Still without understanding?

[Stewart]

I just noticed that Jim had sneaked in another two posts in pretty much the same vain while I was addressing the original one! I think everything I said in my previous post covers those too.

The plain unadulterated reason Bessler blanked those two lines was because his meaning was to call Wagner a very vulgar OBSCENE name. Obscene means off scene. out of sight, not fit for ladies or gentlemen to see. Thus the blank lines.

Pure unsubstantiated speculation on Jim's part. No swear-word could replace the dashes in the sentence and also make any sense.

We might speculate that maybe Bessler's printer refused to type-set certain words. Maybe it wasn't Bessler blanking out these words.

That's the only intelligent suggestion Jim has made in all of this. I've suggested this before and it's certainly a possibility.

Read about the printer's devil here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer%27s_devil
and here:
http://www.writersservices.com/resource ... il-posters

I remember reading somewhere when I researched this before that some superstitious typesetters/printers would refuse to print the word devil, but I can't find the quote now.

There was a convenient belief among printers that there was a special devil in every print-shop.

At night, or when the printer was not watching, this pesky demon would iuvert letters, mizspell a word or perhaps remove an entire or even a complete line.

In the days of movable type, every letter had to be picked and placed by hand. Thin spacers, know as leading, were added to line everything up.

Mistakes were inevitable, and the printer's devil took the blame.

If Bessler is intentionally blanking out the word Teufel, could it be anything to do with the printer's devil? Should we be looking for intentional mistakes?

Stewart

[Stewart]

What is your experience about this, or what do you think which bible translation he mainly used for those quotes?

The quotes come mainly from the German Luther and Latin Vulgate versions of the Bible.

This is most probably complete nonsense, but as a question
it might be allowed. Would it make sense to any of you if the missing word is Jesus (Jesus Christ) instead?

I think you're right, that doesn't make any sense! ;-)

Stewart

[eccentrically1]

I don't think he could have been calling Wagner an obscene name, and also calling his contraption an obscene name. It would have to be one or the other wouldn't it?
I guess jim means the contraption.

It certainly makes sense that superstitious typesetters would leave blanks for the word for devil. If he used different typesetters, maybe that's why it appears sometimes, and other times it doesn't.

[jim_mich]

Stewart, stop your lying and bitching...

Once again Jim can not bring himself to say "I think Bessler..." and instead attempts to pass off his own thoughts ...

Go back to the first post in this current thread. Here is the link:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 848#131848
At the end of my post is my signature, it reads

My words are my opinion. If you disagree - that's your problem, not mine.

It's been there for a very long time. As far as I know, I have no control over when or where it gets displayed. But you, Stewart, keep harping about me NOT including a disclaimer in every post. Good grief, this is a discussion forum, where forum members express their thinking. ALL POSTS are the THINKING of the forum member making the post. Without discussing the pro's and con's, then we might as well not discuss anything.

It seems maybe Stewart does not understand double entendre.

Is this not the same as saying "I think maybe Stewart..."?

There is another place in AP where Bessler (or whoever typeset it) replaces the word 'Teuffel' with 'T - -'. It's on page 50 of part 2. I'd like to see Jim explain that with his "double entendre". Here's the couplet:

Ist Wagner nicht ein Ertz-Bernheuter/
Der T - - ist doch sein Hand-Leiter; &c.

Broken down into syllables and substituting the word 'Teuffel':

Code: Select all

1  |2  |3   |4    |5   |6    |7    |8  |9
Ist|Wag|ner |nicht|ein |Ertz-|Bern |heu|ter/
Der|Teu|ffel|ist  |doch|sein |Hand-|Lei|ter; &c.

It translates as:
Isn't Wagner an arch-coward/idler,
the devil is indeed his guide;
-or-
the devil indeed guides his hand;

The translation makes sense with the word 'Teufel'. I'm open to suggestions of other two-syllable words beginning with 'T' that would fit here and make sense. Can anyone give me one?

What???? So according to you, Stewart Hughes, it is a fact (i.e., no "I think") that this can only be Tueffel, the Devil.

Come on Stewart, how can you keep claiming some sort of superior knowledge about such things? Are you never wrong?? Can't you see that there are OTHER possibilities...

Code: Select all

Es aus des Herren Munde hieß:          |it from the gentlemen mouth stated:
Ist Wagner nicht ein Erz-Berenheuter,  |is Wagner not a story_telling_bear_now
Der T_ _ ist doch sein Handleiter; x.  |the idiot is still be hand_leader [Trottel = idiot/fool/etc.]
Und dieses schöne Prädicat NB.         |and this pretty title NB.
Er bei unzehlig Herren hat. x.         |he with countless gentlemen was. x.

Take your fingers out of your ears. Wipe the planks from your eyes. Stop saying, "No,no, no. You're wrong!"

