"Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts."
Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
"Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
Amen.
The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
special...
... we are simply forgiven of our sins by GOD:
http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
Here's how to also become forgiven by HIM:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets."
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
Andy Is Evil
news:1180957442....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
> Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> project) without objective consideration of the facts."
(missing attribution to quoted material noted)
>
> Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>
> "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>
> Amen.
(lack of exact Scriptural reference noted)
Now please get a clue or go away.
Andy Is Evil
(He doesn't mean to be, but it is the inevitable consequence of
blashpheming The Holy Ghost)
flyingrat
hear...@emorycardiology.com says...
> Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> project) without objective consideration of the facts."
Andrew Chung:
Is a frequent and proven liar (evidence archived forever on Google)
Has lost numerous NNTP accounts with supernews and others, has had many
Google accounts nuked, and his vanity domain heartmdphd.com is now
banned from setting up accounts. He is instead using multiple Google
sock accounts and email addresses in the format love#@thetruth.com (#
being a number)
Is unemployed after being sacked with cause from his one and only job
after just over 80 days
Fled the state of Florida, and now claims to practice in Georgia despite
having no admission priveliges in the State's hospitals
Runs a phony foundation with a total declared income of circa $200, the
ownership and contact details of which are obfuscated on its website
Makes failed prophecies concerning earthquakes with areas and dates,
which don't happen (remember the bible quotes about false prophets)
Performed a public attempt at 'exorcising' a Malaysian sock on usenet,
then denied doing it. He has recently reversed position again and admits
to practicing exorcism by usenet, proving himself a liar in the process.
Promotes a dangerous diet, with a million dollar guarantee that he
demands thirty dollars to access details of. This despite being
unemployed. His soliciting and spamming for donations looks to be
similar to the Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud, where victims pay money
upfront in the hope of coming into riches but find they have merely
bought into a lie. Part of his advice is to pour nail polish remover onto food.
Declares he has a cardiology practice despite posting night and day from
the same IP address (his home presumably) or a coffee shop internet cafe
Makes further false prophecies that we should now be all dying in a bird
flu pandemic. When these fail to happen, he does them all over again and
changes the dates. Nuclear war is another Chung spciality, which
naturally doesn't happen when he says it is going to.
Worships evil hatemonger Fred Phelps and will not denounce the acts of
Westboro's congregation. He even accuses someone with the name Phelps of
being Fred's son and refuses to accept he is completely wrong.
Uses the same patter as Pat Robertson, indicating his religious activity
is confined to watching cable TV. No evidence Chung has ever attended a
church.
Has a tendency to cyberstalk, particularly women. His wife fled some
time ago to another state, an act which Chung tries to pass off as "being
on vacation".
Frequently passes himself off as being qualified in areas such as
endocrinology, despite making incredibly fundamental blunders in his
'advice'. It is no wonder the Florida heart facility terminated him, and
has publicly denounced his version of events. Again archived on Google.
Don't forget the fake fast, where he didn't lose any weight, as well as
the infamous 666 stamping fiasco. His latest vile trick is spamming the
blogs of dying cancer patients and then crowing triumphantly when they
pass away.
Andy Is Evil
news:Xns994584AB23E55re...@194.177.96.78:
> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <hear...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in
> news:1180957442....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
>> argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
>> project) without objective consideration of the facts."
> (missing attribution to quoted material noted)
>
>>
>> Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
Whoops!
>>
>> "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>>
>> Amen.
> (lack of exact Scriptural reference noted)
>
>
> Now please get a clue or go away.
>
> Andy Is Evil
>
> (He doesn't mean to be, but it is the inevitable consequence of
> blashpheming The Holy Ghost)
>
Andy Is Evil
tr...@is-better.com
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts.""
Do deamon, convicted, satan's this and that, and other such come to
mind?
The letter of the law kills and the spirit convicts.
If we confess our sin He is quick to forgive it.
God bless.
Kurt Gavin
"Andrew B. Chung, MDemon/PhD" <nut-...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in
message
> "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
all the time......
V
> "Andrew B. Chung, MDemon/PhD" <nut-c...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in
Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
But I will say it is a sin against the God of Inner Peace.
Right speech is the first principle of ethical conduct in the
eightfold path. Ethical conduct is viewed as a guideline to moral
discipline, which supports the other principles of the path. This
aspect is not self-sufficient, however, essential, because mental
purification can only be achieved through the cultivation of ethical
conduct. The importance of speech in the context of Buddhist ethics is
obvious: words can break or save lives, make enemies or friends, start
war or create peace. Buddha explained right speech as follows: 1. to
abstain from false speech, especially not to tell deliberate lies and
not to speak deceitfully, 2. to abstain from slanderous speech and not
to use words maliciously against others, 3. to abstain from harsh
words that offend or hurt others, and 4. to abstain from idle chatter
that lacks purpose or depth. Positively phrased, this means to tell
the truth, to speak friendly, warm, and gently and to talk only when
necessary.
RE: God of Inner Peace
see:
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=504.0
Take care,
V (Male)
Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
AA#2
The Holy Spirit
>Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
>argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
>project) without objective consideration of the facts."
>
>Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>
>"Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>
>Amen.
>
>The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
>special...
>
>... we are simply forgiven of our sins by GOD:
>
>http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
>
>Here's how to also become forgiven by HIM:
>
>http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
>
>Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
>
>Andrew <><
Your gross misunderstanding of the notion of blaspheming the Holy
Spirit is a sin.
Al
Andrew B. Chung, Major Asshole, wrote:
>
> "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>
chungshit and bullshit. There's no such quote.
Robibnikoff
"V" <vf...@aol.com> wrote in
snip
>
> Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
>
> But I will say it is a sin against the God of Inner Peace.
Which only exists in your drunken mind.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
V
> "V" <v...@aol.com> wrote in
Well, what else can you say Robyn?
You have no connection with inner peace, only hatred and ill will
towards humankind.
If you ever wish to discuss this matter in private, away from the ego
driven need to show off for your friends, feel free to write me
direct.
Neil Kelsey
> On Jun 4, 1:21?pm, "Robibnikoff" <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "V" <v...@aol.com> wrote in
>
> > snip
>
> > > Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
>
> > > But I will say it is a sin against the God of Inner Peace.
