MegaMind

Where do you live?

No. There is a lot of video of other teachers demonstrating abilities similar to John. There were no scientists and medical doctors present to do their best to rule out fraud in a controlled location during these videos. We do not regard these videos as good evidence.

Indeed video footage is used in courts as evidence.

"Where the hell does it say "ALL MEN" meaning all men in existence?" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4324338/ "all men, if they live long enough, can expect to get the disease." Read to the end of the article. "Chang isn't part of your school. Jim and his students are. You have nothing to show." Many in our group were students of Jim, others of Kosta. "Video is subjective by definition" Cops wear body cameras to avoid the "he said, she said" nonsense. The camera functions as an independent observer objectively capturing what occurred without bias, it just records what occurred. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objective 2a : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind 2b : involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena https://kodsiengineering.com/using-video-evidence-in-accident-reconstruction/ "We love objective evidence. When forensic experts get video footage related to a collision or incident, it’s like Christmas came early for us." https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26322744.pdf?seq=1 "Body-worn cameras (BWCs) are one of the nation's latest policing tools to be used in the effort to increase police department transparency, strengthen community trust, and fight crime. BWCs are touted as game-changing technology in policing because of their potential to monitor officer misconduct during police-citizen encounters and provide objective evidence." https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/how-video-surveillance-is-used-in-personal-injury-cases-38998 "When there are two different stories about how an accident occurred, objective video evidence can be the deciding factor."

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/evidence_1?q=evidence "the facts, signs or objects that make you believe that something is true" You can have evidence of a phenomenon, capturing ball lightning on camera would be an example of such.

By definition it is evidence. I have yet to see Chris Angel stripped to a shirt and underwear in a controlled location and checked with a metal detector by a team of scientists and medical doctors.

Link?

Which link needs a login? Jim's cancer was due to agent orange exposure. Kosta has never been confirmed to have any form of cancer there were only rumours. Lawrence Blair claims John (now in his 80s) has cancer, but does not specify what type of cancer.

We can only show others the evidence John provided, and hope some decide to come and see for themselves.

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/evidence_1?q=evidence "the facts, signs or objects that make you believe that something is true" The facts are a team of scientists and medical doctors did visit John, did strip him to a shirt and underwear, did check him for metal with a metal detector, did take him to a random location they chose to get a demo. This much at least was recorded objectively on video. We are not claiming this proves it was not a fraud, or a hoax. We are not claiming that the scientists and medical doctors did not miss a device hidden in a bodily cavity, that was not metallic. We are not claiming to be infallible. What we are claiming is that by definition it is objective, and by definition it is evidence. What we are claiming is that it is the best objective evidence we know of.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4324338/ "all men, if they live long enough, can expect to get the disease."

He needs to come see for himself. Unfortunately sharing such information here will only be be used as ammunition against us.

https://www.yalecancercenter.org/media-player/3779/ Yale School of Medicine "yes, the older you become the greater chance you will have prostate cancer. That number, if you live long enough, may be up to 100%." https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/hhra/recordisplay.cfm?deid=127826 "Essentially all men with circulating androgens will develop microscopic prostate cancer if they live long enough." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4324338/ "all men, if they live long enough, can expect to get the disease." https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/prostate-cancer/prostate-cancer-age-specific-screening-guidelines "Most men will get prostate cancer if they live long enough." https://www.health.harvard.edu/cancer/prostate-cancer-whats-your-risk "The studies suggest that up to 46% of men in their 50s may harbor such cancerous cells; for men in their 70s, it rises as high as 83%. ... most men will develop prostate cancer if they live long enough." https://www.nature.com/articles/528S117a "Live long enough, and most men will develop prostate cancer."

I don't believe we ever used the word experiment, nor are we trying to say this some form of scientific proof or scientific evidence published in journals, peer reviewed and replicated. We are not claiming that fraud or hoaxes do not occur. We are not claiming the researchers could not have missed some device hidden inside a cavity. What we are saying is that it is objective video evidence with scientists and medical doctors present to do their best to rule out fraud. What we are saying is that it is the best objective evidence we know of. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/evidence_1?q=evidence "the facts, signs or objects that make you believe that something is true"

Take it up with the Yale School of Medicine, not me. https://www.yalecancercenter.org/media-player/3779/ Yale School of Medicine "the older you become the greater chance you will have prostate cancer. That number, if you live long enough, may be up to 100%." https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/hhra/recordisplay.cfm?deid=127826 "Essentially all men with circulating androgens will develop microscopic prostate cancer if they live long enough."

My first hand observation is that Mo Pai could revolutionize our world and our understanding of it. It could offer proof of things most do not believe exist to anyone willing to invest the time to see for themselves.

There is much we do not understand about our universe, that includes both you and I. If you think you are on John's level, more power to you.

There is much we don't understand. Things we don't understand seem magical and mystical until we do understand them at which point they become a part of our natural world. If you were to take two way radios back in time to the 1400s you'd be tried for witchcraft. Two way radios were never supernatural. Things are the same as they ever were, only our paradigms have changed.

I am saying there is only the natural world and nothing more. Being ignorant of something that exists or occurs doesn't make it supernatural. Ball lightning was like this until as late as the 1960s even. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet

No lies, and no lack of understanding either. The only members that you seemed to get along with, were the ones you were unaware were members.

Unfortunately that is not true. I am truly glad you and Kar3n are no longer staff members, because your solution was simply just to allow our opposition a voice, and ban any members of our group that dared speak up in public.

The problem here is you are dividing things up, into a supernatural world and our "natural" world. There is but one natural world, and we are ignorant of much that goes on in it. As an example a cave dwelling creature may have never evolved eyes to see with, but that doesn't mean light doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that being able to use light to see is a supernatural ability. All we can do is show others the evidence John provided, and hope they care enough to dedicate themselves to practice and see for themselves.

We are here mainly to politely defend ourselves, our teachers, and our practice. The attacks on us don't change, yet for some reason you expect our responses to be different?

It is important to us that our beliefs be based on the best objective evidence possible, and in our own first hand observations. Accepting things as true simply because someone else says so is not sufficient.

We would need some individuals at level 4+ to do in person demonstrations to convince most of the anti-mo-pai group here, and unfortunately we don't have that. That is not to say the practice does not get results. We firmly believe this would change the world if only enough people cared enough to come see for themselves the truth of the matter. This isn't something based on faith, but rather on your own direct observations and experiences.