triplechoice:



I ask you again, are information not facts?

Please answer this or define the word, information

No, not all information is fact.

Information is any set of inputs (words, symbols, audio, visual, etc) that attempts to covey the state or nature of a thing. So while saying "National Theatre is on fire!" is information, it is not a fact because it is false.

LordReed:


If the information isn't a pertinent fact then it is not evidence.

So you won't define information then?



How would you know if there were pertinent or not when you failed to respond to them to let anyone see that.

The first part were just random responses, the second was when I started to provide some information in support of my proposition.

I expected you to attack directly those information, but you barely did but to read and reacted with where is the evidence..

Now that you agree that information is the same as fact in your definition of it , please respond to them to prove they are pertinent or not.

LordReed:


I totally understand what your position is. Anywhere I don't understand I ask you questions not with the intention of falsifying your position but to further understanding. I expect the same from you.



Where did you get this story from because I have never seen it anywhere. Kindly provide a link.



I am less concerned about what other people are saying than what I am saying in this thread. I can't argue for other people or provide other people's perspective, I can definitely provide mine. Which is what I will do.



The question is how do we know what someone is saying is true if we cannot get sufficient corroboration?



Logic is not enough. Logic is for making sure arguments line up properly from premise to conclusion, it in no way implies the truth of the statement. A statement being logical does not automatically make it true.



If said believers claim they have evidence why would it be senseless to ask them for it?



Do you have direct experience of a previous life or are you repeating what someone told you? Do you have direct experience of being able to move your consciousness out of your body or are you repeating what someone told you?



I have used myself as demonstration and I know that medicines work but that is not the evidence I give for why I accept the science.



Again logic is not evidence. Logic makes sure evidence and conclusion fit, that is all. Logic does not tell you that something is true or correct.



I will only consider it with evidence. I do not accept unevidenced positions. Has nothing to do with you and everything to do with me. I am not asking to accept my position, I am asking you to provide evidence for yours before I can consider it.



I need a proper example of what you are saying, your words are not enough.



LoLz. This is funny. This like someone saying unless you can explain how water got into coconut therefore you can't dispute that it was Wily Wily that caused it. That's not how things work. An inability to explain something doesn't automatically make a position unassailable. You still have to demonstrate how your own explanation is the correct one.

I have seen no reason to accept that consciousness is external to the body. I am still waiting for you to provide the evidence that will support your claim.



Evidence is the set of facts that point exclusively to a certain conclusion. Evidence cannot be equivocal.



Yes but sometimes the evidence cannot be misinterpreted or even if it is some more evidence usually sheds light. This is what I am asking of you.



You are welcome to your opinion of me. Still doesn't change what I am asking, produce the evidence.



You are the one who said what people call souls is energy, I didn't bring up soul out of the blue. Besides I don't really care what you call it, I am interested in the evidence.






You read it again because I don't know where exactly in the article you are failing to understand.

It's very simple .

Let him state what consciousness outside the body does.


I have responded to your email.

LordReed:


No, not all information is fact.

Information is any set of inputs (words, symbols, audio, visual, etc) that attempts to covey the state or nature of a thing. So while saying "National Theatre is on fire!" is information, it is not a fact because it is false.

If information are true they are not false. So tell me how do you know my information are false.

Remember facts can also be proven to be false

triplechoice:


So you won't define information then?



How would you know if there were pertinent or not when you failed to respond to them to let anyone see that.

The first part were just random responses, the second was when I started to provide some information in support of my proposition.

I expected you to attack directly those information, but you barely did but to read and reacted with where is the evidence..

Now that you agree that information is the same as fact in your definition of it , please respond to them to prove they are pertinent or not.

Frustration seems to be mounting.

LordReed:


No, not all information is fact.

Information is any set of inputs (words, symbols, audio, visual, etc) that attempts to covey the state or nature of a thing. So while saying "National Theatre is on fire!" is information, it is not a fact because it is false.

triplechoice:


If information are true they are not false. So tell me how do you know my information are false.

Remember facts can also be proven to be false

Where have I declared your information to be false? Dude you really need to calm down before you blow a gasket. LoLz.

triplechoice:


It's difficult to understand Buda. I know that from experience. here on this board.

Let tell you this and it would surprise you.

