Occult teqniques are the medium through which Power flows.
Teqniques do not themselves contain power.
The service these books provide is to introduce those with the power to channels of use.
You practically wet your pants when someone makes these ridiculous assertions. You so want to believe this tosh, don't you? Never mind me, though, spoiling the fun as ever.
You practically wet your pants when someone makes these ridiculous assertions. You so want to believe this tosh, don't you? Never mind me, though, spoiling the fun as ever.
Having had a library of occult books, and the ones from parker publishing also, this book cyclomancy and psychastra are definitly powerful.but can be dangerous.
You practically wet your pants when someone makes these ridiculous assertions. You so want to believe this tosh, don't you? Never mind me, though, spoiling the fun as ever.
Alfred,
It is painfully obvious that you are as moronic as you are rude. Why I have lowered myself to even dignify you with a responds is beyond me. you are truly a lower life form I have more respect for pond scum.
Kerry, you come to a page on which I have roundly mocked a preposterous work of non-literature, and you gush about it as if it were written on tablets handed down from on high ... and then you are surprised when I turn my attention to you?
I don't care where you live or where you went to school, and the fact that you mention these things only makes you seem sillier. It's what you do with your education that counts, not where you happened to get it. Only the shallow think otherwise. Where did Albert Einstein go to school? Mahatma Gandhi? Elvis?
As for rudeness, I'd like to say my late mother taught me everything I know, but she was a somewhat sweeter person than I. It's not a virtue to be rude, but it's not much of a sin, either. Some of the most vicious bastards have excellent manners.
Never mind, when you do get a copy of Cyclomancy, you'll be able to exact your revenge on me with your almighty psychic powers. You and all the others I have irked over the years: I wonder why I am not plagued with boils already. Oh, that's right: it's because MAGIC DOESN'T WORK. Sorry.
Wow!!!!.......... I can not believe how incredibly rude you are. I live in Cambridge MA. the EDUCATIONAL capital of the world for your information. Now I could sit here at my keyboard, and speak about my time at M.I.T. and shoot insults your way ;but why would I waste my time on a person such as yourself? So please... practice, what I'm sure your mother taught you, and that is, if you do not have anything POSITIVE to say dont say anything at all.
Funny thing about engineers... from what I've seen, they tend to be about as easily suckered as the average person, but be much more confident about their conclusions because they think they're scientists.
Kerry, you come to a page on which I have roundly mocked a preposterous work of non-literature, and you gush about it as if it were written on tablets handed down from on high ... and then you are surprised when I turn my attention to you?
I don't care where you live or where you went to school, and the fact that you mention these things only makes you seem sillier. It's what you do with your education that counts, not where you happened to get it. Only the shallow think otherwise. Where did Albert Einstein go to school? Mahatma Gandhi? Elvis?
As for rudeness, I'd like to say my late mother taught me everything I know, but she was a somewhat sweeter person than I. It's not a virtue to be rude, but it's not much of a sin, either. Some of the most vicious bastards have excellent manners.
Never mind, when you do get a copy of Cyclomancy, you'll be able to exact your revenge on me with your almighty psychic powers. You and all the others I have irked over the years: I wonder why I am not plagued with boils already. Oh, that's right: it's because MAGIC DOESN'T WORK. Sorry.
Kerry, I am curious too. Curious as to why, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this book can impart any special powers (or indeed that it contains any useful information at all), people such as yourself are willing to shell out inflated sums for it.
This book, and others published by Parker, such as Telecult Power and Ultra-Psychonics, scream "quack" from every page. Yet still people lap them up, apparently.
What's the birthrate round where you live? About one a minute, is my guess.
I'm VERY interested to get a copy of Cyclomancy. The least expensive copy I have found is $159.00 USD. I'm going to continue to look for a copy a little less pricey but if I can not find one in the next few weeks I will make that purchase. Has anyone who has read the book been able to develop any of the abilities that the aurthor speaks about?.....The NLP type of skill set is nice ;but I'm more curious about the ability to develop telekinetic abilities. Has anyone risen to this level? Can anyone share their experiences/accounts with the material in this book (x-ray vision, Remote Viewing, telekinetics) ...... personal or otherwise, would be greatly appreciated....Thank You
Kerry, I am curious too. Curious as to why, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this book can impart any special powers (or indeed that it contains any useful information at all), people such as yourself are willing to shell out inflated sums for it.
