This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Heartsong
Filter to certain boards:
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
1
« on: January 23, 2012, 10:39:02 PM »
*ducks and runs out with /white flag/ before the fireworks start* ![]()
2
« on: January 22, 2012, 08:44:08 PM »
This is a strange video if you ask me:
[YOUTUBE]YtVSPfBTUJs[/YOUTUBE]
Also, a very astute commenter on youtube said to see at 0:50 seconds in.
I am still not sure about this guy, Ron Wyatt. Something seems off about him.
Yes, very off. He is a fraudster. Just google him everyone. Even religious organisations have rejected his claims (of which there are more, one being the "discovery" of where the Red Sea parted). As bindup said, if what he said was true, all Christianity would be touting the find and even Answers in Genesis have rebutted him. He has no blood test results (there are none no matter how hard I looked), no empirical evidence, no collaboration, no video or photos- no evidence at all apart from his personal testimony.
I've worked with mentally ill people and they are VERY sincere in many of their wild beliefs, to the point where you sometimes have to wonder if they are right and you are wrong...until the evidence shows up. Case in point, the ill person was sure their 8yr old was being abused at home while she was in care and was very distressed. The person was extremely convincing until the evidence showed up as an adult child of 26 yrs...
Claims without evidence should be dismissed until evidence is forthcoming or people may as well believe any wild assertion, like the orbiting teapot:
"Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of skeptics to disprove received dogmas rather than that of dogmatists to prove them. This, of course, is a mistake.
If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars, there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an ellipitical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add the the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But, if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense.
If, however the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books and taught as sacred truth every Sunday, hesitation to believe in it's existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychatrist in an enlightened age or of the inquisitor in an earlier time" Bertrand Russell
That's a lot of judgement about someone you only 'googled' and never met. Do you know what slander I find if I google MJ? Does that mean that everything on the internet about MJ is truth? Hell no! So if I were you, I would not jump to conclusions only by 'googling'. This man appears very sincere and if there is one thing I learned in the past 3 years, it is that truth is ALWAYS ignored or ridiculed. Just look at how the media and the non-believers treat us hoaxers.
WTF?? is wrong with people lately? So much hate and judgement and assumptions towards people they never even met. It's actually pretty disgusting in my opinion.
So how else would you like me to find out about the guy's work Souza? He is actually dead now so meeting him is out of the question. Maybe my local library? I searched databases as well, of which there is no sign of his purported blood tests. Other words were used to describe his finds besides fraud. I recall 'scam' and 'charlatan' was used also and these were from Christian websites, so there is no bias in the reports. I have concluded his work was fraudulent, however in the light of new evidence I would be happy to change my mind. There is no hate involved in my conclusion. I have no personal feelings towards the man one way or the other. I am reporting comments on his work. As for Wyatt seeming sincere, that is hardly the way to measure the truth or not of what he claims. People are ripped off every day by those that come across as 'sincere'. Yes, if I google Michael I will find much abhorrent info, but I will also find much good. It is up to me to weigh the evidence and I have. Michael was victimised, framed and villified for no good reason except hearsay. There was no PROOF! As there is no proof regarding Wyatt's claims, ALL of them. If there was proof, it would be there, as there was for Michael. The truth always comes out in the end. I don't think the truth is always ignored. The truth is always there, it just depends on what you use to determine what it is, feelings or facts. Some people use feelings, others need facts. For people that use feelings the facts are irrelevant - it 'feels' right so therefore it is. This method however does not necessarily mean one has discovered the truth, even if it feels as if one has. Feelings often trump facts no matter how convincing the facts are. Others, like me, need facts. For ones like me this is more difficult because I have then given myself the task of determining what is fact and what is not, no matter how displeasing I may personally find the truth to be. Regarding Wyatt, I have already listed the reasons I doubt his claims and I did not find them on google. They were my own. There are no adequate answers to any of them and apparently even the bible disagrees as to the position of the Ark at the time of Christs crucifixion. I too wonder what is going on here because atm there seems to be much uncritical acceptance of extraordinary claims. Making conclusions and then finding facts to support those conclusions is not the way fact finding works. Facts come before conclusions. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Maybe TS can set us straight? Maybe, as some have suggested, it needs to be taken as more of a symbolic example?
