Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dionysios

Pages: < Back  1 ... 11 12 [13]
241
Science & Alternative Science / The Creation Museum
« on: March 01, 2015, 10:45:20 PM »
Stopped by the Creation Museum in Petersburg, KY just outside Cincinnati a couple of days ago. It was what I expected which was not bad. It's a scientific oriented relic of Protestant faith which was more widespread 100 years ago. The Institute For Creation Research and Bible Science Association (now renamed Creation Moments) have been around since the 1950's and 1960's, but they do not have museums of this size.

Ken Ham's organization is more well funded and more mainstream although not as robust nor as tight knit as Gerhardus Bouw's geocentric Association For Biblical Astronomy which is also creationist. Funny how the heliocentric creationists shun and scorn geocentrism somewhat similar to how many evolutionists shun them - albeit not quite so badly. What's funny and absurd is how they try to claim the Bible supports heliocentrism which arguments say more about them than anything else. I knew this stubborn aspect about them going in and avoided astronomical subjects because I went because of those subjects with which I agree with them - not their conformity with NASA and modern astronomy.

To be fair, I am not certain that the Bible Science Association routinely stigmatizes people with beliefs even more traditional than their own like Henry Morris and Ken Ham's followers have done. And the good practical effect of that is you can have civilized, interesting conversations about certain important or controversial topics with people whom with you may in whole or part disagree.

242
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« on: February 28, 2015, 12:26:21 AM »
Good.

243
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« on: February 27, 2015, 04:15:47 PM »
We have agreed for Daniel to have ownership of the home page and library, but we've also made sure that regular members will have an easy way of direct contribution. From my point of view, the only risk is that Daniel might pull the plug on something, but honestly I doubt that'd ever happen.

Will you and Parsifal lose ultimate ownership of this forum in case of a split?
If that means that Daniel will have ownership of the forum, then you are gaining nothing and the whole deal is very foolish for you.
Daniel is slick. Don't base the merger on his good will.

I knew two brothers who each owned 24% of Johnny Becnel Farms. Johnny Becnel himself owned 52%. (That tells you something right there.)
This business owned a set of buildings, tractors, and orange groves. It also rented a lot of farm land for a pittance.
Ultimately, the brothers split from Becnel and Johnny Becnel Farms dissolved. It turned out that Johnny Becnel Farms legally only rented the farm land. The tractors, buildings, and orange groves were actually personal property of Johnny Becnel himself which is different from Johnny Becnel Farms. These two brothers had nothing to show for all of their years of work, and they seem very much like you and Parsifal down the road.

244
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« on: February 27, 2015, 03:42:35 AM »
Forgive me as I surely do hope your forum does benefit in the long run.

I considered what you have written, and I reckon you are correct as long as you or Parsifal are the key administrators with ultimate control over the forum rather than Daniel in case of any future breakup. That is vital.

Daniel has made literature available online.
I'll give him that much, but I do think it is foolish for you to throw away the library which you already have and not also retain an independent duplicate of his on your own server. That is my suggestion to you.

Daniel's society has always been worthless.
If being the leader of that strokes his ego, then by all means, let him have it.

Although Chiang kai Shek was a fascist who oppressed all of China, the Chinese communists united with this monster to fight the Japanese, their common enemy during World War II. When the war was over and the Japanese were defeated, the communists were much stronger than before the war while Chiang Kai Shek's position had become much weaker.

As long as you retain control over the forum and this is strengthened by receiving his database, then I can see your wisdom in joining forces with him.


245
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« on: February 26, 2015, 07:15:56 AM »
Everything he remarked there is accurate according to my experience, and I've been using that forum since 2005.

Be that as it may, everything Thork said about Daniel will apply to this forum if it unites with him.
This website evidently has sincere people and is apparently better moderated and thus has had far more potential than is possible for Daniel which makes it unfortunate that the dog returns to its vomit.

That reunion will tend only to make me shy away from serious commitment to this forum.

Best of luck.

