@moderator

[preoccupied]

Psychologists are not scientists. Psychology has no credibility, except maybe personality tests using colored squares or IQ tests. Projection is just inferred reasoning. When James Lingard was making gay comments at me, I believed it was because I was talking about him without talking to him. If I don't engage real conversation with him, something that he tries to receive, it's like I'm trying to get his attention and force him to talk or communicate with me, so it's like rape or gay sex. But if you psychologically analyze something, you deliberately look for things that make sense to you rather than what all of the variables are. In science if you don't consider variables you will always make errors. This is true for psychology as well as Chemistry, but in Chemistry you MUST know the variables, in psychology you can make up whatever shit that you want and it will make sense, but it's still wrong, and because of this psychology is not a science. It's just a bad idea compounding on itself.

[ME]

Anyone can read Jim Lindgaard's thread and see where AB Hammer was disrupting the thread

Is it "Jim" or "James"? I'll use JL, otherwise it gets so confusing...

As I recall things went reasonably well until page 3 or 4, then JL lost something.
JL practically invited Alan by association, "he doesn't like me in here because he and ab hammer don't like Norwegians".

Probably this claim will be rejected, so here's the reasoning:

It really does not matter (for me at least) if JL was right or wrong with that inclusion, but in that sentence Alan was used to reinforce the severity of that accusation; as in: the whole wide wide against JL.
Alan wasn't simply there in your thread: hence you willingly invited him.

The only way to correct this mistake was by saying something like:
"Look Alan, we don't like each other, I made a mistake. Sorry I dragged you in to this. It will not happen again."

As this didn't happen JL's love story (actually a tragedy) continues.

*Wiki: Tragedy (from the Greek: τραγῳδία, tragōidia[a]) is a form of drama based on human suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in audiences.

*Cambridge: A very sad event or situation, especially one involving death or suffering.

I agree someone should be able to work by themselves, nor need permission to explore a hobby.
You've shown JL's Facebook page somewhere, perhaps you two could work together; seems like a perfect fit.

Not_James_Lindgaard, what would you advise JL in this situation?

[WaltzCee]

• quote:

• It's called "projection" - "Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans
  defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative)
  by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person
  who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting."

• John Collins

I've never mentioned but often thought it as JL continually (continuously?) hammers Alan about having amorous intentions toward him.

[Not_James_Lindgaard]

Walt, John Collins,
After I have my medical situation resolved and can build again, I bet AB Hammer will find me. After all, what you guys miss and this is really, really important, okay ? AB Hammer believes I am intelligent enough to be successful. That's why he's in all of my threads. He wants to be able to say he helped me but he hasn't been willing to learn engineering.
And AB Hammer, in that respect you are very much like my Norwegian father, he'd see something fall apart when patience was needed. And remember what the guy told us in museumofhoaxes.com ? Who ever discovers Bessler's wheel will be nothing more than a foot note in history. The fame will be short lived because as they said, it's Bessler's wheel. And I thnk that's why most forum leaders don't put much effort into his work, it's not theirs so why try, right ?

[Tarsier79]

JL. You have no idea. All your assumptions are incorrect. Your grasp on reality is close to nonexistent.

And this, childeren, is why we don't do LSD.

[rlortie]

I enjoy the following quotes, I am sure you will find something fitting the situation here:

http://www.ranker.com/list/a-list-of-fa ... /reference

http://www.bartleby.com/349/authors/45.html

[Not_James_Lindgaard]

JL. You have no idea. All your assumptions are incorrect. Your grasp on reality is close to nonexistent.

And this, childeren, is why we don't do LSD.

tarsier,
I am mindful that you neither you nor rlortie was willing to bet me. :-)

[WaltzCee]

I was looking around the net and found this.

[Tarsier79]

Ha Ha Walt.

What Bet JL. That you will show B's wheel? You have nothing I want. If I did accept your bet, it would be like taking candy from a baby. Instead of giving me your money, you should spend it on rehab.

[Tarsier79]

I did a little digging myself:

[preoccupied]

I see you guys as wrong. The only thing difference between completely civil super intelligent British conversational disagreements, and you guys arguing with James Lingard is his blatant miscommunication. If he were able to put it to words, you guys would be shut up. He doesn't have a mouth piece because he is stupid. You guys are idiotic about it. You know that he can't defend himself but you feel like you should defend yourselves. If there were a lawsuit between AB Hammer and James Lingard where AB Hammer sued Lingard for making fun of him, only a biased legal decision would side with AB Hammer, because it's obvious AB Hammer knows how James Lingard will respond to him, and AB Hammer is picking a fight with a lesser man, so AB Hammer loses in a dispute about who is right. People who can't defend themselves should be defended more. I know it seems contradictory but you should have defended James Lingard when you realized he is an idiot, and you are inviting internet trolling by not being so careful.

