VisionFromFeeling - General discussion thread

[Ashles]

Yes it does. If I find excessively offensive lies that I feel are hurtful (and trust me, I've shown a high tolerance) and also violate my rights as a person (yes, we claimants are persons too) posted about me on your site I will first contact you and if no measures are taken by you I will contact the appropriate legal representative.

Is there an 'appropriate legal representative' for "Trying to take legal action against things that aren't illegal"?
Is there an 'appropriate legal representative' for "Taking actions against things I don't like or people who disagree with me or don't believe my silly claims"?

Anita, most people grow out of the "Stop disagreeing with me or I'll sue you" stage of arguing at about 11.
We know how frankly baffling it is to you that anyone might dare to simply not believe you or your claims, nonetheless the world has many such people.
Nearly 7 billion of them.

There is nothing illegal about finding your ability unbelievable and saying so. Nor is there anything illegal about speculating about your mental health or even ridiculing your claims.

If you could find some lies about you that you could prove have cost you some form of income then you might have the beginnings of a case.

I can't see any lies anywhere. And I can't see any income you might have lost.

If I find justifiable reason to object to your website created about me I will definitely make it matter to you as well.

Oh look - Princess Anita Queen of the Universe has returned. Watch as she once again orders the world to behave as she wills it.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Out of curiosity, how about publicly accusing someone of illegal actions, without proof?
I ask because you may want to proceed with caution there, Anita. Your talk of "legal representatives" may come around to bite you.

The literal answer is yes but conditionally.

The claim, to be prosecuted, still needs to meet the above criteria in the other posts- now it gets "muddy".

Its the difference between stating a claim as fact or opinion. If you state it as a fact- you are walking on thin ice but if you state it as an opinion, you are pretty clear.

Then it gets muddier. You can state it as fact - be 100% WRONG but had a sincere belief and or information ( to a reasonable person) that your belief was "true" then you are legally insulated from the charge.

Then you have the difference between a "threat" versus a WARNING. ( which is a razor thin line)

But, a "threat" to initiate LEGAL action ( such as "I'm gonna sue you if you do or dont do...................." [ or substitute arrest] CANNOT be grounds for action nor can publicity surrounding arrest/litigation be a basis for suit either.) The reason they cannot be is because an arrest or suit has statutory requirements that must be met or the action cannot be performed since the "citizen" isnt the one doing the arresting or prosecuting.

( a good test that illustrates this is the Duke Rape case)

 

[desertgal]

I am deeply offended that some of you would not consider me to be entitled to my own world of thoughts, perception, and information processing...

You are entitled to think and fantasize about whatever you like. Thing is, YOU brought your claims to the table here, and have treated everyone here as completely inferior to you with your actions. You can slap a veneer of civility on arrogant behavior, Anita, but the arrogance still exists.

Your actions give the lie to your words.

...which is most essential to what a conscious human being is and has the right to be.

There you go with that "human" business again. You claim to be ET, you claim to be human. If you are human, then you shouldn't have attempted to jerk everyone here around with your "dwarf star" nonsense. And that's just the tip of the VisionFromFantasy iceberg.

GeeMack said it best. You treat everyone here like crap, even as you are smiling and using polite words and flowery compliments.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

This really belonged in the other thread. I'm sorry that you cannot differentiate between discussing the website and discussing your claims. Like I said, I don't care if you're "okay" with the site or not. If I am doing something that is actionable court, that's a completely different matter.

My claim is most relevant to your website. You will care if I'm ok with your site or not because if it violates my legal rights I will take action. My level of tolerance is quite high, so what ever I will strongly object against I am likely to be backed up by law. Just a heads up.

It's amazing to me how you can contradict yourself and not think anybody is going to notice. Somebody you just met that day or "just recently" is not a "close friend."

They are indeed my close friends. There is no contradiction.

The truth is that you have told people you barely know that they have potentially serious health problems. That's a far cry from telling "loved ones" mostly "harmless" stuff.

The truth is they are my close friends. The serious heart problem is not harmless, no. But the expressed perceptions still fall within the definition of mostly harmless.

You can justify it all you want, but the point is you are being inconsistent at best and deliberately misleading at worst.

You are forming misconceptions one after the other, clouded by your preconceived ideas that in me you will reveal "the next Sylvia Browne" and that that will make your fortune. Nope. Not gonna happen.

