and nonpolemical, I may decide to comment.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
--In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Barry, I know you're upset because your hero Curtis didn't have the decisive
victory you were hoping for,
C: I figured
Happy Easter Birthday for these chicks! Very appropriate timing.
I looked a couple of times but haven't seen her feeding the chicks yet. For
awhile there was what looked as though a whole egg had somehow rolled out from
under her and was sitting at a little distance all by itself. I just
Comments below...
One reason I don't rule paranormal stuff out is that I'm not convinced
science knows how to test for some of it. I could not possibly disagree more
strongly with the notion that only what is measurable is real. Actually,
measuring (in the broadest sense) is the only
Hate to say it, Salyavin, but it looks like somebody messed with your gal.
Here's a photo of the same British Museum sculpture from Wikipedia:
She doesn't look at all disgruntled in this photo. Wha' hoppen?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
.
Still one unhatched egg, though. One of the three chicks she's feeding must
have come out of the shell I saw earlier.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Happy Easter Birthday for these chicks! Very appropriate timing.
I looked a couple of times but haven't seen her
; she's now settled down over the little beauties.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Oh, she's feeding them, right this instant! Hubby must have brought some grub.
Shame there's no microphone; it would be fun to hear their peeps. They look
like they're making quite
.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Hard to guess how much of this from Curtis is self-deception, and how much of
it is an attempt to deceive readers here.
I must admit I completely missed that Curtis's objection to Feser is Feser's
opposition to gay rights
* will be bringing in the *take-out*.
On Sunday, April 20, 2014 2:36 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:
Mike, a minute ago she scooted out of the nest carrying something fairly
substantial in her beak that she apparently deposited outside somewhere.
Couldn't see what it was; could it have been
What are the implications? For the nature of consciousness, perhaps for
reincarnation?
First paragraph of an excerpt from the book Struck By Genius: How a Brain
Injury Made Me a Mathematical Marvel
it right at the beginning? Because philosophical thought evolves
as people become aware of issues.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
It occurs to me that I should make this additional point: If Curtis can
effectively deal with the classical theism argument, he'll
Oh, isn't she lovely! She looks like she knows something's about to happen.
Maybe the chicks are beginning to tap on the shells? I'm done, let me out of
here!
Do send a post when they actually start to hatch. I'll keep checking too.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mdixon.6569@...
This is a good one:
Appeal to Ridicule
Presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear absurd.
Faith in God is like believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
Opsie.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
Something to bear in mind
Starting the day with an Oooopsie: Barry doesn't even know what McCarthyism
was:
Just to point it out to those who still don't get it, highlighted below in red
is another classic example of Judy's intellectual McCarthyism ploy. I have in
my hand a list of detailed refutations of each of
Barry is such a buffoon. This is much funnier than he can possibly imagine.
Remember, I was in constant private contact with Robin; I know why he left.
(Curtis does too, but he'll never admit it.)
Now ask Curtis why he left shortly thereafter, Barry.
No, never mind, he'll lie.
It
What annoys theists is the arrogant ignorance of the vocal few atheists (who
have, of course, a much grander goal than watching theists react--they want to
stamp out theism for good).
I don't believe in the kind of God Barry imagines all theists agree on, so I
can't answer his question
Of course, back in the day, the complaint was that the TMO overlooked People
With Problems and focused on the secure and well-to-do. That fact appears to
have been wiped from Barry's memory.
Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to
regular people, who
One of the very few unequivocally accurate statements Barry has made in this
discussion:
NOTHING could fit better into the description can't really be resolved one
way or another than the existence of God.
But it's perfectly OK for atheists to try to get theists to believe what the
atheists do?
As I've said, people are free to believe whatever they bloody well choose to
believe that helps them get through the day. As I've also said, however, they
cross a line when they attempt to get me to
Er, Barry, this was one of the fallacies listed on your chart.
Oopsie again.
But it IS absurd, and *exactly* like believing in either Santa Claus or the
Tooth Fairy. If you disagree, produce either of these supposed beings. Or the
other one, for that matter. :-)
From: authfriend
I can't find the Hawking post on Feser's blog. Do you perhaps have a link? He
did publish a review of Hawking's book on National Review Online; could that be
where you saw it? It was apparently for subscribers only. Are you a subscriber
to NRO?
