Online Telekinesis Experiments

[Virtual Particle]

I located these other two experiments which while they are they are a little more complicated and involved some of you might prefer that....

http://home.conceptsfa.nl/~rdwinter/experiment3/index3.htm

http://home.conceptsfa.nl/~rdwinter/index2.htm

Any thoughts?

[drakonwick]

It just baffles me that on all these little home made videos which are poorly put together i, might add! That people actually believe this TK

[Virtual Particle]

Moro this thread is not about videos.....

Any thought?

[Avius]

Learning some memory trick of the internet is useless. Your memory is held back by its senses.

[ai_guardian]

As I said, only a sociopath would respond as you suggest and that you seem incapable of understanding that, means you really have no idea what you are talking about.

You definitely seem to have lost it Where do sociopaths come into this??? Seriously, what does antisocial behaviour have to do with this??? You seem to think I am denying that people have emotions . Please re-read my posts, this is starting to get really painful. Last time I checked we were talking about inversion reaction ('inversion of emotions') and how that affects the results not about whether people have emotions or not, sheesh. Get it together already.

This is not a debate it’s a slaughter and you sir have won nothing. I simply do not get any pleasure out of watching another person (you) embarrass his self and if you think about it you will understand why.....

LOL, really? I don't either but since you seem to have the wrong impression you leave me no choice, here you go (a brief recap for others and as such I don't say 'you' rather I use 'Triad' where appropriate )...

Post #25: I comment on the up-to-date results that show a standard deviation the wrong way ie. test participants should influence the results to a pre-chosen side, either left or right - the standard deviation is opposite to the chosen side.

Post #27: Triad, whose favourite evidence is probabilistic/statistical micro-pk tests, shows clear lack of knowledge of probability and statistics by equating standard deviation to probability and admits that he doesn't know what I mean in my post (25) - this indicates that he doesn't really know the details of the test he himself started a thread about

Post #30: I politely point out that his understanding of the test and probability (meaningless gibberish in post 27) is clearly lacking. I also explain what I meant in post 25 since he doesn't seem to study things he starts a thread about.

Post #31 & #34: Triad attempts to reconcile the wrong-side standard deviation by introducing 'inversion reaction' as the reason for this.

consider that in relation to such an experiment the suppression of telekinetic ability is also an expression. In other words, a person who is inherently telekinetic but has some psychological issues regarding its expression can in fact actually cause the results to be the opposite, of what he or she intended

...and...

When a person is confronted with something he or she does not fully comprehend, it experiences stress and because the phenomenon is real, it still does express itself. Variations in this expression beyond the mean to either extreme as still expression of a capacity.

...as far as inversion reaction in respect to statistical analysis its psychology 101

Post #35: I ask for Triad's syllabus text for psychology 101 that defines 'inversion reaction' - I really want to study it.

Post #36: Triad provides 3 links (clearly no syllabus text), 2 of which credibility is suspect and neither of which have anything to do with statistical analysis. So I absorb the information giving it the benefit of a doubt.

Post #39: Armed with Triad's 'psychology 101' information, I now point out that he is stretching the "inversion of emotions" (which is what these articles actually present) too far and the claim of stress (bolded above) is unfounded ie. there is nothing in relation to this test that will cause the subject to stress about. I also point out that the test follows the bell curve closely with a reasonable standard deviation.

Post #41: Triad points out that cultural taboos and fear of penalty by death cause strong emotions (note that Triad is now diverting from inversion of emotions to just plainly having strong emotions)

Issues related to the paranormal, when they manifest themselves, in an individual, do evoke strong emotions as a result of cultural taboos and in reality, these cultural taboos, carried a death penalty as early as 100 years ago. That you suggest otherwise, simply suggest your lack of experience in relation to this feild

(...note also, I did not suggest otherwise - this here is a new claim, I suggested that the subject does not undergo stress as per Triad's prior claim with this test (until perhaps after it when they fail to influence it the right way)).

