Daniel Peterson Posted May 30, 2012 Author Posted May 30, 2012 Y'all realize, of course, that the community of individuals that are exposed to the battles that rage on these internet Boards is rather insignificant in terms of numbers. Board posters, particularly those who spend an inordinate amount of time on the Boards, may have a tendency to lose perspective of just how uninfluential these Boards are in the overall scheme of things.I recently saw some rather unflattering (and untrue) things written about moi on another Board. I chose to ignore it rather than respond there, here or anywhere. I'm not saying that it is wrong to respond, only that it is probably unnecessary. Life goes on, even in the face of uncorrected error.Oh, don't worry. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on economicsishard/Kore Kosmou/Kose Kosmou. Unless and until he or she comes up with something of interest.EIS/KK/KK has been posting lengthy things to me and elsewhere for days now, and I think my responses have totaled five sentences or thereabouts. And they stopped within the first few hours.Zzzzzzzzz.
Daniel Peterson Posted May 30, 2012 Author Posted May 30, 2012 LOL. I should mention that EIS/KK/KK has been posting over at the so-called "Recovery" board as "Lancepeters" and, apparently, under other names as well.For instance, somebody just posted over there about how some guy who knows "freaky" advanced math has just absolutely devastated me here, but laments that, unfortunately, the brilliance of that genius won't be fully appreciated since the folks on this board don't know enough math to recognize his transcendent intelligence. The admirer and the one he so lavishly admires are, I'm willing to bet, one and the same.
Mark Beesley Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Oh, don't worry. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on economicsishard/Kore Kosmou/Kose Kosmou. Unless and until he or she comes up with something of interest.EIS/KK/KK has been posting lengthy things to me and elsewhere for days now, and I think my responses have totaled five sentences or thereabouts. And they stopped within the first few hours.Zzzzzzzzz. Actually I had written my post after reading only the first page of this thread and was unaware of the newly hatched dispute between you and economicsishard . . . (and it is . . . I flunked it twice at BYU before fransferring to the U where I wouldn't have to take it. )Addictions are tough to overcome though, ain't they?Tschüß.
economicsishard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Dan, I am Lancepeters, but I am not anyone else. SL Cabbie shut down my thread over there on Kore Kosmou because he didn't understand what I was trying to get at. I did post alarmesat, yet interesting topics, and I am not here on this board to spew anti-mormon crap, I came here to learn. I have some very interesting books from 1800s, I don't know if they are related to what Joseph Smith did nor do I know if he had access to them, but I do know that I am more that willing to learn. Again, my posts here will not be alarmist, I will post only well thought out, hopefully well researched information, and I will not post anything more about you anywhere, I promise. My last post about you was where I said I was more right than you, but that wasn't a seriuos post, even thouht that post is a demosntration of Bertrand Russell's paradox. I'm serious when I tell you that I have a thousands of books, I even posted a small portion of what I have on the recovery boards, but that is only a small portion. I am interested in the occultt surroundings at thet time of Joseph Smith, not interested like Michael Quiin or Mark Hoffman, but interested in a way where I think it should be discussed and looked at. I think this board here will find some interesting and cool findiings in this literature. I will leave my negativities and frustrations and hate for other situations, but not for here. Great, so here''s the link to a large three volume Hermetic text that was transalated and analyzed in I think 1906, its interesting; have a stab at it folks. Dan, some of the FARMS and FAIR folks have referenced the followiing text, but never from content always from "history" alone, at least that is what I've read so far.http://sacred-texts.com/gno/th1/index.htm
Buzzard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Well, at least you have Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V down pat....
economicsishard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Yeh, but read the stuff Im posting, its pretty crazy stuff from this ancient Hermetic text, its facinating the parrallels
economicsishard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Thats only a portion of the document, and only about the creation of souls, worlds, a savior, etc; its all in the post. If you read this text a couple of times, its pretty darn true to what we think as LDS fols. It only gets better with the afterlife, judgment, etc. The other hermetic texts seem to match this text, but give names to things like "celestial kingdom" this is in the "Vision of Hermes." What I've posted so far is only from the Kore Kosmou or "Virgin of the World." Tell me what you think, well those who are reading it.
