--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@
wrote:
After reading the op-ed piece I must admit that his
interview on NPR was more impressive than this piece.
Either I'm missing his point or his
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, goodie. Story time. Tell us the one again about the infinitely
radiant Pride. Ot the ones where particlees collide in this big
chamber and go boom boom! Or one about dragons. I love the ones
about dragons!
LOL.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Janet Luise [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnDrbagYm24
I love Marley, and *on one level* agree
that every little thing is gonna be all
right. However, that level is theorhetical,
and to get to it you seem to have to be
smokin' the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 25, 2007, at 2:14 PM, new.morning wrote:
MMY uses a parallel management and organization change method,
similar to Mao (and perhaps some western businesses).
(snip)
Mao's famous saying, could also easily be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
It's been a kind of revelation, realizing that
random violence is *not* an ever-present possi-
bility. I walk where I want, when I want, in all
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@
wrote:
snip
THIS IS SHOTOKAN (that I learned, and these are just people
trying to qualify for black belt or 2nd dan)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The videos on your tape were students in point matches and highly
choreographed demos with people playing the part of an attacker but
then giving no resistance and rolling out of the way when the
master
touched
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@
wrote:
Tell that to Arjunalol !3 million people drawn up on the
battlefield ready for COMPLETE anihilation, and he is in the
middle of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those are some violent fantasies you have there. You might want to
get that checked. In the meantime I'll put you down for a no for
any evidence in your corner other than shop worn claims from 1960's
editions of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This verse is often quoted by Samkhya philosophers. Here, it seems,
the
first part of the Tativa-samasa is ended, containing a list of the
twentyfive Tattvas, in the three divisions of Prakritis, Vikaras, and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
The videos on your tape were students in point matches and highly
choreographed demos with people playing the part of an attacker
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill emptybill@
wrote:
This verse is often quoted by Samkhya philosophers. Here, it
seems,
the
first part of the Tativa-samasa is ended, containing a list of
Nice story.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@
wrote:
Actually, as I recall, perhaps incorrectly, that you wished I would
never use your name again.
I replied to your post in which
On Nov 26, 2007, at 3:58 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 25, 2007, at 2:14 PM, new.morning wrote:
MMY uses a parallel management and organization change method,
similar to Mao (and perhaps some western businesses).
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@
wrote:
Actually, as I recall, perhaps incorrectly, that you wished I would
never use your name again.
I replied to your post in which you had said I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@
wrote:
After reading the op-ed piece I must admit that his
interview on NPR was
It would be an interesting thing in my opinion to have
a Meditation Smack-down Match, in which advanced
practitioners of several techniques sit in a room
together and go for samadhi, each of them hooked up
to EEG machines and other testing devices to see if
anything is happening on any other level
No, the question is, *why* is the universe apparently
orderly? Religionists say, That's just how God designed
it. Science says, That's just how it is.
I still don't see the parallel here Judy. One is saying that they do
know why and one is saying that they don't know why. They couldn't be
more
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xp7E3OjhD1U
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, I might suggest that Off's count of 3 million
people drawn up on the battlefield of the Bhagavad-Gita
should give people a clue as to the reality of his one
punch and you're out theory of fighting. :-)
But the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
All is one and perfect as it is is a
valid point of view IMO, but only IF that
is really one's daily perception. And even
then, it is valid only for the being whose
perception is on that level, and only during
the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be an interesting thing in my opinion to have
a Meditation Smack-down Match, in which advanced
practitioners of several techniques sit in a room
together and go for samadhi, each of them hooked up
to EEG
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings
no_reply@
wrote:
snip
THIS IS SHOTOKAN (that I learned, and these are just people
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@
wrote:
Oh, goodie. Story time. Tell us the one again about the
infinitely
radiant Pride. Ot the ones where particlees collide in this big
chamber and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
It would be an interesting thing in my opinion to have
a Meditation Smack-down Match, in which advanced
practitioners of several
Go Figure
Trying to Guess What Happens Next
By PETER S. GOODMAN
Published: November 25, 2007 NYT
YOU need not be a Wall Street chieftain to feel the anxiety that has
wrapped its arms around the American economy. The stock market seems
locked in a downward spiral as one bank after another suffers
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be an interesting thing in my opinion to have
a Meditation Smack-down Match, in which advanced
practitioners of several techniques sit in a room
together and go for samadhi, each of them hooked up
to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I'll follow up on this because the more I think
about it, the more parallels I see to the TM
approach to meditation and self-discovery.
