So right-on. Made me smile!!!!

@think-beyond it is in the introduction of your recommended read.

@think-beyond Serendipity?

@FrayedBear It's been so long that read this book that I forgot. Just looked at it and smiled even more. Love that this Bucky used this poem.

@think-beyond You know other Buckminsters? As I say serendipity & my pleasure to have made you smile. It does me good. Thanks for telling me.
Here's hoping that the Companions of Health, Peace & Fulfilment travel with you throughout 2021.

U R most welcome - and I agree - this Unique Individual is most certainly an - exemplary expression - of Life in Life - as a Magnificent Personification - there-of -

@Unpretentious Right? Mental illness and religiosity are not really agnostic.com staples.

its called - LIFE - Jeff -

get a grip - its about to get messy -

@KWAPELL7 You said earlier

the posts - syntax - grammar - punctuation & structure -
NONE of which - has been shown to be - deficient -

Not only did you fail to signify possession in that statement, but you do it all the time. You have enough dashes and improperly used hyphens to choke a fuckin' horse, but an apostrophe? Not even to save your life it seems.

@Unpretentious I mentioned then together because during my psych clinical rotation, I saw them together A LOT. There are tons of similarities between the writings and behaviors of the mentally ill individuals I took care of and KWAPELL. I would not be surprised at all if he had already been diagnosed, or had a diagnosable illness.

@JeffMurray Have you ever read writings by Buckminster Fuller? I recommend the CRITICAL PATH.

@think-beyond obtainable at:

[scribd.com]

Thanks.

@think-beyond Apparently there is some stuff I cannot read as a result of people blocking me, so if there's a reason you're suggesting this to me, I'm not sure I understand why or what the point you're trying to make is.

However, I read a synopsis of the points made in that book. I find some of them nice but others not generally supported by evidence. He also refers to "what nature wants" and a resultant karmic system which I unfortunately cannot square with my view of the nature of reality.

@JeffMurray It's his syntax. You have to read him, not about him.

@think-beyond I read several actual passages from that book that didn't make sense. Can you tell me the reason for the suggestion though?

@JeffMurray Getting into one's mind is an important journey. It can be complex and not always easy to understand. It comes from a deep place. As a teacher I never make any assumptions but in an intuitive way I get close to knowing how their creativity works. I work with creative people some not very educated. ( Education should enhance that creativity, not inhibit it.) If I don't understand, who am I to be negative? For me, the purpose of getting to that understanding is to be positive and perhaps to help that creativity on its own terms. I don't go by any books, or rules or laws.

@think-beyond If the implication is that I should be positive and foster open communication with the OP you wouldn't be the first one to say that. You also wouldn't be the first one who doesn't know that I already tried and it lead to a fruitless conversation of pure nonsense. You can attempt for yourself if you want, or go back to his old posts and read for yourself if it's still there.

if they give them out for so doing -
then - the answer is - Yes -

a rather - daft & puerile - indoctrination video -
into how to articulate - Ones Self - "properly" -
which of course means - your acceptance there-of -

as to your critique -
Thank U for at least attempting to be - honest & civil -
apparently giving the post at least a - quick perusal -
although U did say - U had to read it twice to derive -
its "drift" - after some brief contemplation U came -
up with this - sanctimonious & captious - exegesis -

then it became clear that U could not - Refute - Dispute -
nor Deny - the Validity nor Veracity of - the postulate -
thus if its - TRUTH - cannot be - repudiated -
it must then - BE - Accurate & Factual -

this U could not stand to contemplate - literally -
so U - as sooo - many others - attempt to pick at -
the posts - syntax - grammar - punctuation & structure -

NONE of which - has been shown to be - deficient -

it simply does not suit your taste - which is fine -
so simply ignore the post and move on -

but No - U figured - with all that - "flowery" - language -
that I would be an easy mark to dispense your - righteous -
indignation upon - for using such nonconforming - Grammar -

Now - let me be - Clear & Concise -
I have - ABSOLUTELY NO - interest - desire - nor - aspirations -
of conforming to your or ANY One else's - definition of "normal"
as such - I appreciate the time & effort it took - to piece together -
such a respectable - yet certainly not admirable - response/reply -

@KWAPELL7 Articulating you point properly is not about indoctrination, it's about effective communication. If everyone used punctuation however they wanted or defined words however they wanted, no one would ever know what the fuck anyone else was talking about.

Every time I try to read your writing all I can think of is...

