Skeptic Project

http://vimeo.com/13726978</p>

Anyone seen it yet? It starts off with some new age guru's speech, then 8 minutes of music and images, then another 2 guys' speeches (from the original movie), for a grand total of 13 minutes, epic pretentious intro! Then Peter finally starts talking. Gotta admit, though, he's got one hell of a smooth voice. It goes down like butter. Mmmmmmmm

The FREE SOURCE PDF, which is supposed to be here http://www.zeitgeistthefilm.com/ , is broken for me.

I haven't watched the movie yet, but the PDF does work for me. You may need to right click and "Save link as..." or your browser's equivalent.

^That 2008 video you linked to just looks like the old version with the intro cut off. The first time i saw the movie a few years ago it DID have the 13 minute intro and speech.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLVSsaS7f0s [uploaded 2008]

I'm impressed with all of the DM Murdock citations instead of primary sources.

Reading through this, it seems to me like there's cherry picking of things through thousands of years of Egyptian mythology, which did change drastically. Somehow all of these hard to find facts were the basis for Christianity.

I'm going to browse through right now, since it's almost 2 am, but I'll read more thoroughly starting tomorrow. Here are some notes/findings thus far to get the conversation rolling.

--

Horus Crucified: The “crucifixion” of Horus is misunderstood because many erroneously assume that the term denotes a direct resemblance to the crucifixion narrative of Jesus Christ. Hence, it is critical to point out that we are dealing with metaphors here, not “history,” as the “crucifixions” of both Horus and Jesus are improvable events historically. [ page 27 ]

Later on page 30 it goes on to compare Osiris holding up the sun to Jesus' arms stretched out on the cross, the just seems spurious as hell to me.

--

(20) “Krishna, of India, born of the virgin Devaki with a ‘star in the east’ signaling his coming. He performed miracles with his disciples, and upon his death was resurrected.” [ page 38 ]

Krishna was her 8th son, how is she a virgin? Well that's explained:

Even though it is accepted that Krishna was another form of the Divine Vishnu, it is nevertheless argued that because Devaki had other children prior to the birth of Krishna, she was not “a virgin.” Yet, in mythology the perpetual virgin is a common motif, regardless of how many children the female is said to have given birth to.

So just like when defining "crucifixion" we can be extremely loose with what that means, in this case virgin doesn't mean virgin, it just means the birth was divine.

Moreover, while Devaki may have had other children, so too is Jesus depicted as having brothers and sisters. For example, Matthew 12:46 refers to Jesus’s “brothers”:

While he (Jesus) was still speaking to the people, behold his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak with him.

I don't know how this logic works out, Mary still could have had an old fashioned Christian birth and gave birth to other children later, but Krishna had 7 kids born before him.

--

Again, why when quoting the bible aren't primary sources used? Then again, I get asked a lot by people who I source the bible, as if there's a better place to source a quote from it.

--

Jordan Maxwell likewise explains the zodiacal cross:

I just wanted to comment on the fact that this is the same guy who lies his ass off far more than Acharya S ever has even come close to. He even claims "Jesus Christ" is Greek for "oily butt sex." Come on. He does the "God's Sun = God's Son" stuff a lot too.

--

Here's what I can't seem to figure out, if now they're backtracking on the "son = sun" thing, why do they keep saying "God's Sun"? It just seems like they're trying to still make the reader create the connection themselves, instead of saying it directly.

(35) “This is why Jesus in early occult art is always shown with his head on the cross, for Jesus is the sun, the ‘Sun of God,’ the ‘Light of the World,’ the ‘Risen Savior,’ who will ‘come again,’ as it does every morning, the Glory of God who defends against the works of darkness, as he is ‘born again’ every morning, and can be seen ‘coming in the clouds,’ ‘up in Heaven,’ with his ‘Crown of Thorns,’ or, sun rays.”

What does "sun of god" imply other than "son = sun"? Yeah, I get it, Jesus is supposed to be the sun just as the aforementioned gods, but since when does that create grammatical possession for god? They are gods, aren't they? So wouldn't it be "sun god" not "sun of god" unless you were trying to explicitly make that connection.

[ 9/11 section ]

It seems basically the same old bullshit that's been debunked from here to hell.

Ed B. or anyone else well versed in 9/11 stuff, if you want to check out this section and give us a run down, I'd appreciate it.

--

(1) With regard to the 100k wire transfer:
-In late Sept. 2001, as documented by the Washington Post, Brian Ross of ABC news relayed: “As to September 11, federal authorities have told ABC News they’ve now tracked more than $100,000 from banks in Pakistan to two banks in Florida to accounts held by suspected hijack ringleader Mohamed Atta.” [ page 108 ]

The included source does mention $100,000 it doesn't mention any Pakistani Generals having breakfast in America, or that it was on September 10th. Howerever later he does use that same spurious Times of India article again.

--

lol, alive hijackers, still pushing that!

--

The 9/11 section is like reading some Alex Jones crap from 2004.

Man, Jordan Maxwell is even more absurd and consistently wrong than Acharya S.

Just browsing through the "source guide." Exactly as expected--circling the wagons over everything. A lot of D.M. Murdock worship, and the usual nonsense about 9/11 and banking.

And yes, he's still whoring the usual tropes, "free-fall," 9/11 hijackers still alive, Steven Jones pseduophysics, etc.

What is interesting is that he mentions "intellectual inhibition" in the intro to each and every section. I can only assume that's aimed at us.

Shit, RBE is newer than 911 conspiracy theories.

911 CTs haven't come up with anything new in years.

That begs the question then, what is more redundant to debunk: 911 or RBE?

So the movies are no longer the movement then?

Merola has a real consistency problem. I imagine it comes from being unable to admit when he's wrong.

What's so hard about saying "I believed something different when I was younger." ? Every adult has to do that.

Guess Merola is the exception to the rule. No wonder he doesn't want to get a real job. He'd never make it.

Only children would be impressed by a manchild.

Haha, I totally forgot that he had other people write it for him. Yet, he doesn't correct that person's comment and just basks in the praise... yet again.

Nope its in posts linked in many threads here.

He said he hired a team of people to do it while he worked on his other movie.
Edwards got the post screengrabbed and saved as well.

http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/topic/new-directors-edition-of-zeitgeist-is-rock-solid-and-needs-no-changes</p>

Theres one

I'm not putting it out until the 200-300 page guide is done. I have a group helping with that as I work on Z:MF.

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=99999&func=view&catid=7&id=266724#266732

Theres another one

Wait until I re-release it in a number of weeks with a near 300 page Source Guide that is being put together by a team of researchers I have hired.

Dream up other things he can blame for his miserable outlook on life.