Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Are you impressed with firewalking?

2 views
Skip to first unread message

liberator

unread,
Mar 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/30/00
to
Lani <kahun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
<<There, by the Grace of God, as foretold by John the Baptist; imbued with
the Fireimmunity by God, under the invocation of the Fire's sentience by a
Kahuna I Ke Umu Ki (Priest of the Firepit); she stops in the fire. Bends
down to play in the flames. >>

[picture snipped]

Coals have a low measure of heat conductivity. If you were to study
physics, you wouldn't be so impressed. I imagine that the first time our
ancestors harnessed fire, it was impressive too. = ) Here are some helpful
sites:
http://www.pitt.edu/~dwilley/fire.html
http://www.skepsis.no/english/subject/firewalk/
http://www.deism.com <<-- I had to slip that one in.

Hey, I noticed that this was in part of your signature:
<<Scares the hell out of me, literally, as God intended.>>

You know ancient bards like Homer came up with stories to explain events in
nature and to entertain people. For instance, lightening scared people, so
a lightening God was created, which was a typical phenomenon back then. I'd
like to think that we have moved on since then. Go to
http://www.pantheon.org/mythica/ for further information on mythology.

Mark
--
The Liberator
E-Mail: ne...@liberator.net
Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/

Need a reliable and inexpensive Internet provider?
Visit FindAnISP: http://www.FindAnISP.com/
Visit CNET: http://webisplist.internetlist.com/

Kevin Stewart

unread,
Mar 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/30/00
to
Not to sound Jungian = P or anything, Mark, but sense doesn't mean much
all the time. The fear of fire and the fact that some *do* get burned can be
useful in personal development, ie overcoming fear. (Not to sound sadistic,
either!)

For example, I have a fear of water from a near-drowning when I was a kid.
Quite irrational and thoroughly senseless. Extremely real. Joining the Navy
was a way to overcome it. Boating is another. I hate heights, so I' m going
to make several parachute jumps -- eventually! -- and ride some hot air
balloons this summer. (Melissaphobia[sic] is something else, of course!)

The fear of fire is much bigger and far deeper. Its impact, worship, fear
&al predates Prometheus legends, AFAIK. And just like the diet trick of
using a smaller plate to fool the mind, the appearance of fire furthers the
fear. So there is something to be said for the conquest of foot-flamme fear
even if there is no danger of the appendages vaporizing.

Think about it.

Kevin

PS If I were to post Jack Van Impe's site, would that convince you of the
imminency of the apocalypse? <G> Seriously, dude, thanks for the
references!

liberator wrote in message ...

liberator

unread,
Mar 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/30/00
to
Kevin Stewart <ke...@jacksonmi.com> wrote:

<<Not to sound Jungian = P or anything, Mark, but sense doesn't mean much
all the time. The fear of fire and the fact that some *do* get burned can be
useful in personal development, ie overcoming fear. (Not to sound sadistic,
either!)>>

I agree. The benefits along that line is easy to believe and I wouldn't
argue against it, but to sell it as anything other than a confidence-builder
is silly.

= )

liberator

unread,
Mar 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/30/00
to
Lani <kahun...@earthlink.net> wrote:

<<Perhaps you'd care to back up your extraordinary claim---the
scientifically fire doesn't burn, BBQs don't cook, the lady with the third
degree burns, isn't really burned.>>

I would love to back up my claims, but there is one slight problem. I
didn't make the claims that you mentioned above. Are you having these
conversations in your head now?

<<Unlike your cowardly self, who mumbles blasphemies and then runs away to
hid.>>

First of all, the word you were looking for was 'hide,' not 'hid.'

Second, is it blasphemy to use my brain along with a knowledge of physics?
Is your God on an anti-science campaign? I know that religions are opposed
to science, but my well-rounded, integrated belief system welcomes science
with open arms. You should try adding on critical thinking to your belief
system. You might learn something about the Universe, which many people
take to be God's creation.

For your information, some materials transfer heat better than others. Coal
is a weak heat 'conductor.' Iron
is a good heat 'conductor.' Try walking on iron after it has the
temperature of a hot coal. Your belief system won't prevent you from
burning. Care to do a simple experiment with a hot coal and a hot chunk of
iron, both at the same temperature used for firewalks?

I didn't think so.

liberator

unread,
Mar 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/30/00
to
Lani <kahun...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:38E413B7...@earthlink.net...

<<I'm willing to go anywhere in the world to watch you chew up a flaming
wood chunk, etc. Drive a pin through your hand without blood, etc. Bend an
arrow on your neck, you know, the regular Firewalk stuff.>>

Are you having conversations with yourself or are you purposefully
misquoting me? I wrote, "Care to do a simple experiment with a hot coal and


a hot chunk of iron, both at the same temperature used for firewalks?"

Now, don't get mad at me because you 1) made a spelling error in your last
post and 2) promote a belief system that attacks the knowledge gained from
physics. If you want to play the misquoting game, it'll discredit your
position further.

Be better than this Lani. Do you remember what you say about Huna Priests?
Don't they believe in honor? What honor is there in misrepresentation?
What honor is there in hiding the truth? -- I'm referring to the knowledge
gained from physics.

Please don't reduce yourself to a typical religious hypocrite. It's
unpleasant to watch. Really.