Buda is in the know of some of the things I am discussing here, but he is pretending not to .know.

But my reaction is because I suspect he is deliberately misconstruing my statements. I it is slowing things down for me to get out the rest of what I have already prepared, since I have to expend energy to explain things I shouldn't be wasting my time on

By what means do you claim to know what budaatum knows or doesn't know? Has he told you before that he agrees with the things you are saying?

LordReed:


Where have I declared your information to be false? Dude you really need to calm down before you blow a gasket. LoLz.

Calm down and read. I never said so.

It has taken you a long time to admit now that fact and information are synonyms

So my question know is, if information can be regarded as fact, evidence, why pursuing me ever since with "where is the evidence?

triplechoice:


Calm down and read. I never said so.

It has taken you a long time to admit now that fact and information are synonyms

So my question know is, if information can be regarded as fact, evidence, why pursuing me ever since with "where is the evidence?

Oga read and understand, I asked you a question. Information is not synonymous with fact. How many other ways can I say information is not fact if it is not true. You have presented information we are discussing what it means but you just accuse me of whatever you like because of whatever is driving your frustration. Calm down, discuss and stop flinging accusations about like a frisbee.

triplechoice:

I never said logic is evidence. I said there are logical truths which can be taken as evidence, not scientific evidence.

I think you use words with no consideration of their general meaning. You have not provided anything here that I would consider a logical truth. What you done is assert your view and insist it is so, which, as you see, is rightly being considered.

You do expect me to use my senses instead of merely believing you, right?

Logical truths are generally considered to be necessarily true. This is to say that they are such that no situation could arise in which they could fail to be true. The view that logical statements are necessarily true is sometimes treated as equivalent to saying that logical truths are true in all possible worlds. However, the question of whether any statements are necessarily true remains the subject of continued debate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_truth

triplechoice:
You and Lordreed seem not to know the difference between scientific evidence and just evidence. They are not the same.

"Just evidence", lol. Would that be the sort of evidence daughter presents claiming she is a boy and the sort made up in one's own head and believed?

Triple, evidence is evidence. The "scientific" is just to denote going through what you called "rigorous training", and I say, to use one's senses, to consider the evidence.

triplechoice:
Evidence can be a body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid, while scientific evidence is evidence that serves to support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis.

Triple, this is why I went layperson on you. You called it a red herring and completely missed the point.

Facts and information can be true or false, just as a scientific theory or hypothesis can be right or wrong. In fact, scientific theory or hypothesis is simply a thing one believes until one has asked and knocked and sought for facts and information and evidence that either proves the belief or scientific theory or hypothesis to be true or not.

It's like Adam believed he would die so he remained ignorant and enslaved instead of using his mind while Eve used her mind to gather information which she scientifically tested to see if she would die or not.

Got to say, love how you wuruwurued that last bit of yours. Must have taken you time to convince yourself you meant it

triplechoice:
Have I been proposing a scientific theory? No

Indeed no, you have not been proposing a scientific theory. What you have been doing is present "facts and information" and then ask us not to use our rigourously trained senses to scientific analyse what you've presented.

triplechoice:
What I have been doing is to provide a body of information which I am exposed to, to support what I have come to accept as truth.

And that's perfectly ok, though we've established that your exposure was read in a book and a daughter told you, but you've also been insisting that we accept as truth the body of information which you have been exposed to" without exposing the body of information which you have been exposed to to us so we can consider it with our own senses, which you've insisted are fallible anyway and should not be used to consider the body of information that you have provided.

I'll ask again, do you expect me to use my senses or should I just believe you?

triplechoice:
Please educate yourself very well before trying to educate others.

I should rigourously train myself to use my senses, you surely must indeed mean.

LordReed:


Oga read and understand, I asked you a question. Information is not synonymous with fact. How many other ways can I say information is not fact if it is not true. You have presented information we are discussing what it means but you just accuse me of whatever you like because of whatever is driving your frustration. Calm down, discuss and stop flinging accusations about like a frisbee.

Funny how he lumped those terms together thinking we wouldn't notice.

triplechoice:


Me or you. I mentioned in my first presentation that I have evidence, not scientific evidence.

You obviously do not know what evidence is and must think daughter said or what you read in a book is evidence.