Hawking's contention that philosophy is dead is
understand this point.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I can't resist highlighting this example of Curtis's typical hypocrisy; it's
so blatant:
You know what you COULD have done? Presented why you find classical theism to
be the strongest version of the god idea
If classical theism is wrong, the universe is no different, of course. Is that
what you really meant to ask?
Here's a question for you:
Try assuming that this classical god theory is wrong and whatever it is that
it does - or did - stops, or never started. In what way is the universe
.
Even your insults are parroted from someone else.
To Ann:Might be the school break schedule. i have more time over the holidays.
Kids were out this week.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Sorry
nothing, because a law like gravity is responsible for the universe.
If this is it, it's wrong because...?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I can't find the Hawking post on Feser's blog. Do
Standard Curtis context-shifting. He can't respond to my point, so he shifts
the context and claims it's a straw man (even though he had insisted on
precisely what I addressed).
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
-In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend
Looks like they did write that sentence.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Is this it?
As I showed in my review of their book The Grand Design
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/?q=MjAxMDExMjk
to find out if anything is true. After all if you look at past
science, almost none of what was done has turned out to be true. Science has
replaced religious belief with a more precise version of wishful thinking.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Is this it?
As I
exists, why we exist.”
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
It appears they are using nothing to mean something different from the
philosophical nothing of ex nihilo, in which quantum fluctuations and/or
gravity would not be nothing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
An exhibition of how Curtis twists what one says:
j: Curtis is indeed very sharp, and anyone who tangles with him is in for a
hassle because he knows how to twist an argument into ingenious corkscrews. As
I've pointed out before, one won't be able to see what he does until one has
tangled
So I still don't know what Feser said that you thought was wrong...
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
It's deja vu all over again!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
BTW, the review of the book I cited for Salyavin quotes
See below...
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
As an example, if there is a God, and He/She/It has a PLAN for all of this,
how is it that all these atheists aren't part of it? Were they created by
physics, maybe starting with a primer about cosmology
like the first 3 minutes book I recommended earlier.
That's it, I'm done with Ed Fess and his funny ideas.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
So I still don't know what Feser said that you thought
definition
is also metaphysical.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote (to salyavin808):
1. Remember Gould's phrase, nonoverlapping magisteria?
2. What do you mean by real? Define it, please.
Perhaps you
Did you misread this, Michael? The study being criticized was a
government-funded report, not a TM study. Read the first sentence again.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote :
Here is what the real world thinks of all your precious science about TM:
Top researchers
Maharishi used the analogy of a falling leaf. It doesn't go straight down but
from side to side, so it takes longer to hit the ground than if it were, say,
an acorn. If you were a leaf, presumably you'd have more time to appreciate the
surrounding environment as you fell from layer to layer.
He did indeed, Share. It's in the back matter of his Gita
translation/commentary. And I suspect he made the same point elsewhere as well.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote :
wgm4u, didn't Maharishi once explain that by doing TM one was actually
practicing all 8
I can't resist highlighting this example of Curtis's typical hypocrisy; it's so
blatant:
You know what you COULD have done? Presented why you find classical theism to
be the strongest version of the god idea. You know, like a real discussion of
ideas between people who disagree but like to
:
Is that it? No argument whatsoever? But then you didn't have one going in to
the discussion so why would you have one at the end. Business as usual.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
(snip all kinds of nonsense)
You do realize this is a metaphysical, not a scientific
leave the junkyard dog act here, they seem like a civilised bunch and
I didn't notice any sneering, badmouthing or withering insults.
Let us know how you get on!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I was just about positive you wouldn't admit your assertion
see you are reduced to your usual nitpicking in order to mask the fact you
have no argument.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
BTW, it's Feser, not Fess. I corrected you once on this already. It's not
really such a difficult name to spell.
And I notice from the Ed
You mean, the post where I pointed out to Salyavin that he was hanging his hat
on metaphysics rather than science?
BTW, I haven't noticed that Salyavin has any hesitation about paying attention
to me. He did start this discussion, after all, and he sure doesn't seem as
though he's ready to
:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
You mean, the post where I pointed out to Salyavin that he was hanging his hat
on metaphysics rather than science?