If you haven't established a real-world connection, why would you tell us, I perceive images of the cells of plants and perceive the vibrational aspect of their molecules. I can take those vibrational understandings of the molecules and in my mind apply them to a variety of theoretical situations, and have discovered for instance a plant that has a very potent cancer remedy. I've also seen a cancer remedy in an orange mushroom, except that this molecule would also destroy the human kidneys.

Because I am describing what I perceive. I never said that these hypotheses perceptions were scientifically tested or verified in a laboratory. But I still might. I'd love to find that mushroom and take some extracts from it (yup, I can do that, I'm doing a B.S. Chemistry) and study the structure of its molecules (which is done with conventional instrumentation) to assess based on conventional scientific knowledge whether there in fact is a reasonable hypothesis of cancer remedy in any of its compounds based on what is already known about cancer and possible medicines. If I found the hypothesis to be reasonable I could take it to the appropriate professor and discuss my idea with them. And see where it goes.

What that is supposed to mean is that you didn't start mentioning colors and shapes until you saw the show about Daniel.

I've always mentioned colors and shapes. Even before I found out that Daniel is doing the same thing in his own thought process.

Closest friends being defined as people you just met that day. It also means the people at FACT. It also means the people here on JREF whose pictures you attempted to read and failed.

Family, close friends and FACT Skeptics are the only ones listed on my medical perceptions page. The test with your picture over the internet was something I did to please all of you who were insisting that I test things that are not my paranormal claim. So the fact that I failed is irrelevant toward my investigation and my paranormal claim. It was never my claim to read from pictures over the internet but I did that just to give it a try and to move on. So let's move on. I have a paranormal claim going on, the same one as always.

 

[Ashles]

My claim is most relevant to your website. You will care if I'm ok with your site or not because if it violates my legal rights I will take action. My level of tolerance is quite high, so what ever I will strongly object against I am likely to be backed up by law. Just a heads up.

And a heads up for you Anita. If you violate our legal rights either here on the JREF or on your website you will feel the full effects of the law brought against you.
If you have breached our legal rights in any way we will seek the full action of law against you and it will likely be upheld by the law.

Gosh isn't it exciting to throw around meaningless legal threats regarding things that haven't happened.

I am in the UK - are you going to threaten me with extradition if I write anything you don't like?
Perhaps if I continue to question why you are unable to back up any of your claims with proper testing you will push for a trade embargo against the British Isles?

There is nothing that has been written that in any way breaches laws and no possible reason to think there will be, so your toothless legal threats are coming across as very childish and trying to imply you have some legal weight that you actually don't.

Really this "Watch out or I'll sue you!" behaviour is a little childish.

 

[desertgal]

My claim is most relevant to your website. You will care if I'm ok with your site or not because if it violates my legal rights I will take action. My level of tolerance is quite high, so what ever I will strongly object against I am likely to be backed up by law.

Wrong. Again.

So let's move on.

I think, to spare the moderators here, those that are familiar with VisionFromFantasy^TM should revert to discussing her claims on UncaYimmy's website, since we will achieve nothing but the same endless debate here. We can always refer any 'newbies' to the truth with a simple linked post.

Continuing to feed her quest for attention gets us nowhere.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

My claim is most relevant to your website. You will care if I'm ok with your site or not because if it violates my legal rights I will take action. My level of tolerance is quite high, so what ever I will strongly object against I am likely to be backed up by law. Just a heads up.

Let me give you a "heads up"- Your "rights" have not been violated by his site.

Also, truth is an absolute defense so be prepared to PROVE yourself first.

His site doesnt require your approval or consent. You made your claims PUBLIC by going here and the other group.

You need to stick to whatever vibrational abilities you specialize in and leave the science and law to those of us who do it for a living.

 

[Ashles]

(From the other thread which, like the whole rest of the internet, Anita believes exists solely so she can talk about her claim at length.)

Most of the "other claims" that you speak about are excerpts taken from my website, where I present them to give a background of my paranormal claim of medical perceptions. I think that my experiences of synesthesia are interesting and relevant to the discussion about my experience of medical perceptions. I have one and only one paranormal claim which I wish to have tested and that is the claim of correlating medical perceptions.

You are sort of turning those sentences into a mantra to be chanted as a magical defence against actually answering the question.

Which is - Why won't you test your other claims which would be far easier to test and yield far less ambivalent results than the medical claim?

