#35 / .jackNote@zen: 9, row: 4, col: 6, nous: 52 [Super: #416 / #25 -
What's behind it all?, Imaging the Mysterious; I-Ching: H62 - Small
Excess; Tetra: 10 - Defectiveness, Distortion, Ego: #349 / #52 - So
What?, Returning to the Origin; I-Ching: H45 - Congregation; Tetra: 61 -
Embellishment]
What I found it to be the most confronting of all conduct of those
persons I met during my residency within Kings Cross, Sydney. Was the
cantankerous, argumentative, disrespectful, disruptive and invective
manner of discourse in which some persons routinely engaged (and
electronically blocking of persons during dialog falls into this
category) as the normal and yet debatably, an entirely arbitrary mode of
socialising conduct. Firstly a conversation participant is reduced to a
stutter. This progresses towards an anxiety in a lingering faux
aspiration that there is actually any merit to having a discourse and
finally subsumes into a state of exhaustion simply by attempting to
finish a sentence. The whole process of clarity as speech and ideas
exchanged by anecdotal story is so impeded because the other party
intentionally is disruptive and deconstructionist as it labours over
every word, notional fact and idea uttered. If integrity is all about
keeping one’s word and deeds relative to time, then a person who engages
in such a mode of cantankerous and invective manner of discourse, might
be considered as antagonistic to the integrity of another person’s being.
Ahowlett1 (Manhunt Profile) 34yo of Sale ("Honesty Integrity and
Genuine"@1745 hrs): "Hi.. I've been single for about 18 months now and
been enjoying most of that time. It would be nice to met some interest
and genuine guys that understand the meaning of integrity as well. I'm
not necessarily looking for short term 'fun'.
I enjoy a wide variety [of] interests, from the usual to the not so
usual. It is very unlikely that you would find me in a pub or a club.
Though you might find me at a nice coffee place, restaurant, theatre,
show, etc..
Please don't ask for naked pics. That simply isn't going to happen.
Any questions? Ask away.."
dolf: "As I'm into a mathematical model of integrity and I don't think
I'd have anything to do with you.
I won't ask for pics cause I like men who are cock proud rather than
peacocks."
Ahowlett1 (Manhunt Profile) 34yo of Sale ("Honesty Integrity and
Genuine"@1745 hrs): "Sorry, did I miss something?"
dolf: "I was then unfairly blocked by “Ahowlett1 (Manhunt Profile) 34yo
of Sale” when I conveyed to him that: ‘Integrity is relative to time and
the noumenal reality’ and his response wasn’t uniquely anything but
simply a resonance with the following daemon of the attributed time.”
Barry OGrady (
ath...@hotmail.com.au): “Ye do err, not knowing the
scriptures, nor the power of God. All things are possible for God.
Everything is always just as almighty God wants it.
Reality must seem weird to you.
That's true. Dolf is ignored because he is not rational. A person is in
prison in America because he called for the death of three judges.”
dolf: “Did I ever tell you about the time I went to the American
Consulate in Sydney and asked to them to intervene against Carl
McCaskey’s Internet conduct--Has he posted again since and whilst
holidaying in Guantanamo Bay?”
Gladys Swager (
gsw...@gmail.com): “Not so!”
With respect to "Idealism in religious thought" I also defer to
Wikipedia 2008 comments as rational and reasonable. And with respect to
a critical examination of 'Relativism' and 'Idealism' the following is
an excerpt from Wikipedia 2008:
Relativism can be contrasted with:
Universalism: the view that facts can be discovered objectively and that
they thus apply universally in all situations, times and places.
Objectivism: the view that cognitive, aesthetic and ethical values are
independent of human thinking.
Absolutism: the view that beauty, truth, etc, are timeless and
unchanging qualities.
Monism: the view that in any given area there can be no more than one
correct opinion.
