PDA

View Full Version : Real Atlantis Story Suppressed?


galexander
06-08-2009, 12:20 PM
I am an author who has explained the true origins of the Atlantis story in my book “Atlantis, the Origins of a Legend”. Despite the credibility of my new theory however none of the mainstream publishers will take it on and the press I have contacted regarding my new theory never reply. Instead we are treated to the endless piffle regarding sunken ruins being discovered off the coast of whatever. This has left me thinking this must be some kind of orchestrated cover up but I cannot work out exactly why this should be.

My theory goes that Plato’s account of the story is unreliable and that Diodorus’ account of the ‘Atlantians’ in Africa is far closer to the original. The word ‘Atlantis’ is most certainly derived from ‘Atlas’ and in Greek mythology Mount Atlas is situated in Africa. Diodorus goes on to tell us that it was actually a lake containing an inhabited island that disappeared during an earthquake and that the island was inhabited by Amazons and not their closest rivals the Atlantians, living at the base of Mount Atlas. Diodorus also tells us that it was the Amazons who defeated the Atlantians and then went on to challenge the might of the Greeks. This accords well with Greek mythology where the Amazons were said to have fought with the Greeks in Asia Minor and not the inhabitants of Atlantis as Plato claimed.

I managed to self-publish my book at some cost and despite much advertising very few copies have ever sold. Its available at Amazon Books (no pun intended!) if you want to read more or see my website at Atlantis, the Origin of a Legend (http://www.atlantislegend.com).

rds2301
09-18-2009, 12:57 AM
I assumed the story was exopolitical, isn't it?

EireEngineer
10-08-2009, 10:11 AM
Atlantis was a plot device used by Plato to describe the "Perfect Society". Thats it. It never existed.

Out of the Box
10-22-2009, 12:39 PM
Atlantis was a plot device used by Plato to describe the "Perfect Society". Thats it. It never existed.

Before Plato, there were already many stories about highly advanced lost civilisations worldwide. Many believe Plato at some degree based his story on such a civilisation.

EireEngineer
10-22-2009, 12:40 PM
Yes, but not one specifically named "Atlantis".

Out of the Box
10-22-2009, 12:59 PM
Yes, but not one specifically named "Atlantis".

Maybe not, but it's nevertheless the most common name given to the very concept of a lost civilisation next to "Mu", "Lemuria", "Hyperborea", "Eden" or "Thule". Although there are indications that's at least one unknown advanced society did exist in our very deep past, we don't have nearly enough information to know if these names refer to several real civilisation, one civilisation or if they were made-up. All we have are just bits and pieces of anarchronistic technology and confusing myths passed orally from generation to generation before they were ever written down.

EireEngineer
10-22-2009, 02:37 PM
It is an anomaly, much like most cultures having a flood story.

Out of the Box
10-22-2009, 03:28 PM
It is an anomaly, much like most cultures having a flood story.

What makes you so certain there wasn't a big flood mankind has been able to preserve in its tales by means of oral tradition for thousands of years. Wouldn't the end of the last ice age around 12500 years ago have caused a lot of giant floods all over the world? Couldn't it be possible humans could pass the knowledge of those floods for thousands of years without the written word? I don't know....... But is it impossible? I don't think so. Hell, can we even be certain there had never been any written language before 5000 years ago?

albie
10-23-2009, 04:51 AM
Atlantis Was A Fucking Space Port That Serviced Merchandise Shipments. They Sold Food And Rented Prostitutes From Nearby Earth. When It Fucking Exploded All The Ships Fucking Came To Fucking Earth And Made You Fucking Herd.

Fucking Got It Now?

The fucking space port was situated just outside of earth and not ON earth because it was too fucking expensive to burn the fucking fuel to escape its fucking gravitational fucking pull when you wanted to leave. So they built the fucking port in space. It fucking exploded because of terrorism.

EireEngineer
10-23-2009, 07:13 PM
Atlantis Was A Fucking Space Port That Serviced Merchandise Shipments. They Sold Food And Rented Prostitutes From Nearby Earth. When It Fucking Exploded All The Ships Fucking Came To Fucking Earth And Made You Fucking Herd.

Fucking Got It Now?

The fucking space port was situated just outside of earth and not ON earth because it was too fucking expensive to burn the fucking fuel to escape its fucking gravitational fucking pull when you wanted to leave. So they built the fucking port in space. It fucking exploded because of terrorism.
You are a foul mouthed idiot.

EireEngineer
10-23-2009, 07:16 PM
What makes you so certain there wasn't a big flood mankind has been able to preserve in its tales by means of oral tradition for thousands of years. Wouldn't the end of the last ice age around 12500 years ago have caused a lot of giant floods all over the world? Couldn't it be possible humans could pass the knowledge of those floods for thousands of years without the written word? I don't know....... But is it impossible? I don't think so. Hell, can we even be certain there had never been any written language before 5000 years ago?
Well, for one where is it? We have a fairly advanced civilization. Look at all of the technology and material that we would leave behind if we vanished suddenly. I am fairly certain the Aluminum shell of the laptop I am typeing on would survive damn near anything, even though the guts of it would be pretty useless in a 1000 years.

Out of the Box
10-26-2009, 08:42 AM
Well, for one where is it?

I don't know. Some suggest we look at the bottom of the Atlantic ocean, others suggest we look beneath the ice of Antarctica. There are numerous different theories that haven't sufficiently been tested yet.

We have a fairly advanced civilization. Look at all of the technology and material that we would leave behind if we vanished suddenly. I am fairly certain the Aluminum shell of the laptop I am typeing on would survive damn near anything, even though the guts of it would be pretty useless in a 1000 years.

Many sources place the end of the lost advanced civilisation at the end of the last ice age or about 12500 years ago. Many materials could have been reused by later cultures or disappeared due to corrosion. If the culture in question really submerged, it's also possible a lot of technology is now at the bottom of the ocean. We're left with speculation since we can only guess what materials this civilisation used (assuming such a civilisation existed in the first place).

albie
10-27-2009, 05:10 AM
Well, for one where is it? We have a fairly advanced civilization. Look at all of the technology and material that we would leave behind if we vanished suddenly. I am fairly certain the Aluminum shell of the laptop I am typeing on would survive damn near anything, even though the guts of it would be pretty useless in a 1000 years.

Yeah, so called advanced civilzation? PAH! they couldn't even come up with metals that don't rust away. It's all bollocks in a sack. Of course all the Illuminati have the metal. They use it in their underground child abuse clinics. Or maybe they fire it at JFK's head in a time loop in another dimension!!!!!!!!!!!

>>Many materials could have been reused by later cultures or disappeared due to corrosion. If the culture in question really submerged, it's also possible a lot of technology is now at the bottom of the ocean.

Yes, the spacemen kindly brushed all the laptops and laser guns into the ocean because they didn't want the future people to know they existed, for some bizarre reason. Just like God plants fake dinosaur bones to test us.

Out of the Box
10-27-2009, 07:05 AM
Yeah, so called advanced civilzation? PAH! they couldn't even come up with metals that don't rust away.

[poor attempt at humour and other pointless nonsense]....[/poor attempt at humour and other pointless nonsense]

Yes, the spacemen kindly brushed all the laptops and laser guns into the ocean because they didn't want the future people to know they existed, for some bizarre reason. Just like God plants fake dinosaur bones to test us.

During the last few decades, we see a shift towards biodegradable materials and recycling. A highly advanced civilisation in the past could have made the same choices and gone beyond. All we have to judge their level of civilisation are a bunch of anarchronistic technological anomalies scattered throughout the world among later civilisations (eg. evidence of travel between the Americas and respectively Europe and Africa prior to Columbus, incredible astronomical knowledge among primitive African tribes or Mayans, incredible accuracy when moving giant stone monoliths, aluminum objects of 3000 years old, etc.).

EireEngineer
10-27-2009, 12:19 PM
I love the old line about the "myterious" stone moving abilities of ancient peoples. The same arguments were used for the guy that built Coral Castle. Is it any wonder that peoples who had only stone for use as a building material gained expertise in its employment? And is it any wonder that as technology improved and materials changed, that these techniques were lost due to obsolescence? There does not need to be a magical font of knowledge for this to be true, and in my opinion it is the more likely alternative.

Out of the Box
10-28-2009, 03:21 AM
I love the old line about the "myterious" stone moving abilities of ancient peoples. The same arguments were used for the guy that built Coral Castle. Is it any wonder that peoples who had only stone for use as a building material gained expertise in its employment? And is it any wonder that as technology improved and materials changed, that these techniques were lost due to obsolescence?

Not really. What is bizarre, however, is the amazing precision of some of these constructions, the intricate use of hidden entrances and/or their allignment with certain stars (for astrological purposes). I'm thinking first and foremost of the Gizah pyramid but also of certain constructions in South-America (like Tihuanacu) or other parts of the world.

