Stupidity & Ignorance are illnesses that spread faster than the common cold!

[Guest guest]

--- , Charlie Koh <ackoh2000> wrote:

 

> No need to be sorry. I am just telling from my

> experience.

 

Are you sure enough about your experiences to not BE WRONG?

 

> I have been experimenting with manifesting 10 years

> ago. But what has 29 years or 10 years got to do with

> what works or not? Y

> I know that the NLP swish pattern works,

 

Yes the NLP SWISH pattern does work, but you are NOT doing it.

 

I'm not saying that what you are doing IS TOTALLY WRONG...

 

....though it IS TOTALLY WRONG according to the founder of that

technique, Richard Bandler...

 

....what I'm saying is how much better would it be if you did it

right?

 

and I have

> used it to cure habits such as nail biting. Swish is

> good for self-image change - seeing yourself or

> someone you like to model.

 

Look!

 

Here you said it RIGHT! " Seeing yourself... " , that presupposes you

see yourself. That is dissociated!

 

You cannot see yourself if you are associated. Do you get the point

yet!

 

You are running around confused, but thinking it's wisdom.

 

> Neville Goddard said " The difference between seeing

> yourself and being in the image is the difference

> between failure and success " which I agree totally

> from experience.

 

I aggree with NOTHING NG said or did.

 

Why not?

 

Because he had VIRTUALLY NO METHOD for others to duplicate

his " claimed " results.

 

Pick a BETTER MODEL, okay? Someone like Jesus, and what Mary

Magdalena said about his SECRET TEACHINGS from 2,000 years ago, and

written up in the NH found in 1952.

 

> I have tried hundreds of experiments in manifesting

> from big to small things in the past 10 years, and

> even before reading Neville's work, I have seen in my

> experience that when I see myself having it, it is

> totally not emotionally fulfilling enough,

 

Continue on DOING IT WRONG if you want. Others who want to learn it

and want to have REPEATABLE PERFORMANCES, should learn it the

CORRECT WAY.

 

and your

> mind actually thinks it is someone else, or a

> self-image to work towards to.

 

HELL, you are evening saying it wrong.

 

EVerytime my

> imagination is immediately effective is when I

> associate into the image. " Thinking of it " may get

> yourself motivated, but it is 'thinking from' that

> actually makes you enter the state.

 

Horse pucky.

 

You are leaving out so much.

 

You don't really have a clue, do you?

 

Let me make a suggestion. Go to google. type is " swish pattern " . And

then find Richard's pattern and restudy it. Then do WHAT IT REALLY

SAYS, and not what you " think " it says.

 

You will learn something very important.

 

> Many people do not have the visualisation skill to see

> themself clearly and get emotional juice out of it.

 

Really?

 

So, instead to teaching people how to do what works, and giving them

the skills to do it right, you want to dumb it down for real stupid

people?

 

You want to give them mud and call in chocolate cake?

 

> The swish works and Bandler even said you can see a

> role model instead of yourself, it still works. It is

> making your mind move towards to. But I have found

> that creation is different from changing(moving

> towards a) new self-image.

 

So, you say.

 

What is your verification process besides words?

 

Besides opinion?

 

Fracken it!

 

It's so kool to find someone that is so evolved that they are

superior in knowledge to NLP founder and Genius Dr. Richard Bandler,

to Silva Mind Control Founder Jose Silva, so much smarter than Max

Freedom Long, and better than all the other EXPERTS that we stand on

the shoulders of...

 

....the people that can ACTUALLY DO THE DAMN DRILLS AND GET THE

RESULTS THEY DESIRE!

 

Stupidity and ignorance are illnesses that spread faster than the

common cold!

 

It's so neat that here on this list we have many superior Huna

trainers like Greg, Lori, Vince, Otha, and a few others that are

vitamin C of the mind and can help erase that common cold of

stupidity.