Lani

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
liberator wrote:

> Lani <kahun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> <<There, by the Grace of God, as foretold by John the Baptist; imbued with
> the Fireimmunity by God, under the invocation of the Fire's sentience by a
> Kahuna I Ke Umu Ki (Priest of the Firepit); she stops in the fire. Bends
> down to play in the flames. >>
>

> [picture snipped]
>
> Coals have a low measure of heat conductivity. If you were to study
> physics, you wouldn't be so impressed. I imagine that the first time our
> ancestors harnessed fire, it was impressive too. = )

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Perhaps you'd care to back up your extraordinary claim---the scientifically fire
doesn't burn, BBQs don't cook, the lady with the third degree burns, isn't

really burned. The guy with the flames coming out of his mouth isn't being given
Fireimmunity by God?

OK. Prove it.

Unlike your cowardly self, who mumbles blasphemies and then runs away to hid.

In mid-October, God willing and the creek don't rise, I will be putting my
throat and hand and feet where you mouth is.

Unlike you, who is content to just talk and talk and talk.

I'm willing to rely on my Faith. And enter the Firepit. While you shrink and
hide from the experience.

And as my Huna Master said:

"A good haumana of Huna will get on better than most because
he knows that he must function and grow on and through and into
all three levels of being. He knows each level for what it is, and he does
not make the mistake that has been so universal---the mistake of
trying to carry the ideals of one level into the one above or
below. He will SERVE as best he can, and with great and impersonal
love. He will be kind and helpful. These attitudes cover the two
upper levels of living. For the lower level, he will fight as hard
as he can, be it with germs or fire or flood or thief---but while
doing it, he will keep the door open to HELP."

Max Freedom Long, 1949

And so it is. I will enter the sentient Fire, five days in a row, protected only
by my faith in my Faith. Protected, for me as a Kahuna Huna, by the goddess
Wahinenuiho`alani, if she'll have my mistake laden self.

If not, I will burn. Nor the folly of "Science" save me from the fire.


-Lani

"Everyone is either a victim or chooses to be a volunteer." -Kahuna Lani

The Huna Discussion Group, Subscribe:
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/Huna-MFL

"THE SEEING: The Confirming Mystical Experiences of Huna" available from
http://www.mistymountainbooks.com/orderbk.htm

Lani

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
liberator wrote:

> both at the same temperature used for firewalks?
>

> I didn't think so.
>
> = )
>
> Mark

Oh, yes.

I'm willing to go anywhere in the world to watch you chew up a flaming wood
chunk, etc.

Drive a pin through your hand without blood, etc.

Bend an arrow on your neck, you know, the regular Firewalk stuff.

And for each of these things, I'll give you my companionship, and do the same
things right there next to you.

Maybe Kevin can come too, and take photos of the ambulance which carries you
away...

(After all kevin, we're safe, he doesn't have the courage of his convictions.)

Pausaune

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Lani wrote...
<<

Oh, yes.

I'm willing to go anywhere in the world to watch you chew up a flaming wood
chunk, etc.

Drive a pin through your hand without blood, etc.

Bend an arrow on your neck, you know, the regular Firewalk stuff.

And for each of these things, I'll give you my companionship, and do the same
things right there next to you.

Maybe Kevin can come too, and take photos of the ambulance which carries you
away...

(After all kevin, we're safe, he doesn't have the courage of his convictions.)
-Lani

>>

Assuming your conjecture that focusing and dropping out of the real
world/letting go of the ego is what gets one across the fire/needle through
hand w/o blood/whatever is true and that those who go into it arrogantly get
screwed: couldn't this be seen as arrogance on your part? I mean, seriously...
if Liberator actually got some balls for once and DID SOMETHING about his
whining/demanding and came to this to prove low conductivity of heat and you
came to prove your faith... (by your standards/theory) if he got burned
wouldn't you too??

~Pat


Pausaune

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Liberator wrote...

<<
Now, don't get mad at me because you 1) made a spelling error in your last
post and 2) promote a belief system that attacks the knowledge gained from
physics. If you want to play the misquoting game, it'll discredit your
position further.

>>

OOH!! A spelling error!!! Lani must be really incompetent and stupid ::twirls
finger::
Anyway... your "knowledge gained from physics" is conjecture. You're not even
implementing the Scientific Method, since the Scientific Method REQUIRES
Personal Experience by the person running the experiment. I don't see any
personal experience here, so this isn't even scientific, and has LESS backing
than Lani's conjectures in my opinion--since at least he has personal
experience and correspondance with a large amount of others with personal
experience. It's called logic, please use it if you're going to insist that we
all live by the Logic God.

~Pat


Pausaune

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Liberator wrote...

<<Please don't reduce yourself to a typical religious hypocrite. It's
unpleasant to watch. Really.

Mark

>>

why not? We have a typical scientific hypocrite ready and willing (a little too
much) to go after this typical religous hypocrite.

And... BTW... Mr. Spelling Bee, it's religous, not religious.

~Pat


Lani

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
liberator wrote: Please don't reduce yourself to a typical religious hypocrite.
It's

> unpleasant to watch. Really.
>
> Mark

I see. You're just trying to slink away and hide, rather than do a scientific
experiment to prove your extraordinary claim.

That "scientifically" speaking, fire doesn't burn.


LOL


hahahahaha

What a strange little person you are.

