|
 Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
 The Contamination on the Cake... 
#604193 - 04/10/02 10:36 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I see you changed your title... so are you the dreaded green mold or that nasty black shit?
I AM THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA, THE GREEN AND THE BLACK, THE NASTY AND THE SLIMEY.
Yes, it is true. I have been called "The Contamination on the Cake that is the Shroomery".
I walk naked down the streets of life speaking in a loud, clear voice, while those not understanding choose to defile me. I wear my new muddied title proudly for my spirit cannot be soiled by another's words!
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Anonymous
|
 Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#604205 - 04/10/02 10:56 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
You are the mold, the penicillin. Fighting the infection of blind acceptance and uncritical thought.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: ]
#604217 - 04/10/02 11:11 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah.. we certainly don't want rhizomorphic mycelium running amock! Anyone got a flow hood?
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: ]
#604229 - 04/10/02 11:20 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Heh, heh - you make a great sidekick!
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: ]
#604230 - 04/10/02 11:22 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Went to a bar last night and dragged some drunk and willing vixen home. She told me that before I could innoculate her petri dish, I would have to wear a flow hood. Whussup wif dat?
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
Edited by Swami (04/14/02 03:34 AM)
|
Revelation
ॐ
Registered: 08/04/01
Posts: 6,135
Loc: heart cave
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#604251 - 04/10/02 12:04 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I guess that's just the way it goes..
--------------------
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Revelation]
#604426 - 04/10/02 02:31 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
What is a few endospores among friends?
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#604531 - 04/10/02 04:37 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
No fruits
|
 Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 33,879
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 30 minutes
|
 Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#605140 - 04/11/02 08:02 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The reason that I said that about you is because you seem to get off on shooting peoples spiritual theorys down. There's a difference between being a skeptic, and just being nasty. I've seen more than one of your posts where you shoot someones theory down with a condescending attitude, just to shoot them down. You're not trying to push them closer to their own truth, you're just trying to get off by putting people down.
The bottom line for you is prove it. Nobody can have an opinion here on this great message board according to Swami unless it's been proven without a shadow of a doubt. There are a lot of unprovable theories out there, either because of gov't coverup, or just because the subject is so complex that ordinary people like us have trouble articulating what we feel. Spirituality ITSELF would be lost if people listened to you. After all, noone in the world can prove that God, or life after life exists, and who are we to trust our own judgement?
If you "Swami" every theory or idea people have on the S & P forum, then there would be no S & P forum. Since the bottom line with you is "prove it", why don't you just save yourself some time, go to each and every thread where someone has an interesting, but as of yet unproven idea, and just write prove it. That'll shut everyone up right then and there. I'm sick of all the free thinking around here. "Prove it" would shut that free thinking down right away. Uncle Sam would be proud of you.
--------------------
--------------------------------
Mp3 of the month: Apple Glass Cyndrome - Someday
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Learyfan]
#605191 - 04/11/02 09:15 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
There's a difference between being a skeptic, and just being nasty.
Very true. I am a skeptic and you are nasty. Attacking ideas is not attacking people, I guess you cannot see the difference. However, you want to EXCLUDE people from here that you don't like. How spiritual is THAT? How many people has the Swam asked to leave? None. I accept all of my children.
Remember that Jesus was highly unpoular while alive and Hitler was very popular; so likability has nothing to do with truth or morals.
I've seen more than one of your posts where you shoot someones theory down with a condescending attitude, just to shoot them down.
I vehemently attack the thinking that supports the War on Drugs, but I doubt that you have a problem with that.
As I stated in our last bout, you are not qualified to judge my motivation. BTW I spelled my motivation out in a long post. Perhaps you did not read it or your short-term memory is weak...
Nobody can have an opinion here on this great message board according to Swami unless it's been proven without a shadow of a doubt.
Not true at all. Internally inconsistent logic, drawing outrageous causal links, using fallacious arguments or stating hypothesis that are EASILY testable are a few of my favorite targets.
Spirituality ITSELF would be lost if people listened to you.
Whatever that is? No one can even roughly agree on a definition. What WOULD be lost is blindly following populist cult leaders, the WOD, war between nations due to twisted thinking. That plus a whole helluva lot of ignorance and fraud. My acquaintence from the Heaven's Gate Cult would still be alive.
I'm sick of all the free thinking around here.
That is a scary posture. Governments and religions also hate free-thinking.
My signature quotes sum up my position, not "Prove it." However when someone clearly states that EVERY time I trip, X happens, then yes, I will definitely say "Prove it." In these cases they are claiming repeatability with a with a known set of initial variables.