Other historical anomalies are traces of the coca plant in remnants from ancient Egypt, traces of black and white people in pre-Columbian South-America, traces of white people in pre-Marco Polo Tibet and Mongolia, the similarity between complex building methods of Romans and South-American cultures, the parallels between Vedic philosophy and both astronomy and quantum physics, knowledge of Sirius B by the Dogon tribe, etc. There are a lot of anarchronistic anomalies for which traditional archeology and historical research have no answer yet.

There does not need to be a magical font of knowledge for this to be true, and in my opinion it is the more likely alternative.

I'm not questioning the ancient Egyptians or Mayas had advanced building techniques that were lost. I'm questioning the supposition that these building techniques were orriginal rather than borrowed from an older more advanced civilisation. If only we had a fraction of insight in all the wisdom and knowledge once stored in the library of Alexandria.....

albie
10-28-2009, 05:13 AM
>>During the last few decades, we see a shift towards biodegradable materials and recycling.

That's US. In time we will make computers that never break and buildings that never fall down and clothes that never fall apart.THAT'S more environmentally sound than recycling and biodegradable materials. I don't see any Atlantian slacks around here, do you?

As for the rest of it. Pul-ease! Why does ALL conspiracy theory rely on grey info? And why do you CHOOSE to believe it isn't grey?

Because a world without conspiracy and the Illuminati and aliens would be death to you. You WANT it all to be true. You WANT child eating lizards in your world. Think about that for a minute. WHO would want that? Admit it. You get hot when you read a new conspiracy theory. You LOVE it. it's not "Oh no, this is horrible! It's "Oh my God the world is SO much more enjoyable now it's more like a film. More! MORE!" Then you can't get enough. You want worser and worser stuff. It doesn't matter how bad the evidence is. So long as there's 0.000001 percent chance of it. Then you can slag off all the people who straight away see it as bullshit and pretend you are a warrior sent to save the world.

albie
10-28-2009, 05:26 AM
David Icke complains that people don't read his books before dismissing them. HAHAHAH! I wonder why. The man has no sense of absurdity any more. Of course, if you sent him a 300 page manuscript of your own ideas and research he would toss it away without reading it - if it didn't support his view of the world. Because HIS view is real.

Out of the Box
10-28-2009, 06:39 AM
That's US. In time we will make computers that never break and buildings that never fall down and clothes that never fall apart.

That's unlikely, as it would halt the economy. In fact, modern capitalism actually leads to a DECREASE in quality of materials and construction because poor quality are cheaper and also because a lower lifespan of appliances and other products lead to greater consumption and therefore greater profit. Cars, radios, televisions and many other appliances have become LESS durable during the last decades as a consequence of this process.

THAT'S more environmentally sound than recycling and biodegradable materials.

Not only is this contrary to the workings of the capitalist system, I'm pretty sure most people just don't want to use clothers or televisions that are 50 years old either because technology has moved on or just because it's second hand.

I don't see any Atlantian slacks around here, do you?

?

Out of the Box
10-28-2009, 06:42 AM
David Icke complains that people don't read his books before dismissing them.

I can't say I've read his books, but I've seen enough of his video material to dismiss at least 50% of his claims as pure speculation or plain rubbish.

Of course, if you sent him a 300 page manuscript of your own ideas and research he would toss it away without reading it - if it didn't support his view of the world. Because HIS view is real.

Do you have a point? I'm pretty sure your reaction would be pretty much the same if I sent you a 300 page manuscript (with source references of course) to explain my view of the world.

EireEngineer
10-28-2009, 10:38 AM
That's unlikely, as it would halt the economy. In fact, modern capitalism actually leads to a DECREASE in quality of materials and construction because poor quality are cheaper and also because a lower lifespan of appliances and other products lead to greater consumption and therefore greater profit. Cars, radios, televisions and many other appliances have become LESS durable during the last decades as a consequence of this process.

I think you are putting too much of an onus on capitalism with this statement. The market only reacts to the whims of the masses. We certainly have developed into a society that prefers disposable to durable goods, this is hardly the fault of capitalism. The tradeoff is certainly goods of poorer quality, but also far lower cost than their more durable counterparts.


Not only is this contrary to the workings of the capitalist system, I'm pretty sure most people just don't want to use clothers or televisions that are 50 years old either because technology has moved on or just because it's second hand.



?
I have to admit, this paragraph confused me a bit. What is contrary?

Out of the Box
10-28-2009, 02:18 PM
I think you are putting too much of an onus on capitalism with this statement. The market only reacts to the whims of the masses.

Wrong. It is the whims of the masses that are directed by PR and advertising.

We certainly have developed into a society that prefers disposable to durable goods, this is hardly the fault of capitalism. The tradeoff is certainly goods of poorer quality, but also far lower cost than their more durable counterparts.

Most people would be happy to pay twice as much for an item that lasts 5 times longer. In fact, some products (like cleaning products) are marketed precisely with a slogan containing this context.

It is not the public that asks for poor quality products. It is poor quality products that are enforced on the masses because there is no better quality alternative.

I have to admit, this paragraph confused me a bit. What is contrary?

Making computers that never break and buildings that never fall down and clothes that never fall apart would be contrary to the workings of the capitalist system.




con·trar·y adj.1. Opposed, as in character or purpose: contrary opinions; acts that are contrary to our code of ethics.
2. Opposite in direction or position: Our boat took a course contrary to theirs. See Synonyms at opposite (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/opposite).
3. Music Moving in the opposite direction at a fixed interval: playing scales in contrary motion.
4. Adverse; unfavorable: a contrary wind.
5. Given to recalcitrant behavior; willful or perverse.

n. pl. con·trar·ies 1. Something that is opposite or contrary.
2. Either of two opposing or contrary things: "Truth is perhaps . . . a dynamic compound of opposites, savage contraries for a moment conjoined" (A. Bartlett Giamatti).
3. Logic A proposition related to another in such a way that if the latter is true, the former must be false, but if the latter is false, the former is not necessarily true.

adv. In an opposite direction or manner; counter: The judge ruled contrary to all precedent in the case.

Idioms: by contraries Obsolete In opposition to what is expected.

on the contrary In opposition to what has been stated or what is expected: I'm not sick; on the contrary, I'm in the peak of health.

to the contrary To the opposite effect from what has been stated or what is expected: Despite what you say to the contary, this contract is fair.

albie
10-29-2009, 04:39 AM
>>That's unlikely, as it would halt the economy. In fact, modern capitalism actually leads to a DECREASE in quality of materials and construction because poor quality are cheaper and also because a lower lifespan of appliances and other products lead to greater consumption and therefore greater profit. Cars, radios, televisions and many other appliances have become LESS durable during the last decades as a consequence of this process.

You assume they had capitalist ideology? An advanced race? You can already see in our society that efficiency will one day make all jobs obsolete. Once free energy comes into play there is no consumerism. They went out at their peak, so where are those atlantian shell suits and plastic shopping bags?

Out of the Box
10-29-2009, 06:06 AM
You assume they had capitalist ideology? An advanced race?

They must have had some sort of economy. I'm usingt he capitalist system as an example since here it is most obvious and it is the system most of us are familiar with.

You can already see in our society that efficiency will one day make all jobs obsolete.

Wrong. Non-technical jobs are simply replaced by technical jobs. For example, my job consists of improving, fixing and modifying the Business Intelligence system connected with a database of 6 TB that grows about 1 TB (1 TB = 1024 GB = 1048576 MB) annually. Many jobs at the company I work for simply didn't exist a few decades ago and many more will probably be created in the decades to come. I also like to point out that about half of the people here are external consultants because of the complexity of the IT landscape and business logic (which makes it hard to find capable employees).

Also, technology doesn't always increase the efficiency of work processes. Technology often just improves the reporting abilities while making procedures far more complex and thus less efficient. For example, some warehouses use scanners to keep track of which boxes are moved by which laborer at what time. Although this will make it easier to figure out who does more work than others, the added scanning complicates the procedure, adds a little bit of time spent and is more prone to error (both human and technical error).

The capitalist need for cost-efficiency as well as governmental needs to implement regulations before a certain deadline further lead to inefficient of bugged implementations which often leads to too complex IT landscapes, unstable (bugged) software, etc. In the long run, this creates far more overhead than it would have taken if deadlines were postponed and less effort was placed on cost-efficiency.

Once free energy comes into play there is no consumerism.

-- Consumerism is a way the oligarchs keep the masses chained. Why would they abandon it?

-- Why would free energy abolish consumerism?

-- Why would our oligarchs allow free energy? In fact, if the wanted we probably already had free energy (Tesla already initiated research in this area many decades ago).

They went out at their peak, so where are those atlantian shell suits and plastic shopping bags?

A culture more advanced than ours would likely have moved beyond such materials and used biodegradable material instead as I mentioned before.

albie
10-30-2009, 04:39 AM
>>They must have had some sort of economy.

We are arguing about something imaginary. There is no reason to believe they did or did not have an economy. You can't say "they MUST have".

