Iam, I very much appreciate your devote efforts to calm Chris down to. Itoo see his fingers tremble - about to hit the ban button. It hit me once and nothing was done here to find out whose fingers got too nervous about whatever. So much for the correct use of the word truth in this context here. When it pleases him, I'm a troll to him, too. He surely has all the potential to be Baby Peter's stepfather. Thanks for trying to protect O. from the same fate. I'm learning how to communicate even under these horror circumstances, which often leads to what is perceived as cryptic.
On 22 Mai, 17:11, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > OmP the athiest. > > It really does not take long to figure out imature children,, and the truth > is non of your post are worth reading to me. > Good bye > Allan > > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 4:23 PM, omprem <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ooh, another threat. > > > Speaking of pointless, how pointless is it for someone to post only > > about his version of style and not make a single post that deals > > directly with a single topic under discussion in a rational way? > > > On May 22, 10:15 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It doesn't matter if the person is stupid or not, the guidelines are > > clear. > > > Lawyerly trolling is still trolling, and trying to engage in this sort of > > > petty behaviour is pointless. Reminding participants of the clearly > > posted > > > guidelines they agreed to follow upon joining is not a threat, it's a > > > reminder, and your attempts at antagonism are tiresome. Comply with the > > > guidelines, or find another group. > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:59 AM, omprem <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > But what if the person is stupid? 'Stupid' is after a word that > > > > carries meaning. It may not be they are stupid because they disagree > > > > with one's point but that they are just stupid. Are you now acting as > > > > the dictionary police. > > > > > You should know by now that I can defend my views on their own grounds > > > > and do not defend them by calling others stupid because they do not > > > > agree with them. Such people may be stupid on other grounds but not > > > > that one. > > > > > Incidentally, you are quite adept at making threats. Is that not a > > > > violation of rational discourse? > > > > > On May 21, 11:29 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Ad Hominem is latin for "to the man", meaning an attack against the > > > > person. The vast majority of the membership here know this, but since > > you > > > > disagreed with my warning as a moderator, you must be unfamiliar with > > the > > > > phrase. Calling someone stupid, or implying they are stupid if they > > disagree > > > > with your point, is an ad hominem attack prohibited by our posting > > > > guidelines, clearly listed on our home page. You would do well to > > > > familiarize yourself with them if you desire is to be a long term > > member > > > > here. > > > > > > [ Attached Message ]From:omprem <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" > > < > > > > [email protected]>Date:Thu, 21 May 2009 07:11:58 -0700 > > > > (PDT)Local:Thurs, May 21 2009 10:11 amSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Purpose > > of > > > > Astral body > > > > > > It is not ad hom but an expression of his belief mistaken though it > > > > > is. > > > > > > You seem to be a bit uptight. > > > > > > On May 20, 10:19 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Tinker, your third paragraph is clear ad hominem. I'm getting a > > little > > > > tired > > > > > > of repeating myself about the posting guidelines. Take it down or > > you > > > > go > > > > > > back on moderation. > > > > > > > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Tinker <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > You start off making a claim to superiority with imaginary back > > up, > > > > > > > ooohh you're so smart. > > > > > > > > I know that they can cause your superior spiritual feeling by > > > > > > > suppressing the orientation center in the brain of anyone, > > including > > > > > > > atheist. > > > > > > > > The collective intelligence is the source of insight, inspiration > > and > > > > > > > revelation. If you don't understand that you're a lot stupider > > than > > > > > > > you make out for atheist to be. > > > > > > > > So you are ignorant of Jehovah? You deny the supreme being that > > is > > > > the > > > > > > > one true God. You are an atheist and all of the crap you have > > been > > > > > > > spewing is yours to own. Suck it up :-) > > > > > > > I know your 'transcendental', it is escapism because you haven't > > the > > > > > > > ability to deal with Life as it is here and now. > > > > > > > > You haven't done anything but flaunt yourself as being > > spiritually > > > > > > > superior. > > > > > > > I'm an obnoxious know it all type and you make me look meek and > > > > > > > humble :-) > > > > > > > > peace & Love > > > > > > > > On May 20, 7:22 pm, omprem <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 20, 5:04 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On May 20, 8:39 am, omprem <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 8:05 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > You are so right, attachment to Life is an addiction, if > > you > > > > are > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > attached to Life you are DEAD. > > > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: Nope. All death means is a change of venue: 'you' > > > > still > > > > > > > exist > > > > > > > > > > in another form on another plane of existence. > > > > > > > > > > Prove it. Die, then repeat that statement, I'll be listening > > :-) > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: If you had the capacity to hear astral beings you > > would > > > > not > > > > > > > > be here whining about them. