Collections of weird artifacts - Klaus Dona

a reply to: Byrd

When did they stop teaching evolution in schools or did I read that wrong?

originally posted by: Onthebit
a reply to: Byrd

When did they stop teaching evolution in schools or did I read that wrong?

They never really teach it for fear of offending Christians - particularly here in the South. People are constantly trying to get it written out of textbooks, and as others keep trying to make us teach things like Creationism the whole topic gets watered down to "Darwin said 'evolution happens' and something about finches."

And even that's seen as controversial in some places (here in Texas, for instance.)

It does get taught at the university level, and in Paleontology courses you REALLY get into it - mechanisms, the boatload of evidence, various evolutionary strategies and so forth. Arguments on the Internet are usually between someone who had the high school version versus someone who had a semester or so of biology at a university or college (but still doesn't know the material.)

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: Marduk

Just as Cayce is a well known fraud? Is everyone a fraud except you?

It is very dangerous to debunk something without hard evidence it is a fraud. You are very skeptical, and its ok to be skeptical, but you are mixed with annoying as well.

You've got it backwards. It's extremely dangerous to disseminate something as factual when there is t any evidence to support it. You don't prove a negative in science, you provide evidence in favor of a hypothesis. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to support them. Every one of these propomemts of "alternate science" fails to do so. Sitchin, Childress, Von Dainiken, Foerster, Hancock and on and on fail to utilize the scientific method for the most part and completely avoid addressing the lack of hard evidence and relying on circular reasoning. In science, we follow the data a evidence to see where it leads. The above named "researchers" begin with the premise they favor and then fabricate fairy tales to pretend they are supporting their preconceived notions and ignore any and all evidence contrary to their favored hypothesis. They utterly ignore some of the cornerstones of science such as falsifiability. Cayce fits in quite nicely with the current crop of woo merchants.

a reply to: Byrd

thanks for this post and sorry for late reply.

comparing cosmology and numbers is valid point and it appears it does not makes sense. It seems to me that this should be considered:
- does modern people really interpret numbers correctly?
there is a lot of talk going about the dates etc. and even in hindu, there are lots who disagree. For me, I like the interpretation made in the book "holy science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri... btw. I really recommend it if you want something different to read : )

- modern science will disagree with it because in their cosmology, as in other (buddhist for instance) religious cosmologies, there are units, planets and concepts which are not supported by modern science. This could be because they don't exists like you say, or it could be because of wrong interpretation or measurements as they could be talking about a bit more subtle planes of existence, which are realized within astral or other "world", for instance...

well ... otherwise many eastern religions are supporting the idea of past yougas in some form. And this is my basis also, I don't know what the facts are yet about the numbers or years, nor will i probably ever know about it for certain, but in my opinion past yugas existed and are not just stuff in myths and legends.

what you say about civilization is absolutely true, BUT from our current understanding based on technology and progress we have made. But what if there were possibility of other type of sciences. For instance today we like to put focus on external world and science is also representation on that.
But what about science utilizing our connection with internal world or subtle energies? Like i suspect previous antediluvian civilization used as religion and spirituality were a lot purer than today.

From our current modern mindset such things are stuff of delusions or legends.

but if science and spirituality would mix and perfectly converge, than scientific waste and elements would be all natural. Nothing plastic or metal like we use today. Nothing left after so long to research about all dissolved or absorbed deep underground or water,...after 10 000, 50 000, 100 000 ... possibly even more years?

nothing left, other than stones used for buildings and other purposes and there are many such locations around the world...unexplained of their origins.

just talking about what if's...not saying anything is true in this post : )

although i have 1 interesting question for you, if we would all disappear in an blink of an eye (imagine we - humans, just went "poof" into air...) , how much time in general would it take earth to completely dissolve or absorb all our traces in your opinion?
or do you think traces (for instance some durable metals or other materials) of us would last forever?

a reply to: Byrd

what you say, it seem true from modern understanding of evolution. Although i admit, i don't know a whole lot of evolution as i am not a scientist. But from my general and shallow observations i have two main problems.

- abiogenesis (yeah it is outside of evolution but even so, it is what science considers the start of planetary evolution of life). They may have insights into the what, but are still lacking why in my opinion.

