A LightWorker's Request - Come and ASK

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   


Way to doge and deflect. The title is "Come and ASK" so you did come to answer questions even if the desired result is the raising of vibrations. Also, I am not really nay saying, I am just saying that you're techique is less than lackluster.


We would not have made the thread if there were no possibilites for those who denied the catalyst at their current time/space, to learn some sort of lesson from their choice of thought forms.

There is no technique, one does or does not.




While they are not the only ones, they are the ones commonly available to those that you are trying to reach. Formatting the words in cliched "master" format doesn't make the words any clearer or cause them to carry deeper meaning.


Correct, so we propose that they use them.

The meaning lies within that who, reads/writes or writes/reads, the annotations typed by this instrument. Since 'you' have such knowledge of that which we do not (a.k.a - this "cliched 'master' format", of which you stated above),please..describe it to us.

We think in the manner of which we think, and this instrument interprets these thoughts in the way that he interprets them; just like a infant may 'write' in scribbles. To him/her, it makes perfect sense, however..to a knowledgable and more evolved being as 'yourself', it is just a bunch of curved lines...However, it is the infant's fault? He/She does not, at his/her current "age", have sufficient experience to even know that letters/numbers/words even exist.

Try to apply this to more than just literal meaning.


Speaking to people in a language they don't even understand and hoping that the sounds, which don't come through on text based communications, cause a reaction not tied to the meaning that they will apply shows a bit of naviety on your part.


As far as we know, we are "speaking" in English. However, if this is not the language that you wish for us to speak in, we will accommodate your wishes to the best of our ability.

..with Google Translate.

What does one do when approached by a man speaking in a Language one does not understand? Let's say... Russian? Would one argue with this Russian speaker, who speaks in a language the being cannot understand? We would sure hope not, for it would lead you back to the first place that you began.

However, if one should maybe ask what certain things "meant", in terms of the person's thoughts, then maybe the Russian man would seem clearer.

We would like to propose a question, my friend.



Sorry but I don't have a glass in sight and if by glass you mean something else then just say what you mean. I would think that thousands of years of people misinterpreting metaphors would have taught people to realize their limitations.


We would propose a question, that maybe he/she has been asked before in "past" time/space.

Has the possibility ever arose that maybe you were not always correct?

There are more to letters and words that meet the eyes.



edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
We would not have made the thread if there were no possibilites for those who denied the catalyst at their current time/space, to learn some sort of lesson from their choice of thought forms.

There is no technique, one does or does not.

The process that you are using is a technique. You can't wiggle out of what things in this material world mean.


Correct, so we propose that they use them.

How can they use them if they don't know how?


The meaning lies within that who, reads/writes or writes/reads, the annotations typed by this instrument. Since 'you' have such knowledge of that which we do not (a.k.a - this "cliched 'master' format", of which you stated above),please..describe it to us.

Stop acting naive. They way you write is that format, also called "lame fortune cookie" and "yoda wanna be style", by me in this thread. You have used it throughout this thread so don't act like you don't know what it is.


We think in the manner of which we think, and this instrument interprets these thoughts in the way that he interprets them; just like a infant may 'write' in scribbles. To him/her, it makes perfect sense, however..to a knowledgable and more evolved being as 'yourself', it is just a bunch of curved lines...However, it is the infant's fault? He/She does not, at his/her current "age", have sufficient experience to even know that letters/numbers/words even exist.

Try to apply this to more than just literal meaning.

Pointing out why this particular communication method fails doesn't eliminate its inadequacy.


As far as we know, we are "speaking" in English. However, if this is not the language that you wish for us to speak in, we will accommodate your wishes to the best of our ability.

..with Google Translate.

If you don't understand that a vocabulary which belongs to a particular field and is not common knowledge to the majority of a group, even though they speak the same language, is also referred to as a language then your choice of communication method is probably as bad as it can get.


We would propose a question, that maybe he/she has been asked before in "past" time/space.

Has the possibility ever arose that maybe you were not always correct?

There are more to letters and words that meet the eyes.

This makes less sense than the original question.

edit on 1-1-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 08:36 PM
link   


The process that you are using is a technique. You can't wiggle out of what things in this material world mean.


There is no process, this idea of a process is, how 'you' would say; "made up". "Made up" by the Scholars of this realm, the ones who "possess great knowledge" and love to give definitions to that which they cannot... decipher; one could say.

One who seeks knowledge for the sake of knowledge, will never find meaning.




How can they use them if they don't know how?