>>Wrong. Non-technical jobs are simply replaced by technical jobs. For example, my job

Wrong? Wrong about an IMAGINARY place and society. How can I be wrong about it? I'm extrapolating the idea of a perfect society. Anyone knows a technical job can be just as obsolete as a non technical. Computers and robots will one day all the jobs. Even fixing each other. That's a logical stream. Even creativity will one day be a matter of pushing a button.

>>Also, technology doesn't always increase the efficiency of work processes.

You seem to think a perfect society ends with what you've experienced. You haven't experienced advanced technology. So why are you commenting on it as if you have?

>>-- Consumerism is a way the oligarchs keep the masses chained. Why would they abandon it?

-- Why would free energy abolish consumerism?

-- Why would our oligarchs allow free energy? In fact, if the wanted we probably already had free energy (Tesla already initiated research in this area many decades ago).


WHY are you assuming there WERE oligarchs in Atlantis? This seems to be guess work beyond the pale.

Unless you were there, were you?

Out of the Box
10-30-2009, 05:44 AM
We are arguing about something imaginary.

No we're not.

There is no reason to believe they did or did not have an economy.

Name one culture beyond the stage of hunter-gatherer or farming society that didn't have an economy.

>>Wrong. Non-technical jobs are simply replaced by technical jobs. For example, my job

Wrong? Wrong about an IMAGINARY place and society. How can I be wrong about it? I'm extrapolating the idea of a perfect society.

We're not talking about an imaginary perfect society but about reality.

Anyone knows a technical job can be just as obsolete as a non technical. Computers and robots will one day all the jobs. Even fixing each other.

Knowing the current stage of human technology and man's nature to screw up, I find that very hard to believe.

You seem to think a perfect society ends with what you've experienced.

Again, we aren't referring to a perfect society.

You haven't experienced advanced technology.

I work in IT. I experience advanced technology on a daily basis ;)

WHY are you assuming there WERE oligarchs in Atlantis? This seems to be guess work beyond the pale.

You said "You can already see in our society that efficiency will one day make all jobs obsolete. Once free energy comes into play there is no consumerism." This is a reference to our future, so I used the present as a start.

albie
10-30-2009, 06:04 AM
OMG.

You're off on one pal. You're mad, in other words.

>>I work in IT. I experience advanced technology on a daily basis ;)

OMG! I was clearly talking about a proposed ultra advanced tech. A matchstick is advanced technology by your definition. I'm talking about technology that is far in advance of anything we know. Hence your view of your DELL job has no bearing.

Originally Posted by albie http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/images/clubconspiracy/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/f25/real-atlantis-story-suppressed-7966-post62086.html#post62086)
We are arguing about something imaginary.

>>No we're not.

You have exact details of Atlantis technology and culture do you? No. We are guessing. Hence imaginary, theoritical.

albie
10-30-2009, 06:09 AM
>>Knowing the current stage of human technology and man's nature to screw up, I find that very hard to believe.

CURRENT is the word.

You are basing your arguments on here and now. We are talking about a theory that is only loosely connected to the CURRENT. You ASSUME too much in your favor.

A perfect society would have created something indestructable that would still be around today. OR it wasn't perfect. Logic. You are arguing that it wasn't perfect. Fine. End of discussion.

Out of the Box
10-30-2009, 07:00 AM
OMG.

You're off on one pal. You're mad, in other words.

You call it mad. Mensa prefers to call it genius (I used to be a member of Mensa Belgium).

OMG! I was clearly talking about a proposed ultra advanced tech.

You're talking about utopian sci-fi technology. I'm talking about technology that seems feasible in the future (and for this I consult my knowledge of high-tech today).

Hence your view of your DELL job has no bearing.

My DELL job? Business Intelligence is quite a different playing field from a "DELL job".

Originally Posted by albie http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/images/clubconspiracy/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/f25/real-atlantis-story-suppressed-7966-post62086.html#post62086)
We are arguing about something imaginary.

>>No we're not.

You have exact details of Atlantis technology and culture do you? No. We are guessing.

We have anachronistic anomalies from other cultures during the last 5000 years and various monolithic structures from unknown eras and cultures. The imply knowledge of how to carve into diorite, knowledge of how to cut huge stone blocks and place them perfectly on top of one another, knowledge of how to make alluminum, advanced knowlegde of astronomy, knowledge of quantum physics, the ability to travel all over the world, etc.

The existence of an advanced high culture in the part is further confirmed by the mythology of numerous ancient peoples, where these

Hence imaginary, theoritical.

Even if we did not have any evidence of a high advanced civilisation in our deep past at all (which we do have), that doesn't mean we should approach such a concept from a utopian and purely hypothetical perspective. Instead of philosophising about an imaginary utopia, we can apply our understanding of anthropology, psychology, sociology and modern engineering to get an idea of what such a culture could have been like. Otherwise, the entire topic is pointless and only interesting for a high school philosophy class.

>>Knowing the current stage of human technology and man's nature to screw up, I find that very hard to believe.

CURRENT is the word.

We can only judge human capabilities by what we know about today and about the past.... If there's no proven historical precedent of technological perfection and many precedents of technological screw-ups up until this very day, your ramblings about technological perfection are meaningless.

A perfect society would have created something indestructable that would still be around today.

The piramids, the Mayan pyramids, the structure in Tihuanacu and many other monolithic structures all over the world are still around today in quite good condition and show traces of anachronistic advanced knowledge. We don't know how many more are still submerged beneath the world's deserts (in Egypt, there's a monolithic structure of an unknown era located many meters below any other structures in that area) or other locations?

OR it wasn't perfect. Logic. You are arguing that it wasn't perfect. Fine. End of discussion.

Of course it wasn't perfect. Nothing human is ever perfect, so I really don't see your point. Where did I suggest a perfect ancient culture? Why did you bring up this pointless concept?

albie
10-31-2009, 07:20 AM
Mensa?

You are framing Atlantian technology in such a way that explains the lack of indestructable materials around today. To do this you are having to bend over backwards and make stuff up. It looks clumsily like grasping at straws.

It's too much. I suppose they didn't have satellites either. No satellites in the sky to speak of. Oh, then you'll say they were advanced in THAT particular branch of technology to not NEED them. How convenient. See what I mean? You are like a christian desperately trying to explain away dinosaur bones.

It doesn't look convincing.

albie
10-31-2009, 07:26 AM
>>The piramids, the Mayan pyramids, the structure in Tihuanacu and many other monolithic structures all over the world are still around today in quite good condition and show traces of anachronistic advanced knowledge. We don't know how many more are still submerged beneath the world's deserts (in Egypt, there's a monolithic structure of an unknown era located many meters below any other structures in that area) or other locations?

'Anachronistic' is stretching it. Hardly lasers is it? stacking one block of stone on top of another. Not exactly exosuits.

Didn't they even have plastic then? We have plastic and we are quite low in the arts of science. A big block of solid plastic would have lasted millions of years. Carrier bags last long enough. I suppose they just had no use for plastic and preffered something that would CONVENIENTLY degrade away just in time for us to come along. Phew!

It's TOO convenient to be believable. As a past MENSA member you should grasp that.

EireEngineer
11-01-2009, 04:47 PM
Wrong. It is the whims of the masses that are directed by PR and advertising.



Most people would be happy to pay twice as much for an item that lasts 5 times longer. In fact, some products (like cleaning products) are marketed precisely with a slogan containing this context.

It is not the public that asks for poor quality products. It is poor quality products that are enforced on the masses because there is no better quality alternative.



Making computers that never break and buildings that never fall down and clothes that never fall apart would be contrary to the workings of the capitalist system.




con·trar·y adj.1. Opposed, as in character or purpose: contrary opinions; acts that are contrary to our code of ethics.
2. Opposite in direction or position: Our boat took a course contrary to theirs. See Synonyms at opposite (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/opposite).
3. Music Moving in the opposite direction at a fixed interval: playing scales in contrary motion.
4. Adverse; unfavorable: a contrary wind.
5. Given to recalcitrant behavior; willful or perverse.

n. pl. con·trar·ies 1. Something that is opposite or contrary.
2. Either of two opposing or contrary things: "Truth is perhaps . . . a dynamic compound of opposites, savage contraries for a moment conjoined" (A. Bartlett Giamatti).
3. Logic A proposition related to another in such a way that if the latter is true, the former must be false, but if the latter is false, the former is not necessarily true.

adv. In an opposite direction or manner; counter: The judge ruled contrary to all precedent in the case.

Idioms: by contraries Obsolete In opposition to what is expected.

on the contrary In opposition to what has been stated or what is expected: I'm not sick; on the contrary, I'm in the peak of health.

to the contrary To the opposite effect from what has been stated or what is expected: Despite what you say to the contary, this contract is fair.
You my friend are a nitwit. Yes I know what the word contrary means, lol. And no, there is no arbitrary function of capitalism that prevents the construction of unbreakable computers or buildings, if that is what the people actually demanded. However, the laws of physics do set some boundaries, and life is all about trade offs. In fact, they do make portable laptop computers that are extremely rugged and damn near indestructible. However, they cost about five times as much as the conventional equipment, and people truly arent willing to pay $9000 for a laptop. Especially if it has Vista installed on it.

