Anytime someone promises "absolute truth," they are lying.
 

I'm sorry you don't understand what I'm speaking about. As a teacher, I teach up first or try to see who has the most understanding.

The heart of the 12 step movement and my life is seeking help from the HP (higher power) and accepting it. In other words, we all have limitations and only Deity has the ABSOLUTE TRUTH. Therefore, if we are all limited, we are all equal and in need of each other and bound, morally, to accept and work with each other. All have dignity and all people have some divine talent or insight. It's my code and I'm sticking with it. :)

All you read was my last sentence and you made no attempt to follow the context or understand the point. In other words, you are guilty of the mistake you say I am making. You made a "dishonest analogy."

Intrinsic in the claim of "absolute truth" is the fanatic's inferiority complex. Why else would someone discard what is very effective, unless they didn't understand it? Put it this way, "the enemy of the good is the perfect."



* Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.
o The better is the enemy of the good.
+ La Bégueule (1772)
+ Variant translations:

The perfect is the enemy of the good.
The best is the enemy of the good.
+ Note: This quotation also appears in Italian (Il meglio è l'inimico del bene) in the Questions sur l'Encyclopédie article, "Dramatic Art" (1764)


What I would've enjoyed from that fanatic was a simple invitation based in reality and the necessary humility which would logically flow from a human being. Something like, "TGM is very effective in what it teaches. Technology is improving since TGM has been written. We are having a conference to discuss how new insights might impact some of TGM's observations. Maybe y'all would like to check it out."

"Footwedge," you are a funny person based on your note here. You didn't answer or address my central point: what is truth in any field, including golf and how do you come to it? I guess you felt that a superficial attack would hide your misunderstandings and your failure to comprehend my point.

Are you a politician or lawyer, or perhaps, you work for a politician that plays a lot of golf and wishes to be "flashy," and not really effective? Perhaps you make your living by trading in dishonest analogies and sounding off to obscure what is effective so that you can be noticed?

Here is another basic idea. Technology can be a great thing or a really crappy thing. Technology helped some scientists decide that DDT could poison rats given massive doses and might poison humans. As a result, Africa is ravaged by Malaria. Technology helps lots of dictators control funds given by UN food programs in "hidden" bank accounts so that their people are enslaved with a shortage of food. BLAHBLAHBLAH...who doesn't get this?

Technology has helped make a lot of golf courses obsolete and so, there are new standards for tour wedges, backing away from "improved technology."

You can see the DNA and miss the fact that the person is hungry.

The big picture and the details are both important concepts. Interdependence is better (people who need people... and people who can go it alone when needed...whole people, emotionally) than dependence or independence, imho.

One last point you missed FW, is that I have spent considerable time and effort with BM and LBG. You want me to have an "open mind?" So I can go back to a 28 hcp.? Did I hurt your feelings by indicating my mistrust of BM? Everyone has a belly button and is entitled to their opinions unless you have the "absolute truth," right?

Do you have a golf hcp.? Is there a system that would reduce a 21 hcp. to a single digit hcp. in 6 months that you are aware of and have tried?

My offer to you is the same offer extended to CMS. Post your videos. Let us see your swing and if you would like help, there are many friendly, insightful people here on this site who could help anyone's swing or hit.

And if you are in my area, and spot me my hcp...:laughing9

Have a happy learning day, FW. :)

BTW, go Brian Gay! 112 to 12 in one year! That TGM, I guess, is pretty effective stuff!

You are presumptuous! I started learning TGM in 2003 from various camps, and it did not take me to the mountaintop. My handicap is lower than yours:golf: I'm glad that the LBG variant of TGM was able to help you so much, but please CALM DOWN! I was once an evangelical believer like you but, but now I sit in the back pews as a doubtful churchgoing agnostic.

When I first started to learn TGM, it was presented as SCIENCE. Now, some of the same people are taking jabs at modern day golf science.

A 2010 Homer Kelly would have all the latest 3D gear, and would have several scientist on speed dial. A guy that edited his Opus 7 times would not sit back marveling at his work; He would be constantly improving it with new ideas.

I would like to see a new yellow book written by a panel of scientist and golf instructors. The scientist will provide the facts, and the instructors will make the information palatable to the average golfer.

:naughty: ChangeMySwing:naughty:

You need to learn to read, as i never said he was wrong i said he might just learn something. This is the typical knee jerk re-action from a closed minded person, always defensive, what are you scared of science?

Nice bait and switch, you must be a lawyer and or politician.
 

And you are accusing me of the shortcomings of "footwedge," who claimed to have "absolute truth," and you haven't answered my challenge. Why don't you try LBG? Give it a shot. "Various camps," are not LBG. Were you a BM guy?

Again, you did not really think before writing. How disappointing.

I wonder what you mean by an "evangelical believer?" If I can change my tires and my oil and fix my brakes so that I save $1000 dollars and my car passes state inspection, now watch the thought process here, and I bless my dad and grandfather who taught me how to do it, am I an "evangelcal believer," or skilled at those things? Take a moment before you try to answer.

Ok, let me help you, again. You can "win" this discussion by your thoughtlessness. Congratulations. Good luck!

Post your vids so we can be in awe and learn from you. :)

Talk about been arrogant, then why 7 editions with changes and additions if it is so right? Scared of the truth? Have you heard the world is round not flat and Homer made mistakes, he's human and he would be the first to admit them unlike yourself. Talk about arrogant!

How do you know it's more about ego than learning, you are making assumptions with no proof as the symposium hasn't even taken place. Seems to be a pattern of resistance for no reason based in reality.

Can you define the benefit of learning?
 

Follow your own advice and read, think, look! Tell us your story, show us your vids, prove something with some measure of effectiveness.

Show us your "absolute truth," that contradicts what LBG and TGM teach. Please don't whine like a little kid, though, and expect it to get you somewhere.

BTW, I'm getting ready for school to get started so capitalize your "i" to an "I." :)

Another twisting of words, point out where i said i have the absolute truth, I said you might learn something and you can make your own judgement. Then again i guess you already know everything and are never wrong about any of it. You need to work on your analogies they are a bit off.

How many teachers on the tour can beat their Pga students? Can Yoda beat Brian in a tour event? Is he Brian's coach/teacher? Your example just doesn't hold water, koolaid maybe.

Homer Kelley wasn't a golfing professional either.

And Pelz could play and probably could have beaten most of us from time to time.

Homer came up with much better conclusions, concepts and ideas than say Ben Hogan...arguably the greatest ballstriker that ever lived....did in '5 Lessons.' Pelz is a smart guy, but his studies were scientifically flawed and led to flawed conclusions. The 'optimal putting speed' (17" past the cup) was poorly researched beyond belief.

The big thing I learned from Pelz and TGM is just because a person is labeled a scientist, doesn't mean that they researched their work accurately and scientifically and they are not prone to errors. Homer Kelley understood that and that's why he had 7 editions. There's no doubt in my mind that he would take in new information that was found to be more accurate and do a mea culpa. OTOH, Pelz doesn't seem to want to do that (the most I've seen him bend is on the SBST stroke vs. the Arced Stroke).

A large part of science is about trial and error, then observation. It's not in a vacuum where a scientist comes up with a theory and is always 100% correct. I feel like the crowd that is into bashing TGM and never really saying a good word about it have that idea that a scientist should always be right. I'm far more interested in the scientist that comes up with concepts and understands that they may not be 100% accurate and will need some tweaking to fully understand the truth.






3JACK