Zeitgeist the Movie

Kahalachan · 12th June 2007, 09:27 PM

I see some atheists circulating this video around.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...114455236037&q

Part 2 I'm not interested in. Part 2 is more 9-11 conspiracy stuff which is already being taken care of in other topics. Part 3 demonizes the Federal Reserve Bank. So we could examine that. I know the claim that the FRB always jacks up interest is false, sometimes they want to lower the circulation of money.

But of course it would be a fallacy to say Part 1 is false just cause Parts 2 and 3 are ridiculous. We've got to examine each fact presented and not overgeneralize.

The main reason atheists circulate this around is that it draws parallels between Christianity and astrology. Some of the linguistic claims this video makes is one that I highly doubt. I do agree with the fact Jesus is very similar to pre-existing deities and that many Messiahs were wandering around during Jesus' time.

What I would like us to do is filter out the fact from fiction in this video.

boloboffin · 21st June 2007, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Kahalachan

I see some atheists circulating this video around.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...114455236037&q

Part 2 I'm not interested in. Part 2 is more 9-11 conspiracy stuff which is already being taken care of in other topics. Part 3 demonizes the Federal Reserve Bank. So we could examine that. I know the claim that the FRB always jacks up interest is false, sometimes they want to lower the circulation of money.

But of course it would be a fallacy to say Part 1 is false just cause Parts 2 and 3 are ridiculous. We've got to examine each fact presented and not overgeneralize.

The main reason atheists circulate this around is that it draws parallels between Christianity and astrology. Some of the linguistic claims this video makes is one that I highly doubt. I do agree with the fact Jesus is very similar to pre-existing deities and that many Messiahs were wandering around during Jesus' time.

What I would like us to do is filter out the fact from fiction in this video.

The God Who Wasn't There analysis
Loose Change Guide
Debunking Federal Reserve CTs
Income Tax myths

Kahalachan · 22nd June 2007, 01:18 PM

Good info. I had no idea that Zeitgeist was a parallel to The God Who Wasn't There movie.

The Rational Response Squad offered The God Who Wasn't There movie to people who partook of the blasphemy challenge without any seeming concern about the accuracy of the movie itself.

It's embarassing to see atheists succumb to facts that support their views, rather than be skeptical.

boloboffin · 22nd June 2007, 11:10 PM

It's more than a parallel - it seems that the editor of Zeitgeist actually took whole clips of The God Who Wasn't There for the first part, various 9/11 CT movies for the second part, and Aaron Russo's From Freedom to Fascism for the third.

Ersby · 23rd June 2007, 01:08 AM

A lot of dubious unreferenced material. On the one thing I could check easily - the origin of the words "horizon" and "sunset", the film was wrong. It could almost be a parody at times. A bishop's hat is based on a fish head?!

Kahalachan · 23rd June 2007, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

It's more than a parallel - it seems that the editor of Zeitgeist actually took whole clips of The God Who Wasn't There for the first part, various 9/11 CT movies for the second part, and Aaron Russo's From Freedom to Fascism for the third.

That's a shame. Good to see this topic is killing 2 woo birds with one skeptical stone

I never saw God Who Wasn't There.

arockincanada · 11th July 2007, 10:17 AM

Does anyone know if some of the main statements made in part 1 of this movie are in fact true?

1. Would "The Three Kings" of Orians belt actually line up with Sirius, as to be pointing towards the sunrise on December 25th, (in ~4AD of course.)

2. Does the sun, when viewed from the northern hemisphere, at the winter equinox "stop" moving south (perceivably), for three days, and then start to move north again?

3. On the winter equinox, does the sun set in the vicinity of the southern cross?

4. Is Moses believed to have been alive in ~2150 BC?

RexMundi · 18th July 2007, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by arockincanada

Does anyone know if some of the main statements made in part 1 of this movie are in fact true?

1. Would "The Three Kings" of Orians belt actually line up with Sirius, as to be pointing towards the sunrise on December 25th, (in ~4AD of course.)

