Illuminati- The Music Industry Exposed [Full Length]

[wormcode]

Where can I find these examples of bebunkment.

Here's a read with plenty of references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Chri ... _mythology

They are around, there's even full on 1 hour + films that debunk it, some of them are exactly the same which is funny, as in religious people pulling a zeitgeist on zeitgeist and using the bible as a source. There are some well done ones though. One I remember is here: http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/ ... zeitgeist/
And there's some video ones on http://www.disclose.tv and some threads discussing it on http://www.godlikeproductions.com

I liked the films because they made people question what they've been told, but the films themselves should also be questioned. Being basically a 1 man team with zero funding for research and fact checking, it's no surprise there's inaccuracies really. In later editions a lot of the religious stuff was removed from the film to give it more credibility.

I'm sure there are just as many 1 + hour videos that try to debunk evolution, and of course there will be inaccuracies in any documentary no doubt, especially when only one person is doing the research. But totally dismissing the video because of what you read on conspiracy.com or a thread on some forum, is a little absurd.

As absurd as totally dismissing outside information because it wasn't in the documentary in question?

[Siderealdb]

Where can I find these examples of bebunkment.

Here's a read with plenty of references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Chri ... _mythology

They are around, there's even full on 1 hour + films that debunk it, some of them are exactly the same which is funny, as in religious people pulling a zeitgeist on zeitgeist and using the bible as a source. There are some well done ones though. One I remember is here: http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/ ... zeitgeist/
And there's some video ones on http://www.disclose.tv and some threads discussing it on http://www.godlikeproductions.com

I liked the films because they made people question what they've been told, but the films themselves should also be questioned. Being basically a 1 man team with zero funding for research and fact checking, it's no surprise there's inaccuracies really. In later editions a lot of the religious stuff was removed from the film to give it more credibility.

I'm sure there are just as many 1 + hour videos that try to debunk evolution, and of course there will be inaccuracies in any documentary no doubt, especially when only one person is doing the research. But totally dismissing the video because of what you read on conspiracy.com or a thread on some forum, is a little absurd.

As absurd as totally dismissing outside information because it wasn't in the documentary in question?

I gave you the wikipedia link that points out nearly all the mistakes the film maker made. I'm not saying the movie is gospel, no pun intended, nor am I saying that wikipedia is the most credible source of information. What I am saying though is that a site like http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/ ... zeitgeist/, or the forums on http://www.godlikeproductions.com, are probably a little less credible in arguing the entire films accuracy given their domain names. You might as well send me to Ilovejesuschrist.com, in other words.

[seckle]

the thing about conspiracy is that you cant get yourself caught up in it. Im sure theres all kinds of disinformation campaigns set to trail these people in whichever direction just because the conspiracy theorists will pretty much follow any trail.

Getting "caught up" in it, goes back to my first point about fallacies.

Find me any conspiracist theories that aren't based on logical fallacies and original research? You'd struggle to, because 95% of them are, and once diseminated via the internet, they get propellled by droves of people stuck into paranoia boxes of their own making. Of course there's dark forces at work around the world, corporate corruption, govt corruption, class wars, etc. No one is disputing the levels to which greed reinforces oppression. The dispute derives from those that trust science, logic and deductive reasoning combined with hope and optimism, and those that need attention, validation, support and justification for their own fantasies of being controlled and disenfranchised by the world around them.

As Hitchens said recently in a radio interview, if you take any theorist away from their "scripted" manifestos and the internet, they get very angry and nervous. Why is that?

[wormcode]

Where can I find these examples of bebunkment.

Here's a read with plenty of references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Chri ... _mythology

They are around, there's even full on 1 hour + films that debunk it, some of them are exactly the same which is funny, as in religious people pulling a zeitgeist on zeitgeist and using the bible as a source. There are some well done ones though. One I remember is here: http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/ ... zeitgeist/
And there's some video ones on http://www.disclose.tv and some threads discussing it on http://www.godlikeproductions.com

I liked the films because they made people question what they've been told, but the films themselves should also be questioned. Being basically a 1 man team with zero funding for research and fact checking, it's no surprise there's inaccuracies really. In later editions a lot of the religious stuff was removed from the film to give it more credibility.

I'm sure there are just as many 1 + hour videos that try to debunk evolution, and of course there will be inaccuracies in any documentary no doubt, especially when only one person is doing the research. But totally dismissing the video because of what you read on conspiracy.com or a thread on some forum, is a little absurd.

As absurd as totally dismissing outside information because it wasn't in the documentary in question?

I gave you the wikipedia link that points out nearly all the mistakes the film maker made. I'm not saying the movie is gospel, no pun intended, nor am I saying that wikipedia is the most credible source of information. What I am saying though is that a site like http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/ ... zeitgeist/, or the forums on http://www.godlikeproductions.com, are probably a little less credible in arguing the entire films accuracy given their domain names. You might as well send me to Ilovejesuschrist.com, in other words.

