thewiz

I have been a member of this forum for a few months. I have never
before posted to this group.

I have merely observed thus far and have often been sickened by the
language, poor spelling and grammar, and the hate from some posters.
Why do some posters who say their modality is far superior (3-D Mind)
want to continually belittle those who want to learn and use NLP? I'm
sure that a new group can be formed to allow for your "magic" to be
highlighted. Why litter this one?

Why spoil our NLP learning and fun? This forum was not created to be an
advertisement for your chosen mode of therapy or to line your pockets.
IF YOUR MODE IS SUPERIOR, share SECRETS of your craft and some detailed
methods in this forum without charge. If it makes sense and if it
works, some of us will likely spend great deals of money and travel
countless miles to learn ADVANCED 3-D Mind. You will prosper, and your
new disciples will prosper!

My professor in graduate school once said that success using any
psychotherapy method depends upon two things: (1) the clinician's
belief that the method will truly be effective, and (2) the clinician's
ability to build rapport with the client and to build FAITH in that
client that the treatment will be effective and successful. This is
basically proved by the research of Dr. Scott Miller in his book,
"Heart & Soul of Change: What Works in Therapy." He stated that success
in treating a client comes not so much from method or school of
treatment ... Success is absolutely a product of relationship between
therapist and client.

I am not indicating 3-D Mind is "fluff," as I know little of it. On the
web, I find little or no description or free information of what it is.
I just ask that my time reading messages within this group not be
wasted by superfluous plugs for 3-D mind, as well as yet unfounded
condemnations of the art of NLP UNLESS you reveal details of why 3-D
mind is superior.

Accept the challenge? The gauntlet has been politely thrown! Anybody
else feel the same as I do?

DD

It must be a secret, because there is money involved. Only if you pay
$70.00 you will get incomplete technique on video and then you need to
join their forum in order to learn it - or maybe you need to spend even
more money. This is their strategy to make online community. 3D Mind
could easily be explained in few minutes on video, but according to Tom
Vizzini "It will never happen.".

Other thing is, 3D Mind is not perfect, it's basic process doesn't
address all problems and processes which lead to problems. If they
openly discussed it, experts would see this problem and also it would
be obvious they took a lot from NLP to create it. Then it would become
difficult to lie about NLP. They always want to tell you NLP is
useless, just to sell some more products.

Third problem is at the core of 3D Mind itself. Balancing, holy grail
of 3D Mind, is not really balancing but mixing different emotions, or
states of them, together. This process may lead to many inner
conflicts.

I guess the level of tension in all responses we see from 3D Mind
people shouldn't surprise us. It must be hard to practice it for years
and stay sane.

Vince

The most funny thing is 3DMind people attacks NLP on therapy side, utterly
trying to sell their stuff, obfuscating the whole field of application of
NLP. On one hand, their website is shamelessly stuck all over with NLP
patterns, and on the other hand, their spit hypocritically on NLP
effectiveness. Utterly incoherent !

This huge incoherence, pityfull at first sight, becomes annoying along the
threads due to their peremptory dishonesty and their pawns posting.

If 3DM is so powerfull, rather than advertising on a NLP group, try to
compare it on a sci.psychology.* or alt.psychology.* group, but why NLP ???
Easiness ? Face it to scientist and therapist community rather than leaning
on a virtual neuroscientist and unreliable subjective beliefs.
insight
Hidden behind economic excuse, Tom, i believe you already know, in your
stomack, what will be the result. It is not the doubt, it is the shame. You
can rest on few success (placebo effect?), but you know 3DMind is just to be
considered as a gimmick for desperate guys ... This is not real therapy.

Like most products, if 3DMind video is leaking on p2p networks, real experts
may find it, value it, and draw conclusions. Be prepared to it ...

When i'll be back from hollidays, I hope to read a real debate with expert
sight, rather than another sterile confrontation of personnal beliefs
looping in a "my daddy beats your daddy" way.




"DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
1153121438.028493.165820@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups. com...
> It must be a secret, because there is money involved. Only if you pay
> $70.00 you will get incomplete technique on video and then you need to
> join their forum in order to learn it - or maybe you need to spend even
> more money. This is their strategy to make online community. 3D Mind
> could easily be explained in few minutes on video, but according to Tom
> Vizzini "It will never happen.".
>
> Other thing is, 3D Mind is not perfect, it's basic process doesn't
> address all problems and processes which lead to problems. If they
> openly discussed it, experts would see this problem and also it would
> be obvious they took a lot from NLP to create it. Then it would become
> difficult to lie about NLP. They always want to tell you NLP is
> useless, just to sell some more products.
>
> Third problem is at the core of 3D Mind itself. Balancing, holy grail
> of 3D Mind, is not really balancing but mixing different emotions, or
> states of them, together. This process may lead to many inner
> conflicts.
>
> I guess the level of tension in all responses we see from 3D Mind
> people shouldn't surprise us. It must be hard to practice it for years
> and stay sane.

duck

Vince wrote:
> The most funny thing is 3DMind people attacks NLP on therapy side, utterly
> trying to sell their stuff, obfuscating the whole field of application of
> NLP. On one hand, their website is shamelessly stuck all over with NLP
> patterns, and on the other hand, their spit hypocritically on NLP
> effectiveness. Utterly incoherent !
>
> This huge incoherence, pityfull at first sight, becomes annoying along the
> threads due to their peremptory dishonesty and their pawns posting.
>
> If 3DM is so powerfull, rather than advertising on a NLP group, try to
> compare it on a sci.psychology.* or alt.psychology.* group, but why NLP ???
> Easiness ? Face it to scientist and therapist community rather than leaning
> on a virtual neuroscientist and unreliable subjective beliefs.
> insight
> Hidden behind economic excuse, Tom, i believe you already know, in your
> stomack, what will be the result. It is not the doubt, it is the shame. You
> can rest on few success (placebo effect?), but you know 3DMind is just to be
> considered as a gimmick for desperate guys ... This is not real therapy.
>

I think that may actually be one of the strengths of 3D mind, it is not
constrained by the shackles of being categorised as "Real Therapy". 3D
minds goal is "Real Results", with a boatload of fun along the way.

Just to put my comments into perspective, I think Tom is a fat, slimy,
creepy shithead (although I've never met him). I think 3D mind is
heavily leveraged from NLP, apart from the balancing of states instead
of the NLP overwhelm. I think UnKa is a comedy version of the mad old
alcoholic derelicts who pace the big cities preaching about the
apocalypse, he is bearable cos he has a nice sick and twisted sense of
humour..

I wish they'd fuck off elsewhere with thier 3D mind pumping NLP
bashing, but they are just too immature to take any other approach.

Tom's pissed cos he spent all that money to get a magical fix to that
secret insecurity of his, and yet he is still a lardy greasball, with a
whiney voice.

Tom's a lazy fuck, his products are all poorly engineered, packaged and
presented, his answers to questions are brief and empty, and that is
why he comes here to play, cos he is a lazy greaseball.

Why not just filter him out, that's what most people do

Tom wouldn't be where he is today without NLP, and that bites him.

> Like most products, if 3DMind video is leaking on p2p networks, real experts
> may find it, value it, and draw conclusions. Be prepared to it ...
>
> When i'll be back from hollidays, I hope to read a real debate with expert
> sight, rather than another sterile confrontation of personnal beliefs
> looping in a "my daddy beats your daddy" way.
>

UnKa

Thank You so much for proving my point about the placebo effect of NLP,
particularly the swish.

Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.

3-D Mind does not rely on getting the client to believe that it will
work, or course it doesn't hurt it either. You find the problem driver,
balance it, problem gone, no matter what the client believes, unless
he/she believes that nothing can help them, then you first work on that
belief.

If you read about brain research and how the brain actually works, then
you would know why the 3-D Mind works so well.

Problems don't exist in the neocortex ( thinking area of the brain )
but in in the limbic system. This is the area of emotional memory,
which emotions are the glue which hold the problem together. The
stronger the emotion, the bigger the problem.

This is why affirmations don't work ( very little emotional content )
This is why creative visualizations don't work ( very little emotional
content )

NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
emotional content.
Small wonder it doesn't work consistantly, or long term.

So you NLP freaks and geeks, your working in the wrong area. Even as
Bandler said, try something different, when what you doing isn't
working.

I am going to order that book and read it, don't you just love new
information?


thewiz wrote:
>
> My professor in graduate school once said that success using any
> psychotherapy method depends upon two things: (1) the clinician's
> belief that the method will truly be effective, and (2) the clinician's
> ability to build rapport with the client and to build FAITH in that
> client that the treatment will be effective and successful. This is
> basically proved by the research of Dr. Scott Miller in his book,
> "Heart & Soul of Change: What Works in Therapy." He stated that success
> in treating a client comes not so much from method or school of
> treatment ... Success is absolutely a product of relationship between
> therapist and client.

UnKa

So now we've heard from the douch bags of NLP, making all this claims
yet knows nothing of the 3-D Mind. Yet hide their real names why
because they are cowardly douch bags.

Is this the new code of NLP, to lie about something you know nothing
about, or just some Bandler tricks?

I am truly amazed at the amount of stupidy generated by the douch bag
trio. Can't you come up with something more orginal? I know that two of
the posters above is Nick Kemp, sock puppet master.

I mean if your going to flame, at least be somewhat funny and orginal,
ohhh sorry, your NLP folks with no skills, sorry I mistaken you for
someone creative.


Your Flame Bud


Joe

DD

Vince wrote:
> The most funny thing is 3DMind people attacks NLP on therapy side, utterly
> trying to sell their stuff, obfuscating the whole field of application of
> NLP. On one hand, their website is shamelessly stuck all over with NLP
> patterns, and on the other hand, their spit hypocritically on NLP
> effectiveness. Utterly incoherent !

Yes, haha! This is the most funny part. When i posted yesterday i even
went to the sales page (ugh) and then i realized its more or less NLP
mixed with some personal theories and "backed up" with incorrect
pseudo-science.

And Tom never forgets to tell us we are uneducated. I guess he is
worrying some potential customer will read this and he quickly jumps
and negates everything we say. How funny!

> This huge incoherence, pityfull at first sight, becomes annoying along the
> threads due to their peremptory dishonesty and their pawns posting.
>
> If 3DM is so powerfull, rather than advertising on a NLP group, try to
> compare it on a sci.psychology.* or alt.psychology.* group, but why NLP ???
> Easiness ? Face it to scientist and therapist community rather than leaning
> on a virtual neuroscientist and unreliable subjective beliefs.
> insight

They have *no balls* to tell the public about it. Customers won't ask
questions since they already spent money and also they can be banned
(and they are!) from private forums.

Cowards. They are afraid someone will say 3D Mind is not working or ask
unwanted questions, for example where are scientific proofs.

> Like most products, if 3DMind video is leaking on p2p networks, real experts
> may find it, value it, and draw conclusions. Be prepared to it ...

O, he is. In case someone mentions old video he says there is new,
improved stuff on private forums. So people are buying for $70.00 just
old crap video. How nice.

> When i'll be back from hollidays, I hope to read a real debate with expert
> sight, rather than another sterile confrontation of personnal beliefs
> looping in a "my daddy beats your daddy" way.

They spam only.

DD

duck wrote:
> I think that may actually be one of the strengths of 3D mind, it is not
> constrained by the shackles of being categorised as "Real Therapy". 3D
> minds goal is "Real Results", with a boatload of fun along the way.

They say it's better than NLP and also they say NLP trainers are trying
to destroy them. Bad NLP trainers! You bastards!

> Just to put my comments into perspective, I think Tom is a fat, slimy,
> creepy shithead (although I've never met him). I think 3D mind is
> heavily leveraged from NLP, apart from the balancing of states instead
> of the NLP overwhelm. I think UnKa is a comedy version of the mad old
> alcoholic derelicts who pace the big cities preaching about the
> apocalypse, he is bearable cos he has a nice sick and twisted sense of
> humour..

Haha! ROFL! This is 10/10! ... about Unka it's 11/10!! )

> I wish they'd fuck off elsewhere with thier 3D mind pumping NLP
> bashing, but they are just too immature to take any other approach.

Me too. But Tom said "No thanks.". I guess he is writing new
testimonials and articles about 3D Mind right now.

> Tom's pissed cos he spent all that money to get a magical fix to that
> secret insecurity of his, and yet he is still a lardy greasball, with a
> whiney voice.
>
> Tom's a lazy fuck, his products are all poorly engineered, packaged and
> presented, his answers to questions are brief and empty, and that is
> why he comes here to play, cos he is a lazy greaseball.

ROFL!

Yes, he will never say anything unless you pay $70. You can find
similar people on the streets at night. So i hear.

> Why not just filter him out, that's what most people do

Idea of the month! But fuck, he will still continue with spam and
misleading peoople into believing NLP trainers are after him.

> Tom wouldn't be where he is today without NLP, and that bites him.

Very true, yet he says NLP is slow and it doesn't work, i really don't
know why.

duck

I'm a coward !

deal with it !

UnKa wrote:
> So now we've heard from the douch bags of NLP, making all this claims
> yet knows nothing of the 3-D Mind. Yet hide their real names why
> because they are cowardly douch bags.
>
> Is this the new code of NLP, to lie about something you know nothing
> about, or just some Bandler tricks?
>
> I am truly amazed at the amount of stupidy generated by the douch bag
> trio. Can't you come up with something more orginal? I know that two of
> the posters above is Nick Kemp, sock puppet master.
>
> I mean if your going to flame, at least be somewhat funny and orginal,
> ohhh sorry, your NLP folks with no skills, sorry I mistaken you for
> someone creative.
>
>
> Your Flame Bud
>
>
> Joe

duck

UnKa wrote:
> Thank You so much for proving my point about the placebo effect of NLP,
> particularly the swish.
>

When did that happen ??????????????????

> Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
>

That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate

> 3-D Mind does not rely on getting the client to believe that it will
> work, or course it doesn't hurt it either. You find the problem driver,
> balance it, problem gone, no matter what the client believes, unless
> he/she believes that nothing can help them, then you first work on that
> belief.
>

Where does it say the NLP relies on the client believing it will work ?

> If you read about brain research and how the brain actually works, then
> you would know why the 3-D Mind works so well.
>

If you read about brain research you will begin to realise that even
the experts know very little about emotions. Research upon research
has shown that the brain is adaptive, and that very little
functionality (e.g. emotion) can be tied exclusively to a particular
part of the brain. The brain is a gestalt, not a neatly
compartmentalised mechanism.

3D mind seems to completely ignore the fact that there is as much
neuronal activity in the abdomen as in the head. Probably Tom hasn't
read it a book he understands yet, or the mythical Dr Ken hasn't told
him about it yet, but I'm sure it will be bolted onto the model
eventualy in a pathetic attempt to pad it's scientific basis
credentials.

> Problems don't exist in the neocortex ( thinking area of the brain )
> but in in the limbic system. This is the area of emotional memory,
> which emotions are the glue which hold the problem together. The
> stronger the emotion, the bigger the problem.
>

Ohh, using big scary words like Neocortex and Limbic system, aren't you
the little Einstein. The whole brain (including the whole body,
particularly the stomach) is the thinking part, deluding yourself that
"it is all packaged nicely in the Neocortex" is a desperate attempt to
bring understanding to your constrained intellect. Read a few books,
thinks he knows the shit.

>From your definitions, 3D mind is akin to doing brain surgery using an
enyclopedia

> This is why affirmations don't work ( very little emotional content )

Affirmations work well for some people. Of course, you believe that
when people state affirmations they are just verbalizing sounds and are
in no way thinking about the meaning of the words.

