It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why isn't The Raelian Message taken more seriously?

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
There has to be some kind of motivating force behind life, or life simply would not exist at all. Spirit.

The spirit is who the person is. You don't "have" a spirit, it "is" you. A science is incomplete when it doesn't factor in the spirit. The "out of body experience," for example, of floating above ones own body defies natural laws delineated (described) by science. Science talks about gravity, yet here is a person hovering above his own body in contradiction to science.

Troy




posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
There has to be some kind of motivating force behind life, or life simply would not exist at all. Spirit.

The spirit is who the person is. You don't "have" a spirit, it "is" you. A science is incomplete when it doesn't factor in the spirit. The "out of body experience," for example, of floating above ones own body defies natural laws delineated (described) by science. Science talks about gravity, yet here is a person hovering above his own body in contradiction to science.

Troy



I understand where your coming, and I've contacted roybass if he had any input on this. It's a critical point to get cleared up, so hopefully he will get back to this thread asap.

Now, for me, I've thought about this and talked to my friends a bit, and I think Spirit might be interpreted as an ENERGY field or aura that embodies what you are, a sort of collection of thought and memory if you will. And since Energy is essentially part of science, it's the only explaination that I have that makes sense that would agree with the Raelian message. But I could be wrong, and probably am, and since I'm supporting Rael, I would like roybass to give an better explaination.

[edit on 16-4-2005 by eudaimonia]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
I have a question, eudaimonia.

A few years ago, wasn't there a Raelian affiliated group called "Heaven's Gate" who thought it'd be fun to cut off there balls, wear the same outfits (including tennis shoes), state that they had to "scrunch up real tight because the spaceships that are coming to get us are really tiny" and then promptly commited mass suicide, in the news??? HHmmmm....


I could be wrong, tho.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ohio_Ron
wasn't there a Raelian affiliated group called "Heaven's Gate"...I could be wrong, tho.


No, The Raelian Movement is not affliated with Heaven's Gate. Comparing the both are like comparing apples and oranges.

If you try to do any research that presents evidence that they are the same, you will not succeed because the comparison cannot be done.

I must also mention that I hate when the word cult is used to describe the Raelians. It has such a negative tone to it because the majority associate it with satanism or the occult. In no way does the word cult should be used in the same sentence with the Raelians, not because it can't be used (cult is also defined as a relgious group), but because it will have others attack and ridicule it simply because the word cult is injected. I'm obviously speaking from a human psychological perspective.

[edit on 16-4-2005 by eudaimonia]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Why is it so hard to believe that other intelligent beings (scientists) from another civilization came to earth, created man and all kinds of animals scientifically by manipulating DNA?


Why is it so hard to believe that God created everything? Neither belief is any more valid than the other. What rational justification do you have for accepting one over the other? None as far as I can tell.


I believe it's time for humanity to remove the concept of God altogether honestly. It's time to evolve and mature from this primitive way of thinking.



I don't believe I've ever said the opposite when it comes to calling Rael's group a religion. It sure is, but it's a religion that's done right. He doesn't ask for faith, he asks for understanding, big difference. He says it himself very clearly.



Having faith in science makes more sense. Eternity is based on science. Faith alone limits human intelligence and limits human progress.


eudaimonia, I really don't understand how you can rationalize such contradiction.

On the one hand, you're clearly stating that faith (and therefore religion) is a barrier to human advancement. But at the same time you wonder why people don't give more credit to the Raelian movement, which is based on faith.

Rael claims he was enlightened by aliens. But he has no convincing evidence of that. Even if he did, he has no convincing evidence that the aliens weren't lying or mistaken. So accepting his claims as factual is no better than accepting Bible teachings as factual.

You're demonstrating the same faith you dismiss. How do you reconcile that?


"Happenstance" or Evolution in my opinion, how it has been presented to us by professors and the like honestly does not leave us with much hope, if you think about it. Imagine, that everything you see in front of you, life around you, people, nature, cultures, animals, plants, books, technology, etc...these things are not by chance, these were by design. Now, if you ask me what makes me more comfortable to believe in, I believe you know the answer.


An uncomfortable truth is still a truth, and a comfortable falsehood remains a falsehood. There's a lot of objective physical evidence supporting natural evolution, and none supporting Rael's assertions.


Well, if you've encountered an intelligent being from another planet and they say we were the ones who created all life on earth but you (humans) mistook us as gods, I would assume (if that event actually took place) that information like that would have to be believed as a fact. Why? Because it's from an extraordinary source.


