09-17-2011, 12:02 AM
BarefootInTheSand wrote:Wait, so let me get this...you berate S for having wild and crazy ideas and then you post channeled Michael book exerps as legitimate...hahahaha.
Ok, so yes...he is trying to understand. Now that you have correctly identified that, is it possible for you to move forward into the conversation or is all you can do is run commentary?
Jeeze, Barefoot..you DO have an interesting style of logic.
Lemme hep you out here. I didn't berate anyone, first of all. I prefer to think I chided Sac for being overly verbose and engaging most often in personal attack, therefore my comments about combat. He IS capable of rational discussion, after all.
Secondly, I did not say anywhere the Michael book was legitimate, only that despite its origin (if you read my post) the information (as in the case of Castaneda, btw, whose sources have frequently also been challenged) was of interest.
Perhaps it is you who might consider moving forward in the conversation.
Ok, so yes...he is trying to understand. Now that you have correctly identified that, is it possible for you to move forward into the conversation or is all you can do is run commentary?
Jeeze, Barefoot..you DO have an interesting style of logic.
Lemme hep you out here. I didn't berate anyone, first of all. I prefer to think I chided Sac for being overly verbose and engaging most often in personal attack, therefore my comments about combat. He IS capable of rational discussion, after all.
Secondly, I did not say anywhere the Michael book was legitimate, only that despite its origin (if you read my post) the information (as in the case of Castaneda, btw, whose sources have frequently also been challenged) was of interest.
Perhaps it is you who might consider moving forward in the conversation.