246
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« on: February 24, 2015, 05:21:23 AM »
  • The Society
    • President/VP - Daniel will be the President of the reunited society. Lord Wilmore will be the Vice President. These positions are at Daniel's discretion.
      • The Zetetic Council - A democratically-elected body of 5 members will be electable yearly. They will be officially recognised as such within the Society and will therefore be expected to act as its legitimate representatives. Their exact remit and structure of the council will be established post-reunification (and pre-election) through a general agreement of all members of the Society and forum regulars (unless they deem that such a body is unnecessary). In principle, they will be a decision-making organ of the society wherever possible (e.g. not in charge of membership and merchandise - see below). Daniel will retain veto power over the ZC's decisions.
So the council has to be elected but the president doesn't? And nor does his Vice? How does that work?

If we have a despot in charge, call him that. Presidents are elected. Also, we've had Daniel for 10 years and he does very little. Even the United States gets rid of a president after 8 years. Lets have a change. Why are we stuck with Daniel? He does nothing, contributes nothing, doesn't know anything about flat earth history or the theories ... why are we stuck with him forever and ever? Fuck him. We don't need him.


  • Merchandise - This remains within Daniel's remit and will likely operate as it does currently on theflatearthsociety.org, under the condition that it will be performed at no profit. After reunification, we may investigate alternative pathways (e.g. Zazzle/CafePress), should there be significant demand for such a development.
So the most flaky, unreliable and perpetually absent member of the society is the person we put in charge of distributing goods when people give REAL money for them? Come on. This is ridiculous. It has always been a great source of embarrassment how people can give money to the society and Daniel trousers it for 4 months and no one can get hold of him. Give the job to someone else.

There. Not so bad. Only disliked two of the suggestions so we aren't a million miles away.

The thing is, Daniel hasn't moved a jot. He still wants to be the President, still wants control over the main site and all financial control. He wants it all, and wants everyone else to just run it all for him whilst he does very little other than get in the way. Why are we so desperate to put up with all his crap again? If you like his way of doing things, post over there. If you don't, stay here. Why are our choices being limited? I don't want Daniel in charge of a site that I like using. He will not change, he will not compromise, he is just a domain squatter. We don't need him or Wilmore. Neither contribute anything any more. Its time they handed over the reigns. They won't. Leave them to rot over there.

The problem with Daniel is that he isn't accountable to anyone, and he doesn't give a shit about anyone else's opinions. Lets not put him in that position of power again. He abuses it.[/list][/list]

I couldn't agree more. 

247
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Re: Lets agree on a chapter format
« on: February 24, 2015, 05:06:13 AM »
I have suggestions for the basic layout of the conspiracy section.

The earlier history of globularism and its development could possibly be controversial. 
In the case of any fundamental differences of opinion, perhaps both alternatives can be described as Tom had suggested about another aspect.

General suggestion for the main sections of the conspiracy volume:

I. Earliest history of globularism up to Claudius Ptolemy
II. Decline of globularism in the early Christian, late Roman era and its vestiges in eastern societies
III. Resurgence of globularism Through Islamic Revival of Greek Sciences
IV. Adoption of Islamic Sciences by medieval europe
V. Imposition of globular doctrine worldwide via european colonialism
This section will have separate chapters chronicling this history for each country such as the Jesuits who discarded the flat earth Zhou Bi when they became the official astronomers for the Court of China in the 1600's. 

VI. I presume that the history of the conspiracy from Copernicus onwards including Apollo missions, et cetera will constitute the latter parts of the conspiracy volume.
(Listing alternative explanations could also be done here for any other issues with fundamentally different viewpoints such as satellites.)

Note:  I also presume that the history of Rowbotham's movement over the last 175 years will primarily be covered in the flat earth history section of the first volume. 

248
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Volume I, Section 2: Flat Earth History
« on: February 24, 2015, 04:02:08 AM »
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. ANCIENT COSMOLOGIES

Introductory

Common Characteristics
    a. Flat Earth
    b. Cosmic Mountain
    c. Flood 

A. ASIATIC

- Hebrew
Israelite Cosmos
History

- Babylonian
Babylonian Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Arab
Arab Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Persian
Persian Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Hindu
Hindu Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Jain
Jain Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Chinese
Chinese Cosmos
History
Footnotes

B. EUROPEAN

- Greek
Greek Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Latin
Latin Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Ireland
Erie Cosmos
History

- Scandinavia
Norse Cosmos
History
Footnotes

C. AFRICAN 

- Egyptian
Egyptian Cosmos
History
Footnotes

D. OCEANUS

Alaska 
Aleutian Cosmos
History
Footnotes

Nunavut
Inuit Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Hawaii
Hawaiian Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Tahiti
Tahitian Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Maya
Mayan Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Inca
Incan Cosmos
History
Footnotes