You may have evidence, but we are informing you that all you've presented here is information, at best, and we are considering it with our senses which includes our minds, and we are not convinced of your claim.

That is how science works. You present evidence for your claim or theory or belief, and we your peers, use our senses to scientifically consider what you've presented to either falsify or truthify it.

Or rather, we are calling for evidence for what you claim but you are asking us to just believe you, because you supposedly have powers to influence people's minds.

budaatum:


You obviously do not know what evidence is and must think daughter said or what you read in a book is evidence.

You may have evidence, but we are informing you that all you've presented here is information, at best, and we are considering it with our senses which includes our minds, and we are not convinced of your claim.

That is how science works. You present evidence for your claim or theory or belief, and we your peers, use our senses to scientifically consider what you've presented to either falsify or truthify it.

Or rather, we are calling for evidence for what you claim but you are asking us to just believe you, because you supposedly have powers to influence people's minds.

If he tries to present,he will fail.

budaatum:


You obviously do not know what evidence is and must think daughter said or what you read in a book is evidence.

You may have evidence, but we are informing you that all you've presented here is information, at best, and we are considering it with our senses which includes our minds, and we are not convinced of your claim.

That is how science works. You present evidence for your claim or theory or belief, and we your peers, use our senses to scientifically consider what you've presented to either falsify or truthify it.

Or rather, we are calling for evidence for what you claim but you are asking us to just believe you, because you supposedly have powers to influence people's minds.

I already mentioned at the beginning I have evidence ,not scientific evidence.

Here again are my original word's.

triplechoice:
Hello, everyone,

I don't pretend to know it all . Of course no one knows it all. I will be stating the "facts" as I know and understand it.

And because it will be a long read, I have decided to divide it into two or three parts. The first is background information and random responses to comments made by others here, while the final part, will contain definitions and explanations for the concept of the "true self" I subscribe to , with evidence not scientific evidence, to identify this self , i

So show me now ,were I said I have scientific evidence?

I have been presenting a proposition not a scientific theory, about something I know to be true and the information I presented along side it was meant to taken as my evidence for it.
Any well informed person who has read it and knows what is scientific evidence different from just evidence , shouldn't be demanding again where's the evidence.
That question alone has exposed the person's ignorance.

To confirm this, I gave cues severally to the person by asking , what evidence, for him to specify it.

Never for once he took the cue to understand what I was asking for, further confirming beyond all reasonable doubt the sort person I was conversing with.

Those who know better know that a non scientist is not in a position to give what can be accepted as scientific evidence, especially when it has nothing to do with a scientific theory.

You and the person now bragging to know better are unaware of this fact ,hence your constant demand I present one for you.

And finally don't miscontrue my words to say I boasted I have powers to change people.

Coming up with this now is not only disappointing but proof iof you trying manipulate me wiith the dark tactics the orgainsaruon I know you belong to has taught you. I know those who belong there from what they say and do.
Don't try it on me . You will certainly regret it I am familiar with these tactics. Going further will have me exposing you to the world.
Keep it to your self. I have warned you for the last time. Keep to your lane from now henceforth and let me keep to mine

Wasted my time I can now understand why deepsight left.

LMFAO! Budaatum which dark organisation do you belong to? Better tell us now before you get exposed! Bwahahahahaha!

budaatum:


Funny how he lumped those terms together thinking we wouldn't notice.

I am just SMH at all of this. May our ignorance continue to receive clay, spit and water.

triplechoice:


I already mentioned at the beginning I have evidence ,not scientific evidence.

Here again are my original word's.



So show me now ,were I said I have scientific evidence?

I have been presenting a proposition not a scientific theory, about something I know to be true and the information I presented along side it was meant to taken as my evidence for it.
Any well informed person who has read it and knows what is scientific evidence different from just evidence , shouldn't be demanding again where's the evidence.
That question alone has exposed the person's ignorance.

To confirm this, I gave cues severally to the person by asking , what evidence, for him to specify it.

Never for once he took the cue to understand what I was asking for, further confirming beyond all reasonable doubt the sort person I was conversing with.

Those who know better know that a non scientist is not in a position to give what can be accepted as scientific evidence, especially when it has nothing to do with a scientific theory.