This book, and others published by Parker, such as Telecult Power and Ultra-Psychonics, scream "quack" from every page. Yet still people lap them up, apparently.
What's the birthrate round where you live? About one a minute, is my guess.
I would be interested to buy / barter the books. if you have 100's of seminars and books on many subjects. Please let me know if you would be interested to sell the copy. if scanned will be even better.
Please let me know.
thanks
Jayant
Hi,
I have all his books, bought it in the 70s at kinokuniya at plaza singapore.
get in touch with me. His Yoga book on body building works. I had the book at 15 and did most of the exercises in there
I would be interested to buy / barter the books. if you have 100's of seminars and books on many subjects. Please let me know if you would be interested to sell the copy. if scanned will be even better.
Please let me know.
thanks
Jayant
Actually, "what needs to be understood" is that to convince others of your point of view it's wise to provide arguments based on evidence, rather than making a series of unfounded assertions. Otherwise you are liable to be taken for a charlatan.
And if you don't agree I shall melt your socks, simply by thinking about it. What, you don't believe me? Why ever not?
I GAINED SECRET ANCIENT POWER FROM WISDENS CRICKETERS' ALMANAC! AND LOST TEN STONE IN WEIGHT!!
What needs to be understood before even flipping the front cover open is that what is discussed in this book it to be taken with all seriousness. I vivid warning is given in the beginning and if you cannot understand how serious this is and how much damage one can do to themselves just by mere thought then the effort should not be put into finding it. The mind creates noises in dark rooms, the mind blows simple situation out of proportion to the point that the body gets physically sick, and the mind has the power to kill the body without a second thought. If the mind can do all of this damage just think of what beneficial things you could accomplish with it, the people you could help, the individuals you could attract.
This book is not meant to attract hot girls at a night club, if thats what you want to use it for, then you have been warned. This book is meant to find inner peace and strength that should be used to benefit yourself and others. Use it wisely.
P.S. Only a fool with a death wish would get on national television and display "magic trick" as someone earlier called it. The most magnificent people in the world today are unknown for good reasons. We all can do everything Jesus Christ did and more but to display the powers that each and everyone of us has inside would be an instant death, I can promise you that.
Actually, "what needs to be understood" is that to convince others of your point of view it's wise to provide arguments based on evidence, rather than making a series of unfounded assertions. Otherwise you are liable to be taken for a charlatan.
And if you don't agree I shall melt your socks, simply by thinking about it. What, you don't believe me? Why ever not?
I GAINED SECRET ANCIENT POWER FROM WISDENS CRICKETERS' ALMANAC! AND LOST TEN STONE IN WEIGHT!!
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am happy that I am wrong!
We are nearing agreement.
In your last posting, if you include all religions in your definition of tosh, then I will agree with that posting 100%. (Except for your definition of me.)
But please, don't pox my house because that would make you a believer in voodoo and cause me to lose faith in your rationality.
p.s. When the person in one of the postings above told the other person about why the other person wasn't attracting hot babes because of his waist line, he was alluding to the cause being that what the other person's belief system was projecting was opposite to what the other person was wanting. (I doubt that I've written this in an understandable way. I hope you get my meaning.)
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am happy that I am wrong!
We are nearing agreement.
In your last posting, if you include all religions in your definition of tosh, then I will agree with that posting 100%. (Except for your definition of me.)
But please, don't pox my house because that would make you a believer in voodoo and cause me to lose faith in your rationality.
p.s. When the person in one of the postings above told the other person about why the other person wasn't attracting hot babes because of his waist line, he was alluding to the cause being that what the other person's belief system was projecting was opposite to what the other person was wanting. (I doubt that I've written this in an understandable way. I hope you get my meaning.)