You keep harping about grammar.
Grammar is simply positioning the words into a nice and pretty order, mostly so that the German ordering of words are re-arranged into the English ordering of words. In my translations I simply keep the words in their original positions in the sentence. I have absolutely no trouble understanding the German ordering of the words. I've previously explained why. Obviously, to someone unfamiliar with such German word ordering, it makes the translation seem somewhat idiotic. But that is your problem, not mine.

[ovyyus]

Without discussing the pro's and con's, then we might as well not discuss anything.

Discussion with someone who believes they are always right about everything is pointless.

[jim_mich]

Discussion with someone who believes they are always right about everything is pointless.

Hey, can I help it if I'm right most of the time?

Why be wrong when you can be right?

[cloud camper]

Of course we have explained this many times before, in his own mind JM has completely become the identity of Bessler, and of course he is right and there is no need of discussion.

This is a simple case of identity assumption, in which the individual in considering his own accomplishments a failure adopts the same thinking pattern, reactions and outlook as the supposed successful individual.

The more the person copies the exact behavioral traits of the successful person, it logically follows that person will enjoy the same success.

This is all a very standard psychological mechanism. Teenage females (and males) use this mechanism all the time,
dressing and behaving in the exact mannerisms as a favorite movie star, musician or successful sports figure.

Like a bad disease, this individual will keep coming back insisting he is right just as Bessler did.

Bessler knew how to create a PM wheel and therefore did not have to keep proving it.

Similarly, JM “knows� exactly how to build a working machine and therefore has no need to construct or demonstrate one.

Then it follows that “fabrications� of successful runners are totally acceptable as these are just logical extensions of reality.

Since JM has assumed this identity, there is no need of translations since he (as Bessler) knows what he said and why.

The only handle for this type of identity confusion is to not indulge it.

Any discussion with JM simply validates he is correct in his thought patterns and continues the process ad infinitum.

[ovyyus]

Hey, can I help it if I'm right most of the time?

Your self-serving over-estimate of the power of Bessler's wheel must be the exception.

Discussion with someone who believes they are always right about everything and who never admits when they are wrong, is stupidly pointless.

[daanopperman]

Hi Art ,

I have in the past claimed too many things I do not have , so no more until I have a runner , simple as that , but still strugelling ahead , only in silince .

@ all

From " verstand " comes "verstaan " or to understand , so the translation in J.C. book is correct and can be taken so .

Daan

[Art]

"..so no more until I have a runner ,.."


You're being harsh on yourself Daan , I don't see any one else wth one either !


What I think would be good would be if more people posted after the experiments and failed runners and gave the benefit of their experience of it .


A lot of that type of stuff in the archives would be very useful and I'm sure would be very informative as well as good reassurance for us that some of the good ideas (even if they are not the ones that are actually successful ,at least are being tested by someone.

If we wait to have a runner before we post then you're not going to hear from me for a few days !:)

[Gill Simo]

What the frick are you's thinking of....there must be a stronger term than pathetic but I can't find one off the top of my head.
There's nothing, whatsoever, that Jim is guilty of, that doesn't/hasn't applied to us all...it's a blight that arises from mixing human nature with this particular subject matter.
You seem to be under the grand illusion that your persistent hijacking of all/any of Jim's posts to conduct your thrill of a verbal lynching is somehow of more value than the post itself?
Well it isn't.....is f**cking sickening to behold, pure & simple.
You think `you` have anything of value to offer this quest of all quests, when you're still without understanding of your own base behaviour, apparently?
Stewart...I thought you were off?
To start your own forum, which you'll post a link to here, just as soon as it's up & running. That speaks volumes doesn't it?.......Like faking your own death, moving across the globe, in desperation to escape your wife...& then sending her a post card! Like us all, despite your many years here you've added precisely nothing to advance the cause. Best wishes, good luck etc but you're hardly gonna be missed.
And please, oh please, drag your pal over with you...the one who's only input is to perpetually camp his cloud over Jim's every utterance....& the one/two others that stand & shout so bravely from behind him.
I hopefully speak for at least a few others here when I say that I'm well able to assess Jim's input for myself thank you....well enough at least to not need fools to do it for me.
The assessment at present is that Jim is arguing a case for certain words in certain blank spaces & others are insisting on alternative words.
Well, put in any damn word you wish, in any space you wish.....not a single one will help, it doesn't matter a toss in terms of solving this riddle....only in terms of serving the ego.
And Jim.....rise above them for God's sake, grass snakes aren't at all hard to step over.
Face piles & piles of trials with smiles, for it riles them to believe you perceive the web they weave.....Keep on thinking free.
Moody Blues, I think?

[Stewart]

Stewart, stop your lying and bitching...