You and the person now bragging to know better are unaware of this fact ,hence your constant demand I present one for you.

And finally don't miscontrue my words to say I boasted I have powers to change people.

Coming up with this now is not only disappointing but proof iof you trying manipulate me wiith the dark tactics the orgainsaruon I know you belong to has taught you. I know those who belong there from what they say and do.
Don't try it on me . You will certainly regret it I am familiar with these tactics. Going further will have me exposing you to the world.
Keep it to your self. I have warned you for the last time. Keep to your lane from now henceforth and let me keep to mine

Wasted my time I can now understand why deepsight left.

LMFAO! Gasket has blown! Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:


I am just SMH at all of this. May our ignorance continue to receive clay, spit and water.

Siloam, Amen!

triplechoice:

I have been presenting a proposition not a scientific theory, about something I know to be true and the information I presented along side it was meant to taken as my evidence for it.

You presented a proposition for something you accept as true and thought your assertion would be accepted for it. Unfortunately, you met sense use people who disagree with your asserted proposition and you can't be bothered to consider what they say because you believe your asserted proposition is true.

Adam like people unquestionably accept propositions, Triple, which is why they remain ignorant naked and enslaved in the Garden, while use her senses Eve type of people use their own senses to scientifically test all propositions to free themselves from the slavery of ignorance.

budaatum:


You presented a proposition for something you accept as true and thought your assertion would be accepted for it. Unfortunately, you met sense use people who disagree with your asserted proposition and you can't be bothered to consider what they say because you believe your asserted proposition is true.

Adam like people unquestionably accept propositions, Triple, which is why they remain ignorant naked and enslaved in the Garden, while use her senses Eve type of people use their own senses to scientifically test all propositions to free themselves from the slavery of ignorance.

triplechoice:
H

However, before I proceed, I would like to issue an important disclaimer; that whatever opinions or statements of "facts" that I am going to make is at the discretion of the reader to accept or reject. It would be irresponsible to force a sense of self of any kind on others that may result in mental confusion or a distortion of one's personal reality.

These are my words. Of course you're too blind and can't read. Use your mud treatment and open your eyes.

And You have failed woefully to achieve your aim of provoking me to vampirise my emotions to fix yourself. That's what you and your ignorant friend who don't know that scientific evidence is different from just evidence, which can be any information whether proven or not, and that non scientist are not in a position to provide scientific evidence that can be acceptable to those within the main body of science, do on this board 24/7.

Did you make any attempt to disprove the information I provided ,statement by statement? Not for a minute ,but to try to turn it into an avenue for ridicule, because you're looking for your normal fix.

The habit of ignorantly demanding scientific evidence from religious people who are not different from you and your friend, has deluded you two into thinking you have both been doing the right thing.

You ignorance is working against you.

Reed has submitted is brain to you through your dark manipulation, and his now your Zombie to be used to attack me.

My behavior, in case you don't know, has been a mocked up one to checkmate your nonsense You two don't have what it takes to provoke me.

The last word from me.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/sex-and-relationships/how-to-spot-emotional-vampires-and-not-get-affected-by-their-negativity/story-eB3AnvdNO2ysfqSdjWxr1L_amp.html

triplechoice:






These are my words. Of course you're too blind and can't read. Use your mud treatment and open your eyes.

And You have failed woefully to achieve your aim of provoking me to vampirise my emotions to fix yourself. That's what you and your ignorant friend who don't know that scientific evidence is different from just evidence, which can be any information whether proven or not, and that non scientist are not in a position to provide scientific evidence that can be acceptable to those within the main body of science, do on this board 24/7.

Did you make any attempt to disprove the information I provided ,statement by statement? Not for a minute ,but to try to turn it into an avenue for ridicule, because you're looking for your normal fix.

The habit of ignorantly demanding scientific evidence from religious people who are not different from you and your friend, has deluded you two into thinking you have both been doing the right thing.

You ignorance is working against you.

Reed has submitted is brain to you through your dark manipulation, and his now your Zombie to be used to attack me.

My behavior, in case you don't know, has been a mocked up one to checkmate your nonsense You two don't have what it takes to provoke me.

