Is Maurice Strong so wrong?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Postby jamesredford » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:44 pm

scollon<br>""<br>"I provided documentary links for your edification"<br><br>It's silly nonsense and you don't have to think very hard to know that. Did the Americans keep records of every Indian they slaughtered, I think not ? <br>""<br><br><br>Like I said, the numbers I cited are *very* conservative figures. The actual figures are undoubtably higher; but the numbers cited are what can be proved for certain.<br><br><br>""<br>Let's not forget, China is now an American controlled fascist slave labour camp.<br><br>The 10 million was an estimate based on numbers before the British left and in the late nineteenth century as I said, the greatest genocide in human history and also the most barbaric slave driven culture in history which persisted right up to the 1960's as apartheid . Today as the most evil, rapacious and racist criminal justice sytem on earth.<br>""<br><br><br>China is still Communist. Nor does the U.S. government control the government of China.<br><br>And now you are either fibbing or mistaken. Like I proved earlier, socialism has been guilty of the greatest genocides in the history of the Earth. Not that I see why you are bringing up another murderous statist government to try to demonstrate to me how lovely statist governments are.<br><br>All governments are quite Satanic. That is why I am an anarchist. I hate all governments to the very core of my being.<br><br>Hatred of all government is the beginning of true political knowledge. <p></p><i></i>
jamesredford
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 10:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Postby scollon » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:58 pm

The native Indians weren't killed by government in the main, but by God's own , the American people. Genocide is the deliberate elimination of a particular race of people for reasons of race and i don't know of any other where 10 million wereb killed .<br><br>"China is still Communist"<br><br>Of course it is. The truly vast pool of Anglo American investment in what is rapidly becoming the manufacturing arm of global capitalsm is just an illusion.<br><br>I used to be an anarchist until I realised that governments are made up of people and that the average ebayer is actually less honest than the average multi national corporation.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=scollon>scollon</A> at: 12/13/05 9:00 pm<br></i>
scollon
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Socialism Drools?

Postby Floyd Smoots » Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:19 am

I agree that socialism is not the answer. I completely agree with scolon, that the Satanists really think they are the "good guys". Also, I think that there is nothing wrong, in this dispensation, with "Mercantilism", but that it is really not Capitalism. I belive that Capitalism was invented by the PTB long ago, in order to replace "M-ism" with "C-ism". (See any post anywhere about how "banks" create money out of nothing.)<br><br>Because I belive in Bible prophecy, as some (the minority?) of the posters here also seem to (might?), I really don't think we can stop the NWO on this physical plane. That belief does not excuse me, in any way, nor ANY truly professing Christian, from doing our part, every day, to take care of the planet, its plant and animal life, and most of all, our human brothers and sisters who have less than ourselves, or need things that we have, and can contribute to, their physical and spiritual welfare in the "here and now". That is one of the "True" truths of the Bible.<br><br>Yes, and I won't apologize for it, we believe that the God who created us, and loves us all, will see us through ALL the trials and tribulations that Satan throws at us in this life. The "REAL Fundie" view of "Life, the Universe, and Everything" (much distorted and perverted by the MSM, Hollywood, the Neo-Cons, the SRA'ers, the Alphabet Agencies and many So-Called Churches), is this, and This Only:<br><br>Because God, in his infinite wisdom, gave us free will, and we, with our God-given free will abused it and angered him with our SIN, He decided (already knew?) that we would need a saviour. What determines whether I/You/He/She/We go to Heaven or Hell has Nothing to do with whether we were "naughty or nice", but Everything to do with how we treated the imparted knowledge of the willing sacrifice on The Cross, of his only begotten Son, Jesus, the Christ.<br><br>We, ourselves, are Not God, but let me try to put it in a graspable, human perspective for any and all of you. Suppose that you were in a human position of presidential or kingly power, and your child was held hostage by evil forces. Your choice, in this scenario, is that, "they" will kill your child, or "Nuke" your whole country. You decide to sacrifice your one and only child out of love for your country, and you make the decision. After "saving" everyone (say only a lousy million citizens), there are many, many (most of the) people in your country who said that what you did was stupid. Then, they spent the rest of their lives disparaging the "sacrifice" that you, as their loving leader, made for them. Now, ask yourselves how you might feel, as a loving and caring parent. This is the best analogy I, as a mere mortal, can give you all right now, as to how an all-powerful, loving God, can possibly, eternally condemn anyone who has been told the "Good News" that the King saved his people, but, instead they chose to "spit in his face" and make fun of he beloved child that he gave up in order to secure their future out of love for them all. Can any of you parents out there relate to what I'm saying? <br><br>Information Not "Guaranteed" In The World's View; just wanted you to know what we old "Fundies" are buying into. If my argument/diatribe made any difference in even one person's life here, then, it was worth the trouble.<br><br>Live Long and Prosper,<br>Uncle Floyd<br> <p></p><i></i>
Floyd Smoots
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: FYI,