> This is why creative visualizations don't work ( very little emotional
> content )
>

Creative visualistions work extremely well for some people. Of course
you believe that all people, when visualising, purely visualise without
any connected feelings.

I have to say it, your world model is extraordinarily limited, you are
cutting yourself off from so much, just prove you are right. Dood you
need to collapse those anchors Tom has set on you and learn to think
for yourself.

> NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
> emotional content.

how can V + K + A = both dumbass, that's like saying "pair off into
threes"

And in which demented recess of your logic department do you imagine
that physical feelings are not emotionally triggered, fuggin half
witted faggot.

> Small wonder it doesn't work consistantly, or long term.
>

According to your extensive and exhaustive research ?

> So you NLP freaks and geeks, your working in the wrong area. Even as
> Bandler said, try something different, when what you doing isn't
> working.
>

Oh shit, ,must I now write to the 100's of people I have helped and
tell them "sorry, it didn't work".

> I am going to order that book and read it, don't you just love new
> information?
>

You need to learn to read first.


Ducky

P.S. What's your obsession with Nick Kemp, you seem a little paranoid
and compulsive

John

On 18 Jul 2006 00:59:15 -0700, "duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>
>UnKa wrote:
>> Thank You so much for proving my point about the placebo effect of NLP,
>> particularly the swish.
>>
>
>When did that happen ??????????????????
>
>> Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
>>
>
>That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate
>
>> 3-D Mind does not rely on getting the client to believe that it will
>> work, or course it doesn't hurt it either. You find the problem driver,
>> balance it, problem gone, no matter what the client believes, unless
>> he/she believes that nothing can help them, then you first work on that
>> belief.
>>
>
>Where does it say the NLP relies on the client believing it will work ?
>
>> If you read about brain research and how the brain actually works, then
>> you would know why the 3-D Mind works so well.
>>
>
>If you read about brain research you will begin to realise that even
>the experts know very little about emotions. Research upon research
>has shown that the brain is adaptive, and that very little
>functionality (e.g. emotion) can be tied exclusively to a particular
>part of the brain. The brain is a gestalt, not a neatly
>compartmentalised mechanism.
>
>3D mind seems to completely ignore the fact that there is as much
>neuronal activity in the abdomen as in the head. Probably Tom hasn't
>read it a book he understands yet, or the mythical Dr Ken hasn't told
>him about it yet, but I'm sure it will be bolted onto the model
>eventualy in a pathetic attempt to pad it's scientific basis
>credentials.
>
>> Problems don't exist in the neocortex ( thinking area of the brain )
>> but in in the limbic system. This is the area of emotional memory,
>> which emotions are the glue which hold the problem together. The
>> stronger the emotion, the bigger the problem.
>>
>
>Ohh, using big scary words like Neocortex and Limbic system, aren't you
>the little Einstein. The whole brain (including the whole body,
>particularly the stomach) is the thinking part, deluding yourself that
>"it is all packaged nicely in the Neocortex" is a desperate attempt to
>bring understanding to your constrained intellect. Read a few books,
>thinks he knows the shit.
>
>>From your definitions, 3D mind is akin to doing brain surgery using an
>enyclopedia
>
>> This is why affirmations don't work ( very little emotional content )
>
>Affirmations work well for some people. Of course, you believe that
>when people state affirmations they are just verbalizing sounds and are
>in no way thinking about the meaning of the words.
>
>> This is why creative visualizations don't work ( very little emotional
>> content )
>>
>
>Creative visualistions work extremely well for some people. Of course
>you believe that all people, when visualising, purely visualise without
>any connected feelings.
>
>I have to say it, your world model is extraordinarily limited, you are
>cutting yourself off from so much, just prove you are right. Dood you
>need to collapse those anchors Tom has set on you and learn to think
>for yourself.
>
>> NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
>> emotional content.
>
>how can V + K + A = both dumbass, that's like saying "pair off into
>threes"

I suspect that he was lumping VAK together as one and Linguistics as
the second.

It does beg the question however about what they think the K stands
for and suggesting it has little emotional content. I thought
Kinaesthetics was pure emotional content.

As for linguistics it may be a model but it represents our thinking
and our emotions. For instance get someone to talk about a recently
dead close relative or friend and see what happens.

--
John

duck

> >> NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
> >> emotional content.
> >
> >how can V + K + A = both dumbass, that's like saying "pair off into
> >threes"
>
> I suspect that he was lumping VAK together as one and Linguistics as
> the second.
>

Ah I see !

> It does beg the question however about what they think the K stands
> for and suggesting it has little emotional content. I thought
> Kinaesthetics was pure emotional content.
>

Yes, but it doesn't count cos that would mean UnKah is talking crap,
and we all know that just never happens ............

Visualisation with no emotion huh ?, I get all kinds of emotion when I
visualise naked ladies, I also get a kinaesthetic response with all
kinds of emotion.

> As for linguistics it may be a model but it represents our thinking
> and our emotions. For instance get someone to talk about a recently
> dead close relative or friend and see what happens.
>
> --
> John

DD

duck wrote:
> > Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
>
> That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate

Exactly.

Reason they don't "get it" is a quick buck spam strategy.

Or maybe they are that stupid? It took them 15 years to come up with 3D
Mind, so i wouldn't be surprised.

Tom Vizzini

"Cameron" <cbrown_1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:44bce3de$0$25358$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
>

>
> But at $2500 per head for his seminars?

Again your ignance is showing. How much do I charge for seminars? Not 2500
dollars. My seminars are the lowest priced out there.

DD

So much money for a fucking seminar?? What are you talking about, how
to make gold? If yes, why don't you make some on your own without
spamming?

Interesting. They have the knowledge and key to any success imaginable,
yet they need your hard earned money in exchange for the same
knowledge. =)

UnKa

DeeR Duck:

Com'on you know you want Tom, by your writing is it plain that you love
his ass, aluding up to it with words like grease and ball, that's gay
talk for ass fucking. Now why don't you just tell Tom that you just
want to be with him because your obsessed with him?

Speak freely dude, no one is going to judge you, quit fucking around
and get your feelings out. I will be quite hard of you when Tom rejects
you but better you know now than carry on this torch to an end where
rejection is all you will know. You can comfort yourself in the arms of
a blow up doll and alcohol.


UnKah


duck wrote:
> Vince wrote:
> > The most funny thing is 3DMind people attacks NLP on therapy side, utterly
> > trying to sell their stuff, obfuscating the whole field of application of
> > NLP. On one hand, their website is shamelessly stuck all over with NLP
> > patterns, and on the other hand, their spit hypocritically on NLP
> > effectiveness. Utterly incoherent !
> >
> > This huge incoherence, pityfull at first sight, becomes annoying along the
> > threads due to their peremptory dishonesty and their pawns posting.
> >
> > If 3DM is so powerfull, rather than advertising on a NLP group, try to
> > compare it on a sci.psychology.* or alt.psychology.* group, but why NLP ???
> > Easiness ? Face it to scientist and therapist community rather than leaning
> > on a virtual neuroscientist and unreliable subjective beliefs.
> > insight
> > Hidden behind economic excuse, Tom, i believe you already know, in your
> > stomack, what will be the result. It is not the doubt, it is the shame. You
> > can rest on few success (placebo effect?), but you know 3DMind is just to be
> > considered as a gimmick for desperate guys ... This is not real therapy.
> >
>
> I think that may actually be one of the strengths of 3D mind, it is not
> constrained by the shackles of being categorised as "Real Therapy". 3D
> minds goal is "Real Results", with a boatload of fun along the way.
>
> Just to put my comments into perspective, I think Tom is a fat, slimy,
> creepy shithead (although I've never met him). I think 3D mind is
> heavily leveraged from NLP, apart from the balancing of states instead
> of the NLP overwhelm. I think UnKa is a comedy version of the mad old
> alcoholic derelicts who pace the big cities preaching about the
> apocalypse, he is bearable cos he has a nice sick and twisted sense of
> humour..
>
> I wish they'd fuck off elsewhere with thier 3D mind pumping NLP
> bashing, but they are just too immature to take any other approach.
>
> Tom's pissed cos he spent all that money to get a magical fix to that
> secret insecurity of his, and yet he is still a lardy greasball, with a
> whiney voice.
>
> Tom's a lazy fuck, his products are all poorly engineered, packaged and
> presented, his answers to questions are brief and empty, and that is
> why he comes here to play, cos he is a lazy greaseball.
>
> Why not just filter him out, that's what most people do
>
> Tom wouldn't be where he is today without NLP, and that bites him.
>
> > Like most products, if 3DMind video is leaking on p2p networks, real experts
> > may find it, value it, and draw conclusions. Be prepared to it ...
> >
> > When i'll be back from hollidays, I hope to read a real debate with expert
> > sight, rather than another sterile confrontation of personnal beliefs
> > looping in a "my daddy beats your daddy" way.
> >

UnKa

Dude, I just know you can't be that stupid.

>My professor in graduate school once said that success using any
>psychotherapy method depends upon two things: (1) the clinician's
>belief that the method will truly be effective, and (2) the clinician's
>ability to build rapport with the client and to build FAITH in that
>client that the treatment will be effective and successful. This is
>basically proved by the research of Dr. Scott Miller in his book,
>"Heart & Soul of Change: What Works in Therapy." He stated that success
>in treating a client comes not so much from method or school of
>treatment ... Success is absolutely a product of relationship between
>therapist and client.

Do you even know what placebo means? You did miss the boat.



UnKah

UnKa

Dear John:

It has come very apparent that you know nothing even about NLP, the K
is for Kinaesthetics. which amount to feelings, like the feeling you
get when you touch someones skin, feelings are not emotions, no where
in NLP have I ever read or learned of emotions.
The point being NLP missed the biggest cause of change, emotions and
you and others like you can't stand it when someone like Tom came along
and said, Hey, this isn't right, this is, now all the time and money
you've spent on a worthless technology you call NLP just went up into
thin air.

I myself have spend lots on money and time on NLP, the difference is, I
moved on.
John wrote:


> I suspect that he was lumping VAK together as one and Linguistics as
> the second.
>
> It does beg the question however about what they think the K stands
> for and suggesting it has little emotional content. I thought
> Kinaesthetics was pure emotional content.

Well you thought wrong as usual. I am asking you here and now to point
to any book on NLP that makes that statement and I will apologize to
you.

UnKah

Joe

UnKa wrote:

> > It does beg the question however about what they think the K stands
> > for and suggesting it has little emotional content. I thought
> > Kinaesthetics was pure emotional content.
>
> Well you thought wrong as usual. I am asking you here and now to point
> to any book on NLP that makes that statement and I will apologize to
> you.
>
UnKah

Hi Tim,

See Appendix 1 of Trance-formations by Bandler and Grinder, published
1981. P239 under "Kinaesthetic".

Quote - "Kinaesthetic: feeling emotions, tactile sensations (sense of
touch) or proprioceptive feelings (feelings of muscle movement)".

I need no apology.

But you and Tom have patchy knowledge of NLP, despite your previous
training. Yes, all change occurs at the level of emotions. And many,
many processes can powerfully affect the emotions. 3D mind is but one.

Joe.

UnKa

duck wrote:
> UnKa wrote:
> > Thank You so much for proving my point about the placebo effect of NLP,
> > particularly the swish.
> >
>
> When did that happen ??????????????????

If you took your head out of Bandlers ass long enough you would see
things like that.
>
> > Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
> >
>
> That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate

Another yet pointless and fruitless arguement, there is a difference,
chocolate is made from cocoa powder, and the difference is there has to
be more added to the cocoa powder to make chocolate, like sugar and
milk. DOH.
>
> > 3-D Mind does not rely on getting the client to believe that it will
> > work, or course it doesn't hurt it either. You find the problem driver,
> > balance it, problem gone, no matter what the client believes, unless
> > he/she believes that nothing can help them, then you first work on that
> > belief.
> >
>
> Where does it say the NLP relies on the client believing it will work ?
Nowhere but if you had read the first thread, you would have read the
part about the research of Dr. Scott Miller. Read the first post again
nummy.
>
> > If you read about brain research and how the brain actually works, then
> > you would know why the 3-D Mind works so well.
> >
>
> If you read about brain research you will begin to realise that even
> the experts know very little about emotions. Research upon research
> has shown that the brain is adaptive, and that very little
> functionality (e.g. emotion) can be tied exclusively to a particular
> part of the brain. The brain is a gestalt, not a neatly
> compartmentalised mechanism.

What research are you reading, brains 101 for dummies? How can you even
say anything as stupid as that? If you knew anything about brain
research you would know they know how memory is stored and which area
affects other area's.
>
> 3D mind seems to completely ignore the fact that there is as much
> neuronal activity in the abdomen as in the head. Probably Tom hasn't
> read it a book he understands yet, or the mythical Dr Ken hasn't told
> him about it yet, but I'm sure it will be bolted onto the model
> eventualy in a pathetic attempt to pad it's scientific basis
> credentials.

The neuronal activity you are refering to are called peptides, peptides
are located all through out the body, most heavily in the stomach area
and up and down the spine.
Why didn't you know that? Just making shit up again as you go along?
That is why you get that gut feeling when something is going on.
>
> > Problems don't exist in the neocortex ( thinking area of the brain )
> > but in in the limbic system. This is the area of emotional memory,
> > which emotions are the glue which hold the problem together. The
> > stronger the emotion, the bigger the problem.
> >
>
> Ohh, using big scary words like Neocortex and Limbic system, aren't you
> the little Einstein. The whole brain (including the whole body,
> particularly the stomach) is the thinking part, deluding yourself that
> "it is all packaged nicely in the Neocortex" is a desperate attempt to
> bring understanding to your constrained intellect. Read a few books,
> thinks he knows the shit.

No I know I know nothing at all but then again that would be 50 times
more than you.
First off the neocortex is the thinking part of the brain or more
acurrately call the creative adaptive part of the brain. Each part of
the brain has it functions to the thinking process, but memory is
stored at two different locations, creative adaptive part and the
cortex or limbic part, the limbic part is the part where heavy emotions
are stored which cause the problems in ones life. If you had read
anything about the brain you would know that. So your postering about
what you know about the brain is nil. The whole body does not think, it
only stores memory and can feel but it can not think, show me
references where it does, and I don't want opinions like yours but data
of studies of some kind.
>
> >From your definitions, 3D mind is akin to doing brain surgery using an
> enyclopedia

Your pathetic opinion again.
>
> > This is why affirmations don't work ( very little emotional content )
>
> Affirmations work well for some people. Of course, you believe that
> when people state affirmations they are just verbalizing sounds and are
> in no way thinking about the meaning of the words.

Geez, you are stupid aren't you. If affirmations really work why aren't
they main stream NLP? It's about results right?
>
> > This is why creative visualizations don't work ( very little emotional
> > content )
> >
>
> Creative visualistions work extremely well for some people. Of course
> you believe that all people, when visualising, purely visualise without
> any connected feelings.

You just tend to get dumber by the minute, visualization cause feelings
to happen, you get a thought, you get a feeling, one creates another
but they are not intense enough to cause it to stick. Change occurs
when two things happen, novelity and emotion.
Most suppers you have eaten have been forgotten, why because there was
no novelity there, now think of suppers you have remembered, something
was added, a surprise, a blow job, intense feelings of something to be
able to commit it to memory. Or think of all the women you have had sex
with, I'm betting none of them remember it, small dick, no staying
power, not much to remember.
>
> I have to say it, your world model is extraordinarily limited, you are
> cutting yourself off from so much, just prove you are right. Dood you
> need to collapse those anchors Tom has set on you and learn to think
> for yourself.

I'm not proving anything, science does my speaking for me, everything I
have said here I learned from science, maybe your the one that needs to
rethink your brain model and get rid of that brain 101 for dummies.
>
> > NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
> > emotional content.

