Inner power and superhuman abilities

The searchable database is here

Search the Register


I would hope someone who professes to help the blind see, wouldn't of been lying online........

 

Searching for "Merpati", the database said their was no org registered under that name.

Are you registered under a different name, or are you registered on a different register?

Please explain?

 

I don't get what you mean. Our organisation in australia is incorporate, because the type of activities is for sports, education and culture. We are not receiving any fund from other institution or government. We just started and everything funded by my own.

Yes in Merpati Putih Indonesia is a member of IPSI. This is the organisation that arranges the competition pencak silat in Indonesia, ASEAN and Asia competition.

In Indonesia we have Merpati Putih MMA, where the students there train with other arts as well.

To attract young generation in Jakarta, we also started to setup a model similar like MMA named as Silat Bebas (free style silat), but the rules a little bit different with MMA to adopt pencak silat styles.

 

Wow, this is just too much I think. I don't have to say anything.

 

Maybe my English is not too clear for you. We are following 3 types of competition. First is IPSI, this is only for pencak silat competition. Second, MP MMA is for MMA competition. The third is Silat Bebas for all arts in Indonesia, this is just started to adopt pencak silat style

 

Have you any video?

Do they allow outside fighters in?

 

How about apologising for charging up to $100 per month for a self defence course that will leave people raped and/or bleeding out in an ally?

 

So your not a registered non profit organisation?
Which you've previously claimed to be?

 

Yes we are a non-profit organisation incorporation, it is the type for education, sports, culture and community type activities., but not a registered charity.

The registered charity in Australia is under Charitable Incorporated Organisation. It is also the Inc. entity.

 

I have to close my comments here, it is already out of topic.

This is not a neutral forum, in my opinion.

 

That's why I asked if you were on a different register...

I take it English isn't your first language?

 

A student in one of the clubs I train at has a saying I pretty much copied from her when training: Once is coincidence.

Because something works once, that doesn't mean anything at all.
Mundane example: I did two or three very nice Harai-Goshi (a Judo-throw); that doesn't mean I can do them, because I'm seriously bad at those. And totally screwed it up during my grading.

Now you managed to blow a candle out once by doing nothing, and it never came to you, that it might have been a coincidence and nothing at all to do with your "playing"?

So, let me get this straight: If something doesn't work, because there is more lying involved than anything, it doesn't prove that it's a lie, but it only shows that you can't do it?

I might agree if it were about a correctly done punching or kicking technique, but with something ridiculous I would say it proves more that the claim was... well, ridiculous.

You mean the instructor has an easier time saying: "Well, it's your fault, because you're doing it wrong"?
Instead of admitting that the system might be scam?

Seriously?
I skimmed it a bit and what I saw made me go "Riiiiiiight" and I couldn't keep going.

Which was the reason for above mentioned reaction.

Or maybe, because you want your art to be taken seriously?

You claim the hocus pocus is real and not a scam. If that were to be true, you should try to convince people of that - but not by avoiding and ignoring questions or by being offended of critical feedback.

Instead you already laid out lots of ways to "explain" why it doesn't work under pressure or in a more neutral environment.
Seriously, if that's part of an explanation, before it even got there, something went seriously wrong.

And that leads to to following:

As soon as an MA claims to help people defend themselves it should be doing that.
Fooling people into believing that but in the end leaving them more vulnerable than before is not only disgusting but also dangerous.

Than why not doing that?

And yet you claim it was due to your training.
See the problem?

 

I'm telling you right now if you can do that under experimental conditions the science community would pay you millions.