[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. Since I chimed in on this earlier by reposting Judy's definitive statement about why those who disagree with her about crop circles will *never* know as much about them as she does: You aren't going to be able to get it right, because you haven't been paying attention to what I'm saying. I'll agree with both Edg and lurk here. The sheer *arrogance* of the statement above indicates a level of attachment to her There is some Woo Woo going on belief. Add to that a continued demon- ization of anyone who does *not* pay attention to her holy word as skeptopaths and having no cojones -- *while claiming that she has never demonized them -- and you have someone who is not only attached in the extreme to her point of view, but unable to recognize the attachment. THIS is what I was talking about last week with Richard M, about why I don't *believe* Judy when she says one thing about what she believes, and then acts in a manner that indicates that she believes something completely different. Don't take my word for it. Just look at the history on this thread. Almost everyone who has dared to disagree with Judy's holy word about crop circles has been called a skeptopath, has been accused of dishonest debating tactics, and of lacking cojones. Does that SOUND like someone who merely doesn't know for sure the truth about crop circles? I also agree with Lurk that Edg's statement is a fine example of moderation and balance and economy of language. He sees what almost every- one else here sees, and what the person claiming that she's not demonizing those who disagree with her cannot. But, speaking of economy of language, one picture is better than a thousand words: [http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_k2rfk6VyHkQ/SFaF7R_8BnI/Ac8/cMuzXd79i\ TA/s400/TinFoilHatArea.jpg] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? If so, we have no basis for our having a debate. Right now though, I put you in the same category as the guy who said to me about professional wrestling Some of it's fake, but some's real. Good line. Great analogy To me, you're wanting something, anything will do, to point at that suggests woo-woo is operative in the world. You're a witch doctor trying to find a special bone special bone, I love that to shake at a patient when you say, I'm the exception to the rule, my bones work and ooogaboooga is a real power that can those in the know can wield. Stop clinging to your need for wooism to be justifiable. No one's levitating, 2012 will be like Y2K, Tony's a fraud, Maharishi dumped Guru Dev and sold out to money, crop circles are man made, psychic surgeons palm chicken parts, Sai Baba is a pedophile, Barry isn't all bad, you are not always right, and you are comfortable calling names as much as Vaj. What part of this paragraph don't you agree with? Edg in top form. Bam, bam. No malice here. Just calling people out on their crap. It's got to be done. Your intellectual heft is often put to a low use -- you've spend 15 years beating a dead horse you call loser. It's sick to beat a dead horse, and you know it. Everyone here knows it. It is true. Raunchy, are we wrong here.? I don't think so. It's easy to get into a rut. I think we have to call it like it is. I don't think there was one wasted word in this post. Edg http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm The article: For over twenty years the southern English countryside has been the site of a strange phenomenon that has baffled observers and spawned countless news stories and not a few books. In the middle of the night, flattened circular depressions have appeared in fields of wheat, rye and other cereal crops. They range in diameter from ten feet to almost a hundred feet wide and vary from simple circles to complex spirals with rings and spurs. All have sharply defined edges. The most striking feature of the circles is the frequency with which they occur. In 1990 over 700 crop-circles appeared in Britain. People who attempt to study these circles have coined a name for themselves: cereologists. The word comes from the name of the Roman goddess of vegetation, Ceres. There are two favorite theories held by cereologists that think crop circles are the result of some not well understood physical phenomena. The first is that the depressions are
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. And another skeptopath to add to the list. Thank you Sister Aloysius. Lessee now, Sister Aloysius is supposed to be the gal who thinks doubt is a terrible thing, right? So your comment assumes inflexible certainty on my part and a great fear of doubt, right? A small sampling from previous posts of mine on crop circles: - I think ETs are *less* probable than that they're all made by humans. I don't think they're messages from the Space Brothers, but I really have no clue whatsoever what/ who might be creating the ones that don't seem to have been made by humans. I have no idea what other possible causes there could be. None of the explanations I've seen proposed seem likely, and I haven't been able to dream any up on my own. I don't *believe* any of the currently available explanations for crop circles. I don't *disbelieve* any of them either. I. just. don't. know. I think being able to take the don't know position at present is crucial if we're ever to have a hope of figuring any of it out. At this point we don't have enough hard information, or perhaps even the conceptual tools, to put this stuff into boxes and label them with anything but Who the hell knows? Yup, that's Sister Aloysius, all right. Not a bit of doubt, ironclad certainty as far as the eye can see. cackle Just as a little bonus, Curtis to me from two posts in a previous discussion of crop circles: - Your answer was useful. It shows that you have an unqualified I don't know how they appear where mine contains the bias that I don't know how people did this. This is where I find the topic useful, to uncover such biases in my thinking. I don't really have a solid reason for making that assumption, but I don't feel compelled by the information of the site to challenge my bias. - Regarding the crop circles: I found that my ability to assess the claims of unusual findings at some sites is severely limited. Although I am skeptical of claims that people know what any of this means (i.e. UFOs), I understand my limits in evaluating their reporting truthfulness, or accuracy, and what any of it may mean. I am willing to move the whole topic of unusual findings at circle sites into the I don't have a clue bin. - Curtis is a *genuine* skeptic about crop circles, not a skeptopath. He also took the time to do his homework and read some of the factual material about them, looking at several of the sites I recommended and digging up a bunch of his own.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: I suppose there is a chance that Judy is right in her views, and everyone else is wrong. Lurk, you don't even know what my views *are*. You read what Edg said about them and assumed what he said was accurate. It wasn't. I suppose this may be the case. But on the other hand, on the surface, and for many layers down, I think Edg is dialed in to the reality of the situaton. And it's not mean spirited expose. Just a sober looking at things as they are. Not sure why Judy cannot give any ground on some things. Which things? I think it reinforces all that her harshest critics say about her. Excuse me for referring to Judy in the third person, or whatever person it is, but I do not care to get into a one on one with her. Nope. Not interested. Call me a coward if you wish. Yeah, it's cowardly big-time to make nonspecific charges and refuse to follow up on them.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: I suppose there is a chance that Judy is right in her views, and everyone else is wrong. Lurk, you don't even know what my views *are*. You read what Edg said about them and assumed what he said was accurate. It wasn't. This is true. I don't know exactly what your views are on cc. However, the little I have read of them the part man made, part ET seemed to summarize it. Perhaps I am mistaken. I suppose this may be the case. But on the other hand, on the surface, and for many layers down, I think Edg is dialed in to the reality of the situaton. And it's not mean spirited expose. Just a sober looking at things as they are. Not sure why Judy cannot give any ground on some things. Which things? I cannot give any specific examples because I generally skim posts rather than do an in depth reading. But the overall impression I get is that there is not much give on your opinions. The few times I have engaged with you on issues, I thought it got into a lot of parsing of words and ideas, and I don't care to get down to that level of minutae. I think it reinforces all that her harshest critics say about her. Excuse me for referring to Judy in the third person, or whatever person it is, but I do not care to get into a one on one with her. Nope. Not interested. Call me a coward if you wish. Yeah, it's cowardly big-time to make nonspecific charges and refuse to follow up on them. I have followed up to the extent I can. At the risk of appearing to preach, maybe think about some of things Edg said. Maybe there is something there you may find useful. Or maybe you are comfortable with how you see things now. Obviously there are some thngs in your life which need to be tweaked, as you have recently alluded to in your state of mind. I know I have recently talked about some issues I am dealing with. I have sought therapy of different types. And I have benefitted from it. Maybe, just maybe, if I were in a therapists office, I might say, I don't know if this is a strengh, or a weakeness, but I have had an online dialogue with a member of a discussion group going on fifteen years, in which I call him out on what I feel are his lies and manipulations. It really bothers me that he thinks he can get away with it. Is this an unheathly obsession or is it a constuctive desire on my part for I view as fairness.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. Since I chimed in on this earlier by reposting Judy's definitive statement about why those who disagree with her about crop circles will *never* know as much about them as she does: You aren't going to be able to get it right, because you haven't been paying attention to what I'm saying. Nope. Barry deliberately misrepresents the context, having carefully snipped it (just as he did in another recent post): - Edg wrote: If you're going to win this debate, I wrote: What would winning mean in this context, Edg? You aren't going to be able to get it right, because you haven't been paying attention to what I'm saying. You're much too anxious to hear yourself talk than to listen to the person you're talking to. - Edg thinks the debate in question is about whether crop circles are made by aliens, and that winning the debate for me would mean convincing him they were. That's because he wasn't paying attention to what I said. And of course not only have I not suggested those who disagree with me about crop circles will never know as much about them as I do, in fact I've said precisely the opposite (it's even quoted in Barry's post): You wouldn't even have to refer to my past posts, BTW, to inform yourself sufficiently to have a reasonable discussion. I just thought it would be easier for you to start with the sources I cited than have to plow through the Web on your own to find them. It's a big topic. Google gives you over a million hits. Most of them are crap. I'll agree with both Edg and lurk here. The sheer *arrogance* of the statement above indicates a level of attachment to her There is some Woo Woo going on belief. Wrong. Add to that a continued demon- ization of anyone who does *not* pay attention to her holy word as skeptopaths and having no cojones -- *while claiming that she has never demonized them Never demonized them *for disagreeing with me*, Barry forgot to add. And in this case, my holy word has to do with what I believe and don't believe about crop circles. It seems a truism that if you don't pay attention to what someone says about what they believe, you're unlikely to be able to state it with any accuracy. Here's what I believe and don't believe about crop circles in a nutshell, from one of my posts to Edg: - I don't *believe* any of the currently available explanations for crop circles. I don't *disbelieve* any of them either. I. just. don't. know. - snip Don't take my word for it. Just look at the history on this thread. Almost everyone who has dared to disagree with Judy's holy word about crop circles has been called a skeptopath, has been accused of dishonest debating tactics, and of lacking cojones. Does that SOUND like someone who merely doesn't know for sure the truth about crop circles? When the charges of skeptopathy and lacking cojones have to do with an unwillingness to *look at the facts*--not my facts but documented, on-the-record facts--rather than with disagreement about the origins of some small percentage of crop circles, it seems rather silly to claim my making such charges somehow proves I'm not being honest when I say I don't know the truth about the origins of these circles. I don't know the truth about the origins of these circles *BECAUSE I've read the facts about them*. This isn't really very complicated. I'm quite sure Barry understands it but is choosing to misrepresent it. (Edg, I'm not so sure about.) Once again I'll remind folks of the discussion I had with Curtis last time around. We didn't end up agreeing, but he did enough homework on the topic for us to have a reasonable discussion, which remained cordial throughout. It would never occur to me to call him a skeptopath or suggest he lacked cojones. He's a genuine skeptic who has the guts to investigate and challenge his own biases.