I've read that wiki before. I meant all this generally, and not necessarily directed at you anyway.
That's funny though, to judge information based on domain names. They aren't religious sites at all, and I'm certainly not a fan of religion. Have you ever checked out godlike productions? It's like the epicenter of conspiracy theorists along with abovetopsecret, nothing to do with religion (unless it's religious conspiracy). There's good information everywhere. I didn't mean people's opinions on a forum, I meant it's a source for more media and research of this nature.

Like I said, I wasn't talking about you, it's just too many people do take zeitgesit as gospel without looking into things deeper, which is exactly the type of thing the film was made to try to stop in the first place. As I said I do like the films, I sometimes still watch them, but at the end of the day they're films presenting ideas.

Trust no one, etc

[Siderealdb]

Agreed. I wasn't saying that the site was religious either. I just suspect that anyone who would go through the effort of trying to debunk the film would, more than likely, have some strong religious background.

[wormcode]

Yeah I know what you mean. I think the information on religions and gods is so vague that it's quite a stretch for anyone to speak in certitude on the subject. There's so many ways to interpret it all, and I think that's no coincidence.

[test_recordings]

^ That's been bebunked countless times already with sources provided. There's only a few coincidences/inspirations whatever you wanna call them.
That's why zeitgeist is a joke to people, they were good and interesting but lacked proper research.

There is still a huge amount of cross-over in ancient religion though (I can't validate or invalidate Jesus = Horus etc as I haven't read the stories but I wouldn't be surprised), e.g. a lot of countries in a stretch between Japan and Greece have the same gods (for instance, check out 'Fujin' and 'Aeolus'). I have read a lot of scholary stuff by Graham Hancock and, amongst other similarities, there is a huge recurring theme of natural disasters causing great strife early in the different cultural lineages (most being about floods, though some are about volcanoes, 'fire from the sky', and earthquakes too I think).
There is also a lot of academic study devoted to this 'comparative mythology' as it can be used as to work out where the history of different cultures and how related they are, you'd be surprised at the connections but it seems the 'European paradigm' makes people think modern Europe was closed off to the rest of the world even though the Greek and Roman empires stretched around most of the Mediterranean basin and quite far in to Asia minor (the Greeks even invaded India and the Romans quite possibly reached China)...
Even most of the languages between Europe and India are related (Indo-European/Indo-Germanic/Arian), that's a fair bit of common linguistic concepts that will can readily be ascribed to cultural mythology - even though people aren't making maybe the exact same sound they're still thinking similar things (e.g. a Spanish guy I know pointed out that some English and German words are identical in concept such as 'understand' and 'verstehen' - Old English even used to be considered an off-shoot of German and sounded quite like it until the 16th century when Shakespeare started making words up).
The most readily available example of this innocent inheritance is the days of the week: they're all named after gods which 'ruled' that particular day which was then carried over with the influence of Persian astrology to ascribe properties to planets which were the physical representations of gods in 'heaven'.

Here's an online dictionary of etymological research so you can check out what (English) words really meant and where they came from: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php

[cityzen]

Here's an online dictionary of etymological research so you can check out what (English) words really meant and where they came from: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php

Bookmarked! Nice one buddy

[wormcode]

Yeah I agree, and we've probably watched/read a lot of the same stuff as I'm a big fan of Hancock's work as well as guys like John Anthony West, Robert Bauval, etc. Things dealing with lost societies, megaliths, all that especially. There are definite connections between the religions as well that's true. When I said "a few" I meant a few of the ones Peter Joseph touched on in the first edition his film, not in total.

[AnomiK]

calling out a tune battle? oh snap.

is the tune in your sig your latest offering? or by project did you mean something completely different.

Yea its down there, check out my new concept. Im using samples from the sacrifice scene in Apocolypto.
Nobody else wana throw down some new material? or are we just trollin the fourms ;D

[erratech]

I am confused. Does better music make you/your worldview more correct?

[borrowed]

Also, anyone else find electronic tune battles the funniest fuckin thing ever? Its like the dance fighting in westside story but somehow even gayer. LOOK GUYS I TWEAKED PRESETS SO THEY SOUND BETTER THAN YOURS NA NA

[erratech]

I take offence to that. I declare a tune battle!!!!!!!

[AnomiK]

Also, anyone else find electronic tune battles the funniest fuckin thing ever? Its like the dance fighting in westside story but somehow even gayer. LOOK GUYS I TWEAKED PRESETS SO THEY SOUND BETTER THAN YOURS NA NA

whats wrong with listening to some peoples interesting projects? o.O i think its a super chill method to get people to share sounds. Assuming they are actually working up something. Got 2 call em out.

[AnomiK]

I am confused. Does better music make you/your worldview more correct?

to me its fun because its something we all share in common, i figured we'd all be able to relate to that subject. I like listening to other experiments. Oh & i have more respect for opinions of people with nice material because at least they are making good use of that viewpoint.

[hifi]

illuminati doesn't exist.

end of discussion.