Let me rephrase that statement, VKA can generate emotions, depending on
what your thinking about, but the way NLP techniques work you have to
keep amping the states up which doesn't follow natural process, so
using fake states to force another change is actually stupid and can be
damaging.
>
> how can V + K + A = both dumbass, that's like saying "pair off into
> threes"

What is that statement supposed to mean?
>
> And in which demented recess of your logic department do you imagine
> that physical feelings are not emotionally triggered, fuggin half
> witted faggot.

Now here is something that is actually be debated by scientists, do
feelings trigger emotions or do emotions trigger feelings? Umm, the
fuggin half witted fagot part I think you have me mistaken for your
father, whom by the way is also your lover. Incest if best, your family
motto.
>
> > Small wonder it doesn't work consistantly, or long term.
> >
>
> According to your extensive and exhaustive research ?

According to the people I know who had used or gone to NLP practioners.
Extensive, exhaustive no, but results are results, if you average a
small group of people then more than likely the larger numbers will
remain the same.
>
> > So you NLP freaks and geeks, your working in the wrong area. Even as
> > Bandler said, try something different, when what you doing isn't
> > working.
> >
>
> Oh shit, ,must I now write to the 100's of people I have helped and
> tell them "sorry, it didn't work".
I wonder if you did any long term and see how the changes have stuck?
I'm betting not. they come into your office, you fix them, they walk
out feeling good and a few days later, well you know the story as in
lots have had to come back to redo it again, so you can charge them
more. Care to have an honest evaluation of that?
>
> > I am going to order that book and read it, don't you just love new
> > information?
> >
>
> You need to learn to read first.

I just passed the 2nd grade so my reading skills are fine.
>
>
> Ducky
>
> P.S. What's your obsession with Nick Kemp, you seem a little paranoid
> and compulsive.

Why would you think I am obsessed with you, Duck...AKA Nick?

UnKa

>Visualisation with no emotion huh ?, I get all kinds of emotion when I
>visualise naked ladies, I also get a kinaesthetic response with all
>kinds of emotion.

Does that mean your mother turns you on as much as your sister does?



UnKaH

Cameron

"DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153215373.409857.277160@m79g2000cwm.googlegr oups.com...
> duck wrote:
>> > Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
>>
>> That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate
>
> Exactly.
>
> Reason they don't "get it" is a quick buck spam strategy.
>
> Or maybe they are that stupid? It took them 15 years to come up with 3D
> Mind, so i wouldn't be surprised.

Well the DVD at $70 dollars dosen't make anyone ritch quickly, Tom would be
better off oging back to being a carpet salesman.

But at $2500 per head for his seminars? Hell he doesn't need to draw many
people into his group mind to live as well as the any of the poor shmuchs
that haven't joined the internation NLP trainers conspiracy.

I mean 2.5 K a head 30 in the room, marketing perpared by the 3-d mind list,
minus transport and hall rental, they guy is probally clearing over 60k a
go.

No wonder he has the time to spend standing over anyone who is desperate
enough to believe in him.

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:JPadnc2AHoyRdCHZnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>
> "Cameron" <cbrown_1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44bce3de$0$25358$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
>>
>
>>
>> But at $2500 per head for his seminars?
>
> Again your ignance is showing. How much do I charge for seminars? Not 2500
> dollars. My seminars are the lowest priced out there.

Well correct me, what price are your seminars?

In those URL's that you posted earlier did the poster mention a figure over
or under $2000?

Why do you have an issue admiting that you charge for your time? is it that
you charge as much as those NLP trainers that you pour vitriol on?

thewiz

It appears the attackers from 3-D Mind who put down those of us that
believe in the reality and power of NLP have just resorted to MENTAL
MASTURBATION.

Open your own group! Satisfy your lust to scramble each others' brains.

IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO CONTRIBUTE TO NLP, join together with 3-D
Minders in your own dimension away from here. It won't be as much fun,
but you all can follow the same stroke. Then, you can advance your
modality instead of criticizing NLP.

AS REDICTED, I notice no 3-D Mind guru chose to reveal the essence of
the 3-D modality online to prove 3-D Mind superior. Notice everyone,
these folks only want your cash! Helping people and spreading knowledge
is not their agenda. Notice, no 3-D Mind guru offered even one free
solid piece of revealing data!

NLP always has shared knowledge and concepts OPENLY. NLP Trainings are
only for mastering the knowledge and techniques. Plenty of online info
and books are there for you to buy or to check out of the library!

That's the truth.

Buzz (my name)

Bart Loos

Cameron schreef:

> "DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1153215373.409857.277160@m79g2000cwm.googlegr oups.com...
> > duck wrote:
> >> > Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
> >>
> >> That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> > Reason they don't "get it" is a quick buck spam strategy.
> >
> > Or maybe they are that stupid? It took them 15 years to come up with 3D
> > Mind, so i wouldn't be surprised.
>
> Well the DVD at $70 dollars dosen't make anyone ritch quickly, Tom would be
> better off oging back to being a carpet salesman.

so what's your point?
>
> But at $2500 per head for his seminars

There you go again Cameron - that's so funny you still can get any of
the facts right.
SO you are 1) plain stupid or 2) deliberatly distorting truth for your
own agenda.
Which one is it gonna be?

Have fun

Bart

duck

UnKa wrote:
> >Visualisation with no emotion huh ?, I get all kinds of emotion when I
> >visualise naked ladies, I also get a kinaesthetic response with all
> >kinds of emotion.
>
> Does that mean your mother turns you on as much as your sister does?
>


It's kind of a dead heat really, it all depends on who as the most
crack rocks on em at the time.

Duck

Cameron

"UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153250910.545543.215460@m79g2000cwm.googlegr oups.com...
> Dear John:
>
> It has come very apparent that you know nothing even about NLP, the K
> is for Kinaesthetics. which amount to feelings, like the feeling you
> get when you touch someones skin, feelings are not emotions, no where
> in NLP have I ever read or learned of emotions.
>
> I myself have spend lots on money and time on NLP, the difference is, I
> moved on.

Prehaps you should have stayed and learnt or read something.

It could have saved those thousands of dollars of seminar fees you pay to
Tom.

Bart Loos

Cameron schreef:

> "Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1153290658.049336.254280@p79g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...
>
> >> Well the DVD at $70 dollars dosen't make anyone ritch quickly, Tom >>
> >> would be better off oging back to being a carpet salesman.
> >
> > so what's your point?
> >>
> >> But at $2500 per head for his seminars
> >
> > There you go again Cameron - that's so funny you still can get any of
> > the facts right.
> > SO you are 1) plain stupid or 2) deliberatly distorting truth for your
> > own agenda.
> > Which one is it gonna be?
>
>
> Maybe a bit of A a bit of B. prehaps it even extends to C
>
> C
>
> Tell me the facts and we'll all know.
>
> Does Tom run trainings?

yes

> He's advertising praticioner and master praticioner trainings.
> (so not like NLP)

No he's not advertising master practitioner trainings.

Tom & Kim basicly offer two trainings : the Essential Skills
Accelerated Seminar and the 3DMind Practitioner Training.
Besides that they have lately been doing 2 days Rapport and Anchoring
Boot Camps.


> Are his trainings attended by paying people?

> How much do they pay?
>

About 4/5th less of what you mentioned above.


Have fun

Bart

DD

But still, it was a simple question and nobody answered. For Unka i
don't know, i just skip over his PTSD-influenced posts.

Here it goes again:
If 3D Mind is so super good and you can resolve anything you desire,
why do you need to sell 3D Mind itself to earn money?

Besides, keeping it secret helps only for a few pesky sales, it doesn't
contribute anything to the world. For the greater good my ass.

What will be next? Magic lamp for $90? Beat casino book for $35? Gimme
a break.

Bart Loos

DD,

> Here it goes again:
> If 3D Mind is so super good and you can resolve anything you desire,
> why do you need to sell 3D Mind itself to earn money?

Give me a reason why not? - and what that has to do with the 3DMind as
a changetool?

So many before you have tried over the years to discredit the 3Dmind,
and when they can't attack the 3DMind Process anymore; they refute to
trying to discredit Tom V. or they start mockin about the 70$.


> Besides, keeping it secret helps only for a few pesky sales, it doesn't
> contribute anything to the world. For the greater good my ass.


it's not kept secret, it's clearly available for everyone who want's
to have it. But I guess everything that costs 70$ is gonna be a secret
to you - damn i barely can fill up my gasstank for 70$ these days.

How about thousands of people knowing and using the 3Dmind for
themselves and others.
How about all the coaches - nlp prac/masterprac/trainers - and
therapists using it to help others live a better life?

Are you proposing that every therapist, coach and trainer, teacher ..
to give their service for free because what they offer is
contributing to the world, ...?

Have fun

Bart

UnKa

That's my boy, I see I raised you right. BTW...Young Duck Skywalker I
am your crack head father. May the pipe be with you.

UnKah
>
> It's kind of a dead heat really, it all depends on who as the most
> crack rocks on em at the time.
>
> Duck

DD

Bart Loos wrote:
> DD,
>
> > Here it goes again:
> > If 3D Mind is so super good and you can resolve anything you desire,
> > why do you need to sell 3D Mind itself to earn money?
>
> Give me a reason why not? - and what that has to do with the 3DMind as
> a changetool?

If you have system so good, why limit yourself? Just imagine all that
could be achieved.

> So many before you have tried over the years to discredit the 3Dmind,
> and when they can't attack the 3DMind Process anymore; they refute to
> trying to discredit Tom V. or they start mockin about the 70$.

It may be, but also 3D Mind people are attacking (mostly free) NLP.

> it's not kept secret, it's clearly available for everyone who want's
> to have it. But I guess everything that costs 70$ is gonna be a secret
> to you - damn i barely can fill up my gasstank for 70$ these days.

When someone pays for 3D Mind, he is not allowed to tell others how it
works. I guess it would be some kind of copyright mess or something. So
unless author decides to reveal the process to the public, it's not
free, not even after you pay $70.

> How about thousands of people knowing and using the 3Dmind for
> themselves and others.
> How about all the coaches - nlp prac/masterprac/trainers - and
> therapists using it to help others live a better life?

Who knows. Neither you nor i can tell how many people are using this
system and if it really works as advertised. More research should be
done in that direction, but with closed source that's not possible.

> Are you proposing that every therapist, coach and trainer, teacher ..
> to give their service for free because what they offer is
> contributing to the world, ...?

No, but with any fantastic system - why limit yourself? First they are
super-smart revolutionaries to come up with THE new system, then they
need to sell same system to make some money. This applies to almost all
self-help market, not just 3D Mind.

UnKa

Deer DDD

Are you just plain stupid or what? If the 3-D Mind can resolve problems
having to do with the brain, how does that equate to making money.
Change work and making money are two different subjects, I really do
believe you are stupid to the 9th degree.

so then since you know nothing about 3-D Mind, how is it you can say
anything about it?
You claim you were lied too but in actuallity, you were by the folks
who pimp NLP.
So go ahead and spend your money on NLP and watch as your money
disappears and you get nothing for it. Bottom line is your to stupid to
think for yourself. So go ahead and join the NLP crowd, they love it
when they get new meat who can't think for themselves because your an
easy mark, and your God Bandler is laughing all the way to the bank.

UnKah


DD wrote:
> Here it goes again:
> If 3D Mind is so super good and you can resolve anything you desire,
> why do you need to sell 3D Mind itself to earn money?
>
> Besides, keeping it secret helps only for a few pesky sales, it doesn't
> contribute anything to the world. For the greater good my ass.
>
> What will be next? Magic lamp for $90? Beat casino book for $35? Gimme
> a break.

Bart Loos

DD schreef:

> Bart Loos wrote:
> > DD,
> >
> > > Here it goes again:
> > > If 3D Mind is so super good and you can resolve anything you desire,
> > > why do you need to sell 3D Mind itself to earn money?
> >
> > Give me a reason why not? - and what that has to do with the 3DMind as
> > a changetool?
>
> If you have system so good, why limit yourself? Just imagine all that
> could be achieved.

who's limiting themselves?

> > So many before you have tried over the years to discredit the 3Dmind,
> > and when they can't attack the 3DMind Process anymore; they refute to
> > trying to discredit Tom V. or they start mockin about the 70$.
>
> It may be, but also 3D Mind people are attacking (mostly free) NLP.

there's nothing like :" 3DMind People "

Mostly free NLP euh .. you know what I paid for my NLP Master
Practitioner training.
about 5000$ .. I'm not claiming 3DMind can replace everything I
learned there but every little NLP changetool i've learned at the
NLP training, ended up in the trashbin when 3DMind came along.

Now you won't hear me say I waisted 5000$ ...because I bought in on
some NLP marketing stuff. I'm not blaming someone else for me being
ignorant about the effectiveness / quality of an NLP training.

> > it's not kept secret, it's clearly available for everyone who want's
> > to have it. But I guess everything that costs 70$ is gonna be a secret
> > to you - damn i barely can fill up my gasstank for 70$ these days.
>
> When someone pays for 3D Mind, he is not allowed to tell others how it
> works. I guess it would be some kind of copyright mess or something. So
> unless author decides to reveal the process to the public, it's not
> free, not even after you pay $70.


Sorry but you're way off. AFAIK he never has told anyone to not tell
the rest of the world how it works. Actually he has explained it over
and over on this list aswell all for free for the last 4 years.

So again you're like all the others I described above, instead of
informing yourself you're trying to come up with something to prove a
point. Which is becoming further and further away from the 3DMind
process in itself.

You started out with your vision on the balancing, which I thought
could lead to a great discussion, ... though now you're ending up with
squirling around trying very hard to find another stick to hit with...

Think about it.

>
> > How about thousands of people knowing and using the 3Dmind for
> > themselves and others.
> > How about all the coaches - nlp prac/masterprac/trainers - and
> > therapists using it to help others live a better life?
>
> Who knows. Neither you nor i can tell how many people are using this
> system and if it really works as advertised. More research should be
> done in that direction, but with closed source that's not possible.
>

I agree. More resource should be done. Maybe it's already been done,
while we speak. I don't know. Maybe Tom can jump in and add his view
about it.


Have fun

Bart

Cameron

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153290658.049336.254280@p79g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...

>> Well the DVD at $70 dollars dosen't make anyone ritch quickly, Tom >>
>> would be better off oging back to being a carpet salesman.
>
> so what's your point?
>>
>> But at $2500 per head for his seminars
>
> There you go again Cameron - that's so funny you still can get any of
> the facts right.
> SO you are 1) plain stupid or 2) deliberatly distorting truth for your
> own agenda.
> Which one is it gonna be?


Maybe a bit of A a bit of B. prehaps it even extends to C

C

Tell me the facts and we'll all know.

Does Tom run trainings?

He's advertising praticioner and master praticioner trainings.
(so not like NLP)

Are his trainings attended by paying people?

How much do they pay?


> Have fun
>
> Bart
>

DD

Bart Loos schreef:
> > If you have system so good, why limit yourself? Just imagine all that
> > could be achieved.
>
> who's limiting themselves?

They are, the 3D Mind People.

> > It may be, but also 3D Mind people are attacking (mostly free) NLP.
>
> there's nothing like :" 3DMind People "

You sure?

> Mostly free NLP euh .. you know what I paid for my NLP Master
> Practitioner training.
> about 5000$ .. I'm not claiming 3DMind can replace everything I
> learned there but every little NLP changetool i've learned at the
> NLP training, ended up in the trashbin when 3DMind came along.
>
> Now you won't hear me say I waisted 5000$ ...because I bought in on
> some NLP marketing stuff. I'm not blaming someone else for me being
> ignorant about the effectiveness / quality of an NLP training.