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Neither the "works" of intellectual minds nor idiot minds can prove that God exist. God is "known" only by experiencing the "unknown" and this does not make any sense to a person's intellect no matter how smart or dumb that person is at the time. Even the people who practice meditation know they cannot reach the level of "oneness" by focusing on getting to that "level" even if they have experienced it at other times. We would all be "saints" by now if religion teachings worked, but what is "preached" and what is "projected" are two entirely different things - and very few people get this.
A person mainly experiences what they "project". Mr. Armstrong, you experience precisely what you project and you cannot experience anything else. Therefore, nothing can exist outside of your projection that you do not believe in and I'll assume you would rather die than project anything else. (The meditation people tell me that I'm using the wrong word with you. I should be using manifest instead of project. I say that neither one will be accepted by your belief system in this context.)
The proof does not lie in the book. The proof lies within each individual and their unique belief system. A person's intellect is based upon their belief system. (The educational system measures only a person's intellect, not their belief system because it is against the law to teach beliefs in the public educational system. Religion is only a very small part of a person's belief system.)
Did Carl Sagan ever write of any extraordinary evidence that proved God? (I liked Carl, he was one of my astronomy heros".)
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am happy that I am wrong!
We are nearing agreement.
In your last posting, if you include all religions in your definition of tosh, then I will agree with that posting 100%. (Except for your definition of me.)
But please, don't pox my house because that would make you a believer in voodoo and cause me to lose faith in your rationality.
p.s. When the person in one of the postings above told the other person about why the other person wasn't attracting hot babes because of his waist line, he was alluding to the cause being that what the other person's belief system was projecting was opposite to what the other person was wanting. (I doubt that I've written this in an understandable way. I hope you get my meaning.)
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
This nonsense has as much to do with quantum physics as it has with balloon modelling. Quantum physics has a coherent theoretical basis and it makes clear predictions about observable phenomena that can be verified, unlike Young's ramblings. It is entirely the work of "intellectual minds", and it cannot be used to justify vague notions about psychic phenomena.
(I am not surprised to hear he wrote this same stuff in several forms to appeal to different classes of sucker. I have another book also published by Parker, apparently written by one Walter Delaney, that I would be willing to bet was also by the same hand. It has the same vainglorious style of bogosity.)
As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but there is none to be found in this book. (Anyone can say they can perform powerful feats of magic, but as this video shows, the wise man avoids putting himself to the test.)
Neither the "works" of intellectual minds nor idiot minds can prove that God exist. God is "known" only by experiencing the "unknown" and this does not make any sense to a person's intellect no matter how smart or dumb that person is at the time. Even the people who practice meditation know they cannot reach the level of "oneness" by focusing on getting to that "level" even if they have experienced it at other times. We would all be "saints" by now if religion teachings worked, but what is "preached" and what is "projected" are two entirely different things - and very few people get this.
A person mainly experiences what they "project". Mr. Armstrong, you experience precisely what you project and you cannot experience anything else. Therefore, nothing can exist outside of your projection that you do not believe in and I'll assume you would rather die than project anything else. (The meditation people tell me that I'm using the wrong word with you. I should be using manifest instead of project. I say that neither one will be accepted by your belief system in this context.)
The proof does not lie in the book. The proof lies within each individual and their unique belief system. A person's intellect is based upon their belief system. (The educational system measures only a person's intellect, not their belief system because it is against the law to teach beliefs in the public educational system. Religion is only a very small part of a person's belief system.)
Did Carl Sagan ever write of any extraordinary evidence that proved God? (I liked Carl, he was one of my astronomy heros".)
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am happy that I am wrong!
We are nearing agreement.
In your last posting, if you include all religions in your definition of tosh, then I will agree with that posting 100%. (Except for your definition of me.)
But please, don't pox my house because that would make you a believer in voodoo and cause me to lose faith in your rationality.
p.s. When the person in one of the postings above told the other person about why the other person wasn't attracting hot babes because of his waist line, he was alluding to the cause being that what the other person's belief system was projecting was opposite to what the other person was wanting. (I doubt that I've written this in an understandable way. I hope you get my meaning.)
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Mr. Armstrong,
I acquired this book in the 60s. Practiced some of the techniques in the book then tried them in the "real" world. They worked.