Post #44: I politely point out that the "as early as 100 years ago" is wrong because it is prior to this period (ie. before 100 years ago) that these cultural taboos have any credibility, and especially with the online & private tests there is no reason to even consider them. Note that this does not necessarily deny any normal emotion but rather the stress that would cause "inverted emotions" leading to inverted results - which is the subject of the discussion. I also point out "Control Runs" here that show similar results to the actual results. (Control Runs are random and no subject is involved!)

Post #45: Triad now clearly resorts to just pointing out emotional reactions forgetting totally about reasons for the "inversion of emotions" that may explain the inversion of the results. Sociopaths are now introduced, again trying to imply that I am denying emotions and again avoiding the subject matter - inversion of results. Also Triad elevates himself to an "expert" ('car mechanic') and I seem to be the uneducated onlooker.

Post #46: I point out the obvious ie. if one wants to claim "inversion reaction" that influences probabilistic results to sway OPPOSITE to choice then ONE MUST APPLY IT TO ANY AND ALL THE OTHERS (this point seems to go straight over Triad's head though as is evident in his follow-up). Here also I point out my education with regards to the subject matter and ask for his credentials hoping, just hoping that I am indeed talking to someone who is educated. Alas, it is not so - apparently, I just "don't understand"

Post #48: Triad says it all and succintly answers all my questions ...

You guys are starting to sound funny and ai_guardian you clearly do not have a clue

(btw, this is a good example of inversion of emotion - I never denied it, I merely denied its applicability to this test )

AND FINALLY...Post #50

As I said, only a sociopath would respond as you suggest and that you seem incapable of understanding that, means you really have no idea what you are talking about.

And again avoiding the all important "inversion of emotion" leading to inversion of results. Referring to sociopaths instead - as if I imply that the test subjects have no emotion.

-------------------------

This is not a debate it’s a slaughter and you sir have won nothing. I simply do not get any pleasure out of watching another person (you) embarrass his self and if you think about it you will understand why.....

Yep, you wished it Triad. And you are right, I have won nothing because there was nothing to it.

Cheers & Peace

Guardian

[drakonwick]

Triad Posted Today, 01:37 AM Moro this thread is not about videos.....

Well okay it has nothing to do with videos!

But arent all these tests still giving out nothing but random results?

Edited August 20, 2006 by Moro Bumbleroot

[Mr Walker]

Being a cantankerous old cuss i tried the tests, but each time did the opposite to what i had signed on to do. Each time i managed a small but interesting deviation in the direction I was aiming for. Usually it said this could happen somewhere between 30 and 50 attempts on a purely random/statistical basis. I don't know if this signifies anything, but I was interested that every attempt registered in the direction I was attempting, and opposite to what the computer was expecting me to do.

Ps, and only now do I go back and read AI Gaurdians post #25 which shows this was to be expected. Oh well, I just thought it might make it more interesting if I tried to influence it the opposite to what i had stated. Wait a minute, if lots of people were being this sneaky/devious could that also influence the overall result. ( I have a lot of fun making up imaginary responses to the Census also, but unfortunately can't get others to see the full potential for wreaking havoc if everyone did this)

Edited August 21, 2006 by Mr Walker

[Virtual Particle]

It is very simple to learn about inverse reactions and its relationship to experimental results and psychology (of which parapsychology is a subset. I learned about it during my first year in college ai_guardian and as presented clearly avenues for review were offered.

You most resent response was rather involved as well as entertaining let me provide you with a response.....

Will be more than happy to respond to inquiries, in relation to this matter as long as they make sense.

The experiment in question is rather famous ai_guardian it is also well documented the data is valid and that a person observes something that results in stress, is real and reacts as if the opposite is true happens every day.

Just look at the way you are behaving.....

That you are asking me to teach (beyond what has cleary been presented) you about something as basic, this is absurd, my advise is that you either go to a college or pick up a book on experimental psychology.