I would never pay that much for any course. But i guess some people
need to put something on the wall, so they go there and pay $5k.

> Sorry but you're way off. AFAIK he never has told anyone to not tell
> the rest of the world how it works. Actually he has explained it over
> and over on this list aswell all for free for the last 4 years.

If you can please provide some links from Google Groups for others too
see. I don't care anymore about the 3D Mind since i can't find any
proof it works and also i am concerned about things i described in the
first post here and also i see how people promoting it are doing it for
years in the same way which says it all.

> So again you're like all the others I described above, instead of
> informing yourself you're trying to come up with something to prove a
> point. Which is becoming further and further away from the 3DMind
> process in itself.

I informed myself from sales page and i asked Tom to inform us some
more, but all i received was something like "educate yourself you
ignorant fool".

Then i went to the archives and i found nothing much, but i became
better at flaming. Maybe i missed some articles, so feel free to point
them out. Thank you.

> You started out with your vision on the balancing, which I thought
> could lead to a great discussion, ... though now you're ending up with
> squirling around trying very hard to find another stick to hit with...
>
> Think about it.

Well, 3D Mind People are not providing any input on this subject except
"you dont know shit" and that pretty much ends any discussion, not just
this one.

> I agree. More resource should be done. Maybe it's already been done,
> while we speak. I don't know. Maybe Tom can jump in and add his view
> about it.

I doubt he will. He is just counting sales and that's all he does
lately.

Bart Loos

DD schreef:

> Bart Loos schreef:
> > > If you have system so good, why limit yourself? Just imagine all that
> > > could be achieved.
> >
> > who's limiting themselves?
>
> They are, the 3D Mind People.
>
how ? -
and from what are they limiting themselves?

Have fun

Bart

DD

Bart Loos wrote:
> how ? -
> and from what are they limiting themselves?

Well it depends what you really want.

They have system capable of doing wonders or so they say. So, why still
the need to spam one almost dead newsgroup? Why not write a book, why
not fix Unka's PTSD so he won't need to relax by verbal abuse, or
create something completely new instead of selling same stuff for
years. It's not my biz so i don't really care what they do, but it
makes me wonder anyway.

Bart Loos

DD schreef:

> Bart Loos wrote:
> > how ? -
> > and from what are they limiting themselves?
>
> Well it depends what you really want.
>
> They have system capable of doing wonders or so they say. So, why still
> the need to spam one almost dead newsgroup?

>Why not write a book, why
> not fix Unka's PTSD so he won't need to relax by verbal abuse, or
> create something completely new instead of selling same stuff for
> years. It's not my biz so i don't really care what they do, but it
> makes me wonder anyway.

So because they don't do what you think they should do or how they
should behave, they're limited. ... right.

Maybe they're writing that book,
Maybe Unka's PTSD is already fixed long ago
Maybe he's just having fun bashing selfclaimed idiots
Maybe they're all creating new stuff constantly

Maybe you could try to see that

Maybe you could try to see the world not only through your own glasses.


Have fun

Bart

Tom Vizzini

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153334309.101407.298150@i3g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
>

Hi Bart

It is the same old story.

First....the 3D mind is just NLP

When that gets disproven..

Second...the 3D mind does not work

When that gest disproven..

Third...Personal attacks

The pattern never seems to change.

The reality of the situation is this. The 3D mind works and is cheaper and
easier to use than NLP. It does not take 5000 dollars to learn. Just 70
bucks.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

Cameron

"Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153303872.062707.66780@i42g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...

>> Does Tom run trainings?
>
> yes
>
>> He's advertising praticioner and master praticioner trainings.
>> (so not like NLP)
>
> No he's not advertising master practitioner trainings.

May 19-21 3D Mind(tm) Practitioners seminar Manchester UK

May 25-28 Essential Skills Accelerated Masters Manchester UK

True, he doesn't put the word praticioner in front of his masters course.


>> Are his trainings attended by paying people?
>
>> How much do they pay?
>>
>
> About 4/5th less of what you mentioned above.

Thanks, Huran also mentioned this.

DD

Tom Vizzini wrote:
> It is the same old story.
>
> First....the 3D mind is just NLP

Yes, more or less. But innovative new stuff.

> Second...the 3D mind does not work

It can work, since it's based on NLP and new discoveries.

> Third...Personal attacks

Ah, i already forgot about them, you can do the same.

> The pattern never seems to change.

As usual. But i am glad we resolved all arguments in just a few days.

I am not going to post about 3D Mind anymore, unless it's some real
discussion. This stupid flaming over and over is making me dizzy
already, also it eats a lot of time.

usmarine_lv

Tom's Trainings are very economical, not to mention you really get from
him basically the necessary tools to make just about any change.

I may not agree with everything he advocates but i'll say that people
would do well, to at the very least try out his essential skills
training. And when you go home actually practice what you went over in
the training you'll find that you'll actually have some usable special
skills.

Chris

Tom Vizzini wrote:
> "Cameron" <cbrown_1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44bce3de$0$25358$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> >
>
> >
> > But at $2500 per head for his seminars?
>
> Again your ignance is showing. How much do I charge for seminars? Not 2500
> dollars. My seminars are the lowest priced out there.

usmarine_lv

Honestly,

I think that NLP has done it self a GREAT disservice by pricing itself
out for thousands and thousands of dollars.


Not to mention that every Dick and Jane can set up a training institute
whether or not they can actually use the skills or not.

Some of these places are just paper mills.

That's unfortunate.

Chris


Tom Vizzini wrote:
> "Bart Loos" <bardos_be@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1153334309.101407.298150@i3g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> >
>
> Hi Bart
>
> It is the same old story.
>
> First....the 3D mind is just NLP
>
> When that gets disproven..
>
> Second...the 3D mind does not work
>
> When that gest disproven..
>
> Third...Personal attacks
>
> The pattern never seems to change.
>
> The reality of the situation is this. The 3D mind works and is cheaper and
> easier to use than NLP. It does not take 5000 dollars to learn. Just 70
> bucks.
>
>
> --
> Tom Vizzini
>
> Real Skills for the Real World
> www.essential-skills.com
> New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
> 3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

duck

UnKa wrote:
> duck wrote:
> > UnKa wrote:
> > > Thank You so much for proving my point about the placebo effect of NLP,
> > > particularly the swish.
> > >
> >
> > When did that happen ??????????????????
>
> If you took your head out of Bandlers ass long enough you would see
> things like that.
> >

Damn it Richard, I told you it was too big !!

> > > Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
> > >
> >
> > That's like saying here is the difference between cocoa and chocolate
>
> Another yet pointless and fruitless arguement, there is a difference,
> chocolate is made from cocoa powder, and the difference is there has to
> be more added to the cocoa powder to make chocolate, like sugar and
> milk. DOH.
> >

Actually it is a mega wicked smart comparison. NLP is the cocoa (the
essential ingredient) and 3D mind is chocolate (not in taste or
texture, but in composition). You thick fucker !!!!

> > > 3-D Mind does not rely on getting the client to believe that it will
> > > work, or course it doesn't hurt it either. You find the problem driver,
> > > balance it, problem gone, no matter what the client believes, unless
> > > he/she believes that nothing can help them, then you first work on that
> > > belief.
> > >
> >
> > Where does it say the NLP relies on the client believing it will work ?
> Nowhere but if you had read the first thread, you would have read the
> part about the research of Dr. Scott Miller. Read the first post again
> nummy.
> >

AH I see.

> > > If you read about brain research and how the brain actually works, then
> > > you would know why the 3-D Mind works so well.
> > >
> >
> > If you read about brain research you will begin to realise that even
> > the experts know very little about emotions. Research upon research
> > has shown that the brain is adaptive, and that very little
> > functionality (e.g. emotion) can be tied exclusively to a particular
> > part of the brain. The brain is a gestalt, not a neatly
> > compartmentalised mechanism.
>
> What research are you reading, brains 101 for dummies? How can you even
> say anything as stupid as that? If you knew anything about brain
> research you would know they know how memory is stored and which area
> affects other area's.
> >
> > 3D mind seems to completely ignore the fact that there is as much
> > neuronal activity in the abdomen as in the head. Probably Tom hasn't
> > read it a book he understands yet, or the mythical Dr Ken hasn't told
> > him about it yet, but I'm sure it will be bolted onto the model
> > eventualy in a pathetic attempt to pad it's scientific basis
> > credentials.
>
> The neuronal activity you are refering to are called peptides, peptides
> are located all through out the body, most heavily in the stomach area
> and up and down the spine.
> Why didn't you know that?
> >

Because neurons are nerve cells, peptides are amino acid chains a.k.a.
building blocks of protien. Peptides are not neuronal activity,
peptides rely on circulation to move around the body. Neurons use an
excitation wave to produce a potential change (voltage to you and I)
across the membrane, which is very rapid (cos lectricity moves real
quick) and hence neural activity is rapid. If peptides were neural
activity, you could hold your hand over a flame and would have to wait
for the peptide to circulate to a suitable receptor (if such a thing
existed) before registering pain, this could take several
minutes.....thinking about it, maybe this impossible situation is true
for you ya medical freak, that's why you are so demented.

At best a peptide can initiate the potential change (as can hormones
and other body chemicals) but cannot effect excitation of a nerve
(a.k.a. neuronal activity)

I believe you have done some reading but I think that maybe it is now
time to do some understanding Forrest.

It is a truth that peptides are located throughout the body, so have a
gold star for that, but must try harder.

>Just making shit up again as you go along?

Just talking shit again as you go along ?

> That is why you get that gut feeling when something is going on.

Wind

> > > Problems don't exist in the neocortex ( thinking area of the brain )
> > > but in in the limbic system. This is the area of emotional memory,
> > > which emotions are the glue which hold the problem together. The
> > > stronger the emotion, the bigger the problem.
> > >
> >
> > Ohh, using big scary words like Neocortex and Limbic system, aren't you
> > the little Einstein. The whole brain (including the whole body,
> > particularly the stomach) is the thinking part, deluding yourself that
> > "it is all packaged nicely in the Neocortex" is a desperate attempt to
> > bring understanding to your constrained intellect. Read a few books,
> > thinks he knows the shit.
>
> No I know I know nothing at all but then again that would be 50 times
> more than you.

Actually I know 50 times more than you, depending on the scale you are
using.

> First off the neocortex is the thinking part of the brain or more
> acurrately call the creative adaptive part of the brain. Each part of
> the brain has it functions to the thinking process, but memory is
> stored at two different locations, creative adaptive part and the
> cortex or limbic part, the limbic part is the part where heavy emotions
> are stored which cause the problems in ones life. If you had read
> anything about the brain you would know that. So your postering about
> what you know about the brain is nil. The whole body does not think, it
> only stores memory and can feel but it can not think, show me
> references where it does, and I don't want opinions like yours but data
> of studies of some kind.
> >

Noticed you used the word "postering" and I think you mean "Posturing",
I don't care about the inadequate spelling, I just wanted to comment on
the excellent attempt to use the intended word, despite the fact that
even with the correct word the sentence is semantically disjointed
(i.e. it makes no sense).

> > >From your definitions, 3D mind is akin to doing brain surgery using an
> > enyclopedia
>
> Your pathetic opinion again.
> >

So, to you, others opinions are not valid, that makes you probably the
worst proponent of any therapy model ever.

> > > This is why affirmations don't work ( very little emotional content )
> >
> > Affirmations work well for some people. Of course, you believe that
> > when people state affirmations they are just verbalizing sounds and are
> > in no way thinking about the meaning of the words.
>
> Geez, you are stupid aren't you. If affirmations really work why aren't
> they main stream NLP? It's about results right?
> >

Loads of effective stuff is not mainstream NLP. One of your problems
is that you believe that anyone who has any interest in NLP, believes
that anything that is not NLP is junk. And then you have gone a step
further, moved to 3D mind and declared anything that is not 3D mind as
junk. You have become (or always were) what you project onto the users
of this group.

> > > This is why creative visualizations don't work ( very little emotional
> > > content )
> > >
> >
> > Creative visualistions work extremely well for some people. Of course
> > you believe that all people, when visualising, purely visualise without
> > any connected feelings.
>
> You just tend to get dumber by the minute, visualization cause feelings
> to happen, you get a thought, you get a feeling, one creates another
> but they are not intense enough to cause it to stick. Change occurs
> when two things happen, novelity and emotion.

I don't 'just' tend to get dumber, I actively engage in getting dumber
by reading your posts, although they are amusing, in a chimp riding a
bicycle kind of way.

> Most suppers you have eaten have been forgotten, why because there was
> no novelity there, now think of suppers you have remembered, something
> was added, a surprise, a blow job, intense feelings of something to be
> able to commit it to memory. Or think of all the women you have had sex
> with, I'm betting none of them remember it, small dick, no staying
> power, not much to remember.
> >

They all got paid, who cares if they remember (although your momma took
a few polaroids of me defiling her flabby ass)

> > I have to say it, your world model is extraordinarily limited, you are
> > cutting yourself off from so much, just prove you are right. Dood you
> > need to collapse those anchors Tom has set on you and learn to think
> > for yourself.
>
> I'm not proving anything, science does my speaking for me, everything I
> have said here I learned from science, maybe your the one that needs to
> rethink your brain model and get rid of that brain 101 for dummies.
> >

Everything you have said is your understanding of what you have read,
it is not scientific explanation. DO you not recall filtering,
deletion, distortion and generalisation, cos that's what you have done
with the information available to you. In an increasingly desparate
attempt to bring some scientific credibility to 3D mind you have
appointed yourself scientific spokesman, and it is real funny cos it is
like Elmer Fudd being the national spokesman for Quantum Physics.

> > > NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
> > > emotional content.
>
> Let me rephrase that statement, VKA can generate emotions, depending on
> what your thinking about, but the way NLP techniques work you have to
> keep amping the states up which doesn't follow natural process, so
> using fake states to force another change is actually stupid and can be
> damaging.
> >

Amping states is entirely natural. What do you think passion, anger,
trance, love, exhiliration are ?

If you ain't amping states form time to time you are living a real
monotonous, dull and empty existence.

And who says amped states need to be fake. Anything elicited is real
at the point of elicitation.

Unless you are brain dead (which is the consensus of this group, cos I
sent out a questionaire behind the scenes) you will amp multiple
states, multiple times every single day. If you are not amping states
your 13 year old boyfriend must think you are a real crap lay !

Amping states can be effective if done effectively, just like 3D mind.

Dood/Dude, you have been believing too much of Toms opinions. Get your
own thoughts and collapse all them anchors Tom has set on you (unless
you actually believe he hasn't .....ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha).

> >
> > And in which demented recess of your logic department do you imagine
> > that physical feelings are not emotionally triggered, fuggin half
> > witted faggot.
>
> Now here is something that is actually be debated by scientists, do
> feelings trigger emotions or do emotions trigger feelings? Umm, the
> fuggin half witted fagot part I think you have me mistaken for your
> father, whom by the way is also your lover. Incest if best, your family
> motto.
> >
> > > Small wonder it doesn't work consistantly, or long term.
> > >
> >
> > According to your extensive and exhaustive research ?
>
> According to the people I know who had used or gone to NLP practioners.
> Extensive, exhaustive no, but results are results, if you average a
> small group of people then more than likely the larger numbers will
> remain the same.
> >

Therein lies the underlying cause of the skewed and misleading
conclusions of small sample statistics.

