The zeitgeist deception and how you're all being lied to.

The problem is that these Bible & Koran folks have been sold on the idea of a "New Heaven" and a "New Earth". They don't care about the here and now because they are fully vested in a future that only exists after they die.

Ya they believe they'll get their R & R after death: rewards and resurrection.

solar put a sock in it already. This ain't a damn tent revival or a bible selling convention!

Do you realize that almost all the arguments you just used can also apply to the kids game pokemon and almost every other item that has been internationally mass produced and advertised.

"Our science books, which represent "truth" about science and nature as we know it, are obsolete in as soon as five to ten years, and must be constantly revised because of "theories" or concepts that are in error!"

... wow I don't think you even know what science is let alone have actually read that grossly antifactual blatently ignorant and obviously man-made book. you're obviously not qualified to make any judgements about science. unity and harmony? yeah if by harmony you mean gore porn!

We may or may not totally disagree (philosophically, I'm not sure) Codis... but I like you. :)

I've said this a hundred times! look at the site i mentioned at the top and it shows you line by line everything that zeitgeist lies about

lol... take one net source and call it bunk, saying the net is loaded with lies and such, then choose another site to reference for your position. like those people who like using the bible to justify the use of the bible. just a funny tactict.

if you're going to pick and choose what to believe or not I'd say you need a strong base in pure raw facts. not myths, not stories, not belief for sake of belief, but facts. and lets face it, most of what is covered by zeitgeist is based on mythology.

I think you are right . There is a big difference between a stimulating , productive , conversation , and calling people hypocritical dipshits and plainly wanting to dominate the thought or opinion of other people . I shan't be replying to them anymore .

"Sorry, but I just don't buy for one second that either Codis or Samuraidave are here on atruistic intentions. "

Oh, snap! Been found out! You're right, jubals, I'm in the pay of the Illuminati to keep you and artemis from discovering the truth. Guess I'll have to contact our allies the Greys to abduct you both and anal probe you two to the point that you either you can't remember a thing or you decide open a trendy coffee house somewhere on the west coast.

"they are here for purely eristic intentions, to argue and to pat themselves on the back while they beat down anyone who doesn't follow their logic or world view."

ummmm, hello? Have you not been on the same page as I have? Apparently not because your little group has done this and even more so. Codis and I have been called religious nuts and Fox News fans, suppressers of the the "truth," and whatnot. The there's your little lapdog, jahvega, who could tell you what you had for breakfast with his nose so far up your bum. Don't try to make this a one-sided affair. You're not that dishonest I hope

You should take a long hard look in the mirror buddy, you are the one here being offensive, arrogant, and eristic.

Calling ME names AND putting words into my mouth ? Very bad form . I am the one who is fine with YOU disagreeing with me . I have not insulted you . You just cannot deal with me , having MY own mind . It is a shame this makes you so angry and rude . How a man wins , shows some of his character , how a man looses shows all of it .

I was following that movie until it started saying aliens have taken over the world... ummmmmm no

Fear is the mind killer, thank you so much. Either the world is being run by completely lunatics, or its being harvested by aliens. Since I can't really go for the second choice, I definitely agree with the first and so we must all overcome our fear in order to overcome the lunacy of those who govern us. We are not the sheep or the cattle.

I love the part about turning the surveillance on those that serve us instead of on us. If we are going to be under surveillance turnabout is only fair play.

Its unbelievable that people like Codis or Samuraidave, in their fervor to demonstrate the holes in the Zeitgeist movie, completely fly over the larger issue and offer no argument about that except to what? Trust the "official story"...."trust the government".....to them Zeitgeist is crap because of a few holes while the larger more important truth goes right over their heads.

