Goey

Ethelbert wrote: Oh really? If it has not already been said, "everyone" is not picking on Mike personally, but his ideas and and methods are definitely being challenged - and rightly so. I might also point out that absolutely no one has interfered with Mike's right to speak in this forum - He has spoken freely without hindrance or obstruction. And by the same token everyone else has the right to express their ideas as well - even if it means challenging, criticizing or rejecting what another has presented. Let's not mistake criticism of someone's ideas with sarcasm that is intended to wound someone personally. I agree that Mike's ideas are unpopular, but even more than that, no matter how well-intended, these ideas spit in the face of what many here believe to be true and factual. Do we not have the right to challenge, criticize, reject or even ridicule these ideas? Ethelbert, who are you to tell "everyone" what they need to do? BTW, Welcome to Greasespot Goey

Rafael, I have seen the light! Rafael, remember, the translations come from corrupted remnants and are only approximations they cannot be relied upon. This is why God gave PFAL to VPW - to clear this up. It may seem that way, but if God said it in PFAL then that is what I'll go with. This is five senses data. There must be another explanation. What keys have you applied? Words can change meanings over time. God chose to give these two words differing meanings and then reveal this in the RELIABLE revelation of PFAL. Again I must ask, what keys did you apply to PFAL? There is ALWAYS another explanation to APPARENT errors. If you tell me what keys you applied then that will save me some time. See my answer to Number 1 In PFAL, God chose to expand HIS definition of Apostle beyond the meaningless definitions in your interlinear or lexicon. I'll go with God's definition in PFAL. You should too. Etcetera, Etcetera, Etcetera . . . . . . . . . . . . Just joking. :)--> Goey

Some Thoughts According to Mike, God made a covenant (promise) with VPW in 1942. This is based soley upon VPW's claim that God spoke to him and told him that, "I will teach you my Word like it hasn't been known since the first century, if you will teach it to others." Also according to Mike, the reason that he believes this is because "I, myself, was a beneficiary of the second half of the promise". As a result of this promise the claim is made that PFAL is the Word of God, and mastery of it is the only way to know God. According to Mike, those who reject PFAL are rejecting God's Word as if it were given directly to them. There were no witnesses present, VPW when VPW heard God's promise. This claim cannot be confirmed by what Mike calls five-senses knowledge. So this claim should be given no weight according to Mike's own methdology. To give it any credibility because it is in PFAL would make the argument circular. ie, It's true because it is in PFAL, and PFAL is true because God spoke to VPW. - Circular reasoning. I think that few who took PFAL will deny that they benefited from it. I benefited from it. Yet the fact that I benefited, says nothing to actually confirm the veracity of VPW's claim of God's promise to him in 1942 or that PFAL is the Word of God. Why? Because it is like saying that because I benefited from the "revelations" of Ellen White or Anthony Robbins that they are therefore the Word of God. This is another logical fallacy. Furthermore "benefiting" is subjective. Mike's theory also negates the scripture that many of us and most of Christiany believe to be reliable when "rightly-divided" as VPW taught - a teaching ot VPW's that Mike seems to have rejected. So this conviently absolves Mike from the duty and responsibility of verifying PFAL's teachings with scripture. In other words, according to Mike, the Bible can only be understood in light of PFAL - PFAL having the greater authority. On top of all of this, Mike has encouraged everyone to reject historical data or eyewitness accounts that may paint VPW's moral character in a bad light, suggesting that these are all lies or that there are other explanations. Another logical fallacy. Honestly, I would not be suprised if Mike were to claim that VPW was the true Messiah and that the historical Jesus was a fraud. I did not say he said that - only that I would not be suprised. Mike, some have suggested that you are mentally ill. Well I do not believe that at all. These folks are being nice. I think you are a deceiver and a pervert. If any spirit is guiding you, it is not of the true God. You are howling at the moon - a wolf. I reject you and your message - It is evil. Consider yourself and your "gospel" rebuked - in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, God's Messiah. Galatian's 1:8-9 ( KJV) Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Get it ? Goey