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: I suppose there is a chance that Judy is right in her views, and everyone else is wrong. Lurk, you don't even know what my views *are*. You read what Edg said about them and assumed what he said was accurate. It wasn't. This is true. I don't know exactly what your views are on cc. However, the little I have read of them the part man made, part ET seemed to summarize it. Perhaps I am mistaken. You're mistaken. I think (and have stated explicitly) that ETs having made *any* of the circles is *LESS* likely than that they're all made by humans. That having been said, however, *some* of the circles have features that have not been found in any of the circles known to have been made by humans, which is why I'm reluctant to conclude that they're all made by humans. Here are three of the features (there are others): 1. Elongated apical plant stem nodes 2. Expulsion cavities in the plant stems 3. The presence of 10-50 micrometer diameter magnetized iron spheres in the soils, distributed linearly At one point a bunch of MIT students were challenged to create a circle that showed these characteristics (proposed by a circle researcher). They had no trouble creating the circle by the usual method of ropes and boards (although it wasn't nearly as complex as many of the circles on record). They managed to replicate #2 by building a portable microwave transmitter and beaming it at the plants. They took a stab at #3 by building a device that sprayed magnetized iron particles around the circle, but it took too much time and they had to resort to a pyrotechnic device; the iron particles ended up unevenly distributed, unlike in the non-hoaxed circles. They couldn't achieve #1 at all. And what they did accomplish required fairly complicated and cumbersome technology. The question is: If humans did make the circles that have these characteristics, why on earth would they go to the trouble to plant this kind of anomalous, virtually invisible evidence throughout circles that would have been difficult enough to create overnight without it? Most people are satisfied that all the circles are human-made simply because humans *can* create complicated patterns in crops that you can see and walk around in and take photos of. But these three characteristics were only discovered after intensive scientific investigation; they aren't anything anybody would be able to detect without careful measurements with complicated instruments. Nor would they result simply from the process of mashing down crops in patterns. And why, after all the intense study of the circles by determined debunkers, haven't they been able to extrapolate from these highly specific types of effects to the technology that accomplishes them? At any rate, these are the types of questions that need to be answered before I'm willing to conclude that all the circles are human-made. But again, if some of them *aren't* human-made, I have NO IDEA what their origin might be. As I said, I think aliens is the *least* likely possibility. snip Yeah, it's cowardly big-time to make nonspecific charges and refuse to follow up on them. I have followed up to the extent I can. I appreciate that, thank you. At the risk of appearing to preach, maybe think about some of things Edg said. Maybe there is something there you may find useful. Or maybe you are comfortable with how you see things now. Pretty much, actually. I'm more interested in striving to be authentic and honest than anything else. I have no motivation to pretend to be be someone I'm not for the sake of getting people to like me. If somebody doesn't like me for who I am, that's just my (and possibly their) tough luck.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Judy, Now why didn't you just do the below in the first place? -- it is a great presentation, and you've done us all a service thereby. That said, let me have some funzies: Here's some crop circles that would get me into all sorts of obsessing: How about a crop circle that predicted something? Go to such and such coordinates and you'll find a white dwarf that cannot be seen by the naked eye and that has not yet been noticed by astronomers. Or, give me a crop circle that portrays a physics' insight heretofore unknown. A few math symbols correctly used in a new way could open some eyes in the ivory towers, but so far, we get zilch. Or, how about a simple sentence in an unknown alphabet that nonetheless has experts convinced that the alphabet is sophisticated and unlikely to be a ruse? Or, how about a photo of a alien (there's been a wheat field Mona Lisa by now, right) -- an alien whose photo convinces Earthly experts that the taxonomy etc. all jive holistically? Or, how about a duplication of a crop circle from one area being used to form an equation with a crop circle from another area? A simple juxtaposition of two symbols might be an equation of a sort. A form of communication could be imagined by such a metaphor. Let's see a jargon created around the world that has consistency. How about some crop circles in an Arctic snow field that only a massively technical effort could produce? Crop circles in the middle of the Sahara would be paradigm shattering if no other footprints or tire tracks or helicopter sand scattering marks could be found. I'd be slavering. Let's see even Bill Whitherspoon pull that off without the use of a black-ops copter and guys who lower themselves 75 feet to the ground to prevent the down-blasts from marring the scene. How about a crop circle on the White House lawn? How about a crop circle on anyone's lawn? How about a crop circle burnished into a large bedrock shelf? How about a crop circle in any cave painting? How about a crop circle on the Moon for all to see? How about a crop circle seen forming for an instant in water seen by a passing pilot? How about a crop circle that joins the Mysterious Nazca Lines in Peru as some sort of, what?, commentary? How about a crop circle that a flock of geese cannot be persuaded to enter? How about a crop circle sniffing dog who can tell, like the dogs that smell cancer, a difference between obviously man-made circles and the mysterious ones? A dog's nose is an insanely great tool. How about a crop circle that either kills the plant life or enhances the vitality of such that color differences or longevity or something distinguishes the circle with continuities unshared with the immediate surroundings? Where are these crops circles? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: I suppose there is a chance that Judy is right in her views, and everyone else is wrong. Lurk, you don't even know what my views *are*. You read what Edg said about them and assumed what he said was accurate. It wasn't. This is true. I don't know exactly what your views are on cc. However, the little I have read of them the part man made, part ET seemed to summarize it. Perhaps I am mistaken. You're mistaken. I think (and have stated explicitly) that ETs having made *any* of the circles is *LESS* likely than that they're all made by humans. That having been said, however, *some* of the circles have features that have not been found in any of the circles known to have been made by humans, which is why I'm reluctant to conclude that they're all made by humans. Here are three of the features (there are others): 1. Elongated apical plant stem nodes 2. Expulsion cavities in the plant stems 3. The presence of 10-50 micrometer diameter magnetized iron spheres in the soils, distributed linearly At one point a bunch of MIT students were challenged to create a circle that showed these characteristics (proposed by a circle researcher). They had no trouble creating the circle by the usual method of ropes and boards (although it wasn't nearly as complex as many of the circles on record). They managed to replicate #2 by building a portable microwave transmitter and beaming it at the plants. They took a stab at #3 by building a device that sprayed magnetized iron particles around the circle, but it took too much time and they had to resort to a pyrotechnic device; the iron particles ended up unevenly distributed, unlike in the non-hoaxed circles. They couldn't achieve #1 at all. And what they did accomplish required fairly complicated and cumbersome
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Duveyoung wrote: Now why didn't you just do the below in the first place? She did, Edg, almost every time the 'crop circles' topic was mentioned. You are supposed to read the messages here BEFORE you post your comments. I tried to tell you that, but you got your 'hot' button pushed and you snapped at me. So, I guess you made a big ass out of yourself again. LOL! I think (and have stated explicitly) that ETs having made *any* of the circles is *LESS* likely than that they're all made by humans. That having been said, however, *some* of the circles have features that have not been found in any of the circles known to have been made by humans, which is why I'm reluctant to conclude that they're all made by humans. Here are three of the features (there are others): 1. Elongated apical plant stem nodes 2. Expulsion cavities in the plant stems 3. The presence of 10-50 micrometer diameter magnetized iron spheres in the soils, distributed linearly At one point a bunch of MIT students were challenged to create a circle that showed these characteristics (proposed by a circle researcher). They had no trouble creating the circle by the usual method of ropes and boards (although it wasn't nearly as complex as many of the circles on record). They managed to replicate #2 by building a portable microwave transmitter and beaming it at the plants. They took a stab at #3 by building a device that sprayed magnetized iron particles around the circle, but it took too much time and they had to resort to a pyrotechnic device; the iron particles ended up unevenly distributed, unlike in the non-hoaxed circles. They couldn't achieve #1 at all. And what they did accomplish required fairly complicated and cumbersome technology. The question is: If humans did make the circles that have these characteristics, why on earth would they go to the trouble to plant this kind of anomalous, virtually invisible evidence throughout circles that would have been difficult enough to create overnight without it? Most people are satisfied that all the circles are human-made simply because humans *can* create complicated patterns in crops that you can see and walk around in and take photos of. But these three characteristics were only discovered after intensive scientific investigation; they aren't anything anybody would be able to detect without careful measurements with complicated instruments. Nor would they result simply from the process of mashing down crops in patterns. And why, after all the intense study of the circles by determined debunkers, haven't they been able to extrapolate from these highly specific types of effects to the technology that accomplishes them? At any rate, these are the types of questions that need to be answered before I'm willing to conclude that all the circles are human-made. But again, if some of them *aren't* human-made, I have NO IDEA what their origin might be. As I said, I think aliens is the *least* likely possibility.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Judy, Now why didn't you just do the below in the first place? Because (a) Lurk was much politer than you were; (b) he admitted his impression could be mistaken about my views; (c) I hadn't gone around with him before on this, as I had with you. -- it is a great presentation, and you've done us all a service thereby. Uh-huh. Did the same presentation the last time we discussed it. That said, let me have some funzies: Here's some crop circles that would get me into all sorts of obsessing: snip list of intriguing types of circles Where are these crops circles? You seem to be suggesting that if aliens made the crop circles, they'd make them more intriguing in various ways, and because there are no such intriguing circles, therefore it's unlikely to be aliens. Right? What I don't understand is why you're asking me to explain why the aliens aren't making intriguing circles when you know I believe aliens are less likely than humans to have made the circles we have.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Duveyoung wrote: Now why didn't you just do the below in the first place? Judy wrote: What I don't understand is why you're asking me to explain why the aliens aren't making intriguing circles when you know I believe aliens are less likely than humans to have made the circles we have... Because Edg is a troll and you pushed one of his 'hot' buttons? LOL!
