3 Days of Darkness in 2012

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Using a calendar of 13 months with 28 days, would bring out 13 full moons in a year. Many civilizations used calendars quite similar to this.

No civilization used a calendar of 13 months of 28 days. Early civilizations used lunar calendars. Those calendars are not 28 day calendars. Instead the calendars track moon phases. Such calendars are quite tricky to match up to the solar year as seen in the strange methods used in ancient Sumer.
en.wikipedia.org...

But you know those religious types hate 13

That would be the silliness of numerologists, not religious types.

There are not 13 full moons a year.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by stereologist

. Many civilizations used calendars quite similar to this.

Do you know what similar means?

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

 

Forgive me if I don't take your word for it. You weren't around to see it.

And neither were you so please stop passing off your baseless speculation as anything but.

This brings the double slit experiment to mind...Who is observing us, huh? Besides, who is to say that life is merely physical?

Please read up on the Observer Effect. It has nothing to do with consciousness, this is just hogwash woo hoos have attached to it in their desperate bid to hijack science in an attempt to rationalise and legitimise their baseless beliefs.

Oh, and your precious Science makes mistakes all the time. You aren't infallible.

Science is all about making mistakes and learning from them, unlike narrow minded individuals such as yourself who are convinced your ignorance holds all the answers. You try to justify your beliefs with science without bothering to inform yourself in the process. You cherry pick and distort science when it suites your agenda but cast it down with a sneer when it exposes your ignorance and refutes your baseless beliefs. You are a wilfully ignorant hypocrite.

reply to post by john_bmth

And neither were you so please stop passing off your baseless speculation as anything but.

Mr. Pot....Kettle is calling....Your speculation is just as baseless, but by all means act as if it isn't or the world revolves around your word.

Please read up on the Observer Effect. It has nothing to do with consciousness, this is just hogwash woo hoos have attached to it in their desperate bid to hijack science in an attempt to rationalise and legitimise their baseless beliefs.

More James Randi nonsense huh? I won't point out that you misspelled rationalize and legitimize, yet you want me to take your information as factual...Righto, boy-o.

Science is all about making mistakes and learning from them, unlike narrow minded individuals such as yourself who are convinced your ignorance holds all the answers. You try to justify your beliefs with science without bothering to inform yourself in the process. You cherry pick and distort science when it suites your agenda but cast it down with a sneer when it exposes your ignorance and refutes your baseless beliefs. You are a wilfully ignorant hypocrite.

Science is all about making mistakes, and ignoring them until called out on them...I'm narrow minded? Take a good look in the mirror....Anything outside the 'rationality' of your left brain hemisphere is completely incomprehensible right? You justify you beliefs with a cult religion that does more damage and brainwashing than even the all powerful wizard of Christianity. You cherry pick what suits science and trash what doesn't suit it. You've exposed your own ignorance. I won't mention that this whole post of yours can be quite easily turned on yourself...Or the fact that you spell willfully wrong....

I'll take Science with a grain of salt, thank you....I've proved your ignorant doctors who are held to the same standards as scientists wrong on a great many occasions...Analogy says your precious science is no different....

Do you even realize that Science is a religion?

You still didn't answer the question. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The mind or reality? You think of life comprising a physical body, when you have no proof that it is....I suppose my memories of past lives are just imaginations huh? Or astral projecting is all in the mind right? It's not real, right?

How do you define what is real? What you can see, or taste, or smell, hear, or touch, then what is real, is nothing more than electrical impulses interpreted by your brain. Your brain allows you to perceive reality in the first place...It is all in your head...ALL IS MIND.

But hey I won't continue making you upset over your precious Master....By all means, keep on believing in the same people who hold on to the same dogma until someone proves them wrong, instead of trying to advance themselves by proving it wrong...

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
Mr. Pot....Kettle is calling....Your speculation is just as baseless, but by all means act as if it isn't or the world revolves around your word.

You have no evidence for life existing before the existence of the universe. There is a LOT of evidence for life arising on this planet well after this planet was formed, let alone the universe. There is no reason to believe that life arouse before until EVIDENCE is found and presented. Seeing as the universe was composed solely of hydrogen initially, good luck finding evidence for that one.

More James Randi nonsense huh?

Nope, physics, that "precious science" that has given us the technology we are using to communicate right this moment.

I won't point out that you misspelled rationalize and legitimize, yet you want me to take your information as factual...Righto, boy-o.

And I won't point out that I'm British so you don't look even more a fool.

Science is all about making mistakes, and ignoring them until called out on them...I'm narrow minded?

Well, you're wrong as well so you can add that one to the list.

Take a good look in the mirror....Anything outside the 'rationality' of your left brain hemisphere is completely incomprehensible right? You justify you beliefs with a cult religion that does more damage and brainwashing than even the all powerful wizard of Christianity. You cherry pick what suits science and trash what doesn't suit it. You've exposed your own ignorance. I won't mention that this whole post of yours can be quite easily turned on yourself...Or the fact that you spell willfully wrong....

Nice straw man argument. How about you retort to what I have actually said rather than what you wish I had said.

I'll take Science with a grain of salt, thank you....I've proved your ignorant doctors who are held to the same standards as scientists wrong on a great many occasions...Analogy says your precious science is no different....