You have a pretty low view of people. I guess you think that all people are just mindless little lemmings willing to do whatever the Mad Men say. In fact, most people make decisions and vote with their feet, as the saying goes. So long as there is choice and competition in the market, that is. If we were to adapt a Soviet style economy, there would be no choice, no competition, and definately no innovation. But the Nomenklatura would still have ipods, so I guess you are hoping to be one of them. Good luck, and when you get a chance try reading some Adam Smith and Milton Friedman to balance out your reading list.

Out of the Box
11-02-2009, 01:16 AM
Mensa?

I was only a member for a few months, though. I was a bit disappointed with the kind of people I met and in fact only joined it to be able to put it on my CV.

You are framing Atlantian technology in such a way that explains the lack of indestructable materials around today. To do this you are having to bend over backwards and make stuff up.

You're somehow assuming that the Atlaneans MUST HAVE had indestructable materials around, which is a groundless hypothesis. Yet you accuse me of bending over backwards and making stuff up? That's rich :D

It's too much. I suppose they didn't have satellites either. No satellites in the sky to speak of. Oh, then you'll say they were advanced in THAT particular branch of technology to not NEED them..

Maybe there were satellites or maybe there weren't. Maybe they needed them or maybe they had different ways of communicating globally. Either way, it's just speculation. I don't think anyone ever took the time to sort out all the space junk and look for ancient technology.

You are like a christian desperately trying to explain away dinosaur bones.

You're like a "9/11 sceptic" desperately trying to explain away the obvious signs of controlled demolition. ;)

Out of the Box
11-02-2009, 01:28 AM
'Anachronistic' is stretching it. Hardly lasers is it? stacking one block of stone on top of another. Not exactly exosuits.

When I spoke of "anarchronistic", I was referring to knowledge of how to carve into diorite, knowledge of how to cut huge stone blocks and place them perfectly on top of one another, knowledge of how to make alluminum, advanced knowlegde of astronomy, knowledge of quantum physics, the ability to travel all over the world, etc. You conveniently left out those references...

Didn't they even have plastic then? We have plastic and we are quite low in the arts of science. A big block of solid plastic would have lasted millions of years. Carrier bags last long enough. I suppose they just had no use for plastic and preffered something that would CONVENIENTLY degrade away just in time for us to come along. Phew!

Maybe they did discover plastic as well as a way to convert it to other materials. Maybe they never discovered plastic and used different materials. We can only speculate about this....

It's TOO convenient to be believable. As a past MENSA member you should grasp that.

I know there is only little evidence to support an Atlantean civilisation, but the evidence is not non-existant either. Without a highly advanced civilisation in the deep past, how do you explain the parallels between Eastern philosophy and advanced physics (see Fritjof Capra's "The Tao of Physics")? How do you explain advanced knowledge of astronomy by seemingly primitive cultures? How do you explain the presence of statues with negroid features in pre-Columbian South-America and the presence of coca traces in Egyptian mummies? How do you explain the detailed nature of the Piri Reis map? etc.

Out of the Box
11-02-2009, 01:57 AM
You my friend are a nitwit. Yes I know what the word contrary means, lol. And no, there is no arbitrary function of capitalism that prevents the construction of unbreakable computers or buildings, if that is what the people actually demanded.

If that's what you really believe, you're a fool. Capitalism inevitably leads to a decline of quality in favor of higher profit margins. I see it happening all around me in all economic sectors (from the concrete industry to the IT sector). Making unbreakable computers or buildings would be the exact oposite of the capitalist way.

You have a pretty low view of people. I guess you think that all people are just mindless little lemmings willing to do whatever the Mad Men say.

Most people, regardless of race of social status, are easily manipulated by the capitalist oligarchy. They will believe ANYTHING as long as it comes from a source they consider credible. To some that source is their local priest or iman, to others that source is "Popular Science", Karl Marx, Noam Chomsky, Alex Jones, ... How else do you think childish religions like Christianity or Islam could have survived the digital age? Why else do you think most American citizens still vote Republican or Democrat?

The rise of the Internet has decreased the hold of the oligarchy on the masses (as underground dissident opinions can not reach a larger public), though, but not to a degree that it makes a difference.

If we were to adapt a Soviet style economy, there would be no choice, no competition, and definately no innovation.

I'm not supporting a Soviet style economy either. Why must you think so black-and-white? Do you really believe there's only the choice between capitalism and communism?

So what types of economic system do I support? My preference goes to Syndicalism, Anarcho-Syndicalism, Natinoal-Anarchism, National-Socialism, Solidarism and similar systems.

Good luck, and when you get a chance try reading some Adam Smith and Milton Friedman to balance out your reading list.

I'm aware of Milton Friedman's theories and consider them utterly naive. The end result of the kind of laissez-faire capitalism he proposes will mean the speedy return of Dickensian society : a tiny well-educated upper class exploiting a huge under-educated underclass and the eradication of the middle-class. Although I'm pretty sure we're currently heading that same direction, laissez-faire capitalism will only get us there faster. After all, what's to stop the industrialist from exploiting his fellow man or developing a monopoly without laws making this illegal? Are we supposed to rely on his morality when today we already see industrial moguls behaving as immoral as legally possible to get profit margins as high as possible?!?

BlueAngel
11-02-2009, 02:37 AM
We have two reports.

WTC 7 was hit by fire from WTC 1 and 2 which were struck in the morning, but the fires from WTC 1 and WTC 2 didn't cause WTC 7 to collapse until late afternoon.

Larry Silverstein says that he wired WTC 7 for demolition on 9/11 and received a call from the fire chief and he told him, hey, since, we've had such a large loss of life, we might as well go ahead with the demolition of WTC 7.

Yeah.

That makes sense.

What about those businesses that occupied WTC 7 and their employees?

Did they know the building was prepared for demolition on 911?

Since America was under a terrorist attack and we had such a large loss of life and our NY fire department, miliatary were on a high alert, why not collapse another building.

What the hell?

A clean-up worker can also attest to this, but he refers to the building as WTC 6 and not WTC 7.

Yeah.

That makes sense, too.

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition (http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/cutter.html?q=cutter.html)

Out of the Box
11-02-2009, 03:52 AM
Maybe this thread should be split in a thread on 9/11, one on capitalism and one on "Atlantis". Last few posts are getting a bit too much off-topic.

albie
11-02-2009, 05:25 AM
>>You're somehow assuming that the Atlaneans MUST HAVE had indestructable materials around, which is a groundless hypothesis. Yet you accuse me of bending over backwards and making stuff up? That's rich :D

Indestructable objects are not fanciful. We make them now. Like I said, a big chunk of plastic would last. No statues in plastic? No buildings? Nothing even discarded like a bottle. How convenient.

>>You're like a "9/11 sceptic" desperately trying to explain away the obvious signs of controlled demolition. ;)

OBVIOUS? HAHH! I think this shows us your level. I think the questions posed about the IQ test may have some validity. You clearly have no grasp of what constitutes evidence.

albie
11-02-2009, 05:31 AM
>>When I spoke of "anarchronistic", I was referring to knowledge of how to carve into diorite, knowledge of how to cut huge stone blocks and place them perfectly on top of one another, knowledge of how to make alluminum, advanced knowlegde of astronomy, knowledge of quantum physics, the ability to travel all over the world, etc. You conveniently left out those references...


Oh, so they found ancient aluminum did they? Yeah, and I suppose you have reliable evidence of that.

Advanced knowledge of astronomy and quantum physics? Where are you getting this from? I hope you are not talking about the Dogon because I've seen that debunked.

knowledge of how to cut huge stone blocks and place them perfectly on top of one another? OOH, I'm scared!!!! Big deal.

>>I was referring to knowledge of how to carve into diorite

"The carving procedure

Tip of the unfinished obelisk with rounded marks that show clearly the use of Diorite balls as carving tools
Symmetrical marks at the quarry of the unfinished obelisk showing the perforation to be filled with wood in order to detach the stone pieces from the bedThe carving was done on granite directly on the surface of the stone at the ground, by cutting four sides. It is now known that the tools employed for carving the granite were small balls of Diorite that is a mineral harder than granite. Once the sides were cut off, the process of separating the stone piece from the ground was a bit more complicated but very trivial. A series of perforations were made, again using Diorite-made tools. Obelisks made out of softer rock other than granite (i.e. sandstone) were carved with wooden spikes. These perforations were then filled with wood and these wood pieces were water saturated. The small pieces of wood expanded with the humidity breaking the separations between successive perforations and then effectively separating the carved piece from its bed. Many residues left at the rock beds and measuring nearly the size of many of the famous obelisks (for example the Cleopatra's Needles) are now known to exist at the Unfinished Obelisk open air museum."

Obelisk building technology in ancient Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk_building_technology_in_ancient_Egypt)

It is not, literally, rocket science; which I WOULD count as anachronistic proof.

Out of the Box
11-02-2009, 06:11 AM
Indestructable objects are not fanciful. We make them now.

