silly quad city message board...

[cagey_vet]

http://www.kungfu4u.com./disc3_toc.htm

i posted a few questions to the board and instead
of being answered, the posts were deleted.
i understand editorial intent... but this was ridiculous.
i leveled straightforward questions and was pretty
complimentary, but never got answers to my
intelligent and well thought-out questions. oh well.
anyone else familiar with this guy?

[fungdoeduk]

The guy is a jerk and a loudmouth. anything he sees that he does not like, he deletes. Likes to hear the sound of his own voice.

He is as useless as titz on a wolf. He is a know it all. He started out learning the bogus Shaolin Do, and then some TKD, and then he fell in with another made up martial art method created by Phil Starr.

The guy also seems to think he knows everything there is to know about martial arts, and he also worships that lil h0m0 ped0 magician who loves to play hide the winkie with lil boys.

[count]

Why don't you just post your questions over here? MOST of us are at least honest practitioners and not just trolls with an agenda :rolleyes:

[Polaris]

.

[KenGullette]

Hi Guys,
I don't delete posts from my message board when people disagree with me. Anyone who thinks this way is mistaken. That's why, if you look at the board, you'll see a LOT of people who disagree with me. The opinions I expressed about chi and empty force have resulted in a lot of vicious and very immature posts from people who can't stand the thought of someone rocking the qigong establishment. If we were back in the 60's these people would be saying "America Love It or Leave It."

Some people from my former kung fu system were beginning to smother the discussion board with posts. I asked them to stop because of some past history that has resulted in bad feelings. I didn't want my board to become political (my former system versus me). Another poster, who I respect a lot as a martial artist, used the discussion board to invite himself to my school to do a demonstration of his martial abilities without asking me, and the school isn't open during the hours he was telling everyone he was coming. It wasn't appropriate and for a couple of days I wasn't sure what his motives were. I still respect him and still want to work out with him, but his system and workout style are VERY different from mine. I tried to get the message across that if you believe in chi, and think you use it in your techniques, more power to you. But if you say you can move me without touching me, or knock me out without touching me -- you should prove it. Very simple. Very honest. Very straightforward.

The conversations were turning dark. I deleted several posts -- including accidentally some posts that were not objectionable but it happened (sorry) -- and I tried to get the discussion back onto an intellectual ground and not a political one. If yours was deleted, and it was a straightforward question, then ask it again. I made that clear on the board. I believe that coming here and attacking me like this means that someone has a different agenda.

Any of you are welcome to kungfu4u.com. Or, you can stay here. I am saying some things that are shocking people who haven't heard an internal artist stand up and say "Chi is outdated, bogus science." Unfortunately, I'm not the one who can't stand to hear other opinions. They are welcome on my board. I've been slammed mercilessly for challenging phonies like Richard Mooney and Dr. Wong. I've been attacked in personal emails by people who threaten to come and fight me (silly attitude for adults but heck, they know where and when I teach and my door is open).

I feel like a whistle blower at a big tobacco company. Maybe you guys don't have the intellectual capacity to realize when a debate has merit and scientific validity. Judging by the posts on this page, that might be the case.

And by the way, I don't have an inflated opinion of my own skill. But I study hard and work hard and I'm getting better all the time. I have a very long way to go. I've been lied to in the past by teachers, as many of us have, and I've been led down the wrong road because I trusted someone with a "master" title. I question authority now. One thing I am certain of is the fact that nothing related to chi has ever been scientifically proven, and the empty force is a lie. And if you don't have the personal honesty to admit that, you belong over here, with a magazine that will print science fiction like the Mooney article.

I have the guts to stand behind my opinions. That's why I use my real name on these messages. Anyone can hide behind a pseudonym.

Ken Gullette

[cagey_vet]

ken wrote:
I feel like a whistle blower at a big tobacco company. Maybe you guys don't have the intellectual capacity to realize when a debate has merit and scientific validity. Judging by the posts on this page, that might be the case.


to which -i- write:
its easy to sling mud when it surrounds one... :)
i hope you didnt mean me. i assume you did. thats fine. you would do ourself a favor to go back through what i have posted in these hallowed forums and you will be proven wrong concerning my ability to realize when a debate has merit and scientific validity. my posts are nothing but intelligent and well thought out. at any point did i at all say anything about believing in moving people with chi alone? no, so please dont be so offensive 'right off the get go', dude. in fact, if you had actually gone through my past posts, you would have seen my own criticizing of several well-known teachers with regards to these astonishing chi claims.