> > > So you NLP freaks and geeks, your working in the wrong area. Even as
> > > Bandler said, try something different, when what you doing isn't
> > > working.
> > >
> >
> > Oh shit, ,must I now write to the 100's of people I have helped and
> > tell them "sorry, it didn't work".
> I wonder if you did any long term and see how the changes have stuck?
> I'm betting not. they come into your office, you fix them, they walk
> out feeling good and a few days later, well you know the story as in
> lots have had to come back to redo it again, so you can charge them
> more. Care to have an honest evaluation of that?
> >

I have an office ????, why did no one tell me of this.

Never heard of Pro Bono ?

I see these people often, socially, and no complaints yet fucko

> > > I am going to order that book and read it, don't you just love new
> > > information?
> > >
> >
> > You need to learn to read first.
>
> I just passed the 2nd grade so my reading skills are fine.
> >

You cheated

> >
> > Ducky
> >
> > P.S. What's your obsession with Nick Kemp, you seem a little paranoid
> > and compulsive.
>
> Why would you think I am obsessed with you, Duck...AKA Nick?

I am really not Nick, I am Dr Richard Altfeld Sykes Baffa Grinder
Slabiak Jeffries Bandler the 3rd

Duck.

DD

duck wrote:
> <snip>
> > That is why you get that gut feeling when something is going on.
>
> Wind

ROFL!

> <snip>
> Amping states can be effective if done effectively, just like 3D mind.
>
> Dood/Dude, you have been believing too much of Toms opinions. Get your
> own thoughts and collapse all them anchors Tom has set on you (unless
> you actually believe he hasn't .....ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha).
> <snip>

This makes me wonder, maybe 3D Mind and similar stuff is nothing more
than some weird way of anchoring?

Think about it ... Let's forget all sales page science for a moment...
You have something unwanted and you introduce something which should
balance it. Isn't this very similar to a classic anchoring or even
swish method?

Because of association made your brain will recall 'new' when 'old' is
due to happen again. I think swish works in the same way. In example,
you want to do some nail biting, but you associated image of someone
who never does that with it, so it forces you to change -- if done
effectively.

Of course you can say "you are uneducated" and remind me about
reptilian/primal and creative brain parts again, but if you look at it
from different perspective, maybe 3D Mind is just advanced
anchoring/swish? And about brain chemistry responsible for a
balancing/change, i believe it changes when needed and it can be done
by anchoring/swish aswell.

duck

DD wrote:
> duck wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > That is why you get that gut feeling when something is going on.
> >
> > Wind
>
> ROFL!
>
> > <snip>
> > Amping states can be effective if done effectively, just like 3D mind.
> >
> > Dood/Dude, you have been believing too much of Toms opinions. Get your
> > own thoughts and collapse all them anchors Tom has set on you (unless
> > you actually believe he hasn't .....ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha).
> > <snip>
>
> This makes me wonder, maybe 3D Mind and similar stuff is nothing more
> than some weird way of anchoring?
>

It is similar, in part, to collapsing anchors, using stacked anchors to
collapse the bad one (they call it balancing, but if you try to balance
with resources that are less powerful than the driver state, you don't
get much of an effect. SO they have you keep adding resources until
you reach nirvana, completely oblivious to the fact that the sum off
the resources is greater than the sum of the problem state (in
emotional terms), and hence you are using classic NLP overwhelm and not
in fact balancing at all.

In fact Tom suggests setting sliding anchors on the resources to enable
you to fine tune them to get the best blend/balance. which sounds
pretty cool, although it confuses me cos all NLP is bad and doesn't
actually work, yet there is the "inventor" of 3D mind saying to use an
NLP technique (which of course requires good elicitation, amplification
and anchoring skills (hence not as easy as they claim cos you need NLP
training, which conveniently Tom provides)), which seems even odder
when you think that Unka and Tom talk about amping states as the work
of the devil).

I like 3D mind, it is a very simple model, but then so is NLP, until
you start using it. For me 3D mind is the symbolic equivalent of the
meta-model approach (which remember doesn't work ever, and is the work
of the devil) i.e. find belief, deconstruct it to components, reframe
the components and watch the belief dissolve.

> Think about it ... Let's forget all sales page science for a moment...
> You have something unwanted and you introduce something which should
> balance it. Isn't this very similar to a classic anchoring or even
> swish method?
>
> Because of association made your brain will recall 'new' when 'old' is
> due to happen again. I think swish works in the same way. In example,
> you want to do some nail biting, but you associated image of someone
> who never does that with it, so it forces you to change -- if done
> effectively.
>
> Of course you can say "you are uneducated" and remind me about
> reptilian/primal and creative brain parts again, but if you look at it
> from different perspective, maybe 3D Mind is just advanced
> anchoring/swish? And about brain chemistry responsible for a
> balancing/change, i believe it changes when needed and it can be done
> by anchoring/swish aswell.

They cannot accept this, because it will mean admitting that most of
thier posts for the past 10 years are full of shit. We all know this,
but they cannot face it, cos it means they will have to get therapy

Duck

UnKa

Dear Wizzie:

Oh another moron who thinks NLP is the shit. I see you attacked us just
fine but left off mentioning the antic's of your fellow NLP'ers who do
nothing but flame.

Look dude, it is this simple, if you can't criticize NLP you cant find
out what is wrong with it and correct it, so it appears that your just
another non thinking follower who does nothing but buy the concepts of
NLP, even though you can't get them to work most of the time. You are
told that it is you who can't do it, but in reality, it is just another
lie to perpetuate NLP.

P.T. Barnum said, there is one born every minute, he was refering to
suckers, which I guess he was refering to you and most other NLP'ers
who won't question anything, just accept it like it is.

I am sorry your so shallow minded, I am sorry they convinced you that
NLP is the truth the way and the life, get your head out of your ass
and start thinking.

The saddest part is, your so stuck, and you don't even know your stuck.

Now your bitching because Tom won't give any free 3-D Mind away, so
point me to a post where Richard has given away DHE or PE for free?
You'll spend thousands of dollars on NLP and won't spend 70 on a
product that offers a 100% money back guarantee?

Part of any discussion is playing the devil advocate, I gave you my
take on the swish, and you proved nicely for me that NLP is nothing
more than a placebo effect. Thanks.

Now if you want real discussion, there are threads that are non flame.
Go there, partisipate and have at it.


thewiz wrote:
> It appears the attackers from 3-D Mind who put down those of us that
> believe in the reality and power of NLP have just resorted to MENTAL
> MASTURBATION.
>
> Open your own group! Satisfy your lust to scramble each others' brains.
>
> IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO CONTRIBUTE TO NLP, join together with 3-D
> Minders in your own dimension away from here. It won't be as much fun,
> but you all can follow the same stroke. Then, you can advance your
> modality instead of criticizing NLP.
>
> AS REDICTED, I notice no 3-D Mind guru chose to reveal the essence of
> the 3-D modality online to prove 3-D Mind superior. Notice everyone,
> these folks only want your cash! Helping people and spreading knowledge
> is not their agenda. Notice, no 3-D Mind guru offered even one free
> solid piece of revealing data!
>
> NLP always has shared knowledge and concepts OPENLY. NLP Trainings are
> only for mastering the knowledge and techniques. Plenty of online info
> and books are there for you to buy or to check out of the library!
>
> That's the truth.
>
> Buzz (my name)

UnKa

>I like 3D mind, it is a very simple model, but then so is NLP, until
>you start using it.

Thank You Duck for making that clear.

DD

duck wrote:
> It is similar, in part, to collapsing anchors, using stacked anchors to
> collapse the bad one (they call it balancing, but if you try to balance
> with resources that are less powerful than the driver state, you don't
> get much of an effect. SO they have you keep adding resources until
> you reach nirvana, completely oblivious to the fact that the sum off
> the resources is greater than the sum of the problem state (in
> emotional terms), and hence you are using classic NLP overwhelm and not
> in fact balancing at all.

So, if i am not wrong again, we could use NLP overwhelm on parts of
some belief and expect same outcome as when using 3D Mind?

First you see what drives something unwanted and then you imagine
adding new stuff to it or anchor in some way new emotional states to
the existing ones?

> In fact Tom suggests setting sliding anchors on the resources to enable
> you to fine tune them to get the best blend/balance. which sounds
> pretty cool, although it confuses me cos all NLP is bad and doesn't
> actually work, yet there is the "inventor" of 3D mind saying to use an
> NLP technique (which of course requires good elicitation, amplification
> and anchoring skills (hence not as easy as they claim cos you need NLP
> training, which conveniently Tom provides)), which seems even odder
> when you think that Unka and Tom talk about amping states as the work
> of the devil).

I am still wondering why the need to deny it's NLP...? Customers don't
care about that and since NLP is mentioned now and then, it would maybe
generate some more sales anyway.

NLP community, well i don't know about it but i don't believe someone
will attack you, if you develop some technique based on NLP.

> I like 3D mind, it is a very simple model, but then so is NLP, until
> you start using it. For me 3D mind is the symbolic equivalent of the
> meta-model approach (which remember doesn't work ever, and is the work
> of the devil) i.e. find belief, deconstruct it to components, reframe
> the components and watch the belief dissolve.

So, a bit modified and maybe simplified meta-model would be as good as
3D Mind?

> They cannot accept this, because it will mean admitting that most of
> thier posts for the past 10 years are full of shit. We all know this,
> but they cannot face it, cos it means they will have to get therapy

This is so childish. By discussing it something could get improved and
better a lot faster. People would still buy from web page, if that's
the reason.

duck

UnKa wrote:
> >I like 3D mind, it is a very simple model, but then so is NLP, until
> >you start using it.
>
> Thank You Duck for making that clear.

I posted a reply to this post, but the firewall here at the penitentery
seems to have intercepted it, so here goes again.

There is a game, can't remember it's name, but on the box it says "A
minute to learn, a lifetime to master".

And as for the statement from my previous post, which you have quoted
above, this applies equally to 3D mind.

Duck

P.S. wasn't my previous post a little more than one sentence ?

DD

Yea, also people are used to quick-fix solutions, they don't want to
take time and study NLP or something else. This is why pre-packaged
solutions sell.

Richard Waters

Cameron furiously typed the following on 22/07/2006 8:18 AM:
> Why do they carry on like this? when a positive marketing approach tends to
> work better.
[snip]

Didnt u know mate - "...spam marketing is the new black"! ;-)

> And who knows after 10 years of various passerby's telling them what
> assholes they are being they might actually believe we are all Nick Kemp.
> (which is a bit flattering in my world)
[snip]

Deletion and Generalisation..? For them, not you! ;-)

I have been reading all this crap and its just getting more silly by the
minute. Cameron, I think ur wasting ur time trying to "speak" to the
"3dmind" people... ...I have noticed over time that a lot of the good
nlp-typers have dropped off here - its a shame, cos in my opinion, the
MORE opinions you have, the more choices you have the and more choices
you have the better the outcome.

But if people feel that limiting themselves to "3dmind" and "ignoring"
all the nlp (and related) tools... ...more power to them, let them
limit away.

It reminds me of the "self help book" delemma that happened in the late
80's early 90's (especially here in Australia) when everyone was
releasing a "self help" book on almost any topic u can imagine! :-D
Problem was, the techniques most of these people were using worked for
them, but a lot of people rubbished them because it would work for other
people - they had limited themselves in approach so much, that there
werent any choices...

Again, just my .02c worth as well - flame away mon frairs! *lmao*

I just found a guy, through a friend who bought a video of 3dmind and
hes giving it to me - he gave it a go and said its a crock-of-shite and
didnt help him in the slightest - I would prefer to make my own mind
up... ...should come in the post in the next few days, Ill see if it
looks genuine and have a listen/watch - AND MAKE UP MY OWN MIND. Geez,
Ill bet some peoples hair just stood up on the back of their necks! :-P

:-D -- Richard W

John

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 08:18:07 +1000, "Cameron"
<cbrown_1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>Why do they carry on like this? when a positive marketing approach tends to
>work better.
>
>Tom has a bit of a history of mismatching which might be a clue to why he
>behaves the way he does,
>
>He can by mocking teh "evil" without ignore any inadaquacies within.
>
>He also has commented occasionally that he recruits a lot from burnt out
>NLP'ers, who presumabally have some of the concepts already installed so
>they're easier to keep working with.
>
>And who knows after 10 years of various passerby's telling them what
>assholes they are being they might actually believe we are all Nick Kemp.
>(which is a bit flattering in my world).


I was beginning to believe it myself. I have even taken to wearing
glasses.

--
John Kemp

Richard Waters

Richard Waters furiously typed the following on 21/07/2006 8:53 AM:
>
> It reminds me of the "self help book" delemma that happened in the late
> 80's early 90's (especially here in Australia) when everyone was
> releasing a "self help" book on almost any topic u can imagine! :-D
> Problem was, the techniques most of these people were using worked for
> them, but a lot of people rubbished them because it would work for other
> people - they had limited themselves in approach so much, that there
> werent any choices...

Correction: should have said - "...rubbished them, because it wouldnt
work for other people..."

- UPDATE -

Also, got the cds in the mail today - apparently an AVI format of a
video. So I cant really tell if genuine or not? But the start of the
video has a moving green(ish) "bubble" and the 3dmind.

It looks like someone has copied their videos (??) to computer and it
comes in 2 parts?

The AVI starts with a guy, I am guessing its Tom (??), rubbing his hands
with a black marker and saying:

"We're gonna start playing with your heads - I mean, in a serious way"

Gonna have a watch over the weekend and see what all the fuss is about?!

:-D -- Richard W

duck

duck wrote:
> UnKa wrote:
> > >I like 3D mind, it is a very simple model, but then so is NLP, until
> > >you start using it.
> >
> > Thank You Duck for making that clear.
>
> I posted a reply to this post, but the firewall here at the penitentery
> seems to have intercepted it, so here goes again.
>
> There is a game, can't remember it's name, but on the box it says "A
> minute to learn, a lifetime to master".
>
Othello, that was the name of the game

duck

> And who knows after 10 years of various passerby's telling them what
> assholes they are being they might actually believe we are all Nick Kemp.
> (which is a bit flattering in my world)
>

I second this

duck

Richard Waters wrote:
> Cameron furiously typed the following on 22/07/2006 8:18 AM:
>
> It reminds me of the "self help book" delemma that happened in the late
> 80's early 90's (especially here in Australia) when everyone was
> releasing a "self help" book on almost any topic u can imagine! :-D
> Problem was, the techniques most of these people were using worked for
> them, but a lot of people rubbished them because it would work for other
> people - they had limited themselves in approach so much, that there
> werent any choices...
>

Indeed.

I know people who have great succes with EFT, meditation, counselling,
psychotherapy, drugs, NLP, ECT, but I also know people who have not had
sucess with them.

I have been told that the 3D mind list has more than it's fair share of
people who just aren't getting the results promised. And of course Tom
tells em they ain't doing it right, and Tim tells em they are slack
jawed faggots and are in denial about something.

I reckon if Nick Kemp was selling 3D mind he'd be a wealthy man by now.

Nick, why not talk to Tom about about some kind affiliation
.....chuckle.

Dick.....errr...I mean Duck.

Tom Vizzini

"Richard Waters" <legerdemain@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:44c00beb$1_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> Richard Waters furiously typed the following on 21/07/2006 8:53 AM:

>
> Also, got the cds in the mail today - apparently an AVI format of a
> video. So I cant really tell if genuine or not? But the start of the
> video has a moving green(ish) "bubble" and the 3dmind.

You have bootlegged copies.

Cameron

Why do they carry on like this? when a positive marketing approach tends to
work better.

Tom has a bit of a history of mismatching which might be a clue to why he
behaves the way he does,

He can by mocking teh "evil" without ignore any inadaquacies within.

He also has commented occasionally that he recruits a lot from burnt out
NLP'ers, who presumabally have some of the concepts already installed so
they're easier to keep working with.

