Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Projection.
I wonder if I can change my userid to Johnnyfuckwad? I like it, but Doctorfuckwad has some panache, too. Well done, Med!
A Challenge ...
- Thread starter ViRedd
- Start date
I wonder if I can change my userid to Johnnyfuckwad? I like it, but Doctorfuckwad has some panache, too. Well done, Med!
email468
Well-Known Member
i'd go with DoctorJohnnyFuckwad from WKRP!
We TaRdED
Well-Known Member
Haven't you guys beat up MM enough? ~LOL~ He has a thread that you can give him shyt in, I believe JohnnyO has slamed him a couple times in there all ready.
You say he has mental disorders, I guess you can psychoanalyze an asshole in many different ways. I believe bitterness, sadness, paranoia, depression, etc etc runs deep and can lead to many different 'mental illnesses'.
Do you not have any problems in your life JohnnyO? ~lol~ I guess the reason why I'm sticking up for MM is because you guys are taking it too far, I'm kind of sick of reading about why you guys hate each other(keep it to the 'beat up MM thread'). I also think you are taking it too far with diagnosing him with a mental illness over the computer- that is rude. You know what they say "two wrongs don't make a right"
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
Edit- Furthermore, why do you get so much pleasure out of focking with MM? Are you a sadist? Do you enjoy feeding the fire to watch him squeal like a little piggy? What should we find a name for you JohnnyO? Is is because your last of self esteem or your insecurities that you get pleasure out of bashing someone else ,to exalt yourself? Enough is enough, keep the MedMan bashing to the "go for it" thread, please debate civilly elsewhere. I'm hear to learn politics and not read about MM problems/imperfections everywhere. I guess I'm being selfish myself. You guys have the right to pretty much post anything everywhere you want, I'm just asking you guys to keep the bullshit out of every thread. No hard feelings JohnnyO, I still think your a cool dude.
Thanks
You say he has mental disorders, I guess you can psychoanalyze an asshole in many different ways. I believe bitterness, sadness, paranoia, depression, etc etc runs deep and can lead to many different 'mental illnesses'.
Do you not have any problems in your life JohnnyO? ~lol~ I guess the reason why I'm sticking up for MM is because you guys are taking it too far, I'm kind of sick of reading about why you guys hate each other(keep it to the 'beat up MM thread'). I also think you are taking it too far with diagnosing him with a mental illness over the computer- that is rude. You know what they say "two wrongs don't make a right"
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
Edit- Furthermore, why do you get so much pleasure out of focking with MM? Are you a sadist? Do you enjoy feeding the fire to watch him squeal like a little piggy? What should we find a name for you JohnnyO? Is is because your last of self esteem or your insecurities that you get pleasure out of bashing someone else ,to exalt yourself? Enough is enough, keep the MedMan bashing to the "go for it" thread, please debate civilly elsewhere. I'm hear to learn politics and not read about MM problems/imperfections everywhere. I guess I'm being selfish myself. You guys have the right to pretty much post anything everywhere you want, I'm just asking you guys to keep the bullshit out of every thread. No hard feelings JohnnyO, I still think your a cool dude.
Thanks
Last edited:
medicineman
New Member
Thanks WE, They've been piling on a bit and that brings out the fuck you tendecies. I don't like sniveling tirades by assholes that have a superior complex. Just call me an asshole and be done with it. You can't psychoanalyze someone over the net. Most of my stuff is just bullshit anyway. I'll leave it to the real dipshits to put up all the sites, no offense WE, but posting sites doesn't impress me. I've been to school and what I learned is that they only need to teach someone how to read and write, balance a checkbook, and think for themselves. The rest is necessary when applied to an occupation, but the mindfuck is unnecessary.Haven't you guys beat up MM enough? ~LOL~ He has a thread that you can give him shyt in, I believe JohnnyO has slamed him a couple times in there all ready.
You say he has mental disorders, I guess you can psychoanalyze an asshole in many different ways. I believe bitterness, sadness, paranoia, depression, etc etc runs deep and can lead to many different 'mental illnesses'.
