this is why religion is dangerous
i would say ban it but that would be counter productive
im hoping religions just fizzle out on their own gradually as people become more aware of there ability to live their lives without needing to subscribe to something that gives them false hope and moronic ideas
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:12 am
by christophera
mks wrote:Annunaki fuckery preceeded by Sirian experiments.
s'wot i'm sayin
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:14 am
by Pada
Ignorance is not caused by religion.
Oh and i'll take the piss out of ridiculous christian literature as much as anyone, just last week I was laughing at this Jahovas witness pamphlet my mate got given, but I don't hold nay grudges against the people who wrote or believe it.
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:16 am
by christophera
R U SIRIUS, BLACK?
SUPER SIRIUS
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:09 am
by upstateface
Yakub created white people by a process of grafting the "black germ" to a "white germ" from the original black population of the world. It took 600 years for Yakub and his successors to fully whiten his creations. This was achieved under a despotic regime on the island of Patmos.The reasons for Yakub's actions are unclear.
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:15 am
by christophera
The following is from a letter wrote to a correspondent who requested views on Yakub and the making of the White Devil.
I believe the History of Mr. Yakub to be wholly spiritual and symbolic, using physical White people to represent mental functions and states of mind. This is not unprecedented. The ancient Egyptian Kings were often depicted "smiting" foreign barbarians who were symbols of the wild passions in the Egyptian people, not actual physical conquests.
White people have been called "cave men" and "cavey." but actually It refers to underground (subconscious) influences that operate in the dark (Unknown, Mysterious).
Yakub represents the left hemisphere of the brain and its related mental activities.
Yakub was a "big headed scientist," meaning he symbolized extreme left-brained arrogance, vanity and unrelenting pride.
Now the alleged making of the devil... it refers to the ego supplanting the former rule or predominance of the right brain hemisphere.
The individual "I" and sense of separateness is a grafted "add on to the original human consciousness. This puny little ego -- created by maya, separate-ness and "tricknology" (i.e. "Yakub) is the real devil (enemy, adversary) and is symbolized by the White man because of our past
Yakub is the modern version of the trickster gods that have been depicted throughout the world: Coyote, Set, Satan, Sebek, Hanuman, Mescalito, Kweku Ansi, etc. They are usually stylised as canines, so
They emphasized how the White Mind. (This is all symbolic wisdom)
i'm quite impressed they even address the issue, tbh
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:04 am
by christophera
when you have more of the pieces, you understand that the stranger ones are worth pondering/investigating further before dismissing
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:06 am
by christophera
futurama is addressing the same thing
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:48 pm
by kingGhost
-dubson- wrote:
kingGhost wrote:And there's a lot of Christian experts who think the story of Adam and Eve is more metaphor than history.
No disrespect. But when people start to say "Oh this is just a metaphor for that, thats why it doesn't actually make much sense." it just seems a bit desperate to justify things which science/evolution can prove are false now (IMO). Not surprising considering how old the Bible is.
No disrespect taken since you seem to have missed the point of my post altogether.
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:04 pm
by -dubson-
Was talking generally about people talking about the Bible being a metaphor ect. I just didnt want the post to come across that I was having a go at your belief's.
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:42 pm
by rbnc
south3rn wrote:i'd just like to remind everyone that at one point, it was scientific "fact" that the earth was flat.
No it wasn't. Even if it was so, the view that the world was flat was based on assumptions rather than empirical scientific evidence, assumptions based on no evidence isn't science. The overwhelming evidence for evolution comes from so many fields that is irrefutable.
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:14 pm
by soulshynchyld
awww... this page makes me miss sirius!
I feel like the mods killed off a part of my soul.
anyways.. read the book of enoch, this book should have been included in the bible as it was common knowledge in the days before the roman takeover of the faith of paul, from the faith of jesus, which was the faith of john the baptist!
read it & ya will know that we come from the heavens/outer space.
but... were we genetic creations or alien halfbreeds?
what happened to all the little people that roamed the earth b4 us?
why is god such a tnuc? why did rome hide from the people that jesus had kids?
soulshynchyld wrote:what happened to all the little people that roamed the earth b4 us?
Read 'Fingerprint Of The Gods', compelling evidence for lost civilisations exist, e.g. the Sphinx is likely to be 20,000 years old rather than the previously thought time period of 10,000 years due to the erosion patterns present.
why is god such a tnuc? why did rome hide from the people that jesus had kids?
To prevent a hereditary monarchy and allowing Christianity to be headed by a symbolic figure that the Romans could make a controllable mouthpiece for people to follow instead, i.e. the Pope? Roman Catholicism is the only non-hereditary monarchy in Europe and seems pretty un-Christian to me, God didn't vest power in divine rulers.
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:12 pm
by belalala
Re: Creationist 'science' classroom
Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:53 pm
by sonar
test recordings wrote:
Read 'Fingerprint Of The Gods', compelling evidence for lost civilisations exist, e.g. the Sphinx is likely to be 20,000 years old rather than the previously thought time period of 10,000 years due to the erosion patterns present.
I watched a load of his videos and decided to do some digging and it *seems* that the geologist/erosion expert whatever is pretty much the only one to agree with Hancock that the patterns were/weren't (can't remember) caused by water. I was pretty gutted as i love the idea of it. I hate not knowing who to believe when presented with two credible theories.
