26648 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 8:26am (Reply to #20926)
sierra skier
Offline
-
ID
Joined: Apr 16, 2013
1324
4546

AGXIIK wrote: but the fact is

AGXIIK wrote:

but the fact is I imbibe infrequently and in moderation. A good whisky is a nice tipple. A gin and tonic delightful

My liver is happy. All functions are good though milk thistle sounds like a good palliative.

There was a time 40 years ago when I was anything but abstentious; until I quit my wicked wicked ways. 3 tobacco farmers went to soy beans, General Brewing filed chapter 11 and the state of Michoacan defaulted on its Eurobonds.

The echoes of youthful indulgences still catch my attention, make me a bit wistful as I reflect on those times; fortunately the draw of intoxication is a reflection in the rear view mirror of age.

Well said. I too went through the issues with tobacco, alcohol and pot. I too grew out of the habits or addictions and have resolved myself to the one beer a day enjoyment. Yes Budweiser stock went down when I quit. We are both fortunate enough to have gotten out of those habits with most of our health.

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 8:39am (Reply to #20917)
sierra skier
Offline
-
ID
Joined: Apr 16, 2013
1324
4546

Green Lantern wrote:Today I

 OOPS

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 8:52am (Reply to #20942)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

sierra skier wrote: People

sierra skier wrote:

People are rude, trashy and inconsiderate. This woman has no thoughts of anyone else around her and can't see through her horse blinders. It is this type of person who would not buss her table after finishing and just walk off leaving her trash for someone else. In a traffic pattern (where I most often see these kind of folks) they mess up the normal flow pattern by blocking lanes with no consideration for others. I refer to it as wearing the (Bozo) wig. They have no idea they are causing others inconvenience and many couldn't even care less. They just have no concept of courtesy to others or personal pride.

The world is filled with them. I could spend everyday giving you a list of acts of the walking dead.

Throwing garbage on the ground, or dumping household garbage infront of business's for them to clean up. Not holding the door for people. A guy that has 6 metro cards and doesn't know which one has any money while he tests them all on the turnstile during rush hour instead of using the machine. People running over you, bumping you thinking that your space is their space. If I had to choose one criteria, only one, ignorance of the environment and being inconsiderate of other people. They are also my buttons. Loud music blasting in residential neighborhoods from cars at 4am in the morning should be tossed in there. 

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 9:26am
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10730
64139

Your truth versus my truth

Last night,

While looking for a bedtime story, I went to my YouTube homepage, casually looking for suggestions.

It just so happens that somebody posted a Mark Passio presentation that was obviously bootlegged, from a cell phone, of a presentation last year, that wasn't posted to his home channel.

Near the middle of his usual diatribes on the evils of government, the evils of following orders, and the evils of believing in human enslavement,

He gets into a rant on how human beings do not have the natural law right to hold certain beliefs. 

Well now, maybe he's finally catching up with me, but I had considered in my own thoughts over the past year or so, that people who believe in the legitimacy of government are holding belief systems that are clearly causing great harm to others.

Can beliefs by themselves cause harm to others? I do believe that they can.

This is where "live and let live” runs into the harsh reality that a group consciousness based on false beliefs can truly fuck over an entire society, and every individual in it.

I used to chide Jim with posts starting with "your tax dollars at work” for a plethora of government sanctioned activities that he was paying for, that were clearly screwing over him, his family, and his community. 

After a while, I concluded that when people are subservient to the government, they are causing direct harm to me.

Yesterday, I saw a brand-new top-of-the-line fully loaded Chevy Tahoe with my towns name painted on the doors, and under it, where the words "code enforcement” Nice to see my property tax dollars being spent on nothing but the very best for some piece of shit to drive around looking for new ways to steal money from local residents for not complying with some stupid rule he just made up.

That's just one example, there are literally thousands. 

Then you run into people like my father, who will declare that "paying your taxes is a moral obligation”.

Obviously, I believe the exact opposite is objectively true.

We can debate what is truth, and we can debate what is opinion all day long, but evaluating whether or not certain beliefs bring harm to others, can be objectively quantified. 

That would meet my basic definition of ”truth”.

Anyway, I've got a customer that bought a truck load of vertical blinds for his wife, and wants me to install all of them.

Sounds like a good way to pass a rainy day.

Enjoy yours.

Duress, Dissidents & Deadly Force by Mark Passio
"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 9:43am (Reply to #20946)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Mr. Fix wrote:He gets into a

Mr. Fix wrote:

He gets into a rant on how human beings do not have the natural law right to hold certain beliefs. 

Well now, maybe he's finally catching up with me, but I had considered in my own thoughts over the past year or so, that people who believe in the legitimacy of government are holding belief systems that are clearly causing great harm to others.

Can beliefs by themselves cause harm to others? I do believe that they can.

Fix just took it out there................ Waaay out there....... That's further than we've ever gone down the rabbit hole of natural law.

This would mean it's a violation of natural law to hold opinions that are false, even opinions that nobody ever hears since throughts have reality and a known effect.

We would have to redefine the 1st amendment. We're gonna have to recreate the world.

Turd...We're gonna need more ink and a bigger space to explore this one.

Now, I aint' saying I agree with his ascertion, but off the cuff, there is an element of truth here.

This could get pretty esoteric. I'll let you guys start. 

