Re: Where's everybody gone?

>
>"nemo" <ne...@naughtylass.wet> wrote in message
>news:Bscwg.1862$F8....@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> ?
>>
>This place isn't anywhere near as busy as when I was here
>about two years or so ago, and the ones that are left aren't
>the same posters. Where's Pearl

Pearl has recently humiliated herself...amusingly by
lying about the Goober. The fool is now probably in hiding,
trying to recover. Poor ol' gal...

Lie about the Goober!!?

Impossible!!

Can't be done.

Present and correct, but busy elsewhere for the moment.

There's been lots happening while you've been gone.

Yes, you added several items to your list of wacky fuckwitted beliefs,
the most recent being the laughable "zero point field":

"zero point field" (GUFFAW!)
"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as cure-all)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
bestiality
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
Chemtrails
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"
long-debunked legends about "ageless wonders"

archived evidence of the above:
http://tinyurl.com/h0br
http://tinyurl.com/h0bl
http://tinyurl.com/v5p8
http://tinyurl.com/v5pf
http://tinyurl.com/mh5w
http://tinyurl.com/mh6h
http://tinyurl.com/mh6r
http://tinyurl.com/mh71
http://tinyurl.com/mh7a
http://tinyurl.com/mh7j
http://tinyurl.com/mh7p
http://tinyurl.com/v5jj
http://tinyurl.com/v5kd
http://tinyurl.com/v5l6
http://tinyurl.com/v5ft
http://tinyurl.com/v5fj
http://tinyurl.com/v5fp
http://tinyurl.com/v5ft
http://tinyurl.com/v5ga
http://tinyurl.com/v5gc
http://tinyurl.com/v5i2
http://tinyurl.com/v5gk
http://tinyurl.com/v5h1
http://tinyurl.com/v5h9
http://tinyurl.com/n9r59

What exactly do you know about it, foolish ball?
- What are your qualifications in any related field?

(That should be good for a laugh).

You continually post this ridiculous ad hominem
because you've no valid argument, and never have.

<part fact / part pervert liar ball's fantasy snipped>

I will not be responding to the troll's ongoing crap.

Thanks. From a.a.e.v. And I haven't killfiled you,
if that was what you had thought? You're alright!

What do *you* know about it, slut, apart from having scanned that silly
book that your pal wrote, and that the science editor of the Times of
London disparaged as pseudo-scientific BULLSHIT?

I don't claim specific expertise in science. My expertise is in
spotting the worthless horseshit spew of ANTI-science fruitcakes like
you - the quackery promoted by charlatan foot-rubbing whores. You have
ZERO qualification in science, but you pretend to have quite a lot.
You DO NOT read the scientific literature; you CANNOT read it.

No ad hominem. You believe in every bit of this bullshit, below.

Yes, you will. You can't help yourself.

You believe in

Evasion noted. You're clueless. Emphasis added**:

--repost--

From:pearl -
Date:Sat, Jul 1 2006 11:27 am
Email: "pearl" <t...@signguestbook.ie>
Groups: uk.business.agriculture, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, talk.politics.animals, uk.politics.animals

> Apart from purely mechanical, DU ammunition has extremely
> dangerous radiological effect on human as well as on environment
> in all.

"chico chupacabra" <'supp...@our.troops' (going to iraq)> wrote

Bullshit.

> Leif Erikson wrote:

> > chico chupacabra wrote:
> > > "pearl" wrote:
> > >
> > > > 'The Field tells the story of **respected frontier scientists all over
> > > > the globe who have produced extraordinary evidence** to show ....'
> > > > http://www.red-ice.net/specialreports/2006/01jan/supernaturaluniverse.html
> > >
> > > Load of crap and conjecture, at best.

'In recent years there has been quite a bit of **scientific research** into
the body/mind connection which can help us to understand what it
is and how it works. In her recent book on this subject titled The
Field Lynne McTaggart has collected a number of **research findings**
into an easily read format.
...
http://www.subtleenergies.com/ORMUS/tw/review.htm

'Very much like the **scientists** she interviews, The Field author Lynne
McTaggart finds herself in unexpected territory when, as an investigative
reporter, she begins studying the **science** behind such alternative healing
disciplines as homeopathy and acupuncture. Intrigued with the disciplines'
consistent use of such terms as "energy fields," "energy healing,"
"energy meridians," and "subtle energies," she wonders if there really
is any "hard science" behind these references.

