Ja, überstanden. Gute Besserung auch dir.
On 13 Mai, 14:23, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13 May, 10:29, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Speak for yourself/ your own perception, please, Pat! A sheer > > necessity if we want to get on with our "Minds Eye"/ mutual > > overstanding - project! Thank you. > > LOL!! Thing is, we all speak for the One that is. Uebersteht? > > > On 12 Mai, 14:02, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 12 May, 11:23, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I see you have placed space time in a active role relationship with my > > > > here and now with your phrasing that suggests that it is space time > > > > that does things. This is where we've parted in the past Pat. I > > > > might consider that my actions become part and participle of space > > > > time record and that it is actually forming out of a continuum of > > > > actions not based on pre-valued/disposed actions which takes away the > > > > necessity of actually living it out. If I chop off my finger it is not > > > > due to the fact that is was necessary in adherence to space time in > > > > order to have the universe appear to be what it is tomorrow but > > > > actually it would be to alter the universe of tomorrow by my thought > > > > through action thereby placing the formation of the universe in my > > > > hands as a canvass onto which an artist paints. I doubt very much > > > > that the universe is dependent somehow on the existence of an under > > > > the bridge denizen scrounging for the next morsel of food. It doesn't > > > > seem likely that there would be any marked difference in universal > > > > principles based on that existence. Therefore as before I would > > > > conclude that the decisions made prior to that point of existence > > > > which led to that existence is independent of any space time > > > > influence. I see it the other way around. > > > > Well, I'll stick with Einstein on this one. The future is already > > > extant as evidenced through time dilation. If you can disprove time > > > dilation, then you can have it your way. Just because you can't see > > > around the temporal corner doesn't mean that there's nothing around > > > that corner; rather, it only implies that you can't see around that > > > corner. > > > > > On May 11, 6:24 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 11 May, 01:05, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Ahh, yes Archy, the memories. I relive the games often. It is > > > > > > actually a very distinct aspect of human exchange very rarely looked > > > > > > at for what it really is; perhaps one of the most pleasurable rue > > > > > > forms of the libidinous nature with mutual high hopes for deep > > > > > > penetrations. I can't think of anything more enjoyable than > > > > > > engaging > > > > > > in seductive parlays with a voluptuous member of the opposite sex. > > > > > > Of course they say marriage is grand but divorce is fifty grand and > > > > > > up > > > > > > so getting past the pleasure without getting tied up in knots can > > > > > > become the challenge. But I have to say there were those that I > > > > > > foolishly let go and in retrospect and reminiscence I ponder the > > > > > > possibilities, ergo; my most famous words "If Only". > > > > > > No need for regrets, my friend. Space-time doesn't do anything > > > > > unnecessary, because ALL of it is already extant. Including those > > > > > regrets. So, whilst that may seem paradoxical (in that I say there's > > > > > no need for regrets, yet also explain that your regrets WERE > > > > > necessary), what I mean is that there is no need for FUTURE regrets, > > > > > now that you know that all events in the past HAD to be the way they > > > > > were in order to get the universe to where it is now. That is, > > > > > there's little sense in regretting what was necessary. > > > > > > > On May 10, 6:29 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Slip has reminded me of the word 'foreploy' and the world of > > > > > > > former > > > > > > > rusing. > > > > > > > > On 10 May, 14:07, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 7 May, 18:39, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, I am not two-faced and my tongue is not split. Please > > > > > > > > > don't burn > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > Oh no, I wasn't trying to imply that you were two-faced. > > > > > > > > Rather, I > > > > > > > > was trying to perform a 'vorterspiele' on your "Also Sprach..." > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > relating you to Zarathustra, who was the prophet of a dualistic > > > > > > > > faith. It was only a pun, NEVER meant as any kind of > > > > > > > > punishment. > > > > > > > > Apologies, if I offended you. Really!! > > > > > > > > > > On 7 Mai, 14:14, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 7 May, 11:09, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, my best Lee, you've made my day! > > > > > > > > > > > > I know the London of the 80's a little bit, a time when I > > > > > > > > > > > was stopped > > > > > > > > > > > in the street by a police officer for walking with a > > > > > > > > > > > black man - I > > > > > > > > > > > should go find find some better company. Policemen in > > > > > > > > > > > Berlin would > > > > > > > > > > > have never dared to act like that, the black man could > > > > > > > > > > > have been an > > > > > > > > > > > American soldier. