Activism.....

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby Donovan » Wed Jan 24, 2007 5:54 pm

The question is...: what is Mr. Too Stoned really doing here.
Causing trouble only. He has no other ajenda. You need see a good number of posts to see it. But once seen it becomes clear.

Here is his style from another thread: This after going on and on on on a good number of posts stating that my dad never worked with those who came up with DNA. He did. And came up with the most noted diagram. Can search Time as well.

quote Too stoned:
"...Pitcairn:

I'm somewhat satisfied by your explanation of whereby you came up with the links.
I'm glad you went through the effort of finding them, because I, despite what you may believe, am about finding the truth. Looking for Donovan's parents names was not a priority for me, as who they were isn't relevant to Donovan's ideas. The fact he mentions them to somehow validate his contentions merely merely demonstrates that his ideas can't stand on their own merits. My priorty was matching his statements with known facts.

And the truth is no matter who is parents may be, he grossly misuses scientific terms and utilizes dishonest argumentation. The proof lies in his posts and mine.

It is great you can look past all the bogus claims to find some gold in Donovan's dross, but don't expect anyone with more native skepticism than you to look beyond the demonstratbly false statements about quantum physics, chemistry, biology,math etc and the bait and switch argumentation of Donovan.

And don't expect people who know better to let Donovan's misstatements about established fact to shut up about it.

I believe Donovan's "style" as you put it, sounds awfully similiar to the cons used by every New Age Charlatan with a chip on the shoulder...

If Donovan wants to claim he can find the angle of great pyramid using a new method, great. Post all the steps and talk about implications. But he shouldn't claim his empiricism is a "mathematical proof" of his "new geometry" because to do so is demonstrably false.

I've hacked down his other misstatments elsewhere so I won't do it again here. (I'm sure that pleases you and the rest of the 'true believers") Laughing

Good luck PC, but I'm sure myself and others won't let sleeping dogs lie...:
(unquote Too Stoned)
my reply.
When Time’s science editors could not fully understand the DNA explanation (it was either Watson or Glick who they flew to Rockefeller Center) they asked my father to make a pictorial. It was one or the other that he worked with and came up with a diagram, one of a number of ways or presentation which ‘stuck’. He later stated there was a better way. Oddities of mapmaking. He was also often cited as having the only diagram of the Wankel engine that was understood. He stated that the only reason it was understood was that it was contrived, no real views would explain it.
Does not tell the full story but go to, Jeremiah Donovan at:
http://www.negia.net/~grossman/donovan.html

I gave pyrite as example of cubed crystal as it can be seen. Salt is more common, true, but would the average person know?. Too Stoned making much out of little. As if someone complaining about lint on your tie when they are pissing on your shoe.

Geometry still stands. Too Stone wimps and tries to cover.

_________________
Donovan
Donovan
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:27 pm
Location: Camden, ME
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Fixx » Wed Jan 24, 2007 6:08 pm

et in Arcadia ego wrote:
Keep in mind that this area is as subject to moderation as any other. I have no problems whatsoever locking any of these threads up, so I repeat:


http://www.phpbb.com/

AND GET YOUR OWN ORGONE/MUDBALL FORUM...


Oh dear you just don't get it do you? It's not you place as a mod to bully people into submission or close threads you personally don't like. It's much less you place as a mod to tell people to get their own forums either. This is not YOUR board, it is Jeff's and he has already created another forum called "Activism" and indicated that orgonite should be discussed there, thereby indicating that discussion of orgonite on RI is not against the rules.
Oh and in response to you're last comment on the Poll thread you locked, I have complained to Jeff about your behaviour.

edited for borked quote codes
Fixx
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:04 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby tigre63 » Wed Jan 24, 2007 6:26 pm

The question is...: what is Mr. Too Stoned really doing here.
Causing trouble only. He has no other ajenda. You need see a good number of posts to see it. But once seen it becomes clear.


All I see TooStoned doing is making a case against your theories. Seems alot of the nastiness has come from your side IMO.

Now your placing seeds of doubt about him as if he were an agent? Not sure where you are going with this, but I might inform you that accusing another poster of being an agent is strictly against board rules.
tigre63
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Orgone....

