Atlantis,Bermuda and Crystal pyramids...

You are in the logic free zone of the logosphere ; )
a reply to: Marduk

Of the three things mentioned in the title, I'd bet only one exists in this universe.

Edgar Cayce getting busted for practicing medicine without a license isn't really discrediting, depending on the actual circumstances of the matter, and I know that psychic abilities do exist... but Cayce was wrong on so many matters and I believe psychic information is flighty and acquired in more of a seemingly random way.

Maybe Cayce should've stuck to occult pharmacology, rather than geo-political prognostication?

But who doesn't love lost civilizations with crystal buildings?

originally posted by: Baddogma I know that psychic abilities do exist...

Haven't you noticed though, that when psychic abilities are tested in regards to history, you only get the information out, that has already been put in
For instance Cayce never came up with anything which would advance engineering did he, while at the same time, he never studied it
+ you made a big claim there, and that requires evidence

originally posted by: Baddogma
But who doesn't love lost civilizations with crystal buildings?

People who have taken the considerable time to study history

a reply to: Marduk

The psychic abilities I meant are the ones akin to occasionally knowing who's calling before the phone rings... you elevated my remark to a more grandiose level than was meant and applied it to Cayce, ignoring my bemused skepticism in regards to his alleged abilities.

And I suppose you are correct that many who take considerable time to study history (or those who immerse themselves in books written mostly by other non-involved third parties ) can apparently become something of a humorless curmudgeon who has no time for crystal architecture, lost civilizations... or chocolate covered ponies, either.

We are only limited by what we think we know, after all.

Monolith on the moon? I'm sorry but that is straight out of Arthur Clark's 2001 A Space Odessey. Right with send astronauts to the moon to retrieve it and when they do it emits a frequency that injures them.

originally posted by: Baddogma
a reply to: Marduk

The psychic abilities I meant are the ones akin to occasionally knowing who's calling before the phone rings... you elevated my remark to a more grandiose level than was meant and applied it to Cayce, ignoring my bemused skepticism in regards to his alleged abilities.

This is a proven fallacy, the truth is, that the phone will ring many times, but human memory being selective, you only remember the times you got it right

There has been a million dollar reward on offer to anyone who can prove any psychic power for about twenty years by James Randi. The attempts are always filmed and made public, no one has even come close.

originally posted by: Marduk
That's nice, but pretending to be a doctor requires a license, without one you are committing fraud, as Cayce did
Its the law

Disingenuous at best, deliberate misdirection at worst.

Cayce in context

1935 brought another arrest, this time in Detroit, where a reading was given for a child whose father disapproved of Cayce's work and took the reading to a doctor who pronounced the treatment worthless...Although he was convicted, the judge imposed no fine for sentence.

Fraud? maybe. But not from pretending to be a doctor. Seems other factors were at work.

Here's an interesting link about how accurate his predictions have been, in general terms:

The Brutal Bottom Line - Cayce's Accuracy

Seems he was pretty accurate in some areas, less accurate than in other areas and not 100% accurate in any area.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm not really a fan of his. I'm have no agenda against him either. But I find his life and predictions interesting and worth keeping an open mind about.

I do that for many people and things though, because I'd rather consider the possibilities.

originally posted by: Thanatos0042

originally posted by: Marduk
That's nice, but pretending to be a doctor requires a license, without one you are committing fraud, as Cayce did
Its the law

Disingenuous at best, deliberate misdirection at worst.

.

I stated that he was convicted of practicing medicine without a license
He was convicted of practicing medicine without a license
I am failing to see how that is either disengenius or misdirection
You accusing me of such is however quite an insult
thanks for that

originally posted by: Marduk

1. Atlantis never existed, even Plato said so. Didn't you see that ?

Are you familiar with cryptography and the use of cipher ? Because there seems to be several reading levels in Plato's "Critias".


See : PLATO'S ATLANTIS WORD PUZZLE

from REGINALD AUBREY FESSENDEN's book.

What do you think ?

originally posted by: thefedge

originally posted by: Marduk

1. Atlantis never existed, even Plato said so. Didn't you see that ?

Are you familiar with cryptography and the use of cipher ? Because there seems to be several reading levels in Plato's "Critias".


See : PLATO'S ATLANTIS WORD PUZZLE

from REGINALD AUBREY FESSENDEN's book.

What do you think ?

Fessenden never proved anything with any relevancy to real history and he wrote that almost a century ago.
I've spent many hours reading that site in the past
You often find, that pseudo history tends to rely on old sources, because for some reason, people think because of their age they are reliable, when in fact, the reverse is actually true

Fessenden once said "The Old Testament in particular appears to compare favorably as regards accuracy in all essential matters, with any history of which I have knowledge."
From which you should be able to detect, that he was a great inventor, but a very poor historian

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: fr33coll3ct1v3

originally posted by: Marduk
a reply to: fr33coll3ct1v3
Cayce was twice convicted of medical fraud
He was therefore a convicted criminal
Anything he claimed can be taken with a large pinch of salt

except for the part where he said to expect 'Great Changes' in the world soon after the warstroubles.First in the middle east iraniraq,then egyptlibya then turkeysyria....that was back in the forties.
.