Do you not have any problems in your life JohnnyO? ~lol~ I guess the reason why I'm sticking up for MM is because you guys are taking it too far, I'm kind of sick of reading about why you guys hate each other(keep it to the 'beat up MM thread'). I also think you are taking it too far with diagnosing him with a mental illness over the computer- that is rude. You know what they say "two wrongs don't make a right"
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Med, ours has largely been a cold war. We engaged a few times until I tired of your antics and largely stopped responding to your vitriolic mannerisms. Our cold war became a full fledged war when you escalated it. You lost the shooting war the moment you started it. You employed the nuclear option right out of the box. Godzilla was created as a result of the development of the hydrogen bomb. I'm Godzilla. You're Tokyo.
How did you start it? I am glad you asked. You suggested I am sympathetic to the Ku Klux Klan. I like to think I am a tolerant dude, but I will not tolerate defamation. You libeled me with irresponsible, thus unprotected, speech. You provided absolutely no evidence to back up your assertion. You committed a grievous error and I demand satisfaction.
I am not asking for a cease fire. A cessation of hostilities would be no more than a temporary solution. It would not be long before you found your comfort zone again and resumed your bad behavior. I seek total capitulation. Med, you may ask for my terms at anytime.
Meanwhile, I will engage you whenever and where ever I decide.
How did you start it? I am glad you asked. You suggested I am sympathetic to the Ku Klux Klan. I like to think I am a tolerant dude, but I will not tolerate defamation. You libeled me with irresponsible, thus unprotected, speech. You provided absolutely no evidence to back up your assertion. You committed a grievous error and I demand satisfaction.
I am not asking for a cease fire. A cessation of hostilities would be no more than a temporary solution. It would not be long before you found your comfort zone again and resumed your bad behavior. I seek total capitulation. Med, you may ask for my terms at anytime.
Meanwhile, I will engage you whenever and where ever I decide.
Seamaiden
Well-Known Member
I read that previous post about NPD, and I thought, "What the fuck? Did he nick that straight out of the DSM-IV?" and then I followed the link and it appears to be quoted directly from the DSM-IV. On to one I consider a friend...
If that's what you want to call it.
The answer is, unequivocally, no. I lurked on this site for quite a while before finally joining. I read, lots (I can chew up written information and data very, very quickly), and quickly saw him for who and what he is. Johnny has him nailed, and personally, I appreciate that there is someone not willing to suck his balls because s/he is afraid of being on the shit end of medicineman's stick. Personally, I'm still wondering why he's allowed to behave the way he does with apparent impunity, while others like Lacy are banned over non-issues. 
I will say that I very much appreciate your sentiments (that you have them, I feel they're misdirected) AND, much more importantly, the person and personality that lies behind.
That would actually be me. The moment someone gives me a button, I will use it. React, and I've found fun. Continue to react and I will continue to have my fun, all at your expense, until it is no longer fun for me. It's wrong and it's cruel, I will freely admit, but it is what it is. I will add one qualification to this aspect of my personality -- I ONLY exhibit this trait with those who I (strongly) feel are deserving. I will not tease a baby or a child or someone I think is mentally infirm, or stupid. That's not fun, to take on someone who hasn't got a chance. What's fun, and funny, is when it's someone who is not only fully cognizant, but capable of understanding, yet insists on taking the tack that a person like medicineman does.
I do gain a small measure of enjoyment from putting tape on the feet of cats and tying things to one of our dog's tail just to watch her chase it til she catches it and bites it off (ribbons are good for that).
(The old dog doesn't give a shit, and thusly, is no fun in that way. For her, there is the harmonica.)On this count you are completely wrong. Johnny's participation has been nothing but civil. And medicineman's? Just take a look through his posts, go back in time. The evidence is there, he shows himself for what he is. I know he has a heart and a soft spot, what I fail to understand fully is just how much of what he writes is truthful in his own heart and what he's flat lying about (because I have already caught him lying, and I'm talking about personal stuff, not his opinions on politics, the economy, or what have you).
I'm sure that last comment will get your attention, med. You know exactly what I'm talking about, too. Next time you're in a mood to bash on people who smoke pot, first you should decide whether you're a pothead that week or not FIRST.
Labeling my husband enemy makes me your enemy as well. Sorry, but he's the one who goes down on me, so.. you know (I know which side my bread's buttered).