Ask

However..if the "process" ('I' will use this in quotations, for we trust it will be easier for 'you' to understand) by which one would go about this was blatantly given, there would be no learning involved.

If a boy does not know how to shoot a basketball, in yet his "teacher" tells him to "watch" while he instantaneously goes through his/her own mental "process" from which he learned; and shoots the ball into the hoop.

Yes, the boy now "knows" what shooting looks like, however..when he takes the ball, all he can do is mimic the actions. No one has taught him how to.

One must take the initiative to ask for an understanding of the details that make up said "process", once all base level understandings have been made, one can then build from the base. Rather; one can then take what he/she has learned and attempt to apply it, by his/her own means. For if he/she never does, how will he/she ever quite learn..and stop mimic-ing.




Stop acting naive. They way you write is that format, also called "lame fortune cookie" and "yoda wanna be style", by me in this thread. You have used it throughout this thread so don't act like you don't know what it is.


We wish to propose that 'you' look at the bolded section of your above annotation.

My friend, 'you' have proved our point. 'You' have created a thought, based on 'your' database of knowledge. This idea of "lame fortune cookie" and "yoda wanna be style" that you speak of (one cannot deny this, for it is clear in the above quote). 'I' have/had no knowledge of such "style", for it never existed in my "database".

My brother/sister, 'you' have said it as clear as day. Look again:


also called "lame fortune cookie" and "yoda wanna be style", by me in this thread. ...


Shortened..


called...by me in this thread


'You' are the only one who has been calling whatever "this" is, a so called "style". Therefore, there is nothing that any being could say or do to destroy such a thought, for it is of 'your' creation. All we can do, is give an understanding..

The point[ of this thread.

Namaste.



Pointing out why this particular communication method fails doesn't eliminate its inadequacy.


If "this" has "failed", then we would not be speaking at the moment.

"Inadequacy" is in the eye of the beholder. For 'you' are the one that applies such 'inadequacy'.



If you don't understand that a vocabulary which belongs to a particular field and is not common knowledge to the majority of a group, even though they speak the same language, is also referred to as a language then your choice of communication method is probably as bad as it can get.


If 'you' wish to for us to "speak" in a manner of that which 'you' could understand, by - we guess - speaking in what you would called "simple" terms..then 'why' do you speak in the same manner we do?

"Common knowledge" is only as common as it is to the people who know about it. If 'you' have an intent, by which you express through written annotation; it will only be 'understood' in the manner of which 'you' intended if one of (or both) things happen:

1) Said being 'explains' their primary intention of said "written annotation", without anyone asking
2) Wait for the "readers" to realize that whatever is going on inside of their mind is completly wrong, and not what 'you' had intended.

BUT, my good friend. how was the reader supposed to know your "intention" if in fact he/she never knew what "they" were in the first place? What is left..is this reader's understanding.

The denial of the possibility of an outside understanding, beyond that of the idea's manifestor is: Ignorance.


Which will rid thee of understanding. A shame..



This makes less sense than the original question.


Think about it, my dear brother..something that this realm has been tricked into not doing.

Namaste.

edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
There is no process, this idea of a process is, how 'you' would say; "made up". "Made up" by the Scholars of this realm, the ones who "possess great knowledge" and love to give definitions to that which they cannot... decipher; one could say.

One who seeks knowledge for the sake of knowledge, will never find meaning.

Wrong, that isn't how it works.


Ask

What for, if the person your asking can't give a clear answer.


We wish to propose that 'you' look at the bolded section of your above annotation.

My friend, 'you' have proved our point. 'You' have created a thought, based on 'your' database of knowledge. This idea of "lame fortune cookie" and "yoda wanna be style" that you speak of (one cannot deny this, for it is clear in the above quote). 'I' have/had no knowledge of such "style", for it never existed in my "database".

That doesn't mean that you didn't use it and that it is an inefficient way of getting knowledge across.


'You' are the only one who has been calling whatever "this" is, a so called "style". Therefore, there is nothing that any being could say or do to destroy such a thought, for it is of 'your' creation. All we can do, is give an understanding..

The point[ of this thread.

Namaste.

I'm calling it that, and whoever is staring my posts is probably concurring because the format you are using fits those descriptions. You are not really giving any understanding so your thread is a fail. I'm just trying to point out why you're failing but it seems like you refuse to accept any responsibility for that.


If "this" has "failed", then we would not be speaking at the moment.