The last word from me.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/sex-and-relationships/how-to-spot-emotional-vampires-and-not-get-affected-by-their-negativity/story-eB3AnvdNO2ysfqSdjWxr1L_amp.html

I guessed correctly that you had become frustrated. Its now clear how frustrated you are. Nobody has insulted you here but you have become insulting, over what? LoLz.

Go and quote anywhere I demanded scientific evidence from religious folk if you can. Bwahahahahaha!

triplechoice:
These are my words. Of course you're too blind and can't read. Use your mud treatment and open your eyes.

It was those very words that made me respond to your mention, Triple. Unfortunately I have not found your actions match them as you seem to be offended by our rejection.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YC5T7sdHANE


For those who are willfully ignorant about the brain’s function and insist the mind/conciousness is some special concoction of magical nonsense.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4GYxS8lFE0&t=161s

budaatum:


It was those very words that made me respond to your mention, Triple. Unfortunately I have not found your actions match them as you seem to be offended by our rejection.

I and Lordreed were enjoying a matured conversation before you jumped in with your warped Rosicrucian perspective of science and the use of the senses.

In the context of scientific discourses everyone knows what the words, science and the senses refers to and not your own subjectivity.Besides I wasn't presenting any scientific theory, but just reference sciences to support some of my arguments.

You never directly responded to the things I wrote, but misconstrued them deliberately to force in your Rosicrucian nonsense of jesus being a scientist, Rosicrucian misinterpreted Bible verses, and the other trash which is not my focus on this thread.


I was trying to be diplomatic and not uncloth you ,so you use that your "senses" you know very well to use to drop that and keep focus, but just like a robot you continued.

Later ,you lied that I said logic means evidence when I never said so.

Maybe you believe as you are told in your organization that non initiates are ignorant, so because of that continued with you nonsense ignorantly thinking you're dealing with a novice.

I don't belong and represent any secret organization here. I have bought my own freedom the hard way. I am on my own.

I don't need any individual or organization to infiltrate my mind to control it as you have been doing on this board

I am not also interested in controlling any ones mind, hence the disclaimer I issued at the beginning.

So ,you're very much guilty of what you're accusing me of.

You brought the current situation between Lordreed and I ,,so after reflecting I am using this medium to apologize to him for some of my outbursts which were not necessary.
But for you, the puppet master, Rosicrucian manipulator, I don't need to accord you that ,you don't deserve it at all.
You were deliberately trying mental tricks on me to throw confusion into my mind to stop me.

I fully aware that you're here to suppress certain truths, so that the public don't know what you know,so you can continue your manipulation unnoticed and have them finally submitting their brains to you for control.

You should be concern about freeing your self as you're in bondage and you don't know it.

Maintain your lane as I don't need your Rosicrucian viruses. And if you don't discontinue this ,I will be forced to make a formal report to your organization, except you're no longer there, then there will be alternative action to take to end this undue interference into my personal space.

Thank you.

Triple, you so love making crap up in your head to believe. Who told you the expression, 'Jesus is a scientist', that I made up with my very own mind, is a Rosicrucian perspective?

Please know that I do not consider you ignorant. Just that you think you know it all and are not open to other perspectives. Nor do you use your powerful mind as you ought to as you think it is fallible and prone to error, which is actually a human trait, science or not, though sense users are more likely to reduce error by the method they rigourously train themselves to use.

Regarding the bolded, I was deliberately trying mental tricks on you to make you use your mind! I can not be claiming the mind is so valuable then be trying to throw confusion into your mind to stop you using it. That would be like turning you into an ignorant Adam as opposed to use her senses Eve whom I value much more and have been advocating should be emulated. No one here is so mindless that they would let buda be their controller.

And an apology is not required of you.

triplechoice:

I and Lordreed were enjoying a matured conversation before you jumped in with your warped Rosicrucian perspective of science and the use of the senses.

In the context of scientific discourses everyone knows what the words, science and the senses refers to and not your own subjectivity.Besides I wasn't presenting any scientific theory, but just reference sciences to support some of my arguments.

You never directly responded to the things I wrote, but misconstrued them deliberately to force in your Rosicrucian nonsense of jesus being a scientist, Rosicrucian misinterpreted Bible verses, and the other trash which is not my focus on this thread.


I was trying to be diplomatic and not uncloth you ,so you use that your "senses" you know very well to use to drop that and keep focus, but just like a robot you continued.