Mike, I did not ask you to exlain what you don't believe. My question was to give specifics on what you do believe - "Whose reading skill is lacking?" Lay it out in plain English - Point by point. The problem I see is that you seem to be so caught up in the set-up, pre-defense, and pre-qualifying your beliefs, that you have made little effort to plainly lay them out. So Mike, cut to the chase and tell us what the diamonds and treasures are. Goey

Mike, One constant theme here is "obedience" - not to God - not to the scriptures - but instead to Dr Weirwille. Specifically to his last teaching where he says to "take and Master PFAL". You say regarding this statement by VPW: It was VPW who said this, but you say it was "God's first instruction". What shall we conculde then, that VPW is God ? or that God spoke when VPW spoke? You also posted: I take this interventinon to mean the covenant that God supposedly made with VPW that resulted in PFAL. You also posted in another place: And also: Let me sum up what you are saying to us. 1. The scriptures are flawed and Christ cannot be fully known through them 2. To correct this situation God intervened in 1942 and made a covenant with VPW. 3. In 1942 through this covenant God gave PFAL to VPW and made VPW His apostle and prophet. 4. What VPW says in his books and on tape is the Word of God and should be obeyed. 5. PFAL totally corrects the problems with flawed nature of the Bible. 6. As a fresh revelation and for all practical purposes, PFAL supersedes and serves to replace the previous scriptures. 7. PFAL and VPW's other books are the only true and reliable written Word of God 8. It is only through mastery of PFAL and it's collaterals that Christ can be known. Mike, Can you confirm that my list above is correct? Did I get anything wrong? I want to make sure that I am in no way misrepresenting what you are sharing with us here. Goey [This message was edited by Goey on December 28, 2002 at 7:36.]

For Windows 98 and 95 Users. Do you want to change the Windows 98 Logo startup screen? It's easy. Create a bitmap file in Paint or any other program. Make it 320 X 400 DPI / 256 colors. It can be anything. After you create it save it to the C: folder. Close Paint, then in Explorer, rename the file to logo.sys. The next time Windows starts this bitmap will be displayed instead of the same old Windows Logo. --------------------- Want to disable the Windows 98/95 logo screen altogether to see what is happening when that logo screen is just sitting there. Do this. Open up a command prompt and go to c: Type Then type In the editor under the [options] section, change the line that says logo=1 to logo=0 then save the file. The next time you start Windows the splash screen will be gone and will not hide the items that load or run from config.sys and autoexec.bat. Don't change the other lines unless you know what you are doing. Goey

This teaching was never "lost". I have read it before. I have a copy of it on my computer. Ok folks, here is where this is going. The idea to be presented is that Wierwille's writings are "scripture" and that they are all "god-breathed" and just as valuable if not more so than the Bible itself. You can bet that Mike will eventually explain it after the song and dance routine. Next we will learn the great "treasure" that has been lost for 17 years - that the Word of Wierwille is the will of God. May I bring to rememberance a thread started by RG a while back entitled Can you believe what someone recently told me? In that thread RG opened with the following: Well is seems a though that "someone" is here now - Mike I have got to think that old Doc Vic, warts and all, might even be rolling in his grave right about now. Goey [This message was edited by Goey on December 27, 2002 at 2:16.]

I knew BT from Ft Wayne Indiana. He was just 17 or 18 years old and a Branch Leader - go figure. If he and his wife got out, hopefully it for more than just wanting to buy a house. Hopefully it has something to do with being tired of running roughshod over people, tired of screaming and yelling - of particitating in TWI's phoney inquisitions and general nastiness. Hopefullly it has something to do with seeing the errors of their ways - and wanting to change. Goey

RottieGrrrl, Here is your puppy, reduced to 60%. It still seems to look pretty good. You can save it an then put it up on your AOL page to link up to. Goey

Sorry Wrong thread - Carry on.