One argument for relativism suggests that our own cognitive bias
prevents us from observing something objectively with our own senses,
and notational bias will apply to whatever we can allegedly measure
without using our senses. In addition, we have a culture bias — shared
with other trusted observers — which we cannot eliminate. A
counterargument to this states that subjective certainty and concrete
objects and causes form part of our everyday life, and that there is no
great value in discarding such useful ideas as isomorphism, objectivity
and a final truth. (For more information on the "usefulness" of ideas,
see Pragmatism.)
Relativism is sometimes (though not always) interpreted as saying that
all points of view are equally valid, in contrast to an absolutism which
argues there is but one true and correct view. In fact, relativism
asserts that a particular instance Y exists only in combination with or
as a by-product of a particular framework or viewpoint X, and that no
framework or standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others. That is,
a non-universal trait Y (e.g., a particular practice, behaviour, custom,
convention, concept, belief, perception, ethics, truth, or conceptual
framework) is a dependent variable influenced by the independent
variable X (e.g., a particular language, culture, historical epoch, a
priori cognitive architecture, scientific frameworks, gender, ethnicity,
status, individuality).
Notably, this is not an argument that all instances of a certain kind of
framework (say, all languages) do not share certain basic universal
commonalities (say, grammatical structure and vocabulary) that
essentially define that kind of framework and distinguish it from other
frameworks (for example, linguists have criteria that define language
and distinguish it from the mere communication of other animals).
Moreover, relativism also presupposes philosophical realism in that
there are actual objective things in the world that are relative to
other real things. Moreover, relativism also assumes causality, as well
as a problematic web of relationships between various independent
variables and the particular dependent variables that they influence.
Nous: #41
Time: 11:35 hrs
Date: 2012.9.16
Torah: #20 #6 #100 %81 = #45
Dao: Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference
Tetra: #60 - Accumulation
I-Ching: H26 - Restraining Force
Latin: Exultabundus {God who gives joy} Alt: Lavyah {Desireless Nature
of God} {
1. HELPS RECOVER THE FRIENDSHIP OF THOSE WE'VE OFFENDED
2. WILLS
3. FRIENDLY DISTRIBUTION
4. Aphoso
}
Rehoboam {Who sets the people at liberty}
-
http://www.grapple369.com/grapple.html?zen:4,row:5,col:5
MALE IDEA #222
ירזה
{#10, #200, #7, #5}
razah-famish [H7329]: #222
1) to be or become or grow lean
1a) (Qal) to make lean
1b) (Niphal) to be made lean
"And in that day it shall come to pass, that the glory of Jacob shall be
made thin, and the fatness of his flesh shall wax lean {razah-famish
[H7329]: #222}." [Isaiah 17:4]
"The LORD will be terrible unto them: for he will famish {razah-famish
[H7329]: #222} all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him,
every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen." [Zephaniah
2:11]
למוצאיהמ
{#30, #40, #6, #90, #1, #10, #5, #40}
mowtsa'-go [H4161]: #222
1) act or place of going out or forth, issue, export, source, spring
1a) a going forth
1a1) rising (sun), going forth of a command
1a2) goings forth, those going forth
1a3) way out, exit
1b) that which goes forth
1b1) utterance
1b2) export
1c) place of going forth
1c1) source or spring (of water)
1c2) place of departure
1c3) east (of sun)
1c4) mine (of silver)
"But if her husband hath utterly made them void on the day he heard
them; then whatsoever proceeded {mowtsa'-go [H4161]: #222} out of her
lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall not
stand: her husband hath made them void; and the LORD shall forgive her."
