10-25-2012, 08:30 PM
(10-25-2012, 08:03 AM)zenmaster Wrote: No need to become offended.
I wasn't offended. Sorry if you got that impression. This dialog hasn't spurred much emotion in me, to be honest with you.
(10-25-2012, 08:03 AM)zenmaster Wrote: If you don't provide any evidence that does not mean I think there is no evidence. And further, this red herring business of what then may or may not constitute evidence is completely beside the point. No one ever brought it up or implied it - so there is an "attachment" to that concept as well. See how that works?
Actually I don't have any clue what you are talking about. You said, "It is pure conjecture to make any inference of principle whatsoever without actual supporting evidence." That's why I brought up the topic of what constitutes evidence, because you were under the impression that I was guessing (which wouldn't involve any evidence). And that wasn't accurate, from my perspective. I have intuitive evidence, and validation from my own "sources". I consider channeling to be a certain kind of "evidence", I consider remote viewing to constitute a kind of "evidence", and I also consider past life memories to constitute a kind of "evidence". Perhaps I haven't shared what precisely those sources are, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.
If anything your statement here is the diversion, with its attempt to restrict the nature of the dialog. Somebody did bring it up, I did, I'm a someone. I know, its shocking.
