Leaderboard

Thought this was worth discussion. Not quite sure in which forum to place it. Seems to link well with some recent threads here. From my Facebook feed today.

This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collected data. But, even then..."How do you know if there is “spirit” there or not?" edit. Oh, silly me. I forgot all about the black heart/white heart thing.

Worth the price of a stamp to write “No” on the back and send to PO Box 328? But I mean their symbolism is on point. Country BFE road. Ditch. Fog covering the path. I mean what could go wrong lol

Write: The Teacher Box 328 New Knoxswill, Ohio 45871

Once again. It's not a theory or thesis, it's a hypothesis. It's not provable nor repeatable. Your research methodology is, to state it kindly , completely flawed. You have presented an idea you believe to be true. And that's fine. We all have ideas. Sometimes they appear to be rational to ourselves but not to others. This is why we are tasked with providing evidence to support those ideas. There is a process for providing evidence that is generally accepted by most. It involves adherence to a set criteria of research methods. If you want anyone to accept your ideas and advance your hypothesis to a theoretical level, you need to follow that process. You need to compile data in an acceptable manner and allow for the possibility that you might have to entertain conflicting data. You might even have to change your position. If you can do that, perhaps you'll find an audience that is more receptive. However, this is something you seem to be unwilling or unable to do.

Knowledge should be humbling: the more you know, the more you should realize you don't know.

Yeah, 26 pages and having it pointed out to you pointedly. "On Facebook, in the discussion groups, I have had everyone take my chapters (or earlier portions of them) very seriously, and I can tell they read the text I offer. I've been seriously discussing my material there for approximately 5 years now, maybe more." If you are getting feedback there, why in the world do you feel a need to impose yourself on GSC?

Months ago, Twinky noted the possibility that Mike was "on the spectrum." Others poo poo'd the notion. Mike's posting without being able to recognize that people are toying with him on this thread takes us back to Twinky's proposition. That he can't recognize the realities of social interaction he's in the middle of... AND fancies himself an intellectual in neurology matters, suggests he may indeed have some ASD even if not severe. Obviously, I'm not qualified to diagnose. I'm simply noting my observations of his behavior in our little ecosystem here.

Again, the reality is posters on this thread are TOYING with you, almost certainly because (as has been documented in various comments) nobody is taking your "thesis" seriously... and because it is obvious to everyone (perhaps excluding you) that you're both full of bullshonta and freely posting without honoring either your fellow posters or the (legitimate) owner(s) of the website who make it available for you to publish your "book" without contributing financially.

Didn't realize you posted this before, or maybe I forgot. So much bullshonta sometimes, it's hard to remember where and when the snow fell. Need to renew my mind. Sounds like you need a Bull-Shonta Governor They’re inexpensive and easy to install In the artist’s depiction below of how we think the Bull-Shonta Governor would work, if you can believe it: By adjusting the # 10 thingy you can reduce or increase the fuel supply (the amount of Bull-Shonta), parts 1 through 7 and parts 11 through 13 are explained in the Advanced Class - for serious operators – and there’s a minimum required donation of ¾ of your cognitive skills. Part # 8 we’re not sure of but we think it’s the tension between the 5 senses and revelation faith. On the back of the box that the Bull-Shonta Governor Kit comes in, is a visual aid of what the Bull-Shonta Governor Kit should look like if installed properly:

here is a follow-up report: responding to the invite, one ex-corps proceeded back – and fortunately for her, the fog lifted just in time:

Everybody can at least THINK they're a genius about SOMETHING.

Everybody is a genius about something? EVERYBODY?? Hardly. Not EVEN a hypothesis. It's merely an asserted claim of imagination.

Follow us back into the FOG... LOL!

The problem is, if you say "Sometimes you don't consider contrary evidence", then every single instance will be the exception, and you'll NEVER consider the evidence you don't like. The truth will survive scrutiny. It can survive the fire when baser elements burn up.

This is an excellent topic, Twinky. Relevant to every forum from "Doctrinal" to "Doctors in Their Own Imaginations." So much to comment on here, but I need to start with this, because it showed up in my feed yesterday. (Don't ya just love synchronicity.) This video addresses this very point, OS. It's a rather deep dive into cult indoctrination and cognitive dissonance. Lots of visual aids and charts. Informative and entertaining. Lots of answers to why and how this cult control could have ever happened. And I found it helpful in developing compassion for myself and others who have fallen into these traps.

The entire thread is pricelessly valuable. And I see your insight here as particularly insightful. I'm reading Denver Riggleman's new book, The Breach. He is a former Member of Congress and a former religious cult member (his characterization of his experience in the LDS church). Chapter two THREE (Among the believers)in his book is an exquisite telling of him having challenged his religious beliefs and how he developed tangible skills to challenge certain cultic beliefs and actions. I highly recommend the book. It's not simply a repackaging of current affairs reporting, btw.

Think it's true on so many levels. The way I see it, is you can challange truth and it will stand no matter what. So even if I believe it to be true, it should still stand to fresh scrutiny no matter where and when that scrutiny pops up. There is a huge difference in how I am now and my former way brained self. With my former cultic based point of view any scrutiny was to be rejected. I used to think that I was able to actually debate points the way international taught but that wasn't really true. I would almost always cosider challenges to my beliefs an attack. We were schooled to do that in TWI. Slogans like truth needs no defence, and others, basically had me in a defensive posture towards any opposing points of view - they were all from the adversary doncha know...lol. Currently there is nothing I won't put to the test. My beliefs, other's beliefs, it all needs to be challenged to determine if these things are so. We should welcome sunlight into our knowledge, ideas, beliefs, etc.

Reminds me of that quote: “You know, everybody's ignorant, just on different subjects.” ― Will Rogers

Talk to Raf or Pawtucket about the reasonableness of donation size. Of course YOU THINK you're right and I'm wrong about you taking over GSC. Far be it from me to try to convince you otherwise. What was it Wierwille use to say (quote), a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. Nevertheless, for two decades you've been a thorn in the side of GSC and whenever you post, it ALWAYS becomes about YOU. As to ASD type behavior/conduct, I observe that you often do not pick up on verbal cues of other posters. Granted, written verbal cues are harder to pick up on than when non-verbals can be observed, but after a while one would think you'd get the point that NOBODY is taking your "thesis" seriously. I mean, 26 pages so far. Sheesh. Proverbs 21:2 New King James Version 2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes, But the Lord weighs the hearts.

I usually go by actions and leave it at that for instance, if i see signs of someone acting like a troll - I may not have a clue as to what motivates them or the status of their mental health - so I just deal with the obvious and point out signs of trolling...I mean what else can I do?

Man’s free will leads him? How? How is man’s mind observable? Mind = the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought; synonyms: · intelligence · intellect · intellectual capabilities · mental capacity · brainpower · wits · wit · powers of reasoning · powers of comprehension · powers of thought · understanding · reasoning · judgment · sense · mentality · perception · head · imagination · subconscious · psyche · ego · ratiocination · sanity · mental balance · mental faculties · senses · reason · rationality How have you been exploring, analyzing, and explaining the mind? How do you know if there is “spirit” there or not? Please explain how the mind is less complicated than the “spirit”. What is “the more simple situation, which aids the observing scientist”?

However, like the story WW relayed about the chef, just before my comment, whether Mike knows what he's doing or not is not relevant. That he refuses to OWN his responsibility for communicating his message clearly IS relevant. IMO, it's well past time to send Mike home. It's a poor communicator that communicates vaguely and then blames the audience for not seeing his points.