 

 

Founder of the Kahuna Mind, co-developer of the Silva UltraMind

Remote Viewing ESP, Remote Influence ESP, NLP Mastery Trainer, blab,

blab, blab...

webpage, mentaltrainingsecrets.com

[Guest guest]

healingenergies-

essentialskills , " kahunamaker " <kahunamaker>

wrote:

 

Hi Doc,

 

I had a few question regarding the part of this post relating to

Neville. I have read just about every book he wrote that I am aware

of, I recall you mentioning one of his books at the October seminar

and was surprised to read that you don't agree with anything he

said. Does that mean that you believe his method for manifesation

does not work? In " The Law and the Promise " and " The Power of

Awareness " he lists many dramatic examples of how he and many of his

students used his technique for manifestation (assuming of course

that these are true stories). I'm also on the Neville Goddard group

and many of the people on that list share stories of how they have

manifested things with his principles, again I can only assume these

are true stories.

 

I recall you saying at the October seminar in regards to the Neville

book something to the effect that there is nothing specific in his

book. I must not understand what Neville is saying because when I

read his books, it seems very specific to me. Basically you pick a

scene that implies your wish fullfilled, you imagine yourself in the

scene, (not looking at it from a distance) feeling what you would

feel, seeing what you would see etc., if the scene was actually

taking place and you keep repeating this until it takes on the tones

of reality. He talks a lot about doing this at night and fallign

asleep in the feeling of the wish fullfilled. He says you that when

you think of your desire you think about it as if is already a fact,

(the law of assumption). According to Neville this is what Jesus

meant when he said that when you pray for something believe you have

already received it. Am I misunderstanding what Neville was saying?

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Doug

 

 

 

>

> --- , Charlie Koh <ackoh2000> wrote:

>

> > No need to be sorry. I am just telling from my

> > experience.

>

> Are you sure enough about your experiences to not BE WRONG?

>

> > I have been experimenting with manifesting 10 years

> > ago. But what has 29 years or 10 years got to do with

> > what works or not? Y

> > I know that the NLP swish pattern works,

>

> Yes the NLP SWISH pattern does work, but you are NOT doing it.

>

> I'm not saying that what you are doing IS TOTALLY WRONG...

>

> ...though it IS TOTALLY WRONG according to the founder of that

> technique, Richard Bandler...

>

> ...what I'm saying is how much better would it be if you did it

> right?

>

> and I have

> > used it to cure habits such as nail biting. Swish is

> > good for self-image change - seeing yourself or

> > someone you like to model.

>

> Look!

>

> Here you said it RIGHT! " Seeing yourself... " , that presupposes you

> see yourself. That is dissociated!

>

> You cannot see yourself if you are associated. Do you get the

point

> yet!

>

> You are running around confused, but thinking it's wisdom.

>

> > Neville Goddard said " The difference between seeing

> > yourself and being in the image is the difference

> > between failure and success " which I agree totally

> > from experience.

>

> I aggree with NOTHING NG said or did.

>

> Why not?

>

> Because he had VIRTUALLY NO METHOD for others to duplicate

> his " claimed " results.

>

> Pick a BETTER MODEL, okay? Someone like Jesus, and what Mary

> Magdalena said about his SECRET TEACHINGS from 2,000 years ago,

and

> written up in the NH found in 1952.

>

> > I have tried hundreds of experiments in manifesting

> > from big to small things in the past 10 years, and

> > even before reading Neville's work, I have seen in my

> > experience that when I see myself having it, it is

> > totally not emotionally fulfilling enough,

>

> Continue on DOING IT WRONG if you want. Others who want to learn

it

> and want to have REPEATABLE PERFORMANCES, should learn it the

> CORRECT WAY.

>

> and your

> > mind actually thinks it is someone else, or a

> > self-image to work towards to.

>

> HELL, you are evening saying it wrong.

>

> EVerytime my

> > imagination is immediately effective is when I

> > associate into the image. " Thinking of it " may get

> > yourself motivated, but it is 'thinking from' that

> > actually makes you enter the state.

