ZeitGeist

Look again But yeah, your point stands.

Given the following assumptions or parameters, please answer the following questions:If the world population is comprised strictly of the following groups of people:1. Christians or theists who have believed in God or a god for their entire lives.2. People who are superficial and are constantly consumed with their own image and really could care less whether there is a god or not.3. Self-thinkers or skeptics who are atheists and constantly question things or trust in the scientific approach to the unknown.4. People who have some kind of emotional or traumatic psychological issues in their lives and have some kind of addiction that alleviates the pains associated with these issues.Who do you think holds the highest percentage of the population?How do you think each group would react to watching Zeitgeist?PS. my name is SPEKTICAL...NOT SKEPTICAL!!!!!also if it wasn't for these 'crockpots' as you so label them, the world would be dead!...no balance. Just like if space was white instead of black, the sun would be usless.

Are you using a different calender? The one I use has it as the 22nd of december of this year. The range seems to be from the 20th to 23rd going back in history.Apparently (I'm reading the article as I write this post), the winter solstice when the julian calender was accepted was the 25th (45B.C)More importantly, perhaps, is that the Catholic church originally banned celebration on that day (given that it was "pagan"). Later the Christians co-opted the Sol Invictus celebration.If I had my previous year's history book, I could cite it (as it has the same info about the Sol Invictus), but this is all from:
Winter solstice - Wikipedia.My question--if christmas was chosen to be celebrated on that day because it was the day of the solstice, why isn't it based on the solstice of the year Christ was supposedly born instead of when the calender was accepted?
(actually, I think I see the answer in the post I'm replying to. It's looking like christ has less and less to do with winter solstice and more with co-oting pagans)Actually, you know, I should read your posts better. You actually have a good chunk of this info already there.

Might get a bit chilly drifting through the emptiness of space, neh?

The sun has more uses than just providing light. It provides heat. It also provides a center of gravity for the solar system. This, of course, is not to say that the sun was created to accomplish these tasks, but rather, these "tasks" are the results of the sun's creation. Almost like unintended consequences.As to your point about the world being dead without crackpots. The world will be dead when the sun envelops (or comes damn near close) the earth when it hits its red-giant phase.I think you mean to say the world would be boring without crackpots. This is debatable. After all, so long as you have fundies (religious or otherwise) and moderates, there won't be any ideological boredom.Your questions are relatively pointless. What are you trying to prove? That the video is valid?

This was the biggest steaming pile of dung imaginable, and with no purpose. All it was was a compilation of things that the filmakers don't personally like and want to revise actual history on.Segment after segment took tiny shreds of truth and then inserted their own version of events, thus erecting a conspiracy theory out of another conspiracy theory.That was total junk. Because it was a load of crap, I decided to call them out on it. What did I receive from their contact information? How convenient. And to think, the 10 people who have heard of Zeitgeist the movie are now overwhelming the producers, but somehow every other company can handle hundreds of transmissions a day.Then I found this... It pretty much sums it up. This was my favorite part:

Isn't that precious! How silly of us... I'm so glad that somebody has the esoteric knowledge-- the real knowledge that all of us aren't privy to or only privy to for $5.00 dollars, $2.00 for shipping and handling.I love their sources to erect their conspiracies. They just get their resources from other conspiracy nuts and then pawn it off as solid fact.

Really? Free, or sorta kinda free... the kind that actually costs money? http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/dvdorder.htmEdited by Nemesis Juggernaut, : typo

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

I could care less about the film...I got what I wanted out of it and that is all. I'm not the kind of person who goes to purchase a dvd when a friend can probably download it for me off a torrent site.Anyways, the point I am trying to make with my questions is that people are not as stupid as we may think they are. There are thousands of people who have watched this movie and have reacted differently.Anarch hates this movie because HE thinks its nonsense and that's his choosing...so I'll just say that its a fact that arachnophillia did not like the movie zeitgeist and leave it at that.The reason I like the movie is because its perfect for religous fanatics or people who have never given thought to the dogmas they unconsciously subscribe to or digest.To bring the pH level of an acidic solution to 7, you have to add an equal amount of a very basic solution.

