ObSki: another run with flatboarding

In article .com,
taichiskiing wrote:

On May 24, 5:44 pm, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article . com,

taichiskiing wrote:
Here's the thread, good read,
http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...ghlight=taichi

Thank you. I now realize everything I have said to you
has been said before.

Yup, it proves that the little knowledge 'net bashers behave pretty
much the same all over the 'net.

That is one possible interpretation, although a conceited and
narrow-minded one.

Another possible interpretation is that you are ill suited both by
temperament and vocabulary to be the lone advocate of "Tai Chi Skiing."

Dave

On May 25, 10:21 am, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article .com,

taichiskiing wrote:
On May 24, 5:44 pm, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article . com,

taichiskiing wrote:
Here's the thread, good read,
http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...ghlight=taichi

Thank you. I now realize everything I have said to
you has been said before.

Yup, it proves that the little knowledge 'net bashers
behave pretty much the same all over the 'net.

That is one possible interpretation, although a
conceited and narrow-minded one.

Another possible interpretation is that you are ill suited both by
temperament and vocabulary to be the lone advocate of "Tai Chi Skiing."

Thanks for proving my point. A conceited narrow-minded 'net basher
cannot see his own ill temperament but others'.

The Way of Taichi is to balance the incoming aggressions, so it may
dissolve it, and in no-mind, Taichi has no temperament of its own.
What you see is only your own temperaments in reflection.


IS


Dave

In article . com,
taichiskiing wrote:

On May 25, 10:21 am, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article .com,

taichiskiing wrote:
On May 24, 5:44 pm, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article . com,

taichiskiing wrote:
Here's the thread, good read,
http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...ghlight=taichi

Thank you. I now realize everything I have said to
you has been said before.

Yup, it proves that the little knowledge 'net bashers
behave pretty much the same all over the 'net.

That is one possible interpretation, although a
conceited and narrow-minded one.

Another possible interpretation is that you are ill suited both by
temperament and vocabulary to be the lone advocate of "Tai Chi Skiing."

Thanks for proving my point. A conceited narrow-minded 'net basher
cannot see his own ill temperament but others'.

The Way of Taichi is to balance the incoming aggressions, so it may
dissolve it, and in no-mind, Taichi has no temperament of its own.
What you see is only your own temperaments in reflection.

With all due respect. that what Scott does. He takes whatever criticism
leveled at him, uses the exact same words and then claims the other
person is doing it.

It's known as the "Peewee Herman, 'I know you are, but what am I'
defense." It doesn't work very well. Mr Herman used it to appear inept
and juvenile for comedic effect.

I also am beginning to think that you are way too thick-headeded to
understand Tai Chi beyond moving slowly and spouting mystical nonsense
while reveling in your own ignorance.

And finally, you never responded to this:

In article .com,
taichiskiing wrote:

Hi Tai Chi Skier,

You are really teetering on netkook behavior here. What you have done,
from my perspective, is to have posted some videos of you on groomed
blues and one run through the super pipe, all without poles and but with
much hand waving. You claim you ride the skis flat and don't use the
edges for turning, and you refuse to use the accepted "language" of
skiing, choosing instead to invent your own terminology.

You claim to be an expert skier and practitioner of this "new school" of
skiing, but can neither describe it nor defend it when challenged. Part
of being an expert is being able to describe and defend you techniques
and theory in discussion. This is true of martial arts as well. With
this in mind, let's look at your most recent response

As you repeated your failed arrogant argument--a 4-old skis faster
than me--then it really reflects your low intelligent level. Most of
reasonable mature adults won't believe such a claim, but you don't
seem to know that. So, "if you believe that, you're dumber than
yourself realized." Maybe it's just a mistake, you were just bashing
without realizing how stupid the argument is, but the second time
around after it failed? So, "Even 4-year olds learn from their
mistakes," but apparently, you don't.

Here you are being both arrogant and defensive. Evojeesus didn't say
you weren't capable of skiing faster than a 4 year old, simply that in
the footage you posted, you didn't appear to be skiing faster than a 4
year old.

You are insulting regarding his ability to judge your speed, yet, you
don't provide any counter evidence that you were going as fast as you
say you were.

