Zeitgeist

[Queso]

This film is incredible.

 

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

 

The beginning is very graphic, but once you get past it there's a very interesting documentary about how the story of Jesus is the same story as Horus, the egyption god of the sun.

It gets very indepth and I think everyone here on hypography should stop what they are doing and watch it.

 

Part 2 talks about 9/11

I know many of you still believe it was "terrorists" :thumbs_up. Believe whatever you want.

(http://www.youtube.com//watch?v=yhF1y-7RCts

in this video you can clearly see how planes were drawn frame by frame in these "amateur videos"

Clearly, there are two different planes drawn.

SEE FOR YOURSELF

I wonder what that means...?)

 

Part 3 talks about our governments.

This part is the best part of the film.

If you choose to remain ignorant and skip thru the 9/11 parts, at least watch part 3.

Watch it all.

[Queso]

The three kings

is a constellation.

They align with sirius, the star of the east

which tells us when the sun reaches its lowest point in the sky.

It stays there 3 days,

and rises into the sky.

 

Like the archetypal ressurection of jesus, horus, and all the others...

 

Amazing.

[Queso]

Radio-frequency identification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

RFID Chips.

They are located in all new american passports.

They are even being implanted in babies.

They will contain everyones information, and everyones money.

[Queso]

Anyone with an open mind and 2 hours to "kill" should watch this film.

 

I would like to discuss it,

I am overwhelmed.

[Racoon]

I agree that this is a powerful film/documentary.

:confused:

 

Heres the final cut free google version.

Zeitgeist, The Movie - Remastered / Final Edition

 

I'll stay away from the Religious first part of the film.. But Parts 2 and 3 concerning 9-11 and the Fed Reserve are really eye-opening.

 

Now that 9-11 has passed some 8 years ago, the more you look at the details, the more fishy it seems. :naughty: :evil:

[lemit]

Conspiracy theorists, like maggots, feed on rotted flesh.

 

Racoon says of the World Trade Center attack, "the more you look at the details, the more fishy it seems." That's strange. The more I look at the details, the more I feel the obvious explanation is the right one, that al Quaida was responsible, that we possibly didn't use all the information we could have, but the information available to us probably wasn't precise enough to have prevented anything, that the World Trade Center collapsed because it had been hit by fuel-heavy airliners, and that to have built it in anticipation of that eventuality would have been insane.

 

The HBO special "In Memoriam" calls the World Trade Center attack "the most thoroughly documented event in history." The records are there. The information is there. We know what really happened.

 

The memory of the victims must be jealously kept at the center of our collective understanding of that event.

 

--lemit

[sanctus]

The memory of the victims must be jealously kept at the center of our collective understanding of that event.

I agree, but in another way than you think. It is exactly for the memory of the victims, that one should question what really happened, in order to shed light into it. It is not because many people died that one should not question how it happened, that is actually the reason why one should.

the World Trade Center attack "the most thoroughly documented event in history."

This is something which in my view makes it a little fishy, because as UncleAl said in a complete different context:

Truths need not be believable, they merely self-consistently exist. Lies must be believable. Consequently, lies are usually much more believable than truths.

So I just wonder why is it so thoroughly documented if the usual way of thinking is more like yours, that it is more important the memory of the victims than to question what it really hapened?

 

So that you don't get me wrong, what I want to say is, in other words, that also in such a case one should keep an open mind to see what really happened and have the courage to question the official explication.

[modest]

There are more than enough factual injustices in this world to be going around without having to invent fictional ones.

The Irish Times - Sat, Aug 25, 2007 - Zeitgeist: the nonsense

 

Thus legitimate questions about what happened on 9/11, and about corruption in financial and religious organizations, are all undermined by the film’s determined effort to maximize an emotional response at the expense of reasoned argument

Issues in Contemporary Documentary - Google Books

 

It is deceptive filmmaking pure and simple and no manner of self-righteous explanation can disregard the simple fact it’s an out and out lie

 

Issues in Contemporary Documentary - Google Books

 

 

This is a

science

website.