When someone tripping in their room, who has not done any deep study claims to know more than people who have dedicated their life to a subject (such as astronomy, physics, Egyptology, biology, chemistry, etc.) then yes, I am extremely doubtful. It seems that your attitude encourages laziness and a total lack of discipline.
Your hero, Leary, may well have been transformed by psychedelics, but he put in his time and paid his dues. He, along with Alpert , Mentzer and Huston, all had PhDs and postions of respect. These were not teenagers tripping during 8th grade math class and having an epiphany about good and evil aliens.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
mr crisper
.
Registered: 07/24/00
Posts: 928
|
 Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Learyfan]
#605199 - 04/11/02 09:29 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
i gotta be honest and say i find swami's posts particularly stimulating, in a unique and wholesome way.
|
Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 33,879
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 30 minutes
|
 Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#605264 - 04/11/02 10:24 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Attacking ideas is not attacking people, I guess you cannot see the difference.
There is no difference sometimes. Attacking someones deep beliefs is just like attacking them. I admit that I challenge peoples beliefs IF I think I have a better line of reasoning. You just say(in so many words) "prove it", and that's it. Of course that's not all of the time. I'm speaking generally. Sometimes you have a good arguement.
However, you want to EXCLUDE people from here that you don't like. How spiritual is THAT? How many people has the
Swam asked to leave? None. I accept all of my children.
I don't remember asking you to leave, but I do feel that The Shroomery was a much nicer place to discuss spiritual matters before you decided that everyone needed to have proof of any idea that they had.
As I stated in our last bout, you are not qualified to judge my motivation. BTW I spelled my motivation out in a long post.
Perhaps you did not read it or your short-term memory is weak..
I'm not qualified to judge your motivation? What kind of excuse is that? Hitler could have said that. I do have a weak short term memory I guess, because I read your reasoning, and forgot. All I know is that it wasn't any excuse for your behavior IMO.
Internally inconsistent logic, drawing outrageous causal links, using fallacious arguments or stating
hypothesis that are EASILY testable are a few of my favorite targets.
"Inconsistent", "outrageous" and "fallacious" are all opinions. I do believe you're right sometimes, I will say once again.
What WOULD be lost is blindly following populist cult
leaders, the WOD, war between nations due to twisted thinking(if people listened to Swami)
No spirituality itself would be lost, because there is NO WAY of possibly proving that there is a higher power out there, or life after death. Since there is no way of proving it, you can sit there and say "prove it" all day, noone can say anything, because they can't prove it. The WOD can be proven wrong by simple logic.
I'm sick of all the free thinking around here.(LF)
That is a scary posture. Governments and religions also hate free-thinking.
I was being sarcasitic. Governments and religions hate free-thinking, and it seems to be the same way with you. You won't stop until everyone stops believing in themselves. Belief in our own judgement is all we have. We don't have proof that God exists, so if proof is what we need in order to have an opinion, then we can't have an opinion.
Your hero, Leary, may well have been transformed by psychedelics, but he put in his time and paid his dues. He, along with
Alpert , Mentzer and Huston, all had PhDs and postions of respect. These were not teenagers tripping during 8th grade math
class and having an epiphany about good and evil aliens.
Ok, you're getting better Swami. Now we can have an opinion about spirituality as long as we have a Harvard diploma. Well at least that's obtainable.
--------------------
--------------------------------
Mp3 of the month: Apple Glass Cyndrome - Someday
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Learyfan]
#605315 - 04/11/02 11:09 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Attacking ideas is not attacking people, I guess you cannot see the difference.
There is no difference sometimes.
Not even close. You say the world is flat and I attack that ridiculous notion. That is not an attack on you, but on your programming or incomplete thought process.
Attacking someones deep beliefs is just like attacking them.
Later in this post you say that you are for free-thinking. A deep-seated belief PRECLUDES free-thinking; at least in that specific arena. So what are you for? Do you think removing a cancerous tumor is attacking the person?
Inconsistent", "outrageous" and "fallacious" are all opinions.
Not even close.
Inconsistent argument:
The bible is the Word of God and always right.
Passage X says killing is wrong.
Passage Y says to kill a man if he sleeps with another man.
Fallacious argument:
All dogs have four legs.
Puffball has four legs.
Puffball is a dog.
Outrageous Argument
Drug use supports terrorism.
The WOD can be proven wrong by simple logic.