- scientific evolution is a fact but in my opinion only as far as evolution of one species goes, but i do not agree, and there is still not sufficient scientific evidence (in my opinion) that "evolution process" can really mutate long enough to cause different species of beings altogether on pure random chance.

Mutations are not the problem and have been observed, but my itch here is "cross species" evolution. As today it seems that random mutations are the main cause for humans and other beings...all that from random mutation in cells (abiogenesis) through all of history of the planet...to us, humans. all just by luck and random chance. Don't get me started on about big bang and evolution of cosmos...another bag of randomness or so it appears.

this is also very similar to the first point, when i think about it.
scientists don't tend to focus on why. For science it seems that random chance is all there is...and everything seems just a coincidence.
Which is also my general problem with modern science. We like to explain about how and we like to think this is enough, but in my case it is just one side of the coin!
the other side being why.

evolution is main backbone for many areas of science, history - archeology or paleontology being one of them, if story of evolution is not what it is in reality, than also other accepted datings and so on could be false and based on false principles, and all comes crashing down like a house of cards.

well sorry to get bit off topic, but as the thread seems a bit dead i decided it should be ok, i hope, if not mods can delete this post.

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: Byrd


- abiogenesis (yeah it is outside of evolution but even so, it is what science considers the start of planetary evolution of life). They may have insights into the what, but are still lacking why in my opinion.

.

Just a heads up, after recent scientific discoveries, the scientific community is now looking seriously at Panspermia as the why and the what
en.wikipedia.org...
Stephen Hawking has been saying that for 7 years
April 7, 2009, Stephen Hawking - "Life could spread from planet to planet or from stellar system to stellar system, carried on meteors."

originally posted by: UniFinity
evolution is main backbone for many areas of science, history - archeology or paleontology being one of them, if story of evolution is not what it is in reality, than also other accepted datings and so on could be false and based on false principles, and all comes crashing down like a house of cards.

Wow really, Evolution is a house of cards now, its genuinely accepted as a fact and a theory across all branches of science, the only people who don't understand it, or believe it are religious fundamentalists...

a reply to: Marduk

thank you for information about Panspermia, i have not looked it up, yet, for now my only knowledge about it are members on ats in many threads about evolution, it has been mentioned a few times...there are really some very knowledgeable people on ats in that area in my opinion.

as far as i know about it at this moment, it makes a lot of sense. But i feel that it is a bit of a deflection of the real question.
it may be that something fell down and caused everything else...why not.
But the real origins of life (first spark?) are still shrouded in mystery with such notions of thoughts and therefore it does not address and provide what we really should know with certainty...
How was life created or how and where it began?

no sorry, i did not mean for evolution to be house of cards, not in general sense at least. But it has some missing pieces, or else it would not stay a theory.

and if someone will find in the future, something that will fill up one or some of the missing pieces ... and it could happen that missing pieces will contradict basic evolution model, than it could crumble like house of cards.

for instance in my observation nothing is random at all and "god" or let say just "the universe" does not play dice as Einstein already said. And science may find in the future a bit of why and finding about "why" could turn a lot around.
maybe...who knows.

originally posted by: UniFinity
But the real origins of life (first spark?) are still shrouded in mystery with such notions of thoughts and therefore it does not address and provide what we really should know with certainty...
How was life created or how and where it began?

.

Well if you consider life to be some God ordained creation, then sure there's no origin to life, because God did it, but surely in this age of science, we don't ned to rely on characters created when our civilisation was in its infancy. Adam wasn't created from dust on the ground, Adam didn't exist...
there's an experiment done in the 1950s which shows that life is a process the same as any other and that eventually, given the right conditions and chemicals and time, life will arise
That biological chemistry is just an offshoot of chemistry...

en.wikipedia.org...

