# What are your thoughts regarding Carlos Castaneda?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [October 3, 2005, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571 "2005-10-03T13:56:22Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/121 "2005-10-10T02:38:55Z")

</div>

Uh, **Graham**? Maybe you should try another therapist. Sometimes you need to try a few before you find the right one.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GrahamWellington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/54ee81/32.png) [@GrahamWellington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrahamWellington)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/122 "2005-10-10T03:44:38Z")

</div>

> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#):
>
> What would I like you to do? Two things:
> 
> 1. Lay out all the evidence you have in the most persuasive manner you can, right away. By “most persuasive manner” I don’t mean the manner that would persuade you: I mean that, having observed our demands,

\<---- Lol. The only thing I’ve “observed” has been inconsistency going back to mapcase first saying he wanted material and then changing it to proof after I asked that Michelle Remembers be read from cover to cover.

> [@](#):
>
> the manner that would persuade us.

\<—You say this, and yet look at how you thanked me when I supplied a link to a 71-yr-old nun being stabbed to death, proving that there really is something to all of this satanist stuff. (And the article included many other women saying they had their own weird experiences with those hooded creeps, so you can’t shoot back with “nothing has been proven because it’s all still under investigation” business. If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck…).

> [@](#):
>
> No “Listen to this section and tell me what you hear”:

\<---- Why on earth would you knock this method of getting to the truth? Do you think in a court of law the judge would prefer your way of making your case, i.e. just blabbing away with nothing to support anything you say, or my way of actually seeing with one’s own eyes and hearing with one’s own ears while integrating it with relevent comments throughout the proceeding? Admit it; it’s a no brainer!

> [@](#):
>
> you need to say, “In this scene, Jim Morrison says, ‘Satan likes HoHos!’” You would also do well to anticipate logical objections to the theories you build

\<----It’s almost laughable that you would say such a thing in view of the fact that it’s been me that’s been logical and consistant throughout this tread, not you people.

> [@](#):
>
> and counter those before they’re even raised. You would also do well to knock it off with the insults.

\<---- Ah, let’s see here … yeah, calling you people clowns and goofballs is way worse than you people impugning my sanity. Sure.

> [@](#):
>
> 1. Answer my question: if you are incorrect, despite all your certainty that you’re not, what would the implications for your own health be, and what would you need to do to take care of yourself?

\<----But I’m not incorrect. The evidence/proof that you people refuse to look at (because it would require too much effort for you to leave the house and get the materials) backs me up 1000%!!!

> [@](#):
>
> And either tell us that you’re not openminded, or tell us what criteria evidence must meet in order to convince you that you’re mistaken.

\<----I don’t understand this, sorry.

You know, for all the time and effort you put into bickering with me, you could have had your eyes opened to some VERY disturbing truth by now. And while I don’t wish to insult you, I must say that even though you had mods and many others supporting you in our little running argument here, you still have done a very poor job of making your points or making any sense.

Didn’t you say you’re a 4.0 student and won some awards for debating or something? (When I was in school, I never got anything better than a “c” in hard subjects. I guess it just goes to show the grading disparity that exists throughout the country, no?)

> [@](#):
>
> Daniel

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GrahamWellington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/54ee81/32.png) [@GrahamWellington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrahamWellington)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/123 "2005-10-10T03:53:53Z")

</div>

> [@Guinastasia](#):
>
> Uh, **Graham**? Maybe you should try another therapist. Sometimes you need to try a few before you find the right one.

Thanks for the advice. I didn’t like them before I sat down with that last gomer, and liked them even less after he pocketed my money and wiped a booger on the copy of Michelle Remembers (after I sent him a self-addressed stamped envelope asking for it back)!

And did you know that of all the professional groups, shrinks have the highest suicide rate? I’d say that’s pretty telling!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/124 "2005-10-10T04:01:17Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> Did people get on Einstein’s case and demand him to explain his theories in ways that each of them wanted?

Yes, in fact. Or, rather, they demanded that he explain his theories in a way that **someone** could understand. So far, you’ve met with universal confusion or contempt. Ask yourself in your heart whether everyone’s wrong, or whether you may not be communicating effectively.

> [@](#):
>
> Also, I’m a shy person, and so it would be difficult for me to make a scene by standing on the roof (plus it’s all very complicated and interrelated … making that sort of means to disseminate unsuitable). However, I have tried talking many times to people in person, but they always blow me off, or the ones (two) that did hear me out on 80% of it have no wherewithal at all and can do nothing. Several times I’ve tried to sit in front of the wordprocessor but it just never comes out right.