And who knows after 10 years of various passerby's telling them what
assholes they are being they might actually believe we are all Nick Kemp.
(which is a bit flattering in my world)


Just my .02

Cameron

"DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153435662.342625.264130@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> Yea, also people are used to quick-fix solutions, they don't want to
> take time and study NLP or something else. This is why pre-packaged
> solutions sell.


True, tell it's all simple and then get stuck into them if they question
anything. (though presumabally Tom has a different style in his trainings
than he exposes here.)

Cameron

"John" <yjdyhugo@d8hujsrfu> wrote in message
news:ea20c21tcac32c0fkgi9sjm4q7fdsia3mj@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 08:18:07 +1000, "Cameron"
> <cbrown_1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>>And who knows after 10 years of various passerby's telling them what
>>assholes they are being they might actually believe we are all Nick Kemp.
>>(which is a bit flattering in my world).
>
>
> I was beginning to believe it myself. I have even taken to wearing
> glasses.
>
> --
> John Kemp

I figured there had to be a reason all of in the wholy illuminated order of
the shining lamp (aka the international nlp trainers conspiracy) we all have
the sirname kemp.

Cameron Kemp.

Richard Waters

Tom Vizzini furiously typed the following on 22/07/2006 1:45 AM:
> "Richard Waters" <legerdemain@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44c00beb$1_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
>
>>Richard Waters furiously typed the following on 21/07/2006 8:53 AM:
>
>
>>Also, got the cds in the mail today - apparently an AVI format of a
>>video. So I cant really tell if genuine or not? But the start of the
>>video has a moving green(ish) "bubble" and the 3dmind.
>
>
> You have bootlegged copies.
>
>

Sorry Tom - thats abuntantly apparent... ...if they are in an AVI
format from videos or dvds on a cd.

Do ur videos start the same way or not?

If so, then I will have a serious look at them, if not I will throw them
out and not bother - write off the experiance as a learning moment! ;-)

I got them cos my mate said they didnt work, and I wanted to know why.

:-D -- Richard W

UnKa

duck wrote:

Thank you for once again proving my point about your disciplines being
nothing more than placebo effect, people who believed they would work,
got fixed, people who didn't believe it, got no results.

> I know people who have great succes with EFT, meditation, counselling,
> psychotherapy, drugs, NLP, ECT, but I also know people who have not had
> sucess with them.


Really and who told you that Santa Clause? The Tooth fairy? Oh, I
forgot you don't want to reveal your sources. Mainly because they they
don't exist or because you love lying?
>
> I have been told that the 3D mind list has more than it's fair share of
> people who just aren't getting the results promised. And of course Tom
> tells em they ain't doing it right,

I am sorry but I have more respect for them than that, I call them Mr.
or Ms. as the case may be, Slack Jaw faggots.

>and Tim tells em they are slack Jawed faggots and are in denial about something.
>

>
> Dick.....errr...I mean Duck.
Right Mr. head?

Tom Vizzini

"Richard Waters" <legerdemain@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:44c2ce9d$1_1@news.iprimus.com.au...

>
> Do ur videos start the same way or not?

LOL!!!! Wait. you have bootlegged illegal videos and you want me to tell you
if the content is right? The answer is simple. If your mate would have
gotten them through us, you would know AND have access to the 3D mind group.

Sorry, I hate to be this way but you are on your own.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

duck

UnKa wrote:
> duck wrote:
>
> Thank you for once again proving my point about your disciplines being
> nothing more than placebo effect, people who believed they would work,
> got fixed, people who didn't believe it, got no results.
>

Tsk tsk !, it proves nothing of the sort you naughty little straw
clutcher. Exactly where in that sentence did I mention the
participants believing in, or otherwise, the success of the process.

You have run out of grin pills 2 days short of your prescription
renewal again.

> > I know people who have great succes with EFT, meditation, counselling,
> > psychotherapy, drugs, NLP, ECT, but I also know people who have not had
> > sucess with them.
>
>
> Really and who told you that Santa Clause? The Tooth fairy? Oh, I
> forgot you don't want to reveal your sources. Mainly because they they
> don't exist or because you love lying?
> >

I haven't been asked about my sources.

> > I have been told that the 3D mind list has more than it's fair share of
> > people who just aren't getting the results promised. And of course Tom
> > tells em they ain't doing it right,
>
> I am sorry but I have more respect for them than that, I call them Mr.
> or Ms. as the case may be, Slack Jaw faggots.
>

I'm not entirely sure you address them formally at all.

> >and Tim tells em they are slack Jawed faggots and are in denial about something.
> >
>
> >
> > Dick.....errr...I mean Duck.
> Right Mr. head?

If it's head you want, I'm your man......oops, hang on that came out
wrong.

DD

Are you still selling those old videos or do you have more recent ones
available, if someone orders today? Is it possible to order forum
access alone?

Tom Vizzini wrote:
> "Richard Waters" <legerdemain@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44c2ce9d$1_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
>
> >
> > Do ur videos start the same way or not?
>
> LOL!!!! Wait. you have bootlegged illegal videos and you want me to tell you
> if the content is right? The answer is simple. If your mate would have
> gotten them through us, you would know AND have access to the 3D mind group.
>
> Sorry, I hate to be this way but you are on your own.
>
>
> --
> Tom Vizzini

Richard Waters

Tom Vizzini furiously typed the following on 25/07/2006 11:31 PM:
> "Richard Waters" <legerdemain@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44c2ce9d$1_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
>
>
>>Do ur videos start the same way or not?
>
>
> LOL!!!! Wait. you have bootlegged illegal videos and you want me to tell you
> if the content is right? The answer is simple. If your mate would have
> gotten them through us, you would know AND have access to the 3D mind group.
>
> Sorry, I hate to be this way but you are on your own.
>

According to him, after a phone call last night - they are the real
deal, he copyied them to avi and on a cd for me, and he did, but like I
said, it didnt work for him and he hasnt used them for ages (or the
group for that matter)...

....I will assume then - and if anyone is interested, my post my
"findings" here when I have finished.

:-D -- Richard W

UnKa

Dear Ducky:

The post you wrote about the brain and how it works was actually quite
good, great stuff you copied from the internet. Your right about how it
all happens except you forgot to point out what happens after it all.
Well let me educate you, it then goes into the limbic system where it
prepares the body for flight, fight, food or sex. But not always
depending on the context of what is going on. The Limbic system is what
generates movement, without the limbic system the VKA is nothing more
than an extensive useless computer. You should have read, basic brain
for dummies 101. I could go into the long explaination but you'd just
start whacking your pecker and reply with something ignorant, when time
after time you get your ass beaten by knowledge. Thanks for the
memories they have been fun.


UnKaH

UnKa

duck wrote:
> UnKa wrote:
> > duck wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for once again proving my point about your disciplines being
> > nothing more than placebo effect, people who believed they would work,
> > got fixed, people who didn't believe it, got no results.
> >
>
> Tsk tsk !, it proves nothing of the sort you naughty little straw
> clutcher. Exactly where in that sentence did I mention the
> participants believing in, or otherwise, the success of the process.

*LOL* Now that is funny, but again you proved my point, when studies
are done on the placebo, they don't tell the participants which are
which, but the studies conclude that those who believe they have a new
medicine and that it will help them, it worked when they got nothing
more than a sugar pill. Wow, now how do you explain that?
Then you said, paraphrasing, NLP, EFT...blah blah blah, works for some
and not for others. Now, what do you think the placebo effect actually
is? I can not for the life of me believe how simple this actually is
and yet you deny it.
>
> You have run out of grin pills 2 days short of your prescription
> renewal again.

No, I kin git my happy pills off the local crack dealer if I run out.


>
> > > I know people who have great succes with EFT, meditation, counselling,
> > > psychotherapy, drugs, NLP, ECT, but I also know people who have not had
> > > sucess with them.

If you read any studies done on placebo, it matchs perfectly what you
just stated above.
Do you not thing that Richard knew nothing of the placebo? He wanted to
market placebo pills, also when he talked about making people go limp (
their dicks ) what do you think he was using? He can't make anyone go
limp unless the moron believes he can do it. Voo Doo, placebo, hello
any one home?
> >
> >
> > Really and who told you that Santa Clause? The Tooth fairy? Oh, I
> > forgot you don't want to reveal your sources. Mainly because they they
> > don't exist or because you love lying?
>
> I haven't been asked about my sources.

Ok, who are your bitch ass snitches
>
> > > I have been told that the 3D mind list has more than it's fair share of
> > > people who just aren't getting the results promised. And of course Tom
> > > tells em they ain't doing it right,.

Correct, then they are shown where they are going wrong and get
results.
> >
> > I am sorry but I have more respect for them than that, I call them Mr.
> > or Ms. as the case may be, Slack Jaw faggots.
> >
>
> I'm not entirely sure you address them formally at all.

Well ask any of the slack jaw faggots, they will tell ya so.
>
> > >and Tim tells em they are slack Jawed faggots and are in denial about something.
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > Dick.....errr...I mean Duck.
> > Right Mr. head?
>
> If it's head you want, I'm your man......oops, hang on that came out
> wrong.

Only if I can twist your nipples and let me whisper in your ear, who's
your daddy now bitch.

duck

UnKa wrote:
> Dear Ducky:
>
> The post you wrote about the brain and how it works was actually quite
> good, great stuff you copied from the internet.

Ahhh, I see, if it's good it must have been surfed for, cos there is no
way I could actually know it.

>Your right about how it
> all happens except you forgot to point out what happens after it all.

I didn't forget to point out anything. I included all I intended.

> Well let me educate you, it then goes into the limbic system where it
> prepares the body for flight, fight, food or sex.

You couldn't educate dog !.

>But not always
> depending on the context of what is going on. The Limbic system is what
> generates movement, without the limbic system the VKA is nothing more
> than an extensive useless computer. You should have read, basic brain
> for dummies 101. I could go into the long explaination but you'd just
> start whacking your pecker and reply with something ignorant, when time
> after time you get your ass beaten by knowledge.

Knowledge without understanding is such a waste.

Dood, you've read some books and have adopted the delusion that you are
an authority, must be cos of the unbearable humiliation of knowing that
to everyone here you are just a sad joke.

Unkah the teacher !, that's like Hitler the benevolent.

Duck

duck

UnKa wrote:
> Dear Ducky:

> Well let me educate you, it then goes into the limbic system where it
> prepares the body for flight, fight, food or sex. But not always
> depending on the context of what is going on. The Limbic system is what
> generates movement, without the limbic system the VKA is nothing more
> than an extensive useless computer.

I'm feeling this bit

Duck

P.S. you forgot freeze, often when people encounter danger they freeze
in fear, which is not fight, flight, food or sex.

Tom Vizzini

"duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1154336090.697521.307860@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...

> P.S. you forgot freeze, often when people encounter danger they freeze
> in fear, which is not fight, flight, food or sex.

Freezing part of the flight or fight response. So it is covered already.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043


>

duck

Tom Vizzini wrote:
> "duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1154336090.697521.307860@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
>
> > P.S. you forgot freeze, often when people encounter danger they freeze
> > in fear, which is not fight, flight, food or sex.
>
> Freezing part of the flight or fight response. So it is covered already.
>

Hmmm, I'm a little confused. they are neither fighting or fleeing, so
what are they doing, to me it suggests there is another possibility..Do
Nothing!

>
> --
> Tom Vizzini
>
> Real Skills for the Real World
> www.essential-skills.com
> New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
> 3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043
>
>
> >

Tom Vizzini

"duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1154357774.393090.163160@i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Tom Vizzini wrote:
> > "duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:1154336090.697521.307860@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> >
> > > P.S. you forgot freeze, often when people encounter danger they
freeze
> > > in fear, which is not fight, flight, food or sex.
> >
> > Freezing part of the flight or fight response. So it is covered already.
> >
>
> Hmmm, I'm a little confused. they are neither fighting or fleeing, so
> what are they doing, to me it suggests there is another possibility..Do
> Nothing!

If that works for you then fine. As far as how the brain works, freezing is
part of the flight or fight responses.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043

DD

You forgot to mention 3D Mind is best anti-freeze for situations like
that, for just $70. If you call NOW you get FREE forum access!

Tom Vizzini wrote:
> If that works for you then fine. As far as how the brain works, freezing is
> part of the flight or fight responses.

Tom Vizzini

"DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1154382899.029062.247680@s13g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> You forgot to mention 3D Mind is best anti-freeze for situations like
> that, for just $70. If you call NOW you get FREE forum access!

Too bad you can't have a civil discussion without flaming. This could have
been a real interesting thread.


--
Tom Vizzini

Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New Gold Members Area www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1056
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/content.php?cid=1043


>
> Tom Vizzini wrote:
> > If that works for you then fine. As far as how the brain works, freezing
is
> > part of the flight or fight responses.
>

Cameron

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:Z5idnanRspIY4lPZnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>
> "DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1154382899.029062.247680@s13g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>> You forgot to mention 3D Mind is best anti-freeze for situations like
>> that, for just $70. If you call NOW you get FREE forum access!
>
> Too bad you can't have a civil discussion without flaming. This could have
> been a real interesting thread.
>

Yeah Tim, you are so right 77 posts into a thread that started with "Why are
these three d mind people so religous in their beliefs" DD went and derailed
the whole valueable conversation with one post.

And you caught him at it, good on you.

Richard Waters

Tom Vizzini furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 8:09 AM:
> "DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1154382899.029062.247680@s13g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
>>You forgot to mention 3D Mind is best anti-freeze for situations like
>>that, for just $70. If you call NOW you get FREE forum access!
>
>
> Too bad you can't have a civil discussion without flaming. This could have
> been a real interesting thread.
>

I would agree Tom, but it seems we all have to put up with it, no matter
what the topic..?

I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
some people... ...I know that sounds crazy. It's part of the way
certain peoples bodies use adenaline and the fact that "...if I cant
fight, Ill play dead" sort of senario.

Also goes back to the old martial arts axiom - "you will respond in the
same way your trained", thats why boxers do more "bag work" and less
"shadow boxing/pulling punches" - if you pull ur punches in training,
your more than likely to pull ur punches when you fight.

Most people arent put into situations that are "life and death" - "fight
or flight", so they arent "trained" to react, a lot of the time people
will either lash out randomly (fight?) or freeze/cry/run (flight).

But Im sure its a little more deep than that, and I just try to explain
myself as well as I can... ;-)

:-D -- Richard W

duck

UnKa wrote:
> duck wrote:
> > UnKa wrote:
> > > duck wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you for once again proving my point about your disciplines being
> > > nothing more than placebo effect, people who believed they would work,
> > > got fixed, people who didn't believe it, got no results.
> > >
> >
> > Tsk tsk !, it proves nothing of the sort you naughty little straw
> > clutcher. Exactly where in that sentence did I mention the
> > participants believing in, or otherwise, the success of the process.
>
> *LOL* Now that is funny, but again you proved my point,

You are a very sick man if you truly believe that the only reason some
things work some times is because of the placebo effect.

>when studies
> are done on the placebo, they don't tell the participants which are
> which, but the studies conclude that those who believe they have a new
> medicine and that it will help them, it worked when they got nothing
> more than a sugar pill. Wow, now how do you explain that?
> Then you said, paraphrasing, NLP, EFT...blah blah blah, works for some
> and not for others. Now, what do you think the placebo effect actually
> is? I can not for the life of me believe how simple this actually is
> and yet you deny it.
> >

I know what placebo effect is, I am denying nothing

> > You have run out of grin pills 2 days short of your prescription
> > renewal again.
>
> No, I kin git my happy pills off the local crack dealer if I run out.
>

Phew, that's a relief.
>
> >
> > > > I know people who have great succes with EFT, meditation, counselling,
> > > > psychotherapy, drugs, NLP, ECT, but I also know people who have not had
> > > > sucess with them.
>
> If you read any studies done on placebo, it matchs perfectly what you
> just stated above.