"Inadequacy" is in the eye of the beholder. For 'you' are the one that applies such 'inadequacy'.

Not always, you seem to have a problem with that bit of understanding.


If 'you' wish to for us to "speak" in a manner of that which 'you' could understand, by - we guess - speaking in what you would called "simple" terms..then 'why' do you speak in the same manner we do?

If you don't realize the difference in the way you speak and the way I speak then maybe you should find someone else to get the message out because it isn't the same.


Think about it, my dear brother..something that this realm has been tricked into not doing.

Namaste.

Namaste? and you want to come off like you have no idea what new age or what some of its ideas are. I call BS and will just let you get on with answering what ever questions others may have, although I would advise them to take anything you say with a few grains of salt.


edit on 1-1-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Some points of reference for you, my brother. From the OP:


However, we guide him in his thought process when approached with the choice of joining into the unnecessary spontaneous conversation(s) that arise when a fellow self decides to post a thread about a topic of concern to him/her.


This is what we have tried not to get engaged in, however, it has occured
But with good intentions on our part.


That all that is said shall be taken with a grain of salt of 'your' choosing. Nothing is to be taking for fact, that choice lies within 'you'. For we know that there are those who seek help, who are afraid to ask, there is no reason to fear, loved ones.


Thank you for "suggesting" that these posters take our annotations with a grain of salt. We can see that 'you' have ignored the OP, for it has already been stated.


We wish to offer some guidance for anyone who seeks it; for those who have battled with themselves over the experiences they encounter on a day to day basis.


If 'you' do not seek it, then that is OK, for we have no purpose to 'shun' those who hear, but do not listen. For they will. when the time comes.


We, nor this instrument, are/is "all knowing".


'You' write as if 'you' know more than the one's who don't even post.

We have surrendered this possibility in our case.



We offer our assistance, we offer a '"outside perspective" , if you will. Do not expect 'answers', do not 'expect'.


That is all.

The only one who/that possess "answers", is you



If there are any matters at hand that one wishes to seek guidance on, please ask. Any question may be asked, however do not 'expect' an answer. For the answer will only be a reflection of the quality of the question being asked.


Any question may be asked, however if the core of the question possess no importance, other than that of the benefit of the poster (some reason that could not be applied to others that wouldn't allow for spiritual growth) then the answer will possess similar qualities; in the eyes of the poster. For this is simple fact.

If 'you' do not like the color Blue, and a loved one buys you a new Blue car; would you not like it? Correct, you would not, for inside 'your' mind..you have already made it known (to yourself) that Blue is meaningless to you. However, it may not be to someone else.



There will always be the "nay-sayers", those who are still strongly under the influence of the veil, as well as the illusion. We do not "shun" you away, brother/sister..we actually welcome you here. However, we ask that instead of acting on your impulse to belittle an argument that lies outside of your current understanding, take a second..and think about what it is you are saying.


Something 'you' still fight.


For the first thought form to come to mind will most likely be that which you seek the most information about.


Confusion can lead to understanding, or more confusion; the choice is up to you


edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   


What for, if the person your asking can't give a clear answer.


What is "Clear" will be decided by that who reads it.

How do YOU pronounce this sound complex: Tomato

One may say: TOE-MAH-TOE

However, another may say: TOE-MAY-TOE

Same word, same meaning, but different ways of approaching it. However, if one is to say one is wrong and one is right or correct, then that being is presenting qualities of the Scholar. We congratulate that being on his/her wonderful achievement of sustaining "great knowledge".

If any being expects the problems he/she experiences at any time/space to be spelled out for them is very mis-informed.

We apologize to say, but my friend, THAT is NOT how it "works".
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GreeneLight
 

If you were really enlightened you wouldn't need to have an escape clause attached to the knowledge that you offer.

BS is BS, regardless if it is clear to the person being duped or not.

edit on 2-1-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   


If you were really enlightened you wouldn't need to have an escape clause attached to the knowledge that you offer.


Please, if you would so kindly, give us 'your' perspective on what we are "using" as a escape clause.




BS is BS, regardless if it is clear to the person being duped or not.


We would ask a similar question that we just did, what is this BS as defined by you?

If the manner of which we ask this question is unclear, please inform us of how we could be of better understanding.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
Please, if you would so kindly, give us 'your' perspective on what we are "using" as a escape clause.

Blaming the reader for not grasping the message when it is in fact you who can't give a clear answer.


We would ask a similar question that we just did, what is this BS as defined by you?

This whole thread and the idea behind it.

