What's new
By:
Filters

ESMB Poster "David Mayo"

Wow. So glad I waited up. Yeah, I know about the AAC being open and running much later than 1984 there on Coach Village Rd. I have the later mags of the newer building with a lady named Nan in the front. I was so jealous I was not there to hear Donna and Harvey Haber tell about their tour of Nepal later.

SO....you were still piloting rundowns. The CASUALTY rundown seems interesting. Deep can of worms that would be. Can't imagine the E/S betrayals sitting on the persons case on THAT. :nervous:

Who do we know in common these days.:eyeroll:

That is so exiciting. I KNEW you guys were the type to go back to college. I like videography and am in awe of good web designs.

I can't keep my eyes open. Don't forget where we are. You will be flooded with mail. The [email protected] got no answer a couple of years ago. I am so glad you are a survivor. I would like to hear about your Casualty Rd. Was it using the TIR stuff. I know nothing about the Serge Gerbode era. I did get some material from Bill Nichols. What a sweetie.

Happy Spring and WELCOME again.
iris-and-yellow-tulip-bouquet--flowers.jpg


Night night.

Love, Juanita
 
Julie Mayo said:
Back in 1996 David and I were delivering Causality Programs that we had developed. We had left IRM in 1988 and not long thereafter started Causality. (David did some windsurf board repairs to keep bread on the table until we got Causality going.) After we settled the C of S cases in 1996 we continued Causality for a few years then got into videography and web designs. We both went back to college for a few years and so forth. (That was really great.)
Click to expand...

Hatshepsut said:
....

SO....you were still piloting rundowns. The CASUALTY rundown seems interesting. Deep can of worms that would be. Can't imagine the E/S betrayals sitting on the persons case on THAT. :nervous:

....
Click to expand...

C-A-U-S-ALITY, Hats. Interesting, though, when I first read it I saw "casualty," too! Must be an ESMB natter board thing. LOL.

Good that you're off to bed. Me twos. Hallucinating is prob'ly not a good sign. :p
 
Casuality

Interesting, I didn't know.
1993

...
This autumn the Mayos are presenting something unique and different: One week complete ability programs that stretch your mind, body, and soul. These intensive enhancement programs incorporate:

a) One-on-one ability advancement sessions with David or Julia Mayo.
b) Daily exercise and activities such as: wind surfing, swimming,walking on a secluded beach, adventuring into a different and exotic culture.
c) Special perception raising exercises.
d) Studies and drills that will: rejuvenate; put a new perspective on your life; raise personal ability; and increase the quality of your life when you get back home.
e) Enhancement programs are individualized and precise. Examples of topics that can be covered: relationships, life purpose, ability to focus, ability to establish and achieve goals, recovery from failures and setbacks, ability to move out of fixed patterns, basic ability development... and higher harmonics of basic abilities.
...
Click to expand...

(Link)
 
Welcome Julie! Wow! :happydance::thumbsup:

So glad you are here with all of Us. It’s just wonderful to have the Mayo’s part of this here Rodeo. I’ve thought of you and David off and on for years, hoping that y’all were well and that your lives were good.

I've made a number of posts about David over the last year. Here’s a post I made about you and David last June.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=430960&postcount=3047

My Best Wishes to You and David Always in All Ways.:yes:

Face:)
 
:clap: :clap: :clap:

Julie Mayo said:
Thank you, thank you, thank you!

It is wonderful to be here and hang out with you. I'm a bit clumsy yet, as I'm still working things out. But some of my very favorite people reside here, and I'm hoping to stay a long while. :happydance:
Click to expand...

Welcome! I hope you stay a long while too. :)

Paul
 
Julie Mayo said:
Love all the exes. Been lots of water under the bridge since 1996, (since I last posted on a forum like this). I had no idea that my posts would still be around. I might have spell checked them, reread them, or at least deleted a few commas had I known.

Back in 1996 David and I were delivering Causality Programs that we had developed. We had left IRM in 1988 and not long thereafter started Causality. (David did some windsurf board repairs to keep bread on the table until we got Causality going.) After we settled the C of S cases in 1996 we continued Causality for a few years then got into videography and web designs. We both went back to college for a few years and so forth. (That was really great.)

I was amazed at Marty's and Mike's mythology over on Marty's blog. No, we didn't go windsurfing after we settled. Unfortunately I didn't go at all in 1995 until mid 1997. The informants couldn't even get the windsurfing right! I'm sure it was a stressful job and stress is supposed to be bad for memory. They also probably wouldn't dare report anything other than what the spymasters wanted to hear. And the spymasters wouldn't dare think any thought other than what they were supposed to think. Most of the rest of Marty's blog about the Mayos is equally nonfactual. E.G., the AAC closed in 1984? Come on Marty. There must be dozens of people on this message board alone that came to the AAC in 1985 and 1986 and got journals during the 1990s. Time to evolve out of old habits and stop fighting old battles that are completely irrelevant in today's world.