Later ,you lied that I said logic means evidence when I never said so.

Maybe you believe as you are told in your organization that non initiates are ignorant, so because of that continued with you nonsense ignorantly thinking you're dealing with a novice.

I don't belong and represent any secret organization here. I have bought my own freedom the hard way. I am on my own.

I don't need any individual or organization to infiltrate my mind to control it as you have been doing on this board

I am not also interested in controlling any ones mind, hence the disclaimer I issued at the beginning.

So ,you're very much guilty of what you're accusing of.

You brought the current situation between Lordreed and I ,,so after reflecting I am using this medium to apologize to him for some of my outbursts which were not necessary.
But for you, the puppet master, Rosicrucian manipulator, I don't need to accord you that ,you don't deserve it at all.
You were deliberately trying mental tricks on me to throw confusion into my mind to stop me.

I fully aware that you're here to suppress certain truths, so that the public don't know what you know,so you can continue your manipulation unnoticed and have them finally submitting their brains to you for control.

You should be concern about freeing your self as you're in bondage and you don't know it.

Maintain your lane as I don't need your Rosicrucian viruses. And if you don't discontinue this ,I will be forced to make a formal report to your organization, except you're no longer there, then there will be alternative action to take to end this undue interference into my personal space.

Thank you.

budaatum:
Triple, you so love making crap up in your head to believe. Who told you the expression, 'Jesus is a scientist', that I made up with my very own mind, is a Rosicrucian perspective?

Please know that I do not consider you ignorant. Just that you think you know it all and are not open to other perspectives. Nor do you use your powerful mind as you ought to as you think it is fallible and prone to error, which is actually a human trait, science or not, though sense users are more likely to reduce error by the method they rigourously train themselves to use.

Regarding the bolded, I was deliberately trying mental tricks on you to make you use your mind! I can not be claiming the mind is so valuable then be trying to throw confusion into your mind to stop you using it. That would be like turning you into an ignorant Adam as opposed to use her senses Eve whom I value much more and have been advocating should be emulated. No one here is so mindless that they would let buda be their controller.

And an apology is not required of you.

I already admitted not knowing it all. No one knows it all, I said so at the beginning.

So, you failed again, because I just took my time to let everyone see how you derailed the conversation with your Rosicrucian nonsense which I said I don't need.

And,old man please respect yourself. I don't need you mental tricks . Use it on those around you. You're comprehensively insane for suggesting I am not using my mind.


I am for freedom of thoughts and expression. If you don't like my thoughts fell free to reject it. I boldly stated so at the beginning, so I don't understand why you're bent on painting me differently.

Is it not about time you visited a professional?

triplechoice:


I already admitted not knowing it all. No one knows it all, I said so at the beginning.

So, you failed again, because I just took my time to let everyone see how you derailed the conversation with your Rosicrucian nonsense which I said I don't need.

And,old man please respect yourself. I don't need you mental tricks . Use it on those around you. You're comprehensively insane for suggesting I am not using my mind.


I am for freedom of thoughts and expression. If you don't like my thoughts fell free to reject it. I boldly stated so at the beginning, so I don't understand why you're bent on painting me differently.

Is it not about time you visited a professional?

Triple, I have huge regard for you but think you've painted a scenario in your head and are running away with it. And of course you think it is I who has been doing the painting. Thankfully, this thread is about the body that has a mind, which everyone reading possesses, so it's very unlikely those who read it would not see who has been painting since they'll use their own minds.

First, I know you use your mind. That is why I am amused that you seem to rate mind use so lowly by claiming it is not the judge of all things because it is not perfect. I did ask what should be used instead but you evaded the question.

Second. If, as you claim, do not know it all - and neither do I, as pointed out with my reference to my ignorance of my village not to talk of my state or my country; but if, as you've repeatedly accused me of knowing more and hiding it, why are you not asking and seeking and knocking for more knowledge instead of being offended when others see it different?

No one knows all of anything, not to talk of the mind that is about unknowable as the beginning of the universe. We are all here to exchange our opinions are consider reactions to it with our minds so we may learn and grow and evolve. I hope.