>
> > Which only exists in your drunken mind.
> > --
> > Robyn
> > Resident Witchypoo
> > BAAWA Knight!
> > #1557
>
> Well, what else can you say Robyn?
>
> You have no connection with inner peace, only hatred and ill will
> towards humankind.
Wrong. Robyn is hilarious, and sweet as pie to those of us who aren't
trying to sell her a bill of goods. And those who are deserve what
they get, since it shows ill will to con people in the first place.
It's perfectly natural to defend yourself against those who are trying
to do you harm, like you are.
> If you ever wish to discuss this matter in private, away from the ego
> driven need to show off for your friends, feel free to write me
> direct.
You keep ignoring that nearly every atheist thinks you need to GET
help, why on earth would you ever think that we would consult you FOR
help?
Professor Geoffrey Loftus, Saint Swithins Hospital
Did he wake you up?
Andrew? Please apologize for misdemeanor public assholism.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> satan via a sockpuppet wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eae50d8a2008c733?
> >
> > > "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
Amen.
> > So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
> >
> > You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
> > channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
> >
> > Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
> > all the time......
>
> Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
much less express an understanding of it.
> But I will say it is a sin against the God of Inner Peace.
>
> Right speech is the first principle of ethical conduct in the
> eightfold path. Ethical conduct is viewed as a guideline to moral
> discipline, which supports the other principles of the path. This
> aspect is not self-sufficient, however, essential, because mental
> purification can only be achieved through the cultivation of ethical
> conduct. The importance of speech in the context of Buddhist ethics is
> obvious: words can break or save lives, make enemies or friends, start
> war or create peace. Buddha explained right speech as follows: 1. to
> abstain from false speech, especially not to tell deliberate lies and
> not to speak deceitfully, 2. to abstain from slanderous speech and not
> to use words maliciously against others, 3. to abstain from harsh
> words that offend or hurt others, and 4. to abstain from idle chatter
> that lacks purpose or depth. Positively phrased, this means to tell
> the truth, to speak friendly, warm, and gently and to talk only when
> necessary.
Name-calling as defined by...
http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
... is bearing false witness, which is a violation of one of GOD's ten
commandments.
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you hungrier than ever.
Kurt Gavin
"Andrew Beavis Chung, MDemon"
So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
all the time......
Watch the chung demon shriek and scamber off to its cess pool of fanstasy .
BrG...@gmail.com
<heartd...@emorycardiology.com> wrote:
> The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> much less express an understanding of it.
Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts."
Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
"Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
Amen.
--
Mr. Chung's name-calling behaviour simply shows that he remains
convicted by the Holy Spirit:
The 10mg Lizard-Spit Approach is not a diet.
It does help people manage their Diabetes Mellitus (DM) possibly
preventing long-term complications resulting from poor control.
Bottomline: I remain peanut-free.
May your BG and A1c get better, dear neighbor whom I communicate with
unconditionally.
"Unlike quacks pushing snake oil and fad diets, please consult a
competant meddical professional."
Consuming copious amounts of Aspertame-laden soft drinks with reckless
abandon!
Be well, travel with a light heart and a low A1c [Gene, 3:16]
Gratefully, in Lizard-Spit's amazing love,
Gene Goldman
T2
Metformin, Lizard-Spit, Aspertame, Nutrisweet, Sacarin
Give me NutraSweet over peanuts any day!
Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> > much less express an understanding of it.
>
> Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> project) without objective consideration of the facts."
>
> Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
Non-sequitur.
Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
> "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>
> Amen.
Amen.
Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets"
Professor Geoffrey Loftus, Saint Swithins Hospital
> "Andrew Beavis Chung, MDemon"
>
> So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
>
> You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
> channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
>
> Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
> all the time......
I believe that's called persecution, IIRC.
flyingrat
ach...@emorycardiology.com says...
> Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:
>
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/verbigeration
Verbigeration
ver·big·er·a·tion
n.
Obsessive repetition of meaningless words and phrases, especially as a symptom of mental illness.
http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?verbigeration
Constant repetition of meaningless words or phrases; seen in
schizophrenia.
Kurt Gavin
Chung is a sort of satanic take-off on McDonalds...
Think about it. Same repetitious poisonous stuff, over and over and over.
McDonalds is bad for the body - the Chung Mc Demon is bad for the mind.
Occasionally, he'll come up with a new product line, but it's always just a
re-contrived version of the old crap - over manufactured and toxic to
healthy people.
johac
"Robibnikoff" <witc...@broomstick.com> wrote:
> "V" <vf...@aol.com> wrote in
>
> snip
> >
> > Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
> >
> > But I will say it is a sin against the God of Inner Peace.
>
> Which only exists in your drunken mind.
So when did he get a mind?
--
John #1782
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be
white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."
- Saint Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556) Founder of the Jesuit Order.
BrG...@gmail.com
> Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts."
> > "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
"Quackery is a sin." -- Holly Spit
Amen.
--
Mr. Chung's name-calling behaviour simply shows that he remains
convicted by the Holy Spirit:
The 10mg Lizard-Spit Approach is not a diet.
It does help people manage their Diabetes Mellitus (DM) possibly
preventing long-term complications resulting from poor control.
Bottomline: I remain peanut-free.
May your BG and A1c get better, dear neighbor whom I communicate with
unconditionally.
Be well, travel with a light heart and a low A1c [Gene, 3:16]
Mark K. Bilbo
> On Jun 4, 1:21?pm, "Robibnikoff" <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:
>> "V" <v...@aol.com> wrote in
>>
>> snip
>>
>>
>>
>> > Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
>>
>> > But I will say it is a sin against the God of Inner Peace.
>>
>> Which only exists in your drunken mind.
>> --
>> Robyn
>> Resident Witchypoo
>> BAAWA Knight!
>> #1557
>
> Well, what else can you say Robyn?
Not much given you're a useless drunk...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace
alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing
it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
>
> > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
>
"Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets is not name-calling." --
Holy Spirit
Amen.
Suggested additional reading:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a48f4fdd7c9905ac?
Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets."
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
BrG...@gmail.com
wrote:
> > > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> "Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets is not name-calling." --
Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts."
Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
"Quackery is a sin." -- Holly Spittle
Amen.