While my astronomy skills are horrible, I was also curious about your first question and so I investigated it using Celestia. I told it to go back to December 25th, year 4 AD and searched on Sirius and turned the constellation outlines on and discovered that the three stars in Orion's belt line up "above" Sirius a little. I can see that back then without the aid of telescopes and software it could be construed as a pointer to the naked eye, I suppose.

I have an analysis picture from Celestia that I cannot post here this this is my first one and I need to do 14 more. Let me know if you'd like to see it.

Kahalachan · 19th August 2007, 12:39 AM

I watched the God Who Wasn't There, and it wasn't like Zeitgeist at all. It was much better.

Simon Parker · 16th July 2008, 03:06 AM

I have been reading all these views and petty squabbles for some time now. I myself watched Zeitgeist for the first a few weeks ago. I intend to investigate it word for word.

I think the most important thing here to remember is that this film is opening people eyes and hopefully they will start to ask questions.

These myths have gone for far to long.

Anyone out there agree ?? Get in touch

devnull · 16th July 2008, 04:08 AM

As an atheist, I thought the Zeitgeist movie was a pile of crap.

Viper Daimao · 16th July 2008, 02:26 PM

anyone here is interested, there's a huge thread about it in the conspiracy theories section. Lot's of good analysis of part 1 by GreNME and nick227 once you get in the teens page numbers. Nick also has a page of issues here.

Also another thread here with some trolling by jerome that shows really how silly the first part of the movie is.

druids brew · 3rd September 2008, 01:42 AM

hi there ...somewhat new so a little patience.....it doesnt really matter whether its basis is fact or supposition....anything that gets people challenging the grip that dogma religion has on this planet is a good thing.... what is apparent is that in 50 000 odd years we are further away from the point than we were.

druids brew · 3rd September 2008, 01:51 AM

hi..just a slight concern about the liberal use of atheist.....just because one doesnt buy into the hypocritical nonesense of the christian religion by no means makes one an atheist......i have absolutely unquestionable faith in my belief...its just not yours....''judge not lest you yourself be judged''

X · 3rd September 2008, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by druids brew

hi there ...somewhat new so a little patience.....it doesnt really matter whether its basis is fact or supposition....anything that gets people challenging the grip that dogma religion has on this planet is a good thing.... what is apparent is that in 50 000 odd years we are further away from the point than we were.

bolding mine

It doesn't matter whether things are correct or false?

Look, there's lots of problems that can be highlighted with repsect to religion (and 9/11, and taxes). It is not necessary to lie. Nor do most people consider it acceptable.

Zeitgeist lies. Whether intentionally or unintentionally I can not say. But almost everything in that movie was fallacious.

Do you truly not see a problem with that?

dudalb · 3rd September 2008, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Simon Parker

I have been reading all these views and petty squabbles for some time now. I myself watched Zeitgeist for the first a few weeks ago. I intend to investigate it word for word.

I think the most important thing here to remember is that this film is opening people eyes and hopefully they will start to ask questions.

These myths have gone for far to long.

Anyone out there agree ?? Get in touch

Replacing one bunch of crap with another bunch of crap benefits nobody.

dudalb · 3rd September 2008, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by [X]

bolding mine

It doesn't matter whether things are correct or false?

Look, there's lots of problems that can be highlighted with repsect to religion (and 9/11, and taxes). It is not necessary to lie. Nor do most people consider it acceptable.

Zeitgeist lies. Whether intentionally or unintentionally I can not say. But almost everything in that movie was fallacious.

Do you truly not see a problem with that?

It's called "The Ends Justify The Means".

Zeitgest is pure crap, and it is embarassing that some alleged rational thinkers are embaracing it just because it says some nasty things about Christiniaty.

dudalb · 3rd September 2008, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by Kahalachan

I watched the God Who Wasn't There, and it wasn't like Zeitgeist at all. It was much better.

