Candide, "highly integral" means without the slightest taint of deceit, dishonour or false implications.

The "ancient fantasy writing" you mention accurately predicted the arrival of a certain gent in Jerusalem to the very day, more than 400 years before he arrived. They also predicted the demise of a world leader (to the very year) more than two millennia before he was deposed.

it (they: the whole book was not written in a day by one person) also speak of Sirius as being fixed from our perspective, and the Pleiades as being mobile, a bit much to expect of "desert nomads" without access to the Palomar Telescope.

They describe a past from which it is reasonable to find an octopus fossil today, which the deluded individuals (fixated on a quantum fluctuation turning absolutely nothing into space, time, energy and matter, for no particular reason, and which then eventually (and purely through an incredibly long series of extremely unlikely accidents) became flint, fish, ferns and philosophers) masquerading as scientists cannot.

They described, millennia ago, the current political/financial/religious sequence of events taking place.

I guess the definition of "fantasy" which you intended was "an imagined or conjured up sequence fulfilling a psychological need," in which case you are badly in present need of a more accurate description.

Either way, if you are living in an amoral world, in which there is no genuine basis upon which to discern "good" from "bad," you have done remarkably well thus far to retain even an approximately coherent conversation.

AusTus
You seem to have confused integral with integrity. What was that you were saying about 'approximately coherent conversation'(apart from just being rude)?

Candide> seem to have confused integral with integrity

No, although the word "integral" also has a mathematical application plus the following one. In this sense, I could have seriously confused things by saying "integral integrity" to mean "integrated integrity" however English is puzzling enough _before_ one messes about with it.

A slight rephrase to "high integrity" would make the statement clearer, however was inconsistent with the sense of expression of the other terms used in that sentence. At this instant, I am unable to think of a way of expressing that explanation clearly without coming across as a kind of intellectual snob, so what will be, will be.

Candide> What was that you were saying about 'approximately coherent conversation' (apart from just being rude)?

Kipp has been highly inconsistent in what they said, to the point where even discerning the core meaning of their words, let alone any connection with what I had said, became quite difficult.

In terms of "being rude," that manner of behaviour is likely (not certain) to be a manifestation of insecurity in Kipp about their current life-position, in which case being more confrontational by pointing this out to them directly would have been closer to "being rude."

Me thinks Aus Tex has an obsession with Kipp, apart from Aus Tex gooky postings.

Perhaps Paul Sheehan has been reading Online Opinion? His article in the Sydney Morning Herald points out the hypocrisy in those who are attacking Senator Cory Bernardi in his article called "So ready to throw book at Bernardi without reading It." Definitely worth the read.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/so-ready-to-throw-book-at-bernardi-without-reading-it-20140112-30okv.html#ixzz2qFNZpmpA

."We know the statistics - that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioural problems, or run away from home, or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it.'' - President Barack Obama, Father's Day speech, 2008.
Yes, we do know the statistics. But that hasn't stopped an avalanche of hate - and I use the word advisedly - being unleashed against Cory Bernardi for quoting and echoing the sentiments of Obama in his book The Conservative Revolution (Connor Court 2013).
Read More: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/so-ready-to-throw-book-at-bernardi-without-reading-it-20140112-30okv.html