Bayou Manchac - Louisiana Goey

Zixar is right. Changing the CAS/RAS timings can cause problems. But then I did warn about that didn't I? And we are talking about tweaking, aren't we? I would not do it on a system where the data is super critical. Changing these timings is kind of like over clocking the processor, it depends upon the tolerences of the individual chip. One way to test if the system is stable after making these kind of changes it to run a loop test on the memory with Norton or another similar utility. If there are no errors after 3 or 4 cycles of stressing the memory, it will work fine. Goey

John, Typically, the memory settings in the BIOS are under "Advanced System Settings." However, a few PC vendors like Dell may "hack" the original BIOS and take away the ability of customers access to these settings. Goey

John, My system loads System Commander at bootup, where I can boot to Windows 2000 Server, Linux, NT4, Win 98 or DOS. The system a dual processor system with 512 meg of RAM. And over 100 gb of hard drive capacity. I mostly use Windows 2000 because it utilizes both processors and multitasks much better than 98. However, NT4 is the most stable, but unfortuately it does not support USB. I used XP for a while, but I found it rather slow and clunky compared to 2000 on my system, and I do not need all the bells and whistles that it provides. With my system, memory and processor resources used by the system tray icons and their tasks are fairly insignificant to the system's performance. However, since 2000 does not have the MSCONFIG Utility like XP, there is an freeware program that I use to control what programs and tasks load at startup. It's really just a simple front-end to the registry to turn on or off unnecessary tasks or programs. John, it seem like you may be a "tweaker" - so am I. Here are some things that might make a noticable difference in system performance. First, you can tweak the BIOS settings in the system set up to speed up memory. SDRAM can usually handle a " CAS Latency" of 2 instead of 3. The "RAS to CAS Delay can also usually take a lower setting. A lower RAS Precharge Time can also speed up the system memory, but could make it unstable. A lower setting for SDRAM Precharge Time could also help but may cause also cause instability. You need to test for stability after each change. If you are using RDRAM, I do not advise changing any of the defaults. Also, with graphics, most programs that convert BMP's to JPEG's or GIf's, uses a conversion algorithim that causes degredation of the image. - This includes Paint, MS Photo Editor, MS Draw, and Adobe Photosuit. This degredation is especially true when converting a 24 bit bitmap to a gif file. They end up looking like crap. There is a program called ACD See, that does a great job of the conversion and image quality is maintained. ACD See comes with some scanners and can also be downloaded from the Internet. Goey

If you want to capture an image of what's on your screen, do this. Press alt-print screen. Press both keys at the same time. Then open up Paint or another graphics program, click edit and then paste. This will paste an image of the "active window" into your program. If you want to capture the entire desktop press ctrl-shift-print screen. This can be useful when capturing error messages, or scren shots of various parts of programs, etc. [This message was edited by Goey on May 23, 2003 at 14:32.] [This message was edited by pawtucket on June 10, 2003 at 22:21.]

Masterherbalist, What do you think of some of the anti-cancer tonics, like the Hoxsey formula? Didn't Dr. Christopher market similar a formula? Are there any case studies? Goey

Zix, OK, Let's say the satelite is 22,300 miles in orbit in the Clarke Belt. At 186,000 miles per second, that is approx 120 ms one way. Now I am assuming that the satelite is used only as a relay or a switch. So a request for a packet would have to travel from the client system to the satellite, then from the satelite to the ISP, taking approximately 120 ms on each leg for a total of 240 ms. Add in a 60 ms switching time at the satellite itself and you have the 300 ms. That is just to get the packet request to Direct TV's Command Center. Next, then the request goes out on the Internet through multiple routers and switches and reaches finally reaches it's target, taking another 50 ms or so to get there and back to Direct TV's Command Center where it is relayed up to the satelite and back down to the client system in another 300 ms. This gives a total time from packet request to receving the packet of about 650 ms or so. Of course this is in a perfect world assuming unlimited bandwith and no conjestion. I would be interested in seeing what the real world time would be on an actual system. For example, on my dialup with ATT, when I ping a site in Singapore, I get a round trip time of about 350 ms, actually not to shabby for dialup. OF course the advantage with the satellite is with the speed of the data transmission when it streaming - Like loading graphics and streaming audion/video or downloading large files. I would also like to know what speeds I can expect here - in the real world. Zix, do you know someone who has this and can provide some real world figures ? Direct TV is elusive. Goey