If you’re really called, your shyness shouldn’t matter. If you’ve been blown off on people, you need to be looking inward to discover why, not making excuses about how it’s other folks’ fault.

> [@](#):
>
> \<----(#3) I’ve wondered about this too. Of course, people such as yourself haven’t exactly been like knights in shining armor, willing to drop the excuses and let me show the picture of things.

I do not think I’m making excuses. I sincerely think you are, and I think it’s because you’re afraid of what you might see if you drop them.

> [@](#):
>
> Oh, you mean like how that one dude said he bought the book, read it, and then balked about getting The Doors movie (even though I said up front that there’d be other materials to get besides the book)?

No: I mean you, not other people. You need to take responsibility. Switching the focus to other people is a copout, and I suspect that, deep down, you realize that.

> [@](#):
>
> Imagine how you and these other “people” are going to feel when one day the shit hits the fan and the horror of things is known …

If you’re correct, then I will feel furious at you for your coyness in this thread. You are so wrapped up in leading us down your primrose path, in the face of such an important message, that you refuse to compromise. If you’re correct, then you’re dooming everyone out of some sort of egotistical game that you’re playing. If you’re correct, then you need to be saying to us, “Look, folks, I’ll do anything: just tell me the format in which I should give you the evidence!”

If you’re incorrect, of course, then continuing to play this coy game won’t hurt anyone but yourself.

Daniel

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/125 "2005-10-10T04:32:19Z")

</div>

> [@GrahamWellington](#):
>
> And did you know that of all the professional groups, shrinks have the highest suicide rate? I’d say that’s pretty telling!

If you keep going, the mods on this board will surpass that rate by mid-week.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GrahamWellington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/54ee81/32.png) [@GrahamWellington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrahamWellington)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/126 "2005-10-10T04:32:42Z")

</div>

Danial, my brother, frame as clearly and concisely what _exactly_ it is you want for me to answer/do, okay?

And, too, if I do a good job in meeting your demands, then how will it benefit my cause?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/127 "2005-10-10T05:39:46Z")

</div>

Well, according to another poster, the Second Coming is a gay teenager (well, he’s probably in his early 20s by now) with a heart condition. Or is it his partner who has the heart condition? Anyway, how old are you, and are you heir to a large fortune? If not, then one of you will have to step aside.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/128 "2005-10-10T11:43:14Z")

</div>

> [@GrahamWellington](#):
>
> Danial, my brother, frame as clearly and concisely what _exactly_ it is you want for me to answer/do, okay?
> 
> And, too, if I do a good job in meeting your demands, then how will it benefit my cause?

What would I like you to do? Two things:

1. Lay out all the evidence you have in the most persuasive manner you can, right away. By “most persuasive manner” I don’t mean the manner that would persuade you: I mean that, having observed our demands, the manner that would persuade us. No “Listen to this section and tell me what you hear”: you need to say, “In this scene, Jim Morrison says, ‘Satan likes HoHos!’” You would also do well to anticipate logical objections to the theories you build and counter those before they’re even raised. You would also do well to knock it off with the insults.
2. Answer my question: if you are incorrect, despite all your certainty that you’re not, what would the implications for your own health be, and what would you need to do to take care of yourself? And either tell us that you’re not openminded, or tell us what criteria evidence must meet in order to convince you that you’re mistaken.

Daniel

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GrahamWellington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/54ee81/32.png) [@GrahamWellington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrahamWellington)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/129 "2005-10-10T14:02:18Z")

</div>

> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#):
>
> What would I like you to do? Two things:
> 
> 1. Lay out all the evidence you have in the most persuasive manner you can, right away. By “most persuasive manner” I don’t mean the manner that would persuade you: I mean that, having observed our demands, \<---- Lol. The only thing I’ve “observed” has been inconsistency going back to mapcase first saying he wanted material and then changing it to proof after I asked that Michelle Remembers be read from cover to cover.
> 
> the manner that would persuade us. \<—You say this, and yet look at how you thanked me when I supplied a link to a 71-yr-old nun being stabbed to death, proving that there really is something to all of this satanist stuff. (And the article included many other women saying they had their own weird experiences with those hooded creeps, so you can’t shoot back with “nothing has been proven because it’s all still under investigation” business. If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck…).
> 
> No “Listen to this section and tell me what you hear”: \<---- Why on earth would you knock this method of getting to the truth? Do you think in a court of law the judge would prefer your way of making your case, i.e. just blabbing away with nothing to support anything you say, or my way of actually seeing with one’s own eyes and hearing with one’s own ears while integrating it with relevent comments throughout the proceeding? Admit it; it’s a no brainer!
> 
> you need to say, “In this scene, Jim Morrison says, ‘Satan likes HoHos!’” You would also do well to anticipate logical objections to the theories you build \<----It’s almost laughable that you would say such a thing in view of the fact that it’s been me that’s been logical and consistant throughout this tread, not you people.
> 
> and counter those before they’re even raised. You would also do well to knock it off with the insults.  
> \<---- Ah, let’s see here … yeah, calling you people clowns and goofballs is way worse than you people impugning my sanity. Sure.
> 
> 1. Answer my question: if you are incorrect, despite all your certainty that you’re not, what would the implications for your own health be, and what would you need to do to take care of yourself? \<----But I’m not incorrect. The evidence/proof that you people refuse to look at (because it would require too much effort for you to leave the house and get the materials) backs me up 1000%!!!
> 
> And either tell us that you’re not openminded, or tell us what criteria evidence must meet in order to convince you that you’re mistaken. \<----I don’t understand this, sorry.
> 
> You know, for all the time and effort you put into bickering with me, you could have had your eyes opened to some VERY disturbing truth by now. And while I don’t wish to insult you, I must say that even though you had mods and many others supporting you in our little running argument here, you still have done a very poor job of making your points or making any sense.
> 
> Didn’t you say you’re a 4.0 student and won some awards for debating or something? (When I was in school, I never got anything better than a “c” in hard subjects. I guess it just goes to show the grading disparity that exists throughout the country, no?)
> 
> Daniel

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/130 "2005-10-10T14:10:52Z")

</div>

> [@GrahamWellington](#):
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Fnord?

Seriously…that’s the second time you’ve responded to someone with a row of x’es. What does that mean?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/131 "2005-10-10T14:16:10Z")

</div>

> [@GrahamWellington](#):
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Could you please work on your quoting? You can separate the post using [quote] [/quote], while letting your comments stand out. Like this:

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> What would I like you to do? Two things:
> 
> 1. Lay out all the evidence you have in the most persuasive manner you can, right away. By “most persuasive manner” I don’t mean the manner that would persuade you: I mean that, having observed our demands,

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<---- Lol. The only thing I’ve “observed” has been inconsistency going back to mapcase first saying he wanted material and then changing it to proof after I asked that Michelle Remembers be read from cover to cover.

And now I post my reply, comments, or smart-ass remark. The remainder is broken out as a public service.

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> the manner that would persuade us.

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<—You say this, and yet look at how you thanked me when I supplied a link to a 71-yr-old nun being stabbed to death, proving that there really is something to all of this satanist stuff. (And the article included many other women saying they had their own weird experiences with those hooded creeps, so you can’t shoot back with “nothing has been proven because it’s all still under investigation” business. If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck…).

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> No “Listen to this section and tell me what you hear”:

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<---- Why on earth would you knock this method of getting to the truth? Do you think in a court of law the judge would prefer your way of making your case, i.e. just blabbing away with nothing to support anything you say, or my way of actually seeing with one’s own eyes and hearing with one’s own ears while integrating it with relevent comments throughout the proceeding? Admit it; it’s a no brainer!

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> you need to say, “In this scene, Jim Morrison says, ‘Satan likes HoHos!’” You would also do well to anticipate logical objections to the theories you build

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<----It’s almost laughable that you would say such a thing in view of the fact that it’s been me that’s been logical and consistant throughout this tread, not you people.

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> and counter those before they’re even raised. You would also do well to knock it off with the insults.

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<---- Ah, let’s see here … yeah, calling you people clowns and goofballs is way worse than you people impugning my sanity. Sure.

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> 1. Answer my question: if you are incorrect, despite all your certainty that you’re not, what would the implications for your own health be, and what would you need to do to take care of yourself?

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<----But I’m not incorrect. The evidence/proof that you people refuse to look at (because it would require too much effort for you to leave the house and get the materials) backs me up 1000%!!!

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> And either tell us that you’re not openminded, or tell us what criteria evidence must meet in order to convince you that you’re mistaken.

> [@GW](#):
>
> \<----I don’t understand this, sorry.
> 
> You know, for all the time and effort you put into bickering with me, you could have had your eyes opened to some VERY disturbing truth by now. And while I don’t wish to insult you, I must say that even though you had mods and many others supporting you in our little running argument here, you still have done a very poor job of making your points or making any sense.
> 
> Didn’t you say you’re a 4.0 student and won some awards for debating or something? (When I was in school, I never got anything better than a “c” in hard subjects. I guess it just goes to show the grading disparity that exists throughout the country, no?)

