[Scribbler]

Originally Posted by Saquist

The one common denominator is that given enough time isolated to the confines of egostatic cultrural concepts incredulity can proliferate no matter how much evidence one may have.

For 2000, years Jesus Christ was had never been questioned.
Then Lyell whom Darwin associated with began theorizing purposely against Judeo-Christian concept and atheism burst onto the scene for the modern age. It gained popularity in a certain circle and was encouraged not because of any discovered errors in the scriptural text vs science but merely for the discord of dominance that the Catholic Church had caused for it's entire period of power.

Anti-Judeo-Christian influence is also well linked with the theories against the Holocaust. It benefits a similar agenda not because of some error discovered consistent with known facts but because of mere incredulity and hate.

Christians don't accept evolution not because they know evolution has flaws but because they choose to believe in God and hate has stired many in both directions. Many are choosing their side merely on emotional incredulity and tradition.

All for the same reasons:
"I haven't seen it."
"I don't want to believe it"
"have been hurt by those who do believe"

The Moonlanding is a different animal but it's agenda is somewhat political aswell and ultimately the Hoax theories originators suffer from the same egotistic isolation that atheist, Christians and Muslims suffer from as a whole so at least there is something in common between these counter intuitive associations.

When one accepts that almost all of the events one knows about are cultrual acceptances are not just a matter of undeniable fact it becomes clear that nothing stops us from rejecting every thing we've learned through someone else's telling of history. It is Agenda...It is ego it is culture.

~This objective analysis brought to you by.
~SaQ

An interesting post, this one. Need time to think about it. The first obvious point is that I can go and see Buchenwald or Auschwitz. There are graves, birth certificates. I can speak with survivors or their children, people with tattoos. Biblical events are much harder to verify - I mean this with no disrespect or bias, true events are equally obscured by the time elapsed and lack of technology at the time of recording. If I understand you, your thesis is that there are no objective analyses possible as everything is coloured by the contact lenses of ego and culture? Odd then that you sign off with a claim of your objectivity. I'm not trying to be argumentative, this is a really good post, just trying to understand.

[Scribbler]

As an aside, it's not right that for 2000 years before Darwin, Jesus Christ had never been questioned. Lots of sources on the internet to back this one up. :-)

[Saquist]

Originally Posted by Scribbler

An interesting post, this one. Need time to think about it. The first obvious point is that I can go and see Buchenwald or Auschwitz. There are graves, birth certificates. I can speak with survivors or their children, people with tattoos. Biblical events are much harder to verify - I mean this with no disrespect or bias, true events are equally obscured by the time elapsed and lack of technology at the time of recording. If I understand you, your thesis is that there are no objective analyses possible as everything is coloured by the contact lenses of ego and culture? Odd then that you sign off with a claim of your objectivity. I'm not trying to be argumentative, this is a really good post, just trying to understand.

Yes you can go see the people, the markings the Stars of David and the Purple Triangles, the crematoriums. With the Moonlandings you can see the Pictures and the artifacts brought back but that hasn't stopped people from questioning it's validity and it never will no matter how logical it presents its self. It was only 40 years ago. 20% of the American population, the amount greater than every major US city combined, 60,000,000 people, believe it was an elaborate conspiracy.

How extensive and dedicated that conspiracy would have to be.
The same is true with the Existence of Jesus, the Holocaust, Evolution.

Have you heard some the theories of atheist concerning Jesus?
Have you heard some the theories of Christians regarding evolution?
Have you heard some the theories of Iranians concerning the Holocaust.

All of them attempt to link a string of highly improbable events and prominent individuals in a conspiracy that fits all the facts based on erronous information, or the most minute detail in an other wise progressive pattern.

Many of us grow up with some sort of visual impairment and require contacts or glasses to see 20/20. However unless someone examined us or otherwise informed or related to us the difference...we wouldn't be anymore aware of our visual flaws than a person who grew up in rual Arkansas, votes Republican and doesn't go for SCI FI and space ship and just happens to believe the moonlanding is a huge hoax.

The idea here is that vision can be corrected if you allow it.
You can be made aware and make use of corrective lenses.
The same is true for the cultural egos we grow up with. t's just much much harder to fight because all of them are well reinforced.