@JeffMurray that was actually a fairly decent & apt - analogy -

the problem is Jeff - that 99% of the words articulated -
actually & factually - R - correctly & properly - being applied -
and such definition & usage can be verified - with a standard -
dictionary - thesaurus - google - ...

yes a few words have been truncated to - letters -
yet both versions - pragmatically & practically -
speaking - elicit & emote - the same - meaning -

yet the lesson is that - Ones - Perspective -
is what will most often determine - Ones choices -
and Ones limitations - as well as - Ones achievements -
as U have so - chosen &/or allowed - for them to BE -

the postulates R - NOT - meant for - everyone -
no more so - than to say - Every one likes the flavor of -
vanilla bean - Ice cream - or - chocolate - Pecan pie -

yet the - Truth - stated there-in - is irrefutable -
undeniable - & - indisputable - and is thus the - reality -
of the - illusion - in which we percieve our Self to exist -

yet not a single person in the past 10+ yrs
of my posting such - esoteric material -
has been able to deny its - Validity or Veracity -

why is that - when it is plainly written in - English -
such "folly"of articulation should be - easy to detect -
analyze - examine - discern & ascertain - its supposed -
deficiencies - discrepancies - and/or - disparities -

@KWAPELL7 Plenty of people have pointed out your errors, including me. You just brush them off and hurl insults. And just because something is technically correct doesn't make it best practice. Whatever it is you're trying to convey would be better accomplished through "proper" (i.e. commonly agreed-upon) use of the language you are using. That is, of course, unless the thing you are trying to convey and elicit is confusion and confrontation. I have not yet ruled that out from among my theories. I mean, the fact that you self-describe your posts as esoteric is telling. If you clearly communicated whatever it is you're trying to say all the time with "proper" use of the language, maybe less people would give up trying to understand what you're saying, thus leaving you with less people you can cite as 'unable to understand your genius' so to speak. Don't worry, if you're as smart as you think you are, it'll shine through the regular-people words we dunces regularly use and more people will be able to appreciate your brilliance. Just for funzies, post one of these postulates with "proper" English. Surely you're smart enough to do that, and you're prolific enough that the few minutes it would take to put together wouldn't be much of a loss, no? Who knows, you may get some converts out of it. Looking forward to it.

I like weird Al.

a very cognizant - yet several times - mistaken -
& severely - mis-quoted - reply/critque -

1. I never stated that he would sing -

in all 8 octaves - in One performance -
I even attempted to Clarify such nuance -
by adding- "(3 to 5 is normal)" -
(just as I did NOT state that he would sing -
in 12 languages in the same performance)

2. I never stated nor proclaimed that One is -

"unenlightened if we don't agree" -
I clearly stated - and I quote -

"I agree - IMHO - only a deaf person -
could not - easily - recognize & thus -
acknowledge - such - Mastery of Ones Self -"

3. "One person's ambrosia is another's vomit" -

again I NEVER stated otherwise -

4. "No need to label such people as unenlightened simpletons, etc,

if they aren't members of the same fan club." -

once - AGAIN - I NEVER made - such statement nor assertions -

** show the video to an actual music aficionado or - cognoscente -
and see if they - even remotely agree - with - your - assessment -
I will wager your skills at developing a cogent musical analysis -
will be found to be - severely lacking - in their - technical acuity -

none-the-less

Thanks for responding -

Have a Nice day & stay Happy -

@KWAPELL7 so, what you're basically saying is if the shoe fits wear it? lol.

@KWAPELL7 re.
Point #1, I have been singing with one choral group or another for 35 years. No one has an 8 octive range, so if you are going to make such a ridiculous claim, don't expect anyone to believe it without verified evidence. And, btw, 3 to 5 octives is not normal. 3 octives is quite good. Many decent singers have somewhat less than that, even including their head voice/falsetto.

#2 and, redundantly, #4, you didn't claim it, I agree. But you implied we are enlightened if we buy into what you presented....conversely the same thing.

#3, that was a comment, not an argument.

Your penchant for using archaic, obscure words when more contemporary ones are readily available remains amusing, not to mention your odd punctuation, which is just wrong. Anyone can make typos; I certainly do. You Make up your own rules and expect us to be impressed.

@MikeInBatonRouge

finally - a mostly - coherent & cognizant - response -

as to - your response to - Point # 1 -
U be the judge - as U always R -
does he - Not - hit 8 octaves -
in these 2 - videos of him -
performing - Live -

I believe he covers a full 6 -
in this - performance -

and U will find the 7th 8th octaves -
I believe -- clearly denoted & expressed -
near the end of this - Unique compilation -

Enjoy - this Evolution of LIFE -

2 & 4 - U stated " But you implied we are enlightened

if we buy into what you presented....conversely the same thing."

I stand by what I said - this Individual is a Unique -
Personification - of the - Eternal - as a - Divine -
expression of - One Self Soul Spirit - in - LIFE -
and in - Fact & Deed - He is - extraordinary -

@MikeInBatonRouge

as to your final comment as quoted below -

"Your penchant for using archaic, obscure words when more contemporary ones are readily available remains amusing, not to mention your odd punctuation, which is just wrong. Anyone can make typos; I certainly do. You Make up your own rules and expect us to be impressed."