VTXDave
Well-Known Member
Beat up on MM We? Hardly. I have not even participated in "psychoanalzing Med, yet he immediately stated that I've thrown in with him and I am now...."The Enemy". If you'll remember early on in my joining here, Med called me an "angry man". He's also asked me "Where's your sense of humor?"...And when I have a little fun with the guy, his retort is...Haven't you guys beat up MM enough? ~LOL~ He has a thread that you can give him shyt in, I believe JohnnyO has slamed him a couple times in there all ready.
You say he has mental disorders, I guess you can psychoanalyze an asshole in many different ways. I believe bitterness, sadness, paranoia, depression, etc etc runs deep and can lead to many different 'mental illnesses'.
Do you not have any problems in your life JohnnyO? ~lol~ I guess the reason why I'm sticking up for MM is because you guys are taking it too far, I'm kind of sick of reading about why you guys hate each other(keep it to the 'beat up MM thread'). I also think you are taking it too far with diagnosing him with a mental illness over the computer- that is rude. You know what they say "two wrongs don't make a right"
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
Edit- Furthermore, why do you get so much pleasure out of focking with MM? Are you a sadist? Do you enjoy feeding the fire to watch him squeal like a little piggy? What should we find a name for you JohnnyO? Is is because your last of self esteem or your insecurities that you get pleasure out of bashing someone else ,to exalt yourself? Enough is enough, keep the MedMan bashing to the "go for it" thread, please debate civilly elsewhere. I'm hear to learn politics and not read about MM problems/imperfections everywhere. I guess I'm being selfish myself. You guys have the right to pretty much post anything everywhere you want, I'm just asking you guys to keep the bullshit out of every thread. No hard feelings JohnnyO, I still think your a cool dude.
Thanks
And...
And...
I challenge anyone to find a response of mine where I've said stuff like this to Med. And now, if I ask him to explain his opinion, he goes all postal....Example:
Polite response, yes?...Now him...
My response...
I personally don't see anything wrong with me "politely" asking him to explain as I didn't understand what he was saying. His retort...
Now let's look at that. I don't believe I've ever "DEMANDED" anything from MM, nor have I ever disparaged him as if I'm looking down on him (although he dishes this out in healthy servings to anyone opposed to his views). If asking someone to explain oneself is a demand for a writing assignment then I don't know what to say.
Creationism is obviously wrong since we can see evidence of extinction and evolution right in front of our eyes with bacteria and molds(not glamorous but true) that have changed their entire life cycle to fit better into ours.
But evolution is also obviously flawed since their are entire species that evolution cant explain and that scientists find no living or dead relatives.
Maybe its time to consider the idea that both schools of thought are both simply an explanation for a phenomenon that cannot be explained: LIFE
Those who preach science do so in order to explain all the mysteries of our world and beyond in a way that we can bring that message to the people in order to calm their doubts and fears
Those who study religion do the exact same thing simply with a different set of facts. The common link is that in both schools of thought at some point you need to make a leap of faith, you need to accept some fundemental unprovable truth as true or the whole system falls apart. ie christians know god exists and scientists know that mass and time are bound. YOu cant see or touch either of them but in order to make any headway, both groups chose to simply accept it as unquestionable and built upon that.
Face it "Science is just as much a system of beliefs as relgion. I may even go so far as to say science is its own religion.
By the way i am a buddhist so get away scott free.
But evolution is also obviously flawed since their are entire species that evolution cant explain and that scientists find no living or dead relatives.
Maybe its time to consider the idea that both schools of thought are both simply an explanation for a phenomenon that cannot be explained: LIFE
Those who preach science do so in order to explain all the mysteries of our world and beyond in a way that we can bring that message to the people in order to calm their doubts and fears
Those who study religion do the exact same thing simply with a different set of facts. The common link is that in both schools of thought at some point you need to make a leap of faith, you need to accept some fundemental unprovable truth as true or the whole system falls apart. ie christians know god exists and scientists know that mass and time are bound. YOu cant see or touch either of them but in order to make any headway, both groups chose to simply accept it as unquestionable and built upon that.
Face it "Science is just as much a system of beliefs as relgion. I may even go so far as to say science is its own religion.