Plastic can be recycled to make other plastic object. Maybe in the future, a prodecure can be developed to turn it into more basic molecules (after all, plastic is based on oil which itself is based on carbon and hydrogen atoms).

No statues in plastic? No buildings? Nothing even discarded like a bottle.

Today, stone is still the most popular material for buildings, followed by a combination of steel and concrete (which doesn't seem to be very durable in comparison with stone). Statues are still most commonly built in stone, bronze or other metals. If plastic would be such a great material for building and statues, why isn't it used more often today?!?

>>You're like a "9/11 sceptic" desperately trying to explain away the obvious signs of controlled demolition. ;)

OBVIOUS? HAHH! I think this shows us your level. I think the questions posed about the IQ test may have some validity. You clearly have no grasp of what constitutes evidence.

A building collapsing on itself at almost free fall speed cannot occur as a consequence of fire and/or mere structural damage. The pancake theory doesn't hold because of the center steel columns that function as a skeleton. It would also have taken more time for the structure to collapse that way. If the central columns weren't nearly as strong as they were designed it makes no sense for the building to collapse almost perfectly vertically on its own (the building should have bent where most structural damage took place rather than collapse on its own). The traces of nano-thermite found, the molten steel found, eyewitness testimonies and other evidence further confirm the use of explosives.

Anyway, to anyone with a decent understanding of physics it makes no sense whatsoever that either WTC1, WTC2 or WTC7 were taken down without the use of explosives. In fact, the collapse of WTC7 was a classic controlled demolition and this has been well-documented.

Oh, so they found ancient aluminum did they? Yeah, and I suppose you have reliable evidence of that.

Here (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/13003/)'s an article dealing with this topic. I expect, however, that you will dismiss this article or any other article dealing with such anomalies since they're not from any "academic source" (who rarely mention this sort of anomalies precisely because they're anomalies and don't fit into any mainstream theory).

Advanced knowledge of astronomy and quantum physics? Where are you getting this from? I hope you are not talking about the Dogon because I've seen that debunked.

The most well-known book on this topic is Fritjof Capra's Tao of Physics. You can find a downloadable copy in PDF format by Googling for it (I tried to insert a link but for some reason it won't work).


knowledge of how to cut huge stone blocks and place them perfectly on top of one another?

Even with today's technology some Egyptian, Tolmec and Roman structures would still be very hard to rebuild due to both the weight of the building blocks and the incredible precision.

albie
11-02-2009, 06:15 AM
I know there is only little evidence to support an Atlantean civilisation, but the evidence is not non-existant either. Without a highly advanced civilisation in the deep past, how do you explain the parallels between Eastern philosophy and advanced physics (see Fritjof Capra's "The Tao of Physics")? How do you explain advanced knowledge of astronomy by seemingly primitive cultures? How do you explain the presence of statues with negroid features in pre-Columbian South-America and the presence of coca traces in Egyptian mummies? How do you explain the detailed nature of the Piri Reis map? etc.

>>Fritjof Capra's "The Tao of Physics

"Many Eastern sages have said many things in elliptical and obscure language, even in the original, which suffer further in translation. Anyone as imaginative and dedicated as Fritjof Capra or even someone limited, such as myself can go through the vast amounts of Eastern sage revelations and come up with parallels that can match and interpret it to suit any scientific conclusion. "

Here we have a comparison pointed out, showing how weak the comparison actually is...

"All right. No arguments, every scientist uses both reason and intuition in attacking problems - but in the end two are not equal. If intuition overwhelmingly suggests as conclusion, it still must be supported by reason, or else it is only a mere soap bubble speculation. If on the other hand, the conclusion of reason goes against intuition, then reason must nevertheless be supported and intuition dismissed. Capra seems to imply that they are equal, and he points out that modern physics, in probing into the most fundamental aspects of matter and energy, has come up with a picture in which the universe seems to be a "continuous dancing and vibrating motion whose rythmic patterns are determined by the molecular, atomic and nuclear structures."
He then quotes a Taoist Text to the following effect: "The stillness is not the realness. Only when there is stillness in movement can the spiritual rythm appear which pervades heaven and earth". This, says Capra is "exactly the message we get from modern physics". But what does the Taoist text mean? I can see that "stillness in movement" represents a dynamic equilibrium and that it is the latter that is important in the universe - but that is my interpretation based on my knowledge of science. What did it mean to the fellow who first said it? And what other interpretations can be made of it by people who do not possess the particular frame of ideas which exist in my mind. "

If all his comparisons are that weak then I would laugh my balls off.





Indian Skeptic Vol 1 No 8/3 (http://www.indian-skeptic.org/html/is_v01/1-8-3.htm)

>>Piri Reis map

It isn't even that accurate. The experts can't even agree about what land mass it shows. That's how unaccurate it is. I think you underestimate the abilities of ancient man.

The Map Room: The Piri Reis Map of 1513 (http://www.mcwetboy.net/maproom/2007/02/the_piri_reis_m.php)

"So, inasmuch as there are pages about the map’s place in Hapgood’s theory, there are also plenty of web sites dedicated to disproving Hapgood’s theory — not on the basis of its own absurdity, but on Hapgood’s own terms. If claims are made to the map’s accuracy and representation, it’s surprisingly easy to refute them. Both Steven Dutch and Diego Cuoghi do just this, pointing out that

•the map is tremendously inaccurate around the Caribbean, reflecting Columbus’s own errors;
•the map does not fit an azimuthal equidistant projection; and, most importantly,
•the curve in South America’s coast does not match Antarctica nearly as well (for one thing, it misses lots of coastline, as well as Cape Horn) as it does Patagonia, if the map is suddenly turned at that point."

See also...


The Piri Reis Map (http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/PiriRies.HTM)

and...

THE MYSTERIES OF THE PIRI REIS MAP - 1 (http://xoomer.alice.it/dicuoghi/Piri_Reis/PiriReis_eng.htm)


>> How do you explain the presence of statues with negroid features in pre-Columbian South-America and the presence of coca traces in Egyptian mummies?

Boats. Obviously people travelled around much more than is recorded. Not evidence for anything.

Out of the Box
11-02-2009, 06:32 AM
Indian Skeptic Vol 1 No 8/3 (http://www.indian-skeptic.org/html/is_v01/1-8-3.htm)

Maybe you should read the book first before dismissing it. It's not that expensive ;)

>>Piri Reis map

It isn't even that accurate. The experts can't even agree about what land mass it shows. That's how unaccurate it is. I think you underestimate the abilities of ancient man.

[....]

What about the Antarctic coastline? Not only wasn't Antarctica discovered for about 3 centuries, the coastline seems to match the coastline UNDERNEATH the ice.

Piri Reis used different sources for his map and the accuracy of some parts and inaccuracy of others can be explained by this.

>> How do you explain the presence of statues with negroid features in pre-Columbian South-America and the presence of coca traces in Egyptian mummies?

Boats. Obviously people travelled around much more than is recorded. Not evidence for anything.

Still.... according to official historiography, no African had ever set foot in South-America at that time and the vikings had been the only "Old World" inhabitants to ever set foot in the Americas (and only a handful of times). So whoes boats were they?!? How did negroes get to South-America and coca extracts to Egypt?

albie
11-03-2009, 05:23 AM
Prove that block of aluminium was actually found in that hole. Prove it didn't slip in recently, during the excavation. Prove that place hadn't been dug up before and the item lost there recently. Prove that the oxidisation couldn't have happened in a short time period. Prove it wasn't a fake. There's no real proof of how old it is or where it was found.

>>Maybe you should read the book first before dismissing it. It's not that expensive ;)


Did you read the criticism of the book and the rest of the stuff I provided? I bet not. Have you spent a second trying to debunk all the things you hold to be true. I bet not.

>>Still.... according to official historiography, no African had ever set foot in South-America at that time and the vikings had been the only "Old World" inhabitants to ever set foot in the Americas (and only a handful of times). So whoes boats were they?!? How did negroes get to South-America and coca extracts to Egypt?

Do you think maybe they WALKED? the land masses are connected, and even more so in the distant past. They could still have used boats. What's to stop them? your dim view of black people?

You haven't provided one iota of real reliable evidence. I wonder why you still believe. Maybe I just have higher standards. You should use your little grey cells and see where I'm coming from.

albie
11-03-2009, 05:45 AM
Piltdown Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man)

Archaeological Forgeries (http://www.sniggle.net/archforg.php)

Category:Archaeological forgeries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Archaeological_forgeries)

Archaeological hoaxes spur history text rethink | The Japan Times Online (http://search.japantimes.co.jp/member/member.html?nn20001109b5.htm)

Archaeological hoaxes spur history text rethink
Six publishers of high school history textbooks are considering revising entries in their books about Japan's earliest stoneware, following Sunday's disclosure that a leading archaeologist had fabricated his discoveries of such artifacts.


The textbooks contain descriptions of stoneware unearthed at the Kamitakamori ruins in Tsukidate, Miyagi Prefecture, purportedly dating back as far as 700,000 years.