--
Mr. Chung's name-calling behaviour simply shows that he remains
convicted by the Holy Spirit:
The 10mg Lizard-Spit Approach is not a diet.
It does help people manage their Diabetes Mellitus (DM) possibly
preventing long-term complications resulting from poor control.
Bottomline: I remain peanut-free.
May your BG and A1c get better, dear neighbor whom I communicate with
unconditionally.
Be well, travel with a light heart and a low A1c [Gene, 3:16]
Gratefully, in Lizard-Spit's amazing love,
Gene Goldman
T2
Metformin, Lizard-Spit, Aspertame, Nutrisweet, Sacarin
"Unlike quacks pushing snake oil and fad diets, please consult a
competant meddical professional."
Consuming copious amounts of Aspertame-laden soft drinks with reckless
abandon!
Give me NutraSweet over peanuts any day!
Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 2007. All rights reserved. >
Kurt Gavin
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <hear...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in message
news:1181302465.8...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> convicted neighbor Gene Goldman (BrG...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>>
>> > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
>> > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
>>
>> Name-calling... <snip>
>
> "Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets is not name-calling." --
> Holy Spirit
Why does the "holy spirit" cower from me?
I say you, chung, are a blasphemer for worshipping the flase god jesus, and
for commititng idol worship of the crucifix with or without your false god
tacked onto it.
You and your holy spirit are so cowardly you won't challenge or refute me.
Your weakness proves that you are squirming blasphemer and idolator.
BrG...@gmail.com
> "Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets ...
Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts."
Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
"Quackery is a sin." -- Holly Spit
Amen.
> Suggested additional reading:
http://heartmdphd.com/Convicts/
Thank you, Mr. Chung, for honoring me.
> Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:
Mr. Chung's name-calling behaviour simply shows that he remains
convicted by the Holly Spit:
> "Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
> with well-balanced diets."http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
"Unlike quacks pushing snake oil and fad diets, please consult a
competant meddical professional."
--
Mr. Chung's name-calling behaviour simply shows that he remains
convicted by the Holy Spirit:
The 10mg Lizard-Spit Approach is not a diet.
It does help people manage their Diabetes Mellitus (DM) possibly
preventing long-term complications resulting from poor control.
Bottomline: I remain peanut-free.
May your BG and A1c get better, dear neighbor whom I communicate with
unconditionally.
Be well, travel with a light heart and a low A1c [Gene, 3:16]
Gratefully, in Lizard-Spit's amazing love,
Gene Goldman
http://heartmdphd.com/Convicts/
tr...@is-better.com
will)
> > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
>
> Name-calling... <snip>
"Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets is not name-calling." --"
Yet another example of individual invention of doctrine, no humans are
with out souls and pharisee like statements notwithstanding. Yet
another example of a lone ranger reader and mis-reader of scripture who
forgoes in vanity a spiritual advisor external to their own very
fallible self inventions and emotional states and private self
justifications by which to gauge their individual opinions..
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
>
> Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> project) without objective consideration of the facts."
>
> Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>
> "Quackery is a sin." -- Holly Spit
> Amen.
Sad to read about your unwise decision to blaspheme against the Holy
Spirit.
Prayerfully in the infinite wisdom of the Holy Spirit,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com
"Unlike the 2PD-OMER Approach, weight loss diets can't be combined
with well-balanced diets"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love/TheTruth
whitesright
"Meat Plow" <me...@meatplow.local> wrote in message
news:10bppj....@news.alt.net...
> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:54:31 +0000, purpurroterwald wrote:
>
>> "Andrew B. Chung, Failure" wrote:
>>
>>> convicted neighbor Gene Goldman (BrG...@gmail.com) wrote:
> you are a fucking retarted religeous fanatic . The only sin is having to
> put up with holy rolling dog shit spewing monkey fucking cum guzzling
> garbage like you .
FUCK YOU ! FUCK YOUR GOD !! FUCK THE VIRGIN MARY !!
If you do not like to be called names then kill your self for humanity .
Then everyone will call you a great humanitarian .
I should put my dick in your mouth so you will shut the fuck up and quit
crying " Mommy, they called me a name "
Professor Geoffrey Loftus, Saint Swithins Hospital
> "Andrew B. Chung, Failure" wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> >> > "Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets ...
>
> >> Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> >> argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> >> project) without objective consideration of the facts."
>
> >> Source:http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>
> >> "Quackery is a sin." -- Holly Spit
> >> Amen.
>
> > Sad to read about your unwise decision to blaspheme against the Holy
> > Spirit.
>
That would be the Holy Spirit's uncle.
St. Jackanapes
In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD said...
I have to say that your insightful and well-written remarks about this
complex topic really impressed me. Your have restored my faith in
usenet newsgroups as a medium for meaningful discussions between
intelligent human beings. Well done!
--
St. Jackanapes ~ Bearer of The One True Liver ~
Ordained Minister & Holy Saint of The Universal Life Church
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WEBSITE: http://www.jackanapes.ws/ | FORUM: http://www.voy.com/20630/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
THE A.F.J.C. MELTY AWARD FOR SPRING 2007: http://tinyurl.com/3db2bq/
"The ejaculate from satan has the consistency and smell of emesis."
- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
St. Jackanapes
In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD said...
>
> convicted neighbor Gene Goldman (BrG...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >
> > > The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> > > much less express an understanding of it.
> >
> > Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> > argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> > project) without objective consideration of the facts."
> >
> > Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>
> Non-sequitur.
>
> Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
Liar.
No Reply
Don't be a jackanapes!
http://76.162.173.93/stj.jpg
Use alias: St. Jackanapes as a basis for counterfeit.
