Apocalypse

nyarlothothep

I'm typing this message from space, Im currently onboard the international space station (dont ask...), all I can say is that Im working hard to defeat me, the time renegade from the future by pumping iron, reading up on quantum theory, studying taoist philosophy, drinking green tea, eating lentils and practicing chuk kun do. As my final parting I think this song best summarizes my feelings on the whole issue

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BhsTmiK7Q2M

Mahatma coat

??? wrote: »

Sorry what does Maya have to with the bible? Or are you taking the piss? I'm totally confused!!!

possibly you missed the Many civilisations bit

I used the Bible as is something most of us are familiar with.

did you understand my point at all??

Call Me Jimmy

DarkJager wrote: »

I think the whole idea of an Apocalypse with demons and other suitably scary sh1t is a load of bollix tbh. 2012 will come and go just like every other year the world was predicted to end, nothing to see here, move along.

ORLY???

Profiler

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I'm typing this message from space, Im currently onboard the international space station (dont ask...), all I can say is that Im working hard to defeat me, the time renegade from the future by pumping iron, reading up on quantum theory, studying taoist philosophy, drinking green tea, eating lentils and practicing chuk kun do. As my final parting I think this song best summarizes my feelings on the whole issue

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BhsTmiK7Q2M

Wibble...
Wibble...
Wibble...

At least you are not alone... I found some friends for you

spadder

Best of luck Narlo for the future!
It’s been entertaining, keep in touch.

Dave!

Best thread ever! Funny and informative!

Sunn

nyarlothothep wrote: »

The Mayan calendar predicts the end of the world in 2012. The Western economy is in decline. China is emerging as a world superpower. Muslims are pissed. Global society has arrived. Do you think theres some catastrophic war around the corner?

Are ghosts time travellers from the future who pretend their ghosts so they don't violate the temporal prime directive?

the mayans said one age would end on december 2012... nothing about the end of the world. true they never went on from that point but why does the end need to be catastrophic?

kryogen

nyarlothothep wrote: »

The Mayan calendar predicts the end of the world in 2012.

Are ghosts time travellers from the future who pretend their ghosts so they don't violate the temporal prime directive?

Bit in bold..Fail. End of credibility, the Mayan calender predicts no such thing, it says its the end of an age. not the world. an age. Piscies to be exact

but the second part, after following the first, excellent, wp sir.....

Do you troll other forums?? ill always look out for you!

Jimkel

ooohhh scarey maan, that must be when we go up a frequency and planet Nuberu collides with our planet and wakes us all up to the Lizard people who control the Earth. We will fight a great spiritual war with the Reptoids etc etc cough cough what a load of BLLX

Hactually the Mayan Calender does not end in 2012 It just rolls over to the next sequence, in fact the Mayan calander contains Characters which represent many thousands of years into our future (Why would they detail these characters if they believed the world was gonna end before they got to use them?). It's Y2K all over again, If I hear one more 2012 waffle my heads gonna explode. let me tell ya'll a little something about human nature EVERY GENERATION OF MANKIND BELIEVES AT ONE POINT THAT THEY ARE LIVING IN THE END DAYS. Please don't base predictions on a misinterpreted version of an ancient nations beliefs, a Nation that failed to predict it's own sudden demise. Try go study some actual Mayan history before you preach please, it makes my head hurt when I hear this sh1t.

I think this forum needs some new rules:

1: no mention of fictional reptoids unles your a qualified herpetologist
2: no mention of shifting frequencys unless you understand quantum mechanics
3: No Mention of Mayan "Prophecy" unless you are a historian or scholer in the field of Native American history.
4:Youtube videos are not "evidence"
5: David Icke is not Right!
6: Tarence McKenna is a drug fiend and unpopular psudeoscientist
sorry been meaning to lash out at this mindset for a while.

Mahatma coat

right thats it

I'm makin a frequency shiftin Lizzzzzzzzard Sig


David Icke can be right sometimes.
theres evidence on youtube


and of course a whole set of Sigs about historical Prophecies.


