Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3336722 -

what makes this a rational discussion? :P


--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3336882 -

"."

?


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Edited by LunarEclipse (11/21/04 04:31 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3336943 -

"Irritation is a self-imposed mindstate. Any intermediate/advanced student of spirituality knows enough to take responsibility for his/her emotions. "

oh and i do, dont worry about that. If you annoy me its because i choose to let you. But when i use a word like irritatingly, what can it mean except i allow it to irritate myself?

nevertheless i allow myself to be irritated by the fact that you have demanded  'source and link' on countless threads, even about things like "a bad attitude never helped anyone suceed" , and then when someone turns the tables on you you start going off about 'apparently im the only one who can use the search engine'  and 'why should i find an article about everything i have read or studied"

did you hear yourself?

"Do you have a link for everything that have eever read or studied?"

No i dont! and that is EXACTLY why i allow myself to be irritated by your constant demands that me and others provide one for you whenever you ask for it (hundreds of times by now im sure)

btw: my irritation is a mental and not emotional one. Im not fuming here, but if i could show you your own hypocrisy on this issue maybe this board would be a little bit easier to post on in the future?

:thumbup: :smirk:


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3337027 -

That large of a sample group is statistically significant, and more than a random occurrence. Maybe they are on to something.

Once again, this type of "cleverness" only reveals your unfamiliarity with acceptable philosophic debating techniques. Apparently you are not acquainted with the false argument concerning large numbers. Do some remedial reading on philosophy.

What it reveals is that when someone cannot back up their position with ANY sort of factual basis, they get angry and attack the character of the poster which has absolutely nothing to do with the thread. The large number of posters is not a random occurrence, nor is it inidcative of anything about me. It is a sad reflection of widespread ignorance and the general lack of emotional control.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (11/09/04 05:43 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #3337059 -

But when i use a word like irritatingly, what can it mean except i allow it to irritate myself?

The table is purple.

Swami's words are irritating.

The first is a characteristic of the table. Words in and of themselves have no such characteristic, though you attempt to make if sound as if they had some inherent quality.

btw: my irritation is a mental and not emotional one.
Distinction? Irritation is an emotional response.

Your rant is so vague as to be taken as more emotional residue than any salient arguments to be responded to. If someone makes a generalized sweeping statement AS IF IT WERE TRUE, then they should be able to back it up in some way, no?

Hate me or love me, I am one of the few to consistently back up my positions with more than words. Should I be more flowerly and phoney to "make friends"? Or should I be a firece warrior for truth?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3337207 -

Who's version of the truth swami?

The truth known by your individual personal experience which has limitations from that of others?

The truth known by what modern (archaic) science can prove to be so which is limited by methodigies and tools yet undeveloped to be able to prove and validate more then it currently can?

The truth of what the government wants us to know, which is limited and corrupted?

Your truth has limitations and your means for validating truth can only validate what falls within that criteria. This is why no one can prove anything outside of it to you to be so. People who understand this know better then to even bother unless it falls within your validating realms.

Being a warrior of the truth does mean taking the truth as you know it and beating it into others. It means fighting for your own greater and deeper truth to be known and realised by YOU. It's a personal and individual crusade requiring courage and strength to confront your own mountain challenges, darkness and demons.

Moonshoe mentioned the difficulty for many to post here with ease and comfort because No One wants to have you show up with your warriors cave man club and beat YOUR truth into them. LOL Granted, these are thier own self created fears that they must overcome. You do serve a role and means for others to overcome such fears and levels of discomfort and they should because other wise dis-ease settles in, first mentally and emotionally and the physically.

So people when you can become at ease with a swami type, the planet is full of them they are verywhere get use to it, you'll know you are on the path to your own healing.

He wants to be of service here so use him AND appreciate him for that means of his helping you discover your own mental and emotional dis-eases.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3337242 -

You can play words games all day long jiggy, but the fact remains that in the last major dowsing test, the DOWSERS THEMSELVES agreed that the challenge was a FAIR TEST of their abilities. Naturally, they did no better than chance.

Why you would want to defend and advance pseudo-science is beyond me.

Why you attack the scientific method as being flawed while using a tool created by that method is ironic at best. All of your creature comforts came from rational thinking and analysis.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3337329 -

Why you would want to defend only one of the possibilities?


--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?

Edited by Gomp (11/09/04 01:07 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3337343 -

"Your rant is so vague as to be taken as more emotional residue than any salient arguments to be responded to"

really? my 'rant' was vague? i thought it was so very clear

ill try again

1. you made a statement "dowsing doesnt work in controlled studies."

2. I asked you to provide a source and link

3. you made statements like 'do i have to have a link for everything i know study or read?' and 'apparently only i can use a search engine'

4. i pointed out the inherent hypocrisy in replying to my request in such a way, as i was only mirroring behaviour i had seen in you in dozens of threads

conclusion: either back up all your own 'factual' claims with sources and links without complaint or else stop demanding that others do the same


was that clear enough for you?

and my point on irritation was perhaps poorly worded. what i meant by saying it was intellectual and not emotional irritation is this. Emotional responses to someone elses behaviour like anger or sadness are inherently useless as their only effect is to make yourself feel badly. However intellectual anger, the result of a desire for the greater good, is what drives us to act the only way to change the way things are .