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 10:18am
abguy4
Offline
-
rochester, NY
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
2075
15134

two-too-tuu important

this is just two-too-tuu important to leave in the Alt medicine thread. The Western Medical cabal is ALL pervasive, and here's more detail for ya's. How much have you and yur Insurance companies paid to Dentists over your life time? How many are paying for heart/artery/BP drugs? How much of yur gawd given spiritual senses (Life Force energies), are totally blocked from you, and you don't even have a hint of what's missing? Prison Planet, and you can't even see the walls, you just feed Hate to the prison Guards (and that's actually Food for them~!), now tell me what's Natural about how the inmates are treating one another....................................

David Wilcock - How to Decalcify Your Pineal Gland
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 11:48am
gold way p
Offline
-
north olmsted, OH
Joined: Apr 18, 2014
148
640

Black or white

Ultimately the choice for everyone is give me liberty or death. Just because it is not crystal clear to everyone that the managed narrative is do as I say not as I do does not mean it does not exist. The blatant hypocrisy of PC and passive thought police in the government and religion with devide, conquer isolate and shame techniques of control is why I thought we participate in this forum. I feel a certain helplessness of seeing the train going down the cliff of real freedom in this country and being unable to stop it , but I hold to my right of free thought and free action in my soul. I mentioned yesterday at a bible study to a group of old women being presented with the concept of Romans 12 that god put all authority in place that those were the exact people who murdered Christ, and that he was not passive, and was very threatening to the thought police of his day. Pilate was really the only honest voice that came to his defense. The proud brave patriots in Germany in the 1930s realized that not expressing the truth of what was happening was not an option. Most were silenced and murdered, the rest suffered untold trials similar to what all people experience when truth is outlawed. God help us all in the days ahead to rightly devide the word of truth and determine the path that sits well with our souls. 

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 11:49am
waxybilldupp
Online
-
Flyover land
Joined: Aug 10, 2011
778
6970

Katie, Katie, Katie ...

Yesterday morning I had a few moments to check on the news, so, of course, I went to DOTS. I saw your post about Ruffian and my immediate thought was, "Oh, oh. Katie just stepped in it." I thought I should make a quick comment in Ruff's defense, but as I said, I only had a moment and had to bolt out the door.

Now that I've had time to get caught up on close to 100 comments that have flowed under the bridge, I can see that Ruffian didn't need me to throw my coat over the puddle.

I will make a few comments anyway. First, I too noted that over the last several years Ruffian's writing ability has improved greatly. I try hard to pay attention to my writing. Proper sentence structure, grammer and spelling. I makes me a little crazy to go back a read what I have written and find errors. I also am internally critical of others' writing, but have learned to STFU and not critique until I see enough of their "stuff" to get a feel for their style. Ruff's style initially was a bit "rough". She knew it and explained why and she didn't give a crap. Nor did I. Her observations were enlightening and entertaining.

Then, she got slammed by one of the semi-regular posters here. I've heard Ruff say many times, "Say what you want about me. I don't give a shit." I think, however, in this case she did give a shit. After that, I could see a gradual but steady improvement in her writing skills. I think her improvement was the result of her general approach to life. "If I think this is important, I'm going to do it and do it well. If I don't think it's important, fuck it." Well, she seemed to think it was important and apparently, I'm not the only one to notice the improvement.

In addition, Ruff has shared that she has a learning disability and is autistic. When it comes to horses, I would suggest that she is an autustic savant. Considering that many folks with autism have narrowly focused interests, I might suggest that DOTS has become a gathering place for some very smart people who are experts in some odd-ball stuff. I don't know that I'm an expert in anything, but I check in here to see what I can learn every day. Ruff has only offered her knowledge and has never been disruptive or asked anything in return. Troll, secret agent? Sorry Katie, I'm afraid you stepped in it. Nothing to see here. Please stop by more often. I always enjoy your Northwest news updates and perhaps, if you stop in more often you will come to know the treasure that we have here in Ruffian.

Wax off
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 12:15pm
AGXIIK
Offline
-
reno, NV
Joined: Jun 11, 2012
2419
18288

Bump me and I bump back

 I'm pretty convinced that one is able to surround one's being and, consequently, one's body with an energy field that, when projected, takes on a certain amount of force, a certain color and vibrational intensity.

 It can be moved in one direction or the other, or multiple directions if needed. It can be used to protect others, one's being, warn or warm people, depending on their ground of being. At 6'2" and 250, my size is a bit larger than most but I project much more mass in most crowded situations, thus quietly telling those people who refuse to behave themselves to behave themselves. Most recoil or jump back when coming too close to me--say 5 feet or so They look down and apologize for getting in my space.

 Shopping at Costco or other large box stores are some of the few times we get into crowds. I wrap my wife in the shield as well. She knows she's protected fully. What was once developed to protect from hurt is now a useful tool when walking in the world.

This is not to say that I have license to be an asshole, barging around and pushing people off their base. Their space is their small piece of psychological real estate that deserves respect. I won't intrude.

The sad part of this is so many people are now totally unconscious of other's rights to invasion of their space. It takes 5 times as many steps back as forward to avoid creating a pocket of anger in a crowded area. They are so untrained that even an animal knows better than to behave like these people.