3
« on: January 22, 2012, 06:54:36 PM »
This is a strange video if you ask me:
[YOUTUBE]YtVSPfBTUJs[/YOUTUBE]
Also, a very astute commenter on youtube said to see at 0:50 seconds in.
I am still not sure about this guy, Ron Wyatt. Something seems off about him.
Yes, very off. He is a fraudster. Just google him everyone. Even religious organisations have rejected his claims (of which there are more, one being the "discovery" of where the Red Sea parted). As bindup said, if what he said was true, all Christianity would be touting the find and even Answers in Genesis have rebutted him. He has no blood test results (there are none no matter how hard I looked), no empirical evidence, no collaboration, no video or photos- no evidence at all apart from his personal testimony. I've worked with mentally ill people and they are VERY sincere in many of their wild beliefs, to the point where you sometimes have to wonder if they are right and you are wrong...until the evidence shows up. Case in point, the ill person was sure their 8yr old was being abused at home while she was in care and was very distressed. The person was extremely convincing until the evidence showed up as an adult child of 26 yrs... Claims without evidence should be dismissed until evidence is forthcoming or people may as well believe any wild assertion, like the orbiting teapot: "Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of skeptics to disprove received dogmas rather than that of dogmatists to prove them. This, of course, is a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars, there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an ellipitical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add the the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But, if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books and taught as sacred truth every Sunday, hesitation to believe in it's existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychatrist in an enlightened age or of the inquisitor in an earlier time" Bertrand Russell
4
« on: January 22, 2012, 12:12:22 AM »
I need to focus on being alive for the time that I have, and pursuing happiness.
This I totally agree with. We must live the one life we know we have well, for it is all we really know for sure. There have been dozens of doomsday predictions (many made based on biblical prophecies). NONE have come true. Here is a website that lists them all You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login Even tho I think the bible is made up by men, I do know it pretty well and I am sure there is something in there to be said about false prophets and what God thinks of them. If I believed in God, I would be very careful about EOW predictions since an incorrect prediction makes one a false prophet in the eyes of God. I think I'll just live life by focusing on giving to others and treating our planet and the creatures that call it home with respect. We can change this world for the better. That for me is Michael's message.
5
« on: January 21, 2012, 06:43:03 PM »
Jermaine doesn't know shit. He just knows about the hoax. And for sure he has no idea about anything else. If Michael is not here then no one from the family reads this forum.
I thought again, I will not further this to the family, as they ignore most of the things, and if they do TS will say "The family didn't speak against me so this means they support me and the message I spread".
But I will further this to the authorities.
Okay, and you are going to tell them what exactly? That a Bible study was posted on a forum about RELIGION? I rather would have had it on here to be honest, but maybe TS is trying to avoid people like you by posting it there. Good luck Anna, and I will help you a hand with leaving, since you are one of the few I addressed in one of my recent posts. Your first comment in this thread is: I am not going to comment. What went wrong?
@bindupbrokenhearted: you are right, but that's totally my fault. TS had trouble posting again (that's why it said 'coming soon' first, so he asked me if I could do it for him, but I copied his file wrongly. There are some things he put in italic too in his original post as I see now, so I hope that I can fix that, but the last sentence is now fixed. Thanks for the heads up.
Thanks Souza! It is just my virgo perfectionism coming out again :lol:
One thing that I saw while reading over the post my first read through:
Last, but certainly not least, the new covenant had to be signed with Christ’s literal blood; otherwise, there would be no way to verify the identity of Who signed. The main purpose of a signature is to verify the identity of the one who signed the contract. With handwritten ink, it’s difficult but possible to forge a signature and thereby give a false identity. With blood and DNA, it is even harder to falsify the identity.
With the blood that Ron Wyatt found on the mercy seat of the true ark, the identity is impossible to counterfeit. Normal humans have 46 chromosomes (You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login). However, the blood of Jesus from the ark has only 24 chromosomes (23 “X” from Mary, and 1 “Y” from God). This is very strong scientific evidence of the virgin birth (see Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38; 3:23).
I need to do more research on this as karyotyping and archeology are not my areas, but I do know that DNA in the lab is VERY hard to keep even when preserved in lab settings. So how would it be found, isolated, and chromosome number counted (with karyotyping You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login which is the way chromosomes are counted)? How was this done if the blood is supposedly 2000 years old? I have to question this and further research into it for sure.
But...if karyotyping can't be done on 2000 year old blood, then RW's story has some holes in it.
