Thursday, January 24, 2008
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
JZ Knight is an Asshole
Mar 24, 2007 8:41 PM
Ishmael:Amanda "The Shankster" Shanks mentioned you lent her "What the Bleep Do We Know!?" I feel like it is my moral obligation to inform you that that movie is a bunch of bull shit. The movie is based on teachings of this woman JZ Knight. Knight says that on February the seventh 1977, an entity called Ramtha, The Enlightened One, appeared to her and her husband in the kitchen of her Tacoma, Washington trailer. Ramtha was supposed to have defeated the Atlanteans and then to have led an army of over 2.5 million across the continents, conquering 2/3 of the known world. Two of the three directors of the film are admitted students of Ramtha's School of Enlightenment. In Knight vs. Knight, 1992-1995, Jeff Knight her husband alleged that he lost years of his life by postponing modern medical treatment for his HIV infection, due to advice from his wife that Ramtha could heal him — he died before he could appeal the court's decision against him.
JZ Knight is interviewed frequently in the movie and all the big-wigs involved in the making of the film are members of Ramtha's School of Enlightenment.
The movie is also full of pseudoscience fiction. Quantum mechanics deals with small systems, and quantum effects (especially Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) are applicable only to matter on the scale of the de Broglie Wavelength. The movie exploits these effects by falsely implying that they (especially a wavefunction associated with an object and probability calculations concerning this object) are applicable to everyday objects like basketballs, humans, or fountains. And that water crystal stuff is complete BS http:
I mean don't get me wrong, it doesn't bother me if people make up their own crazy religion based on fictional history (like the mormons), and I don't care if these people exploit people for money (like all religions) it just bothers me when they try to twist and use science to back them up.
Mar 25, 2007 5:02 PM
ovulayia:hey thanks for the heads up, I appreciate you clearing up bias I wasn't aware of. I think the thing I liked most about the movie wasn't entirely it's spiritual to science connections but more so it's very simple explanations of quarks, chaos, and the laws on the subatomic level of our universe. Naturally the examples they give are non-applicable to everyday objects, I think the point was just that, to make an example to a public audience that was easier to comprehend than trying to explain more complex examples. It isn’t right though to dishonor the original principles of what they are trying to represent. Some of it I admit was pretty cheesy, and there were parts of it I didn't like at all but I appreciate the determination of some people willing to try and find universal truths that are evident in both the spiritual and scientific communities, but not at the expense of misguiding the public with tainted information.
Mar 27, 2007 8:39 PM
Ishmael:Well I also admire search for the truth (though I don't believe in spirituality). It just really pisses me off when people try to deceive me. If you want simple explanations of the actual science you can check out this or this
Monday, January 01, 2007
Santa Claus is an Asshole
Five Reasons:
1. The Creepiness of Santa
He sees me when I'm sleeping? And knows when I am awake? An obese omniscient elf living in an arctic desert just sounds more like an effective horror movie plot than family fun. The mystical antagonist sneaking into your house in the middle of the night through your chimney to steal all of your money and magically turn it into more shit you don't need.
2. Basis of Christmas
Christmas is based on a variety of pagan holidays and virtually all of the traditional practices stem from these pagan roots. One of these holidays was the birthday of Mithras, celebrated on December 25. Mithras was a pagan god who had tweleve apostles, told his followers to commune with him by drinking wine and eating pieces of bread, and ascended to heaven. Furthermore, biblical evidence suggests Christ (if he existed and the story told is accurate) was born in the spring time. Therefore Christmas is either a bastardization of pagan holidays by the Church in an attempt to suppress these pagan holidays or the result of christans assimilating pagan traditions. In any event, christmas has little to do with christ and has been further bastardized by the consumerist society of the united states.
3. Commercialism
The myth and tradition of Santa has been transformed in The United States into rational for an orgy of consumerism. The day after Christmas: throw away the tree, mound trash in the can, and revel in the unneeded products.