Why would I read studies about placebo, I'm not interested.

> Do you not thing that Richard knew nothing of the placebo? He wanted to
> market placebo pills, also when he talked about making people go limp (
> their dicks ) what do you think he was using? He can't make anyone go
> limp unless the moron believes he can do it. Voo Doo, placebo, hello
> any one home?
> > >

What has Bandler got to do with anything ?

> > >
> > > Really and who told you that Santa Clause? The Tooth fairy? Oh, I
> > > forgot you don't want to reveal your sources. Mainly because they they
> > > don't exist or because you love lying?
> >
> > I haven't been asked about my sources.
>
> Ok, who are your bitch ass snitches
> >

With regards to what ?

> > > > I have been told that the 3D mind list has more than it's fair share of
> > > > people who just aren't getting the results promised. And of course Tom
> > > > tells em they ain't doing it right,.
>
> Correct, then they are shown where they are going wrong and get
> results.
> > >

It seems there are a handful who have had good results, whereas the
rest are clinging on for the magic bullet. It seems no different to
NLP, you get a bunch of people go to a seminar, a coule have a profound
change, most experience some interesting shifts, and for a minority it
is a waste of time.

> > > I am sorry but I have more respect for them than that, I call them Mr.
> > > or Ms. as the case may be, Slack Jaw faggots.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not entirely sure you address them formally at all.
>
> Well ask any of the slack jaw faggots, they will tell ya so.
> >

But they are slack jawed faggots (what film is that from...was it
predator).

> > > >and Tim tells em they are slack Jawed faggots and are in denial about something.
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Dick.....errr...I mean Duck.
> > > Right Mr. head?
> >
> > If it's head you want, I'm your man......oops, hang on that came out
> > wrong.
>
> Only if I can twist your nipples and let me whisper in your ear, who's
> your daddy now bitch.

It's a deal but I get to hold the webcam

Duck

duck

Richard Waters wrote:
> Tom Vizzini furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 8:09 AM:
> > "DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1154382899.029062.247680@s13g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> >>You forgot to mention 3D Mind is best anti-freeze for situations like
> >>that, for just $70. If you call NOW you get FREE forum access!
> >
> >
> > Too bad you can't have a civil discussion without flaming. This could have
> > been a real interesting thread.
> >
>
> I would agree Tom, but it seems we all have to put up with it, no matter
> what the topic..?
>
> I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
> response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
> some people... ...I know that sounds crazy.

What leads you to believe that ?. Surely flight means exiting rapidly
(unles it's the mind that flees).

Also, what about capitulation, i.e. the person faced with danger does
not flee, does not fight, does not want to fuck, and ain't hungry, they
just surrender to the situation.

Also, what about utilisation. i.e. the person faced with danger does
not flee, does not fight, does not want to fuck, and ain't hungry, but
embraces the situation to thier advantage (in the way that Aikido
practitioners use the opponents own force against them)

Also what about the masochist who want's the pain, not for sexual
thrills but because it feels good to do so.

Also what about the suicidal who uses the situation to bite the big
one.

I'm not trying to be picky, I am just struggling to accept that all
responses can be filtered down to the four F's

> It's part of the way
> certain peoples bodies use adenaline and the fact that "...if I cant
> fight, Ill play dead" sort of senario.
>

How does adrenaline do that ?

> Also goes back to the old martial arts axiom - "you will respond in the
> same way your trained", thats why boxers do more "bag work" and less
> "shadow boxing/pulling punches" - if you pull ur punches in training,
> your more than likely to pull ur punches when you fight.
>

Makes sense.

> Most people arent put into situations that are "life and death" - "fight
> or flight", so they arent "trained" to react, a lot of the time people
> will either lash out randomly (fight?) or freeze/cry/run (flight).
>
> But Im sure its a little more deep than that, and I just try to explain
> myself as well as I can... ;-)
>

Good effort

Duck

Richard Waters

duck furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 10:39 PM:
> Richard Waters wrote:
>
>>I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
>>response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
>>some people... ...I know that sounds crazy.
>
> What leads you to believe that ?. Surely flight means exiting rapidly
> (unles it's the mind that flees).

Ill do my best Duck... :-)

Ok, please dont mistake "flight" as "actual running away" - I mean,
someone running away from a situation, having the presence of mind to
remove themselves from a situation thats not good for them is ALSO a
good fight response.

Of course, its a Generalisation and a Deletion - u have to look a little
deeper.

Lets say, and this is how I perceive it...

"Fight" - doing SOMETHING, anything to remove urself from the situation,
and stopping any harm coming to you/your mind.

"Flight" - the inibility to do SOMETHING to remove urself from the
situation, understanding that harm may still come to you/your mind.

So really, once you can see that "fight" does not literally =
"fisty-cuffs" and "flight" does not literally = "take wings and leave" I
think it makes a little more sense? :-)

> Also, what about capitulation, i.e. the person faced with danger does
> not flee, does not fight, does not want to fuck, and ain't hungry, they
> just surrender to the situation.

Taking the "definition" above. You could say that "capituation" is a
response that would be the "lesser of two evils". What if their choices
were "capitulate or die"? The you would consider capitulation to be a
FIGHT response... ...see where Im going here? Im doing my best to
explain myself here. But remember, this is my model, it might not be
urs?! ;-)

> Also, what about utilisation. i.e. the person faced with danger does
> not flee, does not fight, does not want to fuck, and ain't hungry, but
> embraces the situation to thier advantage (in the way that Aikido
> practitioners use the opponents own force against them)

Again with a little Gen. and Del., using what I said above - you can say
that this is a FIGHT response. And now, ur talking to a guy that prac.
Aikido for a few years - and it is a FIGHT response in the fact that, in
most martial arts u have to be superfit to last any length of time, so
in Aiki you use that "advantage" of motion, rythem and timing to create
a situation that is beneficial to u, while NOT for the opponant.

> Also what about the masochist who want's the pain, not for sexual
> thrills but because it feels good to do so.

Duck? Are you diagnosing urself again?! :-P *LMAO* *joking*

See, with shit situation, I would say: Ur not dealing with someone who
as a "decent" grip on "reality", there is a LOT more going inside there
that you cant see, and being so, I would say that their "grasp" of
"reality" wouldnt allow them to make a fully lucid decision, even one as
"base" as this...

> Also what about the suicidal who uses the situation to bite the big
> one.

Suicides, well thats a lot like above, not quite the grip needed to
understand whats really going on.

> I'm not trying to be picky, I am just struggling to accept that all
> responses can be filtered down to the four F's

Again, yeah, its a little bit from column A and a little from column B -
some Gen. and Del. and there you have it.

>>It's part of the way
>>certain peoples bodies use adenaline and the fact that "...if I cant
>>fight, Ill play dead" sort of senario.
>>
>
> How does adrenaline do that ?

Remember ur first date, the shaking, the inability to control some of
those fine motor skills that you would normally have: you went from a
charming guy to a dribbling idiot in front of this gal u though was so
beautiful... ...if indeed it went down that way for you Duck?! ;-)

Adrenaline, its an amazing natural drug - and it effects us all in very
different ways. You will find a well trained soldier or martial artist,
boosted by adrenaline. will do amazing things. You may find someone who
is usually meek and mild, lift a car off someone if it is a loved one
trapped. Or you might find people who, when pumped full of adrenaline.
colapse into a foetal state and cry.

Im doing my best here Duck, what do you think..? :-D

>>Also goes back to the old martial arts axiom - "you will respond in the
>>same way your trained", thats why boxers do more "bag work" and less
>>"shadow boxing/pulling punches" - if you pull ur punches in training,
>>your more than likely to pull ur punches when you fight.
>
> Makes sense.

Thanks mate, I mean, its not like Im a Dr or even a therapist. But I do
my best. ;-)

>>Most people arent put into situations that are "life and death" - "fight
>>or flight", so they arent "trained" to react, a lot of the time people
>>will either lash out randomly (fight?) or freeze/cry/run (flight).
>>
>>But Im sure its a little more deep than that, and I just try to explain
>>myself as well as I can... ;-)
>
> Good effort
>
> Duck
>

Thanks! Hope I did just as well this time around too.

:-D -- Richard W

MindFX

On 17 Jul 2006 08:46:20 -0700, "UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Thank You so much for proving my point about the placebo effect of NLP,
>particularly the swish.

And while I missed that post, your premise is flawed. The placebo
effect does not come into it if the swish is done properly and
congruently. That you don't know this shows a deep and puzzling
ignorance of NLP that makes me wonder why you would dare to comment
about it?

>Here is the difference between the 3-D Mind and NLP.
>
>3-D Mind does not rely on getting the client to believe that it will
>work, or course it doesn't hurt it either. You find the problem driver,
>balance it, problem gone, no matter what the client believes, unless
>he/she believes that nothing can help them, then you first work on that
>belief.

The presupposition is that one needs to "believe in" NLP for it to
work. This is a faulty presupposition.

The only problem drivers in my neck of the woods are old people who
shouldn't be on the road. ;-)

Belief change is a basic skill any NLP prac would have some facility
with... any practicing NLPer, that is.

>If you read about brain research and how the brain actually works, then
>you would know why the 3-D Mind works so well.

"If you knew how the brain actually works"... blah blah blah... NOBODY
FUCKING KNOWS how the brain "actually works." There are models, new
discoveries every day... and all we can really do is speculate about
how PARTS of the brain work and how PARTS of the brain work with each
other... and if our speculation tests out, we take it a step further
and so on... until we have a strong model.

Your high and mighty proclamations of superiority based on claims that
you have access to a "neurology expert" or some such bullshit is
completely irrelevant. Unless he's present when you're working with
clients, I don't see what the fuck he or she is doing for you.

>Problems don't exist in the neocortex ( thinking area of the brain )
>but in in the limbic system. This is the area of emotional memory,
>which emotions are the glue which hold the problem together. The
>stronger the emotion, the bigger the problem.

Read Scientific American Mind. Great magazine. And much more current
than a 3-whatever Mind video.

>This is why affirmations don't work ( very little emotional content )
>This is why creative visualizations don't work ( very little emotional
>content )

So where does the "emotional content" come from during a 3-whatever
Mind intervention?

>NLP relys mainly on linguestic's and VKA, both of which have little
>emotional content.

WHAT!? Do you even have a CLUE what you're talking about?

Or how to spell?

Linguistics in NLP refers to words and gestures. We communicate with
words. Words give us pictures. Words give us sounds. Words and sounds
elicit emotions directly or indirectly. Another word for "emotion" is
kinaesthetics. Kinaesthetics are only SOMETIMES part of the problem.
For example, kinaesthetics don't always have a lot to do with ADD or
some of the other learning disabilities. Continuing with the ADD
example, it's the visual that you may want to start with for that
issue. Primary rep systems, when properly calibrated, can be VERY
useful in accelerating results for the client.

But you only work with one, kinaesthetics?

>Small wonder it doesn't work consistantly, or long term.

Small wonder I think you're so full of shit. How many people have you
used NLP with? What's your background with NLP? I'm VERY skeptical
about your NLP knowledge, based on your comments here.

MindFX

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:11:33 -0400, "Tom Vizzini"
<Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote:

>It is the same old story.
>
>First....the 3D mind is just NLP
>
>When that gets disproven..

When has anyone ever proved it is not "just NLP?"

>Second...the 3D mind does not work
>
>When that gest disproven..

Well, it IS just one technique. It's reasonable to be skeptical of a
single NLP technique being a one-size-fits-all answer to everyones'
problems.

>Third...Personal attacks
>
>The pattern never seems to change.

When they happen, they're usually in answer to your own personal
attacks. You seem to thrive on insulting potential customers. That
puzzles me... but I'm not an expert on Internet marketing, so I'll
defer to others on that.


>The reality of the situation is this. The 3D mind works and is cheaper and
>easier to use than NLP. It does not take 5000 dollars to learn. Just 70
>bucks.

And yet to learn it from (what you yourself admit is) incomplete old
video footage, you need to have access to the yahoogroup, new videos,
yadda yadda yadda... and all these marketing opportunities for Tom
Vizzini to sell more and more. Seems to me like an incomplete
solution.

Sad, really.

MindFX

On 18 Jul 2006 13:15:20 -0700, "UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote:

>If you took your head out of Bandlers ass long enough you would see
>things like that.

BRAAAAAHHHHHAHAHAHA! This coming from the guy with his head so far up
Vizzini's ass he speaks for Vizzini !?

Bart Loos

Hey Tom E,

> >When that gest disproven..
>
> Well, it IS just one technique. It's reasonable to be skeptical of a
> single NLP technique being a one-size-fits-all answer to everyones'
> problems.
>
euh since I last checked EFT was and is doing the same - you seem less
skeptical to EFT...

> >Third...Personal attacks
> >
> >The pattern never seems to change.
>
> When they happen, they're usually in answer to your own personal
> attacks.

Euh weird you where not participating in this thread until today, and
the first thing you do is flaming... how do you rhyme that with your
above statement?

>
> >The reality of the situation is this. The 3D mind works and is cheaper and
> >easier to use than NLP. It does not take 5000 dollars to learn. Just 70
> >bucks.
>
> And yet to learn it from (what you yourself admit is) incomplete old
> video footage, you need to have access to the yahoogroup, new videos,
> yadda yadda yadda... and all these marketing opportunities for Tom
> Vizzini to sell more and more. Seems to me like an incomplete
> solution.
>

See this is exactly what Tom Vizzini says, you are not able to
disprove the results using the 3DMind leads to, so you'll start so
hard looking for another stick ...

Why, Is it threathning to you?

> Sad, really.

Oh really ? The truth is 3DMInd is helping people every day to have a
better life, as does NLP as does EFT as does taking a bath ..
whateva... and that's what it's all about .. you should know that as a
EFT -NLP - Hypnosis therapist ... Unless you're only in it for the
money and you don't care about people gettin a better life.

Have fun

Bart

Richard Waters

MindFX furiously typed the following on 2/08/2006 6:01 AM:
> On 18 Jul 2006 13:15:20 -0700, "UnKa" <monsterbrat49@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>If you took your head out of Bandlers ass long enough you would see
>>things like that.
>
>
> BRAAAAAHHHHHAHAHAHA! This coming from the guy with his head so far up
> Vizzini's ass he speaks for Vizzini !?
>

Well you know what they say, the only difference between a Brown Nose
and a Shit Head is DEPTH PERCEPTION!

:-P Sorry, I just love that comment!

:-D -- Richard W

Cameron

"MindFX" <mindrevision@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:q6avc2tkdgljj8vri2hhl8lggjuv9em7nh@4ax.com...

> "If you knew how the brain actually works"... blah blah blah... NOBODY
> FUCKING KNOWS how the brain "actually works." There are models, >new
> discoveries every day... and all we can really do is speculate about
> how PARTS of the brain work and how PARTS of the brain work with >each
> other... and if our speculation tests out, we take it a step further
> and so on... until we have a strong model.
>
> Your high and mighty proclamations of superiority based on claims that
> you have access to a "neurology expert" or some such bullshit is
> completely irrelevant. Unless he's present when you're working with
> clients, I don't see what the fuck he or she is doing for you.

Well the neurology "expert" that they keep refering to as a "brain
scientist" is actually a general praticioner who specalised an
anethestology. He doesn't have a PHD, isn't a researcher, but wrote a pop
pyschology book and told Tim that he areeed with him.

