Mephis

Joined

• started 3 topics
• posted 956 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Mephis

• 
  14

  Germany start a comission against child-abuse

  by crazy_flickering_light in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  if you live in germany, please share your story.

  if not, please spread this link.

  i'm so sorry, this is my first topic.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Shared elsewhere. Thanks CFL.
• 
  17

  Want to have your entire concept of 'history, time and civilization' challenged?

  by kairos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  please spend a couple hours and get yourself familiar with the ancient structures at petra.. we live in a civilization of deceit.it's becoming harder to sort fact from fiction as i keep looking behind all of the curtains..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Did you want me to debunk it segment by segment? I thought you said you'd spent hours researching this?

  We have a fair idea of how good ancient people were with latitude and longitude. What your man there wants us to believe is that the Egyptians could accurately place a pyramid to a particular latitude which then reflects the speed of light.

  Let's see how accurate the Egyptians were.

  First off let's ditch the speed of light thing. That's in metres. The Egyptians used a cubit. I'm not sure what the speed of light is in cubits but it ain't going to match the google map latitude. Not sure they used a decimal point either, but happy to be corrected if they did.

  Best I can get for comparison of latitude is the old system of degrees and minutes. If we use Ptolemy's Geography just as an example. He's consistently about 20 minutes out with his latitude and he's building on many centuries of work after the Great Pyramid had been built. Great Pyramid is 29 degrees and 58 minutes. So twenty minutes from that is 29 degrees and 38 minutes. Which would mean even if they'd used this number (which they clearly couldn't have been doing), they'd have put the Pyramid in a different place.

  So, yeah, an example of trying very hard to fit a number to another number and proclaim 'I've discovered something' but in the process abandoning common sense, historical accuracy and any claim to having a critically valid method of formulating a theory.

  Was that what you were looking for?
• 
  17

  Want to have your entire concept of 'history, time and civilization' challenged?

  by kairos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  please spend a couple hours and get yourself familiar with the ancient structures at petra.. we live in a civilization of deceit.it's becoming harder to sort fact from fiction as i keep looking behind all of the curtains..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  I'm suggesting the math is accurate.
  Watch the 12:00 segment on Giza:

  I got to the part where he listed the grandmasters of Sion before dissolving into laughter. The chap doing it is either pranking people or is an idiot. The Sion stuff was a hoax (Helpful hint: Pentard + Pelat Affair for when Pentard admitted he'd fabricated it all). Just let that sink in. The guy who is doing this is citing a hoax as fact. I think we can spot why Dan Brown was listed as opening the doors of his perception in the earlier video you quoted. But let's get on.

  He then starts to discuss the measurements of the great pyramid. Greaves did in fact think that the (English) foot was the unit of measurement used by the ancient Egyptians. Sadly Greaves was wrong as 5 seconds research would show. Does this perturb our intrepid seeker of truth on Youtube? Oh no, Greaves was right. Why? Because clearly when data doesn't fit theory, data is wrong. (Helpful hint: look up 'cubit')

  So I'm 2 minutes into a 12 minute video. Both points so far made are wrong. Another 10 minutes of this is 10 minutes too long. Sorry for not watching it all. As I said, I have read most of the source material he listed. That's guff too.

  Sorry Kairos, it's tosh. Apply some critical thinking to this, do a little research yourself to see if what this chap is saying is actually correct or whether he's pulling it out of his posterior based on the pseudo-histories he's dug up from the 'Atlantis and other crackpot theories' section of the internet.
• 
  17

  Want to have your entire concept of 'history, time and civilization' challenged?

  by kairos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  please spend a couple hours and get yourself familiar with the ancient structures at petra.. we live in a civilization of deceit.it's becoming harder to sort fact from fiction as i keep looking behind all of the curtains..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  I'm suggesting that video is as much fun and as accurate as anything else which could plausibly appear on Ancient Aliens, yeah.

