XPost: alt.dreams.lucid, alt.dreams, alt.magick   
   From: askpermission@comcast.net   
      
   "Archangel"  wrote in message   
   news:_rhKf.151475$c31.102702@fe08.news.easynews.com...   
   >   
   > "Kaycee"  wrote in message   
   > news:dtapfe$87l$1@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...   
   >> Archangel wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> "Tom"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:2ZadnaWYSpNaG2Xe4p2dnA@comcast.com...   
   >>   
   >>>>Here also he agrees with me.  OOB travel is not actually travel in the   
   >>>>physical world, but in a very close analog to it.  I choose to call this   
   >>>>analog a "mental model".  He chooses to call it some sort of   
   >>>>"dimension".   
   >>>>However, we both agree that OOB's are not physical phenomena but   
   >>>>something that seems very much like it, in our subjective experience.   
   >>>  You are such a fake it is breathtaking. Jung agrees with you? Jung   
   >>> never   
   >>> heard of you son. You are a liar and a fraud.   
   >>   
   >> Before accusing anyone of lying, you might want to read what they are   
   >> writing, first. Tom didn't say Jung agrees with him. I don't think he   
   >> meant that Robert Bruce was literally standing next to him and saying "I   
   >> agree" to him, either. Do you even understand what was written here?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Cheers, KC   
   >   
   > Yes I do, and yes I did.   
      
   No you didn't and you don't.   
      
   > Let me explain.   
      
   This ought to be good.  Archie is going to "explain".   
      
   > Tom is an habitual liar and deceiver,   
      
   Or at least that's what you claim.  Then again, it was you who claimed that   
   uranium ore wasn't radioactive and then tried to excuse your appalling   
   ignorance by claiming that you were actually lying about that.  Not only   
   that but you have accused me of lying about the fact that I have been   
   destroyed, even though I'm clearly still around to remind you of what prat   
   you are.   
      
   > What his recent posts are about is that he has read some stuff about   
   > psychology and (surprise surprise) he has recognised similarities with   
   > what he has heard other people say or with what other people have written.   
      
   Well, sort of, if you want to depict it in a weird collection of   
   half-truths.  However I didn't write in the post you refer to that Jung   
   agreed with me, as you claimed.   
      
   > So naturally (for Tom; he is desperate to portray himself as a person who   
   > knows about Magic - despite all of the evidence), he climbs into   
   > pontificating mode and spouts off .   
      
   This is the best example of a pot calling a kettle black that I've ever   
   seen.  Archie doesn't even *like* evidence and never provides any in support   
   of anything he claims.  He believes that the Hermetic Axiom means "that   
   which is within is the same as that which is without".  He also believes,   
   despite a complete lack of evidence that the British Medical Council   
   translated it, a claim for which he has, yet again, provided not a smidgeon   
   of evidence.   
      
   > Consider this. In recent months he has:   
   >   
   > * Derided people who say they have had OOBE's and said they are   
   > delusional. Now he claims to have had them himself.   
      
   Untrue. I have never called the experience of an OOB a "delusion".  Archie,   
   the self-admitted liar and deceiver, is at it again.   
      
   > * Derided people who say they have seen demons and said they are   
   > delusional.   
      
   An experience of something one calls a "demon" is not the same as a belief   
   about the nature of that demon.  Apparently Archie is unable to distinguish   
   between an experience and one's beliefs about that experience.  It's a   
   common failing for those who don't know very much about magick.   
      
   > Now he claims to have evoked them to visible appearance himself and   
   > claimed to have seen other people doing it as well. In fact he once even   
   > claimed he could eat demons(!) - supposedly we should actually take the   
   > clown seriously.   
      
   *You* do.  You simply take it seriously in a negative sense.  This is   
   because you are consumed with resentment at the fact that so few people in   
   this newsgroup take your own baseless pronouncements about magick seriously.   
   In your frantic effrts to explain to yourself how such an unthinkable   
   situation could possibly have arisen, blame it on me for "deriding" you.   
      
   > * Derided Jungian psychology as having been discredited (esp the bit about   
   > the collective unconscious), and now he claims that his view of the   
   > collective unconscious are supported by noted scholars.   
      
   I have no idea where this bizarre interpetation comes from.  It isn't   
   anything even remotely like anything actually said.   
      
   > * Derided those who say that the Hermetic Axiom has merit as being   
   > gullible and fraudulent. Now he claims it has merit.   
      
      
   I said that *you* are gullible and fraudulent.  I cited a number of sources   
   demonstrating that scholars who have actually studied the Hermetic Axiom   
   don't agree with your interpretation of it.  At no time have I ever claimed   
   that *anyone* who believes the Hermetic Axiom has merit are gullible and   
   fraudulent.   
      
   > * Derided Mathers and the Golden Dawn. Now he says the GD was bona-fide.   
      
   This one apparently is a wholly a product of Archie's overactive (but sadly   
   limited) imagination.   
      
   > * Derided Carroll Runyon as being a charlatan and a poser   
      
   A huckster and a poseur, actually.   
      
   > (apparently because Runyon reportedly threw Tom out of a magical   
   > organisation some years ago for being a notorious and trouble-making   
   > no-hoper).   
      
   Carroll and I have never met in person nor have I ever been a member of any   
   organization in which Carroll wielded any authority.  This is another   
   completely fabricated bit of nonsense.  No doubt he would have done so had   
   we ever crossed paths this way.  Over the years, he's thrown out virtually   
   every other person who ever was in his group, unless they left before he got   
   around to them.  He's kind of a grumpy guy.   
      
   > Now he says that Runyon developed the best evocation method (i.e. the dark   
   > mirror) while being seemingly unaware that this method has been used for   
   > centuries.   
      
   If the method Carroll uses for Goetic evocation has been around for   
   centuries, I can find no evidence of it.  I'm pretty sure you don't have   
   such evidence either, since you never seem to have any.  Carroll takes full   
   credit for devising it.   
      
   > Etc etc etc ad nauseam   
      
   If you are getting sick, Archie, all you need to do is quit trying so hard   
   to force the world to conform to your fantasies.  It's a huge waste of your   
   energy which could be much better employed at actually learning something   
   about magick.  Then again, maybe losing that extra hundred or so pounds   
   would help.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)