Lani

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Pausaune wrote:

> Assuming your conjecture that focusing and dropping out of the real
> world/letting go of the ego is what gets one across the fire/needle through
> hand w/o blood/whatever is true and that those who go into it arrogantly get
> screwed: couldn't this be seen as arrogance on your part? I mean, seriously...
> if Liberator actually got some balls for once and DID SOMETHING about his
> whining/demanding and came to this to prove low conductivity of heat and you
> came to prove your faith... (by your standards/theory) if he got burned
> wouldn't you too??
>
> ~Pat

Man! You're sharp! I wish we were friends!

But YES! If I had the same attitude in the Firewalk as I have when I gird my loins
I would definitely burn in the Fire!

But do you think I could face such trials and not depend, rely, submit to
something greater than I am?

I do not know how I'll fare. I do not know if I will succeed. Or that even my
preconceptions I have stated here will not be ultimately a barrier.

I don't know Pat. I have felt the power of Io when I have healed people, and when
I have done Exorcisms, but this is entirely different.

When I am not in this NG, I almost never think of the Liber8r. He isn't that
important to me.

In Huna, the Fireimmunity comes from the goddess Wahine-Nui-Ho`a-Lani. I think
that is because the Presence is felt as a warm nurturing stillness which enters
the mind, if the mind is resilient and allows it to enter it and numb it.

For me, I will never even think of the Liber8r there. But I will thing of you, and
Nevermore and Kevin and Tom. And I will, if I can, submit myself to the presence
in all humility. I will have to "rest" on my Path, and let my Path and gods and
God carry me, or else I can not make it.

As you and I both know, even if others pretend not to---fire burns.

I can not pass through its flames by being tough, or intent, but by humility. If I
can or ought to be saved, it will have to be something other than me that saves
me.

Pat, you are young and will have a long life before you. But there will come a
time when you, like be (but me sooner) will die.

What will save you then? Yourself? Or something else?

You are immortal. but it is not our egos which make us immortal.

You arte the Child of God. Some God. A God by any name. By no name.

That's nothing to be prideful, it's just natural.

In mid-october, think well of me if you can. Your positive intention, and others,
can only do good, and I'll need it.

--

John C. Randolph

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to

Pausaune wrote:

> And... BTW... Mr. Spelling Bee, it's religous, not religious.

Not according to my dictionary, Mr. Quale.

Why don't you see if Lani can help you develop some kind of mystical
"spelling immunity."

-jcr

liberator

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000330235003...@ng-fu1.aol.com...

<<Anyway... your "knowledge gained from physics" is conjecture.>>

When I took physics in high school, I learned about heat. In short, 100
degrees F. of iron feels hotter than 100 degrees F. of coal. In fact, iron
will do much more damage to a human being than coal if they were both set to
the same high temperature. This is fact, not fiction.

This knowledge was verified in college as I pursued my undergraduate degree
and earned a minor in physics. I'm indicating this to you to give you the
correct notion that I have studied physics -- hands on -- to an appreciable
depth. I have performed many experiments in my lifetime and know these
things as a result.

= )

Thanks for allowing me to clarify my position, Pat.

liberator

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to

If someone would have told me about a comment from Pat of this type, I
probably would not have believed it.

liberator

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:

<<[Liberator] you seem to think you're an excellent teacher, and I'm
skeptical of that.>>

As you should be. If only you could be more skeptical about uncorroborated
religious claims...

liberator

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:

<<I mean, seriously... if Liberator actually got some balls for once and DID
SOMETHING about his whining/demanding and came to this to prove low
conductivity of heat and you came to prove your faith... (by your
standards/theory) if he got burned wouldn't you too??>>

You guys are amazing. You seem to think that one needs to walk on coals to
de-mystify heat. Try this experiment at home:

1) Get a chunk of coal and a piece of iron. Make sure that they have the
same volume.
2) Heat them up in an oven to 200 F. -- waiting to make sure that they both
reach that temperature.
3) Prepare two containers of water at room temperature of equal volume.
4) Carefully place the heated iron into one container and the heated coal
into the other container.
5) Stir each container and measure the temperature over time.
6) Make note of the container that has the sharpest rise in temperature over
time.

= )

Mark
--
The Liberator
E-Mail: webm...@liberator.net

liberator

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Pausaune <pausaune@aol[4-B4Y3Cote:

<<[Liberator] you seem to think you're an excellent teacher, and I'm
skeptical of that.>>

As you should be. If only you could be more skeptical about uncorroborated
religious claims...

Mark
--
The Liberator
E-Mail: ne...@liberator.net
Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/

Need a reliable an]P!"^\%Znsive Internet provider?

Pausaune

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
<<
Man! You're sharp! I wish we were friends!

But YES! If I had the same attitude in the Firewalk as I have when I gird my
loins
I would definitely burn in the Fire!

But do you think I could face such trials and not depend, rely, submit to
something greater than I am?

I do not know how I'll fare. I do not know if I will succeed. Or that even my
preconceptions I have stated here will not be ultimately a barrier.

I don't know Pat. I have felt the power of Io when I have healed people, and
when
I have done Exorcisms, but this is entirely different.

When I am not in this NG, I almost never think of the Liber8r. He isn't that
important to me.
>>

I think this is probably true for most of us. Generally I'm only reminded of
Liberator when I help a friend with their science homework and they make a
comment about their teacher not being able to teach. (And that's not meant as a
flame... I just think of you, Liberator, because you seem to think you're an
excellent teacher, and I'm skeptical of that.) Similarly I was reminded of Lani
when we briefly covered mystics in Humanities. And of Kevin when we had a
debate over what Christianity really is, again in Humanities.