Cop on to yerself lad, if you dont like the way we do things round here then there are plenty of other forums where you can go and pat yerself on the back for having never questioned the shoite yer being fed

Celticfire

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I know this because I wrote a letter to the future asking for an xbox 360 when they'll be dirt cheap and I got one from a temporal renegade who wants to bring down the project.

I'd have got the xbox 660 myself, much better console..... :rolleyes:

Jimkel

Mahatma coat wrote: »

right thats it

I'm makin a frequency shiftin Lizzzzzzzzard Sig


David Icke can be right sometimes.
theres evidence on youtube


and of course a whole set of Sigs about historical Prophecies.


Cop on to yerself lad, if you dont like the way we do things round here then there are plenty of other forums where you can go and pat yerself on the back for having never questioned the shoite yer being fed

My dear lad I question everything, just because I don't agree with 2012 does not mean I work for the proverbial "Man". There are enough real issues in the world that people should be focusing on without people trying to convince others that some hacks prophecies are going to come through.Tired of idiots focusing on alarmist theorys usually stemming from some sort of Generlised anxiety disorder. WHen it comes down to it people like you lot are not ready for the thruth, that maybe, just maybe human greed and lust for power is the main cause of all societies misgivings, and this all stems from fear. If you believe in this sh1te then you subscribe to fear and scaremongering tactics. Don't you see that by allowing alarmism into your life you are cutting yourself off from any hope, and resigning yourself to fear when instead seeking real experience and changing things for the better, you wallow in the gutter and spread mistrust, paronia, and help to proliferate the very things that these kind of conspiracy theories protest...You help to keep intellegent people from making any kind of positive change to the world.

So what do you self rightious illuminated ones really do?? as far as I can see you just spread lies on the internet, and occasionally one of you writes a book and makes allot of money off of poeples fear. Thats a real conspiracy, with yourself., Before you ask what right do I have to say these things to you maybe you should read your previous post and see how you judged me. Tit for Tat my dear lemming, Tit for Tat. If you really care about this world then go to a bank machine, withdraw 100 euro and give it to a homeless person today.OH NO it's so much easier to FEEL rightious in front of a monitor isn't it, then to actually DO something Positive. You better go I think I hear your xbox calling you.

MasterValmont

Jimkel wrote: »

My dear lad I question everything, just because I don't agree with 2012 does not mean I work for the proverbial "Man". There are enough real issues in the world that people should be focusing on without people trying to convince others that some hacks prophecies are going to come through.Tired of idiots focusing on alarmist theorys usually stemming from some sort of Generlised anxiety disorder. WHen it comes down to it people like you lot are not ready for the thruth, that maybe, just maybe human greed and lust for power is the main cause of all societies misgivings, and this all stems from fear. If you believe in this sh1te then you subscribe to fear and scaremongering tactics. Don't you see that by allowing alarmism into your life you are cutting yourself off from any hope, and resigning yourself to fear when instead seeking real experience and changing things for the better, you wallow in the gutter and spread mistrust, paronia, and help to proliferate the very things that these kind of conspiracy theories protest...You help to keep intellegent people from making any kind of positive change to the world.

So what do you self rightious illuminated ones really do?? as far as I can see you just spread lies on the internet, and occasionally one of you writes a book and makes allot of money off of poeples fear. Thats a real conspiracy, with yourself., Before you ask what right do I have to say these things to you maybe you should read your previous post and see how you judged me. Tit for Tat my dear lemming, Tit for Tat. If you really care about this world then go to a bank machine, withdraw 100 euro and give it to a homeless person today.OH NO it's so much easier to FEEL rightious in front of a monitor isn't it, then to actually DO something Positive. You better go I think I hear your xbox calling you.

Excellent point about the conspiracy theory books. For the conspiracy theorists out there who ask how can people just dismiss these claims, the reason is because they are unsubstantiated. If people were bothered to go and do some actual research rather than watching videos on youtube they would see that some of the foremost conspiracy theories with regards to secret societies come from one source which was incorrect but has been quoted ever since. For instance, the supposed link between the Freemasons and Luciferianism was "established" by a quote from Albert Pike who was a Grand Master Freemason but the quote itself was a hoax perpetrated by Gabriel Jogand-Pages aka Léo Taxil who was kicked out of the Masons for bad behaviour and who subsequently admitted that the "quotation" was a hoax. There are more than enough negative things in the world to worry about without grasping at fantastical straws. And as far as the most powerful and richest men in the world influencing how the world develops...who in God's name else is going to do it?