Writing this seems a little strange to me but the above comments kicked off a series of thoughts about how we walk in the world. After thinking a bit about quantum entanglement and its role in everyday affairs, the notion of water flowing around rocks seems apropos. At slow flow, the water flows smoothly around the rock. When moving quickly the water is ruffled. Being both the water and the rock allows a person to control most of the other flows as well as their own. It then becomes habit to do this. I'm not sure if this is some delusional thing but it seems to work for me. I need to be more aware of this and how I affect others and how they affect me

stackaloha. Good guy? It's a daily process.

As for a new face---note to self: Shave behind and walk backwards. New face

Let's see how that works outcheeky

cheers

AGXIIK

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 12:59pm (Reply to #20949)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

gold way wrote: Ultimately

gold way wrote:

Ultimately the choice for everyone is give me liberty or death. Just because it is not crystal clear to everyone that the managed narrative is do as I say not as I do does not mean it does not exist. The blatant hypocrisy of PC and passive thought police in the government and religion with devide, conquer isolate and shame techniques of control is why I thought we participate in this forum. I feel a certain helplessness of seeing the train going down the cliff of real freedom in this country and being unable to stop it , but I hold to my right of free thought and free action in my soul. I mentioned yesterday at a bible study to a group of old women being presented with the concept of Romans 12 that god put all authority in place that those were the exact people who murdered Christ, and that he was not passive, and was very threatening to the thought police of his day. Pilate was really the only honest voice that came to his defense. The proud brave patriots in Germany in the 1930s realized that not expressing the truth of what was happening was not an option. Most were silenced and murdered, the rest suffered untold trials similar to what all people experience when truth is outlawed. God help us all in the days ahead to rightly devide the word of truth and determine the path that sits well with our souls. 

I agree with everything you said.

You are a sovereign being and the 1st amendment was a check against goverment encroaching on the sanctity of your entire being.

However 1st amendment doesn't deal with repercussions and more subtle subject of the influence of thoughts and words.

When I've taught a basic energy medicine class, I pick the biggest, strongest guy in the class to come up to demonstrate I have him put his arms out straight with one hand over the other. I tell him to resist me as I try to bring his arms down. He's usually pretty proud when he wins and I cannot budge his arms. Then, I move my hand down his front side and ask him to try it again. This time his arms falter and he has no power to resist me. Than I fix what I altered. He is really strong again. Then I ask everyone to direct their thoughts at Mr USA and think bad thoughts about him. Ive suddenly reduced Mr Olympus into A 99 lb weakling. ALL of a sudden the class has an ephiphany. THE power of thoughts to effect matter. Then I ask them to do it again except I teach the guy a trick to prevent their thoughts from effecting his energy. 

This is going on all the time in government buildings, megastores, churches business and forums. You can be the effect of unseen individual and group thought forms and it can create I'll health. People who know this stuff can than direct energies at you with harmful intend. This is black magic and a violation of all spiritual laws. People are breaking spiritual law all the time unconsciously. However, the most damage is done to the sender especially if it is aimed at a highly spiritual being, Jesus would be one, for there auras can ectend miles. But there are regular people with spiritual practices that are well developed. Woe is he who tries this on a holy man. 

So the 1st amendment doesn't even pretend to encompass the full spectrum of spiritual law.

I have no evidence that Mark Passio s idea has any reality. That spiritual law wild punish somebody for voting their heart. It sort of borders on instIllinois fear. It might all depend on one's intention and attitudes surrounding the action. Like uou don't go throwing a fit if things don't work out as you thought

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 1:09pm
silver66
Offline
Joined: Oct 8, 2012
3336
15585

sowing via the moon

I am putting into jars to soak for 24 hours the following seeds Beets,carrots,parsnips,radish,turnips and onions. I am going to add a table spoon of PDCM to each jar. Tomorrow I will drain and put into soil. Here is a link to PDCM, this is not the brand I am using(or endorsing) but thought I would put up a link for information https://www.healthyminerals.com/colloidal_minerals.html silver66 into action !!

Silver66 Rage against the dying of the light

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 1:38pm (Reply to #20947)
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10730
64139

Not all false beliefs bring harm to others.

Green Lantern,

If you think I stepped in it, that's fine, but a distinction does need to be made here. There are a lot of false beliefs that are completely innocuous, and don't have any bearing whatsoever on anyone else.

Let's say you believe in, and want to worship a one eyed one horned flying purple people eater...

I only bring up that one, because it has an adorable song that goes with it:

One Eyed one Horned Flying Purple People Eater

Are you harming anyone else by maintaining such a belief?

Not likely.

I was specifically pointing towards beliefs that do bring great harm to others.

If you believe in government, you believe in human enslavement.

If you believe that your imaginary sky daddy is the one and only imaginary sky daddy, and that you have the right, or even a mandate to kill or enslave anyone that doesn't share your belief, you become a direct threat to the well-being of other human beings.

If you think a quarter pounder with cheese is good food, eat up, I don't care. The morality of slaughter houses is another topic.

If you believe you have to do everything your doctor tells you to do, you're a fucking moron, but I don't care.

If you want to do massive quantities of narcotics, or alcohol, as long as you do it in a manner that doesn't have any negative consequences for me, or anyone else, that is your right. You can even call it "medicinal" if you choose to.

But if you think some LEO fucking asshole has the right to drive around robbing people at gunpoint, and maintain a belief that his authority comes directly from your imaginary sky daddy, your not just a moron, you're dangerous to other human beings.