The Miller–Urey experiment[1] (or Miller experiment)[2] was a chemical experiment that simulated the conditions thought at the time to be present on the early Earth, and tested the chemical origin of life under those conditions. The experiment confirmed Alexander Oparin's and J. B. S. Haldane's hypothesis that putative conditions on the primitive Earth favoured chemical reactions that synthesized more complex organic compounds from simpler inorganic precursors. Considered to be the classic experiment investigating abiogenesis, it was conducted in 1952[3] by Stanley Miller, with assistance from Harold Urey, at the University of Chicago and later the University of California, San Diego and published the following year.[4][5][6]

After Miller's death in 2007, scientists examining sealed vials preserved from the original experiments were able to show that there were actually well over 20 different amino acids produced in Miller's original experiments. That is considerably more than what Miller originally reported, and more than the 20 that naturally occur in life

a reply to: Marduk

sorry for the off topic, but it is also related to the thread in faaar off way chance if my parts of this story are indeed true?

for me personally, gods are other types of beings which are a lot like humans, with their own problems and solutions, and sometimes we are included in their plans...but label god is misleading and a very loaded world in abrahamic religions...which are very popular around ats.

i am talking about something deeper.
Evolution of "spirit" and in christianity this is represented as Holy Spirit. And we or gods are all a part of that in my opinion.

also creation and destruction of universe or life can be explained as natural process and science could or will figure it out eventually, with better observation methods and experimentation, like in CERN at the present, for instance. They have already made interesting findings about Higgs Bosons and its fields...they could really affect about how physics will be viewed in the future...exciting times we live in at least as far as scientific development and observation goes.

Also from Eastern part of the world i noticed about few of interesting researches about water and its real significance. Like how it has memory to some extent or how can various feelings projected into water cause different structure of molecules observed under high tech microscope and affect water quality.

more about that in documentary about water, most mysterious element in my opinion, but it has some spiritual agenda so i doubt you will like it...and it is no problem. maybe others will find it more interesting.


yes, i think water, air, fire, earth was what played a large part in life as well...but how exactly i still did not learn, but your linked experiment shows maybe some insights. Although from what i read about it around ats, this is still not real evidence and they make some assumptions about amino acids if i remember correctly.

science will have for the transfer of chemical to bio evolution and creation of spark of life explain a bit about consciousness first and if it is only local or global or what exactly it is and from where it originates in my opinion.
Research into consciousness is what may deepen our scientific understanding about life and its creation from "the Holy Spirit" - "big bang" - to physical - to chemical - to life.

well this is my humble opinion, it is fine to disagree...make of it what you want.

a reply to: UniFinity

I'm guessing you have never studied the history of religion, if you had, or do, you will soon discover that Gods are fabricated by mankind. The current popular Allah/YHWH/Jehovah, I don't think there are many who would disagree that these are all aspects of the same deity, but how many could tell you that the deity that they are all majorly based on is Enlil, the flood God of ancient Mesopotamia, who the Jews discovered during the Babylonian diaspora.

Now are you saying that Enlil, is a type of being, or someone who only ever existed in literature ?
Because if its the former, you have to admit that the current deified paradigm is made up, or if its the latter, you have to admit that all deities are made up

Also, Water memory is bunk, its all based on an experiment made by Jacques Benveniste, who no one has been able to replicate since, including his own team..

a reply to: Marduk

check out this thread if you want. This was discussed just recently between me and Kantz. ... what a nice coincidence?

i realize what are you implying and this is a part of very big story and even conspiracy on many levels in my opinion.
Also on a level as far as public human modern progress of spirituality and mainstream religion goes...maybe even since Sumerian times.

talk about grand delusions or...?

anyway...you touched a very good subject, it should be carefully studied and contemplated about all the implications and also research in depth about religions who are not focused on worshipping gods.
If we want to realize some parts of the truths...or delusions.... who knows.

a reply to: UniFinity

dead link

a reply to: Marduk

oh darn i messed up the link, it should work now.

although you will not find many information there about what we are on about here.
oh well, at least it should make it clear, that you have the right assumption at least on some levels about Enlil.

Oh that thread
Its crap
There is no such thing as Angels, even the culture that invented them admits that they were made up at the time of the Babylonian diaspora...
No one told the Christians though, mind you, they rarely listen anyway


quite frankly if Kandezwet actually believes that she's spoken to angels and wasn't just using that as a hook, then she needs medical help.

a reply to: Marduk

hah, yeah i think we are all a bit like that sometimes...
don't wanna listen, until it is too late to listen.
show me someone who did not do that at least once
: )

quite frankly if Kandezwet actually believes that she's spoken to angels and wasn't just using that as a hook, then she needs medical help.

well ... or maybe she is perfectly healthy in mind and body and is just helping to spread a bit of their message. You do realize that more people than not are still religious or spiritual, even if it seems otherwise on ats.

that is a part of the reason why meditational experiences are not reported and spoken about in public. People sure like to send other people to places...to fast.

originally posted by: UniFinity


hah, yeah i think we are all a bit like that sometimes...
don't wanna listen, until it is too late to listen.
show me someone who did not do that at least once
: )

I didn't say just the once, they do it all the time. Middle eastern cultists if you think about it, who's killed more, ISIS or Jesus

well ... or maybe she is perfectly healthy in mind and body and is just helping to spread a bit of their message. You do realize that more people than not are still religious or spiritual, even if it seems otherwise on ats.