They don't need to be 'as strong' as the medical results (which is fairly ironic in itself), they only need to be above chance.

If they cannot be above chance, why would you think you had such abilities in the first place.

And the "Look I just don't wanna" answer is wearing a little thin now.

 

[desertgal]

Perhaps if I continue to question why you are unable to back up any of your claims with proper testing you will push for a trade embargo against the British Isles?

Quit sending Prince Charles over here and we'll call it square. We don't want to listen to him either.

 

[Ashles]

Quit sending Prince Charles over here and we'll call it square. We don't want to listen to him either.

We send him over there so we can have the occasional break from his gibbering nonsense.
Why do you think we keep sending him to do embarassing dancing with delightful indiginous tribal folk?

Everyone sort of tends to forget that's our future King!

 

[Kariboo]

. I can take those vibrational understandings of the molecules and in my mind apply them to a variety of theoretical situations, and have discovered for instance a plant that has a very potent cancer remedy. I've also seen a cancer remedy in an orange mushroom, except that this molecule would also destroy the human kidneys.

I'd love to find that mushroom and take some extracts from it (yup, I can do that, I'm doing a B.S. Chemistry) and study the structure of its molecules (which is done with conventional instrumentation) to assess based on conventional scientific knowledge whether there in fact is a reasonable hypothesis of cancer remedy in any of its compounds based on what is already known about cancer and possible medicines. If I found the hypothesis to be reasonable I could take it to the appropriate professor and discuss my idea with them. And see where it goes.

But you won't because....?????

How nice for all of us with cancer. You'd rather 'see' if someone needs to go to the bathroom or has their period than do something that could actually (theoretically) be helpful.

 

[desertgal]

We send him over there so we can have the occasional break from his gibbering nonsense.
Why do you think we keep sending him to do embarassing dancing with delightful indiginous tribal folk?

Your grand scheme is revealed. You are really hoping the indigenous tribal folk will take him out into the jungle and lose him. Admit it. I'll bet the Queen is in on it, too.

Everyone sort of tends to forget that's our future King!

I remember. I'm sorry. On the other hand, we do have Tom Cruise. I think we're even.

 

[Uncayimmy]

A person? Did you not come here and post the unsolicited claim that you consider yourself to be an extraterrestrial incarnation from a white dwarf star near Arcturus? In fact, if I recall correctly, two gentlemen who are administrators at another website offered evidence that you specifically asked them to delete your membership in the forum on their site, because their software required you to be classified as a human. I recall that you were rather bummed when UncaYimmy pointed out that one has to be human to be awarded the Nobel Prize. I further recall that you were offered several opportunities to withdraw that claim, and you refused to do so.

Do you truly think that, even if you got a case of defamation against UncaYimmy to court, in light of this specific claim, AND all your other claims, any judge would take you seriously? He'd laugh you out the door.

http://www.meetup.com/Ashtar-Command-Starseeds-Walk-ins/members/8490443/

 

[Ashles]

http://www.meetup.com/Ashtar-Command-Starseeds-Walk-ins/members/8490443/

I'm sure she's just doing that to have the usual "fun with the skeptics".

 

[desertgal]

You're making it sound as if I'm going out into the public to do psychic readings, when that is entirely not true.

But you plan to:

From your website: If you arrange a study with me, you can choose between having a scientific interest in taking part in the investigation, or whether you want to *see me perform as a psychic*. I realize that a lot of people seek out alleged psychics and find this interesting or entertaining. I have previously said no to this but think it would offer me more opportunities to have more experience with my perceptions. If I am invited to do psychic readings, read more about this below.

If I am invited to do a psychic reading, I do it in the exact same way as I do the study otherwise. I would still like to use the questionnaires, and to follow the same study procedure as otherwise. I would carefully explain that my skill has not been verified (and really, has any *psychic* verified their skill?) and that my perceptions might be incorrect and therefore none of them may be taken seriously. I charge no money for doing this. If the location is very far away, I might be able to travel there if we find a way to cover my travel expenses. I do invest in my investigation but I just can't afford long travels at the moment. I would be very grateful for any opportunity I am given for gaining more experience with the claim and for progressing in my investigation. Thank you for considering.

Why I don't want to do *Psychic Readings*
Due to the potential harm that can come to a person who receives incorrect medical information about themselves, I am very hesitant about doing *psychic readings*. The only reason I am tempted in the first place is if it were one of the few and only ways for me to have more experience with the perceptions to learn more about them.