<<In Huna, the Fireimmunity comes from the goddess Wahine-Nui-Ho`a-Lani. I
think
that is because the Presence is felt as a warm nurturing stillness which enters
the mind, if the mind is resilient and allows it to enter it and numb it.

For me, I will never even think of the Liber8r there. But I will thing of you,
and
Nevermore and Kevin and Tom. And I will, if I can, submit myself to the
presence
in all humility. I will have to "rest" on my Path, and let my Path and gods and
God carry me, or else I can not make it.

As you and I both know, even if others pretend not to---fire burns.>>

I think they know fire burns, they just think anyone can walk across it with or
without concentration/release on something. I'm ignorant in this field though,
so the burden of proof for that is on them... and since the Scientific Method
is based off of personal experience. If they want to prove that other materials
are better conductors than coal and that you would all be burned if you walked
on such materials instead... it's their duty to prove that conjecture. I think
they could do a firewalk on coal themselves and then such a firewalk on
mentioned materials and observe the results.

<<I can not pass through its flames by being tough, or intent, but by humility.
If I
can or ought to be saved, it will have to be something other than me that saves
me.>>

And you've made it your goal to prove this, to yourself--not a panel of
scientists, by doing a firewalk in October. Interesting, it's a pity our
skeptics don't meet their own criteria.

<<Pat, you are young and will have a long life before you. But there will come
a
time when you, like be (but me sooner) will die.

What will save you then? Yourself? Or something else?

You are immortal. but it is not our egos which make us immortal.

You arte the Child of God. Some God. A God by any name. By no name.

That's nothing to be prideful, it's just natural.
>>

I'm not too worried about when I die. Not because it's a long way off, which it
may or may not be, but because it's not relevent to me. When I die, I die. I've
lived my life how I saw fit and if something judges me based off of that, I
will get what I deserve. If there is nothing after death... then that's it. If
this is just an endless cycle, then I guess I get to do it again, hopefully
better.

<<In mid-october, think well of me if you can. Your positive intention, and
others,
can only do good, and I'll need it.

--
-Lani
>>

Well Mid-October I'll have troubles of my own, notably Boot Camp and right
around that time the Crucible. Both of which I'm really enthusiastic to
experience. So while you'll be testing your Faith, I'll be testing the strength
of my mind and body to overcome obstacles. But... if I have a couple seconds of
thought to spare for myself that aren't taken up by family, friends, and
hopefully a special woman... I'll wish you luck.

~Pat


Pausaune

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Liberator wrote...

<<
When I took physics in high school, I learned about heat. In short, 100
degrees F. of iron feels hotter than 100 degrees F. of coal. In fact, iron
will do much more damage to a human being than coal if they were both set to
the same high temperature. This is fact, not fiction.

This knowledge was verified in college as I pursued my undergraduate degree
and earned a minor in physics. I'm indicating this to you to give you the
correct notion that I have studied physics -- hands on -- to an appreciable
depth. I have performed many experiments in my lifetime and know these
things as a result.

= )

Thanks for allowing me to clarify my position, Pat.

Mark
--
>>

Thanks for clarifying my point: The above is called a hypothesis. The
Scientific Method is used to test a hypothesis for proof. Now, since the
Scientific Method is based off of recordable and reproducable personal
experience, this would mean that to test if skin, and other tissues beneath,
burned or blistered from hot coals if one did not focus, that somebody would
have to walk across. This is Lani's claim, and what is he doing? He's walking
across. To make it more scientific he could get a group of people and randomly
designate them as "focus" or "don't focus," but he's proving it to himself
rather than a panel of scientists--his theory will either be true for him, or
not true, depending on the results. Thus only he is going across. However to
prove that anyone can walk across the coals without getting burnt would mean,
by the Scientific Method, that several people of different backgrounds, origin,
etc. need to walk across without getting burned. In other words, Liberator, to
change your above statement from a hypothesis to something that has more
backing than a religious doctrine you need to observe a firewalk, and possibly
participate in one.

~Pat


liberator

unread,
Mar 31, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/31/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:

<<He's walking across. To make it more scientific he could get a group of
people and randomly designate them as "focus" or "don't focus," but he's
proving it to himself rather than a panel of scientists--his theory will
either be true for him, or not true, depending on the results.>>

One cannot prove anything unless -- as you have stated -- many different
people of faith and non-faith do the firewalk. So Lani is not proving
anything by walking on low density coals. He might be enjoying himself, but
there's no study going on.

Mark
--
The Liberator
E-Mail: ne...@liberator.net
Web Site: http://www.liberator.net/

Need a reliable and inexpensive Internet provider?

Lani

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune wrote:

> The
> Scientific Method is used to test a hypothesis for proof. Now, since the
> Scientific Method is based off of recordable and reproducable personal
> experience, this would mean that to test if skin, and other tissues beneath,
> burned or blistered from hot coals if one did not focus, that somebody would

> have to walk across. This is Lani's claim, and what is he doing? He's walking


> across. To make it more scientific he could get a group of people and randomly
> designate them as "focus" or "don't focus," but he's proving it to himself
> rather than a panel of scientists--his theory will either be true for him, or

> not true, depending on the results. Thus only he is going across. However to
> prove that anyone can walk across the coals without getting burnt would mean,
> by the Scientific Method, that several people of different backgrounds, origin,
> etc. need to walk across without getting burned. In other words, Liberator, to
> change your above statement from a hypothesis to something that has more
> backing than a religious doctrine you need to observe a firewalk, and possibly
> participate in one.
>
> ~Pat

Mahalo Pat,

And I will do the same positive intentions for you.