as per your own board:
i was merely leading up to a particular series of occurences whereby there was a dubious joining of forces with james randi, and then another guy pulls his message board from his website.

i was curious as to the common thread there... then it hit me, but i will keep my suppositions to myself out of respect for all involved. its just a little odd thats all. an internal guy dispelling chi theories, a little randi one place, a little randi another place...then a prominent internal guy pulls a discussion board after some more randi-ness elsewhere...

one question:
are you working with james randi closely to rid the world of the Chi Menace?

something is up in kung fu land.

besides all that other stuff, are you aware of the different definitions of the word 'chi'? when taken into consideration, they all contributed to my overall knowledge of kinetics and how different areas of our body work together to vector in to transmit a PHYSICAL shock or a highly propulsive or repulsive movement. i believe -that- is the fundamental principle of jing that perhaps you may not necessarily overlook, but its vastly overshadowed by your insistence upon disproving the easily disprovable. now at this point in time, knowing how you feel about chi fakery (and i believe as you do concerning Chi Moving Things but for different reasons, by the way) i am sure that many of us would like to see if you can readily expound upon the principles of alignment, core rotation, costal compression and expansion, intention.... etc, etc.
its easy to b*tch about obvious BS in the arts, but provide your own dissertation to forward the arts in a scholarly fashion and perhaps you wouldnt catch so much flack for being fairly obstreperous in your online missives. you have been teaching a long time, ken. surely you have something more to offer than the obvious 'you cant move me without touching me'. so what advanced line of thought can you provide us? what do all of your years of teaching tell you, and how would you further your own art to someone who was an empty sponge? what do you have left to explore in your art? give us an enlightened alternative besides 'having fun', and yes, i know professional wrestling isnt real either ;)

your friend
cagey vet


p.s. i dont use my real name online (at least in this more public forum) because i have had 2 stalkers in the past 5 years. it caused a lot of problems in my personal life so...
1 was ok. i dealt with that. then 2... i am seeing a pattern here and i was concerned for the welfare of those i could not readily protect. so since #2 i tend to be careful about giving that info out. thats what the law enforcement professionals told me to do, so i take that advice.
*shrug*
at least i am not hiding behind a name like 'bjjK1CkzA$$', right? i suppose it could be worse, ken :P

[KenGullette]

Cagey,
I was responding primarily to those who would use the word "troll" and other words that don't really express anything intelligent.

You have your opinions and that's fine. I used blunt wording regarding "chi" as in Traditional Chinese Medicine (and the ideas some people have of its use in martial arts) in order to rock the boat and get people to think in scientific terms rather than emotional terms. As a result, the debate has gotten very emotional. Like you, I've had people send me threatening emails over this subject. There are a lot of stupid people on the Internet.

There have been no independently verifiable scientific studies that show that chi exists as described in TCM. Since all these martial arts magazines report stories as if the miraculous use of chi healing, etc. is a daily occurrence, I decided to stand up and shout "Bull...!"

You have a good post here. Some of the posts on my discussion board are silly, as is the case on this board (the troll remark for one). But the core message is a valid one in the current discussion of chi.

Good luck to you.

[count]

Ken,

You wouldn't be refering to my above post and the use of the word "troll", would ya? If so, than you misunderstand. I was obviously refering to the person above mine who is a "troll" and "has an adgenda". Thought I made it clear with the roll eyes pointing up. :rolleyes: It was actually in defense of you.

I agree with you that some people have some warped ideas about what chi is and what it does. But I'm not interested in debate or discussion with you about it. Besides, anyone who thinks "chi is a bogus concept that is outdated", either doesn't understand it or hasn't had it explained to them. Your few years of experience to form your opinion doesn't impress me as much as the thousands of years of thought, study and yes, science that formed my opinion do. So why bother debating it?

I only entered this thread to suggest cagey-vet might get a wider variety of opinions from the membership here and should post his questions and see. That's the beauty of KFO's forums, The owners don't take it personal when even ignorant people post their opinions and seldom delete them. Even "a troll with an adgenda" can post here.:rolleyes:

PS: Count is not a pseudonym, it has been my nickname or fighting name for the past 25 years. Yes, even before there was an internet or screen names. Many people know me as count but if it is and issue for you, my name is Jeff. Feel free to repley and express your opinions.

