🚀 go-pugleaf

On 17/09/2010 8:17 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
> "Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote ...
>> "|-|ercules" <radgray123@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote ...
>>>> "|-|ercules" <radgray123@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> OK, your problem as regards litigating against these
>>>>>>> organisations before you have a contract with them, or getting a
>>>>>>> Fair Trading
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't Peter's post a contractual offer to set up a test with me?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.out-of-body/msg/9ce14f8854504863?hl=en
>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> "|-|erc" <h...@c-h-e-s-s.com> wrote: Probably because I'm in
>>>>>> Australia, though they claim to do local preliminary tests which
>>>>>> noone has passed.
>>>>>
>>>>> No problem being in Australia, Herc. The Australian Skeptics have
>>>>> their own prize (it's only $100,000, but it's still worth winning).
>>>>> The rules are simple: 1) Tell us what you are going to do.
>>>>
>>>> Did you do that in unambiguous terms?
>>>>
>>>>> 2) Tell us the conditions under which you can do it. For example,
>>>>> if it only works on Fridays in rooms with red flock wallpaper we
>>>>> will book a suite at Madame Heloise's House of Happiness (I have a
>>>>> frequent flocker card).
>>>>
>>>> Did you do that in unambiguous terms? Remember the protocol and
>>>> conditions have to be mutually agreed, but AS is prepared to
>>>> accommodate claimants' wishes as far as possible.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You got the protocol COMPLETELY wrong!
>>
>> What protocol? You didn't agree to one.
>>
>>>
>>> I don't send a registered letter with a scientific test protocol with
>>> pass and fail
>>> marks and objective unambiguous procedures.
>>
>> You don't have to do that, but you do have to come to an agreement
>> over a "scientific test protocol with pass and fail marks and
>> objective unambiguous procedures". You didn't. You went straight to
>> "Pay me or I will poison food".
>
>
> Absolutely untrue! As already stated you "invited" me to apply in Dec 2001.
> The poison comment was in March 2002.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> Look at your website - "tell us what you can do" THAT'S IT!
>>
>> So, tell us what you can do and why it is paranormal.
>
>
> Quoting my first claim to A.S. back in 2001.
>
> I can state a question and get an answer from God from random quotes of
> information.
>
> That would imply using readily available quotes, not the names, ages and
> types
> of 10 of Barry's pets. The answer is not quoted in any book!
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> I appreciate the change of tune on your behalf Pete, I always knew you
> had it in you
> but $100,000 is pocket change to me now, and nobody here is defending
> the reneging
> that went on in the Paranormal Dataset Cluster.
>
> I can seduce Eve in private now!
> Australia can continue being the US ass lickers they are all taken for a
> spin for.
>
> Herc
>
>

It's interesting that in one thread Herc can be claiming to have plenty 
of money, but in another thread be talking about having to save up to 
afford a lawyer.

Sylvia.