[Numbers 30:12]
יעקבמ
{#10, #70, #100, #2, #40}
`aqab-supplant [H6117]: #222
1) to supplant, circumvent, take by the heel, follow at the heel, assail
insidiously, overreach
1a) (Qal) to supplant, overreach, attack at the heel
1b) (Piel) to hold back
"And he said, Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted
{`aqab-supplant [H6117]: #222} me these two times: he took away my
birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing. And he
said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?" [Genesis 27:36]
FEMALE IDEA #352
אפרסיא
{#1, #80, #200, #60, #10, #1}
'Apharecay (Aramaic)-Apharsites [H670]: #352
1) an unknown office
2) (BDB) secretaries
3) (TWOT) perhaps a title of an official
"Then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest
of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites,
the Apharsites {'Apharecay (Aramaic)-Apharsites [H670]: #352}, the
Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, and the
Elamites," [Ezra 4:9]
שבנ
{#300, #2, #50}
ben-son [H1121]: #352
1) son, grandson, child, member of a group
1a) son, male child
1b) grandson
1c) children (pl. - male and female)
1d) youth, young men (pl.)
1e) young (of animals)
1f) sons (as characterisation, ie sons of injustice [for un- righteous
men] or sons of God [for angels]
1g) people (of a nation) (pl.)
1h) of lifeless things, ie sparks, stars, arrows (fig.)
1i) a member of a guild, order, class
"Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy
conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children {ben-son [H1121]:
#352}; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over
thee." [Genesis 3:16]
-
http://www.grapple369.com/index_files/carl_and_gov_bush.jpg
American ‘Baptist Christian’ Identity as Historical Revisionism, Moral
Relativism and Nihilistic Rationalistic Idealism
Carl McCaskey with Governor Bush
[image dated 02-Jul-2005]
(ru) dolf: "Carl continues to have no answers 'I demand you cease and
desist contacting me via email. If you wish to respond to something
posted on Usenet NG's then respond there. Unsolicited emails from you
after requests to cease is harassment by email and a violation of your
emailer's terms of service. Again, cease and desist contacting me via
email.'" [Carl McCaskey (
sai...@nettally.com) Sent: Sunday 16 November
2008 5:50:57 PM]
MikeSmith (
antarcti...@yahoo.com): "This guy is a loon. And he's
monitoring this entire discussion on his site! It's all there!"
Krudd the Dudd (
let's.have.a...@nodecisions.com / Individual.net):
"Still waiting for you to serve the papers LOL!
Please don't wear a dress when you come to the door; do try to look like
the man you pretend to be. Turd Burglars get bitten by dogs in my
neighbourhood."
(ru) dolf: "And when we finish with you and your ilk at court, next we
will pursue those who tolerated your abuses as fascism for so long!
We will ask them to explain publicly and without a prepared statement,
why they did so!"
Mr. Peter Bowditch (The Quintessence of a Loon): "Or is it the action
threatened on 26 August 2006, when you said: 'A remedy will be sought to
the claim of a religious and racial vilification under Section 8 as
Victoria's (Australia) Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 Act No.
47/2001, will be sustained by a Natural Law, Common Law and
Constitutional Rights argument (see CD ROM), and that will be a made in
perpetuity, against your right to procreate within the Australian
Commonwealth?'
Is there any precedent case which ruled that someone would lose the
right to "procreate within the Australian Commonwealth"?
You might like to reconsider the promise I made when you first started
blowing smoke and mouth foam in my direction: "If you go ahead, I
promise to notify every television station, radio station and print
outlet in Australia that I can reach of your theory as expressed on your
web site and of the fact that you lost badly in the VCAT hearing. I will
also point out to them your hypocrisy, in that you expect the right of
freedom to say whatever you like on your web site but will not extend
that courtesy to me. I also promise to publicly ridicule you at every
opportunity, although the approximately 9,700 Usenet messages from you
archived in Google Groups indicate that you are perfectly capable of
doing this yourself.
The 9,700 number is obviously now out of date."
(ru) dolf: "That a common element in the Internet based racial,
religious and sexual vilification is your www-page--which continues to
this day. And that I have shown you every patience and courtesy in your
consideration of removal of references to my www-page from your
Philately of Loons and Millennium sites."
Mr. Peter Bowditch (The Quintessence of a Loon): "The web site is called
"Quintessence of the Loon" (and has nothing to do with philately). You
are a quintessential loon. I'm sorry if that prevents you from
understanding rationality."