economicsishard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Is there a way to move my posting to another thread? I should have started a thread on this so its not infringin on Dan's thread.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) Is there a way to move my posting to another thread? I should have started a thread on this so its not infringin on Dan's thread.There's a button near the top of the page on the right. It's labeled "Start new topic." Edited May 30, 2012 by Scott Lloyd
economicsishard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Should I start a new topic or keep on this one?Your copious off-topic cut and paste has been removed. You will be removed if you continue to derail threads.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) Should I start a new topic or keep on this one?Start a new one. None of this is relevant to this current thread.And you have made this thread quite entertaining. I am afraid that Dan's analysis is correct. You haven't the foggiest clue what he was talking about at the beginning of this thread.\Oh well time to listen to more G 'n R. Edited May 30, 2012 by Mola Ram Suda Ram
economicsishard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) I'll continue this discussion at the following thread: Edited May 30, 2012 by economicsishard
Popular Post Stargazer Posted May 30, 2012 Popular Post Posted May 30, 2012 And for the internet trolls who will critique my punctuation and grammar, I have very little time to dedicate to posting information to an internet forum. I am very busy today, and due to the length of the post, I decided to post it as is. In the future, my posts will be much more engaging and "correct." This is just the start to a long and fruitful relationship between Dan, the Mopologists, and myself; just you wait folks, math & logic vs. Mormon Doctrine. Lets see how things stand up to 20th century logical systems. From what I've read so far, it seems like you folks seem to default to 2000 year old shepard logic from the days of Socrates and Aristotle. Unfortunately, those days died in the 17th and 18th century. These discussion will only get so much better.You know, I could care hang-all about your punctuation and grammar. But if you insist upon inflicting upon us unwashed masses your obvious superiority in, what the heck was it, again, "computational finance", then you clearly belong to the exact same clique of "I am a PhD therefore I know ALL" you accuse others of belonging to. I doubt anyone will read your deathless prose, for one thing because it is too freaking long and the few people here who could follow your mathematics (assuming your math even holds water), are probably wondering what on earth possessed you post it here.You want some astrophysics thrown into the mix? I can do it, if you like. The problem is, neither the computational economics nor the astrophysics bears any relation to this thread. Just in case you didn't notice. 6
mrmandias Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 I enjoyed his posts more when I thought his username was Economics Is Shard.
selek1 Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) For a woman who claims "not to have a lot of time" to respond to critics, she's spent an awful lot of it saying absolutely nothing.According to her profile, economicsishard has been a member for a total of seven hours.In that time (according to her profile and my hasty count) she has posted thirty-eight times, and dumped roughly 6,000 words (and thirty-five thousand characters) on us.Editted to add: the numbers may actually have been higher. I am uncertain of the degree to which the mod's excising of her rambling has affected the sample. I do know that removing her posts will have the effect of rendering the available sample smaller than her actual word count.Given her behavior, I suspect one of two things: she has either consumed an entire bag of coffee and/or sugar and is working off the "hyper" or was trolling her post count to a level where she could start her own threads.I also find her dialogue to be intersting: she berates Dan for behavior she herself demonstrates, characterizes his behavior in a fashion that is alien to anyone who actually knows him, and throws around both profanity and the slur "Mopologist" as though there are expected to garner some credibility here.I strongly suspect that economicsishard will burn brightly for a brief moment and then, having spent her moment strutting and fretting upon the stage, return to the ignominous darkness from whence she came. Edited May 30, 2012 by selek1 1
Calm Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 we think as LDSQuestion: do you see yourself as a believing LDS?
mfbukowski Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 I'm not offended.I'm not offended.LOL. I'm not offended.I'm not offended.Yup. Really. Do you have even the foggiest idea what I was talking about?My point had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with technical economics, as such.And what on earth is the "hold a gun to the head mentality"?Do you have a Ph.D. in economics? If so, congratulations.But, even if you do, what connecton does that have with my point? Do you understand what my point was? It seems not.I'm not offended.I'm not offended.I'm not offended.And I understand. Even my most hostile and obsessive critics are only doing what they have to do. I've left them no choice. It's my fault.I'm not offended.I'm not offended.And they are, essentially, my victims. I've made them what they are.I'm not offended.More to come!You really need to stop being so offended.
mfbukowski Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 I can't see that you have even the faintest grasp of what I was talking about.Precisely on the, pardon the expression, MONEY.This guy is an irrelevant blowhard.
mfbukowski Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 Economicishard > DanAh yes, a most substantive argument.Naa naa neee naaa naaa
mfbukowski Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 You know, I could care hang-all about your punctuation and grammar.But if you insist upon inflicting upon us unwashed masses your obvious superiority in, what the heck was it, again, "computational finance", then you clearly belong to the exact same clique of "I am a PhD therefore I know ALL" you accuse others of belonging to. I doubt anyone will read your deathless prose, for one thing because it is too freaking long and the few people here who could follow your mathematics (assuming your math even holds water), are probably wondering what on earth possessed you post it here.You want some astrophysics thrown into the mix? I can do it, if you like.The problem is, neither the computational economics nor the astrophysics bears any relation to this thread. Just in case you didn't notice.Wish I could give you 47 points for this one.
Stargazer Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 Wish I could give you 47 points for this one.What? Not 48? I was shooting for 50. Darn. 1
selek1 Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 What? Not 48? I was shooting for 50. Darn.I already gave you one- so you're at 49. Just need one more.
wenglund Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 One way I have found to get Xander/Kevin to ignore me is to offer to help his unbelief--and this in response to his expressed wish to believe. Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Recommended Posts