rockets do the trick, or that you later find that if you applied enormous amounts of force you could change the orbit and rig up a space elevator. The process is still extremely different, and alchemy was still extremely wrong to think that it could get gold its way. Period. The strawman did not have a point. I believe your error is ignoring the journey for the destination.
@Jordan: While I don\\\'t loathe it, the deficiencies you mention are why a couple of times in the past I have gone through this trope and cleaned out a lot of it. At one point it was several pages longer
As for gold into lead- yes, but not at all in the way in which they intended- that is, not involving extremely large, complex, and precise machines but instead chemical formulas and such. By analogy, thinking that you can reach the moon by building an extremely tall pyramid is still extremely wrong, even if you later find that rockets do the trick, or that you later find that if you applied enormous amounts of force you could change the orbit and rig up a space elevator. The process is still extremely different, and alchemy was still extremely wrong to think that it could get gold its way. Period. The strawman did not have a point. I believe your error is ignoring the journey for the destination.
@Jordan: While I don\\\'t loathe it, the deficiencies you mention are why a couple of times in the past I have gone through this trope and cleaned out a lot of it. At one point it was several pages longer