 

Conspiracy theories do not constitute science or truth. What they do constitute is

mindless entertainment

for bored teenagers, the seriously adled and the uneducated. We might put up with you a little longer if you try some other conspiracy, say, UFO Coverups, or faked Apollo Moon missions. But if you keep babbling bogus nonsense about 9/11, we will ban your *** with extreme prejudice.

Re: 9/11 was an Inside Job

 

Admin notice:

 

Posting conspiracy theories is a reason for banning.

 

Please read our rules:

http://hypography.com/forums/?page=rules

Re: 9/11 was an Inside Job

 

I mean nothing of consequence with the quotes above. You are quite justified in wanting to discuss such a film, Orbsycli. It's just a touchy issue with me... for reasons I won't get into.

 

~modest

[Racoon]

Conspiracy theorists, like maggots, feed on rotted flesh.

 

Racoon says of the World Trade Center attack, "the more you look at the details, the more fishy it seems." That's strange. The more I look at the details, the more I feel the obvious explanation is the right one, that al Quaida was responsible, that we possibly didn't use all the information we could have, but the information available to us probably wasn't precise enough to have prevented anything, that the World Trade Center collapsed because it had been hit by fuel-heavy airliners, and that to have built it in anticipation of that eventuality would have been insane.

 

The HBO special "In Memoriam" calls the World Trade Center attack "the most thoroughly documented event in history." The records are there. The information is there. We know what really happened.

 

 

--lemit

 

I take it you watched the movie then??

It doesn't raise any pertinent questions or pique your interest in what appears to be numerous descrepancies??

:confused: Oh well.

I think there are a lot of valid questions the film raises.

 

The Federal Reserve System is also a major part of the movie. Thats a great system, and not at all crooked either, I suppose.

 

I don't find it too far fetched believing our government might be up to some serious Shenanigans.

Call it "Conspiracy". Call it "Investigating". Call it "Free Thinking". Call it "Bullshit". Label it whatever that makes you feel better about your own position.

 

Sorry if I don't take what President Bush Jr., Dick Cheney, and the 9-11 Commission say without a grain of salt.

 

Yes, 9-11 has been beaten to death as a subject, and people have pretty much formed their own opinions on the matter. I just thought this was a pretty good movie.

I'm glad to know its all just a big hoax.

Nothing to look at here folks. Keep moving.

:naughty:

[lemit]

Sorry. I haven't seen the movie. I' ve discovered lately that my tolerance for things like that has greatly diminished, and I don't want to risk adding to their statistics either. I am therefore speaking generically when I say now that stuff like that can rot your brain. (I tried to watch a National Geographic Channel documentary about the conspiracy theories and couldn't. Again, sorry.)

 

Yes, there was a conspiracy on 9/11. Lawrence Wright has documented it very well in The Looming Tower. We botched our response to that conspiracy. If we had attacked the camps and destroyed the cells after the embassy and Cole bombings, we could have angered the world and protected the victims of 9/11. If we had just used the watch list, we could have kept the hijackers on the ground. I think I would prefer to have the conspiracy theories that would have sprung up from those eventualities to the conspiracy theories that are springing up now. I'd like to be able to get the opinions the thousands of people lost on 9/11 and the countless thousands lost stupidly in Afghanistan and Iraq since then, but of course they can't give their opinions, however nutty those opinions might be. I haven't heard any of the new conspiracy theories that impressed me as sufficient to have saved any of those lives.

 

(The buildings were destroyed by explosives planted inside, not by the planes? Come on.)

 

--lemit

[CraigD]

I recently watched, and recommend, nationalgeographic.com’s 2009 documentary, “9/11: Science and Conspiracy" (its companion website, a major media outlet’s review).

 

Although this program doesn’t go as far in the pursuit of impartial reporting that it fails to conclude that the findings of the 9-11 commission are correct overall, it’s sympathetic in its depiction of “truthers” – a catch-all term for the many people and associations of people, such as David Ray Griffin, Dylan Avery, and the "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice", who conclude otherwise. I found this a refreshing departure from films that either credulously support various truther positions, or take strong offense at people for holding them.