It's an important distinction.

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 2:20pm (Reply to #20954)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Mr. Fix wrote: But if you

Mr. Fix wrote:

But if you think some LEO fucking asshole has the right to drive around robbing people at gunpoint, and maintain a belief that his authority comes directly from your imaginary sky daddy, your not just a moron, you're dangerous to other human beings.

1. I don't and have never espoused that kind of society. 2.)I don't espouse violence. 3.) I don't espouse encroachment of any sort either physical or property. 4.) I've never read anybody here that espoused that kind of society or those behaviors. 5) I've experienced whole sale disagreement on what the solution is to our problems, (some like myself leaning toward there is no immediate solution) and either choice tightens the noose. So we have a community, with no moderator, no apparatus to reach consensus, no agreed upon model to reach conclusions on just about any subject but no dirth of opinions on how facts work. If your model of no goverment, 100% personal sovereignty should backfire and unseen conditions arise that harm people, will you be held accountable under natural law? 

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 3:14pm (Reply to #20955)
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10730
64139

How come I've never been called a troll yet?

Could it have anything to do with what I advocate for?

Could it be because everyone knows I am firmly and vehemently opposed to any satanic piece of shit offering compensation for swaying opinions on Internet forums?

Could it be because I am completely opposed to all control systems?

There just isn't any money in advocating for individual sovereignty.

Green Lantern,

Be specific.

100% personal sovereignty automatically requires 100% responsibility for "unseen conditions".

If people choose not to take responsibility for themselves, that is ultimately their responsibility, not mine.

If people believe they are "entitled" to the fruits of other peoples labor, (just an example off the top of my head),

It is highly likely they will have to face severe repercussions which could range from starvation to death, but, that is the natural outcome in reneging on personal responsibility anyway. 

Just the fact that we live in a society that props up the most "entitled" and the most "ignorant", most people have gotten used to there not being any repercussions for a collectivist, or entitlement persona.

Am I willing to take responsibility for millions of people starving because the government shuts down?

Good question,

No,

I can function without a government, and so can anyone else who simply learns to produce more than they consume.

Those that can't, better have good friends.

I hope I've addressed the meaning and spirit of your question, sometimes "live and let live", also means "live and let die.

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 3:48pm
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Fix, Nobody has called you a

Fix, 

Nobody has called you a troll because trolls usually don't write two page essays on natural law.

Post long philosophic essay's on the nature of reality. But on occasion you have pissed people off and maybe baited a couple people. I take your responses as agreements or disagreements, not trolls. I don't know how other people might feel when they find themselves at the wrong end of your ideas. Obviously on a couple occasions, it wasn't pretty. 

I don't believe people are entitled to the fruits of other people's labor.

I'm missing your point or what you want me to answer. I dont believe in the form of government we got.

I'm interested what your society is going to do with the 6 people in your society that have accused Ruffian as being a paid agent and don't have the balls to step up here in public and allow her to face their accusers. How is your society going to handle such accusations? Nobody has yet to make a case, or do you think a well formed case has been made?

You know full well that the response in support of Ruffian is going to ensure that those 6 cowards stay in the background eating away at the integrity of society and civilization. Other than vague ascertions, nobody has the balls to make a case? Maybe these are the same fucktards that steal other people's analysis and don't give credit.

I don't want those people in my society. I want them put out unless somebody here makes a case that either I should show mercy, or that they actually have a reasonable case to make and are able to show me something I don't see other than vague ascertions and then go back into hiding. 

It's NOT about you Ruffian. It's about principle. I mean if Guerilla Capital is going to shoot the asshole in our coffee shop holding what could be a gun at a bunch of girls serving coffee, how should society deal with the people accusing Trump of being Hitler, or the deep state making up evidence that he concluded with Russia? I vote for Mad Max. 

Yeah, this shit bothers me. Because if a community can't handle "silly" shit like this I'm voting for the tyrant. This is the shit that kills a community. The spreading fo falsehoods on twisted logic. Y'all know I"m right. Why should I offer shit to these imbeciles. They don't understand it anyway. 

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 6:03pm (Reply to #20957)
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10730
64139

A couple of pages of drivel....

Green Lantern.

While I agree that trolls usually don't write two page essays on natural law, I also find it incredibly unlikely that our discussions could ever be infiltrated and undermined by a paid agent trying to sway our opinions on anything.

The philosophical underpinnings of our discussions make emotionally based assertions, or ideologically driven “facts”, appear ridiculous under the bright light of critical thought.

Yes, I have "baited” people, and I learned it from a master, namely you.

Back in the early days, I would actually try to avoid certain posters, such as Deep Purple Haze, or Xty (Examples that come to mind) because they would hijack a discussion, usually with name-calling, and often directed at me.

Learning how to deal with these interruptions was a learning process, and I had no idea such a need existed, until confronted with it, and I eventually realized that I was basically doing myself and humanity a disservice by backing off from these assholes.

So, I learned to go on the offensive, because there is a certain truth to the old adage "the best defense is a strong offense”.

I got to the point where I showed no mercy, and expanded the scope of my ”offensiveness” to include those with ridiculous religious assertions, such as quotes from their imaginary sky daddy.

In the minds of those with such moronic predispositions to holding up lies as truth, I fearlessly learned to wage combat.