Zytheran (Nigel Dobson-Keeffe the Healthy Internet Hobbyist): "Yeah, he
has a, ahem, 'stalker' persona ... It's all on the web... looks
impressive but is wrong.
OK, the 'lactose intolerant' would be from when I set up the world's
first web site for milk allergy back in 1993. The site isn't around but
I'm referenced in books about milk allergy and lactose intolerance. No
I'm not lactose intolerant.
'Las Vegas based'! Haha, that's funny. That's because my name comes up
on the Las Vegas atheists because I did a talk there just after TAM6
(The Amaz!ng Meeting 6, held on 19-22 June in Las Vegas) titled
"Rational Irrationality". It's on their meet-up site I think. He doesn't
even notice that "Rational Irrational" is the title of the public talk I
give.
Dolf is taking a guess at the "godless" because of the atheist link, and
the fascist because he's trying to be insulting. Sorry Dolf, fail.
The bit about "technology specialist" is taken from the website of the
Australian Skeptics. (Sort of clashes with being Las Vegas based don't
ya think??) I have no idea where he gets "former president" from, I
still am!"
MikeSmith (
antarcti...@yahoo.com): “Has anyone noticed a real
similarity between the floridly verbose circumlocution of Good King Dolf
of Barkingmad, and the Skeptics Guide to the Universe forum's own Larry
King Live {ie. this lack of originality is perhaps double speak for the
David Letterman show which was especially evident during the writer's
strike}?
Check this out, they might be brothers: "In kind have taken your most
well constructed and thought provoking suggestion to heart. Indeed I
have consulted with a most noble and well synchronized Man of the
Dictionary, a Dictionarian, as you have suggested calling him. He has
done the grandiose pleasure of, first, supping at my table for
nourishment and socialiality, and second, to share with this person,
'words of yore' as he most eloquently and flamboyantly exclaimed."
Are they one and the same? Related? Is Larry King Live parodying Dolf?
Is one a reptilian clone of the other that can read the other's mind?
Dolf, perhaps you have the answer for this.
Let us know on your website, where you are terrifying us all by your
continuous monitoring and silent condemnation of the people in this thread."
carl (Carl McCaskey): "Since you have offered no questions, it is simple
logic that there is nothing you have presented to answer. Quite the
contrary, you have been asked many things of which you have yet to
respond. And actually your posts (and your little website) have
contained nothing but inane, incoherent, irrational ramblings. I think
you may be in need of psychological counselling with proper medications.
Let's look at a specific section of the terms of service your agreed to
when you signed up with Hotmail.
It reads:---
You agree to use the Communication Services only to post, send and
receive messages and material that are proper and, when applicable,
related to the particular Communication Service. By way of example, and
not as a limitation, you agree that when using the Communication
Services, you will not:
Use the Communication Services in connection with surveys, contests,
pyramid schemes, chain letters, junk email, spamming or any duplicative
or unsolicited messages (commercial or otherwise).
Defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal
rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others.
Since you are now engaging in sending unsolicited emails and then
continuing when asked to cease and desist you are violating their terms
of service and are engaging in Internet harassment. This not only
threatens your Internet account, but even in Australia, it could lead to
civil and/or criminal prosecution. If you truly have lawyers at your
disposal (I doubt you have but for the sake of example let's say you
have) they will inform you that your current choice of behaviour is
indeed Internet abuse.
You have been duly informed."
(ru) dolf: "That you are a gluttonous American piece of Christian white
trash engaging in racial, sexual and religious vilification--And without
regard for the ability of my Torah and Daoist compliant Christian belief
to transcend cultural boundaries."
carl (Carl McCaskey): "The name of my blog is 'The World According To
Carl' and as I have clarified to you on multiple occasions, I am not a
member of any Baptist denomination (although most of them are Biblically
sound and I support them). Try comprehending that little tidbit. You
have no legal case."
