|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Mar 30, 2018 18:48:57 GMT
You can't. All you can do is say things like this woman is clearly mentally ill and it's nothing mysterious because the entertainment industry leaves a lot of people messed up. I don't think Dr. Phil is taking her story at face value, whereas I try to keep an open mind. Dr. Phil says people are giving her problems. I say spirits are giving her problems. They may be in human bodies and do all of the things that humans do, but it's the spirit that makes the difference, and not so much the vessel which it occupies.
EDIT -- Haven't seen Proggy around lately. If he's still here I'm expecting a list of all the movies he's seen her in.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Mar 30, 2018 19:01:20 GMT
"If he's still here I'm expecting a list of all the movies he's seen her in."
The Shining and um Popeye. I know she's been in other things, but that's probably the only two movies Joe Schmo could name she's been in.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Mar 30, 2018 19:02:55 GMT
OK, looks like she was also in "Annie Hall" (never saw that one)
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Mar 30, 2018 19:10:13 GMT
OK, looks like she was also in "Annie Hall" (never saw that one) Didn't know that. I never saw that one either, even though it's a well-known film. She was in a movie called "3 Women" which I started to watch once but never saw all of it. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Mar 31, 2018 1:09:28 GMT
tpfkar I think you've got a shot as guest.
Strange, but I didn't see it that way. For the longest time I have been thinking that God the Father might be a collective, but I never thought of them as flesh and blood ETs. They would command incredible power, and not with science that we would understand, but with what would appear to be magic, or science we don't understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 31, 2018 2:39:12 GMT
I remember seeing/hearing bits of this when I was doing some spring cleaning for my parents last year. My mom had it on as she was interested in the story. I think she was on Dr. Phil for several episodes. Whole thing felt rather exploitative to me. I also recall Duvall admitting she was sick and needed help. In any case, I don't know why the burden would ever be on people to prove crazy wrong rather than crazy proving it was right. If I was to claim Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, you should have to disprove that rather than me proving it?  I also remember her saying the Sheriff of Nottingham was out to get her. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Mar 31, 2018 3:00:38 GMT
I remember seeing/hearing bits of this when I was doing some spring cleaning for my parents last year. My mom had it on as she was interested in the story. I think she was on Dr. Phil for several episodes. Whole thing felt rather exploitative to me. I also recall Duvall admitting she was sick and needed help. In any case, I don't know why the burden would ever be on people to prove crazy wrong rather than crazy proving it was right. If I was to claim Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, you should have to disprove that rather than me proving it? I also remember her saying the Sheriff of Nottingham was out to get her. If you claimed that Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, it wouldn't occur to me to try to prove you wrong. More things in heaven and earth, my dear Eva.  |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 31, 2018 3:03:05 GMT
I remember seeing/hearing bits of this when I was doing some spring cleaning for my parents last year. My mom had it on as she was interested in the story. I think she was on Dr. Phil for several episodes. Whole thing felt rather exploitative to me. I also recall Duvall admitting she was sick and needed help. In any case, I don't know why the burden would ever be on people to prove crazy wrong rather than crazy proving it was right. If I was to claim Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, you should have to disprove that rather than me proving it? I also remember her saying the Sheriff of Nottingham was out to get her. If you claimed that Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, it wouldn't occur to me to try to prove you wrong. More things in heaven and earth, my dear Eva. I would hope it would occur to you to think me nucking futs... if you don't already think that anyway.  |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Mar 31, 2018 3:23:38 GMT
"If he's still here I'm expecting a list of all the movies he's seen her in." The Shining and um Popeye. I know she's been in other things, but that's probably the only two movies Joe Schmo could name she's been in. I think she's pretty memorable in Roxanne. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Mar 31, 2018 3:26:38 GMT
If you claimed that Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, it wouldn't occur to me to try to prove you wrong. More things in heaven and earth, my dear Eva. If he ever made that claim... You shouldn't worry about trying to prove him wrong... It should just be evident that he is. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Mar 31, 2018 3:29:41 GMT