Postby jamesredford » Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:25 am

Jeff:<br>""<br>my socialism finds its highest expression in Gerrard Winstanley and the Diggers. Not a murderous doctrine, that. Except it could get you killed.<br><br>You poor take courage<br>You rich take care<br>The earth was made a common treasury<br>For everyone to share<br>All things in common<br>All people one<br>We come in peace -<br>The order came to cut them down<br>""<br><br>"The Great Thanksgiving Hoax," Richard J. Maybury, November 20, 1999:<br><br>http://www.mises.org/story/336<br><br>Jeff, your socialism has already been tried, over and over and over again. And over and over again it has only brought misery. As it must. Even appart from the murderous dictators which socialism must of necessity eventually require if it is to continue, socialism is a reversion to barbarism. It is the absense of economy. Which makes sense, as socialism is economic illiteracy.<br><br>One can wish all one wants, but if one ignores the internal logic of the system (i.e., the incentive-structure of the system) then all one's wishes will not merely be for naught: they will bring untold misery and destruction to people. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. And those so-called "good intentions" were invented, funded, and promoted by Satan, i.e., well-meaning people, such as yourself (I hope), fall for Satan's tricks because they sound nice on the surface.<br><br>I have now read your article. Now please have the intellectual considerateness and fortitude to read mine and inform me of your thoughts on it:<br><br>"Jesus Is an Anarchist" by James Redford, revised and expanded edition, November 9, 2005: <br><br>http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/anarchist-jesus.pdf<br><br>--<br><br>James Redford, jrredford@yahoo.com <p></p><i></i>
jamesredford
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 10:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

--

Postby wintler » Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:35 am

<br>>"Well, since I don't know what "NGO" you work for I'm at a disadvangtage, as it's not possible for me to comment very well on an organization whose name I don't even know."<br><br>I've received no money from any NGO ever, i've given not inconsiderable amounts of time and a v.little money to several. Currently am active in only one v.small effort.<br><br>>"If you're a "green" NGO of any significance, then you get a lot of globalist funding, even if it isn't all directly from the government. There are globalist foundations in place for that." <br><br>There are indeed. Does that make every NGO an expression of globalist will? No. Here in Aus. there are v.few Foundations & v.little govt funding of any ENGO's, and certainly not the ones i associate with.<br><br>>"And yes, all "geenies" are indeed dupes. So-called "environmentalism" is anti-humanity and it is dishonest socialism through the back door." <br><br>How easily you smear your labels together, must make it so much easier to know everything. The depletionist ecological worldview is closer to Adam Smith than socialism. Don't confuse it with commodified environmentalism which freq. advocates centralist methods (having no choice given member apathy/powerlessness), that just demonstrates your ignorance.<br><br><br>"The reason you are a dupe is because of this: in any action, ask yourself: does the cause I'm promoting give more power to the government, or take power away from government? Or: does the cause I'm promoting merely maintain the present level of power of the government?<br>If the cause you're promoting gives more power to the government, or even merely maintains its present level of power, then you are a dupe, whether you know it or not.<br>If the action you promote increases the size of government then you are a dupe. If the action you promote merely maintains the present size of government then you are a dupe. "<br><br>Hmm, so where does nonviolent direct action obstructing the actions of the State or contesting it in the courts figure on your 'dupe' scale? Takes power away from the State, yes? And many ENGO's (many operating informally) have been active in these in recent years. Think your magnificently simple hyporhesis just fell over.<br><br>The Diggers were also greenies who didn't love the State.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
wintler
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:28 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Mercantilism

Postby James Redford » Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:42 am

Floyd Smoots, you reversed mercantilism and capitalism.<br><br>Mercantilism is simply an underhanded form of socialism. It's one step below fascism. And fascism is just Communism Lite. Fascism is de facto socialism except that the people still retain meaningless de jure title to property. Hence, fascism is better than socialism in the sense that it can't get away with as much.<br><br>Mercantilism is where the government grants special privileges and contracts, and inforces various licenses, to favor certain businesses. Hence, it's just one step lower than fascism.<br><br>Genuine capitalism is simply what happens when people are left to be free, i.e., you have something I want and so I make a mutually agreed-upon deal to exhange something that I have which you want. We both benefit, as we each get something which we value more than what we gave up. Social utility has thereby increased.<br><br>That is the sum total of what real capitalism consists of. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
James Redford
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: FYI,