Rodney Eastman: "You track my posts across the groups, you respond to me
in this group by slandering me, then you begin the slander and insults
again just because I posted at all ?? And I'm not supposed to believe
that you've been stalking me for some ungodly purpose? How about your
response to Pat (
thewayt...@webtv.net) in another group, when he was
trying to speak to me. Did Pat or I invite you to step in and slander
me? No, you volunteered to do it because you're a malcontent, a hate
monger and a chronic trouble maker. Of course, as in the other post so
in this one. I am entitled to my opinion. Oh yes, I still have your
emails and the headers, I'll bet that you don't!"
carl (Carl McCaskey): "Pat H, you have made it abundantly clear of your
disdain and possibly even hatred of Baptists. You constantly harp on
what your perceive as 'no Baptist is willing to discuss/debate
Scripture' with you (or words to that effect). Since I am not Baptist
nor a debater, I am asking some Internet acquaintances who are Baptist
if they would be willing to discuss and/or debate with you regarding any
Scriptural topic you care to discuss. I heard back promptly from one, a
gentleman by the name of Frank Turk. He has formally invited you to come
to his blog at
http://q-and-a-blog.blogspot.com/ to engage him in
discussions and/or debate. Frank wrote, 'tell [Pat H] I have never
turned anyone away who would agree to ask questions and give answers
when asked.' So it's time to 'put up or shut up' as the saying goes."
Barry OGrady (
mrha...@iinet.net.au): "Dolf's mind is too far gone for
him to comprehend anything."
carl (Carl McCaskey): "Besides, there are no jurisdictional powers of
your country in the United States regarding this accusation (which is
meritless incidentally). So your threat of legal action is moot,
meaningless and laughable. You have claimed you have legal
representation (I doubt you do) so consult with them and they will tell
you how ridiculous your accusations are. Again you're rambling
incoherently and ignorantly now with some feeble bluster. Furthermore,
being offended is not probable cause for any legal action."
Barry OGrady (
mrha...@iinet.net.au): "I like the way you order God to
do something good. You are wasting your time though. God never does
anything good."
(ru) dolf: "That there will now be a permanent enmity between myself and
Baptists (particularly American) as those who attempt on the basis of
that irrational and deceitful claim to Christian identity to impugn my
autonomic right--Pastor Rowland Croucher (Melbourne, Australia) is
particularly in this group for turning a blind eye to Internet abuses
over the past 12 years."
carl (Carl McCaskey): "dolf, apparently your didn't pay attention to my
earlier post to you so I will clarify once again: I am not a member of
any Baptist denomination. As to 'Internet abuses' I suggest you read
Hotmail/MSN's terms of service of which you agreed when you signed up
for their service. I included the relevant portions above."
(ru) dolf: "Isn't Kudos from the Greek κῦδος (not to be confused with
κύδος "taunt"), kydos, (literally "that which is heard of") means "fame"
and "renown" resulting from an act or achievement? [ref: Wikipedia 2008]
It is not harassment to send a copy of my newsgroup replies to you
privately--This I will continue to do."
carl (Carl McCaskey): "Dolf, you make no sense. May God bless!"
(ru) dolf: "Which statement did you have particular difficulty
with--after all Christian identity is all about UNDERSTANDING as
HYPOSTATIS?"
carl (Carl McCaskey): "You've offered nothing coherent in which to
respond. No answers are necessary when no question has been raised. Your
ramblings aren't making sense to anyone."
Michael Christ (
jesus...@father.com): "As God strolls through the
Earth He moves what He desires to move and stills what He desires to
still." [0505 hrs 9 November 2008]
Raymond (
rwk...@aim.com): "Do not show how foolish you are by such
silly statements, for one thing God does not stroll through the Earth, a
demon may do such and try to still them that disobey God."
Barry OGrady (
mrha...@iinet.net.au): "Do not show how foolish you are
by such silly statements. There are no demons."
Raymond (
rwk...@aim.com): "Oh yes there is such, I have casted them out
of a few people that were insane and after prayer their mind was normal.