Postby dragon » Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:48 pm

Ah, orgone. Even the word has power. Usually though, it takes close contact before it has an effect. This is the first remote I've seen. Quite amusing, really.

Orgone brings up old issues, dark stuff usually, for the person or persons to deal with. Pluto is having that same effect, according to one source. The Pluto energies lay out a matrix of energy where the other forces that bring old issues to the surface may function even more effectively. There is a relationship between the effect and the old issues, is what we observe. The more intense the reaction, the deeper and darker and more demanding the issues that come up.

Arcadia is swinging wildly now over ideas and concepts that he need not get involved in. But it seems that he just can't help himself. Pluto, I think, and the orgone factor. Jeff created this little corner over here for all us orgonauts and activists to go to so we could discuss these things quietly without bothering the wiser and more intellectual forum members who post on the General Discussion forum.

In theory, at least, that should have solved the problem. We have all "left the room", so to speak. Y'all have GD forum for your own. We have our own little clubhouse down here. Great idea, except that all the hoot-down artists followed us here. This was supposed to keep the controversy down, separate the two groups, but no. They all followed us down here.

So it is obvious that the problem isn't "orgone", per se. The problem is the outrageous behaviour of those who don't understand or don't agree with it. It isn't what we say that is the problem. It's the conduct of those who disagree with what we say; that's the problem. And it isn't just the subject of orgone.

Y'all have been ganging up on poor old Donovan, who really is not deserving of all that attention. And for what? You disagree, or you don't understand. Big deal. Is it necessary to beat him on the head until he submits to your superior knowledge? What's it to you if his ideas are wrong? They sound all right to me, but I'm not a mathematician. So when I first read this stuff quite some time ago, I set it up on a shelf in my mind waiting for the day when more information or more understanding came my way. A conditional acceptance based on the fact that I have no way to prove or disprove it. Why not let him be? If he's right, that's wonderful. We've opened up a whole new understanding for math. If he's wrong, big deal. What's it to you? You're not flying in anything he designed using his way of calculating. So, what's the payoff for you?

Y'all used to work for the Inquisition in a former life? Same tactics. Why not label the bloke a witch, or maybe a heretic, and burn him at the stake? You've done it verbally.

He has a right to be wrong. You have an obligation, if you think you understand it better, to point it out to him. That's just the courteous and thoughtful thing to do for anybody who's lost his way. You don't, however, have an obligation to convince him, or an obligation to verbally abuse him until he submits or withdraws. Everybody reaches understanding in their own way, at their own pace. Same way you do.

What would happen to me, how long would Jeff tolerate my presence on this board if I applied the same tactics to you until you understood or submitted to what I have to say about any of the subjects I've written about and you two have scoffed at? If I insisted that you believe and act as I do using the words that you have used on Donovan, would I still be here?

If I verbally abused you day after day and thread after thread until you finally understood the threat posed by "cell phone" towers, the NSA, chemtrails and other subjects, you'd be screaming like a wounded mess cook, running to Jeff in a panic demanding that I be kicked off the board.

You can deny that if you dare, but no one will believe you.

It isn't the subject matter that was to have been quarantined. That's obvious by looking at the threads that were all lumped into the Activism Forum. It was the posters who were to be quarantined. That's how Burnt Hill got down here, and Donovan.

And poor Donovan, if I had not praised his work as soon as I saw it on the board, he'd probably have been treated with much more courtesy. Burnt Hill, too. For the problem isn't Donovan, per se, or his math. Or Burnt Hill wondering about whether evil can be measured. The problem is me, and what to do with me.

I have brought strange ideas for you all to ponder. Ideas that threaten your comfort zone and world view. They're not going away. I'm not going away.

You will adjust to the new reality.

Dragon
dragon
 

Postby philipacentaur » Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:07 pm

HOOT!
philipacentaur
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:45 pm
Location: Gone to Maser
Blog: View Blog (0)

Donovan

Postby TooStoned » Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:52 pm

In the interst of trying to just argue on the merits I will try to turn down my rhetoric and ire at your misstatements of science fact and quit calling you "names"however much I believe you deserve such appellations

However, once again you are provably wrong:

it was either Watson or Glick


It is Watson and CRICK. Why do you continue to make that mistake?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2804545.stm

Last Updated: Thursday, 27 February, 2003, 21:55 GMT

Email this to a friend Printable version

'Secret of life' discovery turns 50

By Ivan Noble
BBC News Online science staff

It was simple; instantly you could explain this idea to anyone

Professor James Watson
Fifty years ago, on 28 February 1953, Francis Crick walked into the Eagle pub in Cambridge, UK, and announced something for which he would later share a Nobel Prize.
"We have found the secret of life," his collaborator and subsequent fellow Nobel laureate James Watson later quoted him as saying.