From my point of view, Mr. Young wrote the same information in four different ways in four different books. Each book is written for a particular type of individual orientation.
Cyclomancy: For individuals who are predominately visionally oriented.
Somo-Psychic Power: For individuals who are predominately feeling oriented.
Psychastra: For individuals who are predominately sound oriented.
The Secret of Spirit-Thought Magic: For individuals who are predominately "?" oriented.
There is obviously nothing written for individuals who are locked into their intellectual minds and cannot consider anything that might be in the realm of quantum physics.
Forget the "out of this world" statements that just can't be true to the intellectual mind. Find what works for you, but remember this: What you project to others must first begin in you, AND IT WILL DEFINITELY EFFECT YOU. Don't project something that you do not want happening to you in the same way it is going to happen to them.
This nonsense has as much to do with quantum physics as it has with balloon modelling. Quantum physics has a coherent theoretical basis and it makes clear predictions about observable phenomena that can be verified, unlike Young's ramblings. It is entirely the work of "intellectual minds", and it cannot be used to justify vague notions about psychic phenomena.
(I am not surprised to hear he wrote this same stuff in several forms to appeal to different classes of sucker. I have another book also published by Parker, apparently written by one Walter Delaney, that I would be willing to bet was also by the same hand. It has the same vainglorious style of bogosity.)
As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but there is none to be found in this book. (Anyone can say they can perform powerful feats of magic, but as this video shows, the wise man avoids putting himself to the test.)
Neither the "works" of intellectual minds nor idiot minds can prove that God exist. God is "known" only by experiencing the "unknown" and this does not make any sense to a person's intellect no matter how smart or dumb that person is at the time. Even the people who practice meditation know they cannot reach the level of "oneness" by focusing on getting to that "level" even if they have experienced it at other times. We would all be "saints" by now if religion teachings worked, but what is "preached" and what is "projected" are two entirely different things - and very few people get this.
A person mainly experiences what they "project". Mr. Armstrong, you experience precisely what you project and you cannot experience anything else. Therefore, nothing can exist outside of your projection that you do not believe in and I'll assume you would rather die than project anything else. (The meditation people tell me that I'm using the wrong word with you. I should be using manifest instead of project. I say that neither one will be accepted by your belief system in this context.)
The proof does not lie in the book. The proof lies within each individual and their unique belief system. A person's intellect is based upon their belief system. (The educational system measures only a person's intellect, not their belief system because it is against the law to teach beliefs in the public educational system. Religion is only a very small part of a person's belief system.)
Did Carl Sagan ever write of any extraordinary evidence that proved God? (I liked Carl, he was one of my astronomy heros".)
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am happy that I am wrong!
We are nearing agreement.
In your last posting, if you include all religions in your definition of tosh, then I will agree with that posting 100%. (Except for your definition of me.)
But please, don't pox my house because that would make you a believer in voodoo and cause me to lose faith in your rationality.
p.s. When the person in one of the postings above told the other person about why the other person wasn't attracting hot babes because of his waist line, he was alluding to the cause being that what the other person's belief system was projecting was opposite to what the other person was wanting. (I doubt that I've written this in an understandable way. I hope you get my meaning.)
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Batz, the author makes audacious (some would say ridiculous) claims. He says you can learn how to move objects without touching them, for instance. It is not "negative" to doubt such extraordinary claims, it is reasonable, because generally people cannot do such things.
The book makes a lot of assertions but there is not one jot of evidence supporting any of them. It seems to me that it is much more likely that the author is a liar than that he really has some sort of magic powers. There are an awful lot of liars in the world, after all.
This Book is worded strangely by today's standards, no doubt, but it's the same principles they will teach you in any sales improvement class today. Any information of this type can be used for the improvement of your life and others OR to harm. If you feel that harming others or manipulating them in a harmful way in necessary to get what you want -REMEMBER that the refection theory is just as real. In other words don't do anything that you wouldn't want some one to do to you.
So...I got this book at a YARD SALE when I was 12...I read it, and re-read it... there are elements that work... controlling your body is very important...I loaned the book out at 17 and never saw it again...