[Justa Man]

wait...chi is outdated, chi doesn't exist? how in the world are you alive ken? explain with your scientifical thought, what the difference between a dead person and a living person. i've heard yang jwing ming asked a room full of doctors to do this and NONE could do it. there's your 'science' for you.
you open a discussion board but try to control what gets put on it. how utterly ridiculous. invite a bunch of people to a party and try to control the flow of conversation and see how many people wind up thinking your an @ss.
and if you happen to dig a little you'll find plenty-a-post worth your inflated intellect.

[cagey_vet]

have you ever watched the show Seinfeld?
are you like "The Maestro"? :)
i think his name is jeff too, haha!
j/k i thought that was funny...
good luck with your board.

[count]

I have seen the episode:D
I am not like the meastro. :mad:
My nickname was given to me by others, his was taken for himself. Screen names online are taken for aninimity. Mine is not. I understand why some would want to hide themselves on open public forums. :cool:

[cagey_vet]

while i have you here.... let me ask you something.
i have seen your ba gua postures from your page.
do you use those postures for fighting?

[count]

But if you want a serious answer, there are NO postures in any of the forms of my system that are not used for fighting. To be quite specific, we don't even learn a form until basics and applications are covered. There are so many variations for every posture or application so some may be harder to grasp from looking a picture of a posture, but the way we train is for martial arts and not for performance arts. So from my personal perspective and speaking from experience, these postures not only work against bagua but also against Boxing, Wrestling, Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Muay Thai or any other style. And before you ask, YES, I do spar against other styles at least weekly as part of my training. Sometimes I am bound by the rules of the specific school or system, but it doesn't stop me from trying things out.

Maybe this is a topic for another thread? I try to keep things topical. Or maybe I can stear it back to this topic. My website hasn't been updated for many, many years. Most of what you see there, I am just experimenting with before I design it into clients websites. I use my website for demonstrating certain applications but maybe I should update it. Those pictures are over 8 years old now.:(

[Scarletmantis]

Ask anyone who that guy in the red "Spidey" suit is and they'll tell you! Criminals beware, the Scarlet Mantis will get you!!:D

Actually, I feel pretty stupid calling myself that. How do you change your profile name on this new board anyhow? For the record, mine's Bodhi Richards.

[cagey_vet]

ok, you know people spend WAY too much time on KFO when other users quotes are in their .sig files! :D

[LaterthanNever]

Ive met Ken Gulette and I say say the following: One of his former students confided in me that he studied "internal arts" for a grand total of 3 years. Ive been to his school and he claims to "teach" Tai Chi, Hsing-I, and Pa qua. Anyone who has ever studied ANY of these three arts individually or collectively will tell you that there is no way to become proficient in all three styles in a matter of three years. Oh and Ken? For the billionth time..if you have not been paying attention?? Kung Fu(REAL kung fu) does not and HAS not ever used a belt system. Secondly(for the other readers of my post as well as Ken), Kens logic goes something like this:(since we have been touching upon Physics). If certain things in physics are impossible such as two masses occupying he same space, then gravity which is a well established principle of physics is ALSO false. It doesn't matter becacuse he will just shut his ears and mindlessly chant his dogma of "ALL" chi is false. Well Ken, noone is disputing that vaporizing at will or walking thru steel walls is false, but chi is related to Blood flow..no blood flow, no life son. No chi? No life. Secondy, you know very little about the scientific method. Science does NOT seek to prove ANYTHING! Science seeks to DISPROVE by eliminating error. Secondly, while a certian aspect of your logic is correct(moving people from a mile away with your mind being false)..the way you go about the REST of your conclusion(ie: ALL chi being false) is very weak. Please for the sake of your own credibility..go to a sifu such as Dr. Yang Jwing Ming(who has probably been studying and teaching Tai Chi as long as you have been past your prepubescent teen years) and introduce yourself and say "All Chi is false" and listen to what he has to say. He'll laugh at you!

[Laughing Cow]

Ken.

You say Chi is false and does not exist.

I doubt that you ever properly studied either qi-gong nor spend a reasonable amount of time doing Zhang Zhuang.

Cheers,

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by LaterthanNever
Ive met Ken Gulette and I say say the following: One of his former students confided in me that he studied "internal arts" for a grand total of 3 years. Ive been to his school and he claims to "teach" Tai Chi, Hsing-I, and Pa qua.

3yrs in my school you are most likely to still be training our 1st Road.
And that is in 1 style only.

Cheers.