Not only is the tradition not willing to put itself
on the line with regard
LOL! good one! Yes, enlightenment is one big fantasy, designed to
make those who have worked so hard to achieve this state feel good
and disassociate from Reality! Whoo HA! See if you can sell that
load of malarkey to someone-- oh wait, you just bought it-- LOL!
I am just talking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
LOL! good one! Yes, enlightenment is one big fantasy, designed to
make those who have worked so hard to achieve this state feel good
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LOL! good one! Yes, enlightenment is one big fantasy, designed to
make those who have worked so hard to achieve this state feel good
and disassociate from Reality! Whoo HA! See if you can sell that
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, the question is, *why* is the universe apparently
orderly? Religionists say, That's just how God designed
it. Science says, That's just how it is.
I still don't see the parallel here Judy. One is saying
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've suggested before in this thread, I
think that it's a *perfect* analog of the
way that TMers believe that their technique
is the best, and that the ME creates
invincibility.
*Some* TMers.
The ones in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
No, the question is, *why* is the universe apparently
orderly? Religionists say, That's just how God designed
it. Science says,
They're identical, actually, in that neither answers
the why? question. *Why* did God design the universe
to be orderly?
Just how it is and Just how God designed it are
synonymous, when you think about it: how it is is how
God designed it; how God designed it is how it is.
There's no
BTW do you believe that the rapture of Christianity is a fantasy?
Same thing for me so far about enlightenment. But perhaps someone
will hover in the air someday and I can happily amend my opinion.
And may the someone be Maria Sharipova, or Kiera Knightly.
And may they hover just
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
No, the question is, *why* is the universe apparently
orderly?
Jim: from the perspective of dense waking state, it does sound ludicrous
doesn't it? I'd stick to material science if I were you.
On a serious note Jim:
If you can understand this you will understand why you get accused of
using your self proclaimed state of consciousness as a position of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
Just how it is and Just how God designed it are
NOT synonymous. One implies that things were designed
and the other does not.
I'm kinda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They're identical, actually, in that neither answers
the why? question. *Why* did God design the universe
to be orderly?
Just how it is and Just how God designed it are
synonymous, when you think about
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
Just how it is and Just how God designed it are
NOT synonymous. One implies
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Nice story.
You just said, To me, anything with words is a story. Even OM / AUM
has its story ---
and is a story. If you take your stories so serious as to believe them
to be something else, then, as you please.
If
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Well, I certainly hope this happens. I wish Dr.
Alvarez the best.
But I have a sneaking suspicion that
this will be the last that we ever hear about this.
MMY has trained his Rajas to be like him: they value
the idea
On Nov 25, 2007, at 8:56 PM, new.morning wrote:
If 3 million warriors had come bent on anihilating me, it may cause me
to ponder what i did to piss so many people off so much.
Or you could simply get into a whole lot of rationalizing, new, as
in ...Well, at least it's not *4* million...
On Nov 25, 2007, at 9:38 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
Too bad no one seems to be able to
live up to his own bold claim and now has to make excuses for why
their internal states don't come with demonstrable party favors.
I don't know what you mean, Curtis...mine comes with all sorts of
party
On Nov 25, 2007, at 10:34 PM, new.morning wrote:
...by the bye, OMGAkashaNewMonitor, I seem to remember that you
recently claimed you found me boring
I did just get a new monitor. How did you know? That omniscience is
really kicking into high gear.
That's just a warm-up for Rory and Jim,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It should be, IMO. How you and Curtis manage the patience to wade
through their insufferably boring tracts is truly beyond me.
Sal
Go Know yourself, Sal -- and I don't mean just in the Biblical sense :-)
new.morning wrote:
This seems to be a quite powerful and apt analogy to spiritual
traditions and their one punch knockouts of ignorance and bondage. A
UFC of masters of pure traditions would be interesting. More to the
point would be having them come up against cross-training masters.
I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
Just
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo
richardhughes103@ wrote:
I don't think he has a point, just a misunderstanding about
how we know what is from what isn't, laws are explanations
of observations
I think I came late to this party. When do we drop
acid?
--- Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 25, 2007, at 9:38 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
Too bad no one seems to be able to
live up to his own bold claim and now has to make
excuses for why
their internal states don't come
By these exchanges I see that Davies' point is either
trivial, not clear or no point at all!
--- hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo
richardhughes103@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nailing someone besides yourself is fun, too, but I suspect that
hasn't happened for you
for quite some time, even though your obvious creative ability could
put someone else in
simultaneous ecstasy with you -
On Nov 26, 2007, at 12:22 PM, Peter wrote:
By these exchanges I see that Davies' point is either
trivial, not clear or no point at all!
Post of the week--I think you've just given a perfect description of
most of the discussions on FFL, Peter.
Sal
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo
richardhughes103@ wrote:
I don't think he has a point, just a misunderstanding about
how we
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By these exchanges I see that Davies' point is either
trivial, not clear or no point at all!
That's definitely what you'd see in what hugheshugo
says. And you're right, it's obviously not clear to
either of you.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim: from the perspective of dense waking state, it does sound
ludicrous
doesn't it? I'd stick to material science if I were you.
On a serious note Jim:
If you can understand this you will understand
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016
mainstream20016@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
snip
(I'm pretty sure it's beyond you, Barry, but Curtis
might find
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LOL! good one! Yes, enlightenment is one big fantasy, designed
to
make those who have worked so hard to achieve this state feel
good
and disassociate from Reality! Whoo HA! See if you can sell
that
Credentials, as you pointed out to me not too long ago, are irrelevant.
authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Credentials, as you pointed out to me not too long ago, are
irrelevant.
Uh, that isn't what I pointed out to you, Angela.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote:
By these exchanges I see that Davies' point is either
trivial, not clear or no point at all!
That's definitely what you'd see in what hugheshugo
On Nov 26, 2007, at 2:47 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
I doubt that very much Curtis. There are people on this forum that
would and do renounce the reality of enlightenment, no matter what
is presented to them. Why? Because all enlightenment is, is a
radical departure from how we see ourselves in
Then you should have.
authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Credentials, as you pointed out to me not too long ago, are
irrelevant.
Uh, that isn't what I pointed out to you,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am certainly not surprised that it's clear to you, Judy, as you
obviously Understand that (y)our consciousness contains it all, but I
must say I am a little surprised that another Dead guy claims that
he doesn't
Is it possible to perceive the world without the filter of concepts? If that's
the case, why does someone blind from birth who gains sight have to learn to
see?
Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 26, 2007, at 2:47 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
I doubt that very
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excuse me, Dr. Pete; I mean to say, maybe you have forgotten what
the
world looks like to those who don't know they are No-one yet?
Questioning the hitherto-unquestioned assumption that there is an
external order to
I thought about the particular passage Vaj has taken exception to
when I wrote it, because I am making a relative comparison, not an
absolute one. To say that enlightenment is a state where all prior
knowledge disappears is not accurate, and this isn't what I meant.
There seems to be a basic
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then you should have.
If you think credentials are irrelevant, why do
you keep making such a big deal of yours?
(BTW, if you'd been following the thread, you'd
know I raised the credentials issue only because
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@
wrote:
Excuse me, Dr. Pete; I mean to say, maybe you have forgotten
what
the
world looks like to those who don't know they are No-one yet?
Questioning
to be able to BE homeless living in a burned out car all right of
course required lots of steel wool to the ego. .
Beyond the snappy tune PURE TRUE lyrics this is a great video
showing the reality of ONEness regardless of outer circumstance.
The Crystal Cathedral, TMO etc always try
I stopped when you took me to task for it. You were right to do so.
authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then you should have.
If you think credentials are irrelevant, why do
http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/
I don't know how to explain this video of the BBC reporting the
collapse of Building 7 before it fell -- in fact the reporter shows
the skyline and Building 7 is still RIGHT THERE while she's talking
about it having gone down.
I don't know how fresh this report is
On Paul Davies and his essay for the NY Times:
http://tinyurl.com/2o9fc7
I'd take exception to a number of things
that Paul Davies said in this article.
Physics does not accept the universality
and immutability of physical laws on faith.
It's an empirical observation that Nature
behaves
Further research shows that this is an old report and that this issue
has been bouncing around since Feb 2007 at least judging by the Web
site dating I've been able to track down.
But the question still remains. I have not found any explanations by
the BBC or other authorities to discount this
http://tinyurl.com/2a96ol
Try this out.