Thus begins an eight year, international journey into the lives and
laboratories of some of the world's **foremost physicists, biologists,
biochemists and psychologists** to discover the properties and potentials
of the mysterious, invisible 'something' which seems to permeate
physical and non-physical reality, effecting - unifying - everything.

McTaggart's straightforward, yet entertaining journalistic style makes
the potentially intimidating subject matter - **leading edge theories in
quantum physics, electromagnetism, biology and neurochemistry** -
approachable. In fact, by setting the science details within the personal
story of each experimenter's life, she makes the **scientists and their work**
seem downright understandable.
..'
http://www.helmar.org/index.php?id=434

'This well- known and credible investigative journalist delves into
the anomalies encountered in **scientific research**, alternative medical
treatments, psychic phenomena and simple faith.
..'
http://www.members.tripod.com/TarotCanada/TheField.html

'She does an excellent job in going through a **large number of
research studies**, and gives you a sense that you are actually on
the inside of a grand scientific conspiracy that will topple the
existing scientistic edifice and allow a great deal of new light and
understanding to pour in.
..'
http://www.enlightenment.com/blogs/j/jordan/jordan3/archives/000638.html

....

> > Did you see the mention of the book in the Times of London review? The
> > crackpot author, Lynne McTaggart, is a quack health practitioner. I'll
> > bet you anything lesley knows her, and that's why she knows of the
> > book.

> I did read it, and I'm eagerly awaiting the little harlot's

'Abuse is about control and the fear of losing it. Ill-treatment is
an absurd effort to maintain and enhance the abuser's hegemony -
social, cultural, legal, and, above all, psychological. Abusers exploit,
lie, insult, demean, ignore (the "silent treatment"), manipulate, and
control. There are a million ways to abuse, directly and by proxy.
To expect too much, to denigrate, to ignore - are all modes of abuse.
There is physical abuse, verbal abuse, psychological abuse, sexual
abuse. The list is long. Most abusers abuse surreptitiously. ..'
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/verbal_emotional_abuse

> response to the science editor of the Times.

'Below's a piece from Mark Henderson, the science correspondent
of The Times. He derides not just the current GM 'public debate' but
the very idea of public involvement in such decision making. What
crops we grow, what foods we eat, it seems, are matters best left to
the experts.

Henderson's vision of that expertise is revealed by the article's
reference to this week's report from the Nuffield Council on Bio-ethics.
It's the product Henderson tells us of "an independent group with
genuine expertise". In reality, of course, the small Working Party of
five behind the report is dominated by "experts" with a history of
passionate advocacy of GM crops. One has even written a guide
on how to "use pressure-group tactics to fight the opponents".
('This will be like no other debate', Derek Burke, Times Higher
Education Supplement)

In between such impartial expertise and 'the people' stand the
interpreters - science correspondents like Henderson.
..
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=947

'In two debates on the treatment of science in the media speakers
explored what happens when these worlds collide.
..
Frank Burnet, director of the Cheltenham Science Festival, said
newspapers influence the perception of science. For Mark
Henderson, science correspondent at The Times, they both lead
and reflect public opinion. Competition between newspapers and
the demands of the newsdesk drive much of the coverage. '[T]he
act of reporting gives [a story] legitimacy that it may not deserve'.
He sought to distance himself and his colleagues from the tabloids;
apparently there is a 'basement slot' on the front cover of The Times
reserved for the quirky stuff.
..
Though the role of scientists, journalists and broadcasters is critical,
there is a danger that the politicians are being let off the hook. By
trying to locate an alleged disinterest in science, or more substantive
mistrust, in the media or society itself, we are overlooking its probable
source. Almost without exception, be it over GM, SARS or BSE,
the official reaction has been decisive. Delaying tactics, endless
consultative exercises, and the elevation of lay opinion in opposition
to scientific judgements, are eroding the already fraying links between
science and society. A responsible elite should defend advances and
look to science in the face of potential threats, rather than
opportunistically seeking to legitimise itself through a cynical attempt
to connect with the public's irrational impulses, which it helped
generate. The press and broadcasters, as mediators and informers,
are more or less critical receptacles for the official line on science,
and caught up in the resulting reaction and confusion.
..
http://www.culturewars.org.uk/2003-02/transmitting.htm