Is is an interesting coincidence that at the same time I am being taught and
tested, you are too.

Just different fields. But the same in that they are appropriate enough for each of
us. :)

-Lani


Pausaune

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Liberator wrote..
<<
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:

<<He's walking across. To make it more scientific he could get a group of
people and randomly designate them as "focus" or "don't focus," but he's
proving it to himself rather than a panel of scientists--his theory will
either be true for him, or not true, depending on the results.>>

One cannot prove anything unless -- as you have stated -- many different


people of faith and non-faith do the firewalk. So Lani is not proving
anything by walking on low density coals. He might be enjoying himself, but
there's no study going on.

Mark
--
>>

Thankyou for reiterating what I just said. I'm sure somebody out there needed
the translation. Now, if you can, please respond to the part of my post which
was addressed to you rather than attempting, once again, to tie me up with moot
points and triviality that I've already explained and admitted.

~Pat


liberator

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:
<<Now, if you can, please respond to the part of my post which was addressed
to you rather than attempting, once again, to tie me up with moot points and
triviality that I've already explained and admitted.>>

Pat, all we have to do it witness people who are not faith orientated as
they perform the same physical phenomena as Lani. These people have no
claim to faith, yet they do it. 'Nuff said.

There used to be a college professor in California -- I believe -- that
performed strange feats in his classroom. He used to place himself on a bed
of nails and show the physics behind it, for example. He de-mystified the
mystics.

If he was a local professor, I would take his course. Learning is fun and
enlightening.

Pausaune

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Liberator wrote...

<<
Pat, all we have to do it witness people who are not faith orientated as
they perform the same physical phenomena as Lani. These people have no
claim to faith, yet they do it. 'Nuff said.

>>

If that's a "all" you have to do... then why don't you?? Lani is practically
INVITING you to do this. So if that's all you have to do and it's soooo simple,
then why aren't you??
"these people have no claim to faith, yet they do it"
And if you paid attention to Lani's POV you'd know one could focus on
ANYTHING--a coke bottle if one chose to--but if they focused on that item and
entered the "sentient fire" humbly the would not be burned. At least this was
my understanding. Which means that you can't just sit there and say "this
person has no faith and they're fine--YOU'RE WRONG!" you have to ask what they
did mentally, etc. It's a largely unprovable field, as Kevin consistently
points out. However, if "all" you "have to do" to prove Lani wrong is go to one
of these things and see somebody without Faith walk across... then why don't
you?

~Pat


Lani

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune wrote:

> If that's a "all" you have to do... then why don't you?? Lani is practically
> INVITING you to do this. So if that's all you have to do and it's soooo simple,
> then why aren't you??
> "these people have no claim to faith, yet they do it"
> And if you paid attention to Lani's POV you'd know one could focus on
> ANYTHING--a coke bottle if one chose to--but if they focused on that item and
> entered the "sentient fire" humbly the would not be burned. At least this was
> my understanding. Which means that you can't just sit there and say "this
> person has no faith and they're fine--YOU'RE WRONG!" you have to ask what they
> did mentally, etc. It's a largely unprovable field, as Kevin consistently
> points out. However, if "all" you "have to do" to prove Lani wrong is go to one
> of these things and see somebody without Faith walk across... then why don't
> you?
>
> ~Pat

Dang! Once again, you are insightful.

The sentient fire tests one for faith. And that faith is moderately tough yet
undistinguished faith.

If a "Scientist" has "faith" in his Science. And if, at the moment before the
Firewalk, he feels the wonderful mental sensation of the Presence, then they will
be "saved".

While it IS possible to have faith in the saving Grace of Coke, usually, religions
are used.

And as Liber8r and jcr have demonstrated so very very clearly here, "Science" is
their dogmatic religion. Held through faith and not truth. (Otherwise they could
point us to a single experiment demonstrating the superiority of the double-blind
experiment)

Pausaune

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to

Lani wrote..

<<
Dang! Once again, you are insightful.

The sentient fire tests one for faith. And that faith is moderately tough yet
undistinguished faith.

If a "Scientist" has "faith" in his Science. And if, at the moment before the
Firewalk, he feels the wonderful mental sensation of the Presence, then they
will
be "saved".>>

I read your statement slightly differently. More like one merely had to have
faith in something they believe in. For instance, I have a lot of Faith in
Logic and Common Sense and my ability to utilize both. I don't expect them to
do anything special for me when I die or anything, but my understanding is that
if I focused in on this beforehand and during that by your standards I would
not be burned. Thus a scientist who trusts in science and believes and respects
it could walk through the fire safely. Atlhough I would suspect a cynical
skeptic would have a harder time.

<<While it IS possible to have faith in the saving Grace of Coke, usually,
religions
are used.