Google DNA Watson and Crick and compare the hits with a google of DNA Watson and Glick if that old link isn't good enough.

It is your repeated mis-statements like that make me question your very motives, and not merely your Ideas.

Speaking of your ideas. You may be able to use your "new geometry" as outlined in a few paragraphs and an UNLABELED diagram to derive the slope of a pyramid, but what you wrote is an empirical procedure not a "math proof."

Simply put it doesn't prove your method works on every occasion, just maybe in this one.

Once again from Wikipedia's page on Math proofs.
[quote]
In mathematics, a proof is a demonstration that, assuming certain axioms, some statement is necessarily true. A proof is a logical argument, not an empirical one. That is, one must demonstrate that a proposition is true in all cases before it is considered a theorem of mathematics. An unproven proposition for which there is some sort of empirical evidence is known as a conjecture. In virtually all branches of mathematics, the assumed axioms are ZFC (Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, with the axiom of choice), unless indicated otherwise. ZFC formalizes mathematical intuition about set theory, and set theory suffices to describe contemporary algebra and analysis.

Proofs employ logic but usually include some amount of natural language which usually admits some ambiguity. In fact, the vast majority of proofs in written mathematics can be considered as applications of informal logic. Purely formal proofs are considered in proof theory. The distinction between formal and informal proofs has led to much examination of current and historical mathematical practice, quasi-empiricism in mathematics, and so-called folk mathematics (in both senses of that term). The philosophy of mathematics is concerned with the role of language and logic in proofs, and mathematics as a language.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_%28math%29

Rather than demand I follow your empirical procedure I can't because I don't have CAD (and I realize is a worthless excercise) please explain how what you've written fulfills the protocols outlined in my wiki quote. 8)

Be pissed at me, question why I'm here, do your best to insult me.

I really don't care.

But if you want to prove your point, or merely make me shut up and admit that you've done what you claim then do as I ask

Otherwise this "wimp" will continue to laugh at your "ideas"
"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, no one but ourselves can free our minds" - RNM
"I'm not Coyote.You're Coyote. I'm Another One." - Wile E. Coyote (AKA Sin'klipt)
TooStoned
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:19 pm
Location: twixt now and zen
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Donovan » Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:46 pm

“…Rather than demand I follow your empirical procedure I can't because I don't have CAD (and I realize is a worthless excercise) (sic)….”
Says Too Stoned.
Anyone can go back to the geometry thread and see Too Stoned wimped out. Yes, as exact angle CAD would be necessary in proof. He can have another do it if he was really serious about his challenge. . He challenged.
Same thing “I throw down my glove but won’t show up because I don’t have a gun.”

The technique is called ‘Fogging’ , repeating same ‘how high can you jump’ silly stuff over and over. Example; I gave pyrite as example of cube crystal you can see. Chose something you could hold in your hand. Too Stoned does search and finds common salt is also a cube. And found a GIANT flaw in my reasoning. Salt is more common. Wow. Explained I wanted something someone could see. Not enough, post after post he brings it up, like post after post he demands that I verify who my father was. Ignored but eventually did. But what is his motive? Only to disrupt. Why is he here? He thought the entire subject bullshit.

Now anyone with a CAD can do my proof, the angle exact. It has been done in a number of high end math groups, that is where I got the radian check, done by another. If it is done here best to have a number go through same process see if all get same result. I have already, certainly to my satisfaction, proved that I am the first to derive the Great Pyramid shape (openly) by simple compass and rule. Too Stoned has had opertunity, and still has oppurtunity to put up or shut up. Only I think I will take MaryK’s advice and simply not read or react to him. I spent years on the ‘free for all unmoderated’ 800 thread and know when someone’s true motive is just trouble. So if he really does take the challenge, someone else let me know, no reason to bother with him. Now not worth reading.