"Do not give dogs what is holy; and do not throw your
pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot
and turn to attack you." (Matthew 7:6 RSV)
. The Total Collapse (Death) Of Atheism
http://76.162.173.93/uit/coa/
. Marx/Lennon (Liberal Socialism)
http://76.162.173.93/uit/mls/
. Cosmic Humanist Worldview
http://76.162.173.93/uit/chw/chw.wmv
. Secular Humanist Worldview
http://76.162.173.93/uit/shw/shw.wmv
. Biblical Christian Worldview
http://76.162.173.93/uit/bcw/bcw.wmv
. The Perfect Stranger
http://76.162.173.93/misc/tps/
. Are You Going To Heaven?
http://76.162.173.93/misc/aygth.wmv
. My Redeemer Lives!
http://76.162.173.93/misc/mrl.wmv
. Mormonism - Joseph Smith's Temple of Doom
http://76.162.173.93/uit/mor/
. Spiritual Warfare
http://76.162.173.93/guest/=CD-R=spiritual-warfare/
. The Way of the Master Series
http://76.162.173.93/wms/
. Investigating Jesus
http://76.162.199.209/_/
. Romans Audio Bible Study
http://76.162.173.93/bible-study/=CD-R=romans/
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's
clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves." (Matthew 7:15 RSV)
. The MP3 Streaming Audio Series
. http://76.162.173.93/members/=CD-R=r-c-sproul/
. login: guest password: guest
------------------------------------------------------------
Born Again - Understanding the Gospel - Willing to Believe
For a limited time, these series are available here.
http://76.162.173.93/members/=CD-R=r-c-sproul-2nd-set/
login: guest password: guest
------------------------------------------------------------
. Overview the Bible
http://76.162.173.93/bible-study/=CD-R=ltb-24/
. There's no hurry?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrmDWn6awMA
"The best way to drive out the devil, if he will
not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and
flout him, for he cannot bear scorn."
. Heaven & Hell
http://76.162.173.93/prophecy/=CD-R=heaven-and-hell/
. The Gospel of Matthew
http://76.162.173.93/bible-study/=CD-R=matthew-rv/
. A Primer on Prophecy
http://76.162.173.93//prophecy/=CD-R=prophecy-101-small-wmv
. Born once, die twice. Born twice, die once.
------------------------------------------------------------
A Workman Approved By God
A Hermeneutical Study on Bible Doctrine
http://76.162.173.93/members/awabg/
login: guest password: guest
------------------------------------------------------------
. Wisdom of a Lifetime - Audio MP3 Collection -
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/ftp-members-0002.html
. The Last (5th) Horseman
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/ftp-members-0003.html
. The Facts About Jesus, the Bible & the Afterlife
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/ftp-members-0004.html
. The Way - http://john-14-6.com/john-14-6.pdf
. A Tribute to THE KING
http://bibleweb.info/public-a-tribute-to-the-king.pdf
. How to Spot a Counterfeit
http://76.162.173.93/guest/ar-mp3/ar-how-to-spot-a-counterfeit.mp3
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there
will be false teachers among you. They will secretly bring in
destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, and
will bring swift destruction on themselves (2 Peter 2:1).
. Scriptural Christianity
http://76.162.173.93/guest/=CD-R=scriptural-christianity/
My Main Collection - http://Bibleweb.Info/
. Maranatha!
No Reply
Cary Kittrell
> @o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <1181061436.3...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Complaints-To: ggroups....@gmail.com
> User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.70.2067
> X-DMCA-Complaints-To: ggroups....@gmail.com
> X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
> Xref: news.arizona.edu sci.med.cardiology:90893 alt.atheism:1473238 alt.christnet.christianlife:330731 alt.usenet.kooks:683918
>
>
> In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD said...
>
> >
> > convicted neighbor Gene Goldman (BrG...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > >
> > > > The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> > > > much less express an understanding of it.
> > >
> > > Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> > > argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> > > project) without objective consideration of the facts."
> > >
> > > Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
> >
> > Non-sequitur.
> >
> > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
>
> Liar.
Whoa, dude -- he's got an actual definition on his side! Could
be he's right, you know...
In fact, I'm sure that he'll provide us with a cite for the
full definition of "sockpuppets of Satan", complete with
reference (multiple references would be better, of
course) right here:
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote in his lying style:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > convicted neighbor Gene Goldman (BrG...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> > > > > much less express an understanding of it.
> > > >
> > > > Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
> > > > argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
> > > > project) without objective consideration of the facts."
> > > >
> > > > Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
> > >
> > > Non-sequitur.
> > >
> > > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> > > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
> >
> > Liar.
>
> Whoa, dude -- he's got an actual definition on his side! Could
> be he's right, you know...
All righteousness comes from LORD Jesus Christ.
Only HIS side is the right side.
"I am the way, the truth, and the life..." -- LORD Jesus Christ
Amen.
The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
special...
... we are simply forgiven by GOD:
http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
Read how this has happened:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you healthier (hungrier)
than ever.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist
Irv Hyatt
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1182889947....@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
>> satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote in his lying style:
>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> > > convicted neighbor Gene Goldman (BrG...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to
>> > > > > recognize it
>> > > > > much less express an understanding of it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
>> > > > argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
>> > > > project) without objective consideration of the facts."
>> > > >
>> > > > Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>> > >
>> > > Non-sequitur.
>> > >
>> > > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
>> > > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
>> >
>> > Liar.
>>
>> Whoa, dude -- he's got an actual definition on his side! Could
>> be he's right, you know...
>
> All righteousness comes from LORD Jesus Christ.
>
> Only HIS side is the right side.
Well that sucks. I can only fall asleep if I'm on the 'right side'.
<CHOMP>
St. Jackanapes
Chronic schizophrenic, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD obediently barked out ...
> convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
>
> > satan via a sockpuppet (demon) in the garb of St. Jack wrote in his lying style:
> > > >
> > > > Proven schizophrenic, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD said...
> > > >
> > > > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> > > > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
> > >
> > > Liar.
> >
> > Whoa, dude -- he's got an actual definition on his side! Could
> > be he's right, you know...
>
> > In fact, I'm sure that he'll provide us with a cite for the
> > full definition of "sockpuppets of Satan", complete with
> > reference (multiple references would be better, of
> > course) right here:
>
> All righteousness comes from LORD Jesus Christ.
>
> Only HIS side is the right side.
>
> "I am the way, the truth, and the life..." -- LORD Jesus Christ
>
> Amen.
>
> The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
> special...
>
> ... we are simply forgiven by GOD:
>
> http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
>
> Read how this has happened:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
That's amazing! How'd you do that, Cary Kittrell? Do you slip him a
treat after he does his trick?
pba...@worldonline.nl
> "Andrew B. Chung, MDemon/PhD" <nut-c...@emorycardiology.com> wrote in
> message
>
> > "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>
>
> You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
> channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
>
> Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
> all the time......
