Dave31

ApostateAbe has been caught smearing Acharya's work repeatedly - as he himself posted his comments on her blog harassing her. And, even after being caught he still insists on continuing on with it because here nobody holds him responsible or accountable in any way shape or form. He can smear & libel however he chooses but, if one attempts to set the record straight, suddenly they are a "marketing agent." ApostateAbe is a type of cyberstalker, plain & simple. People here need to realize who they dealing with. If anybody should be banned ...

ApostateAbe

Did you overlook avi's recent post?

avi

Amen.
Thank you Abe.

Roger Pearse

Many thanks for your comment. Perhaps you would specify where I have discussed AS work, and stated that she advanced some view which in fact she does not? If you do not know of one, I would appreciate an apology.

Those who publicise their views online can hardly demand that those publicised views are not discussed, and indeed criticised. "Buy my book or be silent"... why should we?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Dave31

ApostateAbe, This is the best you can do to cover up the fact that you have been caught in ongoing <edit> behavior while not knowing Acharya's work at all but pretending you do and <edit>. Another red herring distraction to get people to forget all the smears and <edit> you've been spreading here. In other words, you've been caught, so you go on the attack again, when in fact you owe Acharya an apology for your intellectually dishonest behavior. You've been harassing her for years, you've been caught and now you're taking it out on me. Further demonstrating your clear bias and prejudice against Acharya S & her work - work you admit you've never read.

Nobody ever twisted your arm forcing you to post in threads discussing Acharya's works. If you don't care for it fine, don't post. Same goes for the others here that do pretty much the same thing as ApostateAbe. It just seems like basic common sense that goes over your head. It's people like ApostateAbe that give others the impression that IIDB/Freeratio is just another bottom of the barrel forum to smear & libel whatever they wish with no consequences or accountability whatsoever.

No, I did not overlook avi's common sense post.

I'm in full agreement. Still, those who smear & libel an authors work they've never read are intellectually dishonest and should be held accountable.

I've cited this link full of evidence from Acharya's books several times now and not a peep from anyone. Further proving my point here.

Documented Sources for Zeitgeist Part One

LMAO! Don't even try to pretend you're completely innocent here.

I don't have an issue with that, and you know it - we're talking about much more than just criticism, Roger so stop pretending that's all this is about.

The Dagda

Zietgeist?

I am God?

Zietwhat? I am dead.

Good lord..?

Toto

This is old news. I commented on this some time ago.

If you could please rein in your emtional outrage, you might be able to have a productive discussion here. Or maybe not. But at least there would be a better chance.

avi

Thanks Dave, for the link.
Looked through it briefly.

I found it interesting, and well written. With regard to the sources, sorry, I am unqualified to comment. I am impressed by her argument that there appears to be a strong similarity between aspects of the Gospels' story of Jesus, and the various archaeological evidence for a strikingly similar tale in ancient Egypt.

Thank you again for giving us this opportunity to gain some familiarity with her efforts. I am quite thick skinned, so, it will not offend me at all, to rebuke my writing, or lack thereof, feel free to do so, however, I do think, Dave, that your criiticism of Roger, in particular, was a bit over the top. Maybe he has written something negative about AS, that I could not attest to, as I was unaware of his having written anything at all on this topic.

So, if you must criticize someone on this forum, please restrict your emotional criticism to me, or someone like me, as I am unfazed upon reading that my contributions lack substance, are shallow, and undeserving of serious comment. Many others on this forum are very sensitive, and your criticisms of their posts are not well received....

The goal here, I think, ought to be to elaborate how one knows that the Horus/Jesus parallel represents a sequential endeavor, rather than an autonomous discovery. For example, consider the pyramids of central America versus Egypt. Some argue that the similarities in design point to an obligatory communication between old and new world, well before Columbus. To assist in that inquiry, some employ genetic studies, to demonstrate by an entirely different modus, the inescapable conclusion that there must have been transatlantic voyages a full millenium before Columbus...

Regards,
avi

GakuseiDon

And don't forget the Pygmy pyramids. They are very small.

The problem, avi, is that Dave simply won't discuss specifics. I tried for about two years on another forum a few years back to get him to cite the evidence for Acharya's claim of a crucified Horus. He said I should read the books. I read the books (at that time, the "Christ Conspiracy" and "Suns of God"), and couldn't find anything. He said that was evidence I hadn't read the books. I asked for the actual citations. He refused, and told me to read the books. I then asked him for the page numbers in the books so that I can check the damn books and look up the cites for myself. He refused, and told me to read the books.

And then I see him just above claiming I haven't read the books, despite me starting a post on this forum actually CITING from her book, a post that he responded to. You can draw your conclusions; I have drawn mine.

If Dave31 was actually here to try to convince us that Acharya was right, he would be providing some cites for the more surprising claims, esp the more questionable ones, like a "crucified Horus" or "crucified Krishna". Wouldn't that drive a lot of people to her books if he provided such cites? So why doesn't he do it?

Avi, can you think of any good reason why Dave -- if he is convinced that Acharya is right about specific topics like a "crucified Horus" and "crucified Krishna" -- doesn't give out the specific references that support those surprising claims? If you can, please present it.

It doesn't matter what claims Acharya makes on her website. Dave will say to read her books for further information. It doesn't matter what claims Dave makes here. If you question him, he will say to read Acharya's books. It doesn't matter even if you read her books. Dave will claim that you should read her books.

Here is Dave asking people to spread the word:
http://forum.richarddawkins.net/view...hp?f=6&t=18682

"Also, help spread the word, make a request at your local library to get "Christ Conspiracy" and "Suns of God" by Acharya. Major libraries and Universities WORLDWIDE are a good Idea too. I have made the recommendation at the Library of Congress myself. "

Not that there is anything necessarily wrong with that... but what if anyone had questions about the materials? What do they do? At what point does Dave actually start providing specific answers to specific questions, without resorting to his usual stock phrases?

Dave, I have made this same offer to you a few times over the last few years. How about we actually take one of Acharya's more surprising claims -- you can choose -- and we start to look through her citations together. Just one claim. How about it?

ApostateAbe

GakuseiDon, I think the evidence is conclusive that Dave31 is merely a marketing agent for Acharya S's books, and it isn't in his interest to get into tedious arguments with people. He seems to want to stir up trouble to generate attention and motivate the critics to hand over their money. He did it at RichardDawkins.net and he is doing it again here.