If you are going to make claims, at least make some effort to back them
up. It's entirely possible that you felt like you were going much
faster than you actually were. I've stood on a surfboard going 10 mph
and felt like I was flying and stood in a jet liner traveling 500 mph
and felt like I was standing still.

You can't simply post some grainy footage of you on a blue run waving
your arms around and then demand that people who see it "prove" your
actual speed.


My current favourite mountain does not have marked trails (except for
two blue groomed ones for beginners), skipatrol or restrictions on
where one may go. I much prefer untamed mountains to Disneyland.

Sounds a cool little hideout, however, if you only have a limited
access to the mountain and its facilities, it'll be hard pressed for
you to have a more feature-rich all-mountain skiing experience.

He tells you his mountain has very little groomed runs, no ski patrol
and no ropes. It sounds pretty danged hardcore to me. He is telling
you that he is doing real "all mountain" skiing and you respond by
lamenting that he doesn't have access to the whole mountain and doesn't
enjoy "a more feature-rich all-mountain skiing experience." This
response, literally, makes you look stupid. Especially in light of your
apparent fondness for blue runs.

And again, there is nothing wrong with messing around on blue runs, and
I frequently find places to eat lunch at the bottom of them, but posting
videos of you going down them and then talking about enjoying the "all
mountain experience" is just silly.

Not really, that's "only" your part of assumption. I seldom
straightlining on the blacks, (nevertheless, I've done that,) it just
too fast a speed for most of ski resort environments.

The very first time I put on a pair of snow skis, I "flat boarded" in a
straight line down "Panda Ridge" at Buttermilk and I did enough hand
waving for 2 tai chi skiers. I'm pretty sure I was going in excess of
200 mph too. Had it been video taped, it probably would have been hard
to judge the speed, but I am positive it was 200 mph. The instructor
much have been going even faster, because he caught up to me.



I'm not pretending to be a skiing-instructor-guru with new and
radical groundbreaking ideas.

Yeah, you just pretend you know more about skiing than a skiing-
instructor-guru.

If you are going to call yourself a "skiing-instructor-guru" then you
need to present yourself as one. Being petty, defensive, making wild
claims and not being able to back them up makes you look like a
charlatan or netkook.

It may be that you are in fact a skiing-instructor-guru with a
breakthrough new school of skiing. If that is the case, and you want to
be an effective advocate for it, you need to be able to both demonstrate
it and describe it. Riding blues without poles is something that a lot
of people here can do capably.


Pretending that you only see an intermediate level skiing only
reflects your intermediate level of observation, not going to help you
to prove your argument, but only reflects your pathetic denial.

See. That's what I'm talking about. When I look at your videos, I see
(and I don't claim any particular expertise) a guy skiing at an
intermediate level. Now, it may not be possible to ski at an advanced
or expert level on that sort of terrain. If you are doing something
special or noteworthy, you should describe it.


No, I haven't changed, and my words still stand after all these years,
and that's where the credibility stays. Meanwhile, your credibility
has been poked full of holes, "but you don't seem to realize or care."

Here you are obviously getting frustrated. Sadly, when you do that, you
start sounding a little like Scott. For example, you haven't
established your credibility, nor have you poked Evojeesus's "poked full
of holes." Trumpeting that you have just makes you look silly.


No, what's your "experience" in skiing is still in question, and the
question was a challenge to your skiing knowledge.

Describe it (the "feeling" of the flatboarding), please.

How about you define "flat boarding" first. Since I only ever flat
boarded once, during the aforementioned skiing lesson, I can assure you
the feeling was terrifying although I found the technique rather easy.


Is that why you spread your arms and don't tuck when you
straightline those beginner-slopes?

So you get stuck on the beginner-slopes?

I think he is alluding to the fact that you claim not using poles
lessens your wind resistance (to about the same degree as not having a
bobbin on your toque would) but then stand up straight and hold your
arms out to the side in a position that is positively operatic. (aside:
opera singers aren't usually known for their low wind resistance.)