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip Just as a question, is there *anyone* here on this forum who would like to see Nabby be their only supporter? :-) Not a question. And even the premise is wrong. snip What *I* see in Judy's position is Classic I-Want- To-Believe-In-The-Woo-Woo. It's the very *opposite* of the axiom that Rick chose for the FFL Home Page: What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite. ~ Bertrand Russell Only Barry the Loser could claim that the above is the exact opposite of this: I think being able to take the 'don't know' position at present is crucial if we're ever to have a hope of figuring any of it out. Who here believes that Judy really wishes to find out? I, for one, do not. If she were as unattached to non-Woo-Woo explanations for crop circles as she was to Woo-Woo explanations for them, she wouldn't be so defensive. Her ego would not be in play. Ooopsie, you got that backwards. Little nervous, are ya, Barry? And of course Barry's got everything else wrong too, no surprise. What annoys me is not that the skeptopaths won't believe in woo-woo (see my exchange with Curtis on this). It's that they're willfully, proudly ignorant of the facts but are quick to dump on folks who *do* know the facts and aren't quite so sure as they are that there's no woo-woo involved. And while they're busy dumping, the skeptopaths pompously proclaim that they don't care about the phenomenon. If they really didn't care, why would they bother to attack those who find the phenomenon interesting? Others prefer to believe that they are the result of Forces That We Cannot Understand, and rail against those who don't buy into the I-Want-To-Believe-In- The-Woo-Woo mindset as somehow being threatened by the believers in it, or being challenged by them. And still others genuinely Don't Know and don't believe anything either way. *That's* what the skeptopaths find threatening, so threatening that they can't even bring themselves to correctly articulate the position. Instead, they say things like this-- NONE of them do much of anything for me aesthetically, and do even less for me in terms of imagining the great cosmic minds who created them. --when the person they're dumping on has explicitly said she thinks the idea that great cosmic minds made the circles is even LESS likely than that humans made them all. (And great cosmic minds is Barry's phrase anyway, despite the fact that he put it in quotes as though it had been mine.) I mean, the *contortions* are remarkable. Talk about avoidance! I don't think we are. I think we are amused by those who are so attached to believing in Woo-Woo that they perceive those who don't as attacking them, so much so that their stance needs defending. THEY, after all, are the ones reacting defensively. We are not. Says Barry, reacting defensively. guffaw What a *loser*.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? If so, we have no basis for our having a debate. Right now though, I put you in the same category as the guy who said to me about professional wrestling Some of it's fake, but some's real. To me, you're wanting something, anything will do, to point at that suggests woo-woo is operative in the world. You're a witch doctor trying to find a special bone to shake at a patient when you say, I'm the exception to the rule, my bones work and ooogaboooga is a real power that can those in the know can wield. Stop clinging to your need for wooism to be justifiable. No one's levitating, 2012 will be like Y2K, Tony's a fraud, Maharishi dumped Guru Dev and sold out to money, crop circles are man made, psychic surgeons palm chicken parts, Sai Baba is a pedophile, Barry isn't all bad, you are not always right, and you are comfortable calling names as much as Vaj. What part of this paragraph don't you agree with? Your intellectual heft is often put to a low use -- you've spend 15 years beating a dead horse you call loser. It's sick to beat a dead horse, and you know it. Everyone here knows it. Edg http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm The article: For over twenty years the southern English countryside has been the site of a strange phenomenon that has baffled observers and spawned countless news stories and not a few books. In the middle of the night, flattened circular depressions have appeared in fields of wheat, rye and other cereal crops. They range in diameter from ten feet to almost a hundred feet wide and vary from simple circles to complex spirals with rings and spurs. All have sharply defined edges. The most striking feature of the circles is the frequency with which they occur. In 1990 over 700 crop-circles appeared in Britain. People who attempt to study these circles have coined a name for themselves: cereologists. The word comes from the name of the Roman goddess of vegetation, Ceres. There are two favorite theories held by cereologists that think crop circles are the result of some not well understood physical phenomena. The first is that the depressions are the result of an unusual weather effect. George Tenence Meaden, a former professor of physics, calls this a plasma vortex phenomenon which he defines as a spinning mass of air which has accumulated a significant fraction of electrically charged matter. According to Meaden the effect is similar to that of ball lightning, but larger and longer lasting. The second theory is that somehow crop-circles are created by UFOs. Proponents of this theory note that occasionally crop circles seem to appear in conjunction with a UFO sighting. Some of the early, simple crop circles certainly do suggest fields that might have been flattened by the weight of a grounded flying saucer. As the circles have become more complex in shape, though, proponents of the UFO theory have had to modify their ideas suggesting that the marks left are due to a strange effect of the craft's drive force on the plants. Others even argue that the shapes are messages purposefully left by the saucer's crew. The most likely explanation for almost all of the crop circles is that they are hoaxes. Even the most ardent fans of either the weather or UFO theories admit that a significant fraction of the circles are man-made. One cereologist, a believer in the weather theory, Jenny Randles, wrote: I would put the hoaxes to comprise something over 50 percent of the total. Why don't these backers of the weather or UFO explanations believe that all the circles are hoaxed? Most would argue that a close examination of a circle will reveal differences between a hoaxed circle and a genuine circle. There is no clear criteria about what makes circles genuine or not, though. In fact the BBC asked one circle expert to examine a formation they had found. The expert declared it real, only to have to reverse his judgment when the BBC film crew told him they'd had the circle especially built for the occasion. Some cereologists claim that the plants in hoaxed circles have broken stems while those in real circles are bent. It seems the bending is the result of the condition of the plant rather than the type of force used in flattening it. During the summer green, moist, wheat is easily bent and can only be broken with great difficulty. So how do you hoax a crop circle? The tools are simple: A stake, a chain or rope, some boards, and a few people. The stake is pounded into the ground at the center of the soon-to-be circle and the rope attached to it. The rope is then stretched
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Right. And how many men would it take to make for example this huge crop circle, and how many days would it take to make it ? Don't you find it strange that noone has observed them in the making ? Bishop Cannings, nr Devizes, Wiltshire. Reported 24th May. CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST CROP CIRCLE CONNECTOR DVD http://www.cccvault.com/cccvideos/trailer09c.html Image Jack Turner Copyright 2009 http://www.thecropcircleshop.com/ Make a donation to keep the web site alive... Thank you
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? No. It is indeed a typical skeptical article, in that it gets a number of things significantly wrong. The best that can be said for it is that the writer hedges his bets by sticking in almost and similar qualifiers throughout. I just realized that you and I have been through this before, even down to your refusal to look at the links and other information that I've posted. Do you not know how to use Yahoo Search for FFL posts? Is that the problem? Because if you're just being stubborn, the hell with you. This conversation is over. I've made my position extremely clear and have provided my reasons and documentation. And yet you continue to misrepresent what I've said. There's no excuse for that, sorry.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. snip I *understand* that some people place credence in what people *claim* to believe. I really do not. I watch to see what they DO. If what they DO conflicts with what they claim to believe, well...I don't believe that they really believe what they claim to believe. Is that bad? :-) Yes, loser, because you *don't* actually see what they do. You make stuff up and claim that's what they've done, as in the post I'm responding to. You don't have the cojones to engage with reality. You're so threatened by it you have to create a nice comfortable one of your own. I mean, you get very annoyed whenever anybody expresses doubt that Frederick Lenz actually physically levitated. Right?
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them?