Any thoughts?

Edited August 22, 2006 by Triad

[Kibbles]

Being a cantankerous old cuss i tried the tests, but each time did the opposite to what i had signed on to do. Each time i managed a small but interesting deviation in the direction I was aiming for. Usually it said this could happen somewhere between 30 and 50 attempts on a purely random/statistical basis. I don't know if this signifies anything, but I was interested that every attempt registered in the direction I was attempting, and opposite to what the computer was expecting me to do.

Ps, and only now do I go back and read AI Gaurdians post #25 which shows this was to be expected. Oh well, I just thought it might make it more interesting if I tried to influence it the opposite to what i had stated. Wait a minute, if lots of people were being this sneaky/devious could that also influence the overall result. ( I have a lot of fun making up imaginary responses to the Census also, but unfortunately can't get others to see the full potential for wreaking havoc if everyone did this)

This simply screws over the official test data but if your success rate is 100% in the direction you want (rather than the one you signed for), than this is significant personal proof of influence over test results (Though not useable for any official records)

[ai_guardian]

The fact that you cannot make sense of anything Triad is a clear indication that you don't understand your own subject and lack some rudimentary analysis skills.

The history of the posts speak for themselves. There's no more to say because you will never be able to understand unless you get some real education under your belt.

Cheers

[Ness of Psionix]

There's no more to say because you will never be able to understand unless you get some real education under your belt.

The same applies to you, as education has nothing to do with being able to understand something. If it did, then we would all start out with no knownledge, and because of that, we'd be unable to learn; thus, we'd all be even dumber than we are now.

I do believe this so-called telekinesis "test" is a load of BS. I'm sure tons of kids have played with this, with no prior experience, and have gotten outragous results, while other people, with years of practice, people who can move pencils and toothpicks, couldn't even get an above average.

[Kibbles]

The fact that you cannot make sense of anything Triad is a clear indication that you don't understand your own subject and lack some rudimentary analysis skills.

The history of the posts speak for themselves. There's no more to say because you will never be able to understand unless you get some real education under your belt.

Cheers

I don't know, both of you lost me somewhere along the way and I have had a real education.

[Xenojjin]

For the record this kind of technique is refered to as "machine ghost" or the psionic ability to affect electronic data by interfering with it. Its a form of pk, but no completely pk.

If I recall...this kind of Pk was actually proven somewhere to be true but I forget where it was done. ( We had a topic somewhere...buried now... ) Something about a black box that created a 1 or 0 ( Very simple machine ) and people were asked to try and affect it through will.

[ai_guardian]

The same applies to you, as education has nothing to do with being able to understand something.

I realise that Kazuma but do you realise you've just commented on Triad's tactic? You misunderstand the point of my last post though and that is ok. You see Triad is implying that my post #55 does not make sense. I've countered his points, he hasn't countered them back except to say that I don't make sense, I don't understand and that I should get some education. I briefly and on purpose sank to his level to see how he'd react to his own tactic but I've been forced to disclose it.

Kibbles & anyone else, here's the short and sweet for those that got lost in all the posts...

The participants in this online experiment choose to influence the outcome either to the right or to the left. The overall results of this experiment show that there is a small standard deviation opposite to that which was chosen by the participant. Triad is claiming that this is proof of pk because the participants are actually undergoing "inversion reaction". I consider both possibilities, 1. they are (giving "inversion reaction" the benefit of doubt) and 2. that they are not. See each point below...

1. In accepting the possibility of "inversion reaction" in pk experiments (and giving Triad's rather presumptuous assumptions the benefit of the doubt even though I have successfully argued to the contrary) I make a claim that if this is the case then all other similar pk experiments must show the same opposite result and to my knowledge they do not. In fact, if they were and they are so well documented as Triad claims, then my exhaustive searching would have turned something up. Suffice it to say, it hasn't. So once again Triad's "inversion reaction" claim and explanation for the results to this experiment are unfounded.