Skiing without poles reduces aerodynamic drag, and skiing on flat
board/ski reduces frictions, and how to control the ski without re-
introducing all those elements back? "Moving without moving"--and
that's Taichi, the "advanced stuff." If you cannot see that, you
haven't got a clue what "advanced stuff" is.

When you get frustrated, you revert back to this whole "it's too
advanced to explain" nonsense. Honestly, I think that's one of the
failings of Tai Chi. Tai Chi has many, many wonderful benefits, but
because as a rule, you do it alone and don't "challenge" one another as
you might with karate, it leaves you untested and open to make many
claims that can't actually be supported except by how you experience it.
Thus, "moving without moving" might be a valid claim for "Tai Chi in the
park guy," but met with skepticism if you're "posting videos of groomed
blue runs guy."

I think we might be getting somewhere. Let's say you are "Tai Chi in
the park guy" and I am "playing frisbee in the park with labrador
retriever guy." We have both mastered the basics of park enjoyment.
But if you were to come up to me and try to tell me that you're using
the park at a far more advanced level than I, then you would appear to
be a nut.

The techniques that you
are wrangling about only a lower end of skiing; in the end, the high
end skiing is all mental.

When I was a kid, my dad had a riding lawn mower. When I first learned
how to drive it, it took a fair amount of concentration and effort.
After I mastered it's basic operation, I used to imagine that it was a
race car or a lunar exploration vehicle. That is, once I learned the
basics, my primary enjoyment of using it came from my imagination. Now,
imagine if I told you that to truly master lawn mowing, you must imagine
that you're driving in the Indy 500?

I have no doubt that you enjoy skiing and that you Tai Chi has added to
your ability to enjoy it. But if you are going to be such a vocal
advocate of it, you should be able to demonstrate what it adds to the
skiers skill set. You haven't done that yet.

Your videos put your experience and skill in question, that's
the whole point. VtSkier says you're fast and ski well so why
don't you video any of that stuff?

Those video clips were shot at the same location where VtSkier and I
skied, Bashful, Sierra-at-Tahoe, and I "generally" skied faster than
he. Your denial shows.

If I ever met VtSkier, I'd immediately buy him a pitcher of his beverage
of choice, but whether or not you happen to ski faster than him,
particularly on your "home mountain" doesn't really mean much.

45mph is 45 mph, it doesn't matter where you ski it. Your argument
reflects your denial. If you think that you can ski 45mph on a
beginner slope (as you claimed that I did), I'd like to see that you
do it.

Oh yes it does matter where you ski it. But that does raise an
interesting question. How fast can you go on a green? I'm betting if
it's long enough, you can go pretty fast.

The 14mph came from observing some of the clips you sent. I've
noticed later that you go faster in some other clips, maybe even 25+ mph.

So you have no way to really measure your observation, you are only BS
yourself.

That's what I would have guessed too. If you have some evidence to
suggest that you were going faster, then you should present it. If you
told me that you had a friend with a radar gun on you or had used one of
those timed race runs they have at the mountain, I'd give it more
credence, but "it felt like 45 mph" doesn't get you very far.

Hah!! 50mph = 80kmh!! You are not even close, but borderline
delusional. You think you're as fast or faster than World Cup
giant slalom participants? Please get real, next time surprise
yourself by straightlining with a GPS.

I do Chinese Downhill, and it's generally faster than a GS run.

That is a non-sequitur and does nothing to support your claim of going
50 mph in that clip. People who've looked at it and measured your
distance traveled in 1 second don't believe you were going that fast.

"So, it shows that Flatboarding, as a system of techniques, can do
alpine skiing, tele, snowboarding, and rollerblading, and equally
well. That IS "ONE" Way to ski them all. But you don't see that
technical ability; all you can see (not that you see them correctly)
is flat grounds, small bumps, and waving hands. No, I don't think that
you have what it takes to comprehend what you see."

Okay, more spiritual BS. All I see is "lat grounds, small bumps, and
waving hands" too. Again, I have no doubt that Tai Chi helps you with
all those activities. Really. But if you are going to tout your "'ONE'
Way" of skiing, roller blading etc, then you need to be able to describe
what you're doing. Chastising others for falling to see your obvious
awesomeness isn't going to accomplish much.

