Who am I? **A Story of the Struggle for Spiritual Liberation**

reply to post by AfterInfinity

There you go with that bad attitude and negativity again. This thread isn't just for people that agree with the OP, ya know? No matter how angry you get, you can't force people to see things like you do. It just won't work. Why should the OP taken for his word? He writes beautifully but that doesn't mean that people will find substance in his words. I always thought new agers were supposed to be far more positive, more of a "live and let live" crowd? Was I deceived?

reply to post by LesMisanthrope




Nice find. I wish I paid better attention to other posters.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


I am free to conjecture and theorize about any day I wish. I didn't banter it as proof; merely my take on things.

reply to post by NorEaster


I'm just going to say that nowhere in your rant was it even conducive or relative to my post. I'm merely pointing out the obvious. Skeptics aren't the only ones with valid opinions; so you should stop acting as such.

That. Was. All.

But no, you had to go on about all of that nonsense. I think you really missed the point dude.

reply to post by NorEaster

I am free to conjecture and theorize about any day I wish. I didn't banter it as proof; merely my take on things.

If people could theorize about asteroids hitting the planet, Nibiru coming along, etc. I was certainly free to give my perspective on things should they happen.

Anything that I conceive or theorize about is merely that; my take on things. Now the whole December 21st thing, is the Winter Solstice, which is where the pagan holiday of Christmas comes from. I thought the three days of darkness eschatology of Catholicism would have fit nicely with trying to induct an anti-christ to play out all this WWIII nonsense we have been building up to.

Did I believe, and spend money on guru's in the like, wasting my life over this date? Nope. I merely conjectured about the possibility of things.

Scientists do this on a daily basis; but I don't see anybody stringing up their laundry and failures.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas



Somehow, I just knew somebody was going to bring that thread up in a 'character assassination' style...Still not impressed.

If you want to dig up and parade one of my threads around; how about actually finding one of the better ones, hm?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

You will see scientists string up their own failures. Any experiment that yields results is a successful one. Their failures are, arguably, their greatest accomplishments because they learn from their mistakes.

reply to post by forgetmenot

You will see scientists string up their own failures. Any experiment that yields results is a successful one. Their failures are, arguably, their greatest accomplishments because they learn from their mistakes.

Not if their entire community persecutes them for being wrong in the first place.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


But by doing that we don't offer any credence to our speculations. It comes off as deceptive. Here in these topics we must work together. It's better to analyze a certain subject from different viewpoints. When someone brings up something that sheds doubt, we should instead pay attention here and not discard it as frivolous skepticism or immorality.

Of course there's going to be those who will crack a joke or speak maliciously about the OP; and their contribution can be regarded as just that. But the internet is an amoral wasteland where deception isn't only the norm, it is common currency. Skeptical inquiry is a good defence against such deceptive motivations and shouldn't be regarded so negatively by those who will see themselves deceived.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


You're mistaking "persecuted" with "challenged".

reply to post by forgetmenot

Their failures are, arguably, their greatest accomplishments because they learn from their mistakes.

Maybe; but it doesn't get near as much attention drawing and propaganda as if they were right. For instance, not long ago I participated in a thread about vaccines, in which I showed that at least 81 people were awarded settlements and compensation due to proving in court that their vaccines directly contributed to the onset of their autistic symptoms.

Now they are great about letting us know when they are right; but I've noticed more often than not they try to kick it under the rug from view when they are wrong.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

It comes off as deceptive.

If you are worried about deception, then oh boy do we have a few things to talk about. It is a different thing for somebody to be wrong in a conjecture, and the world moves on.

But if I try to pull a Harold Camping, saying I've received messages from God that the world is ending, and you should all follow me to the bank before we commit mass suicide, this would be a little more reason or incentive to be upset.

I think you have the wrong concept of what is deceptive and what is not. From what I'm aware, intent and motive play a big factor. I think it silly though to start stringing up people over 2012, when the most hardened conspiracy topics involving the government and true deception are considered to be deception in themselves...

Just saying, we have bigger fish to fry in terms of deceit, than personal beliefs about 2012.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Anecdotes aside, the point was there is at least one group you will see focusing on their failures.

reply to post by NorEaster

The only things happening at this point that were a change were those self-hypnosis tapes and being introduced to coc aine - lots of it - as a result of a band I'd just joined. That being the case, I cant say for sure which caused the "impossible" cure, but I've never had a stutter affliction since, and that's not supposed to be possible.

I could say the same for yourself. This isn't a thread knocking you or anybody else, so lets not change it into such. I'm saying be careful of statements made that could make you sound hypocritical, for instance, using the case that 'new agers' aren't the only ones entitled to an opinion, and then turning around to act as if theirs don't matter either.

We refer to this as the pot calling the kettle black.