(Note to Dragon: disagree with one thing above. It is the math. It has implications.)
Donovan
Donovan
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:27 pm
Location: Camden, ME
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby TooStoned » Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:53 pm

Donovan:

Yeah I'm a whimp because I've proven your method for determining an angle is not a "mathematical proof" as you have claimed previously.

I feel so much less masculine and cut down... :lol:
"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, no one but ourselves can free our minds" - RNM
"I'm not Coyote.You're Coyote. I'm Another One." - Wile E. Coyote (AKA Sin'klipt)
TooStoned
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:19 pm
Location: twixt now and zen
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Donovan » Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:01 am

BURNT HILL stated:

(quote) "...And so moving on, here in the Activism thread, how do we take the battle to the forces that seem sinister ? It seems to me that Dragons spiritual approach has merits. What do you suggest? Can we count on state and local politicians to hear us? Ive written letters yes. Should we march on the capitol-if its not covered on the telly did it happen? Seems some new approaches are in order. Again, what do you suggest? I am listening...." (unquote)

reply from Donovan:

Subject of Activism:
Best book I have read on Activism is Handbook for the New Paradigm. Bridger House Publishers, Inc. PO Box 2208 Carson City NV 89702. 1-800-729-4131. ISBN: 1-893157-04-0.

No known author, states no restrictions on copyright except that word changes and changes in text not allowed. Perhaps on web. Book backs up my own thoughts. The N.W.O is destroying itself from within. Its days are numbered. In effect states that you are on the winning side.
But not a ‘feel good’ book, gets into how really dire things are. It is about not being ‘victim’ or taking ‘victim psychology’ (i.e. playing ‘ain’t it awful’) but states direct fire to fire will not work. Or perhaps splits some neat hairs in that area. VERY hard to sum up.

It is about continuing to increase personal ‘magick’ (does not use that term) and personal power and making connections with those that do.

Let me take it right to mudballs. Jesus, what the fuck am I going to tell the wife they are when they arrive? Mudballs…? ! Angel shit. That’s it. That’s what I call it: ‘angel shit’, She is into angels. (By the way Dragon is not charging me for mudballs, just sending them.)

From a mapmaker’s perspective the present world situation can be summed up in three (cutsie) ‘catch phrases’. They are:
1- Aqaba is in Dallas.
2- Hadrians Wall is in New Bedford……and….
3- The only road to Jerusalem is through Gulu.

That concept has been bantered around quite a bit. Reason such , (Christian Science Monitor), great CIA focus on Gulu. Not that the neocons would listen to the real CIA at this point anyway. Perhaps later flesh them out more, or perhaps the board, or some here, are familiar. 1- About changing military situation, sudden switch back from the ‘power of navies’ to the ‘power of armies’. As system of economic control, oil pumped in one place, refined another, all that is protected by navies. So using ‘Dallas’ a symbol for that---- like Aqabe (as in Lawrence of Arabia, the guns pointing to the sea and cannot be changed.. 2- Standard internal countryside against the shore areas for revolution as defined by money in Age of Sail (New Bedford) in the manner say of Mao. 3- A tad more complex, but the information I gave on Race and IQ how music as language (which is coming) may suddenly reverse things part of that.

So from a geopolitical perspective if or not Iran is nuked not the biggest thing, the above will still apply.

What about personal activism? Important to ‘stop making sense’, use the intellect as a tool that can be brought out of the toolbox and put back in. Flow with the magic from wherever it is coming.

A time to stand up, (as I have writing about nuke situation), a time to ‘be safe’. Some things seem obvious. Would not live anywhere near large metro areas now. Someone asked if 'evil’ can be measured. Perhaps, don’t know, gravimeters. At any rate stay away from ‘heavy’ areas, move to light areas. (In fact sort of a natural separation, light moving to light, dark to dark now.) And many are doing just that or have done it. You can feel it and you are suddenly in touch with others of like mind. In this type of activism it is not so much what you say about, say 9/11 on some yahoo group as it is what you say in the checkout line. That has power.