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. Poor victimized Judy Stein. I think you should consider replacing your fantasy image of what *you* believe my fantasy image of you on the FFL photos page with this one, which better reflects your victim mentality: [http://www.morethings.com/fan/carrie-sissy_spacek/piper+laurie-martyr_m\ om05.jpg] It has an advantage over *your* fantasy image of my fantasy image of you -- with this photo you get to portray yourself as a more of a victim and a martyr. In reality, my image of you is as you appear in the other photo you posted to the FFL photo page. As an old, overweight woman whose face reveals more about what her life choices and indulgences have done to her than she realizes, and who is trying very, very hard to smile for the camera, and failing: [Judy Stein]
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. No, loser, I'm demonizing them (as the part you snipped shows) because they don't have the cojones, as I said, to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. They can only manage to beat up on straw men of their own creation. That's why they're skepto*paths* rather than skeptics (yourself included, of course). The one person who *did* have the balls (and the honesty) to do that was Curtis. And our discussion was very cordial; neither of us had to demonize the other. The only thing they *can* disagree with me about is whether there are unanswered questions about the origins of some of the crop circles. And that there are such questions isn't *my* rightness, it's facts on the record. Poor victimized Judy Stein. I think you should consider replacing your fantasy image of what *you* believe my fantasy image of you on the FFL photos page with this one, which better reflects your victim mentality: [http://www.morethings.com/fan/carrie-sissy_spacek/piper+laurie-martyr_m\om05.jpg] It has an advantage over *your* fantasy image of my fantasy image of you -- with this photo you get to portray yourself as a more of a victim and a martyr. Nope, wrong AGAIN. I don't portray myself as a victim because I ain't one. I'm portraying *you*, a loser who can't come up with even an honest insult, a twit who is so terrified by reality he has to make up one he can be comfortable with. If you want to victimize me, you're going to have to grow a pair first. In reality, my image of you is as you appear in the other photo you posted to the FFL photo page. As an old, overweight woman whose face reveals more about what her life choices and indulgences have done to her than she realizes, and who is trying very, very hard to smile for the camera, and failing: This is Barry's fantasy image of Judy's *real* image. Just for one thing, Judy hadn't the slightest difficulty smiling for the camera, because she found the whole narcissistic exercise of taking her own picture hilarious. And by what my life choices and indulgences have done to me, were you referring to all the laugh lines? I know they're pretty prominent, since I don't feel the need to wear makeup. Or did you mean the fact that my (undyed) hair isn't gray? guffaw Loser.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. No, loser, I'm demonizing them (as the part you snipped shows) ... What's most fascinating here is that Judy chose to LIE about me snipping. I posted the *entirety* of her post. See for yourself at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 She completely made up the stuff about me snipping. So much for Judy I never lie Stein.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. No, loser, I'm demonizing them (as the part you snipped shows) ... What's most fascinating here is that Judy chose to LIE about me snipping. I posted the *entirety* of her post. See for yourself at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 You've got to excuse Barry. He's at the end of his rope and is grasping at straws. Of course, he has to *manufacture* the straws, because there just aren't any real ones around. This is the post he deceptively snipped: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. No, loser, I'm demonizing them (as the part you snipped shows) ... What's most fascinating here is that Judy chose to LIE about me snipping. I posted the *entirety* of her post. See for yourself at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 You've got to excuse Barry. He's at the end of his rope and is grasping at straws. Of course, he has to *manufacture* the straws, because there just aren't any real ones around. This is the post he deceptively snipped: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? Judy *keeps* lying. There is *no* reference in what I originally posted to the post she claims I snipped. I posted the *entirety* of her comments from the post I was referring to. She is LYING. Here is what I posted: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. And here is the actual message I posted it from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 Note that the only text I snipped was from Richard. Judy is LYING. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. No, loser, I'm demonizing them (as the part you snipped shows) ... What's most fascinating here is that Judy chose to LIE about me snipping. I posted the *entirety* of her post. See for yourself at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 You've got to excuse Barry. He's at the end of his rope and is grasping at straws. Of course, he has to *manufacture* the straws, because there just aren't any real ones around. This is the post he deceptively snipped: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
My mistake. The text I snipped at the top of the message seems to have been originally posted by Judy, not by Richard. HOWEVER, it has absolutely nothing to do with the text she claims below that I snipped maliciously. That was from another post entirely. Compare for yourself. This is what she claims I snipped from the message in question: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. And here is the message she claims I snipped it *from*: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 Not *only* is Judy LYING, she is *continuing* to LIE once it has been proven. I hope this establishes a precedent as to what we should think of her when she claims that someone *else* on this forum lies habitually. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? Judy *keeps* lying. There is *no* reference in what I originally posted to the post she claims I snipped. I posted the *entirety* of her comments from the post I was referring to. She is LYING. Here is what I posted: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. And here is the actual message I posted it from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 Note that the only text I snipped was from Richard. Judy is LYING. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? Judy *keeps* lying. Well, now Barry's *definitely* lying. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he just made a really STPID mistake the first time around, but now it's obvious he did it deliberately. There is *no* reference in what I originally posted to the post she claims I snipped. Of course there is. How does Barry think he can get away with this when the posts are all on the record? He quoted this: - Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. - But he snipped this, which immediately followed in the post he was quoting from: - What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. - The three paragraphs are from this post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973 I posted the *entirety* of her comments from the post I was referring to. She is LYING. Here is what I posted: What he posted is below the part he *excerpts* here. Scroll down past his Judy is LYING lie, to where he says Ahem. Immediately above that is the paragraph beginning Wrong AGAIN, loser that I quoted above, from this post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973 You won't find the other two paragraphs following it, because (as I said) he snipped them. He's a pathological liar. He's been lying for so many years it's his way of life. He literally couldn't function if he couldn't lie. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. And here is the actual message I posted it from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 Note that the only text I snipped was from Richard. Judy is LYING. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: My mistake. The text I snipped at the top of the message seems to have been originally posted by Judy, not by Richard. HOWEVER, it has absolutely nothing to do with the text she claims below that I snipped maliciously. That was from another post entirely. Compare for yourself. This is what she claims I snipped from the message in question: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. And here is the message she claims I snipped it *from*: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 He's insane. Look down at the bottom of this post, where I said: This is the post he deceptively snipped: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973 He's having a psychotic break. Not *only* is Judy LYING, she is *continuing* to LIE once it has been proven. I hope this establishes a precedent as to what we should think of her when she claims that someone *else* on this forum lies habitually. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? Judy *keeps* lying. There is *no* reference in what I originally posted to the post she claims I snipped. I posted the *entirety* of her comments from the post I was referring to. She is LYING. Here is what I posted: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. And here is the actual message I posted it from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 Note that the only text I snipped was from Richard. Judy is LYING. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Please note that ALL of this is a distraction from the fact that Judy was caught in a lie claiming that she had never demonized those who disagree with her attachment to Woo Woo with regard to crop circles. She sought to prove that by claiming that I snipped parts of a post *in which* she demonizes them. Which she then reposted. :-) THIS is what she cited as a distraction, hoping to prove that she had never demonized those who disagree with her: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. What a loon. Let's see how she tries to spin *this*. :-)
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Somebody get him some help, please. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Please note that ALL of this is a distraction from the fact... ...that Barry lied about deceptively snipping my post, got caught, then lied again by claiming *I* lied, and got caught *again*. that Judy was caught in a lie claiming that she had never demonized those who disagree with her That, of course, was not a lie. attachment to Woo Woo with regard to crop circles. But this is. It's an example of why I've been criticizing the skeptopaths. It's a straw man. She sought to prove that by claiming that I snipped parts of a post *in which* she demonizes them. *But not for disagreeing with me*, which is what the two paragraphs Barry snipped pointed out (the ones he quotes below). That's why he snipped them. He's known from the start what I was referring to, because he snipped the paragraphs quite deliberately. His claim that I was lying about not demonizing people for disagreeing with me would have made no sense if he'd included those paragraphs. The skeptopaths haven't been disagreeing with me, they've been bravely disagreeing with their own straw men. *That's* what I've been criticizing them for doing--not for disagreeing with me, but for *not having the guts to disagree with me*. Barry understands this all too well, because he's been one of the cowards disagreeing with his own straw men. Not to mention his cowardice in lying about what he snipped, then lying about *my* having lied, and not being able to admit it when it's all laid out in black and white. Which she then reposted. :-) THIS is what she cited as a distraction, hoping to prove that she had never demonized those who disagree with her: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. What a loon. Let's see how she tries to spin *this*. :-)
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
The real question, as always, is does anybody care?. I figured I'd do one of my once every few months drop ins, just to see what's going on at FFL. What's the first thing I see? Judy obsessing on the topic of Barry and lying. It never fucking changes does it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Barry's just been losing and losing and losing recently. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. Wrong AGAIN, loser. You won't find any of my posts on crop circles demonizing somebody for disagreeing with me. Not one. Ahem. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They look like artworks or, possibly some message but not to get hysterical about as it would seem that if whoever is in command of such technology was mad at us, we would be long gone. Heh. I don't think that's what scares them. It's the idea that some of the circles may not have a mundane explanation they find terrifying. Characterizing those who disagree with you as terrified isn't demonizing them? Oh, how clever of you not to quote the next two paragraphs: What I'm berating the skeptopaths for is their cowardice. They don't have the cojones to disagree with me on the basis of what I've said and the information I've pointed to. Instead they create armies of straw men and beat *them* up, then pound their chests as if they'd actually accomplished something. Losers. Poor, poor, POOR Judy. Someone quoted only the first part of your demonization, not the second part, which is even more demonizing. In the second part, you call them a name (skeptopaths), you say they have no cojones, and you create fantasy images of how they react to the awesome power of your rightness on this subject. No, loser, I'm demonizing them (as the part you snipped shows) ... What's most fascinating here is that Judy chose to LIE about me snipping. I posted the *entirety* of her post. See for yourself at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220723 You've got to excuse Barry. He's at the end of his rope and is grasping at straws. Of course, he has to *manufacture* the straws, because there just aren't any real ones around. This is the post he deceptively snipped: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/220973