[AB Hammer]

I see you guys as wrong. The only thing difference between completely civil super intelligent British conversational disagreements, and you guys arguing with James Lingard is his blatant miscommunication. If he were able to put it to words, you guys would be shut up. He doesn't have a mouth piece because he is stupid. You guys are idiotic about it. You know that he can't defend himself but you feel like you should defend yourselves. If there were a lawsuit between AB Hammer and James Lingard where AB Hammer sued Lingard for making fun of him, only a biased legal decision would side with AB Hammer, because it's obvious AB Hammer knows how James Lingard will respond to him, and AB Hammer is picking a fight with a lesser man, so AB Hammer loses in a dispute about who is right. People who can't defend themselves should be defended more. I know it seems contradictory but you should have defended James Lingard when you realized he is an idiot, and you are inviting internet trolling by not being so careful.

Looks like Lindgaard has you fooled preoccupied. for now you are sounding like a sock puppet for what you just wrote.

1. with James Lingard is his blatant miscommunication

Lies are not blantant miscommunication, but are deliberate attacks when told about someone.

2. He doesn't have a mouth piece because he is stupid.

This is a stupid statement. You must think Lindgaard is a poor victim. The attacker is never the victim. He always attacks first. Even the ultimate fraud string is a response to his constant attacks.

3.You know that he can't defend himself but you feel like you should defend yourselves.

This statement is just laughable.

4. AB Hammer sued Lingard for making fun of him

Another foolish statement. Lies and slander is not making fun.

5. I know it seems contradictory but you should have defended James Lingard when you realized he is an idiot,

I nearly spit out my breakfast on this one. Lindgaard has been banned from countless forums for not obeying the rules, attacks, and lies. Forums that I have never posted on before as well as well.

[WaltzCee]

pro bono opinion

1. I see you guys as wrong.
   Then let's take a look at the matter.
2. The only thing difference between completely civil super intelligent British conversational disagreements, and you guys arguing with James Lingard is his blatant miscommunication.
   Civil & super intelligent & British should never appear in the same sentence.
3. If he were able to put it to words, you guys would be shut up.
   I've reviewed long discourses between James and others. James is adequately articulate. That's not the issue. The issue is James is antagonistic and uncivil. His argument has no basis in reality. People choose to share everything they're doing and some don't. Because one does is no reason every one has to.
4. He doesn't have a mouth piece because he is stupid.
   This is hard to argue against.
5. You guys are idiotic about it.
   This, not so hard. Everyone has their style.
6. You know that he can't defend himself but you feel like you should defend yourselves.
   You would think at some point James would realize this and give it up.
7. If there were a lawsuit between AB Hammer and James Lingard where AB Hammer sued Lingard for making fun of him, only a biased legal decision would side with AB Hammer,
   JL has clearly been slanderous and would loose everything he has. He'd loose his trailer. He'd loose his spam. He'd loose his Norwegian heritage.
8. because it's obvious AB Hammer knows how James Lingard will respond to him,
   If some sucker keeps attacking you there's no disgrace in punching them.
9. and AB Hammer is picking a fight with a lesser man, so AB Hammer loses in a dispute about who is right.
   Alan has asked repeatedly for JL to leave him out of anything JL is doing. JL refuses and so here we are.
10. People who can't defend themselves should be defended more.
    No. They should put up or shut up.
11. I know it seems contradictory but you should have defended James Lingard when you realized he is an idiot,
    Again, very hard to argue against.
12. and you are inviting internet trolling by not being so careful.
    You're blaming the victim.

[Not_James_Lindgaard]

Walt, you guys are funny. That's you, AB Hammer and preoccupied. It is as they say, you can't discuss what you don't know. Kind of why everything you mentioned is a personal attack and no mention of where my science is wrong.
My science isn't wrong. That's why AB Hammer is having you and preoccupied attack me. It makes it seem like he's in the right when he's not. And people in here might find this surprising but I would say that AB Hammer doesn't want Bessler's wheel built unless he gets credit for it.
With how much he posted in the thread His Secret Is In The Levers, his primary claim was that he was being attacked and needed to defend himself. What he was defending is his credibility. The focus should not be on whether AB Hammer is credible or not but if Bessler was successful. And I do not understand why AB Hammer does not want me discussing it with other people and even will allow someone else to build it as it is Bessler's wheel and shouldn't necessarily be about any one individual. Something I have maintained as Bessler was discredited and was not allowed to share his work with other people.

[Andyb]

Projection ha, still working on that one probally always will do ,i find being honest transparent and patient really helps, my therapy was coda and the 12 steps ,later i found various books of help, then i found Iron john by Robert Bly never been the same again ,strange how a series of mythological stories can have such a profound effect on my evolution but they did ,not saying i am perfect ,but i do feel closer ,sorry not really relevant hope this does not irritate any one .Andyb