I'm pretty sure all he's been doing is stating facts and showing his sources. SamuraiDave has only been offensive in response to everyone else attacking him

A paradigm shift is a scary thing . Until you live through a few . Then its kind of a relief . Ready or not , It needs to be done though . We are killing the Earth , the way we are going . The corporations are insane and have infected the government and the religions . And they do not DIE without help . Our survival will likely require RADICAL change . I liked the surveillance part too . ; )

and you haven't been, jubal? You're trying to take some moral high road but you don't have enough to pay the toll

just calling a duck a duck and hypocritical dipshit a hypocritical dipshit. Grow a pair and get some thicker skin

"SamuraiDave has only been offensive in response to everyone else attacking him"

that and you can only stomach so much hypocrisy and weaseling before you just say to hell with it and give them both barrels. That semantics weaseling with 2 constantines and holy roman empire crap just took the proverbial cake and to be ask the hammy question "why do you fear the truth?" almost made me lose my lunch both from laughter and nausea

Well I already apologized earlier to him for cock fighting.

glad we could help you perhaps shed a few pounds.

very very good post. i like the idea of putting all the politicians under surveillance.

Part of the problem is that many people veiw these movies as absolute truths. It is becoming somewhat of a religious movement. Most of the people here want to fight the governments lies and most of us agree that the government needs to be changed. But while having an intellectual argument and a zeitgeist defender speaks out using half truths or full out lies (which is basically what the movies are) it makes our side loose much of it's credibility. Another thing you need to realize is that these are hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of voters who are having there opinion influenced by a flashy powerpoint with no facts backing it.

This gullibility and general obliviousness is what is causing the events in Arizona. I'm not saying that zeitgeist is causing this, just the mindset of american voters that zeitgeist makes apparent.

nothing wrong with the main idea of peace, love, and all that jazz but to fight untruths with untruths isn't the same as fighting fire with fire. It smacks of hypocrisy and false sentimentality. By looking at their board a number of members seem to have a grandiose sense of self that they are better than your average joe because they "get the real picture."

It's kind of like the snobby self-assurance that modern art gives to certain types. Despite wanting to be a bigger movement I suspect a number of them would balk at the idea if everyone appreciated it.

OK solar wind since you seem to be the religous type and will not stop talking about it explain fossils because i would really like to know your explanation

If the bible is correct than people came around at about the same time as dinosaurs yet no human remains have been found from that time. I know adam lived into his 900's but are you trying to tell me that no people died for millions of years and thats why no remains were found?

As for the chicken and the egg this was already established. Over millions of years some small dinosaurs adapted feathers and wings. A dinosaur hatched from an egg and it had what would later become feathers. This slight difference gave the dinosaur some kind of advantage giving it a better chance of passing on his genes (which means his offspring are likely to have the same mutation). Over time these creatures mutated more and more until you had a modern day chicken. An egg of a chickens ancestor hatched a a weird little bird popped out, which was the first chicken. It probably looked strange compared to the other creatures but it turned out that it's "strangeness" was actually beneficial therefore it was better able to pass it's genes on to the next generation and so on.

One of the chickens ancestors laid a mutated egg which made a "strange" bird that actually had an advantage over the others. The egg came first.

You asked the same question earlier, is this your only defense of the bible?

I wouldn't bother discussing the issue with Solar wind codis. You are a logical person. It will only make you irritated.

Why are you Christian Solar_Wind, and say not Muslim, Wiccan, or Buddhist? They all have historical documents too. Please don't reply with scripture, because I will unfortunately turn you off and stop attempting to understand your perspective.

Have any of you zeitgeist defenders realized that your responses are pretty much the same as solar winds? No facts to back yourselves up just opinion and emotion and the refusal to use logic in your thought process.

I didn't realize I was a, "Zeitgeist defender."

yeah and your website that you refer us to was written by someone without so much as a bachelor's degree. pot+kettle=black

assassin's creed 2 is bad-ass. you would love it.

Already owned it. Yes, it is bad-ass.

However, that doesn't really help my argument - other than mentioning the same doctrine is in the game, which wasn't my intentions.

Thanks, anyways.

It probably was intentional because anyone of the muslim faith would find it offensive. You, my friend, have fallen victim to one of the greatest threats to our first amendment right... political correctness

"What I stated were declarative statements, its your interpretation that I was stating them as historical facts."

my god, you are so dishonest! You just keep trying to dig yourself weaselly out of the hole you dug.