- Aztec
Nahuan Cosmos
History
Footnotes 

E. CHRISTIAN

Christian Cosmos
History 
Footnotes 

F. SAMUEL ROWBOTHAM 

‘Plane Truth: A History of the Flat Earth Movement’
By Robert Schadewald
http://www.cantab.net/users/michael.behrend/ebooks/PlaneTruth/pages/index.html

‘Flat Earth: The History of an Infamous Idea’
By Christine Garwood
https://books.google.com/books/about/Flat_Earth.html?id=7uRuzP1RydAC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button

‘Flat Earth Clues: End of the World’
By Mark Sargent
https://www.amazon.com/Flat-Earth-Clues-End-World/dp/1086579003/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?dchild=1&qid=1592092414&refinements=p_27%3AMark+Sargent&s=books&sr=1-2&text=Mark+Sargent

------------------------------------------
Note: This post is a work in progress and will be repeatedly updated.

249
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched
« on: February 23, 2015, 07:07:01 AM »
'The Grand Illusion' (1937)

A marvelous political classic, it indicts western democracies who think themselves so different from National Socialism. Goebbels called it the worst movie ever made.

250
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Re: Lets agree on a chapter format
« on: February 19, 2015, 12:07:06 AM »
Each volume now needs tentative tables of contents.
After these attain a sufficient degree of completeness, the tables of contents can perhaps be maintained online with alteration only possible by moderators or administrators.

After appreciable work proceeds on this and the kernel of a book begins to form, I suggest a responsible and reliable point man be given custody of the whole thing as to prevent changes or mishaps with the text which some put so much energy into. I recommend Tom Bishop. I also suggest all key persons retaining fairly up to date back-ups of the book as it develops in their own personal databases.

I will try to submit a table of contents for part two of volume one (on the history of fet) within the next two weeks if I can find the time. I'll open a new thread when I do this.

For volume one, I will probably leave the introduction and zetetic vs theoretic sections to someone else if interested. I will likely eventually submit a very basic rough draft for the zetetic vs. theoretic section of which I do have definite ideas about Euclid vs the drawbacks of the modern scientific method, but the final product might be interesting after pertinent additions and an editing by others.

251
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Ask a Jew anything.
« on: February 18, 2015, 09:49:12 AM »
Do you think that Gregory Peck's 1947 movie 'Gentlemen's Agreement' applies to attitudes and trends in the United States these days?

252
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Re: Lets agree on a chapter format
« on: February 18, 2015, 09:27:46 AM »
All this being said, it might be a good idea to liberally use Rowbotham's words where appropriate. There are a lot of places where we'd just be rewriting what he said, and I think we can just use the original ENaG

I agree with this to such an extent that I propose that the 1873 edition of 'Earth Not a Globe' would be sufficient by itself to constitute Part One of Volume 3. All other theoretical material combined would fall into either Part Two of Volume 3 or Volume 4.

253
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Re: Lets agree on a chapter format
« on: February 18, 2015, 07:59:44 AM »
Suggestions for the Introductory Volume 1:

Flat earth writers, both ancient and modern, are much less well known nowadays than famous round earth theorists. The flat earth is what we are all about first and foremost - regardless of all the other theories.

Do we then have a consensus that an outline of flat earth history will constitute a part of the introductory volume?

Note: I advise against only one or two chapters of flat earth history. The introductory volume should include a history at least as comprehensive as Christine Garwood's with perhaps 50 well documented chapters on flat earth history.  It should be distinguished from her book most of all in two ways - her book is very ignorant and weak on pre-Rowbotham flat earth history and of course our book will have a pro-flat earth perspective. It should be something people recognize and quote 100 years from now. An entire meaty chapter, for example, should be chronicle the history of Jain flat earth theories.

Western scientists and the world scorn us, but they are ignorant of flat earth history which massively supports us and not them. I am against making the introduction a pathetic pamphlet that sweeps most of all this history under the rug and caters to peoples' ignorance.

I volunteer to write such a book. Of course it will take time, but I am confident that such energy is well spent - especially with Tom Bishop in control of the project.