If what you want is a definition of BS and your instrument can't give it to you, then the "One Infinite Creator", more than likely not real, did a piss poor job of selecting the messenger, which has been pretty much my point all along.

edit on 2-1-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   


Blaming the reader for not grasping the message when it is in fact you who can't give a clear answer.


But, we wish to add.

Please excuse the need for this analogy, for this is how this instrument receives our message:/

If a teacher proposes a "new concept" to the class. In that moment, if your life was paused. Would it be un reasonable to assume that this teacher had a solid "grasp" on the concept. For if the "teacher" did not, he/she would not be, in fact "teaching it".

Now, press play. This teacher begins to write on the chalkboard, and speak English. The words of which the teacher speaks, make sense to you. It is understood, that the teacher is trying to teach you the new material or the new concept that is required by your school's curriculum.

Maybe it is a math class, and the teacher is trying to teach the class how to use a formula, or why the formula is needed, or what the formula performs.

Now, sitting in class. One's mind begins to work. Some concepts just work; they are fully understood in your mind, they just "click" with you. You may or may not be taking notes at this time. If you are, and you understand (for some reason) what the teacher is saying, then you probably understand your own notes. By that, we mean that if 'you' came back in a future time to those notes, you could essentially teach yourself.

On the other hand.. you could be like most students and you just do not understand, it does not "click" inside of you. You do not know why, just for some reason you cannot "grasp" the new concept, maybe because it is "too hard"..for what reason it may be..no one knows.

Now, if the student goes through the entire course and never goes to extra help, or never asks any questions in class( even though the teacher asked "a thousand times"... "are there any questions...?)..he/she will probably get a bade grade. Once this bad grade has been received, the student will do what..? In most cases, the student will "blame" the teacher; for what reasons?...there are many. Maybe: "she/he did not explain it right".. "she/he is mean".. "she/he is a bad teacher"..."she/he never answered my questions.." (even though the student never asked).


Now, we wish to bring you out of the analogic world, if you could say that
. And bring you back to your statement, speaking in context of the teacher/classroom scenario we described.



Blaming the reader for not grasping the message when it is in fact you who can't give a clear answer.



Remember, we are speaking in terms of the above scenario. Would you agree, in the classroom scenario, that in fact the teacher had a very good understanding of the "new concept". However, unless she taught the students...the students would have never understood in any shape/form, unless they sought out the "new concept" on there own terms.

It is not the teachers teachings were unclear in general, they were just unclear to the student because it was not a thought process that they had ever gone through. However, the point of teaching, is too inspire learning. The only way for the student to actually "learn" the "new concept" was to let their own frustration pass of their ultimate mis-understanding , and actually ask questions to further his/her understanding. OR seek an understanding outside of the classroom; "On his/her own terms"

Would you agree that the message wasmade clear once the teacher's offered help was accepted, and not fought off by maybe: fear that the other kid's would think he/she is "dumb" for asking, or maybe the fear off accepting that he didn't know anything about the "new concept" before help was accepted and recieved.

If the student actually did accept and recieve help, as many times as he/she did...that when that report card came; that A look preeety good. Probably felt better too.


edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
Now, if the student goes through the entire course and never goes to extra help, or never asks any questions in class( even though the teacher asked "a thousand times"... "are there any questions...?)..he/she will probably get a bade grade.

You may find people here who never even signed up for the course so they have no idea what the vocabulary you are using means and your carrying on as if they automatically should and are quick to blame them for misunderstanding.


Remember, we are speaking in terms of the above scenario. Would you agree, in the classroom scenario, that in fact the teacher had a very good understanding of the "new concept". However, unless she taught the students...the students would have never understood in any shape/form, unless they sought out the "new concept" on there own terms.

This isn't a classroom scenario which is why you made a mistake in thinking that you could apply that method to this medium.


It is not the teachers teachings were unclear in general, they were just unclear to the student because it was not a thought process that they had ever gone through.

I'm in the position of a student that understands and realizes the the teacher is doing an awful job of explaining things and may have a couple of things wrong. The teacher in this case does not like me pointing this out.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   


This whole thread and the idea behind it.


We will speak in the manner of which your instrument as "asked" us to speak in..or what we think he/she meant:

Simplicity


Please, if you would not mind most graciously, grant us with the knowledge of what you thing the "idea" is "behind" this thread.


If what you want is a definition of BS and your instrument can't give it to you, then the "One Infinite Creator", more than likely not real, did a piss poor job of selecting the messenger, which has been pretty much my point all along.