That a source is extraordinary does not make it credible.


I know I keep hearing stories that when people have NDE (near death experiences), they feel as if they're floating around looking at themselves and others. But...what's the real explaination to this? Is it really called a spirit, or something else?


A reasonable explanation may be that near death experiences are simply caused by random, confused neural activity in a dying, distressed brain. In fact, the stereotypical near death experience has been induced in living subjects by appropriate stimulation.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 06:51 AM
link   
it seems funny that they try to adopt another belief system like the buddist, and others because of a crooked cross,aka, swasstika.his holiness is grasping at straws
anyone can start a belief system ,the pied piper did lol its obvious hes a fraud



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   
How To Clone A Vampire: the 200 K Bite

On Jan. 5, 2003, it was reported that a prince who is a direct descendant of Count Dracula (a.k.a. Vlad the Impaler) & has two sons had announced that a few days ago he'd received a letter.

The letter was signed by Dr. Brigitte Boissonnier --she claims to be a doctor-- President of Clonaid, the biotechnology company owned by the Raelians.

It was she who'd gone on television a week before that (Dec. 27) to state that the first cloned baby had been born in an undisclosed country and that it was a girl (also that there were another four cases & that these other births would take place in the following months in Europe, Asia & North America).

The int'l. scientific community reacted with skepticism. The "experts" said it was a gimmick, an advertising campaign launched by the Raelians to attract followers. The latter replied that they had 55,000 members & that there was no need for them to go campaigning around.

Scientists explained that if the news about the cloned baby was truthful then it wouldn't live more than about 30 yrs., at which age it would already have reached a premature old age (cp. progeria).

This is because every body cell is genetically programmed to divide a certain # of times, & so, since the nucleus that had been used to start the whole process going had been taken from an adult cell (belonging to the individual wanting to be cloned), & consequently had already been involved in many cell divisions, the remaining # of divisions was far lower than the # to be expected for young cells.

That's why Dolly the sheep, the first cloned mammal, suffered from an early arthritis & was spared more misery with a lethal injection.

(Note: The nucleus is placed in an egg cell (ovule) whose genetic material has been discarded & is thus like an empty shell, & who's tricked into "believing" it has been fertilized, & so will start dividing, by "shocking" it with an electric current, or else by dipping it into a "chemical bath".)

Going back to the letter, the prince said that...

1) ...he was being asked to pay 200 thousand dollars for the service,
2) even though his family was forever linked to some horrible historic events (Vlad enjoyed impaling his enemies), he was a good person, &
3) he hoped that human cloning would be forbidden since it would be of use only to people as crazy as Saddam Hussein, who would want to be cloned 100 times over. (He was still at large, maybe.)

(Note: Most doctors say that "therapeutic" cloning is acceptable because it will make possible the development of organs from the cells of the patient & will thus solve the problem of immunological rejection after the transplant, whereas "reproductive" cloning is monstrous because people would use it to satisfy their vanity by having a carbon copy of themselves.)

If it hadn't been for the prince then maybe nobody would've known what the Raelians were up to. They had started to send such letters to the super-rich all over the world. The prince, it seems, had felt it to be his bounden duty to warn humankind about the true nature of the Raelian$.

A Raelian will say, "You don't expect us to clone you for free, do you. Our fees barely cover the overhead costs. "








[edit on 16-4-2005 by Macrento]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by uca6usev2FeDREmU
Why is it so hard to believe that God created everything? Neither belief is any more valid than the other. What rational justification do you have for accepting one over the other? None as far as I can tell.


Who is this...God? And how do you suppose he/she/it managed to create life? By uttering a few words or waving a magic wand? Sure, very easy to say at any time, "God created everything", so every other explaination is dead wrong, and rightly justifies yours because well, how do you prove a God that is not there?

Actually, all beliefs serve a basic function, to believe in something or someone that leaves a positive impact on your well-being. I'm questioning the validity of the belief of a God that no one seems to figure out how exactly this superior being/force created all things. The truth behind creation of life on earth and humanity is my biggest concern. That means addressing how valid and logical your concept of God really is.

Rational justification for accepting my version than yours? Honestly, mine makes more sense. Over 60,000 people think so, and counting.

Again, not trying to convince, just throwing in my thoughts.



On the one hand, you're clearly stating that faith (and therefore religion) is a barrier to human advancement. But at the same time you wonder why people don't give more credit to the Raelian movement, which is based on faith.