>

> Horse pucky.

>

> You are leaving out so much.

>

> You don't really have a clue, do you?

>

> Let me make a suggestion. Go to google. type is " swish pattern " .

And

> then find Richard's pattern and restudy it. Then do WHAT IT REALLY

> SAYS, and not what you " think " it says.

>

> You will learn something very important.

>

> > Many people do not have the visualisation skill to see

> > themself clearly and get emotional juice out of it.

>

> Really?

>

> So, instead to teaching people how to do what works, and giving

them

> the skills to do it right, you want to dumb it down for real

stupid

> people?

>

> You want to give them mud and call in chocolate cake?

>

> > The swish works and Bandler even said you can see a

> > role model instead of yourself, it still works. It is

> > making your mind move towards to. But I have found

> > that creation is different from changing(moving

> > towards a) new self-image.

>

> So, you say.

>

> What is your verification process besides words?

>

> Besides opinion?

>

> Fracken it!

>

> It's so kool to find someone that is so evolved that they are

> superior in knowledge to NLP founder and Genius Dr. Richard

Bandler,

> to Silva Mind Control Founder Jose Silva, so much smarter than Max

> Freedom Long, and better than all the other EXPERTS that we stand

on

> the shoulders of...

>

> ...the people that can ACTUALLY DO THE DAMN DRILLS AND GET THE

> RESULTS THEY DESIRE!

>

> Stupidity and ignorance are illnesses that spread faster than the

> common cold!

>

> It's so neat that here on this list we have many superior Huna

> trainers like Greg, Lori, Vince, Otha, and a few others that are

> vitamin C of the mind and can help erase that common cold of

> stupidity.

>

>

> Founder of the Kahuna Mind, co-developer of the Silva UltraMind

> Remote Viewing ESP, Remote Influence ESP, NLP Mastery Trainer,

blab,

> blab, blab...

> webpage, mentaltrainingsecrets.com

>

[Guest guest]

--- " scarolina1000 " <dougspri@r...> wrote:

> I had a few question regarding the part of this post relating to

> Neville. I have read just about every book he wrote that I am

>aware of, I recall you mentioning one of his books at the October

>seminar and was surprised to read that you don't agree with

>anything he said.

 

Yep.

 

I've all of them also. Many different copies of each one.

 

I've studied them. Several times over the past 45 years.

 

Then I've asked myself the magic questions about the " how-tos " the

parts he never CLEARLY teaches.

 

Please NOTE that I used the word CLEARLY?

 

And " I'VE " came up with very workable solutions that WORK RIGHT NOW

for all that do the drills.

 

> > I aggree with NOTHING NG said or did.

> > Why not?

> > Because he had VIRTUALLY NO METHOD for others to duplicate

> > his " claimed " results.

 

Above is what I did say about Neville.

 

Please REREAD my reasons " why not " .

 

It's because his methods of teaching what he professed to know were

shallow at best.

 

> > Pick a BETTER MODEL, okay? Someone like Jesus, and what Mary

> > Magdalena said about his SECRET TEACHINGS from 2,000 years ago,

> and

> > written up in the NH found in 1952.

 

>Does that mean that you believe his method for manifesation

> does not work? In " The Law and the Promise " and " The Power of

> Awareness " he lists many dramatic examples of how he and many of

his

> students used his technique for manifestation (assuming of course

> that these are true stories).

 

Of course they are " true " . But in what sense of " true " ?

 

True in the sense of a nocebo? Which means it works NOT because it's

valid, but because you believe it's valid?

 

For example. I always calibrate my gasoline milage, for EVERYTIME I

fill the gas tank!

 

Not long ago, I bought these widgits that are supposed to increase

my gasoline milage by 17%.

 

So I put them on, and I continued checking my gas milage every tank

of gas.

 

Guess what? The milage is exactly the same before and after the

widgit was installed.