LesMis, this is what I meant in respects to yourself. This isn't an attempt to start an argument or conflict. I'm just saying mind how you come across.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas



Precisely. Both NorEaster and LesMisanthrope have given the impression that not only do they not understand, but that they don't care.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


You say that as if it's a fact, not the opinion that it really is. People often come different conclusions when presented with the same information. It's really not hard to understand that there would be such a disparity in opinion when such outlandish things are being claimed, would you not agree? That's why objectivity is important in these types of situations. It's important to see what's really there and not just what you want to be there.

reply to post by forgetmenot

It's important to see what's really there and not just what you want to be there.

Well considering we have a number of members who practiced OBE/Astral Projection, and possibly remote viewing...I don't think that everybody who jumped on his proverbial bandwagon, is the mindless robots or sheep you make them out to be.

We never said either that alternate opinions were unwelcome; however it is different thing altogether to act as if that is the only one that matters. This is what I'm saying. Please don't make it anymore complicated than this.

I am not bashing NorEaster, or LesMisanthrope; I'm saying they should be careful of how they present their opinions, because it could be seen as insensitive and hypocritical to the people with contrary opinions to theirs.

It's really not that hard to understand man.

reply to post by AfterInfinity
I believe you are mistaken in that they do not understand and that they do not care. They, as well as I, understand things from a different perspective than yours. And I see much care as if they cared not they would not waste their time with this thread at all, much less continue to express their thoughts on the matter.

I realize that you also care much for this particular OPs writings and that you feel a connection to them, so you defend any criticism passionately. But do please try to remember that there are two sides to every pancake and in any subject both sides of said pancake should be allowed to be exposed.

You guys, who just registered in the last couple months, you're all a posse, aren't you.

NOPE! I know you may not be referring to me, (specifically) sounds like you're referring to "the followers" as a whole, but I felt lumped into this ^ category regardless.

This isn't the introductory section on this forum, duh, but here's a rundown of what I would have said, had I decided to introduce myself.

I've been a lurker on ATS now for a couple of months. I was actually referred to the site by my father, who likes to read, but not interact. Under a different user-name, I was a long time member of another forum, you might have heard of it, called "Unexplained Mysteries" where similar topics were discussed.

I've always had a hunger for the truth. So it was only a matter of time before I joined the conspiracy nutters here.

Though it may not seem like it, I do take into consideration what the skeptics say. I'm used to that, there are plenty of skeptics over at good old UM too, who try to keep the whimsical thinkers in line.

I don't normally get involved with the skeptics and believers tug of war, but I felt like clarifying my position.

I'm on the fence when it comes to the OP. Just like I'm on the fence about a lot of theories. Still, I like to give people who spike my curiosity the "benefit of the doubt", ask questions, while feeling around in the dark for myself. I don't think I should be underestimated for that. I may not seem like it, I may seem like one of the "wounded" sheep, (and I kind of am) but that doesn't mean I'm completely incapable of discerning things for myself. As I said before, no problem with the skeptics who post decent rebuttals to the topic. Those kind of skeptics are a necessity in fact. But when they start to reach out with their pincers and subtly take a jab at those who entertain certain possibilities just because "they" don't like it, that's when the skeptics become oh so annoying.

Likewise, some of the "supporters" are guilty of this too.

That is all.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I am free to conjecture and theorize about any day I wish. I didn't banter it as proof; merely my take on things.

If people could theorize about asteroids hitting the planet, Nibiru coming along, etc. I was certainly free to give my perspective on things should they happen.

Anything that I conceive or theorize about is merely that; my take on things. Now the whole December 21st thing, is the Winter Solstice, which is where the pagan holiday of Christmas comes from. I thought the three days of darkness eschatology of Catholicism would have fit nicely with trying to induct an anti-christ to play out all this WWIII nonsense we have been building up to.

Did I believe, and spend money on guru's in the like, wasting my life over this date? Nope. I merely conjectured about the possibility of things.

Scientists do this on a daily basis; but I don't see anybody stringing up their laundry and failures.

I never had any problem with your thoughts on the 2012 thing. I still don't. My issue is with the pack of dogs that have been attacking anyone that's challenged the OP of this and the other two threads he's authored. That - to me - is a form of determined intimidation that, if the OP wants to engage in it, then let him engage in it. The Greek Chorus gang tackle is a classic tactic that political pros engage in as well - relieving the candidate from having to "get into the mud" with his/her detractors, since everyone knows that such a salesperson loses their broader appeal as soon as they've been forced off their crafted presentation persona.

Let the OP defend himself in his threads, in the same way that we all have to. Shielding him - whether that was your intent or not - is not helping the effort to determine the veracity and validity of his claims. If bold claims are made, powerful evidence must accompany them. Deny Ignorance - right? Well, that's all we're trying to do here.