So, "what you don't understand doesn't invalid a proven theory."

Okay "proven theory." You're using words I like, but not in the order I
like to see them

What is the theory? How you answer this will go a long way to
establishing your credibilty. Or not.

and everyone thinks that your videos show absolutely nothing
even remotely challenging.

Not everyone, only 'net gapers' denial.

Okay, who has seen this and posted they have seen anything other than
you on bland terrain appearing to go slower than your claimed speed.

That's lame-skiing without skiing. Or perhaps flatlining
without corner-turning?

You may not know it, "a blind cat runs into a dead mouse"--lucky, you
stomp onto it.

I think he was making fun of your Humpty Dumptian shifting vocabulary
and stringing together of nonsensical words.

(Humpty Dumpty: "words mean what I want them to mean, nothing else,
nothing more.")

No, you're inventing your own terminology. That's not an achievement,
but a colossal ****-up. You can easily fix it, by reading a couple of
books on skiing techniques so why don't you?

No, since I can do what I described, the "colossal ****-up" is yours.

Have you ever looked at the websites of the guys who are "this close" to
getting their perpetual motion machines to work? They are the
undisputed kings of non-standard terminology. They talk about newtonian
physics not applying to their design, negative energy and things
"exploding inwards." They can't describe the physics behind their
non-working devices because they either don't know or reject the
vocabulary of science.

Well, "Taichi Skiing: the Dance of the Cosmos" was a "published"
article,
http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/maga...hp?article=318
that should give you an even bigger clue.

Actually "ezine with a horoscope" gave me an even bigger clue.


Not really, Taichi Skiing is an open system, and flatboarding is an
open technique, there's no "tower"/limitation to enclose them. What's
sorry about your "a degree or two..." is after you got the degrees you
are not getting any smarter, but get stuck on your partitioned
knowledge.

Again. Stop with the insults and educate us. Or don't educate us. But
if you you're not, then stop making claims without evidence and then get
defensive and insulting when people are skeptical.

Bruce Lee couldsay "be like water" and "no way is way" because he could
demonstrate that his "new" way worked. You haven't done that.

Dave

"Dave Cartman" wrote in message news:vern93-
Thank you. I now realize everything I have said to
you has been said before.

Yup, it proves that the little knowledge 'net bashers
behave pretty much the same all over the 'net.

That is one possible interpretation, although a
conceited and narrow-minded one.

Another possible interpretation is that you are ill suited both
by
temperament and vocabulary to be the lone advocate of "Tai Chi
Skiing."

Thanks for proving my point. A conceited narrow-minded 'net basher
cannot see his own ill temperament but others'.

The Way of Taichi is to balance the incoming aggressions, so it may
dissolve it, and in no-mind, Taichi has no temperament of its own.
What you see is only your own temperaments in reflection.

With all due respect. that what Scott does. He takes whatever
criticism
leveled at him, uses the exact same words and then claims the other
person is doing it.

It's known as the "Peewee Herman, 'I know you are, but what am I'
defense." It doesn't work very well. Mr Herman used it to appear
inept
and juvenile for comedic effect.

I also am beginning to think that you are way too thick-headeded to
understand Tai Chi beyond moving slowly and spouting mystical
nonsense
while reveling in your own ignorance.

There seems to be no way of getting anything meaningful out of
Taichiskipeewee. I did try. It is amusing to watch others try, but I
have given up. It's just not going to happen.

Bob

(snip)
Dave, most of everything you said makes very good sense and logic as I see
it.

Bruce Lee couldsay "be like water" and "no way is way" because he could
demonstrate that his "new" way worked. You haven't done that.

Dave

Bruce Lee may have said those two quotes but they weren't his original
ideas.

I have not seen anything that Bruce Lee did that was all that note worthy
other than being a movie actor and one of the first martial artist that was
hyped to no end in the USA. Most people bought into the hype that was built
around him into being the ultimate martial artist. If he wasn't a movie
star and actor no one would have ever paid attention to him. Being in the
right place and at the right time is what made him.