So why didn't I engage in the great Ruffian ruffle? It's not the first time that I have avoided a name calling war between two posters here, because, when someone is personally assaulted by another member, I generally let them battle it out amongst themselves.

When you in particular start engaging with another member about a particular issue that I just don't give a shit about, I actually scroll past the pages of bullshit. I figure you're going to pound them to a pulp anyway, and I really don't feel it's my duty to contribute to the accumulation of roadkill on this forum.

That's why I tend to debate principals, and not personalities. 

Now, I see that you have concluded that Katie Rose committed some kind of slander against Ruffian, whom I objectively consider to be quite capable of handling herself in any kind of brawl.

I've engaged in many personal correspondences with both Ruffian and Katie Rose over the years, and I like both of them for different reasons. If they have a problem with each other, don't you think it's their responsibility to resolve it?

You seem to think that this group should have some kind of common bond, and defend each other as if we have some kind of common alliance or collective defense treaty where if one member gets attacked, we should all gang up on the offender, and collectively pound the shit out of them.

I disagree.

Do you feel like I leave you hanging in empty cyber space while you are defending your right to be here?

Do you think you would fare better against your detractors if everyone came rushing to your aid?

From my perspective, you have already verbally disemboweled them, without any help at all.

I also suspect you enjoyed every minute of it.

You clearly didn't need my help, or anyone else’s.

Let's face it, if you're going to express any opinion at all on an Internet forum, some people might disagree with you.

If you can't handle that, then maybe you should either find a different forum, or, stop expressing an opinion.

Many people have moved away from this forum, for example, the religionists are all gone. They can't back up their assertions anymore. Then there are the lurkers.

These are probably the people that would not know what to do when attacked, so they just hang in the background.

I'm okay with that. Besides, it's much easier to learn if you can't back up your opinion. Human nature dictates that you might start questioning what you believe to be true, if you can't back up what you believe.

I bait you, and you bait me. It certainly keeps our discussions going, doesn't it?

So you don't believe in the form of government we've got? I don't believe in any form of government.

See? After all of this time, and all these conversations, we still don't see things the same way.

You're probably the only one here that even picked up on my challenge declaring that people do not necessarily have the right to believe what they believe under natural law. 

A belief in government, any form of government, is not your natural right. Even a democracy, is nothing more than tyranny of the majority over the minority. Have you convinced yourself that 51% of the population enslaving the other 49% somehow fits into natural law?

You seem genuinely upset that six cowards stayed in the background, over the Ruffian ruffle, and never came forth and expressed an opinion. I hadn't noticed until you pointed it out. That's why I tend to ignore hat tips.

I have a question for you, regarding those six cowards. Why should I care? Why should anyone?

AG 1969 and I had this conversation years ago, and he repeated it to a large extent in a post regarding this issue.

If I'm enjoying somebody's contributions to this forum, why would I care who they are, or where they come from?

Why would I care if they are being paid to be here or not? 

How I handle a personal attack, has been duly noted in the past, as it has always been my choice to ignore them, or hit them with everything I've got. I've done it both ways, and you might agree that hitting them with everything is infinitely more satisfying.

Would you have me deprive someone else of one of life's simple pleasures?

Since we primarily debate ideas here, and connect a lot of dots in the process, I've always considered this particular forum to be relatively troll proof. Bad ideas just don't last here.

That's why I love this place, and everyone involved.

Near the end of your post, you said: "This shit bothers me” 

Well GL, that is a choice that you have made. You are entitled to be as pissed off and upset about whatever you wish, whenever you wish.

 I make other choices.

You continue:

 if the community can't handle "silly" shit like this, your voting for a tyrant.

I'm voting against you.

You say,

That kind of shit might kill a lot of communities, but I think you have underestimated this particular one.

How far did "spreading falsehoods on twisted logic” go? 

 It went exactly nowhere.

See what I mean? You got your panties all twisted up in a knot over nothing. 

Do you remember years ago when I would actually seek out assistance in a particular debate over government, medicine, or political ideologies? 

I actually remember pleading for the assistance of Puck T. Smith, because I knew he could articulate my position better than I could.

Upon request, he did come to my assistance.

There's been other debates, where my inbox would get overloaded with ”suggestions”. Good stuff.

I don't seek assistance anymore, if I've learned anything here, it's how to articulate my own position, all by myself.

Like Ruffian, I've learned to benefit from the simple adage "practice, practice, practice”.

I still can't type, I still can't spell, but I sure as shit know how to put what I think into words.

I made it a priority to do so.

For me, getting pissed off over an Internet forum is never, ever going to be a priority.

Are we having fun yet? angel

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 7:34pm (Reply to #20940)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Fix, I'll get to your reply

Fix, I'll get to your reply because that's what I do. 

But I'd ask you to ensure that you've read my previous commentary so I don't waste my time revisiting old material. And for the sake of brevity and mutual understanding, I'll summarize it for you.

Listing a series of facts and drawing a conclusion from facts that are really not facts but mere observations of a behavior you don't understand DOES NOT MAKE FOR A CONVINCING, LOGICAL ARGUEMENT. Kapish? (that's a Italian for understand. I once used some italian words and yiddish words and FLyinkel pointed out that was a technique of obfiscation. Dumb bastard)

Point two an oldie but a goodie from Scott Adams. 