4. Santa Claus is a Jewish/New Age/United Nations Conspiracy
As the bible believers website says:
"You ever noticed how easy it is to transform "Satan" from "Santa"? Just move the "n" to the end. And presto! "Satan" appears. . . Hmmm….An internet Google search on "Satan Claus" [not Santa Claus – but SATAN Claus] found over 1,700 hits! Obviously, there are many that tie the two together.The rearranging of letters (called anagrams) to hide secret names or words has long been practiced in the occult. Is "Claus" another anagram for "Lucas"? It’s no secret "Lucas" and "Lucis" is a new-age "code word" for "Lucifer". The Alice Bailey founded new age, occult publishing company was originally named "Lucifer Publishing Company" but in 1924 the name was cleverly changed to "Lucis Trust". By the way, the Lucifer worshipping Lucis Trust is a major player in the works of the United Nations (formerly located in the United Nations building) but now located on "prime-time" 1200 Wall Street."and finally: 'Claus' sounds a lot like 'claws'."
5. The Bible
Even the bible is against Christmas and its elf overlord.
Jeremiah 10:1-4
10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
10:4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
sources:
http://www.truthbeknown.com/Christmas
http://www.endchristmas.com/
http://www.biblebelievers.com
1. The Creepiness of Santa
He sees me when I'm sleeping? And knows when I am awake? An obese omniscient elf living in an arctic desert just sounds more like an effective horror movie plot than family fun. The mystical antagonist sneaking into your house in the middle of the night through your chimney to steal all of your money and magically turn it into more shit you don't need.
2. Basis of Christmas
Christmas is based on a variety of pagan holidays and virtually all of the traditional practices stem from these pagan roots. One of these holidays was the birthday of Mithras, celebrated on December 25. Mithras was a pagan god who had tweleve apostles, told his followers to commune with him by drinking wine and eating pieces of bread, and ascended to heaven. Furthermore, biblical evidence suggests Christ (if he existed and the story told is accurate) was born in the spring time. Therefore Christmas is either a bastardization of pagan holidays by the Church in an attempt to suppress these pagan holidays or the result of christans assimilating pagan traditions. In any event, christmas has little to do with christ and has been further bastardized by the consumerist society of the united states.
3. Commercialism
The myth and tradition of Santa has been transformed in The United States into rational for an orgy of consumerism. The day after Christmas: throw away the tree, mound trash in the can, and revel in the unneeded products.
4. Santa Claus is a Jewish/New Age/United Nations Conspiracy
As the bible believers website says:
"You ever noticed how easy it is to transform "Satan" from "Santa"? Just move the "n" to the end. And presto! "Satan" appears. . . Hmmm….An internet Google search on "Satan Claus" [not Santa Claus – but SATAN Claus] found over 1,700 hits! Obviously, there are many that tie the two together.The rearranging of letters (called anagrams) to hide secret names or words has long been practiced in the occult. Is "Claus" another anagram for "Lucas"? It’s no secret "Lucas" and "Lucis" is a new-age "code word" for "Lucifer". The Alice Bailey founded new age, occult publishing company was originally named "Lucifer Publishing Company" but in 1924 the name was cleverly changed to "Lucis Trust". By the way, the Lucifer worshipping Lucis Trust is a major player in the works of the United Nations (formerly located in the United Nations building) but now located on "prime-time" 1200 Wall Street."and finally: 'Claus' sounds a lot like 'claws'."
5. The Bible
Even the bible is against Christmas and its elf overlord.
Jeremiah 10:1-4
10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
10:4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
sources:
http://www.truthbeknown.com/Christmas
http://www.endchristmas.com/
http://www.biblebelievers.com
Monday, December 12, 2005
John Seigenthaler is an asshole.
The biggest story on the internet: some guy posted a false Wikipedia article about John Seigenthaler. Some Joe Schmoe, Brian Chase, wrote that this Seigenthaler fellow was for a brief period suspected in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. And that's simply not true. However, considering the number of JFK conspiracy theorists and their average mental stability Seigenthaler has probably been suspected by many a wack job.
Who is this John Seigenthaler you might ask? Well I didn't know either so I decided to look him up on Wikipedia. Apparently he is an "American journalist, writer, and political figure." The biggest thing that he has ever done seems to have been being the assistant to attorney general Robert F. Kennedy in 1960.
How could this inaccurate post possibly go unnoticed? How could no one have noticed the false information on this highly well known and influential character? Luckily Seigenthaler was looking himself up on Wikipeida and noticed this horrible, horrible libel. In response, Seigenthaler wrote this ridiculous article for USA Today starting off saying, "This is a highly personal story about Internet character assassination. It could be your story." Those, my friend, are the words of an asshole.
