Zeitgeist

[Medusa]

l hope it is really CT because it seems horrible

 

[mike2810]

One analysis fo the movie. Each should research and judge for themselves.

"So, the conclusion is, the film is 99.999% a complete lie, complete farce, made up garbage.
But hey, you don't have to believe me, I'm not the one making outrageous claims that religion is only meant to control you, and that it is connected with 9/11, which in turn with the Federal Reserve will give you a microchip... with no evidence of consequence."


Zeitgeist, the movie Debunked - Introduction - Zeitgeist Exposed - Skeptic Project

 

[Jango]

One analysis fo the movie. Each should research and judge for themselves.

"So, the conclusion is, the film is 99.999% a complete lie, complete farce, made up garbage.
But hey, you don't have to believe me, I'm not the one making outrageous claims that religion is only meant to control you, and that it is connected with 9/11, which in turn with the Federal Reserve will give you a microchip... with no evidence of consequence."


Zeitgeist, the movie Debunked - Introduction - Zeitgeist Exposed - Skeptic Project

Oh, great, a movie review by a so-called skeptic. Thank you for posting!

 

[mike2810]

Oh, great, a movie review by a so-called skeptic. Thank you for posting!

your welcome.
I basically dislike vids that are bs.
Noticed you didn't refute that the vid was bs.
Thanks for playing.:mrgreen:

 

[Jetboogieman]

Zeitgiest is an absolute load of bollocks.

It's candy for people pre-disposed to believing in conspiracy theory rubbish.

 

[BmanMcfly]

l hope it is really CT because it seems horrible

Well, the section about Jesus is probably around 90% bs...

The section about federal reserve is Historically accurate.

Once you understand that premise, the rest follows logically... But is only as accurate as you think it is, cause I don't really want to get into that discussion.

That said, the maker pretty much believes that technology will create a blend of human and machines, that is presented nicely but really sounds like the Borg from star trek.

 

[Jango]

your welcome.
I basically dislike vids that are bs.
Noticed you didn't refute that the vid was bs.
Thanks for playing.:mrgreen:

I don't really watch videos on the Internet anymore. Is there a review of this show from a non so-called skeptic? I ask because the people that routinely call themselves skeptics nowadays are anything but skeptics - evidenced by JREF.

 

[mike2810]

I don't really watch videos on the Internet anymore. Is there a review of this show from a non so-called skeptic? I ask because the people that routinely call themselves skeptics nowadays are anything but skeptics - evidenced by JREF.

From the OP, I searched for an analysis of the vid. The one I posted is what I found and read.
Like you I don't watch many vids from the internet. I will admit I scanned through the vid.
IMO, it is bunk. Typical CT stuff.

 

[ChezC3]

what was interesting about this movie was that it tried to debunk religion but than carried on about conspiracies which are prophecies...

 

[Sig]

Well, the section about Jesus is probably around 90% bs...

Actually, the section about Jesus seems fairly accurate, with the exception of the statement that the "person whom we know to be Jesus probably never even existed." There was likely a noted Essene preacher from the Galilee region of Israel named Jesus; however, it certainly appears that a standard template was used to craft the popular Jesus mythos familiar to Christianity, beginning with the December 25th birthdate.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Actually, the section about Jesus seems fairly accurate, with the exception of the statement that the "person whom we know to be Jesus probably never even existed." There was likely a noted Essene preacher from the Galilee region of Israel named Jesus; however, it certainly appears that a standard template was used to craft the popular Jesus mythos familiar to Christianity, beginning with the December 25th birthdate.

Ya, I dunno, I don't fully remember all the parts, but there was a serious lack of explanation / sourcing that would lead to those conclusions.

That section, more than any other part came across like bs is all I'm saying.

 

[Sig]

Ya, I dunno, I don't fully remember all the parts, but there was a serious lack of explanation / sourcing that would lead to those conclusions.

That section, more than any other part came across like bs is all I'm saying.

To be fair, there was also a lot of loose (and even false) interpretations of some of the ancient myths and religious figures mentioned, so "accurate" is probably not the best description of Part I. However, the gist of the discussion, namely that all the hocus pocus (i.e.: exodus story, virgin birth of Jesus, walking on water, resurrection, etc.) mentioned in the Bible fits right in with the fantasy myths common to most religions of the day. Hence, it is no less ridiculous to believe in the virgin birth of Jesus than it is to believe that Romulus was the son of Mars, that Mithra was cut out of a slab of rock by a bolt of lightning, or that "Krishna was born without a sexual union, but by divine "mental transmission" from the mind of Vasudeva into the womb of Devaki." (Krishna - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)