By the way i am a buddhist so get away scott free.
AlphaNoN
Well-Known Member
Calling science a religion should be instantly recognized as an ideological attack rather than a neutral observation of facts. Sadly this is not the case, and it has become far too common for critics of modern, godless science to claim that it’s inherently a religion, thus hoping to discredit scientific research when it contradicts genuine religious ideology. Examining the characteristics which define religions as distinct from other types of belief systems reveals how wrong such claims are.
Modern science is necessarily godless because godlessness provides science with the independence of religious ideologies which is necessary to ruthlessly pursue the facts wherever they may lead. Modern science is successful precisely because it strives to be independent of ideology and bias, even if only imperfectly. Unfortunately, this independence is also the primary reason for attacks on it. When it comes to people who insist that their religious and theistic beliefs be incorporated into every aspect of their lives, the absence of those beliefs in others’ lives becomes almost incomprehensible.
In the case of science, it isn’t just a few lives which are godless, but an entire field of study which is obviously fundamental to the modern world. It’s difficult for some people to reconcile their own dependence on the fruits of modern science with the fact that science is methodologically naturalistic, secular, and godless. Because of this, some people deny that science needs to be godless and insist that their personal religious or theistic beliefs start to be incorporated into the scientific process. That they would effectively kill the means by which science is successful either isn’t recognized or doesn’t matter — it’s their ideology which matters and of course serving the goal of spreading that ideology far and wide.
It is for this reason that attempts to label godless science as a “religion” must not only be resisted, but outright rejected. The hope is that if people perceive science as “just another religion,” then science’s ideological independence will become forgotten, thus making it easier to incorporate real religion into it. It’s strange that devout religious followers would employ the “religion” label as an attack, but this merely demonstrates their lack of principle and why they cannot be trusted. Science doesn’t fit any scholarly definition of religion; portraying it as a religion does, however, fit the ideological goals of anti-modern ideologues.
-Austin Cline
If by "scott free" you mean that when you die you'll just be another soulless rotting corpse in the ground like the rest of us, then yeah.. scott free it is.
Last edited:
medicineman
New Member
A scrapper eh. I'm a little old to go duke city, but I'll not back down. She has been up my ass for some time Dave. I tried to ignore her but her snide remarks left me no choice. BTW are you sure your last name isn't Persinger. You look like a Dave Persinger I once knew, and Oh yeah, he was an ass also. Oh you big tough man you,~LOL~, "Nobody insults my family", well she opened her criticism of me which put her in the fair game category. I'm sure I've challenged you so rant on brother!!! Seems rather wierd that you take such offense when you know damn well how vitriolic she can be.
Seamaiden
Well-Known Member
You have NO idea just how "vitriolic" I can be, as you haven't witnessed it. Now DAMN that spaghetti sauce smells GOOD! Makin' me hongreh.
We TaRdED
Well-Known Member
Dave, Seamaiden, JohnnyO, and MM(any anyone else), I love all you guys. I really appreciate everyone who has intelligent things to post. I have learned a lot from you guys. Thanks for that!
I know you guys have your issues and I respect that, just take them here please https://www.rollitup.org/politics/71725-go-14.html
Thanks guys
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
I know you guys have your issues and I respect that, just take them here please https://www.rollitup.org/politics/71725-go-14.html
Thanks guys
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
medicineman
New Member
I agree. I feel like every time I come on here I have to go on defense mode. If you guys want to dance, make it one place and I'll respect your sanctity also. Or not.Dave, Seamaiden, JohnnyO, and MM(any anyone else), I love all you guys. I really appreciate everyone who has intelligent things to post. I have learned a lot from you guys. Thanks for that!
I know you guys have your issues and I respect that, just take them here please https://www.rollitup.org/politics/71725-go-14.html
Thanks guys
RON PAUL REVOLUTION
~PEACE~
Alpha i think you missed the point. Science and religion are very interetwined in my view. And the presence of "god" is not required for a region. A religion is simply a set of beliefs that you organise your life by and use to solve moral quandries. A filter to see the world through if you will, one that you accept as The Truth. Science certainly fits that bill dosent it? I am of the complete opposite school as you, i believe that it is far more dangerous to deny the facets of natural sciences that aproach a religious, dogmatic view. If we cant see that the two are intertwined we cant make any headway.