He's got his trinity mixed up
He means that Duke should be sentenced by the hightest court for
calling us fools,
And it wasn't the spirit but the son,
who regarded that as spiritual violence
and a violation of "thought shallt not kill"
Sorry for posting so late,
should have told you three weeks ago.
Peter van Velzen
June 2007
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
Cary Kittrell
Check around behind him there.
See the string?...
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
> > > > >
> > > > > Liar.
> > > >
> > > > Whoa, dude -- he's got an actual definition on his side! Could
> > > > be he's right, you know...
> > >
> > >
> > > Only HIS side is the right side.
> > >
> > > "I am the way, the truth, and the life..." -- LORD Jesus Christ
> > >
> > > Amen.
> > >
> > > The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
> > > special...
> > >
> > > ... we are simply forgiven by GOD:
> > >
> > > http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
> > >
> > > Read how this has happened:
> > >
> > > http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
> >
>
> Check around behind him there.
>
> See the string?...
No.
Sockpuppets do not require strings unlike marionettes like Pinocchio.
The growing nose ad infinitum with the infinite number of lies would
prove problematic :-)
mailerdaemonATgod.com
wrote:
> > Check around behind him there.
>
> > See the string?...
>
> No.
>
> Sockpuppets do not require strings unlike marionettes like Pinocchio.
Ah. So Chung operates on RF?
What's the frequency, Cary? I wanna give him a whirl,too.
Irv Hyatt
Aw, you're just embarrassed because you've had your fist up his bunghole all
this time... heh heh
Father Haskell
Pinocchio's in your bible, too? Think maybe you should take
it back for a refund?
Cary Kittrell
> convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote in his lying fashion:
> > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > > > > satan via a sockpuppet (demon) wrote in his lying style:
> > > > > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sockpuppets of satan, by definition, have no souls (and no free will)
> > > > > > > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Liar.
> > > > >
> > > > > Whoa, dude -- he's got an actual definition on his side! Could
> > > > > be he's right, you know...
> > > >
> > > > All righteousness comes from LORD Jesus Christ.
> > > >
> > > > Only HIS side is the right side.
> > > >
> > > > "I am the way, the truth, and the life..." -- LORD Jesus Christ
> > > >
> > > > Amen.
> > > >
> > > > The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
> > > > special...
> > > >
> > > > ... we are simply forgiven by GOD:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
> > > >
> > > > Read how this has happened:
> > > >
> > > > http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
> > >
> > > <satan mutters something incoherent>
Naw, it was just ol' Larry asking, vis-a-vis you:
That's amazing! How'd you do that, Cary Kittrell? Do you slip him a
treat after he does his trick?
> >
> > Check around behind him there.
> >
> > See the string?...
>
> No.
>
> Sockpuppets do not require strings unlike marionettes like Pinocchio.
YOU'RE a sockpuppet?
Well, I must admit that I am surprised that I am not more surprised.
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Not for the discerning.
> > > Check around behind him there.
> > >
> > > See the string?...
> >
> > No.
> >
> > Sockpuppets do not require strings unlike marionettes like Pinocchio.
>
> YOU'RE a sockpuppet?
No.
> Well, I must admit that I am surprised that I am not more surprised.
Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
you to unwittingly demonstrate that HIS foreknowledge concerning your
persistent lack of wisdom and understanding continues to be correct.
Laus Deo !
This simply shows that the Holy Spirit is absolutely right in
convicting you:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
flyingrat
lov...@thetruth.com says...
>
> Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
> you to unwittingly demonstrate that HIS foreknowledge concerning your
> persistent lack of wisdom and understanding continues to be correct.
>
> Laus Deo !
>
> This simply shows that the Holy Spirit is absolutely right in
> convicting you:
>
>
> Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
>
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/verbigeration
Verbigeration
ver·big·er·a·tion
n.
Obsessive repetition of meaningless words and phrases, especially as a symptom of mental illness.
http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?verbigeration
Constant repetition of meaningless words or phrases; seen in
schizophrenia.
BrG...@gmail.com
> Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
> you to unwittingly demonstrate that HIS foreknowledge concerning your
> persistent lack of wisdom and understanding continues to be correct.
>
> Laus Deo !
>
> This simply shows that the Holy Spirit is absolutely right in
> convicting you:
http://www.mixedup.com/elvis-nixon_hj50.jpg
Name-calling is "the use of offensive names especially to win an
argument or to induce rejection or condemnation (as of a person or
project) without objective consideration of the facts."
Source: http://m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
"Quackery is a sin." -- Holly Spittle
Amen.
--
Mr. Chung's name-calling behavior simply shows that he remains
convicted by the Holy Spirit:
The 10mg Lizard-Spit Approach is not a diet.
It does help people manage their Diabetes Mellitus (DM) possibly
preventing long-term complications resulting from poor control.
Bottom line: It remains wise to be peanut-free.
May your BG and A1c get better, dear neighbor whom I communicate with
unconditionally.
Be well, travel with a light heart and a low A1c [Gene, 3:16]
Gratefully, in Lizard-Spit's amazing love,
Gene Goldman
http://heartmdphd.com/Convicts/
T2
Metformin, Lizard-Spit, Aspartame, Nutrisweet, Sacarin
"Unlike quacks pushing snake oil and fad diets, please consult a
competent medical professional."
Consuming copious amounts of Aspartame-laden soft drinks with reckless
abandon!
Give me NutraSweet over peanuts any day!
Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> satan via a sockpuppet wrote:
> >> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
> >
>
> >> > So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
> >> >
> >> > You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
> >> > channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
> >> >
> >> > Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
> >> > all the time......
> >>
> >
> >much less express an understanding of it.
>
> mythology states "name calling in a sin", and you in two exchanges
> later refer to some users, with a name? Calling users sinners or sock
> puppets is nothing more than name calling .
Not for either the discerning or those who understand the meaning of
the word "name-calling."
Suggested reading:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
May GOD bless you in HIS mighty way making you healthier (hungrier)
than ever.
Prayerfully in Jesus' awesome love,
Andrew <><
Velvet Elvis
<lo...@thetruth.com> wrote:
>Suggested reading:
>
>http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/name-calling
>
Suggested reading;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy
----------------------------------
If you want a country run by religion, move to Iran
Cary Kittrell
> neighbor Bob Officer wrote:
> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > >neighbor V wrote:
> > >> satan via a sockpuppet wrote:
> > >> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eae50d8a2008c733?