'Creationism and Intelligent Design come in for more ill informed
attacks in the press, this time from the Times science correspondent
Mark Henderson who claims that creationism leads to junk medicine.
However, Henderson appears to not understand the complexity of
the science arguments, both misrepresenting the creationist position,
and fails to mention some historic medical blunders that are directly
attributable to the theory of evolution.
..'
http://www.csm.org.uk/news.php?viewmessage=44

'Mark Henderson, the science correspondent of The Times (of
London, UK) has published a provocative article entitled "Junk
medicine: creationism." His article is an extraordinary mixture of
half-science and pseudo-science.

Henderson expresses relief "that our [meaning: British] schools
have not had to fight off a lobby [as in the USA] seeking to deny
the facts of evolution." The so-called "facts" that he then
expounds are not really facts at all, and many of his observations
do not even relate to molecules-to-man evolution.
..'
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0314medicine.asp

'Mark Henderson, the ill-informed science correspondent of the
Times, took exception to the criticism and wrote a column entitled
"Inconsistent Gardener" on December 17th. He accuses le Carré
of misrepresenting reality and asserts that pharmaceutical
companies do not exploit poor, deprived or ill-educated people as
expendable guinea pigs in clinical trials as it would be folly to do so.

Unfortunately, such optimism betrays profound ignorance of harsh
realities, such as the fact that in 1996 Pfizer, the world's biggest
drug company, tested its potential western blockbuster drug on
children in Nigeria, against the fervent protestations of its own
childhood diseases specialist, whose contract was hastily terminated.
This story, along with other disturbing examples, was told by
Channel 4 in the 2003 documentary "Dying for Drugs."
..'
http://www.curedisease.net/newsletters/winter2005.pdf

GLOBAL CONTROVERSY
Letter to The Times, London

Sir, Having been privileged over a period of several decades to
attend innumerable national and international conferences and to
take evidence on subjects which range from the economic to the
technological and scientific, I make the immodest claim that I can
distinguish between those who speak with outstanding and obvious
authority and impartiality (such as Sir Herman Bondi) and those
who are incapable of concealing the axe which they are grinding
on behalf of a doctrine, institution or ill-concealed vested interest
(such as Arthur Scargill or those representing Greenpeace).

The conference organised by the Scientific Alliance on Thursday,
described by your science correspondent Mark Henderson (Times
28.1.), was, in my judgement, outstanding in the quality, conviction,
impartiality and authority of the speakers. Whatever one's views on
the so-called 'scientific consensus' on global warming may be, the
solid facts and arguments presented deserve rather more attention
and discussion than that which they have so far received in the
British press as a whole. If the 19th century was one in which
science was regarded as a somewhat eccentric interest, the 20th
saw its influence spread into every major technology on which our
standard of living depends. To this our political systems were slow,
if not reluctant, to adjust. Whether the 21st century will prove
mankind's "final", as Sir Martin Rees has argued, will depend on
whether or not the right scientific solutions are developed,
perceived and applied by political systems which yet have major
adjustments to make.

Your correspondent is entitled to his opinion on the balance of
evidence and argument, but readers of the "Times" and others,
as the question of global warming rises inexorably into the arena
of what might become the major political issue of the 21st century,
are entitled to base their judgement on the indisputable fact that the
history of science in the public domain, from Copernicus onwards,
reveals powerful precedents justifying the eventual acceptance and
triumph of a much maligned minority opinion. If the Prime Minister
and his advisers disagree with the evidence presented at this conference
and elsewhere by organisations such as the Copenhagen Consensus
and the International Policy Network, the nation is entitled, before the
full impact of massive and possibly irrelevant policies is felt, to be
told why they disagree.