“One of the biggest illusions of life is that we humans are good at deducing the inner thoughts of both strangers and loved ones based on observing their actions. The truth is that we are terrible at knowing what others are thinking. We just think we are good at it. No one is good at it. NO ONE." 

I noticed, and maybe you did too, that the individuals who ascerted that the facts supported the conclusion never replied. Maybe they never read it. Or understood it. How am I to know?

But my question to you is do you think those who really belief that Ruffian is a insider/paid participant, applied any form of deductive reasoning, Or Inductive reasoning, Or Abductive reasoning (please look them up before replying). If they applied NONE of these forms of thinking to solve a problem, WHAT EXACTLY DID THEY USE TO ARRIVE AT THEIR CONCLUSION? I'd suggest pulling it out of their ass technique.

Before we even talk about this further, I"d appreciate if people declare their model of problem solving and what thought process is being used to come to conclusions. I don't even care about the details. Because if they never endeavored to look at these things, it's likely they resort to the PULLING IT OUT OF THEIR ASS.

Would you be so kind to describe which model/thought process was applied by those who reached the conclusion that Ruffian is a paid informant?

That's the only question. In the meantime, over the evening I'll address your other post. BECAUSE that's what I DO. 

Green Lantern wrote:

We have entered a heuristic argument. What I mean by that is we don’t have a total concenus if the facts support the conclusion. More importantly, as a group, we don't share the same methods of problem solving to find the truth. I’ve noticed that’s the case in just about all our discussions, markets, politics, what makes bridges fall down, did we go to the moon and is the earth flat to name a few…..

If we were a jury that would be problematic. IN a court, the judge dictates process. For better or for worse. he decides what facts the jury hears. He decides which laws the jury should use to deliberate. After that it is each man for himself based on the movie playing in his or her head. The hope is after deliberations 12 people have the same movie playing in their heads.

The majority of the people that weighed in have concluded that Ruffian being a disinformation agent, and well compensated that for that position, is absurd. There are few of you that believe that the “facts” could reasonable support her conclusions. Of course, I don’t know what everybody thinks out there, only those who have stated their opinion.

I’ve spent a better part of year, often quoting persuasion experts like Scott Adams, Robert Cialdini, and Chris Voss, telling you that facts don’t matter and they are all pretty prolific, successful men with very healthy track records. That’s not a opinion. There opinions are backed by piles of scientific data used by multiple billion dollar industries. Choosing to ignore the design of the human brain is optional. Coming to the wrong conclusions about a person is liability. 

See it says it here. FActs don't matter. Must be true. 

Of course, because he says it doesn’t make it true.

The other day AgII said his friend believes “Gold is the only thing worth anything everything else is bullshit” I believe that to be true, in his world.

My trading account says otherwise. I didn’t even attempt to talk a man down from that ledge. I’m happy for him to have it.

I don’t think an invitation to debate that point would have yielded anything worthwhile because it wasn’t a statement of fact, it was a statement of emotions. There might come a time in the future that becomes true, and there might come a time in the future when that’s never true. How do we know?

Scott Adams assertion is that Donald Trump got elected on 100% pure persuasion. Aka he got in your mind and said the things you wanted to hear. He has even gone so far to put a name to the different type of persuasion tricks.

So when he says FACTS don’t matter, he means it in a limited sense because he also realizes the FACTS can kill you! FACTS will make you broke. There is no debate on this dimension of reality. It is rare for human beings to make decisions totally devoid of emotions. Most humans are not rationale thinkers. You’re no exception.

Your investment decisions and your eating decisions and your voting decisions are inextricably connected to your emotions HELLO.

Whether I or Ruffian are deep state agents, let’s not forget the doctor that left under the same allegations and a few more, those allegations were deeply tied to a group of emotions. FACTS played a minor or insignificant role other than trying to squeeze facts into an argument that was false. 

Remember, we are the enlightened and therefore our only real currency is our thinking process to connect DOTS. Absent, a good model of drawing conclusions. You've got NOTHING! 

“One of the biggest illusions of life is that we humans are good at deducing the inner thoughts of both strangers and loved ones based on observing their actions. The truth is that we are terrible at knowing what others are thinking. We just think we are good at it. No one is good at it. NO ONE." 

The other day Peter Schiff tweeted about gold. If you’re a gold bug, you will like this. I'm a gold investor but made me scratch my head and have some deja vous.

I don’t read him much anymore, but I glance. He said something like it’s gold buying season in India and there is good evidence it’s ready to take off. (those weren’t his exact words)

Did I tell you I love Chai tea? Authentic Indian or Pakistani Chai Tea. So I go over to Little India, to my usual place, and I enjoy a nice warm cup of chai tea. Yum, yum.

It just so happens there are gold stores all up and down that street. Lots of jewelry dealers and gold buyers. A few doors down from the chai shop is an Indian guy in the gold business for 35 years. That’s his story. He buys and sells gold and silver coins, mostly to indian jewelers who melt it. He likes when gold goes up. That’s his business.

So I’m talking to him and just for fun, I tell him (just being a devils advocate and seeing his reaction to my statement, you know Vekrum, gold is going up. He says “it could also go down” I said “that’s true” but eventually it will go up higher than it will go down. And then I tell him there is huge buying in India. I'm being a smart aleck to see if he will bit. 