> > >> >
> > >> > > "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
> > >
> > >Amen.
> >
> > >> > So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
> > >> >
> > >> > You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
> > >> > channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
> > >> >
> > >> > Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
> > >> > all the time......
> > >>
> > >> Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
> > >
> > >The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> > >much less express an understanding of it.
> >
> > Do you not find it hypocritical at all that you state that your false
> > mythology states "name calling in a sin", and you in two exchanges
> > later refer to some users, with a name? Calling users sinners or sock
> > puppets is nothing more than name calling .
>
> Not for either the discerning or those who understand the meaning of
> the word "name-calling."
But who, oddly, does not understand the meaning of "sock puppet" as
employed by everyone else on Usenet.
-- cary
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for HIS compelling
you to unwittingly affirm that you continue to lack understanding and
wisdom.
Laus Deo ! ! !
This simply shows yet again that the Holy Spirit is absolutely right
to convict you:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
Velvet Elvis
>Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GO<SMACK>
Get some new material. You're getting tiresome.
-------------------------------------------------------
If Jesus loves me, why doesn't he ever send me flowers?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >>
> >> > therefore their being offended is a feign from satan.
> >>
> >
> >"Rebuking either satan or his sockpuppets is not name-calling." --
> >Holy Spirit
>
> What if the people you think you are rebuking are neither satan or a
> sockpuppet.
Without the LORD, your fantasies are meaningless (Ecclesiates).
> What if you are just flat out wrong, and the Voices you
> have been following is the voice of satan.
In my ever closer walk with LORD Jesus Christ, HE continues to keep me
completely well and so there has been no auditory hallucinations.
> That would mean, you have sinned, and blasphemed against the Holy
> Spirit.
It remains my choice to continue to receive the guidance of the Holy
Spirit in everything I say, do, and write.
> God is going to get you for that...
GOD has blessed me more that the world could possibly ever know or
understand:
http://TruthRUS.org/DreadNought
Suggested additional reading:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/press.asp
The brethren of LORD Jesus Christ are neither perfect nor more
special...
... we are simply forgiven by GOD:
http://www.interviewwithgod.com/forgiven/
May you wisely choose to be forgiven too by publicly declaring with
your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay
James Norris
> On Jun 30, 3:25?am, someone2 <glenn.spig...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 30, 1:55 am, James Norris <JimNorri...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Design for a Conscious Mechanoid
>
> > [Just to deter the predictable 'define what you mean by conscious'
> > posting: 'Conscious' means 'aware of reality' - a human being is
> > conscious, but a piece of paper is not conscious. If there is still a
> > problem with understanding the word 'conscious', try using a
> > dictionary.]
>
> > Start off with millions of identical ordinary (non-conscious) robots.
> > Each robot is pre-programmed to collect things from the environment at
> > random (twigs, elastic bands, teacups, wheels, orange peel etc), and
> > incorporate them into itself, gradually replacing all its original
> > component parts as it does so. Now let the robots free to interact
> > with the environment, and watch what happens.
>
> > Most of the robots would cease to function quite rapidly, of course.
> > They might replace one of their vital components (the computer
> > program, for example), with a piece of orange peel and immediately
> > stop working permanently. Some might continue to function for quite a
> > while, making meaningless minor alterations to their original
> > structure, without affecting their basic operation as a programmed
> > mechanical device, which we knew to be non-conscious. We can ignore
> > robots which have replaced themselves with biological material which
> > was already conscious, because that is obviously not what we are
> > interested in.
>
> > The robots we are interested in are those which manage to replace all
> > their constituent components, including their original computer
> > hardware and software, but are still functioning. They, like
> > ourselves, have been created out of material from the environment, so
> > they might be conscious, as we are.
>
> > A certain amount of complexity is required for consciousness, and this
> > could be provided, for example, by using the twigs to twang the
> > elastic bands - the vibrational properties of the elastic bands could
> > easily carry any complexity necessary for the occurrence of thought.
> > For that to happen by chance is extremely unlikely of course, as is
> > the likelihood of millions of monkeys randomly operating typewriters
> > producing the occasional Shakespeare sonnet by chance, but if you left
> > them long enough, they would eventually do it!
>
> > Consciousness is a subjective experience, so there is no way of
> > determining whether or not anything or anybody is conscious. In the
> > design above, the construction allows the possibility that
> > consciousness might occur in a device which was originally non-
> > conscious. The random self-modifying behaviour may have led to a
> > wheeled mechanism made out of orange peel, teacups and elastic bands
> > held together with bits of wood, with its understanding of reality
> > contained in the vibrational processes occurring in the twig-twanged
> > elastic bands, which wanders around in the natural environment
> > apparently decorating itself with the bits of garbage it picks up.
> > Perhaps the device has improved on its original design and is now
> > conscious? At any rate, it certainly wouldn't be less conscious than
> > it was to begin with.
>
> > James Norris
>
> > > > > I read your thread. Was it a satirical portrayal of atheist
> > > > > "reasoning"?
>
> > > > No, it was a design for a conscious entity, neither biological nor
> > > > computer-based.
>
> > > > > I especially liked the bit:
>
> > > > > "A certain amount of complexity is required for consciousness, and
> > > > > this could be provided, for example, by using the twigs to twang the
> > > > > elastic bands - the vibrational properties of the elastic bands could
> > > > > easily carry any complexity necessary for the occurrence of thought."
>
> > > > > You could imagine atheists setting themselves up as authorities on
> > > > > which tunes played on a guitar gave rise to consciousness, and whether
> > > > > one string, or all the strings, or the whole guitar had the
> > > > > experiences. They could debate on to what extent they could
> > > > > anthropomorphise the conscious experience a certain song gave.
>
> > > > The notion of vibrations carrying information was an example of how
> > > > the necessary complexity for 'thoughts' might arise in the mechanism.
> > > > I understand from your earlier postings that you believe that human
> > > > beings have a non-physical 'soul', so I'm not sure why you think my
> > > > suggestion is so laughable.