Yours sincerely,
Sir Ian Lloyd,
http://www.sepp.org/weekwas/2005/Feb.%205.htm

'Eugenics analogy used inaccurately and selectively in The Times

'I was struck by the science correspondent, Mark Henderson's
comment piece in the Times today "We should all boo that weaselly
phrase 'the welfare of the child'. Apart from the fact that Mark
Henderson has a platform to dismiss this clause and there is no
counterpoint put forward by anyone arguing in favour of the
"welfare of the child", it also struck me that it was rather clever how
he raised the spectre of eugenics to tarnish any state restriction on
fertility treatment.
..'
http://fionapinto.blogspot.com/

.....

Re: Reflexology

Brief Descriptions:
Reflexology Research & Case Studies
Barbara and Kevin Kunz, Reflexology Research Project

Directory

*Controlled study

Absenteeism/Employee morale
Acne
*Alzheimer's
*Amenorrhea
Anemia
Angina
Arteriosclerosis
Arthritis
Asthma
Biofeedback assessment
Birthing
Bronchitis
*Cancer
*Cardio-vascular system (baroreceptor reflex sensitivity,
blood pressure and sinus arrhythmia)
*Cerebral palsy
*Cervical spondylosis
Chest pain
Children / mentally retarded
*Constipation
*Coronary heart disease
*Diabetes
Diagnosis
Dysmenorrhea
*Dyspepsia
Ear disorders in children
Eczema
Edema in Pregnancy
Emotional needs
Encopresis
Enuresis
Fatigue
*Free radicals
Headache
Hospice / palliative care
*Hyperlipimia
* Impotence
*Infantile pneumonia
Infertility
Irritable bowel syndrome
*Kidney function
*Kidney and ureter stones
*Leukopenia
*Menopause
Mental health
Migraine headache
*Milk secretion in new mothers
Multiple sclerosis
*Neurodermatitis
Nervous exhaustion
Pain
Pain (kidney & ureter stones)
Pain of herniated disc
Pain (post surgical)
Pain (shoulder)
Paralysis
*Post surgical recovery
*Premenstrual syndrome
*Prostate (hyperplasia)
Prostate (hypertrophy - enlarged)
Psoriasis
Rhinitis
*Sexual dysfunction
*Sinusitis
Stroke
*Toothache
*Urinary tract stones
*Urinary tract infection
*Uroschesis (retention of urine)

Absenteeism/Employee morale/Specific health benefits/General health benefits

* Reflexology work saved a Danish employer US$3,300 a month in
fewer sick days for employees in addition to improving the work
environment. ". Reflexology had been used to help the staff of the
Scandinavian Airline's Cargo Department. They employ
approximately 60 people and handle 2.4 million documents a year.
Here is a statement made by the employees:
" 'Our work is done through computers and people spending many
hours in a chair doing their work, resulting in aching shoulders and
back. Since we employed our reflexologist . we have experienced a
substantial decrease of people being ill and away from work. The
approximate amount is 20,000 Danish kroner a month (US$3,300).
It has not only a physical effect, but also a psychological effect.
There is a much better atmosphere in the department, because the
employees feel there is something being done about their problems...
Before we used to stay at home when ill, now we see the staff go
to work anyway because they know they can get a treatment and
feel better.'" Eriksen, Leila, Reflexology: Research and Effect
Evaluation in Denmark, Danish Reflexologists Association,
Denmark, August 1995, pp. 15 - 16

. "Over a 2 year period a reflexologist employed by the Telecom
firm of Taastrup, Denmark treated 156 employees who experienced
positive effects on back pains, the musculo-skeletal system, headache,
migraine, stomach/intestinal sufferings. Sickness leave was reduced."
(http://www.fdz-intranet.dk/english/research/results.htm) Eriksen,
Leila, "A Close-up View on Company Reflexology," Danish
Reflexologists Association Research Committee Report, Feb., 1995