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, "God is all so Bastard" is gorgeous! You see, I > > > > > > > > > > > have a bad > > > > > > > > > > > habit of starting my explanations in German with "also", > > > > > > > > > > > which means > > > > > > > > > > > "thus" in this case. You know, the > > > > > > > > > > > Thus-spoke-Gabby-style, always > > > > > > > > > > > wonderfully demonstrated by our friend orny. But I've > > > > > > > > > > > been working on > > > > > > > > > > > it, I hope you've noticed! > > > > > > > > > > > Is this a way of affirming/asserting yourself as a > > > > > > > > > > reincarnation of > > > > > > > > > > Zarathustra? ;-) How about "Die > > > > > > > > > > Verstecktsachenzweisprecherin" as a > > > > > > > > > > title of respect? > > > > > > > > > > > For those who don't speak German to any length, I'd > > > > > > > > > > translate that as > > > > > > > > > > "The woman who secretly speaks two things" (in reference to > > > > > > > > > > Zarathustra (Zoroaster), the prophet of a dualistic faith, > > > > > > > > > > Zoroastrianism) although, literally, I've just shoved the > > > > > > > > > > words for > > > > > > > > > > 'hidden', 'things', 'two' and 'speaker' together with a > > > > > > > > > > feminine > > > > > > > > > > ending and preceded by a feminine definite article. But > > > > > > > > > > German excels > > > > > > > > > > at inventing new words by adding other words together; > > > > > > > > > > truly, it's one > > > > > > > > > > of its greatest powers, in my opinion, and one that English > > > > > > > > > > inherited, > > > > > > > > > > albeit in a, funnily enough, bastardised way. ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7 Mai, 10:30, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hahah! I disagree my dearest Gabs, God is all so > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastard, yep we can > > > > > > > > > > > > certianly call God that, I don't really know why a > > > > > > > > > > > > person of faith > > > > > > > > > > > > would want to but, ahh if they wish to, well go right > > > > > > > > > > > > ahead. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 May, 22:21, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bastards" is definitely not one of the 99 names of > > > > > > > > > > > > > Allah, Pat. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 Mai, 14:02, Pat <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 May, 12:49, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ahhh Gabbs, I'm afraid I can't answer that. Shhh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's my secret to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > keep. I will say though not Tory, ohhh no never > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's also a pretty safe bet you didn't vote BNP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, I'd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reckon you voted Lib Dem. hoping for a hung > > > > > > > > > > > > > > parliament and the chance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that it might just bring, God help us, coalition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between factions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > forcing the bastards to work together rather than > > > > > > > > > > > > > > against one another. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 May, 11:47, gabbydott <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, I'm in for the guessing game, although I'm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > terrible at it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You should be voting Labour for traditional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reasons, but for the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > betterment of your children Tory would be more > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reasonable, yet the old > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > freedom fighter in you calls for the Libs. Help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me, which duty has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > won? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 Mai, 10:31, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless of course the word of the day is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Sarcasam'. I have been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reliably informed though that Americans do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not get it! More racism, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > just to jolly up a drab Thursday morning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ohh by-the-by, I'm happy to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > report that my civic duty has been done again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the next 4 years. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 May, 08:23, gabbydott > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who started this educational thread, OM? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You could note for your lesson learned that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your pupils are too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ignorant to get your fine humor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 6, 8:27 am, ornamentalmind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Race baiting again? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 5, 9:43 pm, Slip Disc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this your insidious attempt at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > insulting a very important Mexican > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > celebration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your post is nothing more than > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > racist commentary based on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ignorance of the actual celebration of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > independence, "Cinco De Mayo" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which anyone with a smidgen of a brain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knows is the recognition > > ... > > Erfahren Sie mehr »