As for flow, I can see orbs, they even show up in pictures where there were crop circles near here. I can’t explain it. Don’t need to. The Wonder is fine with me.
Donovan
Donovan
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:27 pm
Location: Camden, ME
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Burnt Hill » Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:13 am

No you havent too stoned and i am hopeful that you are just about to understand that. First we should agree with what you two are aguing about. Don says he:
proved that I am the first to derive the Great Pyramid shape (openly) by simple compass and rule.
So we have to apply his methodology in order to prove the methodology wrong, if we will. If you use his methodology then you can point out the flaws, assuming as much. Until you do that you have proof of nothing. Why are you willing to use so much personal energy arguing the point? You say
I've proven your method for determining an angle is not a "mathematical proof"
note the quotations, are we getting into semantics here? is that the argument? or do you need to prove his method doesnt work? 8)
User avatar
Burnt Hill
 
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:42 pm
Location: down down
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby TooStoned » Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:33 am

Burnt Hill:

I don't claim anything about his methodolgy other than it isn't a "mathematical proof" Which he does claim. I'll dig up his claim again or you can look at my last comment in the Donovan's Geometry Page thread.

A mathematical proof is a very specific term and that's why I put in paranthesis

Goto Wiki or Google and type mathematical proof and read what it actually is.

Donovan's geometry methods very well may work. I'm willing to bet with CAD you can derive the angle of a pyramid. But they are not "proofs"

That's my problem with Donovan's posts, and if he stuck to explaining methods and didn't claim it was a mathematical proof, or that "spin pairs the four forces" or "cubic crystals rarely form in nature" I wouldn't bother him at all.

In fact I'd love to see what metaphysical correlations and mathematical permutations he can make.

But I can't get past his tale tales to get to the meat of what he's saying.

Sorry, if I'm pissing off the general populace...I'm trying to tone down my rhetoric, but I am not going away quietly.

Thanks for the mellow tone, though. I'll try to return it.
"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, no one but ourselves can free our minds" - RNM
"I'm not Coyote.You're Coyote. I'm Another One." - Wile E. Coyote (AKA Sin'klipt)
TooStoned
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:19 pm
Location: twixt now and zen
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Burnt Hill » Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:37 am

Thank you Donovan. You've reminded me of a song.
Maps & Legends
by R.E.M.
album: Fables Of The Reconstruction (1985)
He's not to be reached, he's to be reached.
He's not to be reached, he's to be reached.

Called the fool and the company,
On his own where he'd rather be.
Where he ought to be, he sees what you can't see, can't you see that?

Maybe he's caught in the legend, maybe he's caught in the mood.
Maybe these maps and legends have been misunderstood.

Down the way the road's divided, paint me the places you have seen.
Those who know what I don't know refer to the yellow, red and green.

Maybe he's caught in the legend, maybe he's caught in the mood.
Maybe these maps and legends have been misunderstood.

He's not to be reached, he's to be reached.
He's not to be reached, he's to be reached.

The map that you painted didn't seem real.
He just sings whatever he's seen
Point to the legend, point to the east,
Point to the yellow, red and green

Maybe he's caught in the legend, maybe he's caught in the mood.
Maybe these maps and legends have been misunderstood,
Been misunderstood. (Maps and legends) (Maps and legends)

Is he to be reached? He's not to be reached.(Maps and legends)
Is he to be reached? He's not to be reached.(Maps and legends)
Is he to be reached? He's not to be reached anymore.
User avatar
Burnt Hill
 
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:42 pm
Location: down down
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Burnt Hill » Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:47 am

Are you saying too stoned that using his methods that we dont end up with a shape? or that the shape we end up with is not the Great Pyramid...shape? Or that it doesnt matter? :wink: Lets just stick with the general premise of Donovans claim for now which can we agree is that he:
proved that I am the first to derive the Great Pyramid shape (openly) by simple compass and rule.
? Can we agree? If not why argue...
User avatar
Burnt Hill
 
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:42 pm
Location: down down
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby TooStoned » Thu Jan 25, 2007 1:03 am

Burnt Hill

why argue?

Because he didn't only claim his methodolgy "worked" but it was a mathematical proof.

and as Donovan himself said, "A math proof either is, or it isn't"

And his methodolgy isn't a proof. Period.