Shinichi Fujimura, 50, who served as deputy director of the Tohoku Paleolithic Institute, admitted Sunday that he buried stoneware in late October to make up the finds at the Kamitakamori ruins. He also said he similarly planted stoneware at the Soshinfudozaka ruins in Shintotsukawa, Hokkaido, in September.

albie
11-03-2009, 05:54 AM
Even with today's technology some Egyptian, Tolmec and Roman structures would still be very hard to rebuild due to both the weight of the building blocks and the incredible precision.

They used skills that DIED OUT. We could easily relearn them and replicate them today. Not evidence.

Out of the Box
11-03-2009, 08:03 AM
They used skills that DIED OUT. We could easily relearn them and replicate them today.

Just like we could easily learn space travel, I guess.....

Not evidence.

The Egyptian, Tolmec and Roman structures are evidence of highly advanced stone building skills (no more, no less). Interesting is also that some of these advanced techniques (eg. binding huge blocks by means of metal pieces moulded on the spot) were used both in pre-Columbian South-America and in the "New World", which might suggest a mutual influence.

Prove that block of aluminium was actually found in that hole. Prove it didn't slip in recently, during the excavation. Prove that place hadn't been dug up before and the item lost there recently. Prove that the oxidisation couldn't have happened in a short time period. Prove it wasn't a fake. There's no real proof of how old it is or where it was found.

What would constitute as proof in your opinion?

>>Maybe you should read the book first before dismissing it. It's not that expensive ;)

Did you read the criticism of the book and the rest of the stuff I provided? I bet not.

Only very superficially. I haven't had the time yet to go through everything yet as I also have a life to manage....

Anyway, criticism of a source is pointless without checking at least relevant excerpts of the source itself or criticism of the critic ("debunkers of the debunkers"). It is very easy and common to misrepresent oposing views by means of quote-mining and other techniques.

Have you spent a second trying to debunk all the things you hold to be true. I bet not.

I always spend many hours checking out sources from as many perspectives as possible before I make up my mind about something. I never limit myself to just one POV.

Do you think maybe they WALKED? the land masses are connected, and even more so in the distant past. They could still have used boats. What's to stop them? your dim view of black people?

It doesn't matter HOW they got from one place to the other. What matters, is that official historiography claims they DIDN'T (which shows that official historiography is wrong in this critical area). How hard is that to understand with that thick skull of yours?

Also, Africa and Europe were NEVER connected to South-America (at least not since man walks on this planet). There is also no evidence of any negroid culture ever making boats that remotely allowed inter-continental travels and also among other cultures there was only very little technology capable of intercontinental travel at a regular basis that we know of (which is why official historiography says is was pretty much non-existant).

You haven't provided one iota of real reliable evidence. I wonder why you still believe. Maybe I just have higher standards.

You prefer to ignore anomalies, whereas I try to find a logical explanation. That's where we differ.

BlueAngel
11-03-2009, 10:11 PM
Maybe this thread should be split in a thread on 9/11, one on capitalism and one on "Atlantis". Last few posts are getting a bit too much off-topic.

This thread doesn't need to be split.

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 05:50 AM
This thread doesn't need to be split.

If you say so....

albie
11-04-2009, 05:51 AM
>>I always spend many hours checking out sources from as many perspectives as possible before I make up my mind about something. I never limit myself to just one POV.

Oh, so you already knew about the criticisms of your evidence? I bet not. I bet I could ask you to provide details of debunkery on any subject and you'd have to google it.

albie
11-04-2009, 05:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by albie http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/images/clubconspiracy/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/f25/real-atlantis-story-suppressed-7966-5.html#post62262)
They used skills that DIED OUT. We could easily relearn them and replicate them today.

Just like we could easily learn space travel, I guess.....


Where is the logic in this statement? It means nothing.

albie
11-04-2009, 05:58 AM
It doesn't matter HOW they got from one place to the other. What matters, is that official historiography claims they DIDN'T (which shows that official historiography is wrong in this critical area). How hard is that to understand with that thick skull of yours?


OMG. Jumping to conclusions they call it. Bullshit, I call it. Just because something doesn't tally with what is presently known does not mean aliens had anything to do with it. Christ! Who makes a leap like that? I thought you were smart.

You are basically doing this:

"Oh! I thought I had more money than that in my bank account! The Aliens must have took it!"

It is now accepted that Columbus did not discover America. There is evidence of many other people getting there first, chiefly the American Indians! I suppose they flew there, did they?

There is nothing supernatural about people getting in boats and crossing large oceans. Get a grip.

albie
11-04-2009, 05:59 AM
>>It doesn't matter HOW they got from one place to the other.

Sweet lord. I think it DOES.

albie
11-04-2009, 06:02 AM
>>Anyway, criticism of a source is pointless without checking at least relevant excerpts of the source itself or criticism of the critic ("debunkers of the debunkers"). It is very easy and common to misrepresent oposing views by means of quote-mining and other techniques.

It is very easy to take a grey thing(The Tao) and another grey thing(Quantum physics) and compare them to fool gullible people.

It is very easy to form a conspiracy theory out of grey information. ALL conspiracy theories rely on ambiguity. FUNNY that.

albie
11-04-2009, 06:06 AM
>>The Egyptian, Tolmec and Roman structures are evidence of highly advanced stone building skills (no more, no less). Interesting is also that some of these advanced techniques (eg. binding huge blocks by means of metal pieces moulded on the spot) were used both in pre-Columbian South-America and in the "New World", which might suggest a mutual influence.

Yes, because there's no way idiot blackies could do stuff like this. Aliens, no doubt white Belgian speaking ones, told them how to do it.

How is moulded metal advanced? Anyone can do it with a fire and some clay and some metal ore.

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 06:55 AM
Oh, so you already knew about the criticisms of your evidence? I bet not.

Do you really think this is the first time I'm having this discussion?!?

I bet I could ask you to provide details of debunkery on any subject and you'd have to google it.

You assume too much.

My directly retrievable knowledge of "debunkery" depends on the topic as I've invested more time in some topics than others. For example, I can reference numerous examples regarding criticism of Holocaust revisionism (Himmler's Posen speech, the Einsatzgruppen coffin map, a few passages from the Goebbels diaries, ...), 9/11 (the NIST pancake theory, "pulling" meaning "evacuation" rather than "demolition" when Silverstein used it, claims that the structure of the WTC was only meant to take the impact of smaller planes, the lack of any direct links to CIA or Mossad, ...) or the domination of Jews over Western civilisation (Jews became bankers and thieves because they had no other option due to bigotry, most Jews are unaware of any anti-gentile agenda, many gentiles are also powerful and immoral, Jews and Jewish movements are ideologically diverse, ...) however I know only little about the "debunking" arguments regarding the murder of Kennedy or Roosevelt's explicit provocation of Pearl Harbor and would have to look up details in those cases.

They used skills that DIED OUT. We could easily relearn them and replicate them today.

Just like we could easily learn space travel, I guess.....

Where is the logic in this statement? It means nothing.

We are currently not capable of space travel (beyond earth orbit) because our current state of technology does not allow this in a safe, efficient and affordable way. Similarly, we're currently not capable of building some of the structures the ancients built (like the pyramids) because our current state of technology does not allow this in a safe, efficient and affordable way. Ignoring evidence of advanced stone building techniques is as silly as ignoring evidence of space travel as both imply advances in civilisation beyond our own.

Capice?!

OMG. Jumping to conclusions they call it. Bullshit, I call it. Just because something doesn't tally with what is presently known does not mean aliens had anything to do with it.

Who's mentioning aliens? I never mentioned aliens at all. You're the one leaping to conclusions.

All I'm saying, is that the pre-Columbian presence of coca in Egypt and negroes in South-America is anarchronistic from the POV of the official historiography. All I'm doing, is looking with an open mind for an alternative to the official historiography that does explain this as well as other anomalies. The existence of a lost pre-Egyptian civilisation with highly advanced knowledge in fields like shipping, stone-carving, astronomy and theoretical physics (whether called "Atlantis", "Lemuria", "Hyperborea", "Shambala" or otherwise) is such an alternative that I'm considering as it not only explains these anomalies but also provides a different perspective on ancient mythology (eg. Gods and demi-gods being both symbols for natural occurances and references to ancient colonisers from this civilisation).

It is now accepted that Columbus did not discover America. There is evidence of many other people getting there first, chiefly the American Indians! I suppose they flew there, did they?

To my knowledge, it is only accepted that Vikings set foot on the Americas a handful of times with their boats and that Mongoloid peoples once crossed the Bering strait from Asia to North-America when it was frozen. This by no means explains the presence of negroes in South-America or the presence of coca in ancient Egypt.

There is nothing supernatural about people getting in boats and crossing large oceans. Get a grip.

You're the one who should get a grip. Where did I imply ANYTHING about this being supernatural?

It is very easy to take a grey thing(The Tao) and another grey thing(Quantum physics) and compare them to fool gullible people.

True. However, when the shades of grey are very similar a comparison is justified.