I'm just waiting for the "I was just trolling" parachute ripcord excuse people use whenever an argument goes against them badly

"And as for the Constantine thing, I knew there were two."

so you were being deliberately misleading? Fancy that but I still think you are being misleading because regardless of which constantine you were talking about, your statement was incorrect.

"Instead you decided to smear me and tell me that there was never a Constantine that was pope."

Oh, it was all about the article "a" was it? Please! This is just pathetic, jubal!

"The Empire may not have actually proclaimed itself the official "Holy Roman Empire" like you learned in your text books, but it was a Holy Roman Empire from the moment Constantine merged the two together "

Oh, give me a break! You don't just start labeling already established institutions just because you want to be clever. By the time of Pope Constantine there was no Empire to be holy about except for the Byzantines and that's a whole other kettle of fish. They BTW tend to celebrate Christmas on January 7th.

Can you not simply admit that you were wrong? For f*ck sakes, grow a pair of balls and man up to it! Or just say you were drunk when you wrote that first statement

Maybe I have had a little too much wine for one night, I can't remember what the first statement was that you are talking about, and I feel like our conversation is going in circles because there is no way for either of us to prove his credentials and all that.

Obviously the history I learned is different from the history that you learned, and that is OK, its a cultural thing. There isn't one ultimate authority on history or that would be tantamount to playing god.

I will man up to one thing, that I have been argumentative with you because I felt you were being so, too, and I guess sometimes that can be like to roosters in the yard. I apologize for taking that stance.

I stated at the start that I was not a Zeitgeist defender, and I am not. Frankly I know that it is a work of fiction but there is a deeper metaphor to be gleaned, just as there is a deeper metaphor to be gleaned, even from a corrupted document such as the bible. You have to filter the information through your consciousness and decide for yourself what is going to take up residence in your world view.

I don't care if it has holes in the story, its a story. All stories are metaphors and you take what you like from it and leave the rest. That is the beauty of a well written story, that it changes peoples lives. Perhaps that is the point that I have been trying to make all along.

"I don't care if it has holes in the story, its a story. All stories are metaphors and you take what you like from it and leave the rest."

But that's just it, Zeitgeist is not a story. It's not the Da Vinci Code though it seems to have borrowed a page from it. It professes itself to be the truth. It reveals the truth by exposing falsehoods and truths but the problem the revelations are ground in falsehoods themselves!

That's how the Jewish law came to be unified with the new Christian law that Paul was creating through his writings and revealing his "Gospel" to the world of the Gentiles as well as the Jews.

This whole thing is so crafty how the Jewish books and history is tied together with Jesus through a man who never actually met him in the flesh happens to gain the strongest influence in the development of the church that arises from his new revelation.

"It is because in your questioning you belittle the other people's point of view by insinuating that they are liars."

Jubal, you are the one who accused codis of having created the debunking site to begin with and accused him of attacking it due his religious belief. You need to look in the mirror, buddy.

"I made characterized Paul as a Jewish infiltrator of the Jesus Movement. "

No, you made a statement that Paul was infiltrator as though it were proven historical fact rather than your opinion or some theory you pick up on a website.

I'm not interested in all the rest of the gobbledegook about Paul/Saul because it has nothing to do with the errors in the film that I pointed out. Go preach your ridiculous gospel elsewhere.

I did not attack him, I asked him questions. I wanted to understand his motivations about posting and supporting the site that he was recommending to the community, of which I am a member. I happened to watch the Zeitgeist movie and it was very interesting because it had gotten together in the form of a movie all of the basic ideas that I had thought about myself and never really wanted to talk about with people because they were "too controversial" into one movie and tied it all together. It demonstrated the causal relationship between religion and government and that is money. Mammon as it was called back in the day.

You cannot server two masters....is the old saying.

I was learned in the bible and bible history as a youth and I had ambitions of being a clergy at first in the Catholic and then later in the Protestant but I could never fully conform to their interpretations of scripture. So I was like you claim to be, searching for the answers in a scholarly way, but I was told not to question and not to doubt because Dante's inferno awaited me.

