Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ApostateAbe · 01-17-2011, 05:13 PM

From the Freethought Nation forum (DM Murdock/Acharya S) at http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/...hp?f=19&t=3644

Quote:

We would like to make the following statements regarding this terrible incident, which we condemn to the fullest:

1. To our knowledge, there has never been a single violent incident at any Zeitgeist meeting or showing worldwide, or any call to violence by any member of the Zeitgeist Movement or fan of the Zeitgeist films.

2. Like the Zeitgeist Movement, we here at Freethought Nation, Truth Be Known and Stellar House Publishing are diametrically opposed to war and violence.

3. Acharya S was cited only in the first or religion part of the first Zeitgeist movie (2007) and has nothing to do with its production, Parts 2 or 3 thereof, or either of the other ZG films.

Also, Zeitgeist is not "little known," as it has been viewed by well over 100 million people worldwide (and that was a couple years ago) across over 30 languages. Here's the updated Zeitgeist Sourcebook (2010) for Part 1 of the original documentary.

Quote:

I say bullshit on this one. Seems like an opportunity to just throw Zeitgeist under the bus. I'm sure they will probably also say he was into Michael Moore, Alex Jones, and David Icke, etc., etc. There's enough defamation in this one to go around for everybody!

Quote:

That was my first thought too - that it was an odd attempt to "throw Zeitgeist under the bus."

The above news article circulates to a large number of readers much unfortunate publicity for Zeitgeist because of its attachment to the tragic incident in AZ. Mark David Chapman, murdered John Lennon of the Beatles, liked Catcher In The Rye.

* Adding a bit more info to #1 above; Actually, the threats have come from the opposite direction at us and we have discussed a few of them throughout this forum. The malicious attacks come from both theists and atheists.

Quote:

There will always be people in this world who are evil or insane or both, just because Loughner happened to have an interest in ZG does not mean that the interest motivated him in any way to commit these horrendous crimes. There is no plausible link or connection to violence, in fact the opposite applies.

Manson said he was God, did anyone blame religion? I don't think so.

Quote:

Well already specific people such as those on Conspiracy Science are using this to try and possibly get the government to sabotage local Zeitgeist Movement events in an attempt to link it even further with the movement. I find this to be extremely disturbing train of thought it seems to indicate that these people won't be happy until every member is possibly labeled as a terrorist and is possibly water-boarded and the movement dismantled.

http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/...ary-oh-hell-no

http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/...er-says-friend

http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/...t-associations

http://conspiracyscience.com/forums/...alsely-accused

I guess they aren't happy with just putting things in their forums, it looks like they actually want to dampen the movement's progress any way they can.

aeebee50 · 01-18-2011, 05:51 PM

Zetigeist Follies, Yeah! We can have dancing girls and guys, jugglers, magic acts, vaudeville, etc. Wait a minute. This is the Zeigfeld Follies, oops. But, it could work; It could be called the Zetigeist Follies.

Roger Pearse · 01-19-2011, 02:30 AM

I wonder whether we ought to accept that people who think independently, by definition, are likely to be somewhat eccentric in their opinions. A certain proportion of those who think originally will be nutcases, more or less inevitably. But this can hardly be grounds to say that all original and independent thought should be condemned!

judge · 01-19-2011, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I wonder whether we ought to accept that people who think independently, by definition, are likely to be somewhat eccentric in their opinions. A certain proportion of those who think originally will be nutcases, more or less inevitably. But this can hardly be grounds to say that all original and independent thought should be condemned!

Yes true, and one could easily say that a certain proportion of those whose dont think independently will be nutcases too.

I think , and this is just my opinion of course, that when a person begins to see the world as a threatening, place then their madness is more likely to be dangerous to others.

bacht · 01-19-2011, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I wonder whether we ought to accept that people who think independently, by definition, are likely to be somewhat eccentric in their opinions. A certain proportion of those who think originally will be nutcases, more or less inevitably. But this can hardly be grounds to say that all original and independent thought should be condemned!

Humans are conformists. New ideas are typically met with suspicion or fear, unless the timing is right for change.

Ask Galileo or Darwin about the joy of being 'different'. We shouldn't underestimate factors like envy and spite.

Pioneers are generally misunderstood and underappreciated in their own time. Then the systematizers move in and make everything 'safe' for ordinary folk.

Toto · 01-19-2011, 09:23 AM

Loughner was not exactly eccentric in the British sense.

I don't think we should confuse "thinking independently" with "believing in strange ideas."

Roger Pearse · 01-19-2011, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I wonder whether we ought to accept that people who think independently, by definition, are likely to be somewhat eccentric in their opinions. A certain proportion of those who think originally will be nutcases, more or less inevitably. But this can hardly be grounds to say that all original and independent thought should be condemned!

Humans are conformists. New ideas are typically met with suspicion or fear, unless the timing is right for change.

Ask Galileo or Darwin about the joy of being 'different'. We shouldn't underestimate factors like envy and spite.

Pioneers are generally misunderstood and underappreciated in their own time. Then the systematizers move in and make everything 'safe' for ordinary folk.

Yes, but the point is that most "pioneers" are nutcases.

Roger Pearse · 01-19-2011, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I don't think we should confuse "thinking independently" with "believing in strange ideas."

But in order to believe in "strange ideas", we're going to have to think independently, aren't we? (Using the term 'think' in its loosest sense, of course). Which means that, while the two are not the same, those capable of the first are always going to be liable to the second, I would have thought. The willingness to break free of convention means the willingness to be different, even to be strange.

Toto · 01-20-2011, 07:21 AM

Sarah Posner on the economics of Zeitgeist, which at times overlap Christian Reconstructionism.

Chili · 01-20-2011, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

[

Humans are conformists. New ideas are typically met with suspicion or fear, unless the timing is right for change.

Ask Galileo or Darwin about the joy of being 'different'. We shouldn't underestimate factors like envy and spite.

Yes but both Galileo and Darwin are what may be called 'flat earthers' who do not understand the difference between heaven and hell on the planet earth where the world is flat and heaven is round and this simply is so because the concept earth is built on the blank slate (Tabula Rasa) that spans only one generation while the concept heaven spans many generations and up to 1000 years in calendar time equivalent that is retained inside the soul of man which then is the 'other' side of our brain that flat earther knows little or nothing about.

In Genesis this is shown to be with the singular creation of earth and the plural creation of heaven that of course was totally beyond the scope of both Galileo and Darwin wherein Galileo confused the planet earth with the world he lived on instead of in, and poor Darwin only observed what was going in his world without understanding what actually made it the way it was and called it evolution as 'basement dweller' below heaven above.

Of course the Church in its defense cannot explain its reason why the worls is said to be flat because that would 'shut their doors' in hurry and the same is true with Darwin as well because to say that the Intelligent Design is contained inside the species removes the idea of God with us externally while in fact he is already in us until our realization of the same.

Quote:

Pioneers are generally misunderstood and underappreciated in their own time. Then the systematizers move in and make everything 'safe' for ordinary folk.

Yes, and this is where conformity is wrong which here now is a re-back from the basement which has become more like the basement of a shit-house to them and they want to breath some fresh air and through repeating oppresssion have decided to take a stand as flat earther who really is only trying to be honest to himself in the end.

And yes, Zeitgeist is good movie material because it speaks to people when 'their world' is on fire and those are many at this age in time some 500 years after 'the world' has been set on fire, again with the aid of 'systemizers' then.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-18-2011, 05:51 PM	#22
aeebee50 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 5,810	Zetigeist Follies, Yeah! We can have dancing girls and guys, jugglers, magic acts, vaudeville, etc. Wait a minute. This is the Zeigfeld Follies, oops. But, it could work; It could be called the Zetigeist Follies.

01-19-2011, 02:30 AM	#23
Roger Pearse Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 4,370	I wonder whether we ought to accept that people who think independently, by definition, are likely to be somewhat eccentric in their opinions. A certain proportion of those who think originally will be nutcases, more or less inevitably. But this can hardly be grounds to say that all original and independent thought should be condemned!

01-19-2011, 09:23 AM	#26
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Loughner was not exactly eccentric in the British sense. I don't think we should confuse "thinking independently" with "believing in strange ideas."

01-20-2011, 07:21 AM	#29
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Sarah Posner on the economics of Zeitgeist, which at times overlap Christian Reconstructionism.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.