Kernel

MasterValmont wrote: »

Excellent point about the conspiracy theory books. For the conspiracy theorists out there who ask how can people just dismiss these claims, the reason is because they are unsubstantiated. If people were bothered to go and do some actual research rather than watching videos on youtube they would see that some of the foremost conspiracy theories with regards to secret societies come from one source which was incorrect but has been quoted ever since. For instance, the supposed link between the Freemasons and Luciferianism was "established" by a quote from Albert Pike who was a Grand Master Freemason but the quote itself was a hoax perpetrated by Gabriel Jogand-Pages aka Léo Taxil who was kicked out of the Masons for bad behaviour and who subsequently admitted that the "quotation" was a hoax. There are more than enough negative things in the world to worry about without grasping at fantastical straws. And as far as the most powerful and richest men in the world influencing how the world develops...who in God's name else is going to do it?

I would say that you are generalising with regard to 'conspiracy' books. Jim Marrs wrote a book called 'Rule by Secrecy' which contains reams of well researched quotes and information on secret societies. The problem with "the most powerful and richest men in the world influencing how the world develops" is that these men are largely unelected industrialists and capitalists who do not have the needs of the masses at heart - instead, as Jimkel warns; they have greed and a lust for power.

Mahatma coat

So

Books that agree with your hypothesis are well researched works

Books that disagree with your world view are all pure hackery and lies.

Kernel

Mahatma coat wrote: »

So

Books that agree with your hypothesis are well researched works

Books that disagree with your world view are all pure hackery and lies.

How the heck do you arrive at that conclusion? Well researched books are well researched books. It's pretty obvious once you read them and delve into the bibliography!

bonkey

Kernel wrote: »

How the heck do you arrive at that conclusion? Well researched books are well researched books. It's pretty obvious once you read them and delve into the bibliography!

It would be pretty obvious if you verified the claims independantly of the bibliography.

Verifying that the author has correctly represented his sources shows that he's not incompetent. Showing that he has chosen reliable and trustworthy sources requires reading beyond the bibliography.

Mahatma coat

Kernel wrote: »

How the heck do you arrive at that conclusion? Well researched books are well researched books. It's pretty obvious once you read them and delve into the bibliography!

that comment was directed at Jimkel not you

Kernel

bonkey wrote: »

It would be pretty obvious if you verified the claims independantly of the bibliography.

Verifying that the author has correctly represented his sources shows that he's not incompetent. Showing that he has chosen reliable and trustworthy sources requires reading beyond the bibliography.

So before you believe the words of Carl Sagan, you would read every book on physics, as well as a host of other topics?

It's not feasible to do this Bonkey, you need to take the author at his word in terms of research performed unless the author gives a reason to doubt. I'm reading War of the World by Ferguson at the moment, imagine if I had to read every book listed in that bibliography and check every source? It would take me years.

bonkey

Kernel wrote: »

So before you believe the words of Carl Sagan, you would read every book on physics, as well as a host of other topics?

No, but I would read the work of other cosmologists, specifically works other than those which Sagan may have referenced himself.

It's not feasible to do this Bonkey, you need to take the author at his word in terms of research performed unless the author gives a reason to doubt.

Ignoring your view on the feasability of finding at least one non-referenced work by which to obtain a second opinion, I'll accept that its reasonable to take the author at his word up until someone else provides an alternate source with a differing viewpoint.

At that stage, it is not reasonable to continue to take the author at their word, nor to use their cited bibliography as verification.

Lets not lose sight of where we came from...

You argued that delving into the blbliography shows if a book is well-researched or not. I made the distinction between accurate interpretation of source material and quality of source material. You are now (apparently) arguing that I'm asking too much by even suggesting that its possible to make this distinction.

I'm reading War of the World by Ferguson at the moment, imagine if I had to read every book listed in that bibliography and check every source? It would take me years.

You said that delving into the bibliography shows if something is well researched or not, not me. I never suggested you do so, nor that you should check every source.