CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>And one doesn't need to be ex-Go, ex-OSA to run those ops, but it does
>"help". They either don't know what they're doing, or they do, hard to say
>which is worse, but I'd say the 2nd is worse.

      Well when someone can't afford to let someone else be right and
admit they are wrong themselves, they will pick a fight at every turn.

      No matter WHAT you say, they will find something to counter it,
even if they have to fabricate to do so.  It becomes pretty obvious.

      Also when they turn to ad hominem, like 'known drug pusher' as if
that somehow throws doubt on your statement that 2+2=4.  Even a drug
pusher can be right.  It also implies that the accuser has NEVER been a
drug pusher himself, ever ever ever, etc, so we see how far their reach
and willingness to have been are.

      KP for example revisits old false rebuttals all the time, like the
one that I believe he doesn't exist.

      FIRST he avoids answering the point by SIDETRACKING the argument
into something that is irrelevant.  Whether I believe he exists or not,
has nothing to do with the fact that I am CLEARLY assuming he exists for
the purposes of the debate.

      He knows this.  He is grateful for the out from having to actually
take up the point

      But worse, the idea that I think he doesn't exist is his
misduplication.  Again, needing to find a reason to fight, he isn't
listening to me clearly enough to see that there is no reason to fight.

      And the last time he brought it up, I explained very clearly to him
what the real situation was, and he even acked it, saying ok, now he
understand etc.  Yet here he is again, using it all over again.

      He also likes to use the term "irrelevant".

      Irrelevant to what?  Clearing?  Getting better?  Tech?
Understanding the nature of the AllThatIs?

      Anyone who thinks my material is irrelevant to the well being of
their future is gone.

      That's like me saying UCP is irrelevant!

      He also uses the world hallucination a lot, but seems to
demonstrate a lack of understanding about what a hallucination actually

      If one believes in external actualities for which one's experiences
are merely symbols pointing to the actual referent, then having an
experience that implies a referent that does not exist would be a
hallucination, particular if one didn't know the experience was in

      But if one believes that experience is all the actuality there is,
beyond the experiencer of course and the underlying actuality that
connects us, then calling any experience a hallucination is absurd.

      There is a deeper level of hallucination which is to assign
significances to experiences.  One feels a mental mass in the way of
one's mocked up thetan hand moving through one's body.

      OK, so that's an experience we call a mental mass.  To say the
being is hallucinating is again out of line.  He experiences what he

      Same thing for disincarnate beings.  If I have a good session with
a being in a sleep dream, who am I to say the being was not actual?

      If I have a fight with a demonic entity in a sleep dream, and it
wins and I lose, who is to say the being was not actual?

      KP declares as hallucination a whole slew of things that he just
has no possible hope in hell of knowing are hallucinations or not.

      He is 'certain' of things that he CAN'T be certain of, and thus
unable to be certain of things he can be certain of.  Until the false
certainties are cleared, the true certainties will never become

      Anyhow, you can tell them by how they 'pick fights'.  You have
known people out looking to pick a physical fight with someone, anyone,
no matter whether they did something or not, and the need to mock up
that they did something even if they didn't do it.

      Well Koos, KP and others do the same thing.

      It's OBVIOUS.

      But pointing it out, won't change it.  The need inside them to pick
the fight is overwhelming and absolute.  Only the impingement of life
that shows them their safe solution is more dangerous than being
forthright will bring about change.


>- CBW

- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com    In the Line of Duty    http://www.lightlink.com

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jun  3 12:00:02 EDT 2018
WEB:  http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP:  ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/kp
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

Sun Jun  3 17:52:14 EDT 2018