It's much better done technically, although I still question a lot of what is in the film.

dudalb · 3rd September 2008, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by druids brew

hi..just a slight concern about the liberal use of atheist.....just because one doesnt buy into the hypocritical nonesense of the christian religion by no means makes one an atheist......i have absolutely unquestionable faith in my belief...its just not yours....''judge not lest you yourself be judged''

Uh, a lot of the people here are Athiest, and find Wicca to be just as silly, if not more so, then Christianity.

sophia8 · 3rd September 2008, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Uh, a lot of the people here are Athiest,

Speak for yourself.

dudalb · 3rd September 2008, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by sophia8

Speak for yourself.

I did not say everybody who post here is an athiest, I said a lot of them are, and I stand by that. And I made NO comment about my religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Amapola · 3rd September 2008, 04:56 PM

No matter what religion a person may happen to be, or not be, and no matter what the poster's religion may happen to be, or not be, the movie Zeitgeist is full of baloney.

paximperium · 3rd September 2008, 05:57 PM

I found Zeitgeist to be one of the funniest movies I've ever seen.

Filled with complete and utter crap and lies, it is not only a joke but the people who actually believe in its garbage are more so of a joke. It gives atheists a bad name.

12th June 2007, 09:27 PM	#1
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237	Zeitgeist the Movie I see some atheists circulating this video around. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...114455236037&q Part 2 I'm not interested in. Part 2 is more 9-11 conspiracy stuff which is already being taken care of in other topics. Part 3 demonizes the Federal Reserve Bank. So we could examine that. I know the claim that the FRB always jacks up interest is false, sometimes they want to lower the circulation of money. But of course it would be a fallacy to say Part 1 is false just cause Parts 2 and 3 are ridiculous. We've got to examine each fact presented and not overgeneralize. The main reason atheists circulate this around is that it draws parallels between Christianity and astrology. Some of the linguistic claims this video makes is one that I highly doubt. I do agree with the fact Jesus is very similar to pre-existing deities and that many Messiahs were wandering around during Jesus' time. What I would like us to do is filter out the fact from fiction in this video.
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237

21st June 2007, 10:42 AM	#2
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,986	Originally Posted by Kahalachan I see some atheists circulating this video around. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...114455236037&q Part 2 I'm not interested in. Part 2 is more 9-11 conspiracy stuff which is already being taken care of in other topics. Part 3 demonizes the Federal Reserve Bank. So we could examine that. I know the claim that the FRB always jacks up interest is false, sometimes they want to lower the circulation of money. But of course it would be a fallacy to say Part 1 is false just cause Parts 2 and 3 are ridiculous. We've got to examine each fact presented and not overgeneralize. The main reason atheists circulate this around is that it draws parallels between Christianity and astrology. Some of the linguistic claims this video makes is one that I highly doubt. I do agree with the fact Jesus is very similar to pre-existing deities and that many Messiahs were wandering around during Jesus' time. What I would like us to do is filter out the fact from fiction in this video. The God Who Wasn't There analysis Loose Change Guide Debunking Federal Reserve CTs Income Tax myths
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,986

22nd June 2007, 01:18 PM	#3
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237	Good info. I had no idea that Zeitgeist was a parallel to The God Who Wasn't There movie. The Rational Response Squad offered The God Who Wasn't There movie to people who partook of the blasphemy challenge without any seeming concern about the accuracy of the movie itself. It's embarassing to see atheists succumb to facts that support their views, rather than be skeptical.
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237

22nd June 2007, 11:10 PM	#4
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,986	It's more than a parallel - it seems that the editor of Zeitgeist actually took whole clips of The God Who Wasn't There for the first part, various 9/11 CT movies for the second part, and Aaron Russo's From Freedom to Fascism for the third.
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,986

23rd June 2007, 01:08 AM	#5
Ersby Fortean Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 1,881	A lot of dubious unreferenced material. On the one thing I could check easily - the origin of the words "horizon" and "sunset", the film was wrong. It could almost be a parody at times. A bishop's hat is based on a fish head?!
Ersby Fortean Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 1,881	__________________ "Once a man admits complete and unshakeable faith in his own integrity, he is in an excellent frame of mind to be approached by con men." David W. Maurer, "The Big Con"

