That will keep the air clean for the rest of us.
For whom? The insult of the day club?
Moved from the Rossi v. Darden aftermath thread. Eric
The Playground
-
-
For whom? The insult of the day club?
If your purpose here is to defend Rossi against what you regard as libelous remarks, I suggest you address the substance of the remarks you find disagreeable and explain why they're libelous rather than shifting the focus of the conversation onto the people making them. If you are for whatever reason unable to avoid drawing the focus of the discussion away from the topic at hand and onto other specific forum members, consider blocking those people so that you no longer see what they write. If your purpose here is simply to attack forum members whose positions and comments you disagree with, you should seek out another forum.
Moved from the Rossi v. Darden aftermath thread. Eric
-
He would never have allowed me to be a part of any team testing the ecat and I doubt very much he would have allowed Jed or anyone else who knew what they were doing. I am amazed Kullander, Essen, the Swedes and Levi played along with Rossi's changing schemes all those years. Rossi's gift is his unerring ability to choose marks and then to play to their weaknesses and hopes. He is good at it and that is about all he is good at.
Why should Rossi want to have you in his way during his own test? You are the last person in the world in which he could trust. You've spent years insulting him everywhere you could, and frankly it's hard to figure out what makes you so constant in this doggedness. For sure Rossi thinks you would do anything to boycott his test just to prove that you are right. Kullander was a very open minded person and very competent, as is Essen and the other Swedes. Surely they have hopes for this technology to work, but it's absurd that you allow yourself to talk about their alleged weaknesses. Sometimes you really look like a frustrated person: since Rossi did not choose you, then you think all those who can work with him are perfect idiots. Get down from that pedestal where you climbed: it's not up to you.
-
I'm surprised you can put your clothes on by yourself in the morning. You can, can't you? PS: dead people can't sue for damages nor can anyone on the behalf. Not to mention that I am not releasing any of Papp's sordid records because I never saw any. I am not even reporting facts about Papp! I am simply reporting an anecdote about what someone told me. Hear say. Also you seem to have lost track and wandered into the wrong thread. Anyway sue me. Give it a try. I am terrified.
Well after the barrage of insults that followed my helping you to understand the laws that surround patients' private medical information, it seems you were terrified enough to delete all the posts where you broke the law. Fancy that!
-
Quote
Why should Rossi want to have you in his way during his own test? You are the last person in the world in which he could trust. You've spent years insulting him everywhere you could
At the time Jed Rothwell and I were discussing how to best test Rossi, I had not been publicly insulting him. I had only critiqued his existing methods, politely and objectively for the most part. It was early in 2011 and I was still curious to see if maybe there was a small chance Rossi actually had something.
-
Quote
Well after the barrage of insults that followed my helping you to understand the laws that surround patients' private medical information, it seems you were terrified enough to delete all the posts where you broke the law. Fancy that
I deleted nothing I said about Papp and I will say it again-- just tell me what you think I deleted and I will repeat it right here. Nobody is going to be stupid enough to sue me for pointing out that Papp was a certified lunatic according to a doctor I spoke with who had treated him for an obviously self-inflicted bullet wound which Papp claimed had been caused by an encounter in the desert with a hit man. Trust me, if Papp had had an encounter in the desert with a hit man close enough to put a bullet in his arm, he wouldn't have come back to talk about it. And I stand by what I said about you as well.
-
Here's post that quoted your thoughts on Papp: Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]
If you try to follow the link, you can see it's been deleted.
There's a new Papp thread now... Maybe that's the best place to repeat Papp's diagnosis?
-
As usual, I am going to ignore Zeus for the most part. However, the link he provides above leads directly to this:
Quote- Post by Stefan:
maryyugo wrote:
to know an old doctor, now dead, who actually met and treated Papp for a clearly self-inflicted gun shot wound of his arm which Papp claimed happened when he was shot in the desert by a hitman and managed to escape. He said Papp was a flaming nut case (not his words-- he said a florid paranoid schizophrenic). There is no reason to believe anything Papp ever said. There is no reason to believe his claims because he never had a single properly done replication or verification or test. And absolutely no reason to believe you can extract power from "noble" gases. Believing that Papp had anything is sort of a classic lowest common denominator of gullibility when believing free energy scams. It is equivalent to a belief that Madoff was a financial genius who would have eventually made good on his promises if only he had not be arrested and jailed.