I don't lie. Show me where you think I've lied about something?
And if confronting the biggest threat to the truth this forum has ever seen is "bitching", then no I won't stop "bitching"!

Go back to the first post in this current thread. Here is the link:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 848#131848
At the end of my post is my signature, it reads
Quote:
My words are my opinion. If you disagree - that's your problem, not mine.
It's been there for a very long time. As far as I know, I have no control over when or where it gets displayed. But you, Stewart, keep harping about me NOT including a disclaimer in every post. Good grief, this is a discussion forum, where forum members express their thinking. ALL POSTS are the THINKING of the forum member making the post. Without discussing the pro's and con's, then we might as well not discuss anything.

What the hell is Jim talking about? I do not keep harping on about him not including a disclaimer in every post! No disclaimer should need to be added to any post. No one else has a disclaimer in their signature, so why does Jim need one. This is just another ruse that allows Jim to be deceitful and manipulative and somehow justify it as acceptable in his own mind. Great qualities for a highly regarded forum member!

Jim_Mich wrote:
It seems maybe Stewart does not understand double entendre.
Is this not the same as saying "I think maybe Stewart..."?

Why is Jim highlighting the one place where he's used the word "seems" - it doesn't even relate in any way to the discussion about not making false statements about Bessler?
Jim SEEMS to be a master at avoiding the issues. I THINK he'd make a great politician, skirting around a question without ever actually answering it.

What???? So according to you, Stewart Hughes, it is a fact (i.e., no "I think") that this can only be Tueffel, the Devil.

Jim's right, I dropped the ball with that one in my rush to get the post out so that my whole evening wasn't wasted on this. I apologise and have corrected the sentence to include the word "appears". Because the word is blanked out leaving only the first letter (T) we can only guess the word to be 'Teufel', although you'd have to be incredibly ignorant to think the word could be anything else on this occasion. So what will Jim do now I wonder? Will he apologise for his countless false statements and make any attempt to correct his posts? Or will he simply completely ignore the whole issue and carry on regardless?

I'm open to suggestions of other two-syllable words beginning with 'T' that would fit here and make sense. Can anyone give me one?

This was a deliberately worded joke to include a double entendre, I included several in my post, but in seems these went right over Jim's head. No surprise. However, the question is a legitimate one - what else could that world possibly be? (Two syllables, beginning with 'T' and making sense in the context of the paragraph).

Come on Stewart, how can you keep claiming some sort of superior knowledge about such things? Are you never wrong?? Can't you see that there are OTHER possibilities...

When it comes to Bessler's writing and the language used by Bessler then yes I have more knowledge than most, which is to be expected from someone who has spent ten years learning and studying it in minute detail. I don't think anyone could argue with that? If someone else went through the same process then you'd hope they'd be equally knowledgable. Jim on the other hand has only recently started to look at the original text and try to translate it himself. He has put no effort in to learning the language and works from inaccurate transcriptions, looking up individual words in dictionaries and can never produce an accurate translation because he refuses to learn grammar, or perhaps is actually incapable of learning it.

Of course I make mistakes and I am sometimes wrong, but I always correct my mistakes if they're pointed out. I take great pains to make sure I get things right. I can always provide proof of how I arrive at a translation using the grammar rules of the language. There is very little guess work. There is only ever one correct translation, but there may be several ways to interpret the meaning. I make a clear distinction between what is a translation and an interpretation. Unlike Jim, I don't force a translation to say what I want it to say, but strive to convey the meaning as written.

the idiot is still be hand_leader [Trottel = idiot/fool/etc.]

What does that even mean? It's not a translation and makes no sense. If you use the word 'Trottel' in my translation you get:

Isn't Wagner an arch-coward/idler,
the idiot indeed guides his hand;

That also doesn't make sense as in the context of the chapter there is no prior mention of an idiot. And using Jim's own argument against him here: why would Bessler blank out the word 'idiot' when he had no problem calling Wagner all manner of derogatory terms throughout AP. There's a lot of support in the rest of AP for that blanked word being 'Teufel' and it makes perfect sense. And lets remember Jim is only looking for different words to replace 'Teufel' because he wants his theory that Bessler uses a swear-word on the last page of AP to be right. I've already proved that it's not grammatically possible to get that text to say what Jim wants it to say! This whole thing is a massive waste of time and has no bearing on anything useful.

Take your fingers out of your ears. Wipe the planks from your eyes. Stop saying, "No,no, no. You're wrong!"

Yawn! Jim is wrong! I've proved it repeatedly, no one needs to take my word for it - the evidence is all there. He's either too stupid to understand the facts presented to him or deliberately chooses to ignore them! Mike's and others translations back up what I'm saying also, so apparently everyone is wrong but Jim!

You keep harping about grammar.

Well, need we wonder any longer just what a charlatan Jim is! To make such a flippant remark shows that Jim has no business trying to foist his translation attempts on us.

