PDA

View Full Version : Please Explain How Rush Doony's "The Earth Is Not Moving", Got 141 Replies and 1400 Views?


truebeliever
03-01-2005, 12:33 AM
I am truly humbled.

I try to write and post to interesting things. Things that matter. To me anyway.

Then along comes Rush with the theory the Earth is'nt moving and the crowd just keeps on getting bigger.

I am impressed. How do you do it Rush?

I hav'nt read any but just to add my 2 bob's worth in...

Do 150km/hr in your car Rush and then jump out of your seat a few inches.

You'll notice you dont end up out the back window.

Rush you are insane.

Will the people who constantly harp i'm a spy please cease and desist.

Your 'well spoiler' is right here.

Lord have mercy Rush.

I hope for your sake you are a amature/professional 'well poisoner' coz if you're not...well...look out for people in white with big butterfly nets.

rushdoony
03-01-2005, 03:52 AM
From: "Amnon Goldberg"
Subject: Scientific Mafiosi



An interesting article "Persecution in the name of science" from the
Orthodox Jewish newspaper "Yated Ne'eman"
http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/TZV65vid.htm
The handling of Richard Sternberg by the scientific establishment
has been mild compared to some of his predecessors.



There exists an academic and media mafiosi which attempts to
discourage, suppress, ostracise, threaten, and demote individuals
who even start to show an interest in "heterodox ideas".



Organised pressure groups, chicanery, sharp practice, and jealous
histrionics abound in the "altruistic" Scientific Establishment,
all
geared to prevent and discredit any research and experimentation
that threatens the establishment "status quo" or is against
"informed opinion", especially in the area of today's three "sacred
cows" of Evolution, Relativity and Heliocentricity.



Any doubters or nay-sayers are lambasted with epithets like "dupe",
"heresy", "shameful", "disgraceful", "pseudo-scientific
fanaticism",
"fog of nonsense", "red herrings", "shallow", "starry-eyed
fundamentalism", "extreme", "lack of balance, "dogmatic",
"bigoted",
"hysterical", "far fetched", "ignorant", "of no help to anyone",
"height of presumption".



When even President Reagan in 1984 dared to express his doubts in
the theory of evolution, public questions were raised as to his
sanity!



Researchers like Immanuel Velikovsky (catastrophist), Halton Arp
(anti-Big Bang), Stefan Marinov (anti-Relativist), Pons and
Fleischmann (cold fusion), Robert Gentry (pleochroic haloes),
Richard Milton (anti-evolution), Barry Setterfield (decrease in
speed of light), Eric Braithwate (free energy), Walter van der Kamp
(geocentrist) etc., have been shown to have strong cases, or even
to
be substantially correct. Yet they were all initially greeted with
epithets like "stupid", "drivel", "loony", "harmless fruitcake",
"in
need of psychiatric help" etc., and conspiratorial attempts at the
highest levels were made to silence them, ban their publications,
restrict their access to laboratories, deny them telescope time
etc.
in blatant disrespect of the pursuit of novel human knowledge.

marypopinz
03-01-2005, 05:11 AM
True...

It's an unusual topic to say the least. There are some very witty comments on that thread and some very nasty ones to. All in all, it makes for quite an interesting giggle!

I like to read the comments people make to Loony. They are usually almost always interesting.

Loony has finally found two folks who agree with him in all those readers of that thread. What does that say?

He is onto something big or that folks like to read that thread becuase lots of other folks have been noted to read that thread.

In honesty... I read the first couple of lengthy posts which I do not believe were the personal written creation of Rush. When I didn't see the point of reading any more, I stopped and I still always go back to read it if someone other than Rush has made a comment.

Capiche?

The interesting thing to be noted is that Rush will constantly re-post this thread back to the home page, when no one responds to his theory. Many of the posts on that thread are Rush, Rush, Rush, whoever, Rush, Rush, whoever. There is also a lot of replication in the posts.

Don't know if that helps and that's my perspective.

Let him spin in his own world - he can't debate, he can only chuck nasty unfounded comments.