I was impressed, it was a damn good way of getting out of answering the
question. Again. And laden with your usual insults
where the laws of physics are inadequate compared to theism or
shut the fuck up.
We're waiting.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Yet another atheist wannabe who simply cannot lower himself to reading enough
philosophy to realize the incoherence of one of his
Yo, Oopsie Boy, starting out on the blooper trail pretty early this
morning, ain'cha? Remember, the lurking reporters are watching.
You dimwit, you can't disbelieve in an idea, dumbfuck or otherwise, when you
don't know what the idea is.
You aren't going to get it from Salyavin,
Tell you what, I'll take a stab at it after you've made a post here giving a
complete explanation of quantum mechanics.
As I pointed out to Barry just now, I've already given you the core principle
of the argument--many times, in fact: Classical theists hold that what they
call God is not a
What tricks?? That was your trick, buster, not mine. Came straight out of
left field. You have a deeply dishonest habit of putting words in my mouth and
then berating me for things I never said.
What you attributed to me makes no sense. It would be like saying meteorology
is inadequate
Just a reminder; here's what he said:
Either tell us where the laws of physics are inadequate compared to theism or
shut the fuck up.
Jeez, talk about a pointless exercise!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
What tricks?? That was your trick, buster, not mine
P.S.: Either you just made up what you attributed to me in a malicious attempt
to make me look stupid, or your thinking has been going off in the wrong
direction, at least where classical theism is concerned. There is no conflict
whatsoever between classical theism and science, including the
Xeno's fine in this post. I'll just respond to Barry, because what he says
requires correction. (What else is new?)
This reply is also specifically for Anartaxius, and is *not* to be used as a
springboard for Judy Stein to use it as an opportunity to reply to him while
still pretending to
(snip all kinds of nonsense)
You do realize this is a metaphysical, not a scientific, statement, do you not?
So the only way it isn't in conflict with science is because it isn't
measurable. And if it isn't measurable it isn't real.
BTW, it's Feser, not Fess. I corrected you once on this already. It's not
really such a difficult name to spell.
And I notice from the Ed Fess blog
What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is
the exact opposite. ~ Bertrand Russell
I do believe you've quoted this from the FFL home page approvingly a number of
times here. Doesn't really seem to describe your attitude toward theism, I'm
afraid.
I
I just love it when Barry decides to deliver the opinions we all know and love
about something he hasn't read being discussed in a thread he hasn't been
following.
In fact, of course, one of Ehrenreich's major realizations--and reasons she
wrote the Times essay and the book--was that she
Well, no, that isn't my definition of his lack of integrity. Want to try again?
This is what is called pre-biasing the audience. I suspect that the very
*definition* of Randi's supposed lack of integrity is the fact that he thinks
people who believe this shit are all mad.
in this wishy-washy green that I've gone off already but can't be
bothered to change...
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
FWIW, this was a long time ago; the Amherst course (the first World Peace
Assembly) took place in 1979. For whatever reason, the TMO decided
believe in one god less gambit thinking it was a
coherent defense of atheism did not have a complete philosophical education.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I don't think you know what you're
Looks like those two pieces pushed a few buttons around here...
At least Salyavin bothered to read them. But he has no more acquaintance with
philosophical theology or philosophy of consciousness than the Dawkins crowd.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote :
For
I'm guessing she meant assess, not access.
salyavin, your mystical experience sounds quite wonderful and you say it
stayed with you. In light of your scientific leanings, how do you access it
now? Hormonal changes as you say?
I don't access it now, it happened when I was young but the
...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
You may want to massage this thesis a bit, Salyavin, because it doesn't make a
lot of sense as you've written it.
Although Curtis was a philosophy major at MIU (as I recall), he seemed to be
missing a whole chunk
oneself about that which does not exist? :-)
From: authfriend@... authfriend@...
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 5:53 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Studying the numinous
It really is astounding, Salyavin, how willing--almost eager--you are to
flaunt your
Oh, and Curtis too, apparently. Not to mention the Dawkins crowd.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Ooopsie. You forgot to add that we (Salyavin and I) know of.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
Judy, I think Salyavin is trying
Maybe there's only one world and you usually see only part of it?