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfr...@... wrote: The real question, as always, is does anybody care?. I figured I'd do one of my once every few months drop ins, just to see what's going on at FFL. What's the first thing I see? Judy obsessing on the topic of Barry and lying. It never fucking changes does it. Did Barry wake you up and call you in for emergency duty? He certainly does need some help. But you won't be able to do him any good when you're so tired your reading comprehension is impaired. After you've had a night's sleep, read this again: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? What you have to do to help him out on *this* one is to somehow prove *he* was correct to call *me* a liar. Good luck on that, sweet cheeks.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfr...@... wrote: The real question, as always, is does anybody care?. I figured I'd do one of my once every few months drop ins, just to see what's going on at FFL. What's the first thing I see? Judy obsessing on the topic of Barry and lying. It never fucking changes does it. P.S.: There's one really good way to change it: Convince Barry to tell the truth. I'll bet that's never occurred to you, has it? As far as you're concerned, it's just fine for Barry to lie all he wants, but it's an outrage for anybody to call him on it. Just amazing.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: The real question, as always, is does anybody care?. I figured I'd do one of my once every few months drop ins, just to see what's going on at FFL. What's the first thing I see? Judy obsessing on the topic of Barry and lying. It never fucking changes does it. Did Barry wake you up and call you in for emergency duty? He certainly does need some help. But you won't be able to do him any good when you're so tired your reading comprehension is impaired. After you've had a night's sleep, read this again: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: BTW, anybody think Barry's going to acknowledge his mistake here? Or apologize for calling me a liar? What you have to do to help him out on *this* one is to somehow prove *he* was correct to call *me* a liar. Good luck on that, sweet cheeks. And good luck on your Barry obsession lard ass. What a way to live
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: The real question, as always, is does anybody care?. I figured I'd do one of my once every few months drop ins, just to see what's going on at FFL. What's the first thing I see? Judy obsessing on the topic of Barry and lying. It never fucking changes does it. P.S.: There's one really good way to change it: Convince Barry to tell the truth. I'll bet that's never occurred to you, has it? As far as you're concerned, it's just fine for Barry to lie all he wants, but it's an outrage for anybody to call him on it. Just amazing. There are many amazing things in this world tubby. Your obsession with Barry isn't one of them though. Sad and boring are the words that come to mind.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? If so, we have no basis for our having a debate. Right now though, I put you in the same category as the guy who said to me about professional wrestling Some of it's fake, but some's real. Good line. Great analogy To me, you're wanting something, anything will do, to point at that suggests woo-woo is operative in the world. You're a witch doctor trying to find a special bone special bone, I love that to shake at a patient when you say, I'm the exception to the rule, my bones work and ooogaboooga is a real power that can those in the know can wield. Stop clinging to your need for wooism to be justifiable. No one's levitating, 2012 will be like Y2K, Tony's a fraud, Maharishi dumped Guru Dev and sold out to money, crop circles are man made, psychic surgeons palm chicken parts, Sai Baba is a pedophile, Barry isn't all bad, you are not always right, and you are comfortable calling names as much as Vaj. What part of this paragraph don't you agree with? Edg in top form. Bam, bam. No malice here. Just calling people out on their crap. It's got to be done. Your intellectual heft is often put to a low use -- you've spend 15 years beating a dead horse you call loser. It's sick to beat a dead horse, and you know it. Everyone here knows it. It is true. Raunchy, are we wrong here.? I don't think so. It's easy to get into a rut. I think we have to call it like it is. I don't think there was one wasted word in this post. Edg http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm The article: For over twenty years the southern English countryside has been the site of a strange phenomenon that has baffled observers and spawned countless news stories and not a few books. In the middle of the night, flattened circular depressions have appeared in fields of wheat, rye and other cereal crops. They range in diameter from ten feet to almost a hundred feet wide and vary from simple circles to complex spirals with rings and spurs. All have sharply defined edges. The most striking feature of the circles is the frequency with which they occur. In 1990 over 700 crop-circles appeared in Britain. People who attempt to study these circles have coined a name for themselves: cereologists. The word comes from the name of the Roman goddess of vegetation, Ceres. There are two favorite theories held by cereologists that think crop circles are the result of some not well understood physical phenomena. The first is that the depressions are the result of an unusual weather effect. George Tenence Meaden, a former professor of physics, calls this a plasma vortex phenomenon which he defines as a spinning mass of air which has accumulated a significant fraction of electrically charged matter. According to Meaden the effect is similar to that of ball lightning, but larger and longer lasting. The second theory is that somehow crop-circles are created by UFOs. Proponents of this theory note that occasionally crop circles seem to appear in conjunction with a UFO sighting. Some of the early, simple crop circles certainly do suggest fields that might have been flattened by the weight of a grounded flying saucer. As the circles have become more complex in shape, though, proponents of the UFO theory have had to modify their ideas suggesting that the marks left are due to a strange effect of the craft's drive force on the plants. Others even argue that the shapes are messages purposefully left by the saucer's crew. The most likely explanation for almost all of the crop circles is that they are hoaxes. Even the most ardent fans of either the weather or UFO theories admit that a significant fraction of the circles are man-made. One cereologist, a believer in the weather theory, Jenny Randles, wrote: I would put the hoaxes to comprise something over 50 percent of the total. Why don't these backers of the weather or UFO explanations believe that all the circles are hoaxed? Most would argue that a close examination of a circle will reveal differences between a hoaxed circle and a genuine circle. There is no clear criteria about what makes circles genuine or not, though. In fact the BBC asked one circle expert to examine a formation they had found. The expert declared it real, only to have to reverse his judgment when the BBC film crew told him they'd had the circle especially built for the occasion. Some cereologists claim that the plants in hoaxed circles have broken
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. And another skeptopath to add to the list. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? If so, we have no basis for our having a debate. Right now though, I put you in the same category as the guy who said to me about professional wrestling Some of it's fake, but some's real. Good line. Great analogy To me, you're wanting something, anything will do, to point at that suggests woo-woo is operative in the world. You're a witch doctor trying to find a special bone special bone, I love that to shake at a patient when you say, I'm the exception to the rule, my bones work and ooogaboooga is a real power that can those in the know can wield. Stop clinging to your need for wooism to be justifiable. No one's levitating, 2012 will be like Y2K, Tony's a fraud, Maharishi dumped Guru Dev and sold out to money, crop circles are man made, psychic surgeons palm chicken parts, Sai Baba is a pedophile, Barry isn't all bad, you are not always right, and you are comfortable calling names as much as Vaj. What part of this paragraph don't you agree with? Edg in top form. Bam, bam. No malice here. Just calling people out on their crap. It's got to be done. Your intellectual heft is often put to a low use -- you've spend 15 years beating a dead horse you call loser. It's sick to beat a dead horse, and you know it. Everyone here knows it. It is true. Raunchy, are we wrong here.? I don't think so. It's easy to get into a rut. I think we have to call it like it is. I don't think there was one wasted word in this post. Edg http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm The article: For over twenty years the southern English countryside has been the site of a strange phenomenon that has baffled observers and spawned countless news stories and not a few books. In the middle of the night, flattened circular depressions have appeared in fields of wheat, rye and other cereal crops. They range in diameter from ten feet to almost a hundred feet wide and vary from simple circles to complex spirals with rings and spurs. All have sharply defined edges. The most striking feature of the circles is the frequency with which they occur. In 1990 over 700 crop-circles appeared in Britain. People who attempt to study these circles have coined a name for themselves: cereologists. The word comes from the name of the Roman goddess of vegetation, Ceres. There are two favorite theories held by cereologists that think crop circles are the result of some not well understood physical phenomena. The first is that the depressions are the result of an unusual weather effect. George Tenence Meaden, a former professor of physics, calls this a plasma vortex phenomenon which he defines as a spinning mass of air which has accumulated a significant fraction of electrically charged matter. According to Meaden the effect is similar to that of ball lightning, but larger and longer lasting. The second theory is that somehow crop-circles are created by UFOs. Proponents of this theory note that occasionally crop circles seem to appear in conjunction with a UFO sighting. Some of the early, simple crop circles certainly do suggest fields that might have been flattened by the weight of a grounded flying saucer. As the circles have become more complex in shape, though, proponents of the UFO theory have had to modify their ideas suggesting that the marks left are due to a strange effect of the craft's drive force on the plants. Others even argue that the shapes are messages purposefully left by the saucer's crew. The most likely explanation for almost all of the crop circles is that they are hoaxes. Even the most ardent fans of either the weather or UFO theories admit that a significant fraction of the circles are man-made. One cereologist, a believer in the weather theory, Jenny Randles, wrote: I would put the hoaxes to comprise something over 50 percent of the total. Why don't these backers of the weather or UFO explanations believe that all the circles are hoaxed? Most would argue that a close examination of a circle will reveal differences between a hoaxed circle and a genuine circle. There is no clear criteria about what makes circles genuine or not, though. In fact the BBC asked one circle expert to examine a formation they had found. The expert
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
I suppose there is a chance that Judy is right in her views, and everyone else is wrong. I suppose this may be the case. But on the other hand, on the surface, and for many layers down, I think Edg is dialed in to the reality of the situaton. And it's not mean spirited expose. Just a sober looking at things as they are. Not sure why Judy cannot give any ground on some things. I think it reinforces all that her harshest critics say about her. Excuse me for referring to Judy in the third person, or whatever person it is, but I do not care to get into a one on one with her. Nope. Not interested. Call me a coward if you wish. FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. And another skeptopath to add to the list. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? If so, we have no basis for our having a debate. Right now though, I put you in the same category as the guy who said to me about professional wrestling Some of it's fake, but some's real. Good line. Great analogy To me, you're wanting something, anything will do, to point at that suggests woo-woo is operative in the world. You're a witch doctor trying to find a special bone special bone, I love that to shake at a patient when you say, I'm the exception to the rule, my bones work and ooogaboooga is a real power that can those in the know can wield. Stop clinging to your need for wooism to be justifiable. No one's levitating, 2012 will be like Y2K, Tony's a fraud, Maharishi dumped Guru Dev and sold out to money, crop circles are man made, psychic surgeons palm chicken parts, Sai Baba is a pedophile, Barry isn't all bad, you are not always right, and you are comfortable calling names as much as Vaj. What part of this paragraph don't you agree with? Edg in top form. Bam, bam. No malice here. Just calling people out on their crap. It's got to be done. Your intellectual heft is often put to a low use -- you've spend 15 years beating a dead horse you call loser. It's sick to beat a dead horse, and you know it. Everyone here knows it. It is true. Raunchy, are we wrong here.? I don't think so. It's easy to get into a rut. I think we have to call it like it is. I don't think there was one wasted word in this post. Edg http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm The article: For over twenty years the southern English countryside has been the site of a strange phenomenon that has baffled observers and spawned countless news stories and not a few books. In the middle of the night, flattened circular depressions have appeared in fields of wheat, rye and other cereal crops. They range in diameter from ten feet to almost a hundred feet wide and vary from simple circles to complex spirals with rings and spurs. All have sharply defined edges. The most striking feature of the circles is the frequency with which they occur. In 1990 over 700 crop-circles appeared in Britain. People who attempt to study these circles have coined a name for themselves: cereologists. The word comes from the name of the Roman goddess of vegetation, Ceres. There are two favorite theories held by cereologists that think crop circles are the result of some not well understood physical phenomena. The first is that the depressions are the result of an unusual weather effect. George Tenence Meaden, a former professor of physics, calls this a plasma vortex phenomenon which he defines as a spinning mass of air which has accumulated a significant fraction of electrically charged matter. According to Meaden the effect is similar to that of ball lightning, but larger and longer lasting. The second theory is that somehow crop-circles are created by UFOs. Proponents of this theory note that occasionally crop circles seem to appear in conjunction with a UFO sighting. Some of the early, simple crop circles certainly do suggest fields that might have been flattened by the weight of a grounded flying saucer. As the circles have become more complex in shape, though, proponents of the UFO theory have had to modify their ideas suggesting that the marks left are due to a strange effect of the craft's drive force on the plants. Others even argue that the shapes are messages purposefully