The idea of "BS", we think is to shorten the amount of time one writes "Bull Sh*t". The idea this instrument gives, and that we give also of "Bull Sh*t" is: the meneur from a male cow, using the sound complex "sh*t" in replace of "meneur" ;or whatever one may wish to use to describe the droppings of a male cow.

However, we can also see that 'you' could have also been sarcastic (you sneaky devil, you) ; which would make more sense in the context of this "thread"..

** for the reason that one would be speaking about the meneur of a male cow, is beyond our understanding**


In the sarcastic sense, we would "assume" (in ways of which this instrument could not fatholm..nor do we at this current space/time) that your instrument attempted to relate that of which he understood with this thread, to the general purpose of the existence of the excrament of a male cow. Which is to say, meaningless and is just an annoyance to anyone that is around it; gross, disgusting, vial..its safe to say that it is something just doesn't agree with you. You do not know why the visual imagery of, and just very being of "poo"..along with all of its scents/smells/sounds...is not pleasing to you; but it would be safe to say (in all cases) that you do not like it..

So, speaking in terms of that which 'you' could understand..whilst also taking into the fact that you are very clever (you have such great knowledge of how to use "sarcasm" in many ways).. the "idea" of this BS
of which 'you' (and we both made it clear before, that it was in fact only 'you'... ) was this..in it's original written text, of which you cannot say did not exist the moment this thread was created.. for they are in the OP:


Before we begin, we wish to make it known. That all that is said shall be taken with a grain of salt of 'your' choosing. Nothing is to be taking for fact, that choice lies within 'you'. For we know that there are those who seek help, who are afraid to ask, there is no reason to fear, loved ones


**If you do not understand why we thought that others were afraid to ask: please refer to our previous analogy of the student/classroom/teacher**



We, nor this instrument, are/is "all knowing".


We also made it known to all, for the benefit of the greater good that:


However, the choices made by this instrument over the course of his life, has allowed for his thought process, as well as spiritual connection to evolve at an ever increasing rate.



We offer our assistance, we offer a '"outside perspective" , if you will. Do not expect 'answers', do not 'expect'.


Just for "sh*ts and giggles", we wanted to prove the classroom/teacher/student analogy before, but at that current space/time, you had no knowledge of it:

A direct message from your teacher...from the OP: Ridden of the distortions by this instrument.

We want to help, that is our purpose... You all have lessons that need to be learned...However, you are not alone in the classrooms where you are being taught....instead of walking in, and sitting in the back, where you hope to not be called on; come to the front, and truly try to understand the matters at hand. We are your teachers, we teach/learn while also fulfilling the purpose of schooling.. learn/teach.


Unclear questions from the student, cant be explained well by the teacher:

If there are any matters at hand that one wishes to seek guidance on, please ask. Any question may be asked, however do not 'expect' an answer. For the answer will only be a reflection of the quality of the question being asked.


The teacher is there to teach, that is it. If the student chooses not to ask questions, they get a bad grade. But after school help was offered:

We do not expect anyone to even ask, for the another purpose of our being here is to simply offer.


Only fear of what the class, or the student may think of him/herself is the harm:

Do not fear, loved ones. What harm could possibly come from seeking an outside perspective?



We hope these annotations have sufficed. You are doing well, brother. We leave you now in the Light and Love of our One Infinite Creator.

Namaste.
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
Please, if you would not mind most graciously, grant us with the knowledge of what you thing the "idea" is "behind" this thread.

The lightworker in the title could only mean that the OP is going to try to convince people that he/she is a or is in contact with higher beings and that these are willing to answer questions.


The idea of "BS", we think is to shorten the amount of time one writes "Bull Sh*t". The idea this instrument gives, and that we give also of "Bull Sh*t" is: the meneur from a male cow, using the sound complex "sh*t" in replace of "meneur" ;or whatever one may wish to use to describe the droppings of a male cow.

Cute, speaks perfect english new age jargon but not plain english jargon. Understands "sh*ts and giggles" but is not sure about "BS". This has got to be some of the poorest acting I have ever seen.

edit on 2-1-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   


The lightworker in the title could only mean that the OP is going to try to convince people that he/she is a or is in contact with higher beings and that these are willing to answer questions.


If that is what you 'think, then please.. quote GreeneLight wherever such annotations are located that spoke of "higher beings". For, we trust you will not find any; because it was never spoken of.