 

How do I know? Because I MEASURED BEFORE AND AFTER.

 

Now, those that HAVE NOT measured before, but measure after the

widgit is installed will THINK that their widgit has increased their

gas milage.

 

That's why, with anything I teach we ALWAYS TEACH YOU SEVERAL

VERIFICATION PROCESSES ALSO.

 

So you won't hallucinate this or that.

 

>I'm also on the Neville Goddard group

> and many of the people on that list share stories of how they have

> manifested things with his principles,

 

Yes, I'm on that group also. And the only reason I've NOT ever

posted there is because I'd just inflame them into wanting to kill

me.

 

I only use technologies that work all the time and are repeatable.

 

That is way past " pretend " .

 

> I recall you saying at the October seminar in regards to the

Neville

> book something to the effect that there is nothing specific in his

> book.

 

That's right.

 

> I must not understand what Neville is saying because when I

> read his books, it seems very specific to me. Basically you pick

a

> scene that implies your wish fullfilled,

 

Okay. Associated or dissociated? How do you imagine if it's right or

not right for you?

 

What are the submodalities of " before the event " and " in the event "

and " after the event " .

 

How do they differ?

 

What are the valuable differences that really change the differences?

 

> you imagine yourself in the

> scene, (not looking at it from a distance)

 

This statement is non-clear. You cannont " imagine yourself in the

scene " and at the same time " not looking at it from a distance " ...

 

The statement, " NOT looking at it from a distance " INSTALLS " looking

at it from a distance " .

 

There are hundreds of factors to associated and dissociated. And

only a few of them really work for manifestation.

 

I'm not talking about " accidents " , I'm talking about everytime you

do the drill you get the result.

 

>feeling what you would

> feel, seeing what you would see etc., if the scene was actually

> taking place and you keep repeating this until it takes on the

tones

> of reality.

 

This is not the WORST WAY, BUT CLOSE, assuming he really mean " you

are in the merry-go-round and not watching someone else on it.

 

The mind, IF ASSOCIATED INTO THE PICTURE, will assume it already has

what it's after, AND " NOT " WORK on achieving it!

 

SINCE you already feel you have skill X, then no more effort is

applied for getting skill X.

 

And, Joe, that might be one of the reasons you've not yet gotten

skill X.

 

I know that Richard, often uses associated in his manifestations,

and he normally does NOT get them.

 

The times he does achieve, is when he's so angry that he's proving

himself to someone else.

 

Which is not what I'm refering to, or what Neville is refering to.

 

 

> He talks a lot about doing this at night and fallign

> asleep in the feeling of the wish fullfilled.

 

Well, how long is that window open?

 

30 seconds? a minute?

 

You need 15 MINUTES IN THAT WINDOW for the thoughts to be installed.

 

And it should be done for 3 days running.

 

That is, if you want results 1,000 times MORE POWERFUL than Neville.

 

And BEST RESULTS are done with the " as frame " from the dissociated.

 

Now, I'm pretty sure you are NOT clear on what dissociated means.

 

It does NOT mean " non-motivated " . It does NOT mean " no goals " . It

does NOT mean " NOT DESERVING " .

 

So what does it mean?

 

> He says you that when you think of your desire you think about it

>s if is already a fact, (the law of assumption). According to

>Neville this is what Jesus meant when he said that when you pray

>for something believe you have already received it.

 

He was refereing to the TIME the tense of past, present and future.

 

What is something he could have added to his drill is to have used

the present progressive, " I am achieving skill X " ...

 

You have NOT read Mary Madalena's part in the recovered texts from

1952.

 

Mary tells " how " the 3 levels of mind are necessary components..

 

Neville NEVER tells how, ever.

 

And in the above example you gave, it was very superficial with much

missing from it.

 

And, because of your training with me, you know unconsciously the

missing parts.

 

So YOU, because of my training can probably make Neville's stuff

work. Can you?