23rd June 2007, 07:23 AM	#6
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237	Originally Posted by boloboffin It's more than a parallel - it seems that the editor of Zeitgeist actually took whole clips of The God Who Wasn't There for the first part, various 9/11 CT movies for the second part, and Aaron Russo's From Freedom to Fascism for the third. That's a shame. Good to see this topic is killing 2 woo birds with one skeptical stone I never saw God Who Wasn't There.
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237

11th July 2007, 10:17 AM	#7
arockincanada New Blood Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4	A few points.. Does anyone know if some of the main statements made in part 1 of this movie are in fact true? 1. Would "The Three Kings" of Orians belt actually line up with Sirius, as to be pointing towards the sunrise on December 25th, (in ~4AD of course.) 2. Does the sun, when viewed from the northern hemisphere, at the winter equinox "stop" moving south (perceivably), for three days, and then start to move north again? 3. On the winter equinox, does the sun set in the vicinity of the southern cross? 4. Is Moses believed to have been alive in ~2150 BC?
arockincanada New Blood Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4

18th July 2007, 06:03 AM	#8
RexMundi New Blood Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7	Originally Posted by arockincanada Does anyone know if some of the main statements made in part 1 of this movie are in fact true? 1. Would "The Three Kings" of Orians belt actually line up with Sirius, as to be pointing towards the sunrise on December 25th, (in ~4AD of course.) While my astronomy skills are horrible, I was also curious about your first question and so I investigated it using Celestia. I told it to go back to December 25th, year 4 AD and searched on Sirius and turned the constellation outlines on and discovered that the three stars in Orion's belt line up "above" Sirius a little. I can see that back then without the aid of telescopes and software it could be construed as a pointer to the naked eye, I suppose. I have an analysis picture from Celestia that I cannot post here this this is my first one and I need to do 14 more. Let me know if you'd like to see it.
RexMundi New Blood Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7

19th August 2007, 12:39 AM	#9
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237	I watched the God Who Wasn't There, and it wasn't like Zeitgeist at all. It was much better.
Kahalachan Illuminator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,237

16th July 2008, 03:06 AM	#10
Simon Parker New Blood Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1	Verititas vos liberab I have been reading all these views and petty squabbles for some time now. I myself watched Zeitgeist for the first a few weeks ago. I intend to investigate it word for word. I think the most important thing here to remember is that this film is opening people eyes and hopefully they will start to ask questions. These myths have gone for far to long. Anyone out there agree ?? Get in touch
Simon Parker New Blood Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1

16th July 2008, 04:08 AM	#11
devnull Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 6,057	As an atheist, I thought the Zeitgeist movie was a pile of crap.
	__________________ _{"Here we go again.... semantic and syntactic chicanery and sophistic sleight of tongue and pen.... the bedazzling magic of appearing to be saying something when in fact all that is happening is diverting attention from the attempts at shoving god through the trapdoor of illogic and wishful thinking." - Leumas}

16th July 2008, 02:26 PM	#12
Viper Daimao Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 496	anyone here is interested, there's a huge thread about it in the conspiracy theories section. Lot's of good analysis of part 1 by GreNME and nick227 once you get in the teens page numbers. Nick also has a page of issues here. Also another thread here with some trolling by jerome that shows really how silly the first part of the movie is.

3rd September 2008, 01:42 AM	#13
druids brew New Blood Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 15	hi there ...somewhat new so a little patience.....it doesnt really matter whether its basis is fact or supposition....anything that gets people challenging the grip that dogma religion has on this planet is a good thing.... what is apparent is that in 50 000 odd years we are further away from the point than we were.
druids brew New Blood Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 15

3rd September 2008, 01:51 AM	#14
druids brew New Blood Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 15	hi..just a slight concern about the liberal use of atheist.....just because one doesnt buy into the hypocritical nonesense of the christian religion by no means makes one an atheist......i have absolutely unquestionable faith in my belief...its just not yours....''judge not lest you yourself be judged''
druids brew New Blood Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 15