. "Three reflexologists employed by the municipality treated 143
patients over a 6 month period. 79% were either cured or helped
with their primary health problem. 57% were helped with secondary
problems. 30% became more satified with their jobs and 92% wanted
to continue reflexology."
(http://www.fdz-intranet.dk/english/research/results.htm) Kristensen,
Karin, Rasmussen, Inge, and Møller, Elsebeth, "Take Good Care of
Your Fellow Employees, Reflexology as personnel care in the Århus
District Corporation," Danish Reflexologists Association Research
Committee Report, Feb., 1995 (Originally published in
Zonetherapeuten, (The FDZ Journal), No. 1, 1996)

. "Staff of the municipality of Ishoj was treated by a reflexologist.
During 6 month the municipality saved DKK 215,00 as
absenteeism was reduced with 2,500 hours as compared to the
previous year." (http://www.fdzintranet.dk/english/research/results.htm)
Eriksen, Leila, "Municipal Reflexology," Danish Reflexologists
Association Research Committee Report, Feb., 1995

. "In a three year peiod 235 employees were treated for a variety
of health problems. 170 reported a good effect. 60 had some effect
whereas 5 had no effect. Absenteeism was reduced from 11.4 to
8.5 days per person per year, implying savings of more than 1 million
Danish kroner." (http://www.fdz-intranet.dk/english/research/results.htm)
Madsen, Synnøve and Andersen, Jette, "Postal Reflexology,"
Danish Reflexologists Association Research Committee Report, Feb., 1995

. "A report on Company Reflexology as appled in the Danish
municipality of Svendborg. Involves 52 female employees. 97.5% had
positive effects on their primary ailments. 77.5% on secondary problems.
Medicine intake was reduce with 27.5% and absenteeism with
65.9%" (http://www.fdz-intranet.dk/english/research/results.htm)
Terp, Hanne, "Municipal Reflexology in Svendborg, A study of the
effect of reflexology treatment in the eastern district of the municipality.

Acne
Thirty eight cases of acne were ages 18 to 29. All were treated with
a daily reflexology session for 10 days as a course of treatment.
All were successfully cured by foot reflexotherapy work: 5 after
3 courses, 26 after 4 courses, 4 after 5 courses and 3 after 6 courses.
Dong Dahai, Xiang Xiangdong, Shi Yanling, Kong Zhifeng, Dong
Congjun, "Treatment of 38 Cases of Acne with Foot Reflexotherapy," 1998
China Reflexology Symposium Report, China Reflexology Association,
Beijing, pp. 62-6

Alzheimer's
Alzheimer's patients saw a reduction in body stiffness and arthritis
as well as alleviation of the illness's symptoms of restlessness and
wandering following reflexology work.
"Old age converts to the New Age," Daily Mail (England),
September 14, 1995

Amenorrhea
* Ninety-five cases of amenorrhea were divided into two groups,
a foot reflex therapy treatment group of 50 and a control group of
45 with participants using traditional Chinese medicine tablets.
The effective rate of the foot reflex therapy group was 96%
compared to the control group rate of 33%.
Xiu-hua, Xu, "Analysis of 50 Cases of Amenorrhea Treated by
Foot Reflex Therapy," (19)96 Beijing International Reflexology
Conference (Report), China Preventive Medical Association and
the Chinese Society of Reflexology, Beijing, 1996, p. 36

Anemia
A forty-six year-old woman with megaloblastic anemia was treated
with foot reflexology. At the start of foot reflexology treatment
her WBC/mm measured 4200 and hemoglobin 5.5. After three
months of foot reflexology treatment she could walk. WBC/mm
measured 8200 and hemoglobin measured 11.0.
Yong-gui, Yang, "A Case Report on Treatment of Megaloblastic
Anemia with Paraplegia by Foot Reflexology," 1994 China Reflexology
Symposium Report, China Reflexology Association, Beijing, p. 48
(Worker's Hospital of Zhuhai Chentang Enterprise, Tianjin, China)

..................'

http://www.reflexology-research.com/abstracts.htm

http://groups.google.ie/group/uk.business.agriculture/browse_frm/thread/31ee7a03764231f1/fab8531b568f8fdf?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1&hl=en#fab
8531b568f8fdf

--- end repost ---

So you base your ridicule/opinion on what exactly?

It IS ad hominem, and we ALL know it. Loser!

Liar. I do not.