Just to be honest, I flunked it too.
Edg
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
The videos on your tape were students in point matches and highly
choreographed demos with people playing the part of an attacker
but
Duveyoung wrote:
Further research shows that this is an old report and that this issue
has been bouncing around since Feb 2007 at least judging by the Web
site dating I've been able to track down.
But the question still remains. I have not found any explanations by
the BBC or other
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@
wrote:
Tell that to Arjunalol !3 million people drawn up on
the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
Those are some violent fantasies you have there. You might want
to
get that checked. In the meantime I'll put you down for a no
for
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Addenda et corrigenda:
sattva-rajas-tamasaaM saamyaavasthaa prakRtiH prakRter
mahaan mahato 'haMkaaro *'haMkaaraat* pañca *tanmaatraaNy*
ubhayam
indriyam indriyebhyaH
Oh, shit! That should be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those are some violent fantasies you have there.
They are not fantasies, just realities which your arrogance and ego
cannot accept. The enlightened see the pearly white teeth in
everything, the unenlightened see
On Nov 26, 2007, at 3:18 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
I thought about the particular passage Vaj has taken exception to
when I wrote it, because I am making a relative comparison, not an
absolute one. To say that enlightenment is a state where all prior
knowledge disappears is not accurate, and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You just don't understand martial arts Turq.
You have no idea of the bone shattering power, or organ collapsing
danger a Shotokan fighter is trained to give on the first strike.
Wanna bet which of us has a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
When you say, actually tickled and stirred Me, don't you mean
with
a particular sensation of bliss? The reason I ask is that I find it
quite easy sometimes to put my attention on a particular individual
and feel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@
wrote:
You just don't understand martial arts Turq.
You have no idea of the bone shattering power, or organ collapsing
danger a Shotokan fighter
Edg, the laws of the universe went zooey that day in all kinds of ways. a
Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/
I don't know how to explain this video of the BBC reporting the
collapse of Building 7 before it fell -- in fact the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, delia555 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Paul Davies and his essay for the NY Times:
http://tinyurl.com/2o9fc7
I'd take exception to a number of things
that Paul Davies said in this article.
Thanks for actually addressing some of what he says.
I don't
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
It would be an interesting thing in my opinion to have
a
and that's even before I hit the Ecstasy
Anytime Sal. I'll bring the raver glow sticks!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Nov 25, 2007, at 9:38 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
Too bad no one seems to be able to
live up to his own bold claim and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Further research shows that this is an old report and that this
issue has been bouncing around since Feb 2007 at least judging
by the Web site dating I've been able to track down.
But the question still remains. I
Turq's condescension apparently escaped your sensitivity to being
offended-- which leads to an obvious conclusion-- that you are not
offended by comments which no matter how condescending, are in line
with your values.
My reply was meant to say, Yes, I understand how you didn't
understand a word
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@
wrote:
You just don't understand martial arts Turq.
You have no idea of the bone shattering power, or organ
collapsing
danger a Shotokan
Home sales fall in 47 states; rise in Vermont again !
Vermont Rocks ! ! !
http://tinyurl.com/364svt
OffWorld
My common sense doesn't tell me there is a benign explanation. Nor have you
offered one.
authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Further research shows that this is an old report and that
You think it is peculiar that it was reported before
it happened? Makes you wonder HUH?
Try this one on. No planes ever hit WTC 7, nor was it
crushed by any falling buildings. Yet it too fell in
its own footprint. From what/
Even if you were to believe a fire could bring down
WTC 1 and 2,
It was obvious on the day it happened. Buildings don't fall onto their own
footprints because a plane hits them. Concrete doesn't turn to dust (rather
than rubble) because a plane hits the building. Those two facts were enough to
give the lie to the official story.
steven klayman [EMAIL
Er, Judy, just how much common sense does it take?
Either the BBC made the report 23 minutes ahead of the fall of Bldg 7
or it didn't.
I can only think that the entire video is faked and that those
reporters are mere actors employed to make the fake video -- or that
someone clever with video
When I quoted G. Spencer Brown (British mathematician) in response to the
Davies piece, Judy assumed I had not read the thing. My comment was that it is
absurd to posit something outside of the universe. So maybe a longer quote
from Spence Brown will make my point clearer. This work was
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