Argument ad populum is a logical fallacy, are you relying on logical fallacies to make a point ?
Most of the world believes that the worlds first civilisation was Egypt, it is wrong in spite of that

that is a part of the reason why meditational experiences are not reported and spoken about in public. People sure like to send other people to places...to fast.

Yes, because temporal lobe epilepsy or alternatively paranoid schizophrenia are serious medical conditions that require treatment, are you saying that she's ok just because she believes in something that's in the bible, and so should not seek treatment on religious grounds...
I have a friend with paranoid schizophrenia, he's currently in prison for Arson, but if you asked him, the voices in his head aren't imaginary, they are messages beamed from aliens. Which is exactly what she is claiming. Angels are Aliens yanno

a reply to: Marduk

hah, you have made me chuckle with first remark.

logical fallacy is a nice sounding world...no that was not my point, but just to make sure that with your notions of thoughts about Kantz, you are sending more than half the population to doctors, it makes one wonder...

there are quite a lot of interesting thoughts about schizophrenia and what is real nature of it...you are talking like modern science knows what it is...
well here is something interesting. Did you know that it can get better or even maybe healed with regular meditation and spiritual guidance by real master, well at least some say so...some got better that way, but you will not hear that from doctors or in media, that is for sure.

what are true sources of some mental illnesses and what they really are, is still an area which medical science is obviously lacking or else it would not put half of americans or even more and more modern countries addicted to many various opiates.
they are like..."hey...you can get healthy or pain free, but possible side effect along the way is addiction. But good luck with your treatment, you will get better!" ..."gotcha, thanks, no problem!"

i don't know who is crazy one here to be honest...well as i said it makes one wonder.

hey, we had our share of interesting talks, thank you for playing, but i think we have put this thread along way from home and i have decided it is time for me to stop, we have had our fun and maybe we will talk about these things more in other threads, but now let's give a chance for others to say something about the thread...
or you can say something interesting about "crappy conspiracies" about Dona?
or is there any conspiracy in archeology which you could consider for potentially being true?

a reply to: UniFinity

You may derail the thread as much as you like.

Much love and respect you know that.

a reply to: Marduk

The "whole religion is bs" thing is a big simplification, you know that, I hope?
There is some "other" not god, aliens, angel, demon, fairy... but something that has accompanied us since we first took "mind trips".
The kaballah for example is a very detailed instruction on how to "break your mind" via fastening, meditation and basically inducing a natural "trip".
So yeah the religious stuff every Joe has access to doesn't much more than tell misleading fancy stories to keep the masses quiet.
But there is still something there. Call it the source, inter dimensional beings, if you like because you are one of those who need an "acting agent". Call it collective sub-conscience if you're further in your rational emancipation. But don't make the mistake to write it of as crazy, just because you never went looking for it.
Try it first, because you call others crazy and sick, which clearly are not. Kantzveldt is very smart and very far ahead of you, in areas of expertise you didn't go beyond kindergarten (yet?).

The almighty Pool of Thoughtsmash, we're inspirations come from is a very unforgiving lover...

All I'm getting from your post is that you have not studied the rise of religion in the ancient world, so are looking for a reason to explain Gods

The fact is, that every new culture that rose to Dominance, did so under the banner of a God, who was amalgamated from the best parts of the previous. Egyptian history is full of it
Bel Marduk for instance was attributed 50 names from older Gods who had ceased to be worshipped...
YHWH, case in point, all his acts had been recounted before, creation, the flood, vengeance, in stories thousands of years older than the existence of Judaism, so inter dimensional beings, sure, got any evidence that didn't come from someone experimenting with drugs ?

a reply to: Marduk

Plenty.
If you want to try it, see your doctor, try fastening for a few weeks and meditate every day. You don't need drugs or god to explore the wonders of your subconscious mind.