Ad hominem is NOT a valid argument, screwball.

The End.

[crapola]

The bullshit about "respected frontier scientists" is utter crap.

Mr. Chupacabra is correct: load of crap and conjecture. Your
fuckwitted new-age pal who wrote that SHIT book doesn't know what she's
talking about. She, too, has ZERO background in legitimate science.

What you beg for.

Quite so.

[snip most or remaining FLOOD OF BULLSHIT]

[snip NON-PEER-REVIEWED flood-of-bullshit]

> http://www.reflexology-research.com/abstracts.htm

Partisan advocacy group for profit-seeking foot masseuses.

I wrote: I am adept at spotting pseudo-scientific charlatans like you.

You have ZERO qualification in science. So does your pal who wrote
that SHIT book about "zero piont field". It's crap.

Not ad hominem.

Yes, you do:

Your ongoing crap.

<....>

You lied. Again.

Oh-ho! So, then - the list *isn't* crap, since you
responded to it.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

That's just being course for the sake of it. Best thing is to keep an
open mind about her beliefs.

cut

Open-mindedness is not an end in itself, dummy; it's a
means to an end. When an idiot-by-choice like lesley
shows up, and gives consistent evidence of her lunacy,
the sensible thing to do is to treat all of her wacky
ideas as more lunacy.

"Leif Erikson" <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:V5Pxg.5694$157....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...

--

Yes, you added several items to your list of wacky
fuckwitted beliefs,

"zero point field" (GUFFAW!)

That's lesley, you dummy. "pearl" is her fuckwitted
pseudonym. She is anything but a pearl; more like a
jagged piece of broken glass from a cheap bottle of beer.

You don't really mean to have an open mind about them,
dumb-ass. What you mean is to be predisposed to accept
them because they're new-age kooky. Any time some dope
like you starts lecturing about open mindedness, it
quickly becomes apparent that you are anything but
that. You are, rather, a true believer - a fuckwit, in
other words.

lesley believes in a whole list of weird, irrational,
anti-scientific fairy tales:

> "Leif Erikson" <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message

Sorry. I didn't know that.

yawn

Apart from a few items on that list I'm open-minded the rest and
believe some of them.

She says she doesn't, and I'm more inclined to take her word rather
than yours on what she believes.

I've been vegan for over two years now and doing great by it.

I very much doubt that.

Yeah right.

Exactly. You are predisposed to accepting at face
value any new-age kooky bullshit that appears to go
against common sense, and that plays to your perverse
need to be "different". You misinterpret this as
"open-mindedness". It isn't - it's anything but that.
What it is is bias toward kookiness.

She's a born liar.

I thought you were open minded?

She was married to a fucking British skinhead, you
idiot! The guy was an ex-convict. He was a skinhead
when she hooked up with him. That's *why* she got
together with him: she was aroused by it.

You see? You're not open-minded at all.

As for all the rest, they're all weird beliefs that fly
in the face of logic and common sense and science, and
that's *why* you believe in them.

I agree - it isn't "open-mindedness." Being open-minded is all about being
receptive of others' ideas and beliefs. You, on the other hand, are not
receptive of others' ideas and beliefs. You are closed-minded.

If born liars exist and you can show that she's one of them, I'll be open-minded
and look at your evidence.

You can doubt things while being open-minded about them. If someone
doubts something they're undecided about it, not closed-minded about
it. Show your evidence proving she believes in bestiality.

You can't possibly know all that. Soryy, but I don't believe you.

I see the emphasis you put on 'why', and I disagree with those
reasons. I'm not a vegan just because it flies in the face of
common sense.

No, that is *NOT* what being open-minded is, but it is
what you are. But you don't mean just any "others".
They have to be others like you: counter-culture
new-age nitwits.

No, I'm not closed minded. I'm skeptical. That isn't
being closed-minded.

lesley is one.

You're not being honestly open-minded about it.

I do know all of it. She went out of town, and he got
into her computer and started posting, right here in
this newsgroup - a lot of wild, violence-tinged stuff.
He found and began posting in some skinhead-oriented
groups as well. Here is his post:
http://tinyurl.com/p6lp8. He was using her computer
and her pseudonym at that time, "lilweed".