Not so impressive now, eh.

bambam
03-01-2005, 10:57 AM
truebeliever,

i think the real message Rushdooney is trying to throw is that:

"things maybe aint the way, they look like"

Please ask yourself:
- Have you ever been in space?
- Have you ever seen the earth from space?
We accept far too many things *they* tell us, without actually knowing the way it really is.
- Have you ever seen the "civil war"?
- Do you believe, we have been on the moon, only because TV (NASA) said so?

My point here is, that we ACCEPT things other people tell us, and cause mankind doesnt have any knowledge - IT IS TRUE!

Dont get me wrong, I also think the earth is spinning, but truth is - i dont really know. And even if I see it with my own eyes, would I believe my own eyes?

Anyway, even if you are right and Rush wrong, this dont give you the right to say:
Rush you are insane.

And Mary,
you said:
Back to... Who am I to judge?
I am still learning not to judge and it is hard.
http://www.clubconspiracy.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=487&forum=28

*I* think both of you (and others) judge here and you are far too busy to tell Rush "he is wrong", then rather give any **PROOVE** that "he is really wrong" (without being judge)

Actually, truebeliever, only because everyone was trying to tell Rush - he is insane - and not give any scientific proove to his statement, his post got so much replies.

- the above stated is my own opinion -

marypopinz
03-01-2005, 02:25 PM
Back at the beginning, I tried to debate the topic with a simple experiment. Rush wasn't having it. It's copy and paste for him, no debate, only mud-slinging.

No wonder people insult him, he is usually the first to insult, as cranky as he has been, when his pet theory is challenged.

Personally, he's not my cup of tea as I'm sure I'm not his. And I congratulated him for being the first to hit the thousand viewer mark. I'm also happy he's now got some folks who see things from his perspective.

my 2 cents

Jimbo
03-01-2005, 06:59 PM
The Earth Is ‘Not’ Moving ? - :-o :-o :-o

Whether his or ours, “Ignorance Is Bliss”…

I’ve got better things to worry about.



May there be “Peace On Earth”.
8-)

truebeliever
03-01-2005, 07:23 PM
Yeh thanks Mary...i see your point.

I'd noted the heading and just giggled and moved on and then i happened to notice yesterday the numbers of people...and then 'I' went and added in my initial amazement.

Sorry to call you a "Loony" Rush...sincerely...after all I get called a loony just for believing powerful people want to rule the world.

It's not that Rush posted this...it was the numbers that viewed it...and then i added :-D That was the driving force behind my post...the numbers who replied.

It's also a nice tactic to distract people and discredit a forum and lets face it CC is probably already certified. Not that I believe Rush is a paid prefessional. I now leave the guessing on who is the stooge to others...O.C for instance.

Dear Bam Bam...no need to preach as a assure you i'm already the choir.

You make reasonable statements, but we must at some point reach a "reasonable" agreement on how the world works.

If we want, we could basically tear everything apart and believe nothing. That is certifiable insanity.

I know the scientific world well. They are indeed a bunch of liars who before worked under repercussions from the church and now do so under the Corps.

I could perform 692.4563344 tests in my backyard leading me to belive that the Earth does indeed spin on it's axis.

It is a perfectly "reasonable" assumption based on the mountains of different people and different experiments done to come to this conclusion.

Take for example your statement on the Moon landing. There has not been ONE peice of evidence offered that stands up to scrutiny that the Moon landings DID NOT take place. Much evidence is convincing at first glance...go to http://users.erols.com/igoddard/journal.htm
for an excellent debunking of that main evidence.

When I pointed out that site to Rush which pulled apart his claims of a moon landing hoax, he simply proffered that Fox news erected a straw man to discredit the detractors.

Before however, he was happy to accept Fox's doco.

Rush, most times, resorts to the same mental level of the people who made a certain person recant that the Earth moved around the Sun. When his argument is challenged and his theory gets shaky he moves the goal posts.

You make the claim "have I ever been in space"...Etc...as a form of argument.

Have you ever seen your heart beat?

Ever been to Australia? How do you know it exists?

There's the story of two philosophers arguing over what reality was. One states emphatically that nothing exists and we could well be butterfly's dreaming we're men...the other philosopher recants..."I refute it thus"!...and kicks his toe against a rock and screams in pain.