 

In addition to its various interviews and engineering experiments, the NatGeo film makes IMHO valid and insightful comparisons of these movements and similar conclusions about the Dec 7, 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor noting that per reliable polls, significantly more Americans at the time believed their government kept secret advanced knowledge of the 1941 attack to promote the entry of the US into WWII than now believe their government kept secret advanced knowledge of the 2001 attacks to promote the US wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, and the similarity between the reactions to these two terrible events. It also provides an introduction to the many factions and differences among truthers, from those who believe the government merely permitted the 2001 attacks to those who believe the US military actually made them. The psychology and sociology of these groups is I think, informative.

[Racoon]

I don't want to beat a dead horse, and we should move forward as a nation and people.. while honoring those who died and tried to protect people and Americans..

 

I just think that our government, and I imply those higher up with tremendous behind-the-curtain influence and power, (NOT the average Joe or Jane grinding through a thankless clerical job), that they have an alternate agenda.

 

Iraq. Post 9-11

We went into Iraq based on a lie, or at least serious misinformation. We've been caught doing all kinds of "wrong" things in the past and up to the current times.

And that was with information we had Prior to and AFTER 9-11! With all kinds of International help!

And we messed that up,... again.

 

If the US Government was wrong about Iraq, and obviously that seems to be a major f*ing mistake that has cost more lives than those who died in 9-11,- then what else is our Government doing thats wrong?? What else have they fudged in all their "Commission Reports"??

 

If you think our top leadership and those who control the economic purse strings are a bunch of Boy Scouts and Good Samaritans, I'd say you would be wrong. IMHO

[lemit]

I recently watched, and recommend, nationalgeographic.com’s 2009 documentary, “9/11: Science and Conspiracy" (its companion website, a major media outlet’s review).

That's the documentary I couldn't watch all the way through because I realized the brushfires will keep burning and taking a lot of otherwise harmless people with them. I grew up with backward, rural people who wouldn't harm anybody unless told by authoritative-sounding people that something was wrong. I'm sure the few people who remain where I grew up are reading conspiracy theory books, watching Fox News, and arming themselves for some conflict that will--if we are all very lucky--remain imaginary.

 

It is those people who frighten me. They are the cannon fodder for conspiracy nuts and bigots. Given a cause, they will fight. Without a cause, they will continue to farm, work on machinery, and watch NASCAR. We need to allow them to pursue the latter course.

 

Vigorous debate is fine. Right now, however, there are a lot of people shouting, "Fire." There isn't any fire, of course, but they're quite willing to use those rural, genuinely innocent and ignorant people to start the fire so they in retrospect will have been right. They have shown that with the manufactured fury of the Town Hall Meetings.

 

Somehow, we need to stop that trend. If the propagation of conspiracy theories is cause for banning, let's see somebody with the appropriate authority show something to those of us who promote Hypography as a tightly moderated science site, and to those who think they can get away with rules violations.

 

--lemit

[Racoon]

I can totally see Lemit as a character in a Charles Dickens' novel.

:)

Its about asking questions.

Many things don't add up.

Theres enough scientific evidence to ask questions..

How did Titanium from the jet engine casings that smashed into the Pentagon disintegrate when jet fuel burns 2000 degrees cooler than the requiered temp to disintigrate Titanium??

 

Thats just a single instance.

 

You obviously haven't even watched the film and are already calling "BAN" for people who question the Norm.

 

Watch the film first. Obviously you have a hang-up about the issue.

 

 

I'm not so sure I like the tone of your last post Lemit. Not everyone here is an old curmudgeon who believes the status-quo and Daily Times newspaper.

 

Yes this is a Science Site , but its awfully easy to use that Label to say "stop talking about that, Its Not Science" when you realize it becomes a painful subject to defend.

 

It'd be Very hypocritical to Claim "Non-Scientific" about the subject when the community discusses all sorts of un-scientific politial, social,commercial matter often! much unrelated to hard facts all the time here.

 

You can believe whatever Bullshit you want to.

And you'll afford me the same luxury to believe all the Bullshit I choose to.