He looks at me like I’m on drugs. Mr. Green Lantern he says, “I am Indian and I know Indians. I’ve been in this business for 35 years. Buying gold is what Indian people do. We are a gold buying culture.. It doesn't’t mean anything”

Well, he told me. His opinion is that Mr. Schiff’s facts are meaningless in deciding if gold will go up and down. Just a random, isolated fact out of context. 

I didn’t fool him for a moment. Neither did Mr. Schiff.

You can use the same facts to make ten different arguments. It’s my allegation that you will put the facts to the argument that you like best. Not just my assertion, all the guys that talk this stuff for a living and keep telling you over and over and over again that's how the mind and reality work. 

I just spent 1000 words explaining to Mr. Fix that most men don’t have the foggiest idea why they do things, or say things or have certain preferences because each man has broad belt of unconsciousness.. Science has proven that. I’ll share the science AGAIN if somebody requests it. 

Apparently, Ruffian likes to suck on Avocado pits. Do you know why? I don’t.

That fact could support that she is delusional schizophrenic. She could be teething. She could be having a memory from when she was in the womb and her mother was sucking on advocados, she could have an oral fixation etc, etc, etc, 

None of you know what makes her tick, what inspires her to change her photo’s or her moods at any given time. Those facts could support an amazing array of arguments. For those that think these facts tell you something about Ruffian is only because you choose to stick them in the script of the movie running in your head. THAT’s BAD EVIDENCE. I don't want you on my jury, not that they would even convene a jury on those facts.

Now here are some other facts that I’d like for you to put in your movie.

Ruffian is well liked. At least it appears to me to be the case because the number of people here that have good things to say about her. “She’s an enigma” “She’s a genius” “She’s a warrior” “Only Ruffian will understand” That could be something to worry about, because the person who is well liked his more likely a deep state agent than the person who is not. That small point has been missed in the past. 

If I was running against Ruffian for prom queen/king, I’d have to change my ways quick.

Of course, we don’t know what others who don’t say think. She certainly has some online personality quirks that might be off putting I don’t particularly agree with her on all things politics for sure. And it’s likely, Katie Rose has been holding this thought for a while and something triggered her (change of picture) to say it. Now we have three people that think the facts support that argument. So who knows what the invisible unconscious mind of the group is thinking. Could be 10? 

It seems many Turdites think along the lines of finding facts to match and support their realities. Some of you like flipping through the DSM-V to find names to your facts and apply them to me. BAD IDEA!! I see people use this mode of thinking for their investments, their politics and probably every area of their life. I don't live in your heuristic world. 

The same exact facts support that Donald Trump is a populist, that he is racists and behaves like Hitler. People do not know how to put facts to reality because their brains didn’t evolve to see reality as it is.

That’s why I have been pushing the moon and his friends. It’s much harder for the mind to be tricked. It’s also the case with sociopaths. Any decent psychological astrologers worth anything, knows the circumstances at birth which are likely to lead to sociopathic behavior. This is much more successful than trying to match behaviors to a made up clinical definition. 

Katie Rose took two isolated facts and drew conclusions. If you’re going to look at who is the disinformation agent, you’re going to look for techniques of persuasion. But if you don’t know what they are, you’ll miss them every time.

Don’t get me wrong, Ruffian is very persuasive to a group of people BECAUSE she tells you what you are already thinking and the idea’s that you embrace. But it’s obvious that her persuasion is not being applied as a skill. It’s clear her persuasion is not being used to move a group away from certain realities. SAME WITH ME.

At the beginning some of her rhetoric was divisive, and aimed at me, because NONE of you told her what was going on. She had to figure it out herself, and she did. She wouldn’t have believed me if I told her because she came in when I was telling you all to go fuck off. That fact could have lead her easily to believe that I was an anti-social prick for it’s own sake. 

And then often, her behavior indicated she’d rather bring people together than sow seeds of discontent. Nobody mentioned that. That is NOT indicative of a person that wants to harm the group. I don’t see that she possess any type of honed linguistically skill designed to get inside your brain. I suspect many of you don’t know the skills yourself to identify them. 

She hasn’t mocked any point of view other than disagreed with me and Mr. Fix. I never felt like I was debating somebody that was trying to manipulate me. It’s likely, none of you can give a testimony where you felt your idea’s were being manipulated. That would be a fact, if you could describe the process being used, that would work against her being anything but herself.

Ruffian could be 10 people. Ruffian could be an extra terrestrial from Venus. Ruffian could be hired by Turd who has done research on forum sentiment as a person to inspire content. Ruffian could be the illegitimate daughter of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Ruffian could be the daughter of some reclusive billionaire just kicking around the world on a horse. YOU CAN’T TELL MUCH FROM THOSE FACTS OTHER than those who think that those facts mean she is a paid informant might have some emotional predisposition. And maybe her heathen ways rubs some more religious people the wrong way. I don’t know. But the science and the evidence tells me that the assertion is baseless just on those two “facts” and we are dealing with an extreme emotional prejudice.

So yes, it’s possible that Ruffian, Me and the doctor that left, Steve? and the other bearish gold bug were all deep state agents. The only problem is that none of you have stated the facts that would most correlate with that reality. Spelling, grammar, online behavior, and picture changing could just mean we’re all eating the worm in a bottle of mesquite. It’s also likely if you use facts the same way when you invest, you’re seeing more red than green.

