> On Mar 30, 1:51 pm, Dan Abel <da...[at]sonic.net> wrote:
> > Most of the posts on this thread are from two different addresses,
> > "Atchoo" and a new one. The bodies of the posts are taken from real
> > people, from the distant past. I don't think they were reposted with
> > permission, certainly mine weren't.
> ...nor mine.

> On 30 Mar, 13:24, Mike Tyner <lite...[at]googlemail.com> wrote:
> > "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > No but that wasnt' the argument. Bates said they
> > > see better color and form worse
> > > with glasses. Nonsense.
> > > I meant "see color and form worse with glasses."
> You know I wasted too much time arguing the point even with 20/20
> correction someone with glasses doesn't have the same quality of
> vision as someone with perfect sight, acuity same, function may be
> fine, but there's at least a little difference in ways things are
> seen. Glasses are a pain and most everyone would prefer to have
> perfect sight, thus the popularity of unnecessary surgical risk.

> Most of the posts on this thread are from two different addresses,
> "Atchoo" and a new one. *The bodies of the posts are taken from real
> people, from the distant past. *I don't think they were reposted with
> permission, certainly mine weren't.

> WTF? Have I got a messed up news reader here? It appears that all the
> conversations including MT's either come from
> absolutelyinvinci...[at]hotmail.com or
> lite...[at]googlemail.com
> Even though they identify as different people... Same posting hosting,
> same version of Firefox.
> Lets test this shall we.

> Kory Postma <kor...[at]NOhotSPAMmail.com> wrote in message <news:
> 3cc2072c103683f24bd69a2dfacf99ab[at]free.teranews.com> ...
> > Thank you Rishi. Like I have even said before, many people do not
> > truly understand what the Bates Method is.
> Can you provide us with a statement as to what YOU think the Bates
> Method is??

> > My goodness Rishi, your incomprehension is about the most complete I've
> > ever seen. I have better things to do than read your extraordinary
> > fabrications or whatever they are, just not understanding I suppose. Do
> > you have any awareness that you misquote and misread?
> Your vision is bad as is your memory.
> You mismatch me with the Evaristo!
> I was not moderated from your group, I simply left when I became aware
> of your incompetence.
> It was the Evaristo that was moderated. Check your loggings, you can
> see it very well. Stop telling lies, otherwise I will continue to
> expose you.
> Then, what is the point of "moderation"?
> People can subscribe with different names and mocker you more easily.
> Either you moderate everybody (as I do in my Italian group, but it is
> an editorial choice, not to put off people who are not according the
> standards), or you moderate nobody. It is unfair to only moderate
> those who are better than you and show more intelligence than you. You
> are an unfair man.
> > Suffice to say that your good friend Evaristo unsubscribed and called me
> > a stupid man when I asked him to help out another reader who wanted to
> > understand the swing and how to implement it. Why? who knows. It looked
> > significantly like turning yellow to me. The same went for another
> > subscriber of around that time - when i asked for some practical signs
> > that they could be of some use to the group instead of just whining and
> > complaining that 'no one else got it', and the response was again stony
> > silence.
> ???
> > No use at all Rishi. None.
> > It's great that you've found something that really fires you up. Long
> > may you promulgate it with enjoyment and of great benefit to others.
> ???
> > It saddens me that you simultaneously alienate yourself from many people
> > with no control over the habit.
> ???
> > You know, you may have the single most significant contributiion to make
> > to the whole of the Bates method movement, but instead of simply
> > bringing it to the table you deliver it like this:
> I do not see ANY BATES METHOD MOVEMENT!!!
> There is none and there will never be none, because the Bates stuff is
> mainly individual, is a single personal process, it is not a religion,
> although you bad teachers are striving to transform it into one!!!
> You are the same rotten minds as the professionals here. But you think
> you are on the right side of the river, just as they are thinking
> about themselves.
> You are part of a rotten church as they are.
> It's ugly to say this, but it is the truth!
> You want to build something, but your fundations are rotten.
> Why don't you cure yourself permanently?
> Explain that.
> > 'This is the real Bates and if you don't understand it or if you have
> > something else to offer you are stupid, a liar, a charlatan etc. and
> > there is no use in talking to you'.
> That's true: the Bates publications are available. Who are you to cut,
> distort and destroy his publications, robbing people of the true
> genius of the man, and in his name, too!!! And you cannot get any cure
> for yourself!!!
> Don't you feel embarassed?
> You and all your friends, high myopic and imperfected sighted people,
> chose not to cure yourselves but to sell your false teachings to other
> gullibles, and you advocate for yourself the truth about "The
> Method"!!!
> > This is two year old behaviour. Why so spoiled? Do you not know that no
> > man is an island unto himself? It is acceptable for someone of the age
> > of two to believe all information and the universe centres on him, but
> > it is not acceptable for someone who can string a couple of sentences
> > together. Would you not like to have many teachers sympathetic to your
> > words and happy to listen, learn, and discuss and share experiences?
> NO IF THE TEACHERS ARE NOT ABLE TO CURE THEMSELVES!!!
> CURE YOURSELF AND I WILL RESPECT YOU!!!
> OTHERWISE STOP TO SPOIL THE BATES NAME AND START SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
> YOU ARE DESTROYING THE WHOLE WORK OF BATES AND LIERMAN.
> > Your approach is exactly what happened to the method in the last 70
> > years. "I have it and those people over there don't" The result was
> > fragmentation, and a disintegration of the much needed support for
> > pushing the method forward.
> I just happened to cure myself, which you cannot do.
> If what happened in the last 70 years was something like this, that
> cures happened, there would have no need to disintegrate anything.
> Instead, people started to call themselves experts and teachers, like
> you do, WITHOUT HAVING ANY SUCCESS IN CURING THEMSELVES!!!
> How cannot you see this, I am puzzled.
> There is no "method" to bu pushed forward.
> You have to push yourself to perfect your understanding and your
> practice, become cured, and cure others.
> But if you cannot cure yourself, if you cannot still maintain your
> constant improvement, then what are you teaching? You are simply
> teaching how to remain uncured.
> It's clear and simple.
> Maybe you need more time to realize this, take your time, I am not
> bothered by you, just wanted to expose your unfairness and
> charlatanery.
> > Right or wrong just tone it down, and *break free of whatever
> > programming you're under and then you'll find a degree of progress that
> > is so much more than now.
> ???
> You'd better tone you up and start finally to practice the right
> methods to get a cure.
> It's a shame that you read only 20/50 and your vision fluctuates. And
> you cannot drive, and you cannot see how people behave with their eyes
> when you teach them.
> Start to practice according to the truth and become cured.
> I assure you that you can be back to 20/20 and more. Believe me. But
> you have to drop the false things they taught you (myopic people
> taught you to remain myopic), return to the Original Sources and
> practice accordingly.
> I suspect you fear the sun too much, you don't practice with strong
> electrical lights and you don't practice with imagination of black in
> the distance.
> So, you have much to do for yourself. Then, and only then, your
> "method" will spread and you won't be embarassed to face the ugly
> professionals that threathen you.
> Start the practice.
> If you need help, I am available.