I picked it up 6 years ago and it has sit on my bookshelf ever since...I need to read it again...in a world of self-exploration and quantum thinking... this book was ahead of it's time...
As you can get it for next to nothing... read it... what have you to lose? Listening to negativity expressed on this board is a ticket to no where... negativity is absence of happiness...read it and see where it takes you.
Batz, the author makes audacious (some would say ridiculous) claims. He says you can learn how to move objects without touching them, for instance. It is not "negative" to doubt such extraordinary claims, it is reasonable, because generally people cannot do such things.
The book makes a lot of assertions but there is not one jot of evidence supporting any of them. It seems to me that it is much more likely that the author is a liar than that he really has some sort of magic powers. There are an awful lot of liars in the world, after all.
I wish your daughter all the magnificent prospering possible, but I fear this book will not help. It is merely a fraud perpetrated by the cynical on the gullible.
I can has this book? My daughter requires my assistance and need to propel her toward magnificent prospering. She has gone zami. We must not be flippant with such astronomical gifts and instruction. Please email talk to me as you do not like it: nokuzola.tuigamala@yahoo.com so i can learn powers instead, so you can help me.
I wish your daughter all the magnificent prospering possible, but I fear this book will not help. It is merely a fraud perpetrated by the cynical on the gullible.
I once had a psychic vision of a man who used his psychic power to manifest trillions of dollars, his name is Rothschild and he hypnotized the entire world into using his monopoly money that he created out of thin air.
This is solid information. Less "weird" or "hokey" than his other books or information from the same publisher. All the books have issues due to them coming out in the 50's. One thing I must say about the publisher. Originally murphy's books came out from the same publisher. You can see his books in the book lists in the back of all the paperbacks. I knew murphys teacher. Used to be my neibor in 1996. I learned some interesting things about salesmen. Your infinite power to become rich is a salesmens bible. What I find interesting if not troubling is a lot of these out-of-print books are ripped off or rehashed by other unscrupilous types, basically with the same issues I learned about from murphys university professor, my neibor. This hackery was invariably incorporated into the modern day seduction, NLP and self-help circles. If you do the reasearch and dig up old references. You'll realize that people are intentionally/unintentionally commiting "intellectual plagarism" by denying the genetic roots of the concepts. Or they are using methods basically to control people. Witchcraft, kinesics, body language, mantras, magic spells. What i'm seeing a lot of is people are not products of what they teach. In other words, there is more going on than meets the eyes. I learned from a psychic that used to be based in florida. Who was also an author who is part of this web who really invented remote viewing. She was approached by the CIA *BEFORE* ingo swan and those guys claim to have invented remote viewing (pronounced BS). They ripped off her methodology and tweaked it. Which basically is what makes it "unique". Minus her method as taught in her books and instructionals. What i'm alluding here is more of the same. If you paid $5,000 an hour to learn it from some NLP or seduction guru or "someone else". You got ripped off. And chances are it was already written in an out of print book in the 50's when NOBODY was talking about this stuff.
EVERYONE: The book works to a degree. It challenges ones state of mind, reality rather. The key behind the whole book is to develop a bond with your body. to find patience within yourself. then you can dominate reality with just the way you are. since ive read it, i can make events work in my favor, play minds games, its changed my life alot. its not for everyone. you litteral have to mentally and physically DRIVE YOURSELF INTO A STATE OF HYSTERIA TO USE THIS BOOK or it WILL NOT WORK FOR YOU. so, anyone with a mental disorder is probably going to have more luck with this then the conservative narrow minded thinker. i felt like a freak at first, but one is the wiser when i gave in to it. Sometimes i feel like Satan himself for all things i get away with now...so beware...
'Personally, if I could “arouse intense desire in the opposite sex by [my] mere presence” I wouldn't worry about my waistline.'
You worrying about your waistline is precisely why you aren't able to arouse intense desire in the opposite sex by merely being in their presence.
Tell you what, if you have
Tell you what, if you have this so-called power, use it to induce me to stop saying your beliefs are utter bollocks.
Shouldn't be too hard. Cause me to post another comment in this thread in which I agree with you. Amaze us.