 

Okay. Here's some more confusion for those that like Neville (I also

like Neville, I just don't like his abstractness). It's okay if you

like him. If you are having good results with what and how he

teaches, more power to you.

 

This is NOT a post to slander Neville. In fact my original post was

NOT about Neville, but about real crappy skills some dumb asshole

was attempting to teach others, and those want-ta-bees methods just

don't work.

 

At least they don't work for 90% plus percent of the population.

 

In fact, Neville's stuff, and Napoleon Hill's stuff only work for

about 10% of the population.

 

So you get to CHOOSE how good you want to be.

 

That is what this post is about.

 

 

 

Am I misunderstanding what Neville was saying?

> Thanks,

>

> Doug

[Guest guest]

healingenergies-

essentialskills , " kahunamaker " <kahunamaker>

wrote:

 

Some good points. Thanks for the clarification Doc.

 

Sincerley,

 

Doug

>

> --- " scarolina1000 " <dougspri@r...> wrote:

> > I had a few question regarding the part of this post relating to

> > Neville. I have read just about every book he wrote that I am

> >aware of, I recall you mentioning one of his books at the

October

> >seminar and was surprised to read that you don't agree with

> >anything he said.

>

> Yep.

>

> I've all of them also. Many different copies of each one.

>

> I've studied them. Several times over the past 45 years.

>

> Then I've asked myself the magic questions about the " how-tos " the

> parts he never CLEARLY teaches.

>

> Please NOTE that I used the word CLEARLY?

>

> And " I'VE " came up with very workable solutions that WORK RIGHT

NOW

> for all that do the drills.

>

> > > I aggree with NOTHING NG said or did.

> > > Why not?

> > > Because he had VIRTUALLY NO METHOD for others to duplicate

> > > his " claimed " results.

>

> Above is what I did say about Neville.

>

> Please REREAD my reasons " why not " .

>

> It's because his methods of teaching what he professed to know

were

> shallow at best.

>

> > > Pick a BETTER MODEL, okay? Someone like Jesus, and what Mary

> > > Magdalena said about his SECRET TEACHINGS from 2,000 years

ago,

> > and

> > > written up in the NH found in 1952.

>

> >Does that mean that you believe his method for manifesation

> > does not work? In " The Law and the Promise " and " The Power of

> > Awareness " he lists many dramatic examples of how he and many of

> his

> > students used his technique for manifestation (assuming of

course

> > that these are true stories).

>

> Of course they are " true " . But in what sense of " true " ?

>

> True in the sense of a nocebo? Which means it works NOT because

it's

> valid, but because you believe it's valid?

>

> For example. I always calibrate my gasoline milage, for EVERYTIME

I

> fill the gas tank!

>

> Not long ago, I bought these widgits that are supposed to increase

> my gasoline milage by 17%.

>

> So I put them on, and I continued checking my gas milage every

tank

> of gas.

>

> Guess what? The milage is exactly the same before and after the

> widgit was installed.

>

> How do I know? Because I MEASURED BEFORE AND AFTER.

>

> Now, those that HAVE NOT measured before, but measure after the

> widgit is installed will THINK that their widgit has increased

their

> gas milage.

>

> That's why, with anything I teach we ALWAYS TEACH YOU SEVERAL

> VERIFICATION PROCESSES ALSO.

>

> So you won't hallucinate this or that.

>

> >I'm also on the Neville Goddard group

> > and many of the people on that list share stories of how they

have

> > manifested things with his principles,

>

> Yes, I'm on that group also. And the only reason I've NOT ever

> posted there is because I'd just inflame them into wanting to kill

> me.

>

> I only use technologies that work all the time and are repeatable.

>

> That is way past " pretend " .

>

> > I recall you saying at the October seminar in regards to the

> Neville

> > book something to the effect that there is nothing specific in

his

> > book.

>

> That's right.