** my response -

that U consider them " archaic, obscure words" -
is irrelevant - as they R in fact - parts of the English -
Language & vocabulary - which makes them - relevant & accurate -

the punctuation - syntax - structure & verbiage -
they R - ALL - Intentional - functional & "Legal" -
that U & most others choose not to - articulate -
in such manner - is part of the - point in so doing -

just for the sake of argument -
here is a vocal coach -
who claims - Dimash -
hit a - D8 or possibly D9 -

Namaste - that which is - ENERGY -
being a Person - in as thru a - tellurian -
& sublunary - human - animal -

what U - percieve - to be "real" -
is in fact - only an - illusion of -
your Self imposed - limitations -

@KWAPELL7 nope. You are deluded. Wishful thinking is not reality, no matter how enlightened you imagination allows you to feel. But nice try.

U post in the manner - shape & form which U so Choose -

and I will do exactly the same -

in Life this "malady" is called - Self expression -
and as U have yet to proffer ANY valid refutation of its Truth -
I suggest U at least attempt a bit of Rational - cognition & cogitation -
before your intellect leaves U entirely devoid of comprehensive thought -

@KWAPELL7 typical answer of an illusory superiority ignorant dummy who still doesn't understand that letters are not words and that 56 year old men do not write like you do, unless you are a teenage girl trolling here. Anyway, learn to write words and stop using your thesaurus to look for words to pretend you "know things" like using cognition and cogitation, which are not synonyms you stupid pretentious asshole?

@Mofo1953 - somebody got their - dander up eh -

listen up dipstick - I never stated nor implied that -
"cognition and cogitation," were in ANY way - synonymous -

I said that U should - make use of such -
"before your - intellect - leaves U entirely" -
devoid & bereft of - comprehensive thought -

it is - abundantly & painfully - obvious -
that U need to - Start using your - dictionary -
and please Stop writing like a 14 yr old - child -
who can't stay focused long enough to - answer -

so how long do U want to continue waging this - war of words -
as U may have noticed - most others have - long since decamped -
what is your motivation for continuously presenting - Ones Self -
as such a prolific target for verbal - mortification & ignominy -

if U should choose to persist - please -
enlist the assistance of your - children -
or perhaps their teachers - someone - anyone -

LOL! I agree, as impressive as Oswald Bates.

@MikeInBatonRouge That's way more accurate than the video I posted.

@KWAPELL7 your slip is showing pompous and pretentious teenage troll.

@JeffMurray he insists on being stupid.

@JeffMurray, @MikeInBatonRouge very funny, KWAPELL7 is a waste of a good thesaurus.

@Mofo1953 Yeah, it's hard to imagine that's a 56 year old dude...

@JeffMurray -

that is because I AM - NOT - merely -
"a 56 year old dude"- I AM - Ancient & Eternal -
Now & then - being human as that which - I AM -
as that which is - All things & No thing - being EVERY thing -

@JeffMurray and delusional also.

Phenomenal voice singing a masterpiece song.

You insult the Kazakh!

@FrayedBear How's that!

@barjoe Because despite his popularity, talent wise, Elvis doesn't make the C juniors grade in comparison.

@FrayedBear That's ridiculous. Your opinion. Elvis Pressley is regarded to be the king and certainly a major inspiration for a lot of artists. Even if you think the comparison is an insult to Dimash Kudeibergen, it's not. It's a complement. It certainly does not "insult the Kazakh" or the people of Kazazhistan.

@barjoe How many octaves could Elvis manage? How many languages did he speak? How many different instruments could he play?

@FrayedBear I don't know bro. Look it up! We all have our own musical taste. It's not American Idol or Star Search. I don't care what you think of Elvis. You said I insulted the Kazakh. I did not.

@barjoe I'm sure that you didn't do it intentionally.

Did you hear the legend that the first Frenchman to send a postage stamp that had been licked was challenged to a duel as the recipient said the sender was spitting at him.

@FrayedBear I didn't do it at alll. SMH. You accused me. If I want to insult someone, I do it intentionally. Do not get me started.

@barjoe Woe!
Let's have more and not followed by and . OK?

@FrayedBear I guess I was angry then. I'm over it.

@barjoe Sadly it is human nature to take on the faults of others that they cannot change nor created. Anger I always describe as a failure to have the knowledge to undestand why something is. I'm angry that I do not know why the phrase "money talks, bullshit walks" gained such ascendency.

@FrayedBear Maybe I just get pissed off at stubborn rude people. Just maybe.

@barjoe good, the message is getting through.