I have learned that the bible is a corrupted document and it does not reflect the entire scope of what and who the central character of the Jesus Myth really is. The bible is Paul's interpretation. And if there never ever really was a Jesus, perhaps he was utterly a creation of fiction, like Scientology is today, a means to influence, power and money.

Codis claimed that he could defend the site, you are correct, I assumed that he had created the it. That was my bad, I am sorry.

"I have learned that the bible is a corrupted document and it does not reflect the entire scope of what and who the central character of the Jesus Myth really is."

Ah so that explains your ardent defense of this film because despite it's obvious and glaring errors you support it because it matches your beliefs!

All that Biblical stuff you quoting would be excellent if we were actually having a debate about the Bible! But we AREN'T! We are debating the validity of a film which grounds its arguments and conclusions in erroneous facts so please spare your walk down memory lane and your preaching about how the bible is a product of Paul. I don't care because it has nothing whatsoever to do with the points I have made.

I have not called you any names . Why the self pity ? I simply disagree. I told you , this free movie validated what I already believed from , many years of reading through my interest in art and art history and comparative religions studies .. I think lots of people think this . If I had never seen the movie , I would believe no different . It was validating . Why don't you do a movie , and give it away free . I will watch it . No need to be so put out . The whole concept of the movie , and the fact it was freely given was really cool . I admire that kind of thinking outside the box . So I would say it was far from propaganda . They put their money up to do it asking nothing but consideration of the concepts therein . In art and myth , there is creation and destruction . When it is perfect , it is long dead . As an artist , I know this . Though this movie seems radical to some , it is just a stepping stone , to new ways of thinking about the possibilities of the future .

Can you find a source or video to share with us on that? Not saying you're wrong but why would he admit to that?

Pull it means to "demo the building". The part about it being pre-wired is a logical conclusion of mine, because there is no way in hell that they had enough time between the planes hitting the WTC and the time that WTC7 came down to wire that building for demolition, the only logical conclusion is that it was pre-wired.

Jubal this video does not in any way say that he ordered the demolition of the building. He says that the fire marshal stated that they wouldn't be able to stop the fire before the building collapsed. he told the fire chief to evacuate the building so that no one was senselessly killed. In the video I posted below that shows building 17 you can here firemen saying that they couldn't stop the fire and that's why they evacuated. This video DOES NOT say that he ordered the demolition of the building. also when he ordered the fire department out of the building there was smoke coming out of almost every floor. It seems to me like he did the correct thing and probably saved many lives by ordering the evacuation. If the building was being demolished on purpose why would the firefighters be in there in the first place?

He said pull the building, I've seen it before and pulling the building means demolish it! Set the fuse in motion, destroy it. But of course it wasn't building 17 it was building 7 and a steel frame building that went down in demolition time. Not even hit by a plane and O steel building that have been on fire for as long as 24 hours have never went down in that fashion in the history of Steel framed buildings.

Codis, no offense, but did you actually listen to what he said? He said the fire Marshall couldn't contain the fire so that is when we made the decision to "pull it".

Pull it is a term used by demolition's experts to indicate they are going to bring down the building. He didn't say that he was evacuating the building, it had already been evacuated.

Here is a transcript to prove what I am saying....

Female receptionist: Good afternoon, Loizeaux Company.
Jeff: Um, sorry, do I -- is this Controlled Demolitions?
CDI: Yes it is.
Jeff: Ok, I was wondering if there was someone I could talk to briefly -- just ask a question I had?
CDI: Well what kind of question?
Jeff: Well I just wanted to know what a term meant in demolition terms.
CDI: Ok, what type of term?
Jeff: Well, if you were in the demolition business and you said the, the term "pull it," I was wondering what exactly that would mean?
CDI: "Pull it"?
Jeff: Yeah.
CDI: Hmm? Hold on a minute.
Jeff: Thank you.
CDI: Sir?
Jeff: Yes?
CDI: "Pull it" is when they actually pull it down.
Jeff: Oh, well thank you very much for your time.
CDI: Ok.
Jeff: Bye.
CDI: Bye.