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Dang, the Edgster telling it like it is. I have hi-lighted some of the parts I most enjoyed, and which I felt were most right on. And another skeptopath to add to the list. Thank you Sister Aloysius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Why should I waste my time doing research into crop circles? All I need to do is read one article by a person who has done this, and the below is a typical balanced view about crop circles. The writer has done some homework, saved me the effort, and the conclusion is that man made is overwhelmingly the best guess to support. Judy, do you agree with the below article? If so, we have no basis for our having a debate. Right now though, I put you in the same category as the guy who said to me about professional wrestling Some of it's fake, but some's real. Good line. Great analogy To me, you're wanting something, anything will do, to point at that suggests woo-woo is operative in the world. You're a witch doctor trying to find a special bone special bone, I love that to shake at a patient when you say, I'm the exception to the rule, my bones work and ooogaboooga is a real power that can those in the know can wield. Stop clinging to your need for wooism to be justifiable. No one's levitating, 2012 will be like Y2K, Tony's a fraud, Maharishi dumped Guru Dev and sold out to money, crop circles are man made, psychic surgeons palm chicken parts, Sai Baba is a pedophile, Barry isn't all bad, you are not always right, and you are comfortable calling names as much as Vaj. What part of this paragraph don't you agree with? Edg in top form. Bam, bam. No malice here. Just calling people out on their crap. It's got to be done. Your intellectual heft is often put to a low use -- you've spend 15 years beating a dead horse you call loser. It's sick to beat a dead horse, and you know it. Everyone here knows it. It is true. Raunchy, are we wrong here.? I don't think so. It's easy to get into a rut. I think we have to call it like it is. I don't think there was one wasted word in this post. Edg http://www.unmuseum.org/cropcir.htm The article: For over twenty years the southern English countryside has been the site of a strange phenomenon that has baffled observers and spawned countless news stories and not a few books. In the middle of the night, flattened circular depressions have appeared in fields of wheat, rye and other cereal crops. They range in diameter from ten feet to almost a hundred feet wide and vary from simple circles to complex spirals with rings and spurs. All have sharply defined edges. The most striking feature of the circles is the frequency with which they occur. In 1990 over 700 crop-circles appeared in Britain. People who attempt to study these circles have coined a name for themselves: cereologists. The word comes from the name of the Roman goddess of vegetation, Ceres. There are two favorite theories held by cereologists that think crop circles are the result of some not well understood physical phenomena. The first is that the depressions are the result of an unusual weather effect. George Tenence Meaden, a former professor of physics, calls this a plasma vortex phenomenon which he defines as a spinning mass of air which has accumulated a significant fraction of electrically charged matter. According to Meaden the effect is similar to that of ball lightning, but larger and longer lasting. The second theory is that somehow crop-circles are created by UFOs. Proponents of this theory note that occasionally crop circles seem to appear in conjunction with a UFO sighting. Some of the early, simple crop circles certainly do suggest fields that might have been flattened by the weight of a grounded flying saucer. As the circles have become more complex in shape, though, proponents of the UFO theory have had to modify their ideas suggesting that the marks left are due to a strange effect of the craft's drive force on the plants. Others even argue that the shapes are messages purposefully left by the saucer's crew. The most likely explanation for almost all of the crop circles is that they are hoaxes. Even the most ardent fans of either the weather or UFO theories admit that a significant fraction of the circles are man-made. One cereologist, a believer in the weather theory, Jenny Randles, wrote: I would put the hoaxes to comprise something over 50 percent of the total. Why don't these backers of the weather or UFO explanations believe that all the circles are hoaxed? Most would argue that a close examination of a circle will reveal differences between a hoaxed
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip If Edg had done his homework, he'd know that there are aspects to some of the crop circles that can't be conveniently attributed to fooling abilities on the part of human beans. I discussed some of these- -with links--the last time we had this discussion. Edg could find those posts easily by searching for authfriend and crop circles. Then he could take a gander at the links and inform himself. Such acid in your tone, tsk. After you've called me a liar, I should be all sweet and submissive? Why should I inform myself about what I think is an impossibility? My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts. If you're going to win this debate, What would winning mean in this context, Edg? You aren't going to be able to get it right, because you haven't been paying attention to what I'm saying. You're much too anxious to hear yourself talk than to listen to the person you're talking to. you gotta at least own the topic enough to educate others again and again - like I do when I promote my true knowledge about the Absolute herein. Repeat repeat repeat. But you don't, and I think it's a tell -- not that you're lazy or a bad teacher -- but that you don't have the mojo to plunk down on the table, and so you send folks into the history of the posts -- knowing what a piece of shit the Yahoo search function is. Yahoo Search works just fine for most posts before March 19. My past posts on this topic, in which I plunked down more mojo than you have the guts to deal with, are easily accessible. snip Judy, seriously, do you really mean to say that someone like The Great Randi couldn't make a joke out of the whole notion that there are non-human explanations It's The Amazing Randi, and he's perfectly capable of making a joke out of anything he doesn't care to believe in. Big whoop. At least get his moniker right. snip Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes Been there, done that, to the extent that it *can* be done. You don't want to know about it, so you aren't going to look it up. You wouldn't even have to refer to my past posts, BTW, to inform yourself sufficiently to have a reasonable discussion. I just thought it would be easier for you to start with the sources I cited than have to plow through the Web on your own to find them. It's a big topic. Google gives you over a million hits. Most of them are crap.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Judy, Magicians have fooled folks for 10,000 years, and such types are obsessed with finding new ways to fool more folks. Crop circles being made so quickly by folks who are intent on fooling others about their production methods is, well, very understandable and a far easier explanation to invest in than that something other worldly is a contender of merit on our list of theories. If anything other worldly was responsible, consider that the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses. Must be. Has to be. Such ability must certainly point to superiority in many other fields if there indeed brains that are able to produce crop circles here from their place in the beyond the beyond. It may be simple to them, cost them almost nothing to do, but really, with giant brains like that, are you telling us that all they can think of to do to us -- for good or ill -- is to mash down our food crops into patterns that have no obvious reason for being? Yeah, sure. And they don't do these patterns in sand or on open prairies for what reason? If an alien wanted to, what?, soften us up for an eventual landing of a space craft, or the appearance of a world teacher, whatever, does ya really think that crop circles are the way that they'd come up with? Okay, if we go religious bonkers, we could imagine the patterns to be some sort of sacred tattoos that enliven Mother Earth's mojo, but isn't that a theory that's a joke next to some clever smirking human magician types made the patterns? Anyone who can do a crop circle from the beyond has the technology to communicate with anyone on the planet anytime any place. It could be in a thousand ways: a voice in your head or a full scale beamed-down actual entity in the fleshbut crop circles are used? WTF? To other worlders, we'd be as backward to them as ants are to us. If we humans wanted to talk to ants, maybe we'd use crop circlesque patterns for cutting swaths across their pheromone trails to alert them, but geeze, I think I'd use strategic placement of bits of food to communicate instead. Other worlders who can do crop circles are so vastly beyond us that there is literally no reason for them to fuck with us by teasing us with, what?, yantras? How many ant colonies do you tease per week? These other worlders must be experts at our languages, modes of thought, religions, etcand they use crop circles? To me, thinking crop circles are from other worlders is like thinking God is doing the circles -- to us, their technology would certainly have given them the ability to duplicate just about all the siddhis and they could fool us into thinking that they're gods easily, effortlessly. Cargo Cult R Us fer shur. Judy, are you wanting this to be your religion? Hey, all it would take for an other worlder to work the Earth like it was a hunk of clay on a potter's wheel, would be to have merely one of them come here and set him/her/itself up as a guru like Maharishi did -- only, you know, with real siddhis fully operative. Why, it would be a cake walk. The alien Maharishi could do a few miracles here and there and have a slavering troop of TB bots at the ready to maraud the world into thinking/doing anything. Anything. Anything. Fuck, Hitler did it, Mao did it, Bush did it, what a joke it would be if an alien truly wanted to do it and had real other world powers. But crop circles? In the TM movement's early days, who here didn't drool over all the rumors like: Maharishi was at two places at once, or, Maharishi told his driver to just bomb through the intersections to make the plane on time, or, Maharishi appeared at Helen Olsen's bedside when she died. All this would be child's play for an alien Maharishi to pull off in actuality. Look at what an amateur magician like Sai Baba is able to do with a bit of palmed ash -- it's fucking holy vibuthi! He does that and suddenly he has all the parents giving him their toddlers for Sai to jack off. Harrumphcrop circlesJudy, if ever your red pencil failed you, this is it. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip I agree with off_world; no matter what/who is responsible for them, they're beautiful. Many of them are real works of art. Even if they're all human- made, that such incredibly elaborate designs can be laid down overnight in complete secrecy is nothing short of remarkable. It's just a fascinating phenomenon, and it gets more compelling the more you look into it. We've had a good bit of discussion here before, if you want to check the archives. It does seem to make some people very nervous, judging from the near- hysterical tone of their skepticism.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Duveyoung wrote: If anything other worldly was responsible, consider that the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses... So, you're thinking that humans don't have the technology to make crop circles?
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: Duveyoung wrote: If anything other worldly was responsible, consider that the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses... So, you're thinking that humans don't have the technology to make crop circles? No, I don't think such and made that obvious in my post, and you're still a troll trying to pull chains and get attention. So many folks here have taken the time to point out your trollishness that it is obvious that you are immune to anyone's attempt to help you. I've stopped dealing with you for all the right reasons, and this little blurb is about all you'll get from me from time to time. What you do here is sociopathic, maybe psychotic. Edg
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Duveyoung wrote: If anything other worldly was responsible, consider that the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses... So, you're thinking that humans don't have the technology to make crop circles? Edg wrote: No, I don't think such... But, you said the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses. So, you're thinking that humans didn't make the crop circles, that aliens made them. But, Judy didn't say this. So, I guess it was you that was trolling. LOL!