I am acting, with this post, due to my intellectual irritation with the hypocrisy of your debating methods, with the hope of changing the way things are in such a way that you will either allow the free flow of ideas and oppinions without constant demands of source and link, or else you will at least follow those same guidelines yourself without complaint.


btw i was confused about this

"Your rant is so vague as to be taken as more emotional residue than any salient arguments "

um, salient arguments eh?

dictionary definition of salient:

Projecting or jutting beyond a line or surface; protruding.

Springing; jumping: salient tree toads

Strikingly conspicuous

my arguments dont jump and spring enough? they dont jut beyond a line or surface? they arent conspicuous enough?

sorry about that ill try harder next time...


lol now im a bit scared that i have offended a 'fierce warrior of truth'

how easy to be a fierce warrior from your den armchair, 'waging war' on people hundreds of miles away. But that wasnt even ever my point. i didnt ask you to be flowery or phony, i asked you not to be a hypocrite and to follow your own rules. that is all



Edited by Moonshoe (11/09/04 01:26 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3337412 -

Fair question. I see psuedo science as being an experimental, trial and error phase of progressive science. I'm glad its out there because, it's how we progress. A lot of what is called psuedo science today will become accepted science tommorow once the bugs are worked out.

The biggest bug resulting in the greatests of the errors of the experimentation phase, is the misinterpretation or mis application of the psuedo scientist himself, which is not neccesarily reflective of the subject they are working with as being flawed. Most often the one applying methods and making interpretations is the flaw in the mix to new discoveries.

Personally, dowsing seems like a pretty harmless past time to me as well as people talking about it. I could care less if it really works or not. I don't know if it does because I havn't tried it. If I ever did and got good consistant results with it myself, that is all I would need to be a believer. Until then, I don't know.

The experiment you posted means nothing to me. What if 50 percent of the dowsers were actually good at it and it does consistantly work for them and the other 50% were false wanna bes in denial of having poor skills and they skewed the test results?

I don't beleive everything I read at face value. I beleive the experiment happened as it was claimed to have happened. It doesn't impress me any which way. I lived enough to know and experience that things are not always what they appear to be. Without fail, I ussually come across something behind something behind something that keeps changing my view on what is in front of me.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Edited by gettinjiggywithit (11/09/04 01:51 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Moonshoe]
    #3338456 -

was that clear enough for you?
No.

However intellectual anger, the result of a desire for the greater good, is what drives us to act the only way to change the way things are .
Why does "your intellect" not get angry at those promoting false teachings such as "dowsing works"? How does spreading pseudo-science benefit the "greater good"?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3339375 -

i must say i am once again disapointed by your word games and dancing. pretending not to understand is one of the lamest cop outs yet. Feigning stupidity to avoid embarasment...

:rolleyes:

if you want to dance and dodge fine. My point is made.


--------------------


Everything I post is fiction.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3341682 -

Swami said:
Dowsers tested under controlled conditions have always failed miserably, performing no better than chance.


actually they don't but only because 90% of the time if you dig a deep enough hole there will be water. they did a test, they asked people NOT to hit water spots, none could.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Swami]
    #3350910 -

I have 20,000 dollars that I would put up, to prove that I can find water with coat hangers.

You want to make a bet?


Only I think that even if I win you will say I lose.


--------------------
What it is, is what it is my Brother.
It is as it is, so suffer thru it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Fucknuckle]
    #3351695 -

I'm sure if it was just a matter of "finding water" anyone could do it.

Water tables are pretty large in most parts of this country. As in, you don't need sticks to find the shit, you just look around, point down, and dig.



ps. pseudoscience is bunk because it's fake. you know.. hence the whole 'pseudo-'.. that means fake.

pps. believing in dowsing requires you believe a lot of other things. basically, you've got to buy that there's some sort of energy or field to water that we cannot detect at all --- except with a wooden stick, but sometimes it's metal, and sometimes it's two sticks, but it's definately a stick and that's the only way we can detect the 'field of the water'?
and nothing else we've ever made can detect this 'field of the water'.
That makes sense.


--------------------
i finally got around to making a sig
revel in its glory and quake in fear at its might
grar.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Finding Water? [Re: Mushmonkey]
    #3351870 -

Unless it is us that detect the water

And subconsciously move the sticks

To cue our conscious cue

Of the subconscious program

To dig

:cool:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Intellect WIll Not Solve Our Problems chodamunky 1,442 18 05/05/03 03:02 AM
by Strumpling
* i find subjective reality more interesting mr crisper 1,557 9 06/26/02 06:40 PM
by Sclorch
* Argument by Design Bullfrog1 1,683 10 12/09/07 07:38 PM
by Holly
* drugs...too self aware...intellectual confusion..need advice
( 1 2 all )		 kapowsin 4,796 31 09/19/03 07:58 PM
by silversoul7
* When you can't find meaning in school...
( 1 2 3 all )		 World Spirit 4,209 41 02/10/03 11:42 PM
by PDU
* The New Model ... I find it interesting- -very Crobih 2,448 14 10/17/01 04:14 PM
by Crobih
* An Age-Old Argument RebelSteve33 950 9 12/20/02 05:41 PM
by RebelSteve33
* If you think you will find enlightenment in a drug...
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Scarfmeister 8,785 65 06/19/03 03:14 PM
by Grav

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,612 topic views. 1 members, 76 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.03 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 17 queries.