--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@...> wrote: > > As I understand it Richard Nelson's sources were first hand > sources who acutally were in a position to know some of the > details which were alleged to have taken place.
In other words, EXACTLY the same as Vaj's. His opinion is based on (he says) what he heard from a direct student of one of the parties involved. And yet you somehow give more credence to what Richard says. Could it possibly be because...wait for it...what Richard says (filtered through his own obvious agenda) conforms to what you want to believe (filtered through your own)? THERE HAVE BEEN NO FACTS PRESENTED. By anyone, on either side. All that's happened is a "My sources are better than your sources" pissing contest. I'm starting to wonder whether Jimbo is not the only person here whose intellect has devolved to the vegetable level. I have no horse in this race (or dick in this pissing contest). I DON'T GIVE A SHIT. All of this Ayurveda bullshit happened long after I'd walked away from the TMO, and if I hadn't it would have caused me to walk away when it appeared. From my point of view it's as much "medicine" as an African shaman shaking a rattle at someone. So WHO FUCKING CARES who stole what meaningless "formula" from who? The only reason I've chimed in is that people like you, Ray, who I used to respect, have managed to cause me to doubt the wisdom of doing so. What I've been seeing is "like agenda gravitating to like." Nothing more. People who already believe (or want to believe) something tend to project credence onto the person who agrees with them. And then they declare that the person whose agenda they don't like has been "proven wrong." And all the time not a single fact has been presented, on either side. If this is what TM produces in the way of intellect, I am not impressed. I doubt lurkers here are, either.