2. In discounting the possibility of "inversion reaction" taking place during this experiment I counter Triad's claims that the participants are under stress during the experiment due to paranormal ability being taboo and that the participants are in fear of their life (thus creating the inversion reaction). This is not the day and age we live in, perhaps 100 or more years ago that would have been the case but not any more among an overwhelming majority of the populace. Shown that his initial claim is unjustified Triad resorts to claiming that "inversion reaction" is common, well documented in psychology and parapsychology. I counter by claiming it is not that common and in fact a search of the internet today for any articles/texts/studies has turned up 2 (yes you see right 2) articles for "'inversion reaction' and psychology". The first was about DNA chemistry the other was in a foreign language. Furthermore, "inversion of emotion" (as it really pertains to emotion) has failed to turn up anything that talks about "inversion reaction" that would give credence to Triad's claim. Anyone can try the search, I have tried all sorts of variants and still find Triad's claim unfounded.

You watch though, he'll come back and most likely once again unfold a blanket statement claiming that I don't make sense and/or don't understand and that I should do some research or get some education instead of pointing out exactly what does not make sense or what I don't understand. When he's confronted about his education and asked about his 'psychology 101' syllabus though (as he is claiming to be an expert in this field) there's zip, silence, nadda, zero, zilch...then "I learned about it during my first year in college ai_guardian and as presented clearly avenues for review were offered". Well, quite frankly (and I hate doing this and never have before) it doesn't say much about your college education if you cannot write the past tense of "learn" (this cannot be a typo btw). And about the avenues for review, hmmm, 3 links to articles, 2 of which are iffy (and I've read all three) are hardly proof of inversion reaction taking place in this experiment.

And finally, if he can't make sense of the above numerous points then I suggest education since a lifetime of learning (and some college education) has not given him the ability to understand simple points. No offence to anyone else here.

Cheers

[Virtual Particle]

Ai_guardian I explained where you could get data Inverse Reactions, I explained how they were related and I explained that your issue with it is irrelevant. As far education I have a BA in psychology and MA in Crisis Intervention (related to psychology). Your point does not make sense and to be honest it is nothing personal. It does not make sense for me to keep repeating myself and as far as the rest of your comments concerning mine I feel it would be childish to even consider responding.

As I have said there are several threads in this forum which present the issue of the relationship between emotions and PSI phenomenon and provide numerous references for review. Beyond that one issue, all your other efforts to debunk the validity of the test do not hold water.

Seriouly ai_guardian why don't you present your points to the folks offering the experiment see what kind of response you get from them?

Any thoughts?

Edited August 24, 2006 by Triad

[ai_guardian]

Ai_guardian I explained where you could get data Inverse Reactions, I explained how they were related and I explained that your issue with it is irrelevant.

No you haven't. You've provided 3 links, 2 of which are iffy, that explain inversion of emotion. Your ungrounded assumptions about its frequency and applicability to this experiment have been refuted and you have nothing to back your claim up with, simple.

As far education I have a BA in psychology and MA in Crisis Intervention (related to psychology).

I strongly suspect that from your writing and numerous grammatical and spelling mistakes you have no such education. Since you didn't come out with it before I also suspect you are making it up to give yourself some credibility. Put your money where your mouth is, post the transcripts to your alleged education.

Your point does not make sense and to be honest it is nothing personal. It does not make sense for me to keep repeating myself and as far as the rest of your comments concerning mine I feel it would be childish to even consider responding.

Just as I suspected. You can keep on repeating yourself as long as you like but if you cannot back anything up - your ranting and rambling is useless.

As I have said there are several threads in this forum which present the issue of the relationship between emotions and PSI phenomenon and provide numerous references for review. Beyond that one issue, all your other efforts to debunk the validity of the test do not hold water.

