In article <MPG.19a692d770af9bc7989...@news.ntlworld.com>,

Kevin <sevenths...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Yes I do want to know, because I don't have time to put my
conviction behind something which is on inadequate foundations.

Very nicely said, Kevin.

Then I gather you'll be gone from this newsgroup until such time as
you have some data to report?

--LB

Hallo Mr. Wooding!!!

Nice to see you here!!!

I drop in and out occasionally.

How are you doing with your myopic refraction? Do you still use
glasses?

Doing very well thank you, no I haven't worn glasses once in over 15
years.

Too bad that you are investing in a study about your "method", because
I know it will be failed and we will all suffer from this.

Well fact is you know very little of what I teach.

What puzzles me Rishi is why you go to such lengths to cause dissension
and discord. There are many many people involved in the NVI movement and

the orthodox vision world in general. Some will be better at passing on
helpful advice than others, some will have a more clearly Batesian
approach than others. Some will not understand it all, some will
understand very little. Yet you will persist in alienating yourself from
them all. If you want to communicate with them in order to pass on your
'knowledge', why make sure that you've offended them all first?

But I guess the real point I want to make is that you seem to be totally
unable to communicate in any other way. Oh, unless you want something of
course in which event you can become very chummy.

So how many Bates teachers are now in the list of those who have told
you to go away?

Doesn't it bother you that you can't actually communicate with anyone
without being offensive?

Personally, I don't have any problems with dealing with Bates oriented
person vs. ophthalmologist, in a civil and organised manner, where
things get discussed and information is passed and shared. There's no
agenda to convince but a genuine desire to exchange. It works, and
things move forward.

But whether you like this or not, or think this is silly or not, or a
waste of time or not, the fact is that to those of orthodox inclination
you epitomize the image of the Bates cult member. Unable to communicate
without offense, unaware that this gets you nowhere and in fact provides
ammunition for the orthodoxy to dismiss the method outright.

I know you are annoyed at me because I put you on moderation on the
Bates yahoogroups list because you were unable to talk without being
rude or childish, but really going from writing to me and telling me
that you considered I was one of only two Bates teachers who could
really teach it (and asking me if I would train you) to this apparent
childish diatribe above, I mean, what a mess.

It's a shame, because your heart's in the right place, but your people
skills suck big time.

Hallo Mr. Wooding!!!
Nice to see you here!!!
I drop in and out occasionally.

You drop always out of the right time.

How are you doing with your myopic refraction? Do you still use
glasses?
Doing very well thank you, no I haven't worn glasses once in over 15
years.

And how do you cope with driving, with life in general? If it is true
that you can see only 20/50 you should be in a very dirty position.You
are not able to detect any sign of eyestrain or strain when you work
with your clients. How do you do that? Get closer?

Speak out the truth, because to lie is against your permanent cure,
remember well!!!

Too bad that you are investing in a study about your "method", because
I know it will be failed and we will all suffer from this.
Well fact is you know very little of what I teach.

I know that you are ignorant about the truth, that's all.
You demonstrate that the Evaristo was right: you are a stupid man. I
once had faith in you and trusted you, but when you confessed that you
are blind and cannot go over 20/50 then I understood how fake you and
your friends at seeing.org are.

This is saddening, because it is unbelievable that after 15 years of
training you are still at 20/50.

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?

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:

'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'.

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?

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.

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.

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.

WTF? Have I got a messed up news reader here? It appears that all the
conversations including MT's either come from

absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com or
lite...@googlemail.com

Even though they identify as different people... Same posting hosting,
same version of Firefox.

Lets test this shall we.

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.

Kory Postma <kor...@NOhotSPAMmail.com> wrote in message <news:
3cc2072c103683f24bd69a2dfacf99ab@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??

On 30 Mar, 13:24, Mike Tyner <lite...@googlemail.com> wrote:
"Mike Tyner" <mty...@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.

On Mar 30, 1:51 pm, Dan Abel <da...@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.