If you claimed that Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, it wouldn't occur to me to try to prove you wrong. More things in heaven and earth, my dear Eva. If he ever made that claim... You shouldn't worry about trying to prove him wrong... It should just be evident that he is. Hopefully you'll have second thoughts about that someday, my dear Vegas. |
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Mar 31, 2018 23:06:58 GMT
Nowhere to go but up.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Apr 1, 2018 14:10:19 GMT
If you claimed that Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, it wouldn't occur to me to try to prove you wrong. More things in heaven and earth, my dear Eva. I would hope it would occur to you to think me nucking futs... if you don't already think that anyway. I can only imagine you think the majority of people are nucking futs then, right? Because with the same "proof" Ms Duval provided for believing Robin Williams is still alive, vast swaths of people believe life goes on after death. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Apr 1, 2018 14:20:26 GMT
I remember seeing/hearing bits of this when I was doing some spring cleaning for my parents last year. My mom had it on as she was interested in the story. I think she was on Dr. Phil for several episodes. Whole thing felt rather exploitative to me. I also recall Duvall admitting she was sick and needed help. In any case, I don't know why the burden would ever be on people to prove crazy wrong rather than crazy proving it was right. If I was to claim Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, you should have to disprove that rather than me proving it? I also remember her saying the Sheriff of Nottingham was out to get her. Keep in mind you’re talking to a guy who believes in chemtrails and flat earth. Perspective! |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 1, 2018 14:47:37 GMT
I would hope it would occur to you to think me nucking futs... if you don't already think that anyway. I can only imagine you think the majority of people are nucking futs then, right? Because with the same "proof" Ms Duval provided for believing Robin Williams is still alive, vast swaths of people believe life goes on after death. Let's take a strictly legal viewpoint here. It happens to be legal to believe that Napoleon is alive and a shape shifter. It happens to be legal to ask (politely) other people to have the same belief. If you want to pass a leash law because you believe Napoleon asked you to arrange it, you can legally make that argument in the halls of the legislature. It will not necessarily be a compelling argument. but it may be considered. You may not say we must pass this leash law because Napoleon said so. You may say perhaps we should pass this law because Napoleon said so. Can you see the subtle but critical difference? Of course no one is going to pass a leash law for no other reason than some clown believes Napoleon asked for it. There might well be other reasons to pass the leash law though. In that case the mental health of one proponent of the law would be irrelevant and citing it would be an ad hominem error. |
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Apr 1, 2018 15:14:45 GMT
I can only imagine you think the majority of people are nucking futs then, right? Because with the same "proof" Ms Duval provided for believing Robin Williams is still alive, vast swaths of people believe life goes on after death. Let's take a strictly legal viewpoint here. It happens to be legal to believe that Napoleon is alive and a shape shifter. It happens to be legal to ask (politely) other people to have the same belief. If you want to pass a leash law because you believe Napoleon asked you to arrange it, you can legally make that argument in the halls of the legislature. It will not necessarily be a compelling argument. but it may be considered. You may not say we must pass this leash law because Napoleon said so. You may say perhaps we should pass this law because Napoleon said so. Can you see the subtle but critical difference? Of course no one is going to pass a leash law for no other reason than some clown believes Napoleon asked for it. There might well be other reasons to pass the leash law though. In that case the mental health of one proponent of the law would be irrelevant and citing it would be an ad hominem error. Sorry, I don't get where you're coming from or what that has to do with me saying most people believe in life after death. I didn't watch the whole interview. Did Shelly start advocating for some laws based on her contention that Robin Williams is still alive? That would sound odd to me but then she does seem to be having some problems thinking clearly...not to put too fine a point on it. But most Christians probably believe Williams IS alive...or at least they believe he along with all others who are "dead," will arise again to be judged. But that aside, technically, at least in the US I certainly MAY (am allowed to by law) say we must pass some law based on what Napoleon said. It's just that no one has to agree/heed me when I make that claim, and many might think me a bit daft unless I refer to some obscure argument he made about leash laws and am able to relate it to current situations and convince others it's a good argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 1, 2018 15:31:48 GMT