Once again you've missed the point and try to steer the issue away from what it is. I'm not debunking the test, I'm debunking your silly assumptions with "inversion reaction". If it leads to the test being debunked, so be it, but it does not have to. And quite frankly, references to things on this forum hardly give any of your arguments any credence, this is not an educational site in the sense that what is posted here can be taken as gospel. You are trying to create a circular argument.

Cheers

Edited August 24, 2006 by ai_guardian

[Virtual Particle]

Ai_guardian it sounds very much like you do not know how you use this forum you can search the various threads using keywords (such as the name Triad) there you will find the various posts I have responses in. As offered, a review of them will turn up substantive references to the matter of emotions and its relationship to PSI.

I am of Native American and Japanese decent I speak 3 languages primary of which is Spanish and am Puerto Rican/Taino Indian (US citizen) in respect to my immediate heritage. In so far as spelling errors and grammar I used a spell checker and since English is not my primary language and I will accept your apology for your presumptuous conclusions (as well as requests).

As far as Inverse reaction in relation to PSI the behavior is quite common and again you have no idea what you are talking. About my advice is that you review the threads which were offered to you, much, much earlier in this discussion and from there realize that the point was discussed in detail in the past. Now while under certain circumstances I could be persuaded to actually search those threads and provide you with direct links I can assure you that this is not one of them........

There is no circular argument your points are is simply not significant.

Any thoughts?

Edited August 24, 2006 by Triad

[ai_guardian]

Ai_guardian it sounds very much like you do not know how you use this forum you can search the various threads using keywords (such as the name Triad) there you will find the various posts I have responses in. As offered, a review of them will turn up substantive references to the matter of emotions and its relationship to PSI.

I will do that and see how much inverse reaction is covered.

I am of Native American and Japanese decent I speak 3 languages primary of which is Spanish and am Puerto Rican/Taino Indian (US citizen) in respect to my immediate heritage. In so far as spelling errors and grammar I used a spell checker and since English is not my primary language and I will accept your apology for your presumptuous conclusions (as well as requests).

So? I am an Australian citizen and my mother tongue is Czech. I speak Czech, German and English. No apology necessary or given. As for my requests, they are valid.

As far as Inverse reaction in relation to PSI the behavior is quite common and again you have no idea what you are talking. About my advice is that you review the threads which were offered to you, much, much earlier in this discussion and from there realize that the point was discussed in detail in the past. Now while under certain circumstances I could be persuaded to actually search those threads and provide you with direct links I can assure you that this is not one of them........

For the one last time, you have given 3 links to "inversion of emotion", 2 of which are iffy, the other is just about the subject. No frequency (ie. being common), no relation to psi etc. The one other article that I can assume you are talking about says "Furthermore, the mind-set and emotional states of both the observer and the observed would have to be taken into account. And causality and synchronicity will always be important factors. Also importantly, the experimenters have to be prepared to be transformed as a result of their participation in the experiments." - notice NO INVERSION REACTION is brought into this. Just because someone is in an emotional state (and that can be anything) does not automatically mean "inversion reaction". You are once again stretching things beyond the context.

[Virtual Particle]

Ai_guardian go back and read the thread I did offer the fact that such discussions exist in this forum and despite what you seem to feel is a serious concern I can assure you that my response is the correct one. When a person has a psi experience and they attempt to explore that experience, often what happens is that the phenomenon expresses itself externally, in the opposite way the person intended.

An example; if a person tries to move a pencil and the pencil does not move placing the pencil in a sensitive enough electronic scale can result in the observation that the pencil seems to be gaining weight. The effect is the result of the individual experiencing stress

in relation to completing the task they are trying to complete. The person is truly telekinetic but because of social and psychological conditioning, related to acts of performing psi, the phenomenon is expressed though not as an individual intended.

This is why such results are acknowledged as valid (in respect to the experiment in question) the point being; that either extreme is still an expression of the phenomenon as either extreme resulted in psi activity, in order for the effect to be externalized (Now I have again presented the same point I originally offered). The specific issue you are bringing up is with respect to why moving the target in the opposite direction can be accepted as significant or valid in the experiment. The response is that the phenomenon in question is occurring (telekinesis) but the subject’s emotional state in relation to the experience is causing the opposite reaction.