What IS is doing to prove his point is no different than what many in the
martial arts have done for many years and still do today. You don't
question the validity or logic of what is being taught, you do as you are
told and in time you if you are diligent and worthy you will see the light,
understand and become a true believer. This is the very same logic that is
used in many of the popular religions.

He believes he is doing something different and better than what most skiers
are doing. He believes he is an accomplished skier that has studied the
dynamics of skiing and therefore is qualified to make his claims. The
problem is he is a big fish in a very small pond and now has wondered out
into a big lake with really big fish. He is impressive with the little fish
in his pond but now with the big fish he is at a loss so to make himself
seem as big as the bigger fish he needs to bring them down to his size by
attacking and name calling. It is a desperate attempt to look as big as the
big boys. He is not used to being challenged and demanded to prove his
theories and ideas. Since he is not used to it he doesn't know how to and
most likely can not.

He has made many different statements over the past two years trying to
explain and prove his new skiing methods and some were conflicting theories
or statements. He is using martial arts logic, most martial arts teachers
has never been in a physical fight and can only tell others theories about
how to fight and what is supposed to happen. Most of these same teachers
have never competed in competition to see how they hold up to other trained
martial artist and is a rare breed that will venture out into the open arena
where there are many different styles, systems and forms of martial artist
competing. The excuses run deep why they do not compete and what is wrong
with competition and that it doesn't prove anything. If you are not aware
of it every system of martial arts teaches secrete deadly techniques that is
invincible and would kill anyone so it is kept a secrete from the outside
world and other martial arts.

I am not knocking IS, if he is really doing something that is noteworthy,
new and improved it will eventually get out to the general public. As many
has previously said if he is to be the spokes person he will need to be
better able to explain and prove it so that everyone will understand it. To
say it is so does not make it so. Just my 2 cents worth...

JQ
Dancing on the edge

In article ,
"JQ" wrote:

(snip)
Dave, most of everything you said makes very good sense and logic as I see
it.

Bruce Lee couldsay "be like water" and "no way is way" because he could
demonstrate that his "new" way worked. You haven't done that.

Dave

Bruce Lee may have said those two quotes but they weren't his original
ideas.

I have not seen anything that Bruce Lee did that was all that note worthy
other than being a movie actor and one of the first martial artist that was
hyped to no end in the USA. Most people bought into the hype that was built
around him into being the ultimate martial artist. If he wasn't a movie
star and actor no one would have ever paid attention to him. Being in the
right place and at the right time is what made him.

There's no question that Bruce Lee "self promoted" endlessly and
tirelessly, but "no way is way" aside, he was an excellent communicator
and while 'there is nothing new under the sun,' he is frequently
credited with starting the "mixed martial arts" movement. There is no
question that he was devoted to his art and trained compulsively.


I'm biased, because when I was 10 there was nobody cooler in the
universe and the story was that he had died from the infamous, dastardly
and deadly "vibrating hand" strike that killed you 24 hours later. Sure
he died during an overnight stay at a hot actresses house - but that was
pretty cool too.

He also changed his message as "Bruce Lee" became more of a brand.
Initially, he was selling basically no spirituality and claimed the
"belts are to hold your pants up." Later on, the public demanded some
mumbo-jumbo and he gave that to them too.

But that why I like mixed martial arts. It is purely about performance
and application of skills. I'm learning Muay Thai and Brazilian Jiu
Jitsu. I have no interest in belts.

That said, this weekend my best friend is here and he is a karate black
belt and 6'6 250lbs (I'm 6'5" 240) On the mats tonight, he showed me how
far I have to go.

I can also understand not being impressed by Bruce Lee, but if you have
time there is a great documentary about him called:

" Bruce Lee: A Warrior's Journey " http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0297814/

If you haven't seen it, it is really well done and has footage (and out
takes) from his final subject.

Dave

"Dave Cartman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"JQ" wrote:

(snip)
Dave, most of everything you said makes very good sense and logic as I
see
it.

Bruce Lee couldsay "be like water" and "no way is way" because he could
demonstrate that his "new" way worked. You haven't done that.

Dave

Bruce Lee may have said those two quotes but they weren't his original
ideas.