You see, you're not open-minded at all. I'm giving you
evidence, and you just dismiss it because you're a
counter-culture new-age kook, and you feel a natural
sympathy with another of your kind. That's
closed-mindedness, pal.

You're a "vegan" (quotes of derision) because it feeds
your need to be "different". You're an unaccomplished
nobody loser, and you're one among millions. Your ego
needs something to make you feel "special", so you went
out and found something.

Yes it is.

o·pen-mind·ed
adj.
Having or showing receptiveness to new and different ideas or the opinions of others.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/open-minded

cut

No. Ispe Dixit knows her well and told me ages ago that she's a reliable
expert on nutrition and alternative animal-friendly treatments.

Yes I am, so how about that evidence I asked for?

Then you should be quiet and stop all your nonsense.

cut

No, it's a consequence of the principles I hold regarding the treatment
of animals.

Enough of the insults.

--

> [snip crap]

No, it isn't.

Wrong. That dictionary definition is simply bullshit.
Being *receptive* is not being open minded, you
fucking idiot; it's being partisan.

Derek was incorrect about that

No, you aren't.

Her endorsement of it was correctly inferred from her
failure to state her opposition to it following her
statement of support for someone (Karen Winter) who
openly endorses it. lesley was asked repeatedly if she
wanted to distance herself from Karen on at least that
one issue, and she refused to do so. That is implicit
support for it.

Why did you cut, you chickenshit closed-minded fuckwit?

<restore>

</restore>

Leave it in shitbag. Leave it in as a testament to
your closed-mindedness.

No, it's based on your wish to try to be distinctive,
to be "different".

No. You are asking for them.

"veganism" is not a thought-out position. It's a
choice people make *SELF-CONSCIOUSLY* to try to create
a persona.

ball wrote:
<..>

Thank you. For the record...

From: pearl =
Date: Sat, Feb 28 2004 2:16 pm
Email: "pearl" <t...@signguestbook.ie>
Groups: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, talk.politics.animals

"usual suspect" <supp...@our.troops> wrote in message news:njI%b.5496$qo....@fe1.texas.rr.com...
> pearl wrote:
> >><...>

> >>>>"The side" is wall to wall with paedophiles,
> >>>>zoophiles, blackmailers, would-be human vivisectionists
> >>>>and horse traders like yourself

> >>>Ipse dixit.

> >>No, it's substantiated by posts over the last three weeks addressing those
> >>issues. Your silence over Karen's repeated support of bestiality tells us plenty
> >>about you.

> > I don't recall reading that support. I seldom read off-topic posts.

> It wasn't off topic.

If I didn't read it, it was within an off-topic post/thread.

> >>>>who don't give a damn about the issues

> >>>BS.

> >>Why did you remain silent when Karen was defending those who condition animals
> >>to engage in sexual relations with humans?

> > They do?

> Yes: A learning process whereby a previously neutral stimulus (CS) is repeatedly
> paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US) that reflexively elicits an
> unconditioned response (UR). Eventually the CS will evoke the response.
> Pedophiles do this with children, and zoophiles with animals, to coerce behavior
> children and animals would normally not engage.

Ok. This sort of treatment of animals is clearly unethical.

> Bestiality is a paraphilia. Paraphilias are one of the major groups of sexual
> disorders; in DSM-IV, this group includes exhibitionism, fetishism, frotteurism,
> pedophilia, sexual masochism, sexual sadism, voyeurism, transvestic fetishism,
> and paraphilias not otherwise specified, which includes necrophilia and
> klismaphilia. The paraphilias (also called perversions or sexual deviations)
> are recurrent, intense sexual urges and sexually arousing fantasies that involve
> nonhuman objects, children or other nonconsenting persons, or the suffering or
> humiliation of oneself or the sexual partner.
> http://www.mentalhealth.com/whgdata/whlstg0.htm

Is repeatedly verbally abusing non-consenting others with overtly sexual
terms and slander, as you and ball do, a form of sexual sadism? - It is.

> >>>>but rather about protecting each others' interests instead.

> >>>Pah. Nonsense.