This is not rocket science ai_guardian, human beings are prone to reacting in the opposite way they are expected to (or want to), when they feel uncomfortable with the results. These experiments are not offered as training tools and as such those who use them do so for the purpose of being part of an experiment. The real purpose and intent of this thread was not just to offer the experiment but also to present a training tool.

To be honest your requests are not valid and you presume much; I do though appreciate your response as it has kept the thread on top, so that those who understand that telekinesis is valid, have an opportunity to take a serious look at this methodology as a

way to apply there ability.

What is interesting to point out is that your "points" have been in relation to the content of the experiment, which for the record adheres to appropriate protocols, is supported by various universities, not for profit and part of a 20 year study.

I am not stretching anything beyond the context unless of course you are suggesting that 1+1 does not equal 2.

Any thoughts?

PS: Cheers

[Virtual Particle]

As is apparent the attached link is in relation to online experimentation with respect to precognition and not PK and it also includes research experiments on Remote Viewing.

In relation to this particular one, those of you who are interested in analyzing the results please review the technical report included in the face page.

http://www.gotpsi.org/bi/gotpsi.htm

Any thoughts?

[ai_guardian]

Oh, still searching for your alleged discussions Toltec Triad, and so far nothing, but I'm not finished yet. This is not my official response to your post (69) - that one will be real fun. It seems like you have some skeletons in your closet and a history of unsubstantiated BS claims and not suprisingly stretching things beyond stretchable.

I do though appreciate your response as it has kept the thread on top

GOOD! At least everyone will be able to see you for who you are then

Oh, I can't stop laughing. What a can of worms.

PS: Your new sig should include a note for participants to expect the result to be opposite to what they chose if they have pk (YOUR CLAIM)

Edited August 24, 2006 by ai_guardian

[Virtual Particle]

As is apparent your next step is to engage in ridicule as is common behavior for those who have been defeated and cannot deal with it. Act as you see fit the reality is that you are wrong and I am right.

As far as who I am that would be a Taino Indian who is also of Japanese decent.

You are the one who decided to bring up this silly issue of yours Ai I made it clear that you were wrong but you would not stop.

That comment that you placed in quotes was made in the hope you would stop making a of yourself (but as is clear such behavior seems something you aspire to).

The responses will not always be the oposite, but in relation to those who have been

raised in cultures, where psi has taboos (such as yours) it can be an issue. There are methedologies which can be used to overcome the problem such as meditation and consistent effort to practice and become more comfortable with the phenomenon.

But for the record, it is really strange, that you prepared all those posts about what

I wrote but missed that issue about my citing past threads, in relation to psi and

emotions.

A Classic inverse reaction if I ever saw one

Any thoughts?

Edited August 25, 2006 by Triad

[ai_guardian]

Triad, you really are deluded aren't you? You have ridiculed yourself over and over, not to mention embarrased yourself to the point where the word embarrasment is an understatement. Yet you believe you have won something. What, do you think people are as deluded as you? I don't think so Your true character is stored in this thread and all the others where you have insulted well respected members of these forums, claimed things that just weren't true and outright lied. No wonder your experience here as Toltec was a downright disaster and you're heading down the exact same path. Thought you could save yourself by changing your username and instead of taunting people in the "Ancient Mysteries and Alternate Histories" section you taunt people in this section. Anyone who reads your history as Toltec and your history as Triad can CLEARLY see the type of person you are. Seems as though your education (if in fact true) has not taught you anything.

The reality of the matter is that you make claims that are outright LIES and people have proven you so over and over again yet you are so immersed in your own ses-pool of delusion, lies and blind belief that you can't even see the egg dribbling down your face. That is really sad Triad, a grown man that acts worse than a child. I feel sorry and pitty for your 14 yo (or perhaps 15yo now) daughter/son, to have a role figure that is a true embarassment to intelligence and integrity.