You haven't even seen the film.

 

;):)

 

Watch the film or don't. You can't really comment upon this thread or this matter until you do.

and by that point you'll already be extremely biased; and thats an Unscientific vantage you should avoid if you're to be impartial to facts ands results.

[Boerseun]

Well, I have seen the movie. A friend of mine brought it to my home the other day (a couple 'o months ago, and he wasn't very happy with my indifference towards it.

 

I could explain to you point by point why it's populist BS, but this kinda explains my point:

Why is Zeitgeist a big piece of conspiracy theory crap? Let me tell you.

 

Zeitgeist is another dull movie with scary pictures and dramatic music that fondly reminds me of Loose Change. Only this one is is more convoluted and idiotic. The fact that most people on the Internet are so accepting to this film astounds me. Well... actually doesn't because information of the average person on the Internet is like this. Someone hands you a piece of cheese and calls it cake. One person says it isn't cake and another insults you for it. Then that someone comes up with a well thought out plot as to why he thinks its cake and that words are meaningless. How did we come up with the word cheese instead of cake? Therefore he has all rights to call it cake. One person sees the point and spreads the idea saying how fantastic and wonderful it is. It spreads like wildfire and people are now calling cheese "cake". When in fact it is still a ****ing block of cheese.

 

Now immediately I noticed the problem with Zeitgeist was the fact that the maker of this "documentary" has the religious knowledge of a poodle. He took many religious figures and gave them basic parables to Jesus Christ despite the fact the most of those aren't looked in depth or are just grossly inaccurate.

 

Take for example Jesus's Birthday. If you have common knowledge you will now that Jesus's birthday was set on December 25th to replace that of Bacchus. Jesus's birthday was not, in fact, on December 25th. Yet, he states throughout the film that his Birthday IS on December 25th. When in fact it says in the Bible that there were "shepherds in the field". This would indicate that Jesus was most likely born during the spring as well all should know that in that period Sheep did not graze in the winter.

 

Another example is the God Horus. Horus's story is pretty much inaccurate to hell other than the fact that he died and came to life again. You should all know that, in fact, there are many religious figures out there who have died and come back to life. Jesus wasn't the one who started the trend. Horus's story, if you ask any college professor or do...I dunno...basic Internet fact checking is not like he had said. Horus's mother was not a virgin as she had sex with a disembodied penis from Hours's father. He was never crucified. He had followers, but they were never called Disciples nor were there a specific numbers. It never really said he was born on December 25th.

 

Still you could look for basic rock hard parables to many religious figures, but if you look down at the stories and how detailed and different they are you learn that each one of them are unique in their own way and in others are not alike at all.

 

The movie rambles on about this while people soak it up like a sponge.

 

Then it moves on the the 9/11 conspiracy despite the fact that many of them have be disproved time and time again and only to assert them would make you look like a fool. The only way you don't look like a fool is that you tell this and share it with a person who is as dumb and gullible as you are. I'm not even going to try to disprove this as I have time and time again shown factual evidence that Loose Change is a load of rubbish. So if you really want some facts to it just look at some great websites who offer a different side of the story. A detailed explanation as to how the towers collapsed and how it was not perpetrated by greasy moose aliens who shot a rocket into the buildings because the US government wanted money.

 

Then it moves on to stuff about banking, but I've gotten so upset and frustrated with the long piece of junk that I stopped paying attention. According what other people have told me is that the US government and the governments of North America are trying to set up a money system similar to that of the Euro. This is to further create the plans to make a one world government even though that is a load of rubbish. The Euro was created for the most part because of practicality. So many European countries that live so close to each other have to change their money constantly because they live so bloody close. The Euro's pretty much fixed this. There were also some European Union stuff and crap like that, but I won't go into detail.

 

Anyway, if you take this film as fact then you are most likely the kind of person who sits at their desk with a point metal hat. However, if you have more questions about it then just use your basic Google search button therefore you can actually look that stuff up for yourself other than having someone else tell you that it's real.

 

It's a block of cheese, dude. Cheeeeeeese.