[ZIM]

I used blunt wording regarding "chi" as in Traditional Chinese Medicine (and the ideas some people have of its use in martial arts) in order to rock the boat and get people to think in scientific terms rather than emotional terms. Getting away from emotional terms is ok, but TCM without chi is not, and can never be, Traditional or even Chinese. If you don't want to study it, then don't. All I see is straw men and spotlight grabbing, so far.

WRT which art? It was said Ken studies under Phil Starr... what is that? Yiliquan?

Cagey_vet: What's up in kung fu land, in your opinion? Do you really think it will have much impact?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Could it be fair to simply concede that Chi is energy.. in that context everyone wins.. Whether it be the energy that powers movement and alignment to such precision that the short concentrated bursts of energy (Chi) snapping the alignment into place and supercharging the muscles to fire so quickly and powerfully that the perceived result is "explosive power", or.. whether it is the more subtle connection to ALL things (again conceding that energy exists in (is) all things), the connection that permits thoughts (intents) to lead energy (Chi) through the well trained physical apparatus (muscle and bone) as it animates our movement of martial intent..

Here, we can look to physics for comfort in the emerging research of consciousness (thought/belief) and its direct effects on energy at the sub-atomic level.. it is in no way unlikely that we do not exchange "energies" with other beings, rather, it is most likely that we are interacting with our brothers and sisters on many levels outside the confines of the fleshy aspect of our existence.. further, it is not unlikely that someone someday will harness these subtle interactions through simple understanding and dedicated training, resulting in something akin to "Chi Blasts".. it's not impossible, and don't let those that can't accept the possibility disuade you from furthering your own experience.. There are those that would even extinguish the possibility, in favor of the security of their belief system.. (like warring religions).. You see, some people don't trust their own experiences, they need to be accepted by others so they submit proofs of measurements and academic models for the approval of others, denying their own sense of possibility in favor of the current structure of logic and reason..

Measure or quantify love, fear or compassion.. of course you can quantify the effect of love, etc.. but, there is a connection across time and space between two people that causes the effects.. the cause remains elusive to the measurement, but can we deny its existence.. On these matters such as Chi, whenever a "scientist" approaches the issue believing that it is invalid, the experience/observation is prejudiced and biased.. Further, it is lunacy to assume that our current technology and limited physical senses can report the complete experience of "being".. To deny thousands of years of experience and reporting of Chi and its effects on the basis non-verifiability is like the Ostrich sticking its head in the sand..

Aside from all that, Chi can live in both camps and keep its respect.. it is simply energy, energy that is utilized according to the beliefs of its "Being"... Heck, science can't define gravity, electricity, dark matter/energy, and quite a few other things it knows exists.. why all the fuss over Chi.. i find it odd that i can leave open the option for Chi (and that includes its non-existence as well), conceding we don't know it ALL yet.. while some others would simply determine the "correct" system and explain it to the rest of us..

Anyhow, thats my $0.02, no big deal.. Be well..

[ZIM]

Well, science, what the hey...

one link (http://coldcure.com/html/bcec.html)

two link (http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/airthred.html)

[red link, blue link...] ;)

Hey, TCB- look at those, maybe you'll like 'em. Any thoughts appreciated. :)

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Thanks for the links.. i think that points-out quite nicely how science and metaphysics are merging.. the links provide a window into the subtle nuances of energies and their relationships to our physical aspects.. although we can't yet measure or define the potential of the phenomenon observed in those links, we can easily see the potential for energy work at levels and modalities previously scoffed at by the logic and reason purists, even though the evidence is right under their noses (pun from link one).. The "force-field wall" in link 2 is particularly interesting.. Perhaps experiments and results like these will incite (insight ;) ) science to begin to consider the long histories of casual observations that have matured into workable systems of healthcare (ie: TCM, QiGong, etc..) as worthy of sincere investigation and funding.. not to mention so much other possibility from other belief systems..

I have no quarrel with science, only the blinders it wears.. Someday i sense that science and metaphysics will merge to the benefit of mankind.. they are just differing paths to the same goal, understanding..

Be well..

[ZIM]

Actually, I think that the apparatus in link 2 is nice... I'm kinda thinkking about building one just to play with. Possible experiments: untrained in qiqong versus trained- any difference? After intercourse: any difference? Focused or scattered yi: any difference? etc. Haven't decided anything yet...

...but you'll notice that Mr. "Amazing" would never use something rational like that as a test, nope.... ;) :p

[jun_erh]

the qigong establishment