Bringing what up Triad? The fact that I should search for the discussions that are outright LIES once again? I'm sorry if you've made yourself a bed of nails. The fact that it keeps on happening over and over again is a testament that there is something seriously wrong with you. I'd recommend a psychiatrist.

And you have won nothing. You can dwell in your own delusions for all you like but when you start leading others into your delusions it really becomes a sad state of affairs. And I'd recommend that those that read this take heed. Do a search on Toltec/Triad, the discussions start out casual enough but the BS & insults from this guy come on thick and fast - as they have here in response to me.

Making something clear and saying I am wrong proves nothing IF YOU CANNOT SUPPORT IT.

But for the record, it is really strange, that you prepared all those posts about what

I wrote but missed that issue about my citing past threads, in relation to psi and

emotions.

Go on Triad, what post number would that be where you cited past threads that discuss emotions in relation to PSI? Save yourself before you drown in your own lies. Or do you mean that you just make a blanket statement that there are such threads? - that does not make it so! Perhaps some people are so gullible that they do not check and take your word for it and cower. You've made this same mistake as Toltec and been caught out big time. Aquatus1, Marduk, Bio-Mage just to name a few will remember your downright fallacious tactics. They've exposed you before and I have exposed you now.

The responses will not always be the oposite, but in relation to those who have been

raised in cultures, where psi has taboos (such as yours) it can be an issue.

So you are saying that the participants of the experiment here in question are all from these cultures? You've changed your story back and forth over and over again trying to weave and dodge but I see you, ha. You are once again grossly deluded. You are a disgrace even to the believers! Because you have now single handedly debunked all of the PSI experiments that have shown a correct result, dufus. And for the record (and I can PM the email address used) I have successfully (apparently using psi - NOT) got results in this test that show out of 11, 9 were correct. You've YET AGAIN put your big foot in it, and boy does it stink.

Yet again the same tactic, making assumptions about members that have no grounding in reality just to suit your deluded view. You are a waste of time my friend! You've led me on a wild goose chase. It may have bought you time but it didn't buy you a new brain.

PS: Isn't it great that this thread is up the top for all to read

Cheerio Juan

Guardian

Edited August 25, 2006 by ai_guardian

[Kibbles]

As far as I have followed this argument, Ai_Guardian, I have not seen Triad embarrasing himself to the point where the word embarrasment is an understatement (Though admittedly I did not understand much of his points nor much of yours).

What I have seen is you consistently making presumptuous remarks regarding Triad's education, mental health, and character which have little relation to the actual topic at hand and if directed at myself I would consider serious personal attacks.

Edit: Well, anyways, please stick to the topic so I can figure out what you are trying to say as divorced from your personal opinions about Triad. I'm outta here til next week. Ciao

Edited August 25, 2006 by Kibbles

[ai_guardian]

As far as I have followed this argument, Ai_Guardian, I have not seen Triad embarrasing himself to the point where the word embarrasment is an understatement (Though admittedly I did not understand much of his points nor much of yours).

Then you must've missed post #55 Kibbles. And I have cleared up the confusion about the subject in post #64. IMO that was straight forward.

What I have seen is you consistently making presumptuous remarks regarding Triad's education, mental health, and character which have little relation to the actual topic at hand and if directed at myself I would consider serious personal attacks.

Kibbles, we're both guilty of attacking each others' education but the only time I've attacked his mental health and character is in my last post so I don't know how you can put the word consistently to it. I'm doing it reluctantly but you cannot argue with the truth, if you knew his history in these forums as I have just found out (by his own prompting).

BTW, there is no topic left. His points have been refuted ad-nauseum and what I wrote was part of the topic as it shows that he has no credibility and claims things he cannot support.

Cheers

Edited August 25, 2006 by ai_guardian