3rd September 2008, 10:02 AM	#15
X Slide Rulez 4 Life Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,127	Originally Posted by druids brew hi there ...somewhat new so a little patience.....it doesnt really matter whether its basis is fact or supposition....anything that gets people challenging the grip that dogma religion has on this planet is a good thing.... what is apparent is that in 50 000 odd years we are further away from the point than we were. bolding mine It doesn't matter whether things are correct or false? Look, there's lots of problems that can be highlighted with repsect to religion (and 9/11, and taxes). It is not necessary to lie. Nor do most people consider it acceptable. Zeitgeist lies. Whether intentionally or unintentionally I can not say. But almost everything in that movie was fallacious. Do you truly not see a problem with that?
X Slide Rulez 4 Life Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,127	__________________ It is sad that this is necessary: Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly." Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly." [X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis

3rd September 2008, 10:41 AM	#16
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 54,831	Originally Posted by Simon Parker I have been reading all these views and petty squabbles for some time now. I myself watched Zeitgeist for the first a few weeks ago. I intend to investigate it word for word. I think the most important thing here to remember is that this film is opening people eyes and hopefully they will start to ask questions. These myths have gone for far to long. Anyone out there agree ?? Get in touch Replacing one bunch of crap with another bunch of crap benefits nobody.

3rd September 2008, 10:44 AM	#17
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 54,831	Originally Posted by [X] bolding mine It doesn't matter whether things are correct or false? Look, there's lots of problems that can be highlighted with repsect to religion (and 9/11, and taxes). It is not necessary to lie. Nor do most people consider it acceptable. Zeitgeist lies. Whether intentionally or unintentionally I can not say. But almost everything in that movie was fallacious. Do you truly not see a problem with that? It's called "The Ends Justify The Means". Zeitgest is pure crap, and it is embarassing that some alleged rational thinkers are embaracing it just because it says some nasty things about Christiniaty.

3rd September 2008, 10:46 AM	#18
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 54,831	Originally Posted by Kahalachan I watched the God Who Wasn't There, and it wasn't like Zeitgeist at all. It was much better. It's much better done technically, although I still question a lot of what is in the film.

3rd September 2008, 10:47 AM	#19
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 54,831	Originally Posted by druids brew hi..just a slight concern about the liberal use of atheist.....just because one doesnt buy into the hypocritical nonesense of the christian religion by no means makes one an atheist......i have absolutely unquestionable faith in my belief...its just not yours....''judge not lest you yourself be judged'' Uh, a lot of the people here are Athiest, and find Wicca to be just as silly, if not more so, then Christianity.

3rd September 2008, 11:14 AM	#20
sophia8 Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 2,457	Originally Posted by dudalb Uh, a lot of the people here are Athiest, Speak for yourself.
sophia8 Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 2,457	__________________ "Nature is floods and famines and earthquakes and viruses and little blue-footed booby babies getting their brains pecked out by their stronger siblings! ....Nature doesn't care about me, or about anybody in particular - nature can be terrifying! Why do they even put words like 'natural' on products like shampoo, like it's automatically a good thing? I mean, sulfuric acid is natural!" -Julia Sweeney

3rd September 2008, 11:22 AM	#21
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 54,831	Originally Posted by sophia8 Speak for yourself. I did not say everybody who post here is an athiest, I said a lot of them are, and I stand by that. And I made NO comment about my religious beliefs or lack thereof.
	Last edited by dudalb; 3rd September 2008 at 11:25 AM.

3rd September 2008, 04:56 PM	#22
Amapola Guest Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 8,254	No matter what religion a person may happen to be, or not be, and no matter what the poster's religion may happen to be, or not be, the movie Zeitgeist is full of baloney.
Amapola Guest Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 8,254

3rd September 2008, 05:57 PM	#23
paximperium Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 10,696	I found Zeitgeist to be one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. Filled with complete and utter crap and lies, it is not only a joke but the people who actually believe in its garbage are more so of a joke. It gives atheists a bad name.
	__________________ "The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age." -Carl Sagan "They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance."-Terry Pratchett