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is total BS to say Life is an obstacle to accessing > > God. > > > > If you > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > dead your brain does Not generate the mind which is the > > only > > > > means > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > which any person here and now or at any time in the past > > has > > > > ever > > > > > > > > > > > accessed God. > > > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: There are many centers of consciousness besides the > > > > mind. > > > > > > > > > > Moreover, the mind survives death along with everything > > else > > > > except > > > > > > > > > > the physical body. Your mistake is to equate the mind and > > > > > > > > > > consciousness as originating with brain function. > > > > > > > > > > There is one center of consciousness, the brain. Your fantasy > > has > > > > no > > > > > > > > > substance, my brain does. > > > > > > > > > I'm very familiar with the realm of your beliefs. I know > > what > > > > you're > > > > > > > > > talking about and it is your imagination boosted by dogma. > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: You are sadly out of touch even with 'discoveries' in > > the > > > > > > > > scientific community. You could start with Dr. Candace Pert's, > > > > > > > > Molecules of Emotion and then get back to me. It's OK, go > > ahead, > > > > > > > > google her because I know you have not heard of her. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your dogma is nothing but one of many different > > descriptions > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > something that is common to all mankind. The connection > > in > > > > our > > > > > > > brain > > > > > > > > > > > generated mind is to our collective intelligence and it's > > > > called by > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > hundred different names to support ones own personal > > > > glorification > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > excuse to put someone else down as inferior. > > > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: Wrong. But the answer is right in front of you. If > > it > > > > is the > > > > > > > > > > brain that is totally responsible for the existence of the > > mind > > > > how > > > > > > > > > > then can there be 'collective intelligence'? > > > > > > > > > > The brain produces an energy that reaches beyond the physical > > > > being > > > > > > > > > and unites as the collective intelligence. It's very simple, > > no > > > > > > > > > mystical BS about it. > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: This is too good to pass up. Now I know you atheists > > claim > > > > to > > > > > > > > value reason, logic and empiricism so show me this 'collective > > > > > > > > intelligence' and tell me how you know about it (on an > > empirical > > > > basis > > > > > > > > of course.) Is it something like the collective intelligence of > > > > > > > > lemmings as they hurtle over the cliff? > > > > > > > > > > > According to your brain = consciousness theory there can > > only > > > > be > > > > > > > conventionally-held beliefs, > > > > > > > > > > that is individual beliefs that people have also agreed > > upon. > > > > > > > > > > How do you come up with that? My brain = consciousness > > theory? > > > > > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > > > > 'collective intelligence' which you also claim to believe > > in is > > > > > > > > > > different from those conventional beliefs. With 'collective > > > > > > > > > > intelligence' you are getting into Oneness and the > > paranormal, > > > > two > > > > > > > > > > areas that atheists deny. > > > > > > > > > > The collective intelligence doesn't store BS. I'm an atheist > > by > > > > any > > > > > > > > > dogmatic definition of God. I understand the One and know > > there > > > > are > > > > > > > > > 'paranormal' things. > > > > > > > > > Your ignorance of what an atheist believes is showing :-) > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: You seem to be labouring under the misconception that > > > > > > > > religion posits an individualized God and you are wrong. No > > > > religion > > > > > > > > claims that God is an individual. > > > > > > > > > Here's a hint: Religions say God is everywhere all the time and > > > > that > > > > > > > > it is all God. This, of course, means that God is not an > > individual > > > > > > > > because for God to be an individual there has to be somewhere > > where > > > > > > > > God is not which not possible according to religions. Do you > > get it > > > > > > > > now? > > > > > > > > > > > > You need to get over your personal claim to superiority > > and > > > > > > > recognize > > > > > > > > > > > the fact that our collective intelligence is God, as far > > as > > > > Life on > > > > > > > > > > > Earth is concerned. Your personal dogma is the support of > > > > > > > selfishness. > > > > > > > > > > > And the world is going down the tube because of it. > > > > > > > > > > OMPREM: I agree that collective intelligence is God but so > > too > > > > > > > > > > therefore must each part of > > ... > > Erfahren Sie mehr » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