I almost think TS is just entertaining possible scenarios of where the ark is, which one is real, which is fake, and maybe this is a test. IDK.
I need to do more research and study and read and study the post some more.
Love and peace.
Edit: and IF the DNA DID miraculously keep, my question would be: why hasn't the karyotype been shown to the world? One of two possibilities: either 1. bias (publication: media and/or scientific) and thus a deliberate keeping of info from the public or 2. RW's results are not real results. For the record: I am not sure about any of this yet. I just get the feeling TS is testing us maybe. IDK, I could be wrong. I do know TS has taught me a lot the short time I have been here, but I am not taking everything he says just because he says it. He was the one that taught me to research it and re-research it.
Love.
Since I am an eternal skeptic, this quote raised in me these questions: 1. How do they know it is blood from Jesus? It could be anythings blood if it even is blood. 2. On what basis do they assume 1 chromosome is from God? How do you verify this is so and doesn't the father contribute half of the chromosmes therefore if this was the case there should be 12 Y chromosomes? 3. Human DNA has 46 chromosomes (23 from mother and 23 from father) or 47 if Down syndrome. How can a substance only showing 24 chromosomes be considered human? Item of interest: VITACEAE: family of flowering plants including the GRAPEVINE. Most species have 38 chromosomes but CISSUS has 24. Maybe what appears to be blood was simply spilt wine! 4. To confirm the identity of an individual by their DNA you need to be able to compare that sample with one from either the mother, the father or the individual themselves. This is the purpose of 'cheek cell sampling' when trying to determine a murderers identity from a given sample of people. Since we have none of those in regards to this sample conclusions as to it's origin should be made with caution imo. 5. When would Jesus have been able to come into contact with the mercy seat of the true ark?
6
« on: January 21, 2012, 04:07:31 PM »
I am confused too.
Was "what went to the hospital' ever finalised? Is the Ark connected to this?
I feel TS's current posts may help some find meaning in the apparent loss of Michael and his life purpose but I'm not sure how they are helping us find out WHAT happened regarding his 'death'.
Are we moving away from investigating his death hoax? Do we now just pick up our bibles and interpret our own correlations regarding the hoax?
All the woo is making this harder and harder to work out, not easier, at least for me.
With respect and love.
7
« on: January 15, 2012, 12:25:27 AM »
I'm not sure if this helps but I have spent time in theatre and have witnessed propofol being administered on numerous occasions by anaesthetists.
To me it appeared to be a medical supply, drawn up and used as needed. I never witnessed any "sign out" or drug counting procedures in regards to it's use (as you do with S8's) and it was not kept in a secure drug cupboard, although the amounts used were written in the patient notes. It was part of the anaesthetist supply trolley. It appeared to be treated the same way IV bags are treated in theatre (also written in patient notes)- use as required by the MO.
It must be noted here however, in regards to IV bags, that once the patient is on ward, there must be a medical officers ORDER before nurses can hang the fluids. But this is not really the criteria for prescription either as this in no way implies that the patient is able to administer fluids to themselves. It must be done by a registered nurse.
So I'm not sure how propofol could be described as a "drug for prescription only" (an S4) as I'm pretty sure it would never be prescribed to a patient to take and use as directed.
It would only be a prescribed drug in the sense that bindup said, in that it should only be administered by a medical officer.
8
« on: January 04, 2012, 12:27:22 AM »
psssst Heartsong, *bec motions to Heartsong from foxhole* it's a triple wide.
I can't type, I'm laughing too hard! Atheist parteh talking deep about the universe in a foxhole, lol.
9
« on: January 04, 2012, 12:15:54 AM »
...I was just trying to hook up Miss G on the atheist hideout.
Lol, "atheist hideout", rofl. You guys aren't allowed to hide, we have work to do! *now where did you say that foxhole is and is it big enough for three?*
10
« on: December 31, 2011, 03:40:56 PM »
JOIN what's happening on Twitter NOW!!!
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
Everyone is thanking Michael for what he's given to their lives... it's flying along!!!
And the best part is you're still here! bearhug mj_dance/
11
« on: December 27, 2011, 08:12:43 PM »
Sure looks like MJ, except for the ring on his hand...
12
« on: December 24, 2011, 11:30:46 PM »
He is so beautiful Adi. I miss him  Same to you and all here, hugs, love and peace at this special time of year. bearhug
13
« on: December 24, 2011, 03:46:40 AM »
mathematical design of that nature is statistically impossible within our whole universe.[ Suzy, with respect, could you please explain this claim? Firstly nature was not "designed"...