He also murders Biochemistry, "DNA is a twisted ribbon", Glick
He murders Chemistry, "Cubic Crystals rarely form in nature"
He murders Physics, "spin pairs the four forces"
etc.

I happen to love those disciplines and when someone abuses them to make themselves seem smart, it bothers me and makes me start asking questions like, "if he is so smart why does he make these blatant mistakes," and "what else is does he fib about" and "why should we take anything he says seriously if he can't be honest and respond to critics in a way that doesn't seem like a shuck and jive?"

If Donovan (or anybody else) sticks to the facts, even if the facts are only an honest anecdote that can't be verified, then I've got no problem.

Otherwise... :evil:

Because a falsehood repeated often enough takes on the false gloss of truth...
"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, no one but ourselves can free our minds" - RNM
"I'm not Coyote.You're Coyote. I'm Another One." - Wile E. Coyote (AKA Sin'klipt)
TooStoned
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:19 pm
Location: twixt now and zen
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Donovan » Thu Jan 25, 2007 2:02 am

Exactly, BURNT HILL !
As it is plane geometry, lines and points and circles and such, it is a drawing by standard rules wherein the result is a fairly precise angle An angle which is or is not the generally accepted angle of the Great Pyramid and the generally accepted angle whereof other pyramid shapes are made that when they are lined up north/south (magnetic) produce some odd effects. And that degree arrived at first by a reporting of a very old historian stating a relationship of height to area of side that relates to pi. (Sides of Great Pyramid being a bit worn)

So it is a rather simple line, point, circles etc . construction…; but where done in such a way that you get a fine angle. A very large sheet of paper would do. (And if paper Too Stoned would say, well kinda like 51 point something di da di da. You want that full precise to get that ‘OH SHIT’ ! And it is. Wow. (And there are implications).

I therefore suggested that it could be done in Corel Draw. Most common program that replaced the Apple Freehand and Window’s based Freelance. (or is it the other way around? Something that Too Stoned would find a big enough ‘error’ to focus on forever, lol) Any other CAD would be fine if it did the job. SolidEdge the most expensive and precise and would LOVE someone to do it with access to that.!!!!!!

I started with the exact steps. Have done many times and there are tricks to the massive zooming in and zooming out you must do. For example the first thing you do is draw a very large circle. So in Corel draw usually, unless you set different, a sheet of 8 ½ by 11 paper comes up. You zoom out until that piece of paper is the size of a dot then make that first circle. !!! ( I know all the steps and can walk any through) A small ‘thumbnail’ of the construction can also be made as guide when zooming in and out. As on my site.

The end result is a angle and is measured by snapping on a guideline (wherein a tad will be lost) and double clicking it so a box shows up with the precise angle. There is massive zooming in and out on this and therein I can give some helpful pointers.

Mr. Barr, Good Lord, I called Too Stoned Mr. Barr the known 800 agent. !!! Mr. Too Stoned has wimped out. In that regard back to energy and activism. I am learning to talk to the energy between people, or between myself and the person I am talking to. I visualize it. Much can be gained. Something like those exercises in Celestine Prophecy (can’t spell Celestine). So above Mr. Too Stoned has a smiley face. I know right away it is not. I can switch from a very rigorous math thing, like above, right to ‘feeling’. So I know there is no smiley face on Mr. Too Stoned’s post above. As I know that as clever as he is in some respects his energy is adolescent. Undeveloped.

I knew Too Stoned for what he was right away. And for quite a time, (and it is right there in the threads as you go back) I ignored his taunts, stupid ‘fogging’ of issues, and out right name-calling. But then he walks into it. HE made a challenge. And AFTER he made the challenge it was “I don’t have a CAD program”. Well why did he make the challenge? And he can still easily borrow one, use a friends (what friends, lol) etc. So it is exactly as I said. He throws down the glove and then says, “I can’t meet you on the Field of Honor, I don’t have a gun.” Be it Too Stoned he might then even go on (perhaps a bit like the one facing Cyrino De Bergerac (Hope you know what I mean, can’t spell that)…. Too Stoned would try to say a glove was not thrown down correctly therefore he won the duel. If he ever comes up with his gun let me know. I am ignoring the wimp.
Donovan
Donovan
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:27 pm
Location: Camden, ME
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Activism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests