Skeptic Project

I knew that "20 something" typo would come back to bite him.

"This post is full of fail."
It really is Matt.

How does that affect my post?

Wrong. Read point five.

I love this shit. You type out a little rule and then expect it to apply to everyone else's perception.

You got a lot to learn, son.

A Nazi can be a nature loving pianist.

But that doesn't mean I have to offer them any special credibility on anything other than piano music.

You did by making this thread.

You want people to grant Acharya S credibility she doesn't deserve and hasn't earned.

No, it isn't.

You act like I've never read any of her books, man.

You have not stumbled across some secret knowledge. I bought The Christ Conspiracy before you even had an Internet connection I'd wager. It was garbage then and it is garbage now. Nothing has changed.

@Matt
Well at least CS has a historian named Matt. No wait. What am I saying!!!

I have very explicit problems with Acharya S. and her sad attempt at scholarship. I have brought it up before, but you seem hell-bent on maneuvering her work back into a position of relevence. So let's just clear the air

"If a source is from an old book(century old), which you don't seem able to get, you say that it is irrelevant because it is old. What the??? In history the older a source is, the more credible it is, even more when the author is really an historian! My guess is that the real issue here is if you can't get it for free, like most of the sources you can get from the Internet, you won't get it at all."

The sentence "In history..." is patently erroneous. There are a great deal of "old historica;" documents that are not only false, but in many ways designed as such. In History, documents are not given credibility based on their age, but rather on the quality of that information in terms of verification with other sources and the author's specific credibility. In history, old sources require the most work in order to establish credibility. Take Plutarch, for example, who cannot automatically be given credibility on the basis that he is an "old source" and a historian. As pointed out here " Plutarch (1972). "Translator's Introduction". Fall Of The Roman Republic: Six Lives by Plutarch. translated by Rex Warner. Penguin Books. p. 8." his historical accuracy has been found to be heavily compromised. I think you need to immediately reformulate your postulate.

Further critiques of her "work" are found everywhere on the Internet, but the following sums up the more technical points in regards to her sourcing and citation:

http://falknerslegend.tumblr.com/post/725970620/pseudoauthor-with-pseudoresearch</p>

as for your attack on Edward, he can handle that himself. But at this point, I find it troubling that you take someone who has breached so many of the checkpoints in good academic research seriously.

@Aaron,

"That's all that's needed. Pendrokar's opinion on the holocaust has nothing to do with his questioning Edward."

I don't really care how Pendrokar views Edward, but I do take issue with Acharya S being propped up as some sort of scholar.

She's a hack with a vivid imagination. Nothing more.

@Kaiser Falkner
She did her own research at the sites. Of course history books, don't show these claims. That is why you have to at least accept the possibility that Christians hid this information for centuries when they had higher power.

@Matt

A conspiracy has to involve more than one person. Acharya S is one person writing books.

Readers and people with proper credentials agree with her study:
Some "Who was Jesus?..." reviews:
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/whowasjesus1.html</p>

The people she did study at excavations would probably agree with her too.

Primary sources were addressed by her here - http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=4772&sid=e7a81612773db0bdb8d2efb3b448633c#p4772 /> and here - http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=4807&sid=e7a81612773db0bdb8d2efb3b448633c#p4807 /> (poster Freethinkaluva22 not her though)

Issue addressed.
"Acharya's work is not scholarly" - http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=4901#p4901

As she sates she made her books light reading. Not for academics. Suns of God she states is different.

considering that she does not cite any sources that seem to predate the founding of the church itself.

What do you want, then? Specific position in an excavation site? "Egypt, Great Pyramid of Giza, front entrance, turn left, left, right, left. Look left at the wall. 1.2 metres from the floor."
Redo 20+ years of work she did?

But you do agree that she has credentials and the way Edward did his research was wrong, Kaiser?

1.

So what's the problem exactly? I usually use Acharya S because so many other people do.

freethoughtnation is basically a circlejerk of blind Acharya S fans, I don't really care about what goes on there and I don't bother reading it.

>> which you seem to know about, because the title "Captain Ferseus" originates from there, yet that thread has never been brought up to this forum

Yes it has; for the longest time I went by the name "Captain Ferseus" here for the lulz. I even corrected the original error, but since you like using outdated pages, you probably didn't know that.

2.

>> You are not neutral on your blogs

I'm supposed to be? Science isn't neutral, why should I be?

>> You wouldn't call Acharya S or anyone else a liar, in fact even make a single attack on a person at all, if you were neutral.

I don't claim I'm neutral, so why does that matter? You're a scumbag holocaust denier, that's not neutral either, but it's true.

>> Rather just say this or that statement is false.

Actually, that's what is done most of the time on this site.

>> Which means you are not really doing this just for curiosity on different aspects of science. "She's a liar, and of story." wow.. do the forum members even read everything you write and forget to mention this typo to you?

Typos do not make someone wrong.

>> Which is actually a hard to do typo, since closest characters to 'a' on a qwerty keyboard are q,w,s,x,z.

I don't use QWERTY.

3.

>> If a source is from an old book(century old), which you don't seem able to get, you say that it is irrelevant because it is old. What the??? In history the older a source is, the more credible it is, even more when the author is really an historian! My guess is that the real issue here is if you can't get it for free, like most of the sources you can get from the Internet, you won't get it at all.

The books contain old research and so much more has been found since then, especially in regard to Ancient Egypt and religious history. Not to mention some of the authors such as Gerald Massey were no where near qualified for the research he claimed to be doing.

4.

>> If sources come from conspiracy theory websites or authors of conspiracy theory books, then you ignore those sources. What the, again??? Every normal researcher would ask from where that website or that author got the information from, no matter who they are!

I ignore them if they don't provide primary sources, almost none do. You consider all sources equal, which is why you're a holocaust denier.

5.

>> Even if a person is a racist or a fanatic. It does not discredit their views on matters that are not connected to their hatred.

That's true, but when it comes to beliefs in vast conspiracies, it tends to show that they're incapable of being rational, and reasons they have for believing what they do, which they do often regardless of evidence.

6.

>> You have no credentials on any aspects discussed in the blogs, even journalism, you are as you said in an E-mail "just some asshole with a blog".

I'm going to use the Peter Joseph stance on that one: that's credentialism, how dare you question me, I'm just as smart as anyone! har har har!

>> You might have knownlage in every aspect, but you do not excel in any discussed. Peter Joseph read more books and interviewed two important people.

"knownlage" say, "O" and "A" are pretty far apart, that's hard to do on a QWERTY keyboard, therefore you're wrong. See, I can do it too.

>> Issue of communication - The way you sometimes make your first answer to E-mails sent to you, makes no wonder that they then go to hate mail. Because you start the first attack or provoke an attack on yourself. Like:

I get a lot of email that doesn't go to hate mail. Why do you assume that it all does with no evidence at all? Do you not see what's wrong with accepting something without any evidence?

>> And you have a forum rule of - "Keep "bad words", i.e. cursing, to a minimum, because it can adversely set off filters at someone's school or job and block them from seeing certain content." You assume what people are like too fast.

Yet, I've never punished anyone for cursing.

>> my name is Edward L Winston, I am a 20-something software engineer

Oh my god, what's with you Acharya S fanboys and using an about page that's over a year old and not only that, was riddled with typos? That was supposed to say "30-something" and I've explained that time and time again. It's hilarious how you guys love using typos as some form of evidence. Not only that, but 20 year olds aren't children.

>> Issue of the forum itself - Most members are here to get good laughs of misunderstood concepts and exaggeration that what one member of another community says or shows, makes the picture of the whole community.

So?

>> Another reason why TZM doesn't take you seriously.

That's funny, because nobody takes TZM seriously anywhere outside the TZM forum.

>> It isn't Peter Joseph or Acharya S that don't respond to criticism, it is you actually.

I'm not responding to this?

>> So they don't have to respond you too: "Acharya S/Murdock should not be required to address every little smart-ass punk that comes along just because they have an opinion or because they found something on Wikipedia that differs.

I never have asked them to.

>> Immediately, I had to call many.. no wait.. all of his claims into question, and I will discuss them here. In short he is not an expert on anything he talks about and is a conspiracy theorist on possible conspiracy theorists with no professional training what so ever, except irrelevant software engineering.

Again, using an old typo ridden about page as evidence of something. Guess what, I may not have any credentials, but neither does Peter Joseph or Acharya S (that's she's ever proven, anyway).

--

I have no credentials (aside from certifications, degrees, etc. related to computer science and software engineering), but neither do you, Peter Joseph, or Acharya S. So let's see.. You've used typos and "credentialism" to discredit me. Wow, profound! Your ability to research is severely hampered by the fact you're a holocaust denier, showing you have the inability to differentiate between good sources or bad, or to actually find out why things like "Zyklon B was just used to delouse prisoners clothes" are total bullshit.

As said by Falkner, we basically have to take her word on her credentials, as even in her work it shows she really doesn't know what she's talking about. Her work is completely unscholarly, but is believed mostly by people who just want to try to stick it to Christianity. There are plenty of real examples of Judaism and Christianity taking from other religions, but the ones she lists aren't at all accurate. She isn't saying anything that hasn't been said, the fact that Gerald Massey said it a century ago and nobody took him seriously, doesn't mean that all of a sudden if she repeats it, it's correct.

I mean, she actually theorizes that all of the sun religions originate from Atlantis, and upon the destruction of Atlantis they spread out around the world, which is why all religions are based on sun worship (which in of itself is incorrect). That alone tells me she 1) isn't qualified for anything 2) is profoundly stupid.

http://www.truthbeknown.com/footnote2.htm</p>

However, we utilize this list to demonstrate that the same concepts are found worldwide with and without cultural exchange, because they are derived from the same astrotheological observations. Also, we are in concurrence with the "ancient advanced civilization" theory ("Atlantis") that would allow for one or more centralized civilizations to have spread throughout the world during a very remote period in protohistory, thus taking with it the well-developed Mythos and Ritual, which would then mutate into the various forms found around the globe.

Lest we forget her constant mentions of Atlantis and ancient technology. Links to web sites about Atlantis, UFOs, etc are those things qualified researches as she claims to be would link to and promote?

--

So, what do you want me to do? Do you want me to lie and say that what she says is correct? I've read her work, I've researched a lot of it, especially the Christ Conspiracy and things in Suns of God. Should I just pretend she's correct because she has a large following? I'm sorry, once she can actually prove what she says, then I'll take it seriously. Until then, I'll consider Zoroastrianism and the Babylonian religion as a good source for many parts of Judaism and Christianity, but every single other religion in the East and far East instead, without real evidence, just cherry picking connections? No way. Not without proof.

I don't claim I'm neutral, so why does that matter?

What makes you different from a racist or a fanatic, then?

You're a scumbag holocaust denier, that's not neutral either.

How would you know? I'm not German. I'm just curious. As if I care if someone close to me is jewish or not. Who knows, maybe I'm jewish myself? I'm not angry at either side of the event. So I am neutral

I don't use QWERTY.

Well that explains it. Just that most use qwerty AFAIK.

"knownlage" say, "O" and "A" are pretty far apart, that's hard to do on a QWERTY keyboard, therefore you're wrong. See, I can do it too.

Unlike you, I'm not American. Nor Canadian, British, Australian or any other Demonym where the native language is English. I used a spell-checker afterwards, seems I missed one highlight. You are a Grammar Nazi in this case.

I have no credentials (aside from certifications, degrees, etc. related to computer science and software engineering), but neither do you, Peter Joseph

I don't need any, neither does Peter. You take only official information, Peter takes both. An expert is above. Two of which Peter interviewed. One of which you say lives in a world of lies while being harassed for years by non-historians and apologetics.

I'm not responding to this?

What...? Me? Am I some messenger, a diplomat? Pick your ass up and go freethoughtnation forums and respond to them. Or is this some type of war and you need some neutral zone?

the fact that Gerald Massey said it a century ago and nobody took him seriously, doesn't mean that all of a sudden if she repeats it, it's correct.

Confirms his notion. Does that make her a copycat?

I mean, she actually theorizes that all of the sun religions originate from Atlantis, and upon the destruction of Atlantis they spread out around the world, which is why all religions are based on sun worship

Zeitgeist: The Movie didn't even say anything like this. You better have a source for this of where she says so.