> >>Why did you remain silent when Karen was defending those who condition animals
> >>to engage in sexual relations with humans?

> > I haven't read that.

> http://snipurl.com/4rgt

I added 'conditioned' to the search and found this;

2004-02-18 11:11:30 PST

<...>

R:

> I think one has to condemn all conditioning as a violation of the
> animal's freedom and personhood, or not condemn conditioning _per
> se_.

u-s
I don't think so, but you're the extremist here.

(me: 1. Why not? 2. Rat just condemned all conditioning, contrary
to your implying that she defended it).

--end insert--

<snip>

To repeat- I think it is a perversion, and if it is contrary to an animals'
instinct and requires conditioning or abuse, I _strongly_ condemn it.

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.animals/browse_thread/thread/cc9e118cfdfa9539/5fc3d2966c9d12e0?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1&hl=en#5
fc3d2966c9d12e0

<..>

Texan SHARP, you idiot.

He did a stint in prison. Where you should be.

False.

Deluded as ever.

Following an inappropriate comment to a serious accident.

I gave him free rein.

I was never a skinhead. If I were, I would freely say so.

Ball complaining about violent out-of-control skinheads - lol!

> your closed-mindedness.

'There are those who believe that science is not just mistaken
on some interesting theoretical possibilities, but IRREDEEMIBLY
wrong on the most fundamental questions science can ask. But to
whom should we listen in order to sort all of this out? If the critics
are correct, billions of tax dollars have been misdirected and/or
completely wasted chasing chimeras. Your response might be,
"OK but who the heck are you?" The answer is, I'm a layperson
who has followed discovery with a particular interest in the work
of independent researchers who are skeptical of the current scientific
consensus. But the term "skeptic" has been so debased and misused
over the years that some interpret the word to mean an opposition to
anything unconventional (i.e. "skepticism" of the paranormal, UFO's,
conspiracies, etc.). In reality, the word "skeptic," has the precise
OPPOSITE meaning. As defined by the American Heritage
Dictionary, it means "One who instinctively or habitually doubts,
questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted
conclusions."

In science today, the "generally accepted conclusions" are
routinely presented as inarguable "facts". From the Big Bang, to
the evolution of planets, from the nature of comets, to highly
speculative and hidden phenomena such as black holes, dark
matter, and dark energy, the big cosmological picture is
presented with such confidence that media in this country
have almost never questioned it. But the picture may be much
less clear than we have been led to believe.
...'
http://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/new_cosmology.htm

:). Yeah, that can happen. Justifies frequent repetition I guess.

Oasis of peace and sanity in this raging world - very good idea.

>My expertise is in out stupiding myself.

Yes she can Goo........far better than you.

Goo, how about starting an archive of tinyurls of you out stupiding
yourself?

I think there is a growing following of usenet users who are following
your out stupiding career.

Did he provid you with some animals?

[snip shit flood]

Your ex-husband was a skinhead, you lying slut.

Exactly.

No, true.

> Deductive as ever.

Right.

Bullshit. You were a Chelsea - he told us.

No, you're a born liar. You're embarrassed by the
episode, little lying Chelsea.

And those people are called "kooks", and you are one.
So is billy.

>>My expertise is in spotting the worthless horseshit spew of ANTI-science fruitcakes like

> Yes she can Leif.

No, she can't, ronnnnnnnnnnie. She has no background
in science *AT ALL*.

> leif, how about starting an archive of tinyurls of me trolling for kinky gay sex in usenet?

No thanks, ronnnnnnnnnnnie.

I am not a 'slut', I do not live in Cork, and I do not lie.

My last reply to this infantile nonsense.

Admit that you have been lying, chickenshit punk.

SHARP - 'Skinheads Against Racial Predudice', you lying lowlife.

> > He did a stint in prison. Where you should be.
>
> Exactly.

Tekel.

Absolutely false. If anything, a turn-off. I'm a 'hippy-chick', remember.

> > Deluded as ever.

He told his buddies on a newsgroup. He was lying.

That's you, liar ball.

Embarrassed by what, exactly? I regret nothing I've done.

Those people are called "skeptics". You get everything wrong.