And as Liber8r and jcr have demonstrated so very very clearly here, "Science"
is
their dogmatic religion. Held through faith and not truth. (Otherwise they
could
point us to a single experiment demonstrating the superiority of the
double-blind
experiment)

--
-Lani
>>

Usually religions are used... but is it exclusive to religions?? What if
somebody there claims no religion but, like me, believes themself to spiritual?
I'm probably stretching your viewpoint, but I think if one were to concentrate
on something that they believed to be a large part of their life and their
defining qualities... by your standards they could walk through without getting
burnt.
And I'm well aware of their dogmatic acceptance of science. Although I find it
a bit comical that a science teacher can't find the difference between a
hypothesis and a conclusion. Any reports he has provided would be citations
used to support a hypothesis--not a definitive, conclusive Scientific Report.
Meaning, not only does he expect everyone to meet his dogmatically accepted
scientific standards but he even bends these standards for his own kind and
more importantly himself.

~Pat


Lani

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune wrote:

You gotta give me a break here, guy.

I'm a student who belongs to a religion which was founded in 1872 in a Honolulu
(lava) Firewalk. I have walked on fire, but I am intimate with it nor an initiated
Kahuna I Ke Umu Ki.

I walked under Tony Robbins, who presents it as purely a psychological thing.

Yet. There is mystery in this too. Why did he have one of his staff call me and
offer his Firewalk night to me for free?

I thought at first, he would try to use me as an advertising thingy.

But not then. I expected to be with difficulty with signing in at the Firewalk,
which was to last five hours. But no. They had my name tag already made.

I expected his organization to contact me later, for at least an endorsement. But
that never happened either.

He knew I was a priest of Huna. Other than that, I have no idea what he knew about
me. but in any case, he NEVER tried to use me.

The Firewalk I did was a gift from him, like a bolt out of the blue.

BUT my impression is that the "focus" part is correct on your part. But for a
different reason. It gives the mind something to do whilst it submits to the
Presence.

A distraction, is my speculation.

John C. Randolph

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to

liberator wrote:
[snippage]

> There used to be a college professor in California -- I believe -- that
> performed strange feats in his classroom. He used to place himself on a bed
> of nails and show the physics behind it, for example. He de-mystified the
> mystics.

I recently saw a show on the Learning Channel about an Indian college
professor who does the same thing, allthough the stunts he takes on are
rather more spectacular. It seems that where he lives, and popular
stunt among the local "god men" is to insert iron hooks into the skin of
their backs, near the shoulder blades, and actually pull heavy carts
around by means of chains attached to these hooks.

-jcr

Kevin Stewart

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to

Lani wrote in message <38E66595...@earthlink.net>...

>A distraction, is my speculation.
>A distraction, is my speculation.
>A distraction, is my speculation.
>A distraction, is my speculation.
>A distraction, is my speculation.
>A distraction, is my speculation.

>A speculation.
>A speculation.
>A speculation.
>A speculation.
>A speculation.
>A speculation.
>A speculation.
>A speculation.

Any questions?

Kevin

Pausaune

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
<<
You gotta give me a break here, guy.

I'm a student who belongs to a religion which was founded in 1872 in a Honolulu
(lava) Firewalk. I have walked on fire, but I am intimate with it nor an
initiated
Kahuna I Ke Umu Ki.

I walked under Tony Robbins, who presents it as purely a psychological thing.

Yet. There is mystery in this too. Why did he have one of his staff call me and
offer his Firewalk night to me for free?

I thought at first, he would try to use me as an advertising thingy.

But not then. I expected to be with difficulty with signing in at the Firewalk,
which was to last five hours. But no. They had my name tag already made.

I expected his organization to contact me later, for at least an endorsement.
But
that never happened either.

He knew I was a priest of Huna. Other than that, I have no idea what he knew
about
me. but in any case, he NEVER tried to use me.

The Firewalk I did was a gift from him, like a bolt out of the blue.

BUT my impression is that the "focus" part is correct on your part. But for a
different reason. It gives the mind something to do whilst it submits to the
Presence.

A distraction, is my speculation.


--
-Lani

>>

Ahhh... and that I couldn't definitely agree on, even with my ignorance on this
subject. I realize this is a stretch of your point of view in it's purest form,
but I also think that this cancels JCRs and Liberators claim that if a
non-religious person walks across safely that you're wrong. It also displays
how quick they are to start throwing the stones at you when they obviously
don't have a complete understanding of your concept. Somehow I'm guessing
science suggests you know and understand Newton's laws before you go around
calling Newton a heretical and schizophrenic dreamer. But then... maybe JCR and
Liberator aren't truly devoted to the scientific ideals, but rather their
personal gain.

~Pat

Lani

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Kevin Stewart wrote:

> Lani wrote in message <38E66595...@earthlink.net>...
>

> >A distraction, is my speculation.
> >A distraction, is my speculation.
> >A distraction, is my speculation.
> >A distraction, is my speculation.
> >A distraction, is my speculation.
> >A distraction, is my speculation.

> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
> >A speculation.
>
> Any questions?
>
> Kevin

Did I write that?

It looks more like jcr's but hey, If i wrote that, and it annoyed you,
I'm sorry.

Lani

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Lani wrote:

> Kevin Stewart wrote:
>
> > Lani wrote in message <38E66595...@earthlink.net>...
> >
> > >A distraction, is my speculation.
> > >A distraction, is my speculation.
> > >A distraction, is my speculation.
> > >A distraction, is my speculation.
> > >A distraction, is my speculation.
> > >A distraction, is my speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> > >A speculation.
> >
> > Any questions?
> >
> > Kevin
>
> Did I write that?
>
> It looks more like jcr's but hey, If i wrote that, and it annoyed you,
> I'm sorry.
>
> --
> -Lani
>

Oh, yeah, Pat reminded me that I had wrote it.