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Wed Dec 14, 2005 1:17 am

James, your paper is 60 pages long. I don't believe it's intellectually inconsiderate of me to decline reading it, though I will grant that I lack the fortitude.<br><br>Forgive me my Canadiana, but socialism here means such things as public health care, and does not invoke leviathan. And historically here, when Christians have been politically mobilized, they have been mobilized on the <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Left</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->.<br><br>Many of the founders of Canada's socialist party - the CCF, which became the NDP - were ministers and people of faith. They regarded it as their calling to see the hungry were fed and the homeless were sheltered. <br><br>Longtime NDP MP Bill Blaikie is also a Minister of the United Church of Canada (our largest Protestant denomination, and a uniquely Canadian amalgam of Methodists, Congregationalists and most Presbyterians). Here's a snip from an interview a couple of years ago:<br><br>How does your Christian faith inform your politics?<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Blaikie: My faith does inform my politics. If you judge your politics by whose side you should be on, I think it's pretty clear from the Biblical tradition whose side God is on. It's the vulnerable and oppressed. It's not on the side of the powerful or corporate elite. It's also clear that any society that reduces us to competitors-as opposed to co-operators-is not in tune with the Biblical message. Who is in charge? Who is Lord? If the current powers and principalities which I regard as the global corporations -they're running the world and it's their view of the world that's in charge-then I think that's contrary to a view which holds that, instead of the view of the corporations, it should be the worldview that we have in the Biblical tradition and other faith traditions as well.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.thesocialedge.com/archives/gerrymccarthy/2articles-sep2002.htm">www.thesocialedge.com/archives</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rigorousintuition>Rigorous Intuition</A> at: 12/13/05 10:20 pm<br></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Your Money or Your Life, in the Name of Jesus

Postby jamesredford » Wed Dec 14, 2005 3:07 am

Jeff:<br>""<br>James, your paper is 60 pages long. I don't believe it's intellectually inconsiderate of me to decline reading it, though I will grant that I lack the fortitude.<br>""<br><br><br>'Tis but a short read, especially considering the monumentally important nature of the subject and my excellent writing skills. It will be a pleasure for you. You will thank me for bringing my article to your attention, I am sure.<br><br>All the more so since my article addresses many vitally important fallacies which you hold. And I prove my claims quite rigorously--indeed, apodictically so.<br><br>I can quite honestly say that there exists no one in this world more knowledgeable on the subject of my article (i.e., Jesus vis-à-vis government, and Jesus vis-à-vis the proper social ethic) than me. You will learn a lot from me.<br><br><br>""<br>Forgive me my Canadiana, but socialism here means such things as public health care, and does not invoke leviathan. And historically here, when Christians have been politically mobilized, they have been mobilized on the Left.<br><br>Many of the founders of Canada's socialist party - the CCF, which became the NDP - were ministers and people of faith. They regarded it as their calling to see the hungry were fed and the homeless were sheltered. <br><br>Longtime NDP MP Bill Blaikie is also a Minister of the United Church of Canada (our largest Protestant denomination, and a uniquely Canadian amalgam of Methodists, Congregationalists and most Presbyterians). Here's a snip from an interview a couple of years ago:<br><br>How does your Christian faith inform your politics?<br><br>Blaikie: My faith does inform my politics. If you judge your politics by whose side you should be on, I think it's pretty clear from the Biblical tradition whose side God is on. It's the vulnerable and oppressed. It's not on the side of the powerful or corporate elite. It's also clear that any society that reduces us to competitors-as opposed to co-operators-is not in tune with the Biblical message. Who is in charge? Who is Lord? If the current powers and principalities which I regard as the global corporations -they're running the world and it's their view of the world that's in charge-then I think that's contrary to a view which holds that, instead of the view of the corporations, it should be the worldview that we have in the Biblical tradition and other faith traditions as well.<br><br>www.thesocialedge.com/archives<br>""<br><br><br>Now Jeff, my article entitled "Jesus Is an Anarchist" wouldn't be worth much if I hadn't already addressed such a fallacy as the above, now would it? Hence, you here demonstrate how much you are in need of reading my said article, assuming you desire to make true statements and avoid falsehood.<br><br>So please do read my article entitled "Jesus Is an Anarchist." But just in passing, I will here say that a gun to the belly in the name of feeding the poor has nothing to do with Jesus. Throughout history Satan has used all sorts of clever tricks to get the misguided to support his rule; and it certainly doesn't help that he has had hold of our minds since the time we were born. <p></p><i></i>
jamesredford
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 10:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Jesus Is an Anarchist

