Re: Let's chew the cud about those Roman guards...

On May 25, 3:17 am, "Yowie" <yowie9644.DIESPAM...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ian Davis wrote:
In article
<9a9a82bd-8703-4052-876e-4819b9ede...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
<Kelly> wrote:
On May 24, 8:59 pm, "Yowie" <yowie9644.DIESPAM...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
<Kelly> wrote:
On May 24, 3:45 pm, Dave <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Get it?

That you're a dodger, a non-scholar, and a liar?

Yep. And it's becoming very clear to many here (finally).

I wouldn't say "finally" so much as "as is consistant with previous
observations" :-)

Well...I used the quantifier, "many" intentionally.

Anyone who thinks it is given to them to know futures, probably is
deluding themselves.  Bear baiting is offensive, primarily because it
preys upon a defenseless creature that cannot be other than it is.
Has any here who thinks that David might need help, and claims to be
offering such help, discussed with those that they imagine are
capable of best understanding how to help David whether their own
conduct in numerous documented posts is likely to be collectively
helpful or harmful to David?  The first law of medicine is
do no harm.

I have never wished David any ill. However, if he wishes to post what are
clearly falsehoods then I think it is reasonable to point said claims out as
falsehoods and provide the evidence that disproves his claim (just saying
'is not' isn't good enough).

Do you have the integrity on a public forum
to identify clearly what falsehoods I posted?
There may be a disagreement with me over
whether they are truthful or false.

I think this is a reasonable thing to do on Usenet, and I would expect
people to do the same to me if I had a track record of posting false claims,
like David has.

False - I have no such track record; it was never
SOUNDLY established.

It is debatable whether he's *lying* when he makes them, or
posts them in good faith believing them to be true when they aren't, and I
will give him the benefit of the doubt on that one, but the records are
quite consistant: David makes claims which are false (he claims that he'll
answer all questions, then doesnt, he also claims to be a meteorologist when
he has no qualifications in meterology[1],

OBJECTION - I am a Meteorologist. I challenge you
or anybody else to test me on ANY meteorological
knowledge.

and he claimed he had zillions fo
friends on facebook when he has preceisely seven, for recent examples).

The number of my FACEBOOK friends is increasing
rapidly thanks to my classmate Sue Chapman Melanson.

Would this observation that David makes false claims be a surpise to most in
SRQ? I doubt it, this pattern of behaviour has been going on for a long
time, back to at least 2007 when I first asked my 12 questions (3 of which
have been answered, another one currently hangs in the balance).

You are ignorant in your evaluation of my patterns
of behaviour.

I can cite my experience with a relative of mine who started having
delusions associated with untreated schizophrenia. When we (the relatives)
asked the doctors how to react to our relative when he was creating
falsehoods (such as the belief that he had lit all the bushfires that year -
something we *know* he couldn't have done, since he was at home on the couch
when they started) the psychiatric doctors said that we should not pander to
his delusions and, if it was safe to do so (ie, if he wasn't likely to fly
off into a violent rage), first say that we realised thats what he thought
he had done, but to then point out to him that he could not have possibly
done what he had claimed to do and give the reason (ie, he was onthe lounge
at the time). In this way we had acknowledged that our relative had a
different recollection of the events that we did, but that his version
couldn't possibly be true.

Now, whether the above has any relevance to David I don't know, but I
personally find pandering to falsehoods as if they were real (even if they
are obviously quite real to the person claiming them) a greater crime than
pointing out - with as much 'evidence' as is needed - how the claim they are
making is demonstrably false.

NOBODY on SRQ has demonstrated a cotton-picking
thing; whatever happened to INTEGRITY?

There are of course different ways of doing
that, it could be gentle, it could be harsh (both ways can be valid,
depending on the circumstances) but I don't think its unreasonable for folks
to dispute David's claims about himself when there is clear evidence that
what he is claiming is false.

You are deep, deep trouble with the truth.

As to 'do no harm' the sharp pain and disruption of the flesh due to a
needstick injury is, by defintion, harm. However that small pain may well
prevent much more harm from occuring. The pain associated with putting a
dislocated joint back into place can be excrutiating (I speak from
experience) but its a small price to pay for having a functional body part
again. So I can't speak of 'do no harm' but rather 'attempt to minimise
harm'. And if that means causing some 'harm' now to fix or prevent a greater
'harm' being done later, then I'm all for doing the first 'harm'.

As for your last question, I refer you to:http://www.narcissism.com.au/narcissism.html.

Even more bunk...

In summary, it says to "parent" the narcissist such that the narcissist is
forced to take responsisblity for their actions.

Seeing as Kelly believes David has NPD, her interaction with him here is
consistant with the advice from the above source. Again, i can assure that
she does indeed have David's best interests at heart.

Yowiebunk.

Kelly has not once
complained about the disgusting things David has called her ("whore" and
"witch" are not nice),

I never called Kelly witch or whore; I called her
ignorant fool and cheap bigot.

yet when David starts whining that Kelly is being
mean to him (and if you look closely she doesn't resort ot calling names but
using the correct adjectives of one who lies "liar" and one who makes
fraudelnet claims '"fraud") he gets some sympathy. Its classic narcisstic
behavior - the narcisst gets away with poor behaviour and makes the one who
questions their behaviour into the bad guy.

Garbage by an amateur psychologist from Australia.

Calling David out on all his bad behaviour may be harm, perhaps, but it
strikes me that its akin to the immunisation injection or the pain
associated with reducing a dislocated joint - it is done for the greater
good rather than out of an intent to cause harm.

his web page may also be helpful:http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/

Yowie
[1] If anyone can show that David has formal qualifications from a
recognised training institute in the field of meteorology, I will most
humbly apologise, otherwise, my the claim that he is *not* meterologist
stands.
--
"because its more fun to be evil" - Jarppi, _The Dudesons_- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Actually, Yowie has forgotten all about the original
topic, which was the guards at the crucifixion - which
one(s) were Roman and which ones were Essenic.

Remember?

So, take your personal attacks elsewhere...

David Christainsen

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lets chew the cud about those Roman guards...
    ... like David has. ... falsehoods (such as the belief that he had lit all the bushfires that year - ... needstick injury is, by defintion, harm. ... recognised training institute in the field of meteorology, ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: The End of Faith
    ... is not the tragedian -- he can't be spoken to at all, ... as having some similarity to the way that David behaves. ... what will help another and what will harm them? ... agendas than when David does. ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: Lets chew the cud about those Roman guards...
    ... I wouldn't say "finally" so much as "as is consistant with previous ... Has any here who thinks that David might need help, ... As to 'do no harm' the sharp pain and disruption of the flesh due to a ... behavior - the narcisst gets away with poor behaviour and makes the one who ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: I will entertain informed questions on Thiering pesher
    ... Don't understand why David would answer some question and not others. ... caused harm to folks her eI am truly sorry and ask ... I tend to wade in and try to help sort it out. ... even if you do write screes and screes of text in your ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: What does it profit a man..
    ... Unfortunatley for David, protesting against wars ... the war against Serbia ... at the harm we were doing by our actions were so compelling that describing ... the day his protest ends, ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)