Norm, There is a pretty big difference between "giving up the ghost" as Jesus did on the cross, and giving up on life because of inability ur unwillingness to stop self-destrictive behavior like chain smoking or excessive drinking. If you do not want attention as you say, then why are you posting these things that seem like somewhat disconnected appeals for attention of some kind? You sound rather fatalistic in your posts on this thread. I hope you are getting the help that you need. Goey [This message was edited by Goey on December 03, 2002 at 7:29.]

OCD Posted: No, that's not believing OCD. - That's giving up. Goey

MasterHerbalist replied to Kay: Masterherbalist, with all due respect, how do you take issue with something that the evidence suggests is working? Are you saying that the medical treatment has little or nothing to do with Tim's results? While I accept that natural medicine and wholistic treatments has it's merits and can be a valid form of treatment, It seem to me that you have taken an angle againt modern medicine, similar to the angle that modern medicine took againt chiropractic and naturopathy. That is, deny it's validity in spite of the apparant positive results. This does not seem too wise to me. Naturopathy, wholistic medicine, herbalist, etc have slammed the medical community, especially the drug companies for being money mongers, ie. - it's all about the dollar. But when asked where the double blind studies are that can validate the claims made by alternative medicine and it's advocates, the naturalists have bemoaned the lack of money to fund such studies, claiming that the drug companies can afford it. But, the truth is today, that the herb, vitamin, naturopathy ornganic food, and other related industries are now enjoying a multi-billion dollar industry and can't or won't get their acts together to fund valid scientific studies to support their claims. What's up with that? It seem now that they, while enjoying profits unheard of in the past are being the greedy one's and don't want to spend the money. Or they are afraid that valid studies might hurt their industry and their profits. Don't get me wrong, I am a believer in a wholistic approach, but it seems to me that there are too many wild claims, unsupported by anything but theory and personal testimony that need to be sorted though before one can make sensible and effective cholces. Goey

Well, Living out in the country, I can't get cable or DSL. So I looked into Directway Satelite Broadband as an add-on to my satelite TV system. Yikes ! It runs $99 per month PLUS the $39 I am already paying for Direct TV. Looks like I will remain on dialup for a while longer. Goey

Bowtwi, I want to see what you are doing so here is a test. See the little tractor below? I want you to send it to me just like you did the files to your friend in Germany.

Bowtwi, It has been a while since I messed with AOL but if I recall, when you save an image from AOL, it saves it in the "art" format which may not be compatible with some browsers or email programs. This format compresses image files and can cause animated graphics, (gif's) not to work. The problem could be on your end or on your friend's depending upon what browers/email programs are being used. Are you sending her "art" files or "gif" files ? Why don't you send me one of the graphic files in question and let me look at it? I will be able to tell you more. But if I were betting, I would bet it probably has something to do with AOL or their propritary file scheme. goey@att.net Goey

Hi Bowtwi, When you send an animated graphic via email it must be opened in an email program that supports html/animated graphics. The person on the other end must have their email program set for rich text or html. It that person is using AOL or Hotmail it may not animate properly. Also you should send it in the "body" of the message rather than as an attachment. Your email program must also be set to rich text or html. Outlook Express and Outlook work well. What email are you using ?

Merry Christmas ! Merry Christmas ! [This message was edited by Goey on November 26, 2002 at 11:15.]