Occult teqniques are the
Tell you what, if you have
Tell you what, if you have this so-called power, use it to induce me to stop saying your beliefs are utter bollocks.
Shouldn't be too hard. Cause me to post another comment in this thread in which I agree with you. Amaze us.
Non-existent? You
Non-existent?
You practically wet your pants when someone makes these ridiculous assertions. You so want to believe this tosh, don't you? Never mind me, though, spoiling the fun as ever.
Wow that is interesting, how
How would you best describe
Non-existent? You
Non-existent?
You practically wet your pants when someone makes these ridiculous assertions. You so want to believe this tosh, don't you? Never mind me, though, spoiling the fun as ever.
Having had a library of
How would you best describe
Non-existent? You
Non-existent?
You practically wet your pants when someone makes these ridiculous assertions. You so want to believe this tosh, don't you? Never mind me, though, spoiling the fun as ever.
Yup.
How sweet of you to notice.
How sweet of you to notice.
Alfred is fat.
How sweet of you to notice.
How sweet of you to notice.
"Why I have lowered myself to
"Why I have lowered myself to even dignify you with a responds is beyond me. "
You're funny. Are you cute, too?
Alfred, It is
"Why I have lowered myself to
"Why I have lowered myself to even dignify you with a responds is beyond me. "
You're funny. Are you cute, too?
Hey Kerry, why not go for the
Kerry, you come to a page on
Kerry, you come to a page on which I have roundly mocked a preposterous work of non-literature, and you gush about it as if it were written on tablets handed down from on high ... and then you are surprised when I turn my attention to you?
I don't care where you live or where you went to school, and the fact that you mention these things only makes you seem sillier. It's what you do with your education that counts, not where you happened to get it. Only the shallow think otherwise. Where did Albert Einstein go to school? Mahatma Gandhi? Elvis?
As for rudeness, I'd like to say my late mother taught me everything I know, but she was a somewhat sweeter person than I. It's not a virtue to be rude, but it's not much of a sin, either. Some of the most vicious bastards have excellent manners.
Never mind, when you do get a copy of Cyclomancy, you'll be able to exact your revenge on me with your almighty psychic powers. You and all the others I have irked over the years: I wonder why I am not plagued with boils already. Oh, that's right: it's because MAGIC DOESN'T WORK. Sorry.
Wow!!!!.......... I can not
Funny thing about engineers..
Funny thing about engineers... from what I've seen, they tend to be about as easily suckered as the average person, but be much more confident about their conclusions because they think they're scientists.
And here's one: http://www
And here's one: http://www.silee.me.uk/
Yes, I think you have
Yes, I think you have something there. There's certainly evidence of that from my collection.
Hey Kerry, why not go for the
Kerry, you come to a page on
Kerry, you come to a page on which I have roundly mocked a preposterous work of non-literature, and you gush about it as if it were written on tablets handed down from on high ... and then you are surprised when I turn my attention to you?
I don't care where you live or where you went to school, and the fact that you mention these things only makes you seem sillier. It's what you do with your education that counts, not where you happened to get it. Only the shallow think otherwise. Where did Albert Einstein go to school? Mahatma Gandhi? Elvis?
As for rudeness, I'd like to say my late mother taught me everything I know, but she was a somewhat sweeter person than I. It's not a virtue to be rude, but it's not much of a sin, either. Some of the most vicious bastards have excellent manners.
Never mind, when you do get a copy of Cyclomancy, you'll be able to exact your revenge on me with your almighty psychic powers. You and all the others I have irked over the years: I wonder why I am not plagued with boils already. Oh, that's right: it's because MAGIC DOESN'T WORK. Sorry.
Kerry, I am curious too.
Kerry, I am curious too. Curious as to why, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this book can impart any special powers (or indeed that it contains any useful information at all), people such as yourself are willing to shell out inflated sums for it.
This book, and others published by Parker, such as Telecult Power and Ultra-Psychonics, scream "quack" from every page. Yet still people lap them up, apparently.
What's the birthrate round where you live? About one a minute, is my guess.
I'm VERY interested to get a
Kerry, I am curious too.