I think you weren't annoyed with it though.

PAT:

You mean that you and I who are not initiates have slightly different POV's
about a phenomena neither of us can produce and initiate yet?

You mean you don't speculate 100% the same as I do on this phoneme?

As far as I can see, buddy boy, there are only 4 possibilities:

1. You're wrong and'd I'm right (my all time favorite).

2. You've right and I'm wrong! ACK!

We're both wrong.

4. We're both right?

WELL! *I THINK* that we would both have to alter our speculations to conform
to the actual experiences we have with the phenomena.

Pausaune

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Lani wrote...

<<
You mean that you and I who are not initiates have slightly different POV's
about a phenomena neither of us can produce and initiate yet?

You mean you don't speculate 100% the same as I do on this phoneme?

As far as I can see, buddy boy, there are only 4 possibilities:

1. You're wrong and'd I'm right (my all time favorite).

2. You've right and I'm wrong! ACK!

We're both wrong.

4. We're both right?

WELL! *I THINK* that we would both have to alter our speculations to conform
to the actual experiences we have with the phenomena.

--
-Lani

>>

::shrugs:: Cool with me. Rarely am I completely right, and I'm wrong quite
often. And in regards to this field I'm rather ignorant... so I'm certainly not
attempting to assert a superior POV or disregard yours. In fact what I think
I've more or less done is mold your POV so it better fits my own viewpoints.
But anyway, I can agree to this.

~Pat


Lani

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune wrote:

What???

"In fact what I think
I've more or less done is mold your POV so it better fits my own viewpoints."

<LANI is seen to be sputtering>

But, but...

Kevin Stewart

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to

Lani wrote in message <38E67630...@earthlink.net>...

snipped

>Oh, yeah, Pat reminded me that I had wrote it.
>
>I think you weren't annoyed with it though.


All I was trying to say was you were identifying the post as personal
speculation, not absolute fact.

Kevin


liberator

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:


Liberator wrote...
<<Pat, all we have to do it witness people who are not faith orientated as

they perform the same physical phenomena as Lani. These people have no
claim to faith, yet they do it. 'Nuff said.>>

>>If that's a "all" you have to do... then why don't you??<<

Because it has already been done. = )

Mark
--
The Liberator
E-Mail: ne...@liberator.net

Web Site: http://liberator.net/
Better Business: http://liberator.net/special/betterbusiness.html

liberator

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Lani <kahun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
<<If a "Scientist" has "faith" in his Science. And if, at the moment before
the Firewalk, he feels the wonderful mental sensation of the Presence, then
they will be "saved".>>

Truth is independent of faith. = )

liberator

unread,
Apr 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM4/1/00
to
Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:

<<For instance, I have a lot of Faith in Logic and Common Sense and my
ability to utilize both. I don't expect them to do anything special for me

when I die or anything...>>

Pat, your faith in logic comes from experience. It is a tool that allows
you -- and all of us -- the ability to understand the universe right here,
right now. You don't have to believe in unprovable life-after-death
fairytales, but you do have to acknowledge the benefits of logic for the
here and now. = )

Lani

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to
Kevin Stewart wrote:

Well, of course.

What else can there be on usenet?

Kevin Stewart

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to

liberator wrote in message ...

snipped

>Truth is independent of faith. = )


snipped

Start a "Poor Mark's Almanac", are you? <G>

Kevin

Lani

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to
liberator wrote:

> Pausaune <paus...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Liberator wrote...
> <<Pat, all we have to do it witness people who are not faith orientated as
> they perform the same physical phenomena as Lani. These people have no
> claim to faith, yet they do it. 'Nuff said.>>
>
> >>If that's a "all" you have to do... then why don't you??<<
>
> Because it has already been done. = )
>
> Mark

No it hasn't.

There has been been a double-blind Scientist who has walked on Fire using the
sacred Fireimmunity.

There has never been a scientist who has driven a 5" or better pin through his
handout pain or blood, whilst under the protection of the sacred Fireimmunity.

Etc.

liberator

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to
> Liberator wrote...
> <<Pat, all we have to do it witness people who are not faith orientated as
> they perform the same physical phenomena as Lani. These people have no
> claim to faith, yet they do it. 'Nuff said.>>
>
> >>If that's a "all" you have to do... then why don't you??<<
>
> Because it has already been done. = )

Lani <kahun...@earthlink.net> responded:
<<No it hasn't.>>

Hey you grass-skirt wearing, fish waving knucklehead, go to a circus and
watch as the PERFORMERS do this wacky crap all the time. It's not as
spectacular as you think. Besides, scientists have performed the firewalk
successfully plus they actually know what's going on. [Did you examine the
URLs I posted?]

Your faith is starting to stink up the whole place. Let it go already and
watch it float downstream with all the other dead fish.

Pausaune

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to
Liberator wrote...

<<
Your faith is starting to stink up the whole place. Let it go already and
watch it float downstream with all the other dead fish.