Postby James Redford » Wed Dec 14, 2005 3:10 am

Below is the above-mentioned article:<br><br>"Jesus Is an Anarchist" by James Redford, revised and expanded edition, November 9, 2005: <br><br>http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/anarchist-jesus.pdf<br><br>--<br><br>James Redford, jrredford@yahoo.com <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
James Redford
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Wow, James Redford ....

Postby maggrwaggr » Wed Dec 14, 2005 3:52 am

You are blowing my mind. How someone could weave an intelligent-sounding and logically-appearing argument into your conclusions is absolutely fascinating.<br><br>Unfortunately I think you are deranged.<br><br>You ask if an action gives more power to the "government" or less? In regards to environmental movements and organizations.<br><br>I ask you this: Who is the "government" you're talking about?<br><br>The "government" these days is big corporations, who pretty much tell the bureaucracy we consider to be the "government" what to do.<br><br>So if, say, a big corporation wants to dump raw sewage into the lake behind my house, for example, you're suggesting that my fighting this by requiring governmental LAW to make it ILLEGAL for hiim to do so is giving the GOVERNMENT more power over me?<br><br>You have things precisely bass-ackwards.<br><br>Still, I find your rantings fascinating. <br><br>Oh, and by the way, please quit confusing socialism with totalitarianistic communism. The two have nothing in common.<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=maggrwaggr>maggrwaggr</A> at: 12/14/05 12:58 am<br></i>
maggrwaggr
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 4:59 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

exciting

Postby smiths » Wed Dec 14, 2005 4:53 am

ooh, how exciting, like talking to 'god'<br>chuck him a timeframe, a geographical location and a couple of soggy biscuits and mr wankford can explain annoyingly the infinite complexities of the interconnected ideas, actions and recipes better than the people who were there, doing it,<br>mind boggling,<br><br>can we now return the group conversation james? <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2204
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Wow, James Redford ....