The majority of people say otherwise. To attack their beliefs would be tantamount to attacking their personage (Learyfan paragraph 1). This is a fine example of your INCONSISTENT logic.
I was being sarcasitic.
Now we are getting somewhere. Learyfan's sarcasm is acceptable and Swami's sarcasm is irreprehensible. Once again your logic fails me.
Governments and religions hate free-thinking, and it seems to be the same way with you.
You must be joking! All my posts regarding religion are cleary against it.
Yet, according to your (I hate to use the term) logic:
A. Swami is religious; therefore he hates free-thinking.
B, Swami is anti-religious; therefore he hates free-thinking.
Once again you are totally inconsistent. Of course, on your reply, you will quickly evade all of my salient points as per usual.
What WOULD be lost is ... the WOD...
No...
SO the WOD would not go away using clear Swami-style logic?
The WOD can be proven wrong by simple logic.
Oh, the WOD would go away using Swami-style logic.
Does schizophrenia run in your family?
Now we can have an opinion about spirituality as long as we have a Harvard diploma.
Nowehere did I state that. Those are your words. Perhaps a reading comprehension class would help.
There is a HUGE difference between a Harvard professor rejecting status and position, and some burnt-out teenage stoner saying education sucks. This is called perspective.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 33,879
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 30 minutes
|
 Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#605407 - 04/11/02 12:52 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Ok, you'll probably just accuse me of side-stepping the issue, as you do every time I prove you wrong but....
Attacking someones deep beliefs is just like attacking them.(LF)
Later in this post you say that you are for free-thinking. A deep-seated belief PRECLUDES free-thinking; at least in that
specific arena.
So a free-thinker can't have any deep-seated beliefs?
"Inconsistent", "outrageous" and "fallacious" are all opinions.(LF)
Not even close.
Ok, you're just plain wrong here. I don't want to get off track anymore than we already have, but "Inconsistent", "outrageous" and "fallacious" are all opinions. They are subjective phenonmenon. The examples you gave were correct, but anyone can say anything is "outrageous".
The WOD can be proven wrong by simple logicThe majority of people say otherwise. To attack their beliefs would be tantamount to attacking their personage (Learyfan
paragraph 1). This is a fine example of your INCONSISTENT logic.
Oh get real. The WOD is not a deep-seated spiritual belief. That's what I was refering to, and you know it. Even if it does tie into that persons deep-seated spirital beliefs, the WOD hurts many many innocent people, and some guy who gets on the Shroomery and says that he talked to God after eating 7 grams of shrooms isn't hurting anyone. To that person you would say "prove it", just because it gets your dick hard
I was being sarcasitic.
Now we are getting somewhere. Learyfan's sarcasm is acceptable and Swami's sarcasm is irreprehensible. Once again your
logic fails me.
What are you talking about?? When were you being sarcastic? Did you just pluck that out of thin air or what?
SO the WOD would not go away using clear Swami-style logic?
I never said that. You're twisting my words Swami. The WOD would go away using Swami style logic. If you said "prove it prove it prove it prove it" everytime someone brought up some eronious justification for the existence of the WOD, to enough politicians, it would go away. The WOD is a completely different. Before you got us off track we were talking about how you constantly say "prove it" when someone suggests an unproveable spiritual theory.
Now we can have an opinion about spirituality as long as we have a Harvard diploma.(LF)
Nowehere did I state that. Those are your words. Perhaps a reading comprehension class would help.
Of course you didn't say it, but you obviously suggested that. Read your own words. You even suggested it again when you said There is a HUGE difference between a Harvard professor rejecting status and position, and some burnt-out teenage stoner
saying education sucks. This is called perspective.
What are you saying? You're saying that the only "opinion" you will accept is from someone with a Harvard degree.
Look, it's obvious that you get your rocks off by slashing peoples unprovable theories even if you have no logical reason why they are wrong, so just go ahead an keep doing it.
--------------------
--------------------------------
Mp3 of the month: Apple Glass Cyndrome - Someday
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Learyfan]
#605497 - 04/11/02 02:36 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
See? I knew you would dodge this!
Governments and religions hate free-thinking, and it seems to be the same way with you.
You must be joking! All my posts regarding religion are cleary against it.
Yet, according to your (I hate to use the term) logic:
A. Swami is religious; therefore he hates free-thinking.
B. Swami is anti-religious; therefore he hates free-thinking.
Once again you are totally inconsistent. Of course, on your reply, you will quickly evade all of my salient points as per usual.
What part of this inconsistency is opinion? A and B cannot both be true. Please clarify.
The WOD brainwashing is no different then religious brainwashing. Prohibitionists strongly believe that they are taking a moral and hence, religious stance.
You think it OK to question those people's beliefs because you think that their stance is wrong. But you say to attack anothere's beliefs is to attack the person? I still don't get you. Now you add the "deep-seated spiritual" sub-clause to belief that is not OK to attack.
Look, it's obvious that you get your rocks off ..
More standard believer emotional noise adding zero content to the discussion.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
AbstractSoul
member
Registered: 02/01/02
Posts: 172
Last seen: 21 years, 1 month
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#605531 - 04/11/02 03:15 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
says in his best mortal kombat voice: FINISH HIM!
--------------------
---------------------------------------------
house is a spiritual thing
---------------------------------------------
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#605536 - 04/11/02 03:25 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Swami-
This is the problem:
1. People's egos take it personally when they are proven wrong. Most people are uncomfortable with the idea of being imperfect (though many will boast that they are comfortable with it... most of them are just lying to themselves). I personally went through all that shit back in high school. Ten weeks of intensive self-administered ego-depressants and some psychoanalysis blew most of that away (now I just feel kinda shitty when I am proven wrong, but I DO admit any wrongness on my part).
2. Our culture's (and most others) rejection of hypocrisy and contradiction. Most people misunderstand both of these concepts and they think that changing their stance on any issue will have an adverse affect on the rest of their belief system. So, they'll go out of their way trying to maintain this belief system... some will even go as far as denying the definition of simple philosophical terms (where did I see that?).
I'm not sure if I made my point clear enough... Oh well, I'll fix it later (mind is drifting).
--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 33,879
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 30 minutes
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Swami]
#607309 - 04/13/02 01:33 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Governments and religions hate free-thinking, and it seems to be the same way with you.
You must be joking! All my posts regarding religion are cleary against it.
Yet, according to your (I hate to use the term) logic:
A. Swami is religious; therefore he hates free-thinking.
B. Swami is anti-religious; therefore he hates free-thinking.
Once again you are totally inconsistent. Of course, on your reply, you will quickly evade all of my salient points as per usual.
What part of this inconsistency is opinion? A and B cannot both be true. Please clarify.
Dude, what the hell are you talking about? I'm all confused. You're smarter than I am. I admit defeat.
--------------------
--------------------------------
Mp3 of the month: Apple Glass Cyndrome - Someday
|
Buddha
enthusiast
Registered: 12/21/99
Posts: 356
Loc: Toronto
Last seen: 21 years, 4 months
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Learyfan]
#607416 - 04/13/02 04:27 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I just wanted to point out that Jesus was extremely popular during his time, that why he was killed, because he was developing too much of a following and threatened the stability and the power of others at that time. And Hitler wasn't too popular, thats why he was killed. The people who hated Hitler far outnumbered the people who liked him.
I dont know swami, so I could be wrong, but it seems like his only problem is his ego. It seem like he thinks that he's always right, and that he see's himself as superior to others. But he has good intentions and he is no worse than anyone else. I appologize if I am wrong.
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: The Contamination on the Cake... [Re: Buddha]
#607827 - 04/14/02 04:00 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I just wanted to point out that Jesus was extremely popular during his time,
OK, you pointed it out. Incorrectly though. The crowd had a choice to free one man on a religious holiday. They could choose either the savior of all mankind or a common thief. Jesus was so popular that the thief, Barabas, was released.
And Hitler wasn't too popular...
Just voted in by a landslide by the people of Germany. You must have a strange definition of popularity. Several million backers is popular by any stretch of the imagination.
[but it seems like his only problem is his ego
Everyone here has an ego, so what? Time and again my points are dodged and my persona and /or motivation is questioned. Statements should stand or fall on their own merit regardless of the nature of the poster.
It seem like he thinks that he's always right...
A large number of my rebuttals are in the form of questions or hilighting a clear inconsistency in the poster's thought process.
My pointing out that Egyptologists know more about the pyramids than any poster here cannot be construed as the Swami being right.
My pointing out inaccuracies in astrophysics regarding Niburu is hardly about the Swami being right.
My pointing out that telepathy on mushrooms can easily be tested is not about the Swami being right.
My pointing out discrepancies in Astrological theory has nothing to do with the Swami's ego.
And so on...
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Red Vein Kratom 
Buy Kratom Extract 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Buy Super Blended Green Sumatra 
North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Learyfan
LunarEclipse
Swami
psychopsilocyber
OldWoodSpecter
Metasyn