I have not seen anything that Bruce Lee did that was all that note worthy
other than being a movie actor and one of the first martial artist that
was
hyped to no end in the USA. Most people bought into the hype that was
built
around him into being the ultimate martial artist. If he wasn't a movie
star and actor no one would have ever paid attention to him. Being in
the
right place and at the right time is what made him.

There's no question that Bruce Lee "self promoted" endlessly and
tirelessly, but "no way is way" aside, he was an excellent communicator
and while 'there is nothing new under the sun,' he is frequently
credited with starting the "mixed martial arts" movement. There is no
question that he was devoted to his art and trained compulsively.


I'm biased, because when I was 10 there was nobody cooler in the
universe and the story was that he had died from the infamous, dastardly
and deadly "vibrating hand" strike that killed you 24 hours later. Sure
he died during an overnight stay at a hot actresses house - but that was
pretty cool too.

He also changed his message as "Bruce Lee" became more of a brand.
Initially, he was selling basically no spirituality and claimed the
"belts are to hold your pants up." Later on, the public demanded some
mumbo-jumbo and he gave that to them too.

But that why I like mixed martial arts. It is purely about performance
and application of skills. I'm learning Muay Thai and Brazilian Jiu
Jitsu. I have no interest in belts.

That said, this weekend my best friend is here and he is a karate black
belt and 6'6 250lbs (I'm 6'5" 240) On the mats tonight, he showed me how
far I have to go.

I can also understand not being impressed by Bruce Lee, but if you have
time there is a great documentary about him called:

" Bruce Lee: A Warrior's Journey " http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0297814/

If you haven't seen it, it is really well done and has footage (and out
takes) from his final subject.

Dave

Bruce Lee is not credited with the development of mixed martial arts as he
proclaimed that the best martial arts was his system, next in line was
Chinese martial arts then oriental now called Asian martial arts in that
order and all else was not real martial arts which would include mixed
martial arts of today. I would say that mixed martial arts of today may
have an advantage over traditional martial arts of yester year. One of the
main problems of martial arts in general one is not taught how to take a
hit. In a real fight one will most likely get hit and if you are not
trained at getting hit you will not know how to respond when you get hit and
hit hard. That is the greatest advantage of the non commercialized mixed
martial arts system. However, as with the traditional martial arts most new
mixed martial arts schools are commercial schools just using the name and
throwing in a few grappling techniques and now you have mixed martial arts
but taught no differently than it was before the name mixed martial arts.

I have seen the movie you mentioned many years ago, not being a Bruce Lee
fan I was not impressed, it was more hype about him and what he was
supposedly doing.

You are correct the belts really don't mean that much in the real world but
and all commercial schools it is a way to generate great amount of revenue.
Originally it was a way to help visiting instructors of the same system
teach students by knowing what they should know and how well they can do
those things. Today it is a different story especially here in the USA and
those commercial schools across the globe.

Keep up your MA training and developing those skills you are learning.

Good luck,
JQ
Dancing on the edge

In article ,
"JQ" wrote:

Bruce Lee is not credited with the development of mixed martial arts as he
proclaimed that the best martial arts was his system, next in line was
Chinese martial arts then oriental now called Asian martial arts in that
order and all else was not real martial arts which would include mixed
martial arts of today. I would say that mixed martial arts of today may
have an advantage over traditional martial arts of yester year. One of the
main problems of martial arts in general one is not taught how to take a
hit. In a real fight one will most likely get hit and if you are not
trained at getting hit you will not know how to respond when you get hit and
hit hard. That is the greatest advantage of the non commercialized mixed
martial arts system. However, as with the traditional martial arts most new
mixed martial arts schools are commercial schools just using the name and
throwing in a few grappling techniques and now you have mixed martial arts
but taught no differently than it was before the name mixed martial arts.

I have seen the movie you mentioned many years ago, not being a Bruce Lee
fan I was not impressed, it was more hype about him and what he was
supposedly doing.

You are correct the belts really don't mean that much in the real world but
and all commercial schools it is a way to generate great amount of revenue.
Originally it was a way to help visiting instructors of the same system
teach students by knowing what they should know and how well they can do
those things. Today it is a different story especially here in the USA and
those commercial schools across the globe.