It is very easy to form a conspiracy theory out of grey information. ALL conspiracy theories rely on ambiguity. FUNNY that.

All conspiracy theories are based on anomalies within the mainstream explanations and attempt to provide a logical explanation that is consistent with those anomalies. Sometimes this logic is farfetched and implausible, while other times it makes far more sense than the mainstream account.

>>The Egyptian, Tolmec and Roman structures are evidence of highly advanced stone building skills (no more, no less). Interesting is also that some of these advanced techniques (eg. binding huge blocks by means of metal pieces moulded on the spot) were used both in pre-Columbian South-America and in the "New World", which might suggest a mutual influence.

Yes, because there's no way idiot blackies could do stuff like this. Aliens, no doubt white Belgian speaking ones, told them how to do it.

You're the one bringing up aliens, not I.

My hypothesis is that there was a lost EARTHLY civilisation capable of colonising other nations and actively doing so, posing as Gods to increase their grip on the colonised peoples. Like many civilisations throughout history, this advanced civilisation collapsed and fragments of its knowledge ended up in libraries (eg. the library of Alexandria), while others were passed on orally between generations by mostly the sages (usually priests).

How is moulded metal advanced? Anyone can do it with a fire and some clay and some metal ore.

I'm talking about the use of portable furnaces able to mould a connection between two blocks each weighing tons at the spot, as the ends of the metal part requires it to be moulded within both stone blocks itself. This would still be a puzzle for many 21st century engineers.

EireEngineer
11-04-2009, 08:11 AM
Its certainly possible, if improbable. Ever read "Guns, Germs, and Steel"?

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 08:16 AM
Its certainly possible, if improbable.

What is?

Ever read "Guns, Germs, and Steel"?

Nope. Please do enlighten me.

EireEngineer
11-04-2009, 02:28 PM
Basically, rapid technological innovation does not occur in isolated societies, but can occur when there is a broad geographical area with trade routes traversing it, as happened in Eurasia. It is highly unlikely that there would be a highly technological precursor society that was isolated to a small enough area not to have been found already.

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 03:41 PM
Basically, rapid technological innovation does not occur in isolated societies, but can occur when there is a broad geographical area with trade routes traversing it, as happened in Eurasia. It is highly unlikely that there would be a highly technological precursor society that was isolated to a small enough area not to have been found already.

The Pole shift hypothesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_shift_hypothesis) gives a possible explanation for what happened to this lost civilisation and why we haven't found it yet. If the Pole shift hypothesis is accurate, Antarctica would be a possible location for this lost civilisation and this would explain why we haven't found it yet.

EireEngineer
11-04-2009, 09:08 PM
Still, a civilization on Antartica, the terrestrial portion of which (not counting the current ice sheets) is still fairly small and isolated. It is highly unlikely they could have developed an advanced culture rapidly. All this aside from the fact that a significant enough pole shift to give it a warm climate has not happened since humankind evolved. The Precambrian pole shift is an interesting theory.

Out of the Box
11-05-2009, 02:44 AM
Still, a civilization on Antartica, the terrestrial portion of which (not counting the current ice sheets) is still fairly small and isolated. It is highly unlikely they could have developed an advanced culture rapidly.

Who says they developed rapidly? Maybe they had tens of thousands of years to develop their culture before they traveled to and colonised other parts of the world. How can we know if we don't know what's under those huge layers of ice?

All this aside from the fact that a significant enough pole shift to give it a warm climate has not happened since humankind evolved.

According to some, the so-called "Ice Ages" and the end thereof are caused by pole shifts.

Anyway, there's also "Hollow Earth" theory (http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/holearth.html), but (although there is a physics theory to explain it all) even I find this too farfetched as it requires most polar NASA footage to be forged, many governments to be complicit in hiding the polar holes and you'd expect at least one person to have gone inside, taken pictures and put them on the Internet. But still : some people believe not aliens or some lost culture on the surface of the earth but a culture within Hollow Earth is the origin of the lost civilisation. I should add this to be complete since (although not very plausible) I'm not aware of any evidence contradicting it (if you're willing to accept claims that NASA is involved). Nevertheless, I would like to stess that I do NOT support this theory.

albie
11-05-2009, 07:04 AM
We are currently not capable of space travel (beyond earth orbit) because our current state of technology does not allow this in a safe, efficient and affordable way. Similarly, we're currently not capable of building some of the structures the ancients built (like the pyramids) because our current state of technology does not allow this in a safe, efficient and affordable way. Ignoring evidence of advanced stone building techniques is as silly as ignoring evidence of space travel as both imply advances in civilisation beyond our own.


BWAHAHAHAH! You are assuming ancient man could travel through space. BWAHAHAHAHA! Why? Because of all your other assumptions.

Circular logic. I suppose that's what powers their ships?

albie
11-05-2009, 07:06 AM
>>I'm talking about the use of portable furnaces able to mould a connection between two blocks each weighing tons at the spot, as the ends of the metal part requires it to be moulded within both stone blocks itself. This would still be a puzzle for many 21st century engineers.

Provide more info on this. Where does it occur?

albie
11-05-2009, 07:07 AM
>>True. However, when the shades of grey are very similar a comparison is justified.

Grey means ambiguous. Hence unknowable, hence you cannot justify it.

Out of the Box
11-05-2009, 08:06 AM
BWAHAHAHAH! You are assuming ancient man could travel through space.

No I'm not. You're twisting my words (as you seem to do often). I was just making an analogy.

>>I'm talking about the use of portable furnaces able to mould a connection between two blocks each weighing tons at the spot, as the ends of the metal part requires it to be moulded within both stone blocks itself. This would still be a puzzle for many 21st century engineers.

Provide more info on this. Where does it occur?

I'll have to look up the details. I saw footage of these blocks and the metal in between on some TV documentary but I don't remember the exact details.

>>True. However, when the shades of grey are very similar a comparison is justified.

Grey means ambiguous. Hence unknowable, hence you cannot justify it.

In this case, "grey" implies that only some parameters are known. You can compare the parameters you DO have, leaving the other parameters open for interpretation/speculation/interpolation.

albie
11-07-2009, 04:40 AM
>>No I'm not. You're twisting my words (as you seem to do often). I was just making an analogy.

So you are saying ancient man didn't fly around in space ships now?

Well, we are in agreement with the evidence then.

albie
11-07-2009, 04:45 AM
>>In this case, "grey" implies that only some parameters are known. You can compare the parameters you DO have, leaving the other parameters open for interpretation/speculation/interpolation.

I gave an example of this correlation between the Tao and quantum physics and it wasn't very good. This was chosen by someone who DID read the book.
It would logical for you to entice me into reading the book if you gave me more startling quotes from the book.

I see faces in rusty cans. I suppose those are the faces of gods peeking at me? One looks like Jesus! Oh, it must be him! Grey means=bad evidence no matter how you slice it.

You haven't proven to me why you believe rather than wonder or suspect.

Out of the Box
11-08-2009, 08:16 AM
So you are saying ancient man didn't fly around in space ships now?

To my knowledge, there's no evidence they ever did. Although mythological records do seem to suggest the "Gods" were flying around in vehicles, this alone does not suffice as evidence.

I gave an example of this correlation between the Tao and quantum physics and it wasn't very good. This was chosen by someone who DID read the book.

So? Just because someone did read a book, that does't mean he gives accurate information about it. You should know better.

It would logical for you to entice me into reading the book if you gave me more startling quotes from the book.

I'll have to take a look. The book was recommended to me and I own a copy, but I thusfar haven't read it.

You haven't proven to me why you believe rather than wonder or suspect.

I DON'T believe. I DO wonder and suspect. I just mix mainstream science with philosophy and controversial science, whereas you seem to stick to mainstream science.

albie
11-09-2009, 04:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by albie http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/images/clubconspiracy/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/f25/real-atlantis-story-suppressed-7966-7.html#post62510)
I gave an example of this correlation between the Tao and quantum physics and it wasn't very good. This was chosen by someone who DID read the book.

So? Just because someone did read a book, that does't mean he gives accurate information about it. You should know better.


Quote:
Originally Posted by albie http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/images/clubconspiracy/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/f25/real-atlantis-story-suppressed-7966-7.html#post62510)
It would logical for you to entice me into reading the book if you gave me more startling quotes from the book.

I'll have to take a look. The book was recommended to me and I own a copy, but I thusfar haven't read it.



OH. MY. GOD.

You haven't even read the book and you hold it up as fact? Sweet lord. And you think you have a better opinion of it than someone who has read it?


I think this alters my opinion of you for good now. I won't trust a word you say. Nor should anyone.

Christ, you should be apologising.

Out of the Box
11-09-2009, 06:31 AM
You haven't even read the book and you hold it up as fact? Sweet lord. And you think you have a better opinion of it than someone who has read it?

It was recommended to me by one of the wisest people I've ever met and he did read the book.

I think this alters my opinion of you for good now. I won't trust a word you say. Nor should anyone.