If it was my story it would go something like this: "well I was bored one day. I had already played several games of solitaire, masturbated twice already, and my lunch break wasn't for another thirty minutes so I went to Wikipedia and looked myself up to see what would come up. I then saw that someone had written this faux article about me. The article said I ate shit for a living, stuff like that. I thought it was pretty funny, but I decided that I didn't really want any young kids who really really want to do school papers on me getting false information. So I moved my mouse over to the top of the page and clicked 'edit this page' and changed it around."
Since this whole controversy is about how Wikipedia could give false facts I decided that I should probably check the Wikipedia article so I don't look like a dumb-ass writing this entry. I didn't want somebody emailing me telling me that John Seigenthaler is actually a porno actor or something. So I went to MSN Encarta and typed in "Seigenthaler." The only thing that popped up? "No results were found for your search in Encarta."
Huh that's weird. Doesn't Seigenthaler's son work at MSNBC? So I then went to Encyclopedia Britannica: "Sorry, we were unable to find results for your search."
It is okay to be offended by untrue statements written about you. But John Seigenthaler Sr. is an asshole. He himself noticed the false material in Wikipeida, one of the few places that actually acknowledges his existence. But instead of just changing the information on the website, which is the premise of Wikipeida, he sat there and watched it like a vengeful asshole. He sat there for 132 days and no one changed it. Is this because no one gives a shit about Seigenthaler? Then again instead of just changing the article, he writes another article crying to the world about his character assassinatation.
Libel is usually defined as untrue written material that does harm to the person it is written about. Well the man who wrote this article about Seigenthaler as a joke has lost his job. So who's the real victim here? I say that Brian Chase was not necessarily in the right for writing false information about Seigenthaler, but it is not Wikipedia's fault that the article was not changed for such a long period of time, it's Seigenthaler's.
Who is this John Seigenthaler you might ask? Well I didn't know either so I decided to look him up on Wikipedia. Apparently he is an "American journalist, writer, and political figure." The biggest thing that he has ever done seems to have been being the assistant to attorney general Robert F. Kennedy in 1960.
How could this inaccurate post possibly go unnoticed? How could no one have noticed the false information on this highly well known and influential character? Luckily Seigenthaler was looking himself up on Wikipeida and noticed this horrible, horrible libel. In response, Seigenthaler wrote this ridiculous article for USA Today starting off saying, "This is a highly personal story about Internet character assassination. It could be your story." Those, my friend, are the words of an asshole.
If it was my story it would go something like this: "well I was bored one day. I had already played several games of solitaire, masturbated twice already, and my lunch break wasn't for another thirty minutes so I went to Wikipedia and looked myself up to see what would come up. I then saw that someone had written this faux article about me. The article said I ate shit for a living, stuff like that. I thought it was pretty funny, but I decided that I didn't really want any young kids who really really want to do school papers on me getting false information. So I moved my mouse over to the top of the page and clicked 'edit this page' and changed it around."
Since this whole controversy is about how Wikipedia could give false facts I decided that I should probably check the Wikipedia article so I don't look like a dumb-ass writing this entry. I didn't want somebody emailing me telling me that John Seigenthaler is actually a porno actor or something. So I went to MSN Encarta and typed in "Seigenthaler." The only thing that popped up? "No results were found for your search in Encarta."
Huh that's weird. Doesn't Seigenthaler's son work at MSNBC? So I then went to Encyclopedia Britannica: "Sorry, we were unable to find results for your search."
It is okay to be offended by untrue statements written about you. But John Seigenthaler Sr. is an asshole. He himself noticed the false material in Wikipeida, one of the few places that actually acknowledges his existence. But instead of just changing the information on the website, which is the premise of Wikipeida, he sat there and watched it like a vengeful asshole. He sat there for 132 days and no one changed it. Is this because no one gives a shit about Seigenthaler? Then again instead of just changing the article, he writes another article crying to the world about his character assassinatation.
Libel is usually defined as untrue written material that does harm to the person it is written about. Well the man who wrote this article about Seigenthaler as a joke has lost his job. So who's the real victim here? I say that Brian Chase was not necessarily in the right for writing false information about Seigenthaler, but it is not Wikipedia's fault that the article was not changed for such a long period of time, it's Seigenthaler's.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)