>>

Personally I think it's your self-righteous, cynical, hypocritical, ignorant,
and prejudice "I'm right no one else can be right and you're all stupid morons
who need my glorious education knowledge and experience" attitude that's
stinking the place up.
You preach how the ULC welcomes ALL viewpoints when we challenge the relevance
of this so-called debate, and now you demand that one of our regular posters
drop his faith??
I think you and JCR are the only two people here, at least regular posters,
that are against Lani's participance. I welcome his viewpoint and interesting
stories even if I am highly critical of them. He's also very accepting of
other's viewpoints and he himself has stated time and time again that it's just
his SPECULATED viewpoint. At the very least he has something productive to
offer to a religious newsgroup. More than can be said for you.
You know... when one starts throwing personal cheapshots (esp. to the extent of
the above) it's generally because they're merely a bad loser.
Oh, and BTW, Mr. Spelling Bee... it's Fath, not Faith.

~Pat


Steve

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to
I'm not entirely sure which subthread this will wind up on, but please
understand I mean this as a general response to the mother thread...

What liberator ("Bishop of Chicago and other Frank Sinatra songs") says
about the science of the firewalk is true. I know this only from my
education. But, that education was based upon the research and study of
millions, if not billions, or scientists of the past and present. I know
enough to trust nothing with 100% surety, whether science, religion, or
something else. This is why I was drummed out of two churches and
blacklisted by several of my Christian peers--they felt that true faith does
not question, while I felt that true faith must question to ensure its
truth. The nice thing about science is that questions are welcomed and
mistakes are required to be addressed. There are shortcomings to science,
but they are far less than in traditional blind-faith religion. Science
relies on observation, and (ideally, at least) constantly changes to address
what is observed. Meanwhile, religions endeavor to claim that they have all
the answers, that those answers are true, and that any evidence to the
contrary should be ignored. In other words, while science conforms to
reality, religions insist reality conform to them.

We have observed that coal is a poor conductor of heat. I still wouldn't
walk on coals, b/c I know I'd roast my feet (despite my barefoot
southerner's callouses). I'm not entirely sure, but I'd expect that one
would have to be very careful while firewalking to keep from burning,
despite coal's poor conductivity. Besides, no matter how bad a conductor
coal is, burning coal is still pretty friggin' hot. I'm impressed with
firewalking, but only because firewalkers obviously have more psychological
and physical control over themselves than I do.

However, it really doesn't matter if anyone is impressed with firewalking
other than those who practice it. It seems to me that it's a religious
ceremony, like any other. I believe religious ceremonies are powerful
symbols of faith, not only for those who participate but for whatever Higher
Being you may believe in. Many in the liturgical denominations of
Christianity know full well that the bread and wine of the Eucharist isn't
REALLY (as in, physically) the body and blood of Christ. But, the ceremony
symbolizes the participants' commitment to communion with Christ. This is
proof, however flimsy, to both the participants and observers that their
faith is genuine. I personally believe this also sends a message to God
that their faith is genuine. If you believe firewalking affirms your faith,
then as a symbol it does. It doesn't have to be true on any but the
symbolic level to be valid. The rest is moot.

Of course, I may be wrong, but there are only four things that can happen to
me when I die anyway: heaven, hell, purgatory/reincarnation, or nothing at
all, and I won't know which until I die. All anyone can do is TRY for
heaven and hope for the best.

Peace in freedom,
Steve

Lani

unread,
Apr 2, 2000, 4:00:00 AM4/2/00
to
Steve wrote:

LANI:

Aloha, Steve, I thought at first that you were going to attack me, that happens so often in this NG.

Yet, you didn't.

I have to agree with what you say as a starting point. But then if you read the stories of actual experiences, one is shifted. Then once that happens, one becomes compelled, if one is a Priest, as I am, with a congregation, to see for one's self what all the hoopla is about.

We have observed that coal is a poor conductor of heat.  I still wouldn't
walk on coals, b/c I know I'd roast my feet (despite my barefoot
southerner's callouses).  I'm not entirely sure, but I'd expect that one
would have to be very careful while firewalking to keep from burning,
despite coal's poor conductivity.  Besides, no matter how bad a conductor
coal is, burning coal is still pretty friggin' hot.  I'm impressed with
firewalking, but only because firewalkers obviously have more psychological
and physical control over themselves than I do.

However, it really doesn't matter if anyone is impressed with firewalking
other than those who practice it.  It seems to me that it's a religious
ceremony, like any other.  I believe religious ceremonies are powerful
symbols of faith, not only for those who participate but for whatever Higher
Being you may believe in.  Many in the liturgical denominations of
Christianity know full well that the bread and wine of the Eucharist isn't
REALLY (as in, physically) the body and blood of Christ.  But, the ceremony
symbolizes the participants' commitment to communion with Christ.  This is
proof, however flimsy, to both the participants and observers that their
faith is genuine.  I personally believe this also sends a message to God
that their faith is genuine.  If you believe firewalking affirms your faith,
then as a symbol it does.  It doesn't have to be true on any but the
symbolic level to be valid.  The rest is moot.

Of course, I may be wrong, but there are only four things that can happen to
me when I die anyway: heaven, hell, purgatory/reincarnation, or nothing at
all, and I won't know which until I die.  All anyone can do is TRY for
heaven and hope for the best.

Peace in freedom,
Steve


You're wrong, FROM MY POV, you are mortal in the flesh and immortal in the spirit.

You are, as are all the Children of God, safe in the arms of your God, or if you aren't "claimed" then in the arms of your Aumakua or Guardian Angel.