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Is it just me, or is Willy extra extra bonkers today? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: Duveyoung wrote: If anything other worldly was responsible, consider that the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses... So, you're thinking that humans don't have the technology to make crop circles? Edg wrote: No, I don't think such... But, you said the technology for making a crop circle must be vastly superior to anything our civilization presently possesses. So, you're thinking that humans didn't make the crop circles, that aliens made them. But, Judy didn't say this. So, I guess it was you that was trolling. LOL!
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
This post of Edg's is an excellent example of why I said the notion of crop circles makes the skeptics nervous. Why else would Edg have read this from my post-- I don't think they're messages from the Space Brothers, but I really have no clue whatsoever what/ who might be creating the ones that don't seem to have been made by humans. --and then demanded to know: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: snip To me, thinking crop circles are from other worlders is like thinking God is doing the circles -- to us, their technology would certainly have given them the ability to duplicate just about all the siddhis and they could fool us into thinking that they're gods easily, effortlessly. Cargo Cult R Us fer shur. Judy, are you wanting this to be your religion? This is precisely what happened the last time we discussed crop circles here. The only exception was Curtis. Of the crop circles that can't be shown to have been made by humans, I said *repeatedly* that I didn't think it was ETs and that I had absolutely no idea how they were produced. But *nobody* (except Curtis) was able to tolerate the don't know position. It had either to be all humans, nice and comfortable, or ETs, equally comfortable because vanishingly unlikely (for many reasons, including those Edg just elucidated). The don't know position was so UNcomfortable that the skeptics were unable even to register it, just as Edg couldn't.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Judy wrote: This post of Edg's is an excellent example of why I said the notion of crop circles makes the skeptics nervous. Why else would Edg have read this from my post-- I don't think they're messages from the Space Brothers, but I really have no clue whatsoever what/ who might be creating the ones that don't seem to have been made by humans. --and then demanded to know: Duveyoung wrote: snip To me, thinking crop circles are from other worlders is like thinking God is doing the circles -- to us, their technology would certainly have given them the ability to duplicate just about all the siddhis and they could fool us into thinking that they're gods easily, effortlessly. Cargo Cult R Us fer shur. Judy, are you wanting this to be your religion? This is precisely what happened the last time we discussed crop circles here. The only exception was Curtis. Of the crop circles that can't be shown to have been made by humans, I said *repeatedly* that I didn't think it was ETs and that I had absolutely no idea how they were produced. But *nobody* (except Curtis) was able to tolerate the don't know position. It had either to be all humans, nice and comfortable, or ETs, equally comfortable because vanishingly unlikely (for many reasons, including those Edg just elucidated). The don't know position was so UNcomfortable that the skeptics were unable even to register it, just as Edg couldn't. Slap him real good, Judy! I don't think such and made that obvious in my post, and you're still a troll trying to pull chains and get attention. - Edg
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
Your don't know position is a lie. I think you have strong beliefs that you don't want to have to defend and are posing as a don't knower. And, WTF? Again with the personal attack about my psychology being athwart because I was seeing logical conclusions in your don't know-ness that you seem to be ignoring. I attacked, not you, but your concept that not all the crop circles could have been made by humans. How you could know this is beyond me. Do you think Doug Henning did actual magic? If it's true that some circles could not have been made by ingenious human magicians, then the only other explanation would be that you believe that non-human causes were at work.which, given the sophistication of the circles, couldn't be from anything but an advanced mind. You can't deny some circles their human origins without at least some reasoning that would then be the foundation of the intellect automatically concluding that an ET cause was operative. I think you're being a weasel in your reply. Own up to your obvious belief; this I don't know stance of yours is merely a cover story given how strongly you've participated in the crop circle threads here. Don't challenge me to have to read all your previous posts, simple tell us here and now if you believe ETs are the PROBABLE cause of some circles. Do ya or don't ya? Your openmindedness is laudable, but you have offered no explanation as an explanation for why at least some crop circles are of non-human origin. WTF? Again, where's your red pencil? How do you go from I don't know to but I'm not going anywhere near to espousing ET causes? It makes logical sense that anything as creative as crop circles cannot come from any other causes than either human or ET kinda possibilities. Perhaps you can list other causes that I have not considered -- if so, pony up some examples of how crop circles could be from anything other than a human or an ET mind. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: This post of Edg's is an excellent example of why I said the notion of crop circles makes the skeptics nervous. Why else would Edg have read this from my post-- I don't think they're messages from the Space Brothers, but I really have no clue whatsoever what/ who might be creating the ones that don't seem to have been made by humans. --and then demanded to know: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: snip To me, thinking crop circles are from other worlders is like thinking God is doing the circles -- to us, their technology would certainly have given them the ability to duplicate just about all the siddhis and they could fool us into thinking that they're gods easily, effortlessly. Cargo Cult R Us fer shur. Judy, are you wanting this to be your religion? This is precisely what happened the last time we discussed crop circles here. The only exception was Curtis. Of the crop circles that can't be shown to have been made by humans, I said *repeatedly* that I didn't think it was ETs and that I had absolutely no idea how they were produced. But *nobody* (except Curtis) was able to tolerate the don't know position. It had either to be all humans, nice and comfortable, or ETs, equally comfortable because vanishingly unlikely (for many reasons, including those Edg just elucidated). The don't know position was so UNcomfortable that the skeptics were unable even to register it, just as Edg couldn't.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
One more comment on Edg's post: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Magicians have fooled folks for 10,000 years, and such types are obsessed with finding new ways to fool more folks. Crop circles being made so quickly by folks who are intent on fooling others about their production methods is, well, very understandable and a far easier explanation to invest in than that something other worldly is a contender of merit on our list of theories. Absolutely, much more understandable and a far easier explanation to invest in (although I'd want to change the phrase in quotes to inexplicable with current knowledge, because, as noted in my earlier post, I don't think they're other worldly). But facts don't necessarily always conform to the comfortable understandable and easier explanation criteria. The other thing I said about the skeptics is that they're *ignorant*, and here too Edg fits the pattern. If Edg had done his homework, he'd know that there are aspects to some of the crop circles that can't be conveniently attributed to fooling abilities on the part of human beans. I discussed some of these--with links--the last time we had this discussion. Edg could find those posts easily by searching for authfriend and crop circles. Then he could take a gander at the links and inform himself. If he runs true to form, though, he won't be bothered. Neither did the other skeptics the last time (except for Curtis). Skeptics isn't really the right term here. *I'm* a skeptic, in that I've suspended judgment because we simply don't know enough either way. The others are skeptopaths.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: [snip] Your openmindedness is laudable, but you have offered no explanation as an explanation for why at least some crop circles are of non-human origin. WTF? Again, where's your red pencil? How do you go from I don't know to but I'm not going anywhere near to espousing ET causes? It makes logical sense that anything as creative as crop circles cannot come from any other causes than either human or ET kinda possibilities. Perhaps you can list other causes that I have not considered -- if so, pony up some examples of how crop circles could be from anything other than a human or an ET mind. Edg - can't go along with that. Aren't you foregetting Rumsfeld-ji? There are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know. (And perhaps we cannot even imagine. e.g. my cat is watching my fingers moving on the keyboard as I write this. What could she know, or hope to know, of what I'm *really* up to? Wait, come to think of it, what AM I really up to?)