I also want to add this after reading through most of the debate between Phat and TrueChristian. The idea of a relationship with 'God' comes up alot during their discussion and it made me start thinking of how this relationship superimposes itself on relationships humans have with each other.If we are brought up to believe in a SUPREME being who is always right and never wrong, but we must FEAR his punishment or suffer endless trips to the dentist and dermatologist (if they have those in Hell), then we become conditioned to think that love is based on Fear which is a fallacy and the true evil that we are really trying to extricate from our psyches.It is not that man was created in God's image, but rather the opposite...God was created in Man's image.

There is overlap between all of those groups. None of them "holds the highest percentage of the population" and none of them has a group-think that can be summed up in one post or one thread. Some people would have a knee-jerk rejection (see Nemesis_Juggernaut). Some would swallow the hook, line or sinker, but not necessarily all three. Most would ignore it or just laugh.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Or a lot of water. pH is determined by the concentration of hyrdogen ions.

Good answer...water it is then woohoo!

oh, whoops. its taht pobrelm aobut raednig reararnegd wrods aigan.

---

I certainly agree. I would say that disclaimer is prominently displayed because they are fully aware that they can't substantiate these claims. Since Arach has already dismantled those supposed parallels, there is no need for me to in to great depth about it. There are no considerable parallels. The film makers are relying on the ignorance of its audience to woo them in to believing their revisionist version of events. There is ample evidence that Jesus did in fact. If one wants to question his deity, they can certainly make a strong case of reasonable doubt. But that he was an actual man in human history is only contested by people who don't know where to find the extra-biblical evidentiary sources that would corroborate his existence. Arach has already gone over it, so I will just briefly reiterate. Jesus was not born on December 25. This, like most "Christian holidays," all have a strong pagan influence where the two traditions have converged in to one muddled holiday. No one is exactly certain of the exact day of Jesus' birth. But based on all accounts, it certainly was nowhere in the winter months. Do you have a reputable source that would corroborate your claim? I actually think they did a great job in the editing room. The film, as far as the art of film is concerned, was done very well. Its the information that I have considerable contention with. The film makes it all seem so easy for these grand conspiracies to come about. The collusion factor, of course, is never considered. Its so improbable to the point of hilarity. But people that sit in their basement all day, who have no idea about how the real world works, get all their information from sensationalist literature. But it doesn't make it true. I found the video to be entertaining too, especially with the dramatic and ominous sound bytes, the severe editing of speakers, the way some random guy is standing at a podium with a black curtain behind as if he's actually speaking to an audience, etc, etc. But it was the kind of interesting that I find all fictional movies-- entertainment and nothing more.

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

my apologies -- i seem to be mildly lysdexic when i'm tired. and people who have converted or lost their faith. i don't see that as a reason, really. people will care or not care based on any number of factors. and being unconcerned about the existance of god does not seem to hinder a person from being a philanthropist. actually, it seems to help it -- with no active, present, easily evident god acting to right wrongs in the world, the person unconcerned about god's existance might be even more concerned with saving the world. the theists who imagine that god will take care of everything, not so much. the scientific approach is not about trust. it is about asking questions, repeatedly, until one is reasonably confident that the answer is a standard one. not sure what you even mean by this. of where? the US? it's been a pretty much rejection all around, actually. there's been a bit of a show of atheists who accept it, merely because it tries to drag christianity through the mud. but these are about as informed and educated as the average christian response, just phrased in the positive instead of negative. space isn't black, because it's not an object. it's nothing -- there's no way for light to reflect off of nothing and create the color white.and yes, we do need the occasional free-thinker that goes against the accepted science. of course we do. but there's a difference between "revolutionary" and "crackpot." crackpots like to think they're revolutionaries. but real scientific revolutions happen because of evidence, not denial of evidence.

---

Do you have any substantial linkable evidence that crucifixtion WAS a Roman invention? And I'll ask the same about the parallels between Horus and Jesus.Also, what about the fact that Judiasm is completely based on the ancient Egyptian religion?I'll tell you what, you find me linkable evidance for your claims and I'll do the same for mine.