John

On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 08:22:02 +1000, "Cameron"
<cbrown_1974@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

>
>"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
>news:Z5idnanRspIY4lPZnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@adelphia.co m...
>>
>> "DD" <0000spam@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1154382899.029062.247680@s13g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>>> You forgot to mention 3D Mind is best anti-freeze for situations like
>>> that, for just $70. If you call NOW you get FREE forum access!
>>
>> Too bad you can't have a civil discussion without flaming. This could have
>> been a real interesting thread.
>>
>
>Yeah Tim, you are so right 77 posts into a thread that started with "Why are
>these three d mind people so religous in their beliefs" DD went and derailed
>the whole valueable conversation with one post.
>
>And you caught him at it, good on you.

I think it may be a case of someone having their Deletion Filter
turned up to high.

On the other hand Unka seems to have the needle permanently in the red
on his Distortion Filter.

Perhaps this is what they mean when they say that the 3D Mind provides
balance.

I wonder which one of that crew is the over Generalist.

Perhap I'll open a book. We like a challenge here don't we? Odds
anyone?

--
John

duck

Richard Waters wrote:
> duck furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 10:39 PM:
> > Richard Waters wrote:
> >
> >>I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
> >>response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
> >>some people... ...I know that sounds crazy.
> >
> > What leads you to believe that ?. Surely flight means exiting rapidly
> > (unles it's the mind that flees).
>
> Ill do my best Duck... :-)
>

I'm grateful to be offered that much.

> Ok, please dont mistake "flight" as "actual running away" - I mean,
> someone running away from a situation, having the presence of mind to
> remove themselves from a situation thats not good for them is ALSO a
> good fight response.
>

Ok, I am already looking at the screen going "eh ?". In my simplistic
mind 'fight' = face the challenge and go at it, 'flight' = flee from
the challenge. Where do your definitions originate, e.g. is there a
standard 4F model that describes the scope of the four F's ?, if so
then if I read that It would be clearer to me.

> Of course, its a Generalisation and a Deletion - u have to look a little
> deeper.
>
> Lets say, and this is how I perceive it...
>

Ok, so it is a perspective, I'm down with that.

> "Fight" - doing SOMETHING, anything to remove urself from the situation,
> and stopping any harm coming to you/your mind.
>

To, me this is not logical, fight = stay and ..eerr......um...fight.

> "Flight" - the inibility to do SOMETHING to remove urself from the
> situation, understanding that harm may still come to you/your mind.
>

Again, this seems to be inversely logical.

> So really, once you can see that "fight" does not literally =
> "fisty-cuffs" and "flight" does not literally = "take wings and leave" I
> think it makes a little more sense? :-)
>
> > Also, what about capitulation, i.e. the person faced with danger does
> > not flee, does not fight, does not want to fuck, and ain't hungry, they
> > just surrender to the situation.
>
> Taking the "definition" above. You could say that "capituation" is a
> response that would be the "lesser of two evils". What if their choices
> were "capitulate or die"? The you would consider capitulation to be a
> FIGHT response... ...see where Im going here? Im doing my best to
> explain myself here. But remember, this is my model, it might not be
> urs?! ;-)
>

I follow your logic, but it seems bizarre to me, but hey, that's your
prerogative.

> > Also, what about utilisation. i.e. the person faced with danger does
> > not flee, does not fight, does not want to fuck, and ain't hungry, but
> > embraces the situation to thier advantage (in the way that Aikido
> > practitioners use the opponents own force against them)
>
> Again with a little Gen. and Del., using what I said above - you can say
> that this is a FIGHT response. And now, ur talking to a guy that prac.
> Aikido for a few years - and it is a FIGHT response in the fact that, in
> most martial arts u have to be superfit to last any length of time, so
> in Aiki you use that "advantage" of motion, rythem and timing to create
> a situation that is beneficial to u, while NOT for the opponant.
>
> > Also what about the masochist who want's the pain, not for sexual
> > thrills but because it feels good to do so.
>
> Duck? Are you diagnosing urself again?! :-P *LMAO* *joking*
>

Shit, my cover is blown, now they will all laugh at me at the annual
spankfest

> See, with shit situation, I would say: Ur not dealing with someone who
> as a "decent" grip on "reality", there is a LOT more going inside there
> that you cant see, and being so, I would say that their "grasp" of
> "reality" wouldnt allow them to make a fully lucid decision, even one as
> "base" as this...
>

But aren't the 4F's meant to be primal, automatic necessities, so no
matter the state of mind, these primal drivers will seek fulfillment ?

> > Also what about the suicidal who uses the situation to bite the big
> > one.
>
> Suicides, well thats a lot like above, not quite the grip needed to
> understand whats really going on.
>
> > I'm not trying to be picky, I am just struggling to accept that all
> > responses can be filtered down to the four F's
>
> Again, yeah, its a little bit from column A and a little from column B -
> some Gen. and Del. and there you have it.
>

Hmmmmmmm. It seems to me that the 4F's are purely down to
interpretation then, and that everyone may have a different take on it,
which to my thinking renders it unsuitable as a robust model of
drivers. It seems a bit like the bible, it doesn't matter what the
words say, it's any old meaning you attach to them that pertinent.

> >>It's part of the way
> >>certain peoples bodies use adenaline and the fact that "...if I cant
> >>fight, Ill play dead" sort of senario.
> >>
> >
> > How does adrenaline do that ?
>
> Remember ur first date, the shaking, the inability to control some of
> those fine motor skills that you would normally have: you went from a
> charming guy to a dribbling idiot in front of this gal u though was so
> beautiful... ...if indeed it went down that way for you Duck?! ;-)
>

No, not really, she did what she was paid to do and I went home
satisfied :-)

I would imagine love-esque experiences are more
dopamine/seratonin/endorphine based.

> Adrenaline, its an amazing natural drug - and it effects us all in very
> different ways. You will find a well trained soldier or martial artist,
> boosted by adrenaline. will do amazing things. You may find someone who
> is usually meek and mild, lift a car off someone if it is a loved one
> trapped. Or you might find people who, when pumped full of adrenaline.
> colapse into a foetal state and cry.
>

indeed, which kind of relates to a question I asked on this group a few
months back "do you believe you can do something if you don't believe
you can ?". I
do, but only have anecdotal evidence to back it up. Most people
replied with "No, it's impossible". However I still feel it is
entirely possible, and some of the situations you describe above may
support this hypothesis. I think people cling on real tight to the
notion that beliefs carry absolute dominion over ones behaviours,
capabilities etc. whereas I believe that beliefs are a factor, not an
omnipotent filter (i.e. they are one component of a set of components
which control/dictate/limit/filter ones activities).

> Im doing my best here Duck, what do you think..? :-D
>

Admirable

> >>Also goes back to the old martial arts axiom - "you will respond in the
> >>same way your trained", thats why boxers do more "bag work" and less
> >>"shadow boxing/pulling punches" - if you pull ur punches in training,
> >>your more than likely to pull ur punches when you fight.
> >
> > Makes sense.
>
> Thanks mate, I mean, its not like Im a Dr or even a therapist. But I do
> my best. ;-)
>

I'm not a doctor or a therapist, I consider it a strength.

> >>Most people arent put into situations that are "life and death" - "fight
> >>or flight", so they arent "trained" to react, a lot of the time people
> >>will either lash out randomly (fight?) or freeze/cry/run (flight).
> >>
> >>But Im sure its a little more deep than that, and I just try to explain
> >>myself as well as I can... ;-)
> >
> > Good effort
> >
> > Duck
> >
>
> Thanks! Hope I did just as well this time around too.
>

I understand your definitions, but do not agree with them. To me, from
your description flight does not mean flight at all, it in fact means
self preservation. I am still of the opinion that unless the 4F's do
mean exactly what they say on the tin, they are flakey cath-alls.

Again, if there is a clearly documented descriptin of them, I'd like to
read it, but if they are down to individual interpretation, then they
are nothing more than a simplistic and vague and redundant model.

Duck.

P.S. Afain, I am still not trying to be awkward, this post is in the
spirit of discussion with a view to clarification and understanding on
my part.

duck

Richard Waters wrote:
>
> Remember ur first date, the shaking, the inability to control some of
> those fine motor skills that you would normally have: you went from a
> charming guy to a dribbling idiot in front of this gal u though was so
> beautiful... ...if indeed it went down that way for you Duck?! ;-)
>

Thanks for that bit by the way, it got me thinking back and eliceted
all kinds of feel good stuff (gonna need another box of Kleenex
though).

Duck

John

On 2 Aug 2006 03:59:42 -0700, "duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>
>Richard Waters wrote:
>> duck furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 10:39 PM:
>> > Richard Waters wrote:
>> >
>> >>I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
>> >>response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
>> >>some people... ...I know that sounds crazy.
>> >
>> > What leads you to believe that ?. Surely flight means exiting rapidly
>> > (unles it's the mind that flees).
>>
>> Ill do my best Duck... :-)
>>
>
>I'm grateful to be offered that much.
>
>> Ok, please dont mistake "flight" as "actual running away" - I mean,
>> someone running away from a situation, having the presence of mind to
>> remove themselves from a situation thats not good for them is ALSO a
>> good fight response.
>>
>
>Ok, I am already looking at the screen going "eh ?". In my simplistic
>mind 'fight' = face the challenge and go at it, 'flight' = flee from
>the challenge. Where do your definitions originate, e.g. is there a
>standard 4F model that describes the scope of the four F's ?, if so
>then if I read that It would be clearer to me.

Flight is about the mind removing itself from an unpleasant or
unwanted scenario. One method for the mind to accomplish this is to
tell its own body to run away. Another method might be for the mind to
shut down the channels that are telling it that it is in the midst of
a problem i.e. to freeze.

This is of course about as effective as an ostrich sticking its head
in the sand and working on the premise that if it cant see the problem
then the problem doesn't exist.

BTW do ostriches really do this? I have never seen one.

I think that is what they are getting at here.

--
John

Richard Waters

John furiously typed the following on 2/08/2006 9:31 PM:
> On 2 Aug 2006 03:59:42 -0700, "duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Richard Waters wrote:
>>
>>>duck furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 10:39 PM:
>>>
>>>>Richard Waters wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
>>>>>response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
>>>>>some people... ...I know that sounds crazy.
>>>>
>>>>What leads you to believe that ?. Surely flight means exiting rapidly
>>>>(unles it's the mind that flees).
>>>
>>>Ill do my best Duck... :-)
>>>
>>
>>I'm grateful to be offered that much.
>>
>>
>>>Ok, please dont mistake "flight" as "actual running away" - I mean,
>>>someone running away from a situation, having the presence of mind to
>>>remove themselves from a situation thats not good for them is ALSO a
>>>good fight response.
>>>
>>
>>Ok, I am already looking at the screen going "eh ?". In my simplistic
>>mind 'fight' = face the challenge and go at it, 'flight' = flee from
>>the challenge. Where do your definitions originate, e.g. is there a
>>standard 4F model that describes the scope of the four F's ?, if so
>>then if I read that It would be clearer to me.
>
>
> Flight is about the mind removing itself from an unpleasant or
> unwanted scenario. One method for the mind to accomplish this is to
> tell its own body to run away. Another method might be for the mind to
> shut down the channels that are telling it that it is in the midst of
> a problem i.e. to freeze.
>
> This is of course about as effective as an ostrich sticking its head
> in the sand and working on the premise that if it cant see the problem
> then the problem doesn't exist.
>
> BTW do ostriches really do this? I have never seen one.
>
> I think that is what they are getting at here.
>

I think you might have got the jist here - thats the sort of thing I was
"meaning"...? :-)

Fight isnt "absolute" and it doesnt mean "a one on one match, queensbury
rules", and Flight isnt "absolute" or we would actually have wings.

The body does some strange things in the name of self defence - take
hypothermia. In an effort to keep core temp. at the right level, and
keep the heart and lungs running, it will restrict blood flow to the
outerlimbs to save the body from "leeching" heat... ...so the outer
limbs start to restrict...

....the toes and hands, further in the legs, arms and head - THE
HEAD?!?!?!?! Yeah, a lot of heat dissipation goes out through our scalp
and head, so it slows the blood flow, you pass out and, being imobolised
in the cold, usually end up dying.

The bodies "systems" dont always make sense, Fi and Fl is one of them

Like the Ostrich, the BugBlatter Beast of Traal is almost the same, but
all you have to do is remember ur towel! :-)

And no, they dont, it only happens in the cartoons as far as I am aware!
;-)

BTW - thanks for the help John, and keep up the questioning Duck - Im
not luck UnKa, Ill let you have ur opinion without taking the piss.

*LMAO*

:-D -- Richard W

duck

Hi

So, you are saying Flight and Fight refer to mental behaviours and not
physical actions ?

Duck

Richard Waters wrote:
> John furiously typed the following on 2/08/2006 9:31 PM:
> > On 2 Aug 2006 03:59:42 -0700, "duck" <jism_monkey2002@yahoo.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Richard Waters wrote:
> >>
> >>>duck furiously typed the following on 1/08/2006 10:39 PM:
> >>>
> >>>>Richard Waters wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I would agree with Tom that "freezing" is part of the fight or flight
> >>>>>response - Im led to believe that it is part of the flight response in
> >>>>>some people... ...I know that sounds crazy.
> >>>>
> >>>>What leads you to believe that ?. Surely flight means exiting rapidly
> >>>>(unles it's the mind that flees).
> >>>
> >>>Ill do my best Duck... :-)
> >>>
> >>
> >>I'm grateful to be offered that much.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Ok, please dont mistake "flight" as "actual running away" - I mean,
> >>>someone running away from a situation, having the presence of mind to
> >>>remove themselves from a situation thats not good for them is ALSO a
> >>>good fight response.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Ok, I am already looking at the screen going "eh ?". In my simplistic
> >>mind 'fight' = face the challenge and go at it, 'flight' = flee from
> >>the challenge. Where do your definitions originate, e.g. is there a
> >>standard 4F model that describes the scope of the four F's ?, if so
> >>then if I read that It would be clearer to me.
> >
> >
> > Flight is about the mind removing itself from an unpleasant or
> > unwanted scenario. One method for the mind to accomplish this is to
> > tell its own body to run away. Another method might be for the mind to
> > shut down the channels that are telling it that it is in the midst of
> > a problem i.e. to freeze.
> >
> > This is of course about as effective as an ostrich sticking its head
> > in the sand and working on the premise that if it cant see the problem
> > then the problem doesn't exist.
> >
> > BTW do ostriches really do this? I have never seen one.
> >
> > I think that is what they are getting at here.
> >
>
> I think you might have got the jist here - thats the sort of thing I was
> "meaning"...? :-)
>
> Fight isnt "absolute" and it doesnt mean "a one on one match, queensbury
> rules", and Flight isnt "absolute" or we would actually have wings.
>
> The body does some strange things in the name of self defence - take
> hypothermia. In an effort to keep core temp. at the right level, and
> keep the heart and lungs running, it will restrict blood flow to the
> outerlimbs to save the body from "leeching" heat... ...so the outer
> limbs start to restrict...
>
> ...the toes and hands, further in the legs, arms and head - THE
> HEAD?!?!?!?! Yeah, a lot of heat dissipation goes out through our scalp
> and head, so it slows the blood flow, you pass out and, being imobolised
> in the cold, usually end up dying.
>
> The bodies "systems" dont always make sense, Fi and Fl is one of them
>
> Like the Ostrich, the BugBlatter Beast of Traal is almost the same, but
> all you have to do is remember ur towel! :-)
>
> And no, they dont, it only happens in the cartoons as far as I am aware!
> ;-)
>
> BTW - thanks for the help John, and keep up the questioning Duck - Im
> not luck UnKa, Ill let you have ur opinion without taking the piss.
>
> *LMAO*
>
> :-D -- Richard W