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
This is my 50th. We can continue after Friday if you like. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Your don't know position is a lie. I think you have strong beliefs that you don't want to have to defend and are posing as a don't knower. Ah, yes, the fallback position of the nervous skeptopath: accuse the real skeptic of lying about what they believe. snip I attacked, not you, but your concept that not all the crop circles could have been made by humans. How you could know this is beyond me. Do you think Doug Henning did actual magic? If you weren't so ignorant, you'd know the basis for that concept (and I never said I knew it, BTW). If it's true that some circles could not have been made by ingenious human magicians, then the only other explanation would be that you believe that non-human causes were at work. No, no. If it's *true* that some circles could not have been made by humans, then the only other explanation *no matter what I believe* is that nonhuman causes are at work. (But nonhuman doesn't necessarily mean extraterrestrial.) I don't *believe* any of the currently available explanations for crop circles. I don't *disbelieve* any of them either. I. just. don't. know. which, given the sophistication of the circles, couldn't be from anything but an advanced mind. Not necessarily. You can't deny some circles their human origins without at least some reasoning that would then be the foundation of the intellect automatically concluding that an ET cause was operative. *Your* intellect, maybe. Not mine, not as an automatic conclusion. I think you're being a weasel in your reply. Own up to your obvious belief; this I don't know stance of yours is merely a cover story given how strongly you've participated in the crop circle threads here. Don't challenge me to have to read all your previous posts, Just as I prediced. simple tell us here and now if you believe ETs are the PROBABLE cause of some circles. Do ya or don't ya? Nope. I think ETs are *less* probable than that they're all made by humans. Your openmindedness is laudable, but you have offered no explanation as an explanation for why at least some crop circles are of non-human origin. WTF? No explanation makes you nervous, Edg, just as I've been pointing out. Again, where's your red pencil? How do you go from I don't know to but I'm not going anywhere near to espousing ET causes? How could I *not* go from I don't know to I'm not going anywhere near any of the current explanations? It makes logical sense that anything as creative as crop circles cannot come from any other causes than either human or ET kinda possibilities. It does indeed. But I'm not sure we're dealing with something that makes logical sense. Perhaps you can list other causes that I have not considered -- if so, pony up some examples of how crop circles could be from anything other than a human or an ET mind. I have no idea what other possible causes there could be. None of the explanations I've seen proposed seem likely, and I haven't been able to dream any up on my own. I *do* think there are aspects to human experience that are currently inexplicable and that encompass much if not all of what we consider paranormal. I *suspect* they're all related somehow, but I can't even guess at what that relationship might involve. I think being able to take the don't know position at present is crucial if we're ever to have a hope of figuring any of it out. At this point we don't have enough hard information, or perhaps even the conceptual tools, to put this stuff into boxes and label them with anything but Who the hell knows? Coming from don't know won't stop us from studying whatever it is that's going on. Premature labeling, though, could well do so.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
below --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: One more comment on Edg's post: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Magicians have fooled folks for 10,000 years, and such types are obsessed with finding new ways to fool more folks. Crop circles being made so quickly by folks who are intent on fooling others about their production methods is, well, very understandable and a far easier explanation to invest in than that something other worldly is a contender of merit on our list of theories. Absolutely, much more understandable and a far easier explanation to invest in (although I'd want to change the phrase in quotes to inexplicable with current knowledge, because, as noted in my earlier post, I don't think they're other worldly). But facts don't necessarily always conform to the comfortable understandable and easier explanation criteria. The other thing I said about the skeptics is that they're *ignorant*, and here too Edg fits the pattern. If Edg had done his homework, he'd know that there are aspects to some of the crop circles that can't be conveniently attributed to fooling abilities on the part of human beans. I discussed some of these--with links--the last time we had this discussion. Edg could find those posts easily by searching for authfriend and crop circles. Then he could take a gander at the links and inform himself. Such acid in your tone, tsk. Why should I inform myself about what I think is an impossibility? If you're going to win this debate, you gotta at least own the topic enough to educate others again and again - like I do when I promote my true knowledge about the Absolute herein. Repeat repeat repeat. But you don't, and I think it's a tell -- not that you're lazy or a bad teacher -- but that you don't have the mojo to plunk down on the table, and so you send folks into the history of the posts -- knowing what a piece of shit the Yahoo search function is. Send folks on a wild goose chase ya does. Shame. Own the fucking topic. Tell us, 1., 2., 3. your top stunners about crop circles -- like: the stems are bent by methods we know not of but it sure isn't a guy with a plank and a rope stomping them down. That statement, fraught with illogic, can at least be examined, but we don't see you ponying up these kinds of items, and instead, we get you putting my personality to shame. Tsk. Your crop circle agnosticism is a know-nothing-ism sham stance. Judy, seriously, do you really mean to say that someone like The Great Randi couldn't make a joke out of the whole notion that there are non-human explanations, and that you'd still be there saying, Nope, could be something non-human? Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed. Chicken shit! Edg If he runs true to form, though, he won't be bothered. Neither did the other skeptics the last time (except for Curtis). Skeptics isn't really the right term here. *I'm* a skeptic, in that I've suspended judgment because we simply don't know enough either way. The others are skeptopaths.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: This is my 50th. We can continue after Friday if you like. Indeed Judy. If it was'nt for you and 2 other posters here I would be long gone.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed. Chicken shit! Edg Edg, Judy nailed you many posts ago on the Crop Circle issue. Give it up.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed. Chicken shit! Edg, Judy nailed you many posts ago on the Crop Circle issue. Give it up. Just as a question, is there *anyone* here on this forum who would like to see Nabby be their only supporter? :-) The only thing more likely to class you irredeem- ibly as a nutcase is to have Willytex on your side. What *I* see in Judy's position is Classic I-Want- To-Believe-In-The-Woo-Woo. It's the very *opposite* of the axiom that Rick chose for the FFL Home Page: What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite. ~ Bertrand Russell Who here believes that Judy really wishes to find out? I, for one, do not. If she were as unattached to non-Woo-Woo explanations for crop circles as she was to Woo-Woo explanations for them, she wouldn't be so defensive. Her ego would not be in play. But it clearly is. So much so that she feels she has to demonize anyone who isn't as open as she is. BULLSHIT. She isn't the *least* bit open. She is *defending* the right to believe in Woo- Woo. JUST as she defends the right to believe that TM is the most effective means of achieving enlight- enment, even though she has never experienced it, and can point to *not a single person on the planet* whom the TM movement has ever acknowledged to be experiencing enlightenment. Edg -- whom, as I think all of you know by now -- I consider a nutcase in his own right, is Right On in this case. It's not Judy's *ostensible* stance that proves her a liar and devoid of self-awareness. It's the *intent* -- the sheer and utter *defensiveness* of her stance -- that shows how much she has *invested* in her right to believe in Woo-Woo. By contrast, I don't much give a shit. Crop circles have as little fascination for me as people who make sculptures out of shit. Yeah, they call themselves artists. Some of them even claim to be inspired during the creation of their shit-art. But in the end, their creations are piles of shit. Crop circles are piles of matted grass. NONE of them do much of anything for me aesthetically, and do even less for me in terms of imagining the great cosmic minds who created them. They're Folk Art. Period. Ho fucking hum. Me, I suspect that ALL of them are *human* Folk Art. Me, I don't know either, but I don't really CARE. They are not important enough *TO* care about, much less to defend what I think about them. Others prefer to believe that they are the result of Forces That We Cannot Understand, and rail against those who don't buy into the I-Want-To-Believe-In- The-Woo-Woo mindset as somehow being threatened by the believers in it, or being challenged by them. I don't think we are. I think we are amused by those who are so attached to believing in Woo-Woo that they perceive those who don't as attacking them, so much so that their stance needs defending. THEY, after all, are the ones reacting defensively. We are not. Who in this scenario really has a wish to find out, and who has a will to believe?
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed. Chicken shit! Edg, Judy nailed you many posts ago on the Crop Circle issue. Give it up. Just as a question, is there *anyone* here on this forum who would like to see Nabby be their only supporter? :-) The only thing more likely to class you irredeem- ibly as a nutcase is to have Willytex on your side. What *I* see in Judy's position is Classic I-Want- To-Believe-In-The-Woo-Woo. It's the very *opposite* of the axiom that Rick chose for the FFL Home Page: What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite. ~ Bertrand Russell I have to say I don't think you've taken in what she said. She is NOT saying she believes in woo-woo! It's Edg that is trying to say Judy you MUST believe in ET. And saying that quite unreasonably I think. ALL Judy is saying is that the out-and-out sceptics have not convinced her. That's all. Quite simple really. And without doubt Russell would have approved (i.e. approved of not rushing-to-believe in woo-woo merely because you're inclined to think *something* unexplained is going on). [snip] Who in this scenario really has a wish to find out, and who has a will to believe? The answer to your question is easy I think: Not the knee-jerk sceptics, and neither the true believers. The Judy attitude seems the most rational and - call me naive as you no doubt will - I find it perfectly sincere.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed. Chicken shit! Edg, Judy nailed you many posts ago on the Crop Circle issue. Give it up. Just as a question, is there *anyone* here on this forum who would like to see Nabby be their only supporter? :-) The only thing more likely to class you irredeem- ibly as a nutcase is to have Willytex on your side. What *I* see in Judy's position is Classic I-Want- To-Believe-In-The-Woo-Woo. It's the very *opposite* of the axiom that Rick chose for the FFL Home Page: What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite. ~ Bertrand Russell I have to say I don't think you've taken in what she said. She is NOT saying she believes in woo-woo! But she is clearly *demonstrating* that she believes in Woo-Woo. THAT is what we are talking about. We don't BELIEVE what Judy says. We believe only what she DOES when she reacts so defensively. It's Edg that is trying to say Judy you MUST believe in ET. I think that in this case Edg is reacting to her ATTACHMENT. That is the thing we see as more indicative of what she really believes than what she says she believes. You have to understand where I am coming from here. I am a firm believer in the adage: Do not believe anything anyone says; believe only what they DO. People say all sorts of shit about what they claim to believe or not believe. But watch what they DO. If they consistently feel the need to defend some- thing that they claim to have no vested interest in? Duh. They are LYING. To themselves, more than anyone else, but LYING nonetheless. In my opinion, of course.
[FairfieldLife] If Maharishi was from an advanced civilization (Re: New Crop Circle)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost1uk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Frankly, I count on your intellect to post stuff here that penetrates the crop circle type of mystery enough to rule out non-human causes, but the fact that you're not doing so is a very strong tell that you are holding back from admitting your beliefs to us here lest you be ridiculed. Chicken shit! Edg, Judy nailed you many posts ago on the Crop Circle issue. Give it up. Just as a question, is there *anyone* here on this forum who would like to see Nabby be their only supporter? :-) The only thing more likely to class you irredeem- ibly as a nutcase is to have Willytex on your side. What *I* see in Judy's position is Classic I-Want- To-Believe-In-The-Woo-Woo. It's the very *opposite* of the axiom that Rick chose for the FFL Home Page: What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite. ~ Bertrand Russell I have to say I don't think you've taken in what she said. She is NOT saying she believes in woo-woo! But she is clearly *demonstrating* that she believes in Woo-Woo. THAT is what we are talking about. We don't BELIEVE what Judy says. We believe only what she DOES when she reacts so defensively. To follow up, Richard, read what Judy actually SAYS in reply to Edg. She keeps berating him (and others) for not reading what I have posted, and reading the links I have posted. Only THEN will Edg (and these others) learn the truth, she implies. And what exactly IS the nature of this truth? Duh. They have to agree with Judy. THAT is the *intent* that causes me to not believe that she is being forthright here. If she were *NOT* attached to her position, and *NOT* firmly attached to it, what would it *matter* what Edg believed, or what anyone else believed? But it DOES. It matters to her so much that she perceives anyone who does *NOT* believe what she believes in this matter as worthy of demonization. I'm sorry, but that is *NOT* objectivity. That is *NOT* walking the walk of her talk. That is trying to cloak a strong belief in Woo-Woo behind a guise of not knowing. If she *really* believed that she didn't know, then what would it *matter* what anyone else thought? If they didn't know, and she does not know, then they are equal. But it clearly DOES matter to her. It matters a LOT. Enough for her to demonize anyone who does not agree with her. Anyone who disagrees with her position is *NOT* equal. Do you see what I'm talking about here? I *understand* that some people place credence in what people *claim* to believe. I really do not. I watch to see what they DO. If what they DO conflicts with what they claim to believe, well...I don't believe that they really believe what they claim to believe. Is that bad? :-)
