Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #597688 > unrolled thread

Telepathy drug

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 07:25 -0700
    Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 10:33 -0500
      Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 09:39 -0700
        Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-20 19:31 +0000
          Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 16:51 -0700
            Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-21 00:35 +0000
              Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 17:44 -0700
                Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-20 21:36 -0500
                Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-21 05:48 +0000
                  Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 08:32 -0700
                    Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 09:29 -0500
                      Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 07:45 -0700
                        Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 10:35 -0500
                        Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-22 15:35 +0000
                          Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 11:02 -0700
                            Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 13:23 -0500
                            Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 13:25 -0500
                            Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-22 19:27 +0000
                              Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 13:13 -0700
                                Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 15:48 -0500
                                Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-22 20:48 +0000
                                  Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 16:57 -0700
                                    Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 18:48 -0700
                                      Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 19:09 -0700
                                        Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-23 03:13 +0000
                                          Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 21:56 -0700
                                            Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-23 13:15 +0000
                                          Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-23 08:42 -0500
                                            Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 06:54 -0700
                                              Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 07:19 -0700
                                                Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 07:57 -0700
                                                  Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-23 10:22 -0500
                                                  Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-23 17:12 +0000
                                                    Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 10:57 -0700
                                                      Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-23 13:18 -0500
                                                Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 09:57 -0500
                                            Re: Telepathy drug pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-09-23 20:37 -0700
                                              Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-24 14:43 +0000
                                                Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 08:16 -0700
                                                  Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-24 12:16 -0500
                                                  Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-24 19:13 +0000
                                                    Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 13:39 -0700
                                        Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 07:10 -0500
                                      Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 07:08 -0500
                                    Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-23 03:05 +0000
                                    Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 07:06 -0500
                    Re: Telepathy drug moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-22 15:32 +0000
    Re: Telepathy drug "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 12:26 -0700
      Re: Telepathy drug "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-20 12:33 -0700
    Re: Telepathy drug Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-23 22:14 +1000
      Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 06:16 -0700
        Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 08:20 -0500
          Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 06:34 -0700
            Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 06:39 -0700
              Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 09:51 -0500
                Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 08:02 -0700
                  Re: Telepathy drug john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 08:26 -0700
                    Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 11:05 -0500
                  Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 11:04 -0500
                    Re: Telepathy drug Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-23 13:22 -0500
            Re: Telepathy drug Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 08:39 -0500

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#597961

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> tarded:

>You.
>Don't.
>Have.
>A.
>Model.

I don't have my own personal model, no.  I personally believe in the
Standard Model, even if I can't claim it as my own.

I'm guessing that by not drawing a pretty picture or something, then
you believe what I wrote is not valid.  Or as Odd stated, you need a
children's museum demonstration unit with lots of cogs, gears and
wheels.

>You have measurements.

WTF, John?  Measurements and other observations are what validates
or disproves a model.  Measurements and other observations are what
science is all about.  Do you even understand the Scientific Method?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597975

You have released hold of
a 3D world- both of you.
Unfortunately, you've been
talked into bullshit, because a
3D universe is what we got and
yes it changes gradually with
Time- YOU STILL HAVE TO BE
ABLE TO CONNECT POINT A TO
POINT B at every juncture.
You gotta present a representative
picture for your model or you
don't got one. Sorry. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597983

I'll say this more clearly-
The phrase, "you can't picture it", 
means you can't see it being real.

That's where you are- with no
clear vision- or even ANY vision.

Sorry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597985

Also
Odd and Michael
You also seem to have the simplistic
notion that smaller means less
complex to the point where the
smallest things have no features
at all, or at least are indistinguishable
by their fundamental-ness.
Why do you think that?
Can you explain how smaller
equals less detail?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597993

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Also
>Odd and Michael
>You also seem to have the simplistic
>notion that smaller means less
>complex to the point where the
>smallest things have no features
>at all, or at least are indistinguishable
>by their fundamental-ness.
>Why do you think that?
>Can you explain how smaller
>equals less detail?