Then I would have no problem believing if you keep denying them you
could well have a demon in your spirit or soul, then I wonder if you
don't believe in that either? Then again you select only a limited view
that fits what you want. I just checked with the dictionary and one
meaning of demon is this: "A cruel wicked and inhuman person" and we all
know a lot of those kind of demons such as Adolf Hitler, chairman Mao
and lots of folks walking this world today. Not only some supernatural
being, could also be someone that is extremely diligent or skillful.
Check it out. What you did was show how foolish you are by your statements."
The following commentary on "Idealism in religious thought" was obtained
from Wikipedia 2008: "A broad enough definition of idealism could
include most religious viewpoints. The belief that personal beings (eg:
God/s, angels & spirits) preceded the existence of insentient matter
seems to suggest that an experiencing subject is a necessary reality.
Also, the existence of an omniscient God suggests, regardless of the
actual nature of matter, that all of nature is the object of at least
one consciousness.
Materialism sees no incoherence in a scenario of there being a cosmos
where no sentient subject ever develops; a wholly unknown universe where
neither any subject, nor any object of a subject's experience ever
exists. Historically, Mechanistic Materialism has been the favourite
viewpoint of Atheist philosophers. Still, idealistic viewpoints that
have not included God, supernatural beings, or a post-mortem existence
have sometimes been advanced."
Barry OGrady (
ath...@hotmail.com.au): “You live in a fantasy world.
You even failed the Turing Test.”
Manifestly by such besieging and unnatural conduct as invention of
nonsense, diversions and delusions which is made relative to time as a
psychological distress.
Barry OGrady (
ath...@hotmail.com.au): “Are you saying God wants to be
mocked by his creations?”
Nous: #63
Time: 17:45 hrs
Date: 2012.12.18
Torah: #1 #50 #10 %81 = #61
Dao: Origins in Reversal, Consider Beginnings
Tetra: #62 - Doubt
I-Ching: H51 - Thunderclap
Latin: Decantatus {God of virtues} Alt: Yzalel {Deliverance of God} {
1. HELPS CONQUER & TO OBTAIN RELEASE FROM SIEGE
2. THE SCIENCES & ARTS
3. THE MEDITATION OF THE WISE
4. Souchoe
}
Asa {Physician; cure}
-
http://www.grapple369.com/grapple.html?zen:2,row:7,col:8
νοηματα
noema-mind (G3540): #470 = #50, #70, #8, #40, #1, #300, #1
1) a mental perception, thought
2) an evil purpose
3) that which thinks, the mind, thoughts or purposes
בקרי
qeriy-contrary (H7147): #312 = #2, #100, #200, #10
1) opposition, contrariness, encounter, contrary or hostile encounter
יבקר
baqar-enquire (H1239): #312 = #10, #2, #100, #200
1) to seek, enquire, consider
1a) (Piel)
1a1) to seek, look for
1a2) to consider, reflect
If that furious behaviour escalates to a vital point where I consider it
to be less than healthily robust and is then as a domestic disputation,
entirely disruptive of the peace within my residential area as my
obligations for single occupancy as quietude under the Tenancy
Agreement. As an adverse and disagreeable argumentative conduct which is
then manifestly disrespectful to such a flagrant degree, that it might
be considered a brutalisation and breach of the law requiring police
attendance and intervention. I’ve sought to have those persons
voluntarily leave the abode where in is my presence of being as their
chastisement and punishment for such iniquity. In every instance, they
have done so without recourse to violence and consequently there has
been no need for police attendance.
Accordingly, there has not ever been a breach of the peace within my
rental premises and any failure of my peaceable obligations as single
occupancy as quietude under the Tenancy Agreement.
#36 / .jackNote@zen: 9, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 55 [Super: #376 / #74 -
Controlling Feelings, Overcome Delusion; I-Ching: H39 - Obstacles;
Tetra: 80 - Labouring, Ego: #317 / #55 - Abstruse Mysterious Signs;
I-Ching: H22 - Grace; Tetra: 54 - Unity]