Keep up your MA training and developing those skills you are learning.

JQ,

You are obviously far better educated on this history than I am. I say
that without a trace of sarcasm or irony.

This was funny coincidence, but as my wife and I progress with this, we
needed some basic equipment. I placed and order with MMA Warehouse in
Illinois. I live in Hawaii. When I placed my second order, they threw
in a free tee-shirt and a free "Icons of Ultimate Fighting" dvd.

Thinking we might be able to learn something from watching these guys,
we put in the dvd. The very first fight was our instructor, who had
never talked about competing. That was really funny just because it was
so random and coincidental.

Thanks for the encouragement. What martial art(s) do you study?

Dave

On May 26, 9:58 am, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article . com,

taichiskiing wrote:
On May 25, 10:21 am, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article .com,

taichiskiing wrote:
On May 24, 5:44 pm, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article . com,

taichiskiing wrote:
Here's the thread, good read,
http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...ghlight=taichi

Thank you. I now realize everything I have said
to you has been said before.

Yup, it proves that the little knowledge 'net bashers
behave pretty much the same all over the 'net.

That is one possible interpretation, although a
conceited and narrow-minded one.

Another possible interpretation is that you are ill suited both by
temperament and vocabulary to be the lone advocate of "Tai Chi Skiing."

Thanks for proving my point. A conceited narrow-minded 'net basher
cannot see his own ill temperament but others'.

The Way of Taichi is to balance the incoming aggressions, so it may
dissolve it, and in no-mind, Taichi has no temperament of its own.
What you see is only your own temperaments in reflection.

With all due respect. that what Scott does. He takes whatever criticism
leveled at him, uses the exact same words and then claims the other
person is doing it.

You mean Scott does Taichi? You are complimenting him. Or it is just
your lame argument designed to berate your opponent by praising a
lower character? Maybe you win the argument, and that's a big "maybe,"
but you've already lost your character. Your inept tactic shows.


It's known as the "Peewee Herman, 'I know you are, but what am I'
defense." It doesn't work very well. Mr Herman used it to appear inept
and juvenile for comedic effect.

It is known to you, you must have the experience; no, it doesn't work
well as you can see, nevertheless, it does have the comedic effect
when such a smart-aleck comment becomes real.


I also am beginning to think that you are way too thick-headeded to
understand Tai Chi beyond moving slowly and spouting mystical nonsense
while reveling in your own ignorance.

Let me guess, you are another 'net gaper who doesn't practice the/an
art (has no expertise), but pretends that he knows something about it?
Your gaper quality shows.


And finally, you never responded to this:

A gaper's lame ranting on the 'net? It ain't worth the thought.


IS

......
Dave

In article . com,
taichiskiing wrote:

With all due respect. that what Scott does. He takes whatever criticism
leveled at him, uses the exact same words and then claims the other
person is doing it.

You mean Scott does Taichi? You are complimenting him. Or it is just
your lame argument designed to berate your opponent by praising a
lower character? Maybe you win the argument, and that's a big "maybe,"
but you've already lost your character. Your inept tactic shows.

Thank you for clearing that up.

It's known as the "Peewee Herman, 'I know you are, but what am I'
defense." It doesn't work very well. Mr Herman used it to appear inept
and juvenile for comedic effect.

It is known to you, you must have the experience; no, it doesn't work
well as you can see, nevertheless, it does have the comedic effect
when such a smart-aleck comment becomes real.

Again, your clarification is much appreciated.



I also am beginning to think that you are way too thick-headeded to
understand Tai Chi beyond moving slowly and spouting mystical nonsense
while reveling in your own ignorance.

Let me guess, you are another 'net gaper who doesn't practice the/an
art (has no expertise), but pretends that he knows something about it?
Your gaper quality shows.

I don't pretend to understand Tai Chi at the level you obviously do.



And finally, you never responded to this:

A gaper's lame ranting on the 'net? It ain't worth the thought.

Sorry. Obviously, this is a very emotional issue for me. I shouldn't
take it all so personally.

Dave