Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy (Post 3488145)

Firstly let me pull you up on one pint,he is NOT a monk

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3488168)

No.
It is obvious to him that he has done that and it can be done again. So it is not FRAUD.

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3488168)

No.
It is obvious to him that he has done that and it can be done again. So it is not FRAUD.

I'm not sure why you are confused about this because you would constantly be using and applying this idea in your daily life. Applying to yourself and to others around you.
In your lifetime its probably going to happen that a Doctor will be convinced some kind of medication will cure something, prescribe it and its even possible that at some time along the process you and him will even become convinced it is working,
but,
later it will be found that it was not working at all and maybe even was doing more harm than good.
You will never describe this as FRAUD, never accuse the Doctor of FRAUD,
and,
for that matter you will never consider your own self as having been a FRAUD when you reported to the doctor that YOU thought it was working at the time and for a while.

So I don't know why you are confused over this David thing as if you don't know how to apply 'FRAUD' in this case or what the difference is between FRAUD and 'being incorrect' or 'mistaken'?

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3488168)

No.
It is obvious to him that he has done that and it can be done again. So it is not FRAUD.

I'm not sure why you are confused about this because you would constantly be using and applying this idea in your daily life. Applying to yourself and to others around you.
In your lifetime its probably going to happen that a Doctor will be convinced some kind of medication will cure something, prescribe it and its even possible that at some time along the process you and him will even become convinced it is working,
but,
later it will be found that it was not working at all and maybe even was doing more harm than good.
You will never describe this as FRAUD, never accuse the Doctor of FRAUD,
and,
for that matter you will never consider your own self as having been a FRAUD when you reported to the doctor that YOU thought it was working at the time and for a while.

So I don't know why you are confused over this David thing as if you don't know how to apply 'FRAUD' in this case or what the difference is between FRAUD and 'being incorrect' or 'mistaken'?

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3488113)

Yes.
This is what I tried to explain to you earlier. You really don't need to rub your own face in it.

Its important to identify problems first before you can solve them.

Originally Posted by fingers (Post 3488258)

Just because HE believes his own bullsh!t doesn't make him any less of a charlatan, maybe imbecile describes him better?

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy (Post 3488368)

Dick going from hm8 to hm8 telling them how much he loves them :yuk::mad:

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3488305)

IF simply being 'wrong' made someone a fraud then every pharmaceutical company, every doctor and every hospital would be confirmed 'frauds' and being charged with 'fraud'.

But they are not.
Because (for example) at the time, Doctor Jones did sincerely believe that prescribing boloxifiian tablets would lend cure to conligers syndrome,
and,
it is 'beside the point' that Dr. Jones got confused over what he was reading in his journal and had a wrong idea about how this worked.
He is not a 'fraud' or 'charlatan'.

btw.. this is also why mentally insane people who believe they are Prince Henry are NOT considered to be 'liars' or 'defrauding' or ever accused of identify theft.
It is simply because they believe they are Prince Henry YOU do not call them frauds.
Now 'intellectual hypocrite' would be an interesting name we could discuss here don't you think?

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3488305)

Yes it does make him less of a 'Charlatan' and you can see this idea constantly in Courts of Law.
IF you actually believe some bull**** you won't be charged with fraud or misrepresentation etc.

IF simply being 'wrong' made someone a fraud then every pharmaceutical company, every doctor and every hospital would be confirmed 'frauds' and being charged with 'fraud'.
But they are not.
Because (for example) at the time, Doctor Jones did sincerely believe that prescribing boloxifiian tablets would lend cure to conligers syndrome,
and,
it is 'beside the point' that Dr. Jones got confused over what he was reading in his journal and had a wrong idea about how this worked.
He is not a 'fraud' or 'charlatan'.

btw.. this is also why mentally insane people who believe they are Prince Henry are NOT considered to be 'liars' or 'defrauding' or ever accused of identify theft.
It is simply because they believe they are Prince Henry YOU do not call them frauds.
Now 'intellectual hypocrite' would be an interesting name we could discuss here don't you think?

Originally Posted by flamingGalah! (Post 3488491)

I couldn't understand a bloody word of any of that either... :conf:

When you can write something that makes any sort of sense come back & try to prove your point...

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3491789)

What I wrote makes perfect sense. It is a step-by-step explanation. IF you have problems understanding any of that then its you.
You are the problem.
That is damn sad you don't understand simple ethics and easy-to-see examples of right and wrong.

Originally Posted by flamingGalah! (Post 3491889)

Obviously not just me, as others also said they could not understand a word you were going on about... :xyxwave:

How am I the problem that you cannot make any sense??? :conf:

It's a damn shame you cannot see that Dave is a fake, taking advantage of the sick & vulnerable in claiming he can cure them of their ills... :nono:

Originally Posted by ElProximo (Post 3492243)

Nope.
Its you.
You and about 3 others here who have some kind of real problem comprehending basics they themselves actually DO apply in other areas of their life yet become intellectual hypocrites lost and confused in some moral relativity.
Its 'cognitive dissonance'.
The actual problem is in you receiving and processing the information and chopping it up into nonsense so it won't offend your 'emotional' and 'political' opinion.

btw.. people like you are the most easy to take advantage of when a real fraud comes along. A good con artist would see you as a perfect meal.

Originally Posted by flamingGalah! (Post 3492263)

No sorry, wrong :xyxwave:

You made no sense... :sleep: