Cte

Imagine you could levitate the balls an inch (so they'll stay in the same position relative to your body) while somebody moved the table away from you 4 1/2", and then lowered the balls carefully back onto the table without moving their positions. Now you and the balls are in exactly the new table position you described, except it's more clear (or should be) that your position relative to the balls has not changed.

So why is "your alignment not on"?

Ok, so someone please humor me (since you won't seem to answer PJ) and, even if you have done so previously and I missed it, answer that question; because it's the one that keeps me from taking this seriously and from "going to the table"...
 
If you step in front of a speeding bus it won't hurt you in any way.

Of course you're going to try it before disagreeing, aren't you?

pj
chgo

Irrelevant analogy, but I'll play along.

As a child we are hit by many things and they hurt, so yes we know that being hit by a bus will hurt.

Nice try.
 
If you step in front of a speeding bus it won't hurt you in any way.

Of course you're going to try it before disagreeing, aren't you?

pj
chgo

There is history with cte and Patrick Johnson going back 10 years or longer. He has always claimed the system is nonsense and pretty much claimed to be the most knowledgeable person on the subject pretty much. Now an instructional dvd came out and he was unable to figure out how to do it. So i believe he is embarrassed and has taken the fight up again with those that were able to figure it out. lol
 
jamesroberts:
to all the people that have posted in this thread and are skeptical of cte and its benefits, HAVE YOU TRIED IT?
imwithstupid:
Not a single one.

And they still pretend to know things
.
Me:
If you step in front of a speeding bus it won't hurt you in any way.

Of course you're going to try it before disagreeing, aren't you?
imwithstupid:
As a child we are hit by many things and they hurt, so yes we know that being hit by a bus will hurt.
If somebody claims he can make a rectangle with three sides do you need to try it before disagreeing? That's literally how obvious the holes in CTE's simple geometry are - unless you're incapable of visualizing simple geometry.

The CTE users on AzB are simply incapable of visualizing simple geometry - and of following simple logic.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
So no "facts" have actually "come out"?

pj
chgo
champ2107:
i will let your future posts decide this, i will see what direction your posts go. I will be watching
You and your annoying, aggressive stupidity have finally earned you an exclusive position in my bit bin. Bye.

pj
chgo
 
If somebody claims he can make a rectangle with three sides do you need to try it before disagreeing? That's literally how obvious the holes in CTE's simple geometry are - unless you're incapable of visualizing simple geometry.

The CTE users on AzB are simply incapable of visualizing simple geometry - and of following simple logic.

pj
chgo

Once again. Irrelevant analogy. You wouldn't know anything about rectangles unless you learn it.

How about this for following simple logic...you can't claim to know anything about a subject unless you go learn it or study it. This an aiming system for making pool shots. Gee I wonder how one would know if it works or not? Oh yea, they try it on a pool table. Seems LOGICAL enough.

Go learn it and try it. Then come at me with retarded analogies.

I can do this all day.
 
Back
Top