14
« on: December 24, 2011, 03:23:59 AM »
@Heartsong I never said that; I think there are facts in The Bible but faith must also be used, much like this hoax. We have evidence, but we need faith aswell. Of course if you don't believe in it, you'll think otherwise. When we have hard evidence, belief and faith are irrelevant and not required. I think observational reality and evidence will help us solve the answers to what happened on June 25th '09, not faith. Science is flawed, and scientists are constantly changing their beliefs and debunking their own theories previously held amongst the majority as "truth". Some will say religion and science don't mix, I tend to think scientists and religion don't mix. This can appear to be so, since science modifies it's theories to fit reality. It tests assertions inside out. Any that fail the tests are thrown out since the scientific process actually tries to disprove or falsify postulates. Ie: the statement "All swans are white" would be disproved or falsified by the discovery of at least one black swan. This is what scientists always try to do. It does not mean that they were wrong, just that they did not have all the information yet. This is honest enquiry and it works. Technology proves it. If anything, the study of science--atoms, molecules, DNA--all prove the existence of an intelligent creator. Learning about all of these things, for example the intricate system of DNA within our bodies and nature; or the perfect mathematics in everything from the solar system to a flower, I wonder how one cannot believe in a God? So in my opinion, science can be used to prove a creator exists rather than disprove. This is an argument from incredulity: "I can't understand it, it is too complicated, therefore God must have done it" Using magic to explain observational reality explains nothing and causes us to sit down. Scientists know very well about DNA/RNA and what it is comprised of- the very building blocks of all life on this planet. Science is based on the premise that a tangible, physical claim can be either proved or disproved by more tangible/physical evidence. Therefore, how can something non-physical or intangible such as God, or spirits etc, be disproved by lack of physical evidence? Or, why does the divine existence of a God need to be proven based upon physical evidence? Because this intangible, non-physical being claims to have created the tangible, physical world we are a part of. This being claims to interact with our thoughts, is omniscient, omnipresent, can cure cancer, answer prayers, raise the dead, impregnate virgins and move mountains accompanied by other miracles. If he is there he is part of observational reality and should be detectable. I think the claim that God is intangible and therefore unknowable is a convenient out. We can't see wind but when it blows we feel it's existence. We can't see gravity, but the fact that "what goes up must come down" and our feet stay on the floor etc., proves it exists. It can go on and on. The fact is that just because the human mind cannot fathom the existence of an infinite, intelligent designer does not mean he doesn't exist; it only means we can't prove it with physical evidence. Humans are curious creatures constantly needing to know why, how, when, where and who, whilst reducing everything to things that fit within our realm of understanding. Sometimes we really do just need to have faith and combine it with logic.
Ahhhh, but faith and logic are chalk and cheese. Yes, many things we can't see, hear or feel are still detectable and I have faith in gravity mainly because I know it works (as does science) though if I had never seen gravity demonstrated or used before I would be very skeptical until I had proven it's existence, and our realm of understanding is much, much wider than what is expressed in the Bible.
15
« on: December 23, 2011, 10:15:12 PM »
Suzy, just because you refuse to acknowledge it, doesn't mean I'm not posting it. You guys can pull up the Pepsi accident thread I posted. There's a lot of excellent hard evidence that he faked it. Why did he? I don't know but maybe because it was a huge story with his name in it. Everyone loves to gawk at an accident and that one he and Miko actually could fake pretty easily. Besides, why not? Does this not fit with the MJ persona he shows us in home movies and outtakes? It's a joke, what's not to like. It's also a delightful experiment. Can he get away with it? What a rush if he did. Sometimes people just do things to have fun. Doing massive public hoaxes like this might just be fun for him. If you had the money and the means and you were a practical joker at heart, wouldn't you try something? The media are just whores for a story. It would be like sport to play with them. And who would suspect MJ? Look at him. Pure and innocent as new fallen snow, he is.
IF he did fake it THEN he pulled it off masterfully with no one ever being the wiser. Knowing he could do something like that, visible, in front of a live audience, he must have considered the plan for 6/25/09 a walk in the park. Lol, he probably did fake it. He never like Pepsi anyway and never wanted to do the commercial. One sure way to get out of it!
|
Show Posts