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/06/cdi-pull-it-means-pull-it-down_30.html

http://www.dictionary.net/pull

1. To draw, or attempt to draw, toward one; to draw forcibly. [1913 Webster]
2. To draw apart; to tear; to rend. [1913 Webster]

To pull down, to demolish; to destroy; to degrade; as, to pull down a house. " In political affairs, as well as mechanical, it is easier to pull down than build up." --Howell. " To raise the wretched, and pull down the proud." --Roscommon.

you are just grasping for straws now codis. Do you really think you can convince anyone with such word play?

Pull means pull with cables not to wire it up to explode. The explosion heard (and probably what increased the fire to such a great level) was the several large diesel storage tanks for back up generators in the building. Once the building was deemed unstable they attached cables to it and pulled it away from other buildings. These seems like the responsible and logical thing to do as a matter of public safety.

Even you're source says "when they pull it down" it doesn't mention explosives at all

Word play? That is a video (obviously not created by me) demonstrating what the phrase "pull" actually means. And I didn't make this up you can check my source which is above for the full story. If anyone is trying to trick you with word play it is Jubal. This video shows demolition experts using the phrase "pull" which clearly means that they were pulling the building so that it didn't hit any others or cause more damage than it has to.

the official story says that building 7 fell by itself. "Pulling" would mean there was an active role in bringing the building down. Pulling is a verb, action word.

So you suggest that when a building like building 7 is falling down no actions should be taken in order to prevent it from causing more damage than it has to? The building did fall by itself it was just directed in a way that it wouldn't harm other people or other buildings.

Imagine this scenario: There is a tree next to your house that has died and you know that the next storm you have the tree is going to fall. You don't simply let it fall on it's own because it could hit your house, instaed you loop a guide rope around it and pull it in the direction that causes the least amount of damage. Even though the tree was going to fall anyway you need to take preemptive measure's to ensure your safety, the safety of your family and the safety of your property.

Building 7 was a case where the "tree" was going to fall in a matter of hours if not less so these measures had to be taken. Are you really condemning someone because they took measures to ensure the public's safety?

What your saying is that you should allow the tree to fall any way it wants and possibly hit your house, your neighbors house, or a pedestrian walking down the street. That's a really good philosophy, you'll make a very responsible home owner one day.

You're missing the point entirely. The official story is that building came down all by itself. So the fact that it was pulled means it was done by people and not by itself.

The rest of your stuff is apologist crap.

amen

"Alot of ppl hate Zietgiest, because it shows the origins of the christ mythology in egypt."

No, it's because Zeitgeist makes many errors and bold statements without any supporting evidence. Either it's sloppy research or outright lies

We've gone over that fact a thousand times yet everyone keeps saying thats why we don't like the film. How many times do I have to say that this thread has nothing to do with religion? Well one could consider the zeitgeist movement to be a religion (as I do).

i thought you need a god to be considered a religion

Isn't it funny that this is the same tactic Zeitgeist defenders use. Either you agree with my or your mentally ill. Allow me to take a quote from this thread.

keithponder said:
"Codis:You are crazy or stupid.Take you pick."

No logical arguments or anything just say im crazy. hmmmmmm sound like zeitgeist fans are following their messiah PJ to the point that they are emulating him.

I like the tactic being used by Jahvega as well as most other zeitgeist defenders where you give them factual evidence (cited and all) and if they cant refute it they just pretend it's not there. How many times have the two of us alone used multiple sources to back up our facts? But those posts on my computer screen must just be a glitch and not really exist.

Also if you call us fools five times in a post does it make it any more true than if you call us a fool once?

Bravo Bking couldn't have said it better myself

wow, you sound like aynn rand. Anyway there's two things that caught me in your comment. First off nationalism is what got the world hitler and fascism, its also making western europe act stupidly politically against an influx of young arab youth seeking cultural acceptance and its the cause of American racism (we can argue that all day, but look at the inequity of the prison system). So no nationalism is a plague, a form of barbarism that can only combatted with education and a stable environment.
Competition may sound great for capitalist rhetoric however it isn't a driving force in technological advancement, and it can actually kill great ideas. Ask guys like tesla or any MIT student whos idea get bought up and patented by companies seeking self preservation.