Postby jamesredford » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:30 am

maggrwaggr:<br>""<br>You are blowing my mind. ...<br>'''<br><br><br>Indeed, that is why I was put on this Earth. I can put a blowin' on a think-box like nobody's business. You may try to resist me, but in the end I will still be correct. Like all good men and women, your info-receptacle was made for my edification-cannon. I'm impregnating the datasphere with my electronic mustard seeds of truth.<br><br><br>'''<br>... How someone could weave an intelligent-sounding and logically-appearing argument into your conclusions is absolutely fascinating.<br><br>Unfortunately I think you are deranged.<br><br>You ask if an action gives more power to the "government" or less? In regards to environmental movements and organizations.<br><br>I ask you this: Who is the "government" you're talking about?<br>""<br><br><br>Government (i.e., when the word is used in the sense of a state) is that organization in society which attempts to maintain, and is generally successful at maintaining, a coercive regional monopoly over ultimate control of the law (i.e., on the courts and police, etc.)--this is a feature of all governments; as well, historically speaking it has always been the case that it is the only organization in society that legally obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for contracted services rendered but by coercion.<br><br><br>""<br>The "government" these days is big corporations, who pretty much tell the bureaucracy we consider to be the "government" what to do.<br>'''<br><br><br>Rather, the highest level of the ruling elite nowadays tend to prefer to stay out of the limelight. Doing this greatly helps to take off heat from them, since then they can put in new puppets when their old ones overstay their welcome with the masses. It also gives the masses a little dog and pony show when the ruling elite switch out puppets called "Democrats" or "Republicans" (or some other names, as well), so that the masses can think that they have a choice within the system.<br><br>But even so, many of the most high of the ruling elite do hold office, in a sense (indeed, in the most fundamental of sense, if people were but to take their title and offical job-description seriously). They are the European royalty. But they have their puppets in the major media make constant jokes about them so that the public just thinks they're funny and nothing to take seriously.<br><br>This is one area where Jeff could certainly do better. I do very, very much appreciate him focusing attention to the spiritual aspects of the esoteric elite, as this is an area where Jeff is doing something pretty unique (at least in blog format), but when Jeff names names he doesn't tend to get very high on the scale of ruling elite. On one of my websites I use the term "Illuminati." I don't think any formal organization run by the ruling elite is actually called that, but that term is certainly how they view themselves (i.e., as the "Illuminated Ones," or as the "Enlightened Ones"); and indeed they make inside jokes about it with each other, such as Bush, Jr.'s web-server for his first run for Presidency. Hence, as a generic term it is accurate, so long as we're not referring to 1700s Bavaria.<br><br>But there is a formal organization run by the highest level of the elites, and we have their names. It's called the Bilderberg group, and it is absolutely documentable (at least as far as that it actually exists; most of the majors who attend; and some of what they plan: including some of what they devised in the somewhat distant past, that being the European Union and the euro European Union single-currency, all invented and planned by the Bilderberg group since 1954, as reported by the BBC from Bilderberg archive documents). When it comes to naming names of those who control the Western (and many Asian and Middle-Eastern) countries, that is where it is at.<br><br>And the highest of the high are the European royalty and the central bankers.<br><br><br>'''<br>So if, say, a big corporation wants to dump raw sewage into the lake behind my house, for example, you're suggesting that my fighting this by requiring governmental LAW to make it ILLEGAL for hiim to do so is giving the GOVERNMENT more power over me?<br>'''<br><br><br>That of course would be an aggression against your natural property rights. As to how this would be resolved in a stateless society, see the below:<br><br>"Defense Services on the Free Market" by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard:<br><br>http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/marketdefense.html<br><br>"The Private Production of Defense" by Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe:<br><br>http://www.mises.net/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf<br><br>http://www.mises.org/journals/scholar/Hoppe.pdf<br><br>"Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security" by Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe:<br><br>http://www.mises.net/journals/jls/9_1/9_1_2.pdf<br><br>"Police, Courts, and Laws--On the Market," from The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism by Prof. David D. Friedman:<br><br>http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freedom/MofF_Chapter_29.html<br><br>Concerning the ethics of human rights, the below book is the best book on the subject:<br><br>The Ethics of Liberty by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard:<br><br>http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp<br><br><br>""<br>You have things precisely bass-ackwards.<br><br>Still, I find your rantings fascinating. <br><br>Oh, and by the way, please quit confusing socialism with totalitarianistic communism. The two have nothing in common.<br>""<br><br><br>I haven't confused anything regarding this matter, not even in the slightest. Socialism requires totalitarianism in order to enforce it. For more on that, see the below article:<br><br>"Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian," Prof. George Reisman, Ludwig von Mises Institute, November 11, 2005:<br><br>http://www.mises.org/story/1937 <p></p><i></i>
jamesredford
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 10:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: exciting

Postby jamesredford » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:52 am

smiths:<br>""<br>ooh, how exciting, like talking to 'god'<br>chuck him a timeframe, a geographical location and a couple of soggy biscuits and mr wankford can explain annoyingly the infinite complexities of the interconnected ideas, actions and recipes better than the people who were there, doing it,<br>mind boggling,<br><br>can we now return the group conversation james?<br>""<br><br><br>Did you have a question concerning the deep, deep mysteries of the universe that you have long wanted answered? If so, ask me. I'll try my best. <p></p><i></i>
jamesredford
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 10:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Megalomania

Postby chillin » Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:12 am

Somebody needs to remember to take their meds. <p></p><i></i>
chillin
 
Posts: 596
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:56 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: you cant treat "jesus fever" with meds

Postby hmm » Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:26 am

i hear there has been some success with microwave treatment though :P<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm16.showMessage?topicID=29.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...D=29.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>This Is Your Brain on God<br><br>Michael Persinger has a vision - the Almighty isn't dead, he's an energy field. And your mind is an electromagnetic map to your soul.<br>~snip~<br>His theory is that the sensation described as "having a religious experience" is merely a side effect of our bicameral brain's feverish activities. Simplified considerably, the idea goes like so: When the right hemisphere of the brain, the seat of emotion, is stimulated in the cerebral region presumed to control notions of self, and then the left hemisphere, the seat of language, is called upon to make sense of this nonexistent entity, the mind generates a "sensed presence."<br><br>Persinger has tickled the temporal lobes of more than 900 people before me and has concluded, among other things, that different subjects label this ghostly perception with the names that their cultures have trained them to use - Elijah, Jesus, the Virgin Mary, Mohammed, the Sky Spirit.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>do not try this at home,you should see the mess those jehova's witnesses made in my microwave :P <p></p><i></i>
hmm
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Deep Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest