RE: is now using an NLP technology that is a convincer strategy for those that misma

[Guest guest]

Sandy,

 

You make good observations as always. I thought it was interesting that he

ignored the creators of the systems (Bandler, etc)... and the 1st generation of

good trainers, but rather focused on watered down " sources " -- or did he choose

them for that reason. I mean every thing you read or hear is completely true

and without bias... is it not?

 

I think this is " a lark " that seems to falsely feel empowered by playing within

his own mind...

 

Greg R.

 

 

>

>

> On

> Behalf Of sandygodheart

> Monday, August 29, 2005 4:51 PM

>

> is now using an

> NLP technology that is a convincer strategy for those that misma

>

> --- , " Oliver Lark " <awenbendithia> wrote:

> > Hello Doc

> >

> > Here are a few of the sources I have. They are infinitely better

> than

> > testemonials. The most interesting thing is that they tend to

> > indicate there are far better ways of doing things:

>

> Hi Doc. I find the above very cloudy. First he states his

> sources are better than any testimonial. Then he gives source

> materials with no clarification of why nor of how they back

> his premise.

>

> So, to me, he's still has no clarity.

>

> And because of his lack of clarity and no supporting research

> done by people that are credible in the field under

> discussion, I see no point in reading any further on his

> post, nor any of his future emails.

>

> > I respect other people's choice to use NLP or not.

>

> Notice how this guy is now using an NLP technology that is a

> convincer strategy for those that mismatch automatically.

>

> And he's using NLP after he tells us that NLP is not valid.

>

> I'm done with him. I'm pretty sure he's the same guy that

> keeps cropping up here and on your other list with his

> dissention statements for the past month, that you keep

> getting rid of. But under a new name. Remember how I was

> correct about the other person, the person that stated you

> were doing a BJ pattern on them?

>

> Sandy

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Greg

 

Fair point! I did actually seek research done by Bandler and

friends. The only thing remotely similar to research was a book

called NLP the study of the structure of subjective experience. But

it did not test the theory. I also noticed that Bandler stated " I

do not do theory " . So they don't do theory or test the theory. I

don't think it is in their interests to do so.

 

But plenty of people have done research on NLP, including the US

army. Its very convincing research and it supported my own

observations. The references I posted were more reviews, meta-

analyses or overviews of literature.

 

I know you will follow your own path. Clearly you have a mind of

your own:)

 

Cheers

Oliver

 

 

 

, " Greg Radke "

<gdradke> wrote:

> Sandy,

>

> You make good observations as always. I thought it was interesting

that he

> ignored the creators of the systems (Bandler, etc)... and the 1st

generation of

> good trainers, but rather focused on watered down " sources " -- or

did he choose

> them for that reason. I mean every thing you read or hear is

completely true

> and without bias... is it not?

>

> I think this is " a lark " that seems to falsely feel empowered by

playing within

> his own mind...

>

> Greg R.

>

>

> >

> >

> > On

> > Behalf Of sandygodheart

> > Monday, August 29, 2005 4:51 PM

> >

> > is now using an

> > NLP technology that is a convincer strategy for those that misma

> >

> > --- , " Oliver Lark " <awenbendithia> wrote:

> > > Hello Doc

> > >

> > > Here are a few of the sources I have. They are infinitely

better

> > than

> > > testemonials. The most interesting thing is that they tend to

> > > indicate there are far better ways of doing things:

> >

> > Hi Doc. I find the above very cloudy. First he states his

> > sources are better than any testimonial. Then he gives source

> > materials with no clarification of why nor of how they back

> > his premise.

> >

> > So, to me, he's still has no clarity.

> >

> > And because of his lack of clarity and no supporting research

> > done by people that are credible in the field under

> > discussion, I see no point in reading any further on his

> > post, nor any of his future emails.

> >

> > > I respect other people's choice to use NLP or not.

> >

> > Notice how this guy is now using an NLP technology that is a

> > convincer strategy for those that mismatch automatically.

> >

> > And he's using NLP after he tells us that NLP is not valid.

> >

> > I'm done with him. I'm pretty sure he's the same guy that

> > keeps cropping up here and on your other list with his

> > dissention statements for the past month, that you keep

> > getting rid of. But under a new name. Remember how I was

> > correct about the other person, the person that stated you

> > were doing a BJ pattern on them?

> >

> > Sandy