The Objective Portrayal
by SaQ

Originally Posted by Scribbler

As an aside, it's not right that for 2000 years before Darwin, Jesus Christ had never been questioned. Lots of sources on the internet to back this one up. :-)

Jesus was questioned in legitmacy at the very time of his era by the Pharasiess. Despite it's singualar views to culture and God while most were poly-theistic it became viral. The 19th Century was the begining of serious contention but if you know of others I'm always expanding my database.

[Star Trek Viewer]

Oh, ye gods, not a debate about the Holocaust. And I thought the transporter debate was a doozy!

Can we keep this thread light, pleeeeze?

[Kiko Kea]

Originally Posted by Star Trek Viewer

Oh, ye gods, not a debate about the Holocaust. And I thought the transporter debate was a doozy!

Can we keep this thread light, pleeeeze?

Or 'lite' since the moon's made of cheese.

[Samuel]

Originally Posted by Kiko Kea

Or 'lite' since the moon's made of cheese.

Yes. And pepperoni and mushrooms and olives and.... now I am hungry again.

[Scribbler]

Originally Posted by Saquist

Yes you can go see the people, the markings the Stars of David and the Purple Triangles, the crematoriums. With the Moonlandings you can see the Pictures and the artifacts brought back but that hasn't stopped people from questioning it's validity and it never will no matter how logical it presents its self. It was only 40 years ago. 20% of the American population, the amount greater than every major US city combined, 60,000,000 people, believe it was an elaborate conspiracy.

How extensive and dedicated that conspiracy would have to be.
The same is true with the Existence of Jesus, the Holocaust, Evolution.

Have you heard some the theories of atheist concerning Jesus?
Have you heard some the theories of Christians regarding evolution?
Have you heard some the theories of Iranians concerning the Holocaust.

All of them attempt to link a string of highly improbable events and prominent individuals in a conspiracy that fits all the facts based on erronous information, or the most minute detail in an other wise progressive pattern.

Many of us grow up with some sort of visual impairment and require contacts or glasses to see 20/20. However unless someone examined us or otherwise informed or related to us the difference...we wouldn't be anymore aware of our visual flaws than a person who grew up in rual Arkansas, votes Republican and doesn't go for SCI FI and space ship and just happens to believe the moonlanding is a huge hoax.

The idea here is that vision can be corrected if you allow it.
You can be made aware and make use of corrective lenses.
The same is true for the cultural egos we grow up with. t's just much much harder to fight because all of them are well reinforced.

The Objective Portrayal
by SaQ

Jesus was questioned in legitmacy at the very time of his era by the Pharasiess. Despite it's singualar views to culture and God while most were poly-theistic it became viral. The 19th Century was the begining of serious contention but if you know of others I'm always expanding my database.

Very interesting post, thank you. I'm rather surprised to be in complete agreement with you. Something's wrong, help me!

[Star Trek Viewer]

I believe that there must be a hidden hand behind conspiracy theorists. I mean, it's just too convenient, isn't it? It's just a matter of time before the whole thing is blown wide open.

Wide open, I say!

[horatio]

There are of course silly conspiracy theories like fake moon landing, then there are those which are created when someone tries to cloud information like the 9/11 ones (the Bush administration held too much information back, so a direct critique would be wiser than building conspiracy theories) and then there are those who are justified because the official version is utterly incredible, e.g. the JFK assassination.

[Star Trek Viewer]

Originally Posted by horatio

There are of course silly conspiracy theories like fake moon landing, then there are those which are created when someone tries to cloud information like the 9/11 ones (the Bush administration held too much information back, so a direct critique would be wiser than building conspiracy theories) and then there are those who are justified because the official version is utterly incredible, e.g. the JFK assassination.

Yeah, well I don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job, though. To me, it's too farfetched even if you believe that the Bush Administration was up to no good. I don't rule out that Bush insiders tried to muddy up the record somehow, of course, because that's the way the world works. But the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, to me, belong to the tinfoil hat brigade, whatever they say about implosions and the melting point of steel girders.

You'd have to believe that hundreds of people, including the wife of a Solicitor-General of the United States, were intentionally sacrificed in the interests of oil or for the sake of personal revenge, when much more could be accomplished at far less cost. (OPEC, for example, has achieved a great deal for its members without any such craziness.) It seems ludicrous on its face, and that's probably because it is.

We've all heard of the adage that if something seems too good to be true, then it is. Well, the analogous saying here should be, if something seems to ludicrous to believe, then it probably is.

"Ludicrous speed" notwithstanding.