That's simple.  Consider a big thing.  It has lots of little pieces.  Now I
divide the big thing into 5 parts.  Each part will have fewer total pieces
since combining the five parts gives the original.  Now if I divide one of
the five parts into smaller parts, each part will have even fewer, simpler
pieces. Repeat the process and get fewer simpler pieces, until you reach
the point where each part has only one piece and can no longer be divided,
so the one piece is fundamental.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597998

Moron alert
"- show quoted text -
That's simple.  Consider a big thing.  It has lots of little pieces.  Now I 
divide the big thing into 5 parts.  Each part will have fewer total pieces 
since combining the five parts gives the original.  Now if I divide one of 
the five parts into smaller parts, each part will have even fewer, simpler 
pieces. Repeat the process and get fewer simpler pieces, until you reach 
the point where each part has only one piece and can no longer be divided, 
so the one piece is fundamental. "

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598015

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Moron alert

No need to warn us of the complete lack of intelligence of your
posts, John.  We've figured it out.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598022

On 9/22/2016 10:13 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Also
>> Odd and Michael
>> You also seem to have the simplistic
>> notion that smaller means less
>> complex to the point where the
>> smallest things have no features
>> at all, or at least are indistinguishable
>> by their fundamental-ness.
>> Why do you think that?
>> Can you explain how smaller
>> equals less detail?

> That's simple.  Consider a big thing.  It has lots of little pieces.  Now I
> divide the big thing into 5 parts.  Each part will have fewer total pieces
> since combining the five parts gives the original.  Now if I divide one of
> the five parts into smaller parts, each part will have even fewer, simpler
> pieces. Repeat the process and get fewer simpler pieces, until you reach
> the point where each part has only one piece and can no longer be divided,
> so the one piece is fundamental.
>

PIZZA !   (6 or 8 parts is easier)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598023

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/remarkable-story-of-maths-genius-who-had-almost-no-brain-1.1026845

Dr Lorber examined former
hydrocephalics 
later in life, and found that half
with less than 10%
had IQs of over 100.

I think they should look
and see what's wrong with Odd's brain.
Pickled, I think

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598025

Anyway.
10% max. necessary.
Proof.

Or did YOUR study find differently, Odd?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598032

Anyway.
I experienced telepathy.

There is literally a "thought bubble"
that you go into and participate
as a player until the end.
From outside, you can see what's going on
inside it against a black background
as from afar, but then you go into
it and ride it through. There is a
specific "dimple" in the bubble,
where you go in- you can go in anywhere,
but if you do, you only experience from
there to the end, and usually don't get
enough information.

I'm sure there are other forms of
telepathy, but this one is like
audio video immersion- total detail
and sensory experience.

We are riding others' thoughts all
the time, and don't know it. It only
takes your brain a split second
to detour through one in a mental
flash, so others' thoughts are heavily
thicketted through our mental
forest.
Know yourself, and you will know which
thoughts aren't yours.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598036

On 9/23/2016 9:57 AM, john wrote:
> Anyway.
> I experienced telepathy.
>
> There is literally a "thought bubble"


on those people that only have 10% brain and 90% water, perhaps you can 
put in a fish tank bubblier, via the ear, keeps the O2 levels up.
Lots of thought bubbles then

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598051

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Anyway.
>I experienced telepathy.
...
>Know yourself, and you will know which
>thoughts aren't yours.

Schizophrenia? Or just a "Little Pharma" product at work?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598053

Pearls before swine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598056

On 9/23/2016 12:57 PM, john wrote:
> Pearls before swine.
>

Matthew 7:6

New International Version
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If 
you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to 
pieces.

New Living Translation
"Don't waste what is holy on people who are unholy. Don't throw your 
pearls to pigs! They will trample the pearls, then turn and attack you.

English Standard Version
“Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before 
pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.

Berean Study Bible
Do not give dogs what is holy; do not throw your pearls before swine. If 
you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear 
you to pieces.

Berean Literal Bible
Do not give that which is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before 
the pigs, lest they shall trample upon them with their feet, and having 
turned, tear you to pieces.

New American Standard Bible
"Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before 
swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you 
to pieces.

