Three guesses who this is: "I read your posts Jim", "I never read your posts Jim!!", "I read your posts Jim", "I never read your posts Jim!!", "I read your posts Jim", "I never read your posts Jim!!", "I read your posts Jim", "I never read your posts Jim!!", "I read your posts Jim", "I never read your posts Jim!!", "I read your posts Jim", "I never read your posts Jim!!", etc.
Straighten out that wet mess of a mind Bozotronic Barry, and perhaps you can eventually respond rationally to me and/or be consistent on here. In the meantime, please enjoy another helping of turnips and foot fungus dude.:-) --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@> wrote: > > > > On May 26, 2011, at 6:19 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Pile on? Vaj has simply been exposed as a liar. Not sure > > > > what standard you look for in evaluating statements. But > > > > Vaj made a series of assertions and all of them turned > > > > out to be false. > > > > > > Not true. What actually happened is that several > > > people have *declared* them false. Those people > > > have IMO exactly the same level of credibility as > > > Vaj -- namely none. No one has presented verifiable > > > facts yet. > > > > That's what it seems to me as well~~ > > if there were some posts made which > > in any way proved Vaj's assertions to > > be false, or even dealt with them on > > any kind of level other than pseudo- > > hysteria, I haven't seen them. > > Neither have I. Absolutely *nothing* has > been presented but hearsay and unverifiable > claims, by those (on both sides) who have > done nothing in the past to lend them such > claims any credibility. > > > Perhaps lurk could point them out? > > Especially since he seems so sure that > > Vaj has been "exposed as a liar." Where, > > exactly, did this occur lurk? I must > > have missed the posts. > > And you'll continue to miss them, because > based on past performance he won't answer > you. He (sadly) seems limited to emotional > overreaction drive-bys. > > > And this > > Richard Nelson seems more intent > > on coming across more as mentally > > unbalanced than in having any kind > > of rational discussion. > > Sadly, I have to agree. In his earlier drive-bys, > I gave him the benefit of a doubt as possibly > having something positive to contribute, because > of a sweet story about Jerry. I encouraged the > positivity and chided him for having to "balance" > it at the time with a gratuitous slam at Vaj. He > claimed to have gotten the point. However, he > has posted nothing since *but* slams at Vaj. I'm > starting to get the feeling that, like so many > on this forum, that is all he is capable of. > > Have you noticed that NONE of these supposed "TM > supporters" have posted anything positive about > TM and its supposed benefits in months? It's been > pretty much all negative, all the time. > > > > Did you even *notice* that feste did *exactly* > > > what he was accusing Vaj of? He just slung insults, > > > and presented not even a single supposed fact. > > > > > > > When asked to back up these assertions, the best he could > > > > come up with, was "he heard it from someone" > > > > > > Yup. The people piling on didn't even go that far. They > > > just claimed things *as if they were facts*, but without > > > anything that could enable anyone to determine whether > > > they were really facts or not. > > > > > > In other words, on one level what we seem to have here > > > is a pissing contest, in which both sides are saying, > > > "What I've heard is better than what you've heard." I > > > call it total bullshit, on all sides. > > > > > > As for the "piling on" thang that Sal brings up, it *would* > > > have been possible for Richard Nelson or others to just post > > > a few verifiable facts (y'know...stuff including dates and > > > contact information and where one could go to verify their > > > claims) and leave it at that. They did not. What they did > > > was to do *exactly* the same thing that Vaj did -- make a > > > bunch of unverifiable claims -- and then proceed to call > > > him names. > > > > Not only unverifiable claims, but almost hysterical > > ones at that. > > Certainly angry ones, and out-of-control emotionally. > Pretty interesting for people who claim to have been > practicing "the best" form of meditation on the planet, > and for decades. One of them -- the person who has > posted the most gratuitous insults in this pissing > contest actually claims to be enlightened. > > > Which isn't exactly what you'd call either a > > great advertisement for meditation or a ringing > > endorsement for their version of the "truth." > > Exactly. > > The point I have been making for years is that I > don't see how *any* lurker on this forum could come > away from the FFL experience having a positive view > of TM and what it produces. Clearly, based on the > "TM supporters" here, it produces people who are so > thin-skinned and attached to their own beliefs that > they have to spend the majority of their posts, week > after week after week, insulting people who have > committed the heinous sin of...wait for it...believing > something different than they do. > > I'm sorry, but this seems to indicate to me that > TM creates people who are *more* attached than any- > one you could meet on the street, and *less* in control > of their emotions. In the case of the person who claims > that he's enlightened, I'm starting to believe that I > was aiming far too high up the evolutionary ladder by > comparing his intellect and thinking abilities to a > turnip. Based on his recent posts I'm thinking more > along the lines of athlete's foot fungus. :-) >