Ah, I still get that stunned feeling that hits you in your gut and that sense
of wonder about just...how? How there can be two worlds when I only usually see
one...?
wrote :
Yawn. Wake me up when you've actually posted a strong argument for that idea.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
It really is astounding, Salyavin, how willing--almost eager--you are to
flaunt your ignorance.
See, here's the thing: If you want to make
would be clearer to the
uninitiated if he used It instead of He.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I believe I've already explained why one god less is incoherent, in the
process exposing all kinds of ideas you had about what God is said to be that
are refuted
fabric of their own beliefs. That's be true science!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Maybe there's only one world and you usually see only part of it?
Ah, I still get that stunned feeling that hits you in your gut and that sense
of wonder about just...how
you mean! That's funny!
Sounds like you've got a perfect I win every argument clause, just what you
always wanted!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I believe I've already explained why one god less is incoherent, in the
process exposing all kinds
philosophy as he does?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
P.S.: Here's a good place to start:
http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/search?q=%22one+god+less%22
http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/search?q=%22one+god+less%22
Note: Feser does not use the male pronoun to refer
Third Opsie! for Barry today. He seems to have missed the fact that I've
referred Salyavin to sources that do explain what I mean, but that Salyavin has
refused to read. Which one of us is feeble-minded, again?
Pretty funny charge coming from a person who lacks the intellect to
Uh, what?? You're waiting on a treatise from me on why scientific methods are
inadequate compared to classical theism?
That's sort of like waiting for a treatise on why a pregnancy test is
inadequate compared to the Pythagorean Theorem.
I'm going to stay optimistic and wait for a
be bothered to get dragged into another yet another tedious groundhog
day with you.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Er, no. Look, I know it's difficult for you to have your ignorance exposed
like this
Yawn.
BTW, I didn't start this discussion with Salyavin; he did. (There you go,
Barry, I just saved you an Oopsie.)
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Like Curtis, Salyavin tends to become intellectually dishonest when he
encounters any kind of conflict.
If anyone
Exactly what is a divinity?
This is where atheists, especially those with pretensions to scientific
understanding but who are deficient in philosophy, tend to get all tangled up
and become incoherent, saying things like I just believe in one less divinity
than you do.
---In
is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that
may never be questioned.' — source unknown
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Exactly what is a divinity?
This is where atheists, especially those with pretensions to scientific
understanding
.
On Sun, 4/13/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@...
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Jyotish
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, April 13, 2014, 5:04 AM
Oh
-plants-on-the-moon-by-2015-if-they-can-thrive-we-probably-can-too-8972642.html
The trees in space is one of many from the NASA site, I chose it coz of
similarites but there are loads of experiments going on or planned.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Thanks
I fell so hard for Bruce Dern in that film. It's one of my favorites too, and I
agree it's held up well.
Huey, Dewey, and Louie clearly served as prototypes for R2-D2.
Ah, that's one of my favourites! I remember being in tears first time I saw
it. But I was only 12 so that's OK. Those
online. You could see if it is there. I think both
David Orme-Johnson's website and MUM have it.
L
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
The study I had in mind (don't know if it was ever published, don't remember
where I read about it, maybe in MSVS?) took the EEG
Perhaps the TMO can take credit for our not having to endure what would have
been Romney's policies.
Oh, really? And that is your view of Obama? I remind you that when Obama was
elected there was a huge celebration in the Domes in Fairfield with the TMO
taking credit for his
A fascinating exchange of views...
Opinion piece in the NYTimes by Barbara Ehrenreich, rationalist author and
political activist (and atheist), about the change in her perspective on life
wrought gradually over many years by a mystical experience she had as an
adolescent (note: at age 73,
.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
Comments in this wishy-washy green that I've gone off already but can't be
bothered to change...
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
FWIW, this was a long time ago; the Amherst course (the first World
is.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote :
Judy, wonderful post. I loved Ross Douthat's article.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
A fascinating exchange of views...