Third. This forum is for freedom of expression of thought. You simply register and post whatever you thought. Other people will then freely express their own thoughts on what your thought you expressed. It's what you did. You saw a thread with a title that interested you and you expressed your thought on it. Your expression was then read and thought was freely expressed on it. But here you are being defensive and insulting because thoughts were freely expressed on your freely expressed thoughts! Personally, I'm glad you freely expressed your thoughts. Pity though, that you believe what you think.

budaatum:

Triple, I have huge regard for you but think you've painted a scenario in your head and are running away with it. And of course you think it is I who has been doing the painting. Thankfully, this thread is about the body that has a mind, which everyone reading possesses, so it's very unlikely those who read it would not see who has been painting since they'll use their own minds.

First, I know you use your mind. That is why I am amused that you seem to rate mind use so lowly by claiming it is not the judge of all things because it is not perfect. I did ask what should be used instead but you evaded the question.

Second. If, as you claim, do not know it all - and neither do I, as pointed out with my reference to my ignorance of my village not to talk of my state or my country; but if, as you've repeatedly accused me of knowing more and hiding it, why are you not asking and seeking and knocking for more knowledge instead of being offended when others see it different?

No one knows all of anything, not to talk of the mind that is about unknowable as the beginning of the universe. We are all here to exchange our opinions are consider reactions to it with our minds so we may learn and grow and evolve. I hope.

Third. This forum is for freedom of expression of thought. You simply register and post whatever you thought. Other people will then freely express their own thoughts on what your thought you expressed. It's what you did. You saw a thread with a title that interested you and you expressed your thought on it. Your expression was then read and thought was freely expressed on it. But here you are being defensive and insulting because thoughts were freely expressed on your freely expressed thoughts! Personally, I'm glad you freely expressed your thoughts. Pity though, that you believe what you think.

You have not expressed your own perspective, ,but just to ridicule me , accuse me of things, I never said, and misinterpret my intentions .That's what you have been doing. and I have rebuffed all of that.

The first reaction to my presentation was that I made so many assumptions. I was eager to see you point them out to learn from you.

But what did you do. You delved into subjectivity by bringing your own definition of what science means and how the scientific methods should be applied.

I disagreed with that and told you I am only interested in an objective discussion of what science means, if not,it will derail from how the public understand it and the sense of how I have used it in my argument.

You ignored me and continued with lecturing me on how using one's senses makes you a scientist equal to those who are trained scientist , and also how one can apply the scientific method, and not common sense, to cross a road. That was when I knew something was wrong and that you have a personal agenda you're pursuing.

You just want to condemn other people's opinion as not good enough to show you know it all. Something you have accused me of.

Yet amongst everyone on this thread ,you are the only one whose perspective is not clearly spelt out. You have not presented anything ,but to wait and criticize those of others as not good enough, without mentioning what is good enough.

Thank God the evidence of my extensive conversation with Lordreed is there for the public to judge if I never wanted to listen to other people's opinion, but to force my own.

If you think you know better than me ,not that I think I know better than you, why not say what you know that is better than my own, instead if expressing incredulity like I have committed a heresy.

This exactly is why I am reacting this way.

triplechoice:

You just want to condemn other people's opinion as not good enough to show you know it all. Something you have accused me of.

I am not condemning your opinion, triple. I am delighted you have one and could express it. Nor have I accused you of condemning anyone's opinion either because I don't think you condemned anyone's opinion. You just got frustrated when your opinion was not accepted as one's opinion is all. And you did make assumptions, which is not a fault since we are laypeople talking about a subject neither of us is an expert on, just that you seem to want to insist that your assumed opinion and perspective is the only opinion or perspective that could be assumed, and when you are not agreed with you are throwing a tantrum.

My own perspective or opinion is well expressed in this thread and in many others, but if you have specific questions about it please do ask and I will very gladly express it as well as I can.

budaatum:


I am not condemning your opinion, triple. I am delighted you have one and could express it. Nor have I accused you of condemning anyone's opinion either because I don't think you condemned anyone's opinion. You just got frustrated when your opinion was not accepted as one's opinion is all. And you did make assumptions, which is not a fault since we are laypeople talking about a subject neither of us is an expert on, just that you seem to want to insist that your assumed opinion and perspective is the only opinion or perspective that could be assumed, and when you are not agreed with you are throwing a tantrum.