By get off scott free i mean that i simply am. True i think my soul/energy/karma/chi/flow will be passed on to another being after i die but it is not the focus of my life. My life is, as i am. No more no less.
By get off scott free i mean that i simply am. True i think my soul/energy/karma/chi/flow will be passed on to another being after i die but it is not the focus of my life. My life is, as i am. No more no less.
AlphaNoN
Well-Known Member
That's just silly and deluded..
I have a set of beliefs that winter precedes spring, spring precedes summer, summer precedes fall, fall precedes winter and the cycle renews. I organize my life according to this set of beliefs and use it to solve various quandaries. Does that make my belief of seasons a religion?
Scientific method refers to the body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.
No faith. No dogma. Just because people who accept the results of a well-researched and executed study without having done the research themselves, does not mean they accept it on faith. There is a world of difference between the anti-reason called faith, and testable, repeatable experiments and theories generated by science.
Last edited:
medicineman
New Member
One mans faith is another mans dogma. Faith is unprovable at this time. Put me in the category of WTF, it may be good insurance, Plus a few interesting phenomon that I've experienced.
YOU ARE NOT LISTENING.
sorry that i have expressed my self badly but you need to relax man. When i say a set of beliefs i mean things that you chose to believe.
Using your example, you choose to call the season in which the earth starts to shut down for the cold ahead, "autum". It does not have a name it just is. That you chose to call it autum means nothing to the season or what happens during it, only to you. You need that name to put it in a neat little box as we humans love to do. Thats a set of beliefs equaly odd as saying that the 25th of december is a holy day cause some jewish dude was born.
Yes science is method based and our information gained through scientific annalysis is based on repeated trial and error. But in order to do those trials you need to have certain factors as a given. If you follow those facts all the way back, you come to a point that you must simply accept that they are true. From there you must simply take it on faith that it works the way it is supposed to.
LIke time for example. Time is not a physical thing, it is an abstract idea that we have created from thin air in order to mesure and regulate our lives. In order for all your impartial experiments you need to take it on faith that time flows in the neat little way we have chosen, or else you cant do anything. Its as simple as that to me. Anything you need to take a certain factor as a given, then you are no longer working with solid proofs.
sorry that i have expressed my self badly but you need to relax man. When i say a set of beliefs i mean things that you chose to believe.
Using your example, you choose to call the season in which the earth starts to shut down for the cold ahead, "autum". It does not have a name it just is. That you chose to call it autum means nothing to the season or what happens during it, only to you. You need that name to put it in a neat little box as we humans love to do. Thats a set of beliefs equaly odd as saying that the 25th of december is a holy day cause some jewish dude was born.
Yes science is method based and our information gained through scientific annalysis is based on repeated trial and error. But in order to do those trials you need to have certain factors as a given. If you follow those facts all the way back, you come to a point that you must simply accept that they are true. From there you must simply take it on faith that it works the way it is supposed to.
LIke time for example. Time is not a physical thing, it is an abstract idea that we have created from thin air in order to mesure and regulate our lives. In order for all your impartial experiments you need to take it on faith that time flows in the neat little way we have chosen, or else you cant do anything. Its as simple as that to me. Anything you need to take a certain factor as a given, then you are no longer working with solid proofs.
email468
Well-Known Member
I don't think you've expressed yourself badly but your argument has some fallacies. Your definition of time is incomplete and inaccurate for scientific purposes. Time can be measured physically. It is both a concrete and an abstract idea. Science uses both concepts of time in different ways. Just one example of how science uses the abstract to describe distance in space is light years - a measure of distance using time. and science uses the physical concept of time when doing experiments that require an accurate time element.
And your argument that if you "go back far enough" is false (reductio ad absurdum). The "go back far enough" principals are the bedrock of the experiment. If one is not sure of the base of the experiment - the whole experiment is invalid.
By your argument if we are doing an experiment - let's say the affect of molasses on trichome development you are saying we would have to go back to what? how plants first came into existence? that is the absurd part.
I hope this clears up a few things about how science works and the methods it employs.