Quick short story here
My father attended a conference in the south with a team of scientist and engineers for the purpose of installing renewable tech into the appalachia region to completely render the coal industry obsolete. Appalachia has become a pollution cesspool as result of coal mining, and nearby water isn't fit for drinking (i think its mostly acidic) Local miners/citizens were allowed to attend to voice their input, and after the panel made their presentation the miners had actually howled in protest of the idea. Why? Because they said they would have no work because of the newer cleaner technology regardless of the fact that this went against their need for clean drinking water also in spite of a cheaper, efficient system of energy. This is what money makes people do, act irrationally to a point that boarders insanity.

I have to add one more thing that you said that caught my eye. You said " I believe that from chaos and conflicts come great leaps in technology", and what scares me is not your conclusion but the fact that you "believe", I'll leave you with a quote I paraphrased. A believer is far more dangerous than a liar, for a liar can be easily disrobed with facts but the believer will kill and die for his lie simply because of his commitment to the lie.

Just because nationalism was present in nazi Germany doesn't mean its a bad thing. Anti smoking laws were formed under Hitler, are those also a bad thing?

well I'm not going to argue a good thing cannot come out of the worst types of government but nationalism isn't the reason anti smoking laws came about. Nationalism is just blind faith, kind of the same type of faith needed for a fascist regime. That is the worst part of fascism it is altruism only to the state not to the society, and it is usually used to divide a majority against a scapegoat. After all nationalism needs an enemy, someone to blame societies problems on rather than the ruling class, and so far every nationalist movement has done this on varying scales. I haven't seen any type of nationalism to date that isn't hurting some minority in any part of the world yet, so far nothing great has come out of it and its safe to say the trend indicates nothing good can ever come out of it.

No, nationalism is simply having pride in your nation. I believe there is a lot wrong with our government and I dont agree with many things they do, but I still do feel a sence of national pride. If anything this sense of nationalism pushes me to end corruption in our country.

I never said corruption was a result of nationalism. You mentioned hitler to bash nationalism and thats just incorrect to say that nationalism is the cause of Hitlers rise to power. You used the scare tactic of mentioning hitler in order to get people to look down on nationalism. I simply compared it to smoking laws to exxplain that not everything connected to hitler is evil. Hitler actually did do many good things for Germany such as introduce anti smoking laws and many government funded programs to help the poor.

Not saying he's a great guy just saying you need to do more than mention Hitlers name to prove nationalism is a bad thing. It's like in harry potter when people were afraid to say voldemort's name

Nationalism or wrapping one self in the flag has always been used to sway the week minded into dying for the wealthy that have profited by WAR!

Codis, now I know you are intentionally being obtuse. Nationalism is blind faith in your nation, not Civic Pride. You are intentionally confusing the two.

You are the one who gave kudos to Hitler for banning smoking. Geez.

I did give kudos to hitler for instituting ati-smoking laws. I'm simply trying to say that in order to convince this comunity that nationalism is evil he needs to do more than compare it to hitler. most of us are smarter than that

I have to agree with you racebannon--again. The same as your father's experience, I too have watched people make clearly insane choices based on immediate or short term needs relating to income. Every time we have some great idea about how to fix a problem, the first rallying cry of those who oppose it, is how are we going to pay for it? Could we make our energy and transportation infrastructure more efficient? Yes, but who is going to pay for it? Do we know how to give everyone a meaningful education? Yes, but who is going to pay for it? Can we heal the sick, shelter the homeless, and feed the hungry? We can, but how are we going to pay for it? I am not saying the resource based economy is the answer, but we havn't really tried it in any meaningful way.

oh there is nothing wrong with a false system and destroying the environment for profit. i guess there isnt anything wrong with nationalism and competition but they have become way out of hand...