I try to read as much as possible, but I can't read everything. You rely on the word of someone who read the book yet you consider my arguments invaluable because I do the same. Isn't that pretty hypocritical?!?

Christ, you should be apologising.

What for?

Out of the Box
11-09-2009, 07:30 AM
A few other reviews of The Tao of Physics :

"A brilliant best-seller. . . . Lucidly analyzes the tenets of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism to show their striking parallels with the latest discoveries in cyclotrons."—New York Magazine

"A pioneering book of real value and wide appeal."—Washington Post"Fritjof Capra, in The Tao of Physics , seeks . . . an integration of the mathematical world view of modern physics and the mystical visions of Buddha and Krishna. Where others have failed miserably in trying to unite these seemingly different world views, Capra, a high-energy theorist, has succeeded admirably. I strongly recommend the book to both layman and scientist."—V. N. Mansfield, Physics Today
"I have been reading the book with amazement and the greatest interest, recommending it to everyone I meet, and as often as possible, in my lectures. I think [Capra has] done a magnificent and extremely important job."—Joseph Campbell Fritjof Capra's The Tao of Physics is a unique combination of inspiration and rationality, of spiritual vision and the spirit of scientific inquiry. Mystical poetry and scientific formulae easily meet, cross and merge into an organic whole in this book.
In Part one of the book Capra takes off from a turning point that modern new physics has arrived at, which is a recognition of consciousness. He proceeds to explore the various meeting points of modern scientific 'visions' with the ancient wisdom of Hinduism, Chinese thought, Zen and Buddhism in the second part. The final phase of the book easily shatters the age old dichotomy of matter and spirit promoted by Enlightenment thought and gives science a human face and spirituality a scientific explanation.
Capra effectively proves that a dichotomous view of the universe where spirit was seen outside the matter, more from a Newtonian angle, has led to insensitivity and exploitation at various levels of human life. To re-establish this contact, Capra's link is the Relativity Theory, which continue to inspire many a scientist even to this day. On reading these chapters in the last part of the book, the relativity theory and pages from the Yoga Vasishta or Yoga Sutras sound one and the same. The book reads like a formulaic transcription of the Yoga Sutras. But what makes the book different from an esoteric scientific treatise is that it speaks with a heart--in other words with a perfect balance between the left and right side of the brain. Conversely, Capra's style and language makes Modern Physics well within our reach and understanding.
The Tao of Physics is sheer experience. Capra also establishes that every invention in Science is like a Cosmic experience. The book in essence reveals the third eye of our scientific community. The book makes us wish if only our science text books in schools and colleges could provide us with this experience. —Sandhya Gopakumaran (http://www.shvoong.com/books/389287-tao-physics-exploration-parallels-modern/)

albie
11-10-2009, 04:32 AM
It was recommended to me by one of the wisest people I've ever met and he did read the book.



I try to read as much as possible, but I can't read everything. You rely on the word of someone who read the book yet you consider my arguments invaluable because I do the same. Isn't that pretty hypocritical?!?



What for?

>>You rely on the word of someone who read the book yet you consider my arguments invaluable because I do the same. Isn't that pretty hypocritical?!?


I based my evidence on an actual quote from the book. You can't even do that. But if me not reading the book means I cannot talk about it then why don't you, as someone who hasn't read the book either, not talk about it too?

>>It was recommended to me by one of the wisest people I've ever met and he did read the book.

Oh, wise, eh? Well that's convinced me. Apologise for wasting my time.

Out of the Box
11-10-2009, 05:49 AM
>>You rely on the word of someone who read the book yet you consider my arguments invaluable because I do the same. Isn't that pretty hypocritical?!?

No. I try to check out books recommended to me if they are available to me, regardless of whether they're recommended to me by someone who shares my position or someone who oposes it. You seem to be only interested in books that already support your position.

I based my evidence on an actual quote from the book. You can't even do that.

To celebrate India's connection to the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) Experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider), India's Department of Atomic Energy gifted a two-metre bronze statue of Nataraja (Dancing Shiva ) to CERN on June 18, 2004 with a plaque that had the following lines of Fritjof Capra engraved on it.

"Modern physics had shown that the rhythm of creation and destruction is not only manifest in the turn of the seasons and in the birth and death of living creatures, but is also the very essence of inorganic matter. For modern physicists...Shiva's dance is the dance of subatomic matter."

- Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics.

But if me not reading the book means I cannot talk about it then why don't you, as someone who hasn't read the book either, not talk about it too?

You can never judge a book based on quote-mining alone.

I should read the book, though, however it's not highest on my reading list. In fact, I only just started reading The Diversity Myth (http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=38).

>>It was recommended to me by one of the wisest people I've ever met and he did read the book.

Oh, wise, eh? Well that's convinced me. Apologise for wasting my time.

Are you implying you never take someone on their word after they've already proven their wisdom and knowledge to you?

EireEngineer
11-11-2009, 08:30 PM
You will like it. Political correctness has run amok in this country, and Europe is taking it even further.

albie
11-12-2009, 07:21 AM
>>Are you implying you never take someone on their word after they've already proven their wisdom and knowledge to you?

Never an ENTIRE BOOK. Quote-mining is unreliable? So you are saying you are not going to read it and find a quote that backs up the book's premise? I think you CANNOT. I think you have been looking through and find nothing that strays from the boundaries of ambiguity. It is all ambiguous. Ambiguity;the food of the agenda-driven.

>>"Modern physics had shown that the rhythm of creation and destruction is not only manifest in the turn of the seasons and in the birth and death of living creatures, but is also the very essence of inorganic matter. For modern physicists...Shiva's dance is the dance of subatomic matter."

Oh, but we have this. Which proves nothing and is vague as I expected.

albie
11-12-2009, 08:00 AM
You complain that debunkers are nasty to you? And you go and do something like this? It is the absolute major big rule that you do not post evidence you haven't checked. LAZINESSS. Unforgivable. I would put forward the notion that you deserved any bad reaction from debunkers.

You are typical of conspiracy theorists. I wouldn't be able to say that if you had read the book you extolled as evidence.

Your credability is shot. Accept it.

Out of the Box
11-12-2009, 09:26 AM
You will like it. Political correctness has run amok in this country, and Europe is taking it even further.

Absolutely !

>>Are you implying you never take someone on their word after they've already proven their wisdom and knowledge to you?

Never an ENTIRE BOOK. Quote-mining is unreliable? So you are saying you are not going to read it and find a quote that backs up the book's premise?

I already told you I do have a copy of the book and it's on my reading list.

I think you CANNOT. I think you have been looking through and find nothing that strays from the boundaries of ambiguity. It is all ambiguous. Ambiguity;the food of the agenda-driven.

I'm at my girlfriend's now. I'll be back home on Sunday. If you wish, I can try to find a quote that isn't ambiguous :p

You complain that debunkers are nasty to you? And you go and do something like this? It is the absolute major big rule that you do not post evidence you haven't checked. LAZINESSS. Unforgivable. I would put forward the notion that you deserved any bad reaction from debunkers.

I admit that I should have read the book first before referencing it. It's not because of laziness, though. Out of the hundreds of books in my collection, I simply have to be selective since I can't read them all.

Also, it is usually the areas where I've done most research where "debunkers" show most nasty behaviour as they tend to get nasty when they're out of arguments and they realise there's no way to disprove what I'm saying.

You are typical of conspiracy theorists. I wouldn't be able to say that if you had read the book you extolled as evidence.

I guess you've read the NIST report, the Warren Comission Report and other common debunker references from cover to cover?!?

Your credability is shot. Accept it.

ROFL

albie
11-13-2009, 03:48 AM
>>I guess you've read the NIST report, the Warren Comission Report and other common debunker references from cover to cover?!?

No, a "wiseman" did all that for me and he told it was all fine and dandy.

Garret did all that and all he came up with is making Tommy Lee Jones wear a fag wig.

My point being is that if there is anything to a conspiracy it does make it to the mainstream media. You guys just have a very bad sense of what makes evidence. You have nothing worth hearing.

albie
11-13-2009, 03:52 AM
Besides. You are the one who makes the accusations therefore YOU provide the evidence. And me not reading everything doesn't make it alright for you to not read everything.

I don't need to read anything but what you lay before me. That's how it works. Lay it on me and I will look at it. If it is crap I will deem it so. YOU do all the ground work.

Out of the Box
11-13-2009, 04:04 AM
My point being is that if there is anything to a conspiracy it does make it to the mainstream media.

That might have been the case if the mainstream media was actually objective and free, but this is obviously not the case.

Besides. You are the one who makes the accusations therefore YOU provide the evidence.

So because your views are mainstream, you don't have to prove anything? Is that what you're implying here?

And me not reading everything doesn't make it alright for you to not read everything.

Considering this is something I do in my spare time and I actually do have a life, there's no way you can expect me to read everything. I try to read as much as possible but I'm only human.

I don't need to read anything but what you lay before me. That's how it works. Lay it on me and I will look at it. If it is crap I will deem it so. YOU do all the ground work.

Have you read ANY of the sourcs I've referred to thusfar?!?