Sooner or later we have to come to a generally agreed set of principals on how the Universe works. We could just as easily say why bother and put a gun to our head as nothing is what it seems.

The point is it has to somehow be "reasonable". Rush has not done this. Rush points out the first part of his "helicopter theory" to begin his argument. That was enough for me. I simply pointed out why he does'nt fly backwards out his car window when he jumps a few inches out of his car seat.

Perhaps we would be better spent discussing the Banking system?

I cant believe I just added more to a fairly pointless discussion.

Maybe Rush should have posted in the Lounge section Mary? Or was it the joke section?

I will no longer comment on the subject.

I'm very busy proving Lord Rothschild is a Lizard...laughing are we? Have you ever seen him NOT be a lizard? AH HA!

truebeliever
03-01-2005, 07:25 PM
You always say it so succinctly Jimbo...a full 25 paragraphs less than me.

madkhao
03-01-2005, 08:17 PM
Consider reading the first three pages if you haven't yet. I was actually quite amused by that thread.

truebeliever
03-01-2005, 08:33 PM
I could...or I could walk down the beach and get a Souvlaki and chips by the sea side and savour my week off...

8-)

this
03-01-2005, 09:50 PM
TB - I replied not because it was a pressing concern but because yes with so many views it takes on a life of it's own. However it's one of those arguments that is hard to make, so it is a challenge.

It is important to be able to explain yourself, no matter to who or about what. Almost all of the conspiracy theories meet immediate mental blocks to our global media mind. Some of us can see through it, or so we think. If we can't debate amongst ourselves what preposterous idea might indeed be true, than we won't be able to do it about our pet theories with "reality theorists" / the mainstream.

Most of the ideas that I want to discuss on this forum are closer to Rush's preposterous ideas. That Communisms' death was a Ruse, or that Vaccinations cause harm not good. I think that society is more easily flummoxed by the big lie as has often been noted. 911 is a perfect example how a big lie can fool just about everyone. A huge building weighing millions of tons being felled by an oversized pop can - right! Even more strange, a third WTC tower in that complex falling down that day... no plane hitting it - oh sure!! But I believed it at the time until an article asked me to consider that belief.

As for the moon landing TB I think you are dismissing it too early. As someone mentioned, Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke may be the ET unveiling agenda that the NWO has planned for a NW religion/belief/ control system. Faking a moon landing may have been a step a long that road of faking an ET unveiling. There are plenty of moon questions that I don't see being answered to my satisfaction.

truebeliever
03-01-2005, 10:48 PM
G'Day This.

Give me some specific things about the Moon Landings you dont believe and I'll point you in the right direction.

I agree that possibly their will be a ruse used around Alien space man/woman landings. I believe terrorism and endless war may be dead and they are desperately planning part B of the attempted lock down.

The weather will feature prominently as well as natural disasters.

All in all i think the power of the net has them a little backfooted.

I dont put the supposed death of Communism and the Earth standing still in the same boat.

The origens and nature of the NWO including who financed and supported the Soviet Union is WELL documented by respected historians and researchers.

You will never see them quoted in the mainstream though I will assure you they will quote Rush.

Beleive me you are talking to the choir on this. My view is simply based on the fact that Rush's beginning arguments are a joke. They are ridiculous and the so called scientific arguments left me chuckling.

If you like i'll prove to you the moon is made of cheese.

There are bigger fish to fry. Try the fact that the Oil industry and scientific community has been telling you for years that oil and gas are 'fossil fuels'. The evidence pointing to the flaws in this 'theory' are overwhelming and well documented. I wish Rush would spend more time on such subjects. This will 'blow the scam apart' more than will absoloute gibberish and child like assertions that the Earth is standing still.

In the end of course you are free to post and read what you like.

I saw Rush's post a while back and did'nt even give it a thought...i was just shocked at the amount of response he got which has since been explained.

Again, specifically on the Moon Landing...PM me your queries.

I dont want to post on Rush anymore. Nothing against him. He's probably a nice guy. Read and post what you like.

Sincere best including to Rush.