And I'll take your ignorance with an ocean of salt. On second thoughts, I'll just leave it.

Do you even realize that Science is a religion?

Do you realise you are wrong? Nope, probably not.

You still didn't answer the question. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The mind or reality? You think of life comprising a physical body, when you have no proof that it is....I suppose my memories of past lives are just imaginations huh? Or astral projecting is all in the mind right? It's not real, right?

How do you define what is real? What you can see, or taste, or smell, hear, or touch, then what is real, is nothing more than electrical impulses interpreted by your brain. Your brain allows you to perceive reality in the first place...It is all in your head...

Now you're just babbling.

But hey I won't continue making you upset over your precious Master....By all means, keep on believing in the same people who hold on to the same dogma until someone proves them wrong, instead of trying to advance themselves by proving it wrong...

I'm sure you had a point to make here but I'm at a loss as to what it is. Your coherency has been deteriorating with every sentence so as much as I'd love to it around listening to your nonsensical stream of consciousness arguments all day I really have better things to do with my time. I'd like to say come back when you have a leg to stand on but to be fair we both know that's not really going to happen any time soon.

reply to post by john_bmth

And I won't point out that I'm British so you don't look even more a fool.

British people speak English the last time I checked...

More character assassination, opposed to straightforward addressing of my rebuttals....

Gotta love you skeptical 'science' folks; you've been hating on us free-thinkers and philosophers since day one...

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

And I won't point out that I'm British so you don't look even more a fool.

British people speak English the last time I checked...

DING DING DING we have a winner! Congratulations on you astuteness and ability to state the obvious.

Now for the bonus prize: Do British people use British spelling or American spelling? Answers on the back of postcards please!

reply to post by john_bmth


English is English. Proper grammar is proper grammar..

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


You really are the gift that keeps on giving.

I'm afraid you lost the bonus round as you incorrectly identified what spelling British people use. The correct answer is of course "British spelling". I'm going to have to deduct further points for incorrectly equating spelling with grammar. Thank you for playing, better luck next time.

reply to post by john_bmth

I'm going to have to deduct further points for incorrectly equating spelling with grammar.

Both are aspects of writing, and you will find a chapter on spelling in virtually every grammar book.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

I'm going to have to deduct further points for incorrectly equating spelling with grammar.

Both are aspects of writing, and you will find a chapter on spelling in virtually every grammar book.

Swing... miss.

You attempted to correct my spelling. You demonstrated your ignorance of the differences between British and American spelling. You then confused spelling with grammar. Now you're trying to hand wave away your foolishness by saying "Yeah, well... it's all writing". Suuuuure *wink*.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


I am well aware of lunar calendars systems that have been adjusted to try and match the year. The first such calendar was used in Sumer. It was a mess. That calendar had a changing number of months, not 13.

NO civilization has used a 13 month calendar. One of the reasons for that is that there are not 13 full moons a year.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas

Do you even realize that Science is a religion?

That's the sort of misguided baloney spouted by creationists and other nuts.

Science is very different from religion.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

I'm going to have to deduct further points for incorrectly equating spelling with grammar.

Both are aspects of writing, and you will find a chapter on spelling in virtually every grammar book.

Did you hit your head or something that would have a similar effect,

But were you not correcting his spelling that was correct to begin with?

I have to repeat ---

and I'm sure it will get lost in all the off-topic back and forth...

1012 3 days of darkness (OP and title of this thread) DIDN'T HAPPEN,.

So why is this thread still going??

reply to post by stereologist


www.eecis.udel.edu...

Doesn't agree with you..

Early calendars used either thirteen lunar months of 28 days or twelve alternating lunar months of 29 and 30 days and haphazard means to reconcile the 354/364-day lunar year with the 365-day solar year.

reply to post by john_bmth


This is the 21st century....Get with the program...You might as well spelled it grammer....

reply to post by Chamberf=6


Because people want to argue about claims that I'm not even making....I stated it would be hard to outline a scientific mechanism in which this would happen, because Science doesn't know everything....

Somehow that turned into a "Let's try and make you look stupid with ad hominem" debate...

Then, it got worse when people don't even know what allegory means....Although I wouldn't expect any less from Scientists

At the winter solstice, darkness is at its maximum, but there is hope in the winter sunrise from which the light gradually increases—this is the time of spiritual birth, and why we find so many deities born at the time of winter solstice.

You didn't answer me either; what is the difference between you and doctors? Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Isn't this from the same Science that considered it blasphemous that the Sun was causing global warming? I thought it was from all the CO2 emissions from cars!!! I wonder how many hummer's they have on Jupiter

epw.senate.gov...

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

This is the 21st century....Get with the program...You might as well spelled it grammer....

You're not even making sense any more. Are you seriously denying you were mistaken in correcting my spelling? And you have the nerve to accuse others of being dogmatic? Let's see what you said earlier on in this thread:

Science is all about making mistakes, and ignoring them until called out on them...I'm narrow minded?

...yet you continue to ignore the mistake you have made (which was off-topic in the first place) and continue to drag things off topic even further in your attempts to deny it. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

reply to post by john_bmth


Spelling matters very much, which if you pay attention even poorly, you will see people getting knocked for sentences like...

"I hate when people don't use proper grammer."

So can I spell things however I want, and just claim citizenship matters?

Ye, speak ol' english too eh,?