Grammar is simply positioning the words into a nice and pretty order, mostly so that the German ordering of words are re-arranged into the English ordering of words.

LMAO. Jim really shows his ignorance here. There is a whole lot more to grammar than just word order as I'm sure most here know. Being able to recognise a word as a noun, adjective, verb, adverb etc. is crucial. Understanding tenses, cases, moods is also important, to name just a few things.

In my translations I simply keep the words in their original positions in the sentence.

That's because all Jim can do is look up words in dictionaries. Anyone can do that. He has no understanding or skill that would allow him to produce anything better.

I have absolutely no trouble understanding the German ordering of the words. I've previously explained why. Obviously, to someone unfamiliar with such German word ordering, it makes the translation seem somewhat idiotic. But that is your problem, not mine.

Knowing German sentence structure is the first baby-step into understanding the written language. It doesn't sound idiotic at all when read in German - what sounds idiotic is when Jim presents it in English without making any attempt to make it understandable in English. What Jim does could not be classed as proper translation. Jim manages to get some understanding of the text from AP because of the short little sentences, but he wouldn't have a hope in hell of translating something like GB without knowledge of grammar.

Hey, can I help it if I'm right most of the time?

Jim is hardly ever right, the poor deluded thing.

Why be wrong when you can be right?

I wish Jim would reflect on that question himself. Language is logical and follows rules, to refuse to learn the rules while expecting everyone to take your translations seriously makes you either some sort of idiot or someone suffering from a personality disorder.

Anyway, once again I hope it's clear to everyone that Jim does not have the necessary skills to produce an accurate translation or any sort of translation for that matter. Worse than that even, he continues to try to deceive you into thinking he does, and makes no attempt to actually learn the language. The only reason he is even attempting to translate the text himself is because he doesn't like what it actually says and wants to force it to say the things that he wants and that will support his own theories.

Stewart

[Stewart]

Hi Gill,

Stewart...I thought you were off?

I will be off soon, but work and illness has held me up opening a new forum. It was only because Jim mentioned me directly that I felt the need to respond.

Like faking your own death, moving across the globe, in desperation to escape your wife...& then sending her a post card!

Lol, I can see your point.

Best wishes, good luck etc but you're hardly gonna be missed.

Thanks, and I'm not under any illusion I will be missed. I don't post here to stroke my own ego or to get anything in return, but just to try and help others where I can.

And please, oh please, drag your pal over with you

Seriously Gill, you're trying to make out I have some sort of connection to Cloud Camper?

I hopefully speak for at least a few others here when I say that I'm well able to assess Jim's input for myself thank you....well enough at least to not need fools to do it for me.

Well thats good that you are able to do that. A newcomer to the forum might not be so lucky. So what is your assessment of Jim's ability to translate 300 year old German and Latin into English? And will you convey that assessment to newcomers to the forum when Jim presents a translation and I'm not here? Yes I'm clearly a fool for caring about this forum and for wasting my time trying to stop people perpetuating false information about Bessler. Does anyone really care about Bessler and his wheels anymore? This could be any old free-energy board these days - how about a rename such as RandallWheel.com?

The assessment at present is that Jim is arguing a case for certain words in certain blank spaces & others are insisting on alternative words.

That is Jim's current preoccupation, yes, but not what is at the heart of my argument with him - it's to do with him presenting false information about Bessler as fact based on his own flawed translations.

Well, put in any damn word you wish, in any space you wish.....not a single one will help, it doesn't matter a toss in terms of solving this riddle....

It's only relevant if the word has any importance in decoding information. Like you, it seems, I prefer to spend more time thinking on actual devices and building them, rather than spending time worrying about possible codes.

And Jim.....rise above them for God's sake, grass snakes aren't at all hard to step over.

Why do you keep defending Jim? You seem to think he's being unfairly attacked? I don't see you jumping to the defence of others when Jim rounds on them with full abusive force!

Well it isn't.....is f**cking sickening to behold, pure & simple.

You seem to have a lot of anger in you for an old hippy - chill out man!

All the best,
Stewart

[Wubbly]

At the end of my post is my signature, it reads
Quote:

My words are my opinion. If you disagree - that's your problem, not mine.

It's been there for a very long time. As far as I know, I have no control over when or where it gets displayed.

If you edit your profile, there's a signature text box.
A few lines down in the Preferences section there's a radio button for: "Always attach my signature (Yes/No)".
You must have this set to "NO" because your signature only appears the first time you post on a thread.

[jim_mich]

"A few lines down in the Preferences section there's a radio button for: "Always attach my signature (Yes/No)".
You must have this set to "NO" because your signature only appears the first time you post on a thread.

Sorry, its been set to "YES" like since forever.

Like I said, I have no control over when or where it gets displayed.