(Perhaps within a history of flat earth theory is where round earth theory should be mentioned in the introductory volume - inadvertently as it relates to the context of flat earth history.)

Therefore, my advice is that the introductory volume one consist of:
1) an introduction to flat earth theory
2) a history of flat earth theory
3) zetetic vs theoretic


Garwood's book will be an obvious reference source for this history during the last 200 years, but by no means uncritically adopting her opinions or assuming her interpretations.

254
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Re: Lets agree on a chapter format
« on: February 18, 2015, 07:46:56 AM »
I agree with Tom Bishop's rearrangement of the conspiracy as volume two and the reasons behind it.

Suggestions for the Conspiracy Volume (2):

As far as the history of round earth theory, I suggest that this constitute some of the initial chapters of volume two on conspiracy since it is an early part of the conspiracy. Of course, round earth theory should be mentioned in an introduction, but to place the main chapters on it in the introductory volume instead of in the history of conspiracy adds to confusion.

The conspiracy has been methodical, and we should map it accordingly as it happened historically.

As far as the conspiracy volume goes, I also suggest that it should be structured chronologically as a general rule - things like Aristotle earlier in the volume and things like Apollo missions towards the end.

255
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Re: Lets agree on a chapter format
« on: February 16, 2015, 12:12:32 AM »
The contents of volumes one and four seem to overlap a bit, and I have a suggestion.

The history of round earth theory is listed as a major part of volume one, but the history of flat earth theory is not listed. I suggest that the history of round earth theory belongs to volume four on the conspiracy which is concerned with the history of lies, and round earth theories fall into that category.

I suggest that the history of flat earth theory belongs in volume one instead. I'll be glad to contribute some of this, particularly the more ancient parts.

Therefore, volume one as an introductory volume can map out a lot of history of flat earth belief among other things. Volumes two and three delving more into the meat of the issues is a good idea. I like the overall framework of this idea.

256
Flat Earth Media / Re: Henry Howorth
« on: May 21, 2014, 12:37:57 AM »
Henry Howorth is endorsed, incidentally, by David Wardlaw Scott in Terra Firma.

257
Flat Earth Media / Henry Howorth
« on: May 21, 2014, 12:33:17 AM »
'The Glacial Nightmare and the Flood'
By Henry Howorth
Volume One
https://archive.org/details/glacialnightmare01howorich
Volume Two
https://archive.org/details/glacialnightmare02howorich

Henry Howorth (1842-1923) was a nineteenth century British barrister and conservative MP.  He was also the most prolific nineteenth century opponent of Lyellian geology and champion of the old catastrophism to have written in English whom I have so far encountered.  Technically, Howorth is not quite a complete biblical literalist as far as the Noahic flood because he does not necessarily believe the biblical flood covered the entire world.  The reason for this is that Howorth might occasionally give credence to aspects of other ancient deluge stories when they contradict the bible.  That being said, Howorth was by no means an opponent of biblical literalists.  His research was and is valuable to creationists, and they were his allies in a fight over scientific opinion in the nineteenth century. 

Volume One is primarily a history of science writers who wrote both for and against the Noahic flood.  Occasionally going a few centuries deeper into history, Howorth traces this debate from the enlightenment to his own day (i.e. from about 1700 A.D. to 1900 A.D.).  This volume also covers the history of the ice age theory in great detail - a theory which Howorth is very much against.  Howorth makes it obvious that the growth of the ice age theory is often intertwined with skepticism of the biblical account of Noah. 

Volume Two is largely a survey of the impact of a deluge in different areas of the world and an argument against glaciers in such areas as the Sahara, et cetera.
Howorth also wrote a two volume attack on the ice age theory at the end of his life entitled 'Ice or Water?'

---------------------------------------------------------------

Howorth today might be classed as a paleo-creationist because he completely rejects the ice age whereas many creationists such as Ken Ham and Henry Morris accept and teach the ice age or ice ages. 

In my opinion, Howorth's refutation of Louis Agassiz's ice age theory is vital to clearing away a nineteenth century myth about the so-called polar regions which has done a great deal to conceal the facts and darken minds about these areas. 

As far as researching Noah's flood as well as the ice age theory, the value of Howorth is second to none. 


Pages: < Back  1 ... 11 12 [13]