🚀 go-pugleaf

"Danie|_ Swan" <DAN@ZIONIST-HEADQUARTERS.com> wrote in message
news:03cod.198742$9b.62183@edtnps84...
> In article <gJbod.198728$9b.104050@edtnps84>, Me@home.ca says...
> >
> >
> >"Danie|_ Swan" <DAN@ZIONIST-HEADQUARTERS.com> wrote in message
> >news:xrbod.198725$9b.8138@edtnps84...
> >> In article <yebod.198717$9b.129259@edtnps84>, Me@home.ca says...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> you've just made an argument - that I don't understand the
definitions
> >of
> >> >what
> >> >> I'm talking about.  You've neither demonstrated the veracity of that
> >> >argument,
> >> >> nor have you provided any indication that you understand the
> >definitions
> >> >of
> >> >> what I'm talking about.  If you don't understand the definitions of
the
> >> >words
> >> >> I'm using, how could you know that I don't understand them?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Simple.  "To put this in perspective, there is no behavioral
difference
> >> >between engaging in Pascal's wager, and engaging in an OCD ritual
> >> >(obsessive-compulsive disorder)", indicates that you don't know what
OCD
> >is.
> >> >Whether I understand it or not becomes irrelevant.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> But I do know what OCD is, and I'm certain I've read far more on the
> >subject
> >> than you have.  I happen to have a friend with a severe case and so I
did
> >quite
> >> a bit of research on it last year.  So that means you don't know what
OCD
> >is.
> >>
> >I see.  Trust me.  I can GUARANTEE you that I know considerably more
about
> >OCD than you do unless you have specific education (not personal research
> >because of your freind) on the subject.
> >
>
> No, trust me, you do not know nearly as much about OCD as I do.  I am a
very
> highly functioning autodidact and a couple months of my study on a subject
is
> equivelent to years of graduate work.
>
>

LOL!  There are many who claim such things, and in the absence of any proof
(and given your statements above, proof to the contrary) you'll have to
pardon my scepticism.