> [@LHoD](#):
>
> Daniel

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/132 "2005-10-10T14:31:01Z")

</div>

\*\* GrahamWellington\*\*, I have no idea what you mean by quoting entire posts and then placing a row of Xs as a response, but it is both rude and unproductive (as well as a waste of server space). Do not do this again.

[/Moderator Mode]

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/133 "2005-10-10T14:34:28Z")

</div>

> [@This Year's Model](#):
>
> Could you please work on your quoting? You can separate the post using [quote] [/quote], while letting your comments stand out…

Or, in other words, **Graham,** _preview_ is your friend.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GrahamWellington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/54ee81/32.png) [@GrahamWellington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrahamWellington)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/134 "2005-10-10T14:37:47Z")

</div>

> [@jayjay](#):
>
> Fnord?
> 
> Seriously…that’s the second time you’ve responded to someone with a row of x’es. What does that mean?

When I finished my business and hit “submit,” the icon came back and said that my post was two characters too few for it to post. Sooo I just held the x key down for a bit to fix the problem.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/135 "2005-10-10T14:43:04Z")

</div>

> [@Graham](#):
>
> And do any of you (whiners) remember too that I said it would be required that my INSTRUCTIONS BE FOLLOWED TO THE LETTER?

What an extraordinary requirement. [/confused]. Why can’t your factual claims, whatever they are, simply be held to a generally reasonable interpretation as in every other thread on this forum (or indeed in daily life)? It sounds for all the world like you’re setting up a condition which pre-emptively forbids examination of a logical or interpretive step which you know to be a little shaky, rather like a stage magician saying “My trick only works if you close your eyes exactly when I tell you”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/136 "2005-10-10T14:43:05Z")

</div>

> [@GrahamWellington](#):
>
> When I finished my business and hit “submit,” the icon came back and said that my post was two characters too few for it to post. Sooo I just held the x key down for a bit to fix the problem.

That was because you included your replies inside what you were quoting. It didn’t count any of that as a post.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/137 "2005-10-10T14:53:03Z")

</div>

> [@GrahamWellington](#):
>
> Why on earth would you knock this method of getting to the truth? Do you think in a court of law the judge would prefer your way of making your case, i.e. just blabbing away with nothing to support anything you say, or my way of actually seeing with one’s own eyes and hearing with one’s own ears while integrating it with relevent comments throughout the proceeding? Admit it; it’s a no brainer!

This actually gives me the answer which I’ve dreaded but expected. You really aren’t interested in communicating: you are interested in controlling. You are incapable of conceiving of the possibility that you are wrong: you are not openminded.

I am not interested in being controlled by you, and I no longer think there’s the slightest chance that you can be introspective on this manner. In this respect, I neither see that you are willing to blow my mind if you’re correct, or that you are willing to be helped if you are incorrect.

I am saddened by this, but so it goes. There’s nothing I can do.  
Daniel

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/138 "2005-10-10T14:57:00Z")

</div>

> [@This Year's Model](#):
>
> That was because you included your replies inside what you were quoting. It didn’t count any of that as a post.

That explains why I missed all of it…I gloss over quoted sections automatically if they’re longer than a paragraph. On going back and reading his replies, I have to say that it read better the first time…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GrahamWellington](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/54ee81/32.png) [@GrahamWellington](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrahamWellington)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/139 "2005-10-10T15:00:13Z")

</div>

> [@This Year's Model](#):
>
> That was because you included your replies inside what you were quoting. It didn’t count any of that as a post.

Well, okay. Thanks.

I still don’t understand how you were able to do what you did. But to be honest, it does seem almost a little too coincidental that when I write my most devastating post to dorkness, all of the sudden I start hearing about all these bad things I’m doing … despite the fact that I’ve been doing 'em for a while now. And as a matter of fact, even dorkness said that he liked how I broke down and replied to the comments the way I do.

Anyway, I’m a team player and will try my best to learn the ropes around here. Please be patient.

By the way, did you marvel at how well I handled him this last time?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\
**Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571/140 "2005-10-10T15:07:27Z")

</div>

[ul][li]5 year-old Michelle was allegedly “ritually” abused by a woman from Vancouver.[/li][li]Three quotes from The Doors movie, one being “It’s happening to you and to me!”, implicate Jim Morrison in a Satanic conspiracy involving millions.[/ul]It would seem that Graham seeks to convince us of this Satanic conspiracy.[/li]  
My suggestion, **Graham** , is to click the link (“Listen to …” ) under the photo of the priest on [this page](http://www.nyas.org/snc/readersReport.asp?articleId=25&page=1), and tell me what happens in the little toolshed.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571.md?page=6)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-are-your-thoughts-regarding-carlos-castaneda/324571.md?page=8)