Kerry, I am curious too. Curious as to why, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this book can impart any special powers (or indeed that it contains any useful information at all), people such as yourself are willing to shell out inflated sums for it.
This book, and others published by Parker, such as Telecult Power and Ultra-Psychonics, scream "quack" from every page. Yet still people lap them up, apparently.
What's the birthrate round where you live? About one a minute, is my guess.
I would be interested to buy
Hi, I have all his books,
I would like to have books by
I would be interested to buy
Yes, but aren't we all?
Yes, but aren't we all?
Alfred you're a dick head
Yes, but aren't we all?
Yes, but aren't we all?
How can I get in touch with
i need this book urgently. my
Actually, "what needs to be
Actually, "what needs to be understood" is that to convince others of your point of view it's wise to provide arguments based on evidence, rather than making a series of unfounded assertions. Otherwise you are liable to be taken for a charlatan.
And if you don't agree I shall melt your socks, simply by thinking about it. What, you don't believe me? Why ever not?
I GAINED SECRET ANCIENT POWER FROM WISDENS CRICKETERS' ALMANAC! AND LOST TEN STONE IN WEIGHT!!
What needs to be understood
Actually, "what needs to be
Actually, "what needs to be understood" is that to convince others of your point of view it's wise to provide arguments based on evidence, rather than making a series of unfounded assertions. Otherwise you are liable to be taken for a charlatan.
And if you don't agree I shall melt your socks, simply by thinking about it. What, you don't believe me? Why ever not?
I GAINED SECRET ANCIENT POWER FROM WISDENS CRICKETERS' ALMANAC! AND LOST TEN STONE IN WEIGHT!!
were can i get this book in
Try http://used.addall.com
Try http://used.addall.com though copies tend to be pricy.
Do you know where a copy of
Try http://used.addall.com
Try http://used.addall.com though copies tend to be pricy.
Do you wish to purchase this
I need this book. Whats the
I need this book. Whats the price . I m in kolkats
I need this book. Whats the
I need this book. Whats the price . I m in kolkats
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes, Please let me know price
Do you know where a copy of
Try http://used.addall.com
Try http://used.addall.com though copies tend to be pricy.
Bob, anyone who manages to
Bob, anyone who manages to contact you on the basis of this comment is probably so psychic they don't really need the book.
am bob prince i have this
How can I get in touch with
i need this book urgently. my
Bob, anyone who manages to
Bob, anyone who manages to contact you on the basis of this comment is probably so psychic they don't really need the book.
I doubt we'll ever be in
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am
I doubt we'll ever be in
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Dear Anonymous, you know so
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am
I doubt we'll ever be in
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Neither the "works" of
Dear Anonymous, you know so
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am
I doubt we'll ever be in
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
This nonsense has as much to
This nonsense has as much to do with quantum physics as it has with balloon modelling. Quantum physics has a coherent theoretical basis and it makes clear predictions about observable phenomena that can be verified, unlike Young's ramblings. It is entirely the work of "intellectual minds", and it cannot be used to justify vague notions about psychic phenomena.
(I am not surprised to hear he wrote this same stuff in several forms to appeal to different classes of sucker. I have another book also published by Parker, apparently written by one Walter Delaney, that I would be willing to bet was also by the same hand. It has the same vainglorious style of bogosity.)
As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but there is none to be found in this book. (Anyone can say they can perform powerful feats of magic, but as this video shows, the wise man avoids putting himself to the test.)
Neither the "works" of
Dear Anonymous, you know so
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am
I doubt we'll ever be in
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
Mr. Armstrong, I acquired
This nonsense has as much to
This nonsense has as much to do with quantum physics as it has with balloon modelling. Quantum physics has a coherent theoretical basis and it makes clear predictions about observable phenomena that can be verified, unlike Young's ramblings. It is entirely the work of "intellectual minds", and it cannot be used to justify vague notions about psychic phenomena.
(I am not surprised to hear he wrote this same stuff in several forms to appeal to different classes of sucker. I have another book also published by Parker, apparently written by one Walter Delaney, that I would be willing to bet was also by the same hand. It has the same vainglorious style of bogosity.)
As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but there is none to be found in this book. (Anyone can say they can perform powerful feats of magic, but as this video shows, the wise man avoids putting himself to the test.)
Neither the "works" of
Dear Anonymous, you know so
Dear Anonymous, you know so much about me, it's scary. No, sorry, you are terribly wrong.
As it happens I used to believe all kinds of tosh. Gradually I realized that the many tosh merchants disagreed with one another in fundamental ways, and their systems could not be reconciled. So I stopped believing in it all, and I've never regretted doing so.
The idea that believing in something for no good reason makes you in some undefined way superior to those of us who insist on rationality is a familiar one, but no less depressing. You are the one with a narrow view, in my opinion.
There surely are many things beyond my experience or understanding but that does not explain why anyone should believe in some intangible supposition purely on the word of another doubtless fallible human being. It is preposterous. Especially because, as I said earlier, the believers disagree amongst themselves. A pox on all your houses!
Dear Mr. Armstrong, I am
I doubt we'll ever be in
I doubt we'll ever be in agreement, if you can countenance that Young might have been anything other than a huckster.
I'm not sure exactly what brand of tosh you favour (The dreaded "Law" of Attraction, perhaps?), but it doesn't have to go by the name of religion to be considered dreary and preposterous. Humanity believed in and practised magic for thousands of years with bugger all to show for it; science came along relatively recently and here we are, actually communicating at a distance instead of pretending to do so.
"it's the same principles
"it's the same principles they will teach you in any sales improvement class today".
Do they teach you how to view objects at a distance of two thousand miles in your sales class? Amazing!
Batz, the author makes
Batz, the author makes audacious (some would say ridiculous) claims. He says you can learn how to move objects without touching them, for instance. It is not "negative" to doubt such extraordinary claims, it is reasonable, because generally people cannot do such things.
The book makes a lot of assertions but there is not one jot of evidence supporting any of them. It seems to me that it is much more likely that the author is a liar than that he really has some sort of magic powers. There are an awful lot of liars in the world, after all.
You could say pretty much the
You could say pretty much the same thing about the Bible and all religions. But billions of people still believe.
"I can project myself into
"I can project myself into your room right now and prod you with my magic finger."
"Yeah, right. I don't believe you."
"You could say pretty much the same thing about the Bible and all religions, skeptic boy. ONLY BELIEVE."
This Book is worded
"it's the same principles
"it's the same principles they will teach you in any sales improvement class today".
Do they teach you how to view objects at a distance of two thousand miles in your sales class? Amazing!
So...I got this book at a
Batz, the author makes
Batz, the author makes audacious (some would say ridiculous) claims. He says you can learn how to move objects without touching them, for instance. It is not "negative" to doubt such extraordinary claims, it is reasonable, because generally people cannot do such things.
The book makes a lot of assertions but there is not one jot of evidence supporting any of them. It seems to me that it is much more likely that the author is a liar than that he really has some sort of magic powers. There are an awful lot of liars in the world, after all.
You could say pretty much the
You could say pretty much the same thing about the Bible and all religions. But billions of people still believe.
"I can project myself into
"I can project myself into your room right now and prod you with my magic finger."
"Yeah, right. I don't believe you."
"You could say pretty much the same thing about the Bible and all religions, skeptic boy. ONLY BELIEVE."
I wish your daughter all the
I wish your daughter all the magnificent prospering possible, but I fear this book will not help. It is merely a fraud perpetrated by the cynical on the gullible.
I can has this book? My
I wish your daughter all the
I wish your daughter all the magnificent prospering possible, but I fear this book will not help. It is merely a fraud perpetrated by the cynical on the gullible.
I once had a psychic vision
What in the hell is all this
This is solid information.
who is the woman who
Alive or dead, she'll contact
Alive or dead, she'll contact you if she wants.
WOOOOOOHHH!
EVERYONE: The book works to
HOG WASH! AT LEAST "HARRY
You win this week's wittiest
You win this week's wittiest comment contest!
'Personally, if I could
You win this week's wittiest
You win this week's wittiest comment contest!
... yes it does work but