>
> > > > > Though the part where you said, "consciousness is a subjective
> > > > > experience, so there is no way of determining whether or not anything
> > > > > or anybody is conscious", did illustrate that from an atheist
> > > > > perspective there would be no experimental difference expected whether
> > > > > something was or wasn't consciously experiencing, which is something a
> > > > > few of them here are having problems coming to terms with.
>
> > > > I don't know why you pick on atheists in particular as having a
> > > > problem with the unverifiability of subjective experiences, but
> > > > anyway, perhaps many of us do - I personally don't.
>
> > > > > Still, very amusing, assuming of course you weren't being serious, and
> > > > > an absolute nutter.
>
> > > > An absolute nutter in your opinion might be someone who believed that
> > > > they had four souls, rather than just the one, I suppose.
>
> > > > The Design for a Conscious Mechanoid is quite serious - a hypothetical
> > > > example of how a constructed 'mechanical' (ie non-biological) being
> > > > might be conscious. I'm not suggesting that it would ever work in
> > > > reality, any more than that a million monkeys typing on a million
> > > > typewriters for a million years to produce the works of Shakespeare
> > > > would ever work in reality. The example draws attention to the
> > > > salient aspects of an interesting question. I'm glad you found it
> > > > amusing though. I always try to make my postings interesting and
> > > > memorable, and humour is a well-known didactic tool.
>
> > > The problem with no experimental difference expected whether something
> > > was or wasn't consciously experiencing, is that it means whether it
> > > was or wasn't, couldn't be thought to influence behaviour. If that was
> > > the case, it would have to be a coincidence that our behaviour
> > > expressed the conscious experiences we actually have (it couldn't have
> > > been influenced by their existance).
>
> > You are trying to discuss consciousness using behavioural concepts.
> > The behavioural understanding of the psyche has little to say about
> > consciousness - the brain reacts to external stimuli and produces
> > behaviour in the organism, which is studied to give an understanding
> > of the workings of the brain. Cognitive models of consciousness,
> > which you should look into as they might help you express your
> > argument, are inside-out compared to the behavioural viewpoint. The
> > 'mind' (which is believed to exist because of processes occurring in
> > the brain) is considered as an Ego, with Superego, Id and various
> > other paraphernalia, and these all contribute to goal-directed
> > behaviour caused by subjective 'needs' which the conscious being tries
> > to satisfy.
>
> > > Anyway, interesting post. So have you any thoughts on which tunes
> > > played on a guitar might be give rise to, the string(s) or the guitar
> > > thinking? Any thoughts on what those thoughts might be? I ask you, as
> > > I guess you would be the closest thing to a world authority on the
> > > concept, or have you got competition?
>
> No, you haven't really grasped the point about the vibrations in the
> example. I was just pointing out that a certain amount of complexity
> is required for consciousness, so complexity is needed somewhere in
> the mechanoid. Vibrating systems can contain information of arbitrary
> complexity - they don't have to be made out of physical elastic
> bands. Vibrations occur in strings in general, these could be the
> theoretical strings of string-theory, or hair-like cilia made from
> millions of tiny pinheads all oscillating in a plasma field, if you
> think elastic bands are too primitive a device to be worth
> considering. Some people think that Mobius strips are weirdly clever
> - perhaps if millions of elastic bands were Mobius strips interacting
> in a complex 3-d lattice, with carefully placed twigs and twiglets to
> provide the necessary resonance and feedback effects, it would be
> rather more likely to have the necessary complexity for conscious
> awareness of reality, than using just the one guitar string that you
> suggest?
Discuss.
Jim
On Jun 30, 3:17?am, Bob Officer <boboffic...@127.0.0.7> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:49:05 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "Andrew B.
>
> Chung, MD/PhD" <l...@thetruth.com> wrote:
> >neighbor Bob Officer wrote:
>
> I ain't your neighbor Chung. So don't try that shit.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> >neighbor V wrote:
> >> >> satan via a sockpuppet wrote:
> >> >> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> >> >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eae50d8a2008c733?
>
> >> >> > > "Name-calling is a sin." -- Holy Spirit
>
> >> >Amen.
>
> >> >> > So, a voice in your schizophrenic mind told you "Name-calling is a sin" ?
>
> >> >> > You're either a schizo, a fraud with unfathomable motives, or actually
> >> >> > channeling supernatural beings onto Usenet.
>
> >> >> > Hmmmm,,,,,, and, of course, another symptom is that you yourself "name-call"
> >> >> > all the time......
>
> >> >> Well, I can't say it is a sin as you mean.
>
> >> >The sockpuppets of ragin' satan are too steeped in sin to recognize it
> >> >much less express an understanding of it.
>
> >> Do you not find it hypocritical at all that you state that your false
> >> mythology states "name calling in a sin", and you in two exchanges
> >> later refer to some users, with a name? Calling users sinners or sock
> >> puppets is nothing more than name calling .
>
> >Not for either the discerning or those who understand the meaning of
> >the word "name-calling."
>
> No according to those of faith. They say you are a hypocritical
> sinner and worship Satan.
>
> --
> Bob Officer
> COOSN-266-06-01986
> Hammer of Thor, Sept 2005- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
On Jun 30, 4:26 am, James Norris <JimNorri...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jun 30, 3:25?am, someone2 <glenn.spig...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 30, 1:55 am, James Norris <JimNorri...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Design for a Conscious Mechanoid
>
> > [Just to deter the predictable 'define what you mean by conscious'
> > posting: 'Conscious' means 'aware of reality' - a human being is
> > conscious, but a piece of paper is not conscious. If there is still a
> > problem with understanding the word 'conscious', try using a
> > dictionary.]
>
> > Start off with millions of identical ordinary (non-conscious) robots.
> > Each robot is pre-programmed to collect things from the environment at
> > random (twigs, elastic bands, teacups, wheels, orange peel etc), and
> > incorporate them into itself, gradually replacing all its original
> > component parts as it does so. Now let the robots free to interact
> > with the environment, and watch what happens.
>
> > Most of the robots would cease to function quite rapidly, of course.
> > They might replace one of their vital components (the computer
> > program, for example), with a piece of orange peel and immediately
> > stop working permanently. Some might continue to function for quite a
> > while, making meaningless minor alterations to their original
> > structure, without affecting their basic operation as a programmed
> > mechanical device, which we knew to be non-conscious. We can ignore
> > robots which have replaced themselves with biological material which
> > was already conscious, because that is obviously not what we are
> > interested in.