Opinion piece in the NYTimes by Barbara Ehrenreich, rationalist author and
political
and be
surprised over and over at the way it affects me. It's all new to me and I
find it fascinating.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Glad you enjoyed it, Emily. It certainly is an unusual pair of pieces to
appear in the NYTimes! Her new book, from which she
as it is. I can pick it up and open it to any place and be
surprised over and over at the way it affects me. It's all new to me and I
find it fascinating.
authfriend as a meditator charitably writes:
Glad you enjoyed it, Emily. It certainly is an unusual pair of pieces to
appear
to rule out first
Ah, if only the plural of anecdote was data...
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Thank you. How about his second question, do you have any comments on that?
I mean, in theory, just about anything could be seen as potentially a siddhi,
when
foolish as to not
being able to read the writings on the wall.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
As we know, Barry wasn't kicked out of either group. He left of his own
accord.
Right. He left of his own accord rather than being kicked out. End of story
your mind back, this conversation is about how the TMO will use
anything to promote its woo woo claims. The forest fire was another example.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
I do remember that, yes. And so...what? Were you thinking I'd have endorsed
that claim? Did you
Not to mention a faiure by the Professional Writer among us to spell-check his
post...
Judy will probably feel the need to point out that none of the pandits were 9
months old, so this is an attempt to lie and misleed. :-) Best line:
Musa Khan
(grin) That would be failure, not faiure.
Not to mention a faiure by the Professional Writer among us to spell-check his
post...
Judy will probably feel the need to point out that none of the pandits were 9
months old, so this is an attempt to lie and misleed. :-) Best line:
This is for you, Emily:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQBUChBG98Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQBUChBG98Q
Ha. It was a beautiful line from Share to Emily, I thought. No one dismisses
her posts better than Share does.
Well, took you long enough! I first posted
Yes, serial farthing was a classic of its kind, perhaps never to be outdone
by anyone..
(grin) That would be failure, not faiure.
Not to mention a faiure by the Professional Writer among us to spell-check his
post...
Still, it doesn't come close to outdoing his serial
Tokyo (AFP) - A cosmic mystery is uniting monks and scientists in Japan after a
cherry tree grown from a seed that orbited the Earth for eight months bloomed
years earlier than expected -- and with very surprising flowers.
The four-year-old sapling -- grown from a cherry stone that spent
in one go,
normally radiational changes are destructive but who knows? Whereas most things
get mutated too much and die, one gene in the right place gets zapped and two
major differences occur.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
Tokyo (AFP) - A cosmic mystery is uniting
When and where did he give these alleged lectures, Michael? How many were
there? What's your source?
was that when the big reesh was giving lectures on what a great guy Adolph
was?
://www.scholarpedia.org/article/EEG_microstates#Event-related_microstates
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/EEG_microstates#Event-related_microstates
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
(I think you meant obviously not.) I mentioned it because I thought
Bhairitu might
, if they survive the
cosmic rays we might.
Maybe this cherry tree is has had a perfectly normal type of mutation like the
four leafed clover? It just happened to be on the ISS at the time. Way beyond
my meagre ken.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote :
What puzzles me
I seriously doubt anyone here defends sati, on any grounds.
You know, Michael, it seems as if your fantasies of some terrible breach of
human decency, as here, are as real to you as an actual breach.
I am sure Buck and that idiot Nabby will find something satvic in it and
defend it as
Oh, gee, sorry to tell you, Michael, but that accusation is hurled at astrology
generally, not just jyotish--usually by people who know very little about
astrology, in which certain particularly intense configurations can be either
very positive or very negative. transformation being the
Please note, lurking reporters, here's another one for you:
No, Barry, sorry, you're lying. You can't cite even a mistake I made about the
history of the TM-Sidhi courses. I had to correct you.
I don't lie; I don't have to. That's your game. What I do is find and expose
your lies, as
One hopes you didn't tell these lurking reporters that this article reveals
significant similarities between CoS and the TMO, because that wouldn't be
true. The folks here who know what the TMO is really like would just laugh, but
outsiders might not know enough to recognize such an attempted
Being a skeptic is hard. It’s not easy to try to weigh evidence for everything,
be methodical, critical, aware of bias, and come to a conclusion that you’re
willing to drop if better evidence comes along. Worse, many times the things
you are being skeptical of are cherished beliefs and values
101 - 200 of 25156 matches
Mail list logo