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 7:58pm
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5481
31512

I should probably add some context...

...Since I let a private conversation out of the bag without Fix's permission. When he said, "I don't care," it wasn't in a context that he did not care whether or not you were being attacked. It was in the context that he did not care whether you were a paid shill or not because he liked conversing with you and the content of your posts. 

GL, you are right, it does bother me when I see someone unfairly accused, even in a nameless, faceless internet forum. Yes, there are a few people here whom I have become friends with over the years. It is in my nature to defend my friends when I think they are unfairly attacked. It is also in my nature to tell my friends when I think they are full of shit. I just try to use a little more tact than when I tell a stranger they are full of shit.

Believe me, there are a few times when I wish I had just shut my hole. I guess I befriended Ruff when she guinea pigged the Avocado pits for me...wink

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 7:58pm
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Fix, Sorry more homework.

Fix, Sorry more homework.

Now, I'm sure for most of you anything written back in 2014 has completely disappeared from your radar. But this conversation triggered my associative memory. I am entering into evidence, a mainstreet post written on 9/14/2014 by Argentus Maximus. (And you thought nobody looked back? HAHA).

His line that is forever imprinted in my memory is 

Sherlock Holmes observed "the dog that didn't bark" at the crime scene and knew the culprit must the the dog's owner. What isn't there can be more revealing than what is. It depends.

And of course this line was pretty sweet. It made an impression. I generally know when a man is slipping in a message. 

Eastwood- A Man's Got to Know his Limitations

So while he goes on to give us some information about the nefarious nature of government, he first slips in a lesson on deductive and inductive thinking. This particular story is a good example of when Sherlock Holmes applied both to solve the mystery.

In the short story, The Adventure of Silver Blaze, Sherlock Holmes solves a murder by establishing the premise that dogs bark at strangers. Silver Blaze is a champion race horse who disappears from the stables the night his trainer is murdered. Holmes has two premises: 1) The dogs didn’t bark the night of the murderer broke into the barn where Silver Blaze was stabled, and 2) dogs bark at strangers. These premises lead Holmes to the conclusion the dogs knew the murderer. His premises turns out to be correct and lead to an accurate conclusion; Holmes solves the mystery and the murder. One could argue he's used deductive reasoning, setting up the general premise, "dogs bark at strangers," and then the more specific, "these dogs did not bark at whoever entered the stables," therefore, "whoever entered the stables was not a stranger." One could also argue Holmes is using inductive reasoning, essentially reasoning by sign, (the clues), and perhaps by cause, (because dogs bark at strangers, therefore...) In fact, Holmes uses both forms of reasoning to solve crimes.

With the EVIDENCE bEFORE the JURY, I am going to prove without a shadow of a doubt that a public that ignores the material given to it, shoots itself in the foot and causes it's own decline.

This ONE TIME, and ONE TIME ONLY, Im going to pick on the LEFT. THE LIBERALS.....I have my reasoning but it's my reasoning. NOT YOUR business.

I would suggest that if a small percentage of liberals took a basic course in thinking, WE wouldn't see the chaos that we are seeing on a daily basis. The deep state or whoever it is couldn't lead them to support their lies.

Global Warming? OH SHIT, with the 6th or 7th winter storm on the way, in a record COLD APRIL, I"M PISSED AT AL GORE. FUCK HIM. He's definitely going to hell.

When we utilize the same thought process's as the enemy, WE BECOME OUR OWN WORST ENEMY.

I'll stop there. The question remains the same. What thought process did those who reached the conclusion that the facts match the conclusion use? And maybe how can this process be USED against TRUTH SEEKERS? 

Wed, Apr 4, 2018 - 8:11pm (Reply to #20960)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

ag1969 wrote:GL, you are

ag1969 wrote:

GL, you are right, it does bother me when I see someone unfairly accused, even in a nameless, faceless internet forum. Yes, there are a few people here whom I have become friends with over the years. It is in my nature to defend my friends when I think they are unfairly attacked. It is also in my nature to tell my friends when I think they are full of shit. I just try to use a little more tact than when I tell a stranger they are full of shit.

Believe me, there are a few times when I wish I had just shut my hole. I guess I befriended Ruff when she guinea pigged the Avocado pits for me...wink

I'm not sure Ruffian and I have established a friendship, but since you like Q, the idea of Q, and you have no personal contact with all the criminals, you might just not like the idea of human beings acting anti-social against other people. Just as a principle. Of course, you would tell your friends.

But my reality is my reality. I'll own it. I can't fanthom why a person would do this a SECOND TIME and think it would turn out better. And why anybody thinks that the facts support her conlcusion anymore than the facts support the conclusion that Trump is Hitler. It's the same type of thinking. 

I know you guys want me to lay off her, but THIS SHIT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.

So I promise that my replies will be filled with concepts and idea's that can be applied to anything else and not aimed to destroy her. 

As far as Ruffian eating avocado pits, That's ODD. Of course, I should ask her why she does it. It's easier than speculating. But if I were to speculate, I'd throw out the teething and schizophrenic pit. I wonder if she is intuitively picking up on the health properties of the seed? 

https://draxe.com/avocado-seed/

Notice: If you do not see your new comment immediately, do not be alarmed. We are currently refreshing new comments approximately every 2 minutes to better manage performance while working on other issues. Thank you for your patience.

randomness