>

> > I must not understand what Neville is saying because when I

> > read his books, it seems very specific to me. Basically you

pick

> a

> > scene that implies your wish fullfilled,

>

> Okay. Associated or dissociated? How do you imagine if it's right

or

> not right for you?

>

> What are the submodalities of " before the event " and " in the

event "

> and " after the event " .

>

> How do they differ?

>

> What are the valuable differences that really change the

differences?

>

> > you imagine yourself in the

> > scene, (not looking at it from a distance)

>

> This statement is non-clear. You cannont " imagine yourself in the

> scene " and at the same time " not looking at it from a distance " ...

>

> The statement, " NOT looking at it from a distance "

INSTALLS " looking

> at it from a distance " .

>

> There are hundreds of factors to associated and dissociated. And

> only a few of them really work for manifestation.

>

> I'm not talking about " accidents " , I'm talking about everytime you

> do the drill you get the result.

>

> >feeling what you would

> > feel, seeing what you would see etc., if the scene was actually

> > taking place and you keep repeating this until it takes on the

> tones

> > of reality.

>

> This is not the WORST WAY, BUT CLOSE, assuming he really mean " you

> are in the merry-go-round and not watching someone else on it.

>

> The mind, IF ASSOCIATED INTO THE PICTURE, will assume it already

has

> what it's after, AND " NOT " WORK on achieving it!

>

> SINCE you already feel you have skill X, then no more effort is

> applied for getting skill X.

>

> And, Joe, that might be one of the reasons you've not yet gotten

> skill X.

>

> I know that Richard, often uses associated in his manifestations,

> and he normally does NOT get them.

>

> The times he does achieve, is when he's so angry that he's proving

> himself to someone else.

>

> Which is not what I'm refering to, or what Neville is refering to.

>

>

> > He talks a lot about doing this at night and fallign

> > asleep in the feeling of the wish fullfilled.

>

> Well, how long is that window open?

>

> 30 seconds? a minute?

>

> You need 15 MINUTES IN THAT WINDOW for the thoughts to be

installed.

>

> And it should be done for 3 days running.

>

> That is, if you want results 1,000 times MORE POWERFUL than

Neville.

>

> And BEST RESULTS are done with the " as frame " from the dissociated.

>

> Now, I'm pretty sure you are NOT clear on what dissociated means.

>

> It does NOT mean " non-motivated " . It does NOT mean " no goals " . It

> does NOT mean " NOT DESERVING " .

>

> So what does it mean?

>

> > He says you that when you think of your desire you think about

it

> >s if is already a fact, (the law of assumption). According to

> >Neville this is what Jesus meant when he said that when you pray

> >for something believe you have already received it.

>

> He was refereing to the TIME the tense of past, present and

future.

>

> What is something he could have added to his drill is to have used

> the present progressive, " I am achieving skill X " ...

>

> You have NOT read Mary Madalena's part in the recovered texts from

> 1952.

>

> Mary tells " how " the 3 levels of mind are necessary components..

>

> Neville NEVER tells how, ever.

>

> And in the above example you gave, it was very superficial with

much

> missing from it.

>

> And, because of your training with me, you know unconsciously the

> missing parts.

>

> So YOU, because of my training can probably make Neville's stuff

> work. Can you?

>

> Okay. Here's some more confusion for those that like Neville (I

also

> like Neville, I just don't like his abstractness). It's okay if

you

> like him. If you are having good results with what and how he

> teaches, more power to you.

>

> This is NOT a post to slander Neville. In fact my original post

was

> NOT about Neville, but about real crappy skills some dumb asshole

> was attempting to teach others, and those want-ta-bees methods

just

> don't work.

>

> At least they don't work for 90% plus percent of the population.

>

> In fact, Neville's stuff, and Napoleon Hill's stuff only work for

> about 10% of the population.

>

> So you get to CHOOSE how good you want to be.

>

> That is what this post is about.

>

>

>

> Am I misunderstanding what Neville was saying?

> > Thanks,

> >

> > Doug

>