My own perspective or opinion is well expressed in this thread and in many others, but if you have specific questions about it please do ask and I will very gladly express it as well as I can.

You're engaged in barefaced lying. That's is it.

The evidence is there for everyone to see that you brought in your subjectivity which has no bearing on the topic to derail the conversation I was having with Lordrreeed.

You were trying to force your personal definition of science and the scientific
method on me when the discussion wasn't about that.

Are you denying that or what? Did you not also accuse me of saying logic means evidence which I countered.

You were using in your typical style, one word, science to mean two different things at the same time to confuse me ,and I warned you I don't like that . I am familiar with such style of deceptive argument used by people who want brainwashed others into accepting their position unthinkingly.

You can't try that with me. I don't want to engage people who do that as they would never accept their fault when you point it out to them.

And actually you displayed that. Did you ever accepted that your subjective definition of science is not the standard one? No you did not and up till now you have not changed.

So why should I have anything to discuss with a unstable character like you that engage in double speak?

Now you want to turn it into I was frustrated by you criticizing my opinion . Did you wait for me to fully explain what I mean by temporarily suspending your mind, so you can think outside the box before starring to mock me like a jobless clown

The records are there for all to view how this whole thing all started. You were derailing. That is it..

You just want to have the last word. You can have it with your lies.

Where is the evidence of your perspective about mind, consciousness, and their emergence on this thread? show it?

If you have it elsewhere, how do I know. You think I follow you. Why don't you present it here.
Just look at you lying that you have it here and elsewhere another evidence of putting two things together to mislead.

You nor dey shame. You are a troll who go about bullying other people with your so called superior knowledge.

Just a little check on your past comments will reveal how you have been in the habit of passing disparaging remarks on others for their opinion .You think you can try that with me? Drop those misbehavior and behalf like an adult that you are.

Have your last word as I am sure you would do since you lack shame.

It is said that a man who lacks shame is capable of saying and doing anything and not being embarrassed by it.
Have your last and no matter what I am not ever going to reply you.

triplechoice:


Please cut the crap buda . Your not a scientist in any way, whether trained or not.

My first presentation which has led to this, was not to lecture the public on what it means to be a scientist or what the scientific method means

I only tried to highlight the limitations of the scientific method to support my argument that there are things in life science will never make us know or understand.

Anyone who has taken their time to read the other parts of what I wrote, would have understood that by mentioning science and the scientific method, I was talking of how it is understood by expert scientists, and not your subjective understanding of it which you brought in to make me look stupid; that I don't know the meaning of science and the scientific method, and that you, a non scientist, know it more than me ,so you want to lecture me.

This is exactly what you're doing and I believe others following would have noticed it too.

So ,please cut the crap, and state the facts as you know and understand it concerning my main presentation just like Lordreed and others have done

If you have nothing to say no problem. I already mentioned in my introduction that I am not forcing anything on any one. You're free to reject and accept whatever I have posted.

You're also free to announce your subjective definition of science to the world, but to force it on me without highlighting the standard definition to show the difference, means you consider me a stupid person who doesn't know the difference.

This was when I try to make you understand that my conclusions has no scientific support and that what I was presenting was a body of knowledge which has been corroborated elsewhere be true.. I my self have verified them using alternative methods .
And that later I would present the alternative methods which was used to verify those information.

I kept mentioning that all through, but you wanted to accuse me of presenting scientific conclusions, hence you endless lecture of what is science and the scientific methods.

You never understood me .You already believe you know for sure what I want to say even before I say it ,hence your conclusion I was just forming crap in my head to force it on others.

I mentioned in my first presentation that in the final part I shall explain how exactly I have arrived at my conclusions for the public to judge if the methods can be relied on or not.

But you never allowed me to do that.

triplechoice:


You're engaged in barefaced lying. That's is it.

The evidence is there for everyone to see that you brought in your subjectivity which has no bearing on the topic to derail the conversation I was having with Lordreed.

I've said you use words without knowing their meaning, I think.

Your thoughts and opinions and what you called "facts that you expressed, are subjective, triple, so why can you bring in your own subjectivity but then say I shouldn't?

Sorry I could not read more than the above for now, but so you don't miss it:

Science is the use of the senses properly.

Subjectively speaking.