You can express all the reluctance you want, but if you do a psychic reading, you do a psychic reading. And the potential harm hasn't stopped you so far.

(and really, has any *psychic* verified their skill?)

Since ESP has never been proven to exist, and you know that, then this is a deliberately disingenuous question designed to mislead any volunteers.

The study will be presented as a study into what impressions people make about their health and whether those impressions represent their actual health or not. There is no mention of anything paranormal what so ever, since that would not be necessary and we haven't established anything paranormal as of yet. According to what evidence is or is not available now I could be doing just that, looking at external impressions and basing my conclusions on that.

So, you don't intend to be honest with the participants of the study, and acknowledge that the study is part of a paranormal investigation, or explain that you will be evaluating them with this alleged 'psychic' ability?

Why even bother? You aren't honest about recording your perceptions* because you are "afraid you might be wrong" (Dr. Carlson), or because you want to be "nice" (anxiety vs. excitement, which is NOT the same thing), or simply because you aren't honest (Wayne), you don't intend to be honest with the participants, you aren't objective about your conclusions, you don't accept objective analysis, you revise your anecdotes to better fit your paranormal claim, etc, etc. This study will prove nothing, because you will not allow it to, except in your own mind, which already believes. You'd be better off using the time to sketch dinosaur ghosts.

*Not intended to imply that I, or anyone here, believes her tale about not recording that perception because she was afraid she would be wrong. IMO, she didn't record that perception because she didn't have that perception, and her story is just "post-perceiving".

 

[GeeMack]

So, you don't intend to be honest with the participants of the study, and acknowledge that the study is part of a paranormal investigation, or explain that you will be evaluating them with this alleged 'psychic' ability?

"Honest?" Did you say, "Honest?" You make me laugh!

 

[desertgal]

http://www.meetup.com/Ashtar-Command-Starseeds-Walk-ins/members/8490443/

Oh, jeez.

Q: Are you willing to "role up your sleeves" and get this planet back on track?
Anita: That is what I am doing every day.

Get over yourself.

 

[quarky]

Playing devil's advocate a moment:

I've had 'trips' wherein my senses were taking in lots of real data that I would normally miss. I'm sure many here have had such experiences; a temporary amplification of the sensory and processing systems; where the data was actually correct, like noticing the tiny insect, or the subtle colors of a butterfly.

Its fathomable that someone might have that going on all the time, or at least be able to go in and out of it.

If that was the deal, how would you put it to a test? It wouldn't be paranormal. It would be amplified normal. Where does such a line get drawn?

I can 'intuit' the intent of a dog, if its mean. Who can't?
I can tell if it has something hurting its paw.
An old vet would see more. His guess of 'thorn' would have some extra points.

The idiot savant is paranormal. Randi should just give him the $ and be done with it.

 

[desertgal]

Playing devil's advocate a moment:

I've had 'trips' wherein my senses were taking in lots of real data that I would normally miss. I'm sure many here have had such experiences; a temporary amplification of the sensory and processing systems; where the data was actually correct, like noticing the tiny insect, or the subtle colors of a butterfly.

Its fathomable that someone might have that going on all the time, or at least be able to go in and out of it.

Sure, I agree. That isn't what Anita is describing, though. If that IS the case:

If that was the deal, how would you put it to a test? It wouldn't be paranormal. It would be amplified normal. Where does such a line get drawn?

Then that would be where a proper study would come in. Problem is, even Anita's preliminary 'readings' in preparation for a study are not honest: she isn't collecting proper data, and she appears to be fudging the data she does collect. Which doesn't hold out much hope that a study would be conducted properly.

I can 'intuit' the intent of a dog, if its mean. Who can't?
I can tell if it has something hurting its paw.
An old vet would see more. His guess of 'thorn' would have some extra points.

Sure. But if the old vet looked at the paw, and said "thorn", and you responded with "I knew it was a thorn before I even brought the dog to you, because I looked into his paw at the atomic level-and it doesn't matter if you don't believe me, because I know it's true" - then you have to consider that any test or study would be fruitless, since the claimant refuses any findings that disprove an extraordinary ability.

That's pretty much the point we are at with Anita.

 

[Senex]

[VFF off topic]
How cute. You watched it. I will post some cartoons here for you.

OK, you rascals better back off. VFF is flirting with me. You don't want to get between me and a flirtaitous woman