>
> > The robots we are interested in are those which manage to replace all
> > their constituent components, including their original computer
> > hardware and software, but are still functioning. They, like
> > ourselves, have been created out of material from the environment, so
> > they might be conscious, as we are.
>
> > A certain amount of complexity is required for consciousness, and this
> > could be provided, for example, by using the twigs to twang the
> > elastic bands - the vibrational properties of the elastic bands could
> > easily carry any complexity necessary for the occurrence of thought.
> > For that to happen by chance is extremely unlikely of course, as is
> > the likelihood of millions of monkeys randomly operating typewriters
> > producing the occasional Shakespeare sonnet by chance, but if you left
> > them long enough, they would eventually do it!
>
> > Consciousness is a subjective experience, so there is no way of
> > determining whether or not anything or anybody is conscious. In the
> > design above, the construction allows the possibility that
> > consciousness might occur in a device which was originally non-
> > conscious. The random self-modifying behaviour may have led to a
> > wheeled mechanism made out of orange peel, teacups and elastic bands
> > held together with bits of wood, with its understanding of reality
> > contained in the vibrational processes occurring in the twig-twanged
> > elastic bands, which wanders around in the natural environment
> > apparently decorating itself with the bits of garbage it picks up.
> > Perhaps the device has improved on its original design and is now
> > conscious? At any rate, it certainly wouldn't be less conscious than
> > it was to begin with.
>
> > James Norris
>
> > > > > I read your thread. Was it a satirical portrayal of atheist
> > > > > "reasoning"?
>
> > > > No, it was a design for a conscious entity, neither biological nor
> > > > computer-based.
>
> > > > > I especially liked the bit:
>
> > > > > "A certain amount of complexity is required for consciousness, and
> > > > > this could be provided, for example, by using the twigs to twang the
> > > > > elastic bands - the vibrational properties of the elastic bands could
> > > > > easily carry any complexity necessary for the occurrence of thought."
>
> > > > > You could imagine atheists setting themselves up as authorities on
> > > > > which tunes played on a guitar gave rise to consciousness, and whether
> > > > > one string, or all the strings, or the whole guitar had the
> > > > > experiences. They could debate on to what extent they could
> > > > > anthropomorphise the conscious experience a certain song gave.
>
> > > > The notion of vibrations carrying information was an example of how
> > > > the necessary complexity for 'thoughts' might arise in the mechanism.
> > > > I understand from your earlier postings that you believe that human
> > > > beings have a non-physical 'soul', so I'm not sure why you think my
> > > > suggestion is so laughable.
>
> > > > > Though the part where you said, "consciousness is a subjective
> > > > > experience, so there is no way of determining whether or not anything
> > > > > or anybody is conscious", did illustrate that from an atheist
> > > > > perspective there would be no experimental difference expected whether
> > > > > something was or wasn't consciously experiencing, which is something a
> > > > > few of them here are having problems coming to terms with.
>
> > > > I don't know why you pick on atheists in particular as having a
> > > > problem with the unverifiability of subjective experiences, but
> > > > anyway, perhaps many of us do - I personally don't.
>
> > > > > Still, very amusing, assuming of course you weren't being serious, and
> > > > > an absolute nutter.
>
> > > > An absolute nutter in your opinion might be someone who believed that
> > > > they had four souls, rather than just the one, I suppose.
>
> > > > The Design for a Conscious Mechanoid is quite serious - a hypothetical
> > > > example of how a constructed 'mechanical' (ie non-biological) being
> > > > might be conscious. I'm not suggesting that it would ever work in
> > > > reality, any more than that a million monkeys typing on a million
> > > > typewriters for a million years to produce the works of Shakespeare
> > > > would ever work in reality. The example draws attention to the
> > > > salient aspects of an interesting question. I'm glad you found it
> > > > amusing though. I always try to make my postings interesting and
> > > > memorable, and humour is a well-known didactic tool.
>
> > > The problem with no experimental difference expected whether something
> > > was or wasn't consciously experiencing, is that it means whether it
> > > was or wasn't, couldn't be thought to influence behaviour. If that was
> > > the case, it would have to be a coincidence that our behaviour
> > > expressed the conscious experiences we actually have (it couldn't have
> > > been influenced by their existance).
>
> > You are trying to discuss consciousness using behavioural concepts.
> > The behavioural understanding of the psyche has little to say about
> > consciousness - the brain reacts to external stimuli and produces
> > behaviour in the organism, which is studied to give an understanding
> > of the workings of the brain. Cognitive models of consciousness,
> > which you should look into as they might help you express your
> > argument, are inside-out compared to the behavioural viewpoint. The
> > 'mind' (which is believed to exist because of processes occurring in
> > the brain) is considered as an Ego, with Superego, Id and various
> > other paraphernalia, and these all contribute to goal-directed
> > behaviour caused by subjective 'needs' which the conscious being tries
> > to satisfy.
>
> > > Anyway, interesting post. So have you any thoughts on which tunes
> > > played on a guitar might be give rise to, the string(s) or the guitar
> > > thinking? Any thoughts on what those thoughts might be? I ask you, as
> > > I guess you would be the closest thing to a world authority on the
> > > concept, or have you got competition?
>
> No, you haven't really grasped the point about the vibrations in the
> example. I was just pointing out that a certain amount of complexity
> is required for consciousness, so complexity is needed somewhere in
> the mechanoid. Vibrating systems can contain information of arbitrary
> complexity - they don't have to be made out of physical elastic
> bands. Vibrations occur in strings in general, these could be the
> theoretical strings of string-theory, or hair-like cilia made from
> millions of tiny pinheads all oscillating in a plasma field, if you
> think elastic bands are too primitive a device to be worth
> considering. Some people think that Mobius strips are weirdly clever
> - perhaps if millions of elastic bands were Mobius strips interacting
> in a complex 3-d lattice, with carefully placed twigs and twiglets to
> provide the necessary resonance and feedback effects, it would be
> rather more likely to have the necessary complexity for conscious
> awareness of reality, than using just the one guitar string that you
> suggest?
Discuss.
Jim