  I also don't think the measurements of any pyramid give the date for the second coming of Christ, but few people write books about that these days. Aliens, secret societies and the people of Atlantis are much more fashionable.
• 
  17

  Want to have your entire concept of 'history, time and civilization' challenged?

  by kairos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  please spend a couple hours and get yourself familiar with the ancient structures at petra.. we live in a civilization of deceit.it's becoming harder to sort fact from fiction as i keep looking behind all of the curtains..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  That's not giving new information a chance.

  Garbage in gets garbage out Kairos. If someone is basing a theory on the nonsense that guy was citing as parts of his evidence, then there's nothing to be profitably gained from the videos for me. I've read many of his 'sources' - mainly for amusement. The best in the genre, which he sadly seems to have missed out, remains Rat Scabies and the Holy Grail. It includes DIY instructions for building an ark of the covenant too.
• 
  17

  Want to have your entire concept of 'history, time and civilization' challenged?

  by kairos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  please spend a couple hours and get yourself familiar with the ancient structures at petra.. we live in a civilization of deceit.it's becoming harder to sort fact from fiction as i keep looking behind all of the curtains..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  I got to alignment of sacred sites before I giggled and turned it off.

  

  Serious point - it's nonsense. If Dan Brown is his portal to enlightenment then he really should read more books which are supported by historical evidence rather than the fantasy nonsense churned out about Orion and pyramids and secret historical fraternities building the same shapes.
• 
  88

  What was there before the Big Bang?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpuhj98vjoa.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hik8hj0_t9q.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Thanks for answering prologos. Just find it interesting. Different ways to see things I guess. I'm agnostic about it really, though I suspect there will be a non-intelligent design answer to be found at some stage. Personally would want more answers - if intelligence is required for creation, who created God? etc. Also the 'why' of things which doesn't vanish into 'mysterious ways' as an attempt to explain.

  But, in any case, scientific laws don't need divine origin. They just are as they are. Because if they weren't, the universe would be different as we perceive it.
• 
  88

  What was there before the Big Bang?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpuhj98vjoa.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hik8hj0_t9q.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  well, The laws by which nature works are embodied in the universe and it's movements, It is the human genius that is able to express them in Mathematics, a logic that allows us to extrapolate into further understanding of the workings of the universe. It probably can be said that these are among the eternal truth, because some are almost self evident like the inverse square radiation/ gravity laws, inverse fourth power cooling law, Pie, --The source of other constants are still being investigated, the mass/ gravity mystery, Higgs, gravitons, space tensioning. so.
  to me, the deist creator is as useless as my parents. I would not be here without them, and they not without nature and it's possible maker, even if he appears to be fully finished with his work, just as my parents are with my pro-creation event. and I am not quoting Nietzsche here.

  Genuine question, but if that's your god, aren't you a bit peeved he doesn't care enough to check in? Or is he not irrelevant to all intents and purposes in your life? Other than a theoretical construct which exists to provide an explanation?

  I don't see the 'genius' really, other than in testing and establishing detail. Things are because they are not something else. It's perfectly plausible that in other universes things are different. That the 'constants' only hold for this particular universe. Not sure how that would speak of intelligence or a god or, indeed, eternal truths.
• 
  88

  What was there before the Big Bang?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpuhj98vjoa.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hik8hj0_t9q.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  So you have an absent God who you're claiming made laws which are instead invented by humans to describe how our universe works. It's kind of irrelevant even invoking him as part of a discussion then.
• 
  88

  What was there before the Big Bang?

  by Brokeback Watchtower in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpuhj98vjoa.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hik8hj0_t9q.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Laws are a product of intelligence

  Scientific laws describe how things are and how they interact. In fact, scientific laws actually require God not existing because if he did then the laws stop being laws. They're only laws if they work all the time, and God playing about with them kind of messes with that. You can't reliably plan how to send a rocket to the moon if you don't know whether or not God's going to change how gravity works because he's feeling grumpy that day.

  So scientific laws say nothing about requiring an intelligence to make them. They just are, in the same way that 2+2 making 4 just 'is'.