Saying "expect great changes" on the back of two world wars is hardly the most mindblowing of predictions now is it?

Not only that, but I note that the poster decided not to list the "great changes" Cayce predicted.

Such as half of California becoming an island. Or China becoming a Christian nation.

Obviously both of these occurred in the 1960's, as we all know. Exactly as Cayce provided at the time.

Harte

Hey you left out the Atlantean death ray that Cayce said would be discovered by the U.S. in 1958.
and that Atlantis itself would rise from the depths in 1968 or 1969.
Those are the best bits

did he say 1958,1968, and 1969, Or did he say 58,68, and 69? If he said the latter, maybe he ment 2058...

originally posted by: tinyDAWK

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: fr33coll3ct1v3

originally posted by: Marduk
a reply to: fr33coll3ct1v3
Cayce was twice convicted of medical fraud
He was therefore a convicted criminal
Anything he claimed can be taken with a large pinch of salt

except for the part where he said to expect 'Great Changes' in the world soon after the warstroubles.First in the middle east iraniraq,then egyptlibya then turkeysyria....that was back in the forties.
.

Saying "expect great changes" on the back of two world wars is hardly the most mindblowing of predictions now is it?

Not only that, but I note that the poster decided not to list the "great changes" Cayce predicted.

Such as half of California becoming an island. Or China becoming a Christian nation.

Obviously both of these occurred in the 1960's, as we all know. Exactly as Cayce provided at the time.

Harte

Hey you left out the Atlantean death ray that Cayce said would be discovered by the U.S. in 1958.
and that Atlantis itself would rise from the depths in 1968 or 1969.
Those are the best bits

did he say 1958,1968, and 1969, Or did he say 58,68, and 69? If he said the latter, maybe he ment 2058...

He said it as a proper year, with 19 in front of the other two numbers
he got it wrong/made it up, knowing that he would be dead when people realised he was a fraudster.
Zechariah Sitchin did the same thing with his proposed date for the return of Nibiru, but then modern medicine saved him, so he had to revise his dates way into the future

a reply to: Marduk

So you just pushed under the rug the whole part about cryptography then ? xD

originally posted by: thefedge
a reply to: Marduk

So you just pushed under the rug the whole part about cryptography then ? xD

No Nick, as I said "I've spent many hours reading that site in the past "
Its mostly nonsense based on assumption and poor scholarship.

The cryptography bit is especially bad
It requires you to believe that the Greek language changed dramatically between Solon 638 – c. 558 BCE and Plato 423 – 348 BCE
The language didn't change that much and as a quick look at any map will tell you, nouns don't change at all over many centuries.
Then he qualifies what he's saying with words like "probably" and then he states that his numbers "don't agree", so he simply adds numbers until they do. It also requires complete faith in the Babyaloniaca by Berossus and I have to tell you, that book from surviving extracts is quite laughable (with good reason).
Where he states at the start "The "power of names" cipher was a standard international cipher used by scholars of that and earlier and later ages", is also complete nonsense, there's no such thing.
This is esoteric numerology invented by Fessenden to push his pet theory into rationality.
Anyone with any intelligence can see what a huge stretch it is. But that's quite normal for articles written in this time period when people genuinely thought Atlantis was real, modern science has completely dismissed the possibility of Atlantis
sorry

Now did you just join this forum to harass me with stupid questions because I notice that your only two posts here since you joined today have been directed at me and me alone and your second post was an insult to my intelligence. I am not sceptical because I don't understand the facts, I am sceptical because I've spent decades examining the facts and found them wanting

originally posted by: Marduk
I stated that he was convicted of practicing medicine without a license
He was convicted of practicing medicine without a license
I am failing to see how that is either disengenius or misdirection
You accusing me of such is however quite an insult
thanks for that

Actually what you said was not that, what you said is actually a bit...confusing now that I re-read it today.

Pretending to be a doctor is fraud and obviously doesn't require a license.

You said

That's nice, but pretending to be a doctor requires a license, without one you are committing fraud, as Cayce did
Its the law

There's no dispute at all he was convicted. As a matter of fact, his entire family was charged - he was just the only one convicted. That doesn't mean he was actually guilty of it though. He never passed himself off as a medical doctor, wrote prescriptions, etc. It happened because of a vindictive man with an agenda and what amounts to some technicality of the law. The judge basically supported it by imposing no fine, no sentence.

It's like being convicted of driving 56 in a 55 because a cop has a grudge against you. Technically, you are in violation, but really it's just silly and teaches you an important lesson in making friends and enemies.

I stand by what I said, but no insult was intended and I am sorry if you took it that way. I do sincerely apologize. I don't even disagree with much of what you have said and presented in this thread.