Let's take a strictly legal viewpoint here. It happens to be legal to believe that Napoleon is alive and a shape shifter. It happens to be legal to ask (politely) other people to have the same belief. If you want to pass a leash law because you believe Napoleon asked you to arrange it, you can legally make that argument in the halls of the legislature. It will not necessarily be a compelling argument. but it may be considered. You may not say we must pass this leash law because Napoleon said so. You may say perhaps we should pass this law because Napoleon said so. Can you see the subtle but critical difference? Of course no one is going to pass a leash law for no other reason than some clown believes Napoleon asked for it. There might well be other reasons to pass the leash law though. In that case the mental health of one proponent of the law would be irrelevant and citing it would be an ad hominem error. Sorry, I don't get where you're coming from or what that has to do with me saying vast swaths of people believe in life after death. I didn't watch the whole interview. Did Shelly start advocating for some laws based on her contention that Robin Williams is still alive? That would sound odd to me. But most Christians probably believe Williams IS alove...or at least they believe he along with all others who are "dead," will arise again to be judged. But that aside, technically, at least in the US I certainly MAY (am allowed to by law) say we must pass some law based on what Napoleon said. It's just that no one has to agree/heed me when I make that claim, and many might think me a bit daft unless I refer to some obscure argument he made about leash laws and am able to relate it to current situations and convince others it's a good argument. I'm sorry I'm going off on tangents. I do that a lot. The belief that Napoleon is alive and a shape shifter is not comparable to the belief that there is life after death. It is terribly unfair for anyone to suggest there is a comparison. Comparison or not though it is necessary to respect the opinions of others whichever side you happen to be on. Just as they must ask politely for you to believe there is life after death, you must not forget your manners in asking them to believe there is not. The reason you may not say that some law must be passed because Napoleon said so is that the United States does not recognize any authority outside it. We are "sovereign" in that sense. It does not recognize any titles of nobility. It does not recognize the authority of any church to dictate any law. It may consider laws on the advice of anyone, church or Napoleon Shape Shifter. |
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Apr 1, 2018 19:01:53 GMT
You can't. All you can do is say things like this woman is clearly mentally ill and it's nothing mysterious because the entertainment industry leaves a lot of people messed up. I don't think Dr. Phil is taking her story at face value, whereas I try to keep an open mind. Dr. Phil says people are giving her problems. I say spirits are giving her problems. They may be in human bodies and do all of the things that humans do, but it's the spirit that makes the difference, and not so much the vessel which it occupies. EDIT -- Haven't seen Proggy around lately. If he's still here I'm expecting a list of all the movies he's seen her in. Poor Olive Oyl |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Apr 1, 2018 19:09:19 GMT
I remember seeing/hearing bits of this when I was doing some spring cleaning for my parents last year. My mom had it on as she was interested in the story. I think she was on Dr. Phil for several episodes. Whole thing felt rather exploitative to me. I also recall Duvall admitting she was sick and needed help. In any case, I don't know why the burden would ever be on people to prove crazy wrong rather than crazy proving it was right. If I was to claim Napoleon was alive and well and shapeshifting, you should have to disprove that rather than me proving it? I also remember her saying the Sheriff of Nottingham was out to get her. Keep in mind you’re talking to a guy who believes in chemtrails and flat earth. Perspective! Now, Bryce, you're telling barefaced lies again. As for round earth/flat earth I keep an open mind. As for chemtrails, it isn't a matter of belief. The evidence is self-evident. You'll never get to Heaven that way. Work on it. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Apr 1, 2018 19:50:07 GMT
Keep in mind you’re talking to a guy who believes in chemtrails and flat earth. Perspective! Now, Bryce, you're telling barefaced lies again. As for round earth/flat earth I keep an open mind. As for chemtrails, it isn't a matter of belief. The evidence is self-evident. So therefore what I said was in fact TRUE. Thanks for clearing that one up Erjen!  Note: The evidence for a round earth is self-evident to anyone who has flown an airplane. Yet you still remain skeptical. So clearly your judgment of what constitutes evidence is questionable. You'll never get to Heaven that way. Work on it. Not necessary since I don’t believe in heaven in the first place. That’s more of a concern for someone like you. |
|