--------------
The problem with this argument is that people can be both schitzophrenic and genious during the lifetime (but of cause not at the same time). See "A beautiful mind" where the life of the prisewinner ( the prise to nobels memory in echonomics e.g. not a true nobel prise) John Nash is told. You simply need to conclude that his inventive phase co-inside with illness. Also there are nut cases that live perfect normal life, doing brilliant work, but for which we loose to insanity a couple of months every 5th year or so. I would demand proof in order to believe any words of Papp though, everything can very well be crazy work.
Zeus46 and ZenoOfElea like this.
I am not bothering to track this further but what I said is right there. I will guess that the admins may have moved the more abrasive part of the discussion elsewhere and that Zeus merely imagined, as he is wont to do, that I had deleted it. BTW, deleted posts by author are marked "deleted by author".
-
Not every deleted post leaves behind a marker. I recently deleted an old post of mine in the 'doggerel' thread, and now there's now zero trace of it.
And your original post doesn't show up in either 'clearance items' or 'the playground', so I doubt that the admins moved it anywhere.
Anyway, it's good to see that you are willing to reaffirm your crime, resetting the 180 day reporting limit for HIPAA violations.
-
Not every deleted post leaves behind a marker. I recently deleted an old post of mine in the 'doggerel' thread, and now there's now zero trace of it.
Well your original post doesn't show up in either 'clearance items' or 'the playground', so I doubt that the admins moved it anywhere.
Zeus46
You don't have to like MY or agree with him/her. But abrasive truth-telling from a limited but consistent perspective is his/her style. Not lying about post deletion. And it is pretty unlikely he'd forget that.
Mods here did a whole load of post deletion before they started the rubbish threads. You have no evidence for your accusation here.
-
Huxley.
1. Where do I accuse Mary of lying? Everyone knows heshe has a notoriously bad memory, more so when it suits hem.
2. If you are going to start holding those whom (you assume) accuse others of lying, to some kind of standard of evidence, why not start with Mary herself? Or are you a hypocrite?
3. It's normal practice for moderators to remove later posts that quote offensive material... otherwise what's the point?
4. If someone deleted a Yugo post, the result would be a huge amount of childish bitching about "censorship" by said poster. None seen any (regarding that post) yet...
-
Quote
If someone deleted a Yugo post, the result would be a huge amount of childish bitching about "censorship" by said poster. None seen any (regarding that post) yet.
Actually, I'd be very unlikely to even notice it unless it was towards the end of a current and active discussion. Zeus, you're a waste of time to respond to. You virtually never say anything worthy of consideration.
-
Considered blocking one another? All it takes is one of you to do it, and then everything will be better.
-
Eric, are you kidding? Zeus is a never-ending source of comedy. Tragi-comedy perhaps, but comedy nonetheless.
-
It would be a courtesy to the rest of us.
-
Maybe you should block us both Eric?
Zeus is a never-ending source of comedy.
See here, for instance.
-
I can't, unfortunately, nor do I want to. I find that both of you have interesting things to say. The food fighting sets a bad example for others, though, which makes me wish you guys would block one another.
-
The ridiculous deserve ridicule.
-
Zeus and Mary. I can mediate here.
What's on your mind guys, let's discuss. It can be like ECN all over again! -
I can't, unfortunately, nor do I want to. I find that both of you have interesting things to say. The food fighting sets a bad example for others, though, which makes me wish you guys would block one another.
Hi Eric, blocking would be a bit of a cop out on this forum. As we know Mary loves to post and her life revolves around posting on forums. There is no disputing this. I say let her be. We should be at liberty to reply to those who we wish to talk to. That's freedom of speech, right?