I, for one, am glad to leave all that stuff behind me!
Click to expand...

013.gif


Julie, Glad to see you posting here. This will bring happiness to many people, as David's arrival has.

Just one question:

Did Marty mis-state or exaggerate his statement about the special master judge being drunk in court every day? I was pretty upset to see him post this about a man who is no longer around to defend himself. I saw it as an attack and a diversion from the facts that posters on his blog were mentioning.

Best wishes,
Mary
 
Welcome, Julie, I have heard and seen mention of many good things about you, and I'm very glad you are happy and in open communication, here.
 
This sure was worth waking up and turning the computer on for. Welcome Julie. It is wonderful to have you both here now. Just Beautiful. :happydance:
 
My ride

:happydance::happydance::happydance:

Welcome, welcome, welcome. ..... I was just dusting off my Klepper this morning. I've never sailed with a Kiwi before...what kind of winds do you get there? Heading out to practice Jibs and waterstarts...look forward to some great discussion here...:clap::clap::clap:
 
Hmm... Just a suspicion that I came to think of.. If David Mayo has a gag-agreement in force.. Does this agreement limit the Sinister Scam Cult of Scientology saying shit about David Mayo?

And if Mr.Rathbun says shit about David Mayo, does this violate the agreement for the part of the cult.. Or can Mr.Rathbun claim he's an 'Independent' now?

:unsure:

Oh.. Hi and Wecome Julie! :welcome:
 
Mark A. Baker said:
I don't buy it. Probabilistic based self-adaptive heuristic models are clever ways for creating algorithms for determining 'likely solutions', but there is nothing which relates them to the actual process of consciousness inherent to a mind. Sure a mathematician can develop & use such an algorithm. Yes, engineers are able to implement such algorithms in hardware. But nothing about that process implies consciousness in the device or the implementation. :no:

Mark A. Baker
Click to expand...

Self-awareness is not implied by such a computational architecture, correct. Obviously, despite the fact that all brain-possessing organisms have such an architecture, only a few of them are self-aware.

The important claim here was with regards to the above-described system vs a Turing machine (a computational system whose behavior is predicated on formal rules). A Turing machine isn't really a good approximation of what we're doing. It can't learn things. It can't solve problems for which it wasn't programmed to solve. And a model of the mind in which the person is a Turing machine doesn't capture a great host of the salient facts of our own minds (the very young, the very old, the mentally ill, the 'recreationally intoxicated', REM sleep, etc).

___________

Mark A. Baker said:
Strictly speaking, no it isn't. Dark energy is an (key word) hypothetical explanation which has been proffered to account for this observed anomaly. The actual 'dark energy' has not been observed, nor does it 'fall naturally' out of any physical existing theory. What has been observed is the apparent presence of a greater 'repulsive effect' than for which can otherwise be accounted by existing verified physical theory.

[snip]

Thus, in the case where the physics is well established and understood, the presence & behavior of the indirectly observed object is directly inferable and determinable from its effects on other objects in the system. No 'new physics' is required to explain the observations. Thus no 'mystery' exists.

In contrast, the belief in 'dark matter/energy' stems from an inability to account for an apparent measured cosmological anomaly by currently known & verifed physical theory. The actual cause of the anomaly therefore remains uncertain. Thus, no reasonable conclusions can be made affirming the 'actual truth' of such an interpretation. That situation will hold until such time as the relevant physics becomes fully understood and verified.


Mark A. Baker
Click to expand...

That's fine. Any kind of model involving other galaxies is going to be 'brand new'. The discovery that there are, in fact, other galaxies was more or less concomitant with a) the discovery that they are moving apart with a velocity proportional to their distance and b) the prediction in QM that empty space contains energy (not much -- a volume of space the size of the Earth has about as much energy as you'd get out of a couple of barrels of petrol).

The consistency of candidate models with established models from other domains is a major criteria here. Dark energy and dark matter do not shake the ground from under the standard model. On the contrary, it predicts both of them, as mentioned (ie, QM predicts vacuum energy and elementary particle physics predicts various kinds of WIMPs). It's entirely true that neither of them, as an historical fact, fell out of the standard model. It's also true that the abundance of dark matter was a surprise. But what's not true is that we had to invent from whole cloth a new set of frameworks for dealing with them.

-- edit: I'm down to continue discussing any of this, but I now fear this thread isn't the place for it. We should take it up in another thread or PM.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top