If a poster on this forum sees the sound complex "Lightworker", then the only thing that would lead said poster to think "higher beings", would be the poster him/herself. For there must have been some past association with the word "Light worker" and the phrase "higher beings".

There was no such manifestation in this thread.



Cute, speaks perfect english new age jargon but not plain english jargon. Understands "sh*ts and giggles" but is not sure about "BS". This has got to be some of the poorest acting I have ever seen.


Correct us if we are wrong, but we just spoon fed you our explanation above, please re-read.

We gave all possible explanations of how "BS" could be used in this context, as well as analyzed them. Please, quote us on that which does not resonate with you, and we will try to explain in one way that we have not already.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   


You may find people here who never even signed up for the course so they have no idea what the vocabulary you are using means and your carrying on as if they automatically should and are quick to blame them for misunderstanding.


Please, tell us, what vocabulary used, from the English language, do you not understand?





This isn't a classroom scenario which is why you made a mistake in thinking that you could apply that method to this medium.


Medium you say..? You are aware of what that word assumes, or are 'you' confused on how to use it?

Some things cannot be explain in plain english jargon a.k.a normal explanation. So, you have forced us to use a method of speaking that paints a pretty easier picture of the situation at hand. If we did not trust that this analogy held meaning within our context, it would not have been said. Then that would have been "BS"



I'm in the position of a student that understands and realizes the the teacher is doing an awful job of explaining things and may have a couple of things wrong.


We find this amusing, for this is exactly what we explained



The teacher in this case does not like me pointing this out.


The teacher as tried to communicate with the student, but the student repeats the same thing over and over. Such is the way of the Scholar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We wish to ask a question. What is it that 'you', are trying to accomplish by this repetitive regurgitation of the same statements. For if your "argument" made sense - by now - to anyone else other than yourself, then we are sure it would have been commented on.

What is it about the "new concept" the teacher is trying to explain, that you do not understand, for all of this fighting and refusing to accept the teachers aid has just confused you more
edit on 2-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
We wish to ask a question. What is it that 'you', are trying to accomplish by this repetitive regurgitation of the same statements. For if your "argument" made sense - by now - to anyone else other than yourself, then we are sure it would have been commented on.

Prove that you are a false teacher/hoaxer. Some have said the same and others have starred my posts but all have probably stopped following the thread because there is no point in reading how you fail over and over to prove that you really have anything to teach.


What is it about the "new concept" the teacher is trying to explain, that you do not understand, for all of this fighting and refusing to accept the teachers aid has just confused you more

I understand it and I disagree. What about that don't you understand?



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   


Prove that you are a false teacher/hoaxer. Some have said the same and others have starred my posts but all have probably stopped following the thread because there is no point in reading how you fail over and over to prove that you really have anything to teach.


We knew that you would talk about how many people flagged your posts, because 'I' also flagged all of them as well, for we thought they were excellent examples to use.

Also, we now ask how is it that you will prove what ever it is you are trying to prove? With what arguments will you use, along with there associated examples; along with some more proof on what makes that example apply to your argument. Then, we may be able to less confused.



I understand it and I disagree. What about that don't you understand?


We have understood this all along, brother. But, what is it that you will do[/] about it this disagreement; that will help you or help others come to a mutual agreement.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
Also, we now ask how is it that you will prove what ever it is you are trying to prove? With what arguments will you use, along with there associated examples; along with some more proof on what makes that example apply to your argument. Then, we may be able to less confused.

It's already proven.


We have understood this all along, brother. But, what is it that you will do about it this disagreement; that will help you or help others come to a mutual agreement.

Nothing needs to be done. No mutual agreement needs to be reached.

edit on 3-1-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   


It's already proven.


To yourself, yes. So, we ask, why do you still persist. Repeating the same statements, as if you are trying to figure something else out. Even though you have already made up your mind.



Nothing needs to be done. No mutual agreement needs to be reached.


In your case, yes. We have known this since your first few posts.

edit on 4-1-2013 by GreeneLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by GreeneLight
To yourself, yes. So, we ask, why do you still persist. Repeating the same statements, as if you are trying to figure something else out. Even though you have already made up your mind.

You may not have noticed but it has only been us two posting in this thread for the last 5 or 6 days. It would seem that others have also come to the same conclusion as I.

You kept making the same claim so I keep repeating the same statements because it seemed that you had not understood. Seems that you still don't.


In your case, yes. We have known this since your first few posts.

More BS. If you knew then why ask?

No point in dragging this thread along. Have a nice day.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join