King James Bible
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls 
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again 
and rend you.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Don't give what is holy to dogs or toss your pearls before pigs, or they 
will trample them with their feet, turn, and tear you to pieces.

International Standard Version
"Never give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs. 
Otherwise, they will trample them with their feet and then turn around 
and attack you."

NET Bible
Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; 
otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and 
tear you to pieces.

New Heart English Bible
"Do not give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls 
before the pigs, or they will trample them under their feet and turn and 
tear you to pieces.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Do not give a sacrifice to dogs; neither throw your pearls before wild 
boars, lest they trample them with their feet, and return to run you 
through.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
"Don't give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls to pigs. 
Otherwise, they will trample them and then tear you to pieces.

New American Standard 1977
“Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before 
swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to 
pieces.

Jubilee Bible 2000
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls 
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet and turn again and 
rend you.

King James 2000 Bible
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls 
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again 
and tear you.

American King James Version
Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast you your pearls 
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again 
and rend you.

American Standard Version
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls 
before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and 
turn and rend you.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before 
swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon 
you, they tear you.

Darby Bible Translation
Give not that which is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before the 
swine, lest they trample them with their feet, and turning round rend you.

English Revised Version
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls 
before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and 
turn and rend you.

Webster's Bible Translation
Give not that which is holy to dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before 
swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

Weymouth New Testament
"Give not that which is holy to the dogs, nor throw your pearls to the 
swine; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and then turn 
and attack you.

World English Bible
"Don't give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls 
before the pigs, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and 
turn and tear you to pieces.

Young's Literal Translation
Ye may not give that which is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls 
before the swine, that they may not trample them among their feet, and 
having turned -- may rend you.

Proverbs 9:8
Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you, Reprove a wise man and he 
will love you.

Proverbs 23:9
Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, For he will despise the wisdom of 
your words.

Proverbs 26:4
Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him.

Matthew 7:5
You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you 
will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Matthew 15:26
But Jesus replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and 
toss it to the dogs."

Revelation 22:15
But outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the sexually immoral, the 
murderers, the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598033

On 9/23/2016 9:19 AM, john wrote:
> Anyway.
> 10% max. necessary.
> Proof.

John, Los Angeles is a city that is 24 times the size of Sioux Falls. In 
other words, Sioux Falls is a city that is 4% of the size of Los 
Angeles. Both are perfectly functioning communities with average 
demographics. Does this prove to you that 96% of Los Angeles is unused?

Does the fact that a brain that is 10% the size of another brain is 
equally functioning tell you that 90% of the larger brain is unused?

>
> Or did YOUR study find differently, Odd?
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598116

On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 6:42:56 AM UTC-7, Serigo wrote:

> PIZZA !   (6 or 8 parts is easier)

I always have them cut it into 6 pieces because I can't eat 8  :>)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598130

pnalsing@gmail.com writes:

>On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 6:42:56 AM UTC-7, Serigo wrote:

>> PIZZA !   (6 or 8 parts is easier)

>I always have them cut it into 6 pieces because I can't eat 8  :>)

Made into a joke I heard long ago:

Did you hear about the really dumb guy who ordered a pizza?

The pizza shop guy asked him if he wanted it cut into 6 or 8 slices.

The dumb guy responded: Cut it into 6 slices, please.  I am not hungry 
enough to eat eight slices.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598135

Michael said
"Did you hear about the really dumb guy who ordered a pizza? "

And then there were the guys
that said the pizza couldn't be
pictured, because it had no dimensions.
A "quantum-point" pizza.
Wow- dumber than dumb.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#598146

On 9/24/2016 10:16 AM, john wrote:
> Michael said
> "Did you hear about the really dumb guy who ordered a pizza? "
>
> And then there were the guys
> that said the pizza couldn't be
> pictured, because it had no dimensions.
> A "quantum-point" pizza.
> Wow- dumber than dumb.
>

just scale,  it has "quantum-point" pepporonie on it too

and the cost is zero as well.

......a thought pizza.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web