Rael claims he was enlightened by aliens. But he has no convincing evidence of that. Even if he did, he has no convincing evidence that the aliens weren't lying or mistaken. So accepting his claims as factual is no better than accepting Bible teachings as factual.

You're demonstrating the same faith you dismiss. How do you reconcile that?



No, you're misunderstanding. When I address the concept or definition of faith, it's the majority of what people understand or follow today, which is placing this 'faith' on a unseen all-powerful, all-knowing, ever-present single force looking over your shoulders on what you've done or said. So this faith that is put upon their daily life as if it's the only thing that matters, means they are discarding everything else. It is a block on human freedom and consciousness.

A lot of people say, "Yes, I believe in God", but do they truly understand who this God is? Even if it gives them this illusion that it guides them postivitely from not really understanding what they're believing in?

Evolution or the big bang theory is a hopeless and dangerous idea. Do you honestly believe that our way of existance as we have it today was out of chance or luck? Or that at one single moment in time an ape came along and POOF, man evolved from this animal.

Utter nonsense.

Intelligence that had physical form had to have intervened at some point with a thought process much more advanced than ours in figuring out how man and nature on this planet would turn out. It is a design, an experiment, a work of art, call it what you will, but it gives me more comfort in leaning to this explaination.


Please be careful with the word aliens. As far as I know, there are and should be more than one race that are extraterrestrial within this infinite universe. I'm not sure which alien you're talking about, but I hope it's not the greys or reptilians. Because a race like that would not give such a hopeful and positive message to mankind. As rael says, the ET he encountered were human-like. Now, about the evidence. In a case like the Raelians, there's no way to prove that incident happened to him, but then again who are we to say that man has never been visted by ETs in the past or present? Is it possible? More than likely, in my opinion. In fact, if it never happened before in our history, I would be very SHOCKED. I already believe they're already here. So it's not about the evidence, it's about probability and what makes the most sense.

No, I'm not demonstrating the same faith. Maybe I or the rest of us should take a hard look at the actual word faith. Faith has been associated with Christianity. So I can see where your coming from in terms of trying to compare something that seems similiar but isn't. To me, faith has more of a symbolic tone to it, like to say "I have faith in my brother, I know he will succeed!" or, "I have faith in the pope, because he is such a powerful and charismatic man!". For me, the word faith has less truth in it. I think most people who use the word faith have put a divine and godly significance to it. So what I was really trying to say before, is that science is the only true connection with man and our creators and it is more credible, understandable, and testable.



An uncomfortable truth is still a truth, and a comfortable falsehood remains a falsehood. There's a lot of objective physical evidence supporting natural evolution, and none supporting Rael's assertions.


Where do you find falsehood in science?

Well, the evidence that your talking about with the findings of natural evolution isn't proof that we derived from apes. It's an assumption, and a rather silly one. An explaination by man's imagination for his disregard of the existance of other life in the universe.



That a source is extraordinary does not make it credible.


Hmm. Really? Maybe in some rare instances, but usually it's a good indication that something with great importance was taken place.



A reasonable explanation may be that near death experiences are simply caused by random, confused neural activity in a dying, distressed brain. In fact, the stereotypical near death experience has been induced in living subjects by appropriate stimulation.


Well, at least we agree on something. That is, if your trying to explain the many stories people report of being lifted off their bodies, being present and conscious of what is happening to them from an unknown and unseen dimension.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by cybertroy
There has to be some kind of motivating force behind life, or life simply would not exist at all. Spirit.

The spirit is who the person is. You don't "have" a spirit, it "is" you. A science is incomplete when it doesn't factor in the spirit. The "out of body experience," for example, of floating above ones own body defies natural laws delineated (described) by science. Science talks about gravity, yet here is a person hovering above his own body in contradiction to science.

Troy




I hope roybass is okay with this, I got a response in an email I sent regarding the spirit. Here's what he said:

In short the word spirit derives from Latin and spanish , in regards to the way it is used now. In essence it means , the breath. to breath. Without it of course there is no life. what we term the Genetic code is the soul. Through our genetic code we are connect to and a part of infinity. A near death experience isnt death , but a few moments when the brain starts to shut down , triggering chemical resonses we dont yet fully understand. But we do recognise that the brain has the ability of telepathy , and this may account for the experiences some people have when the brain begins to shut down. Anyway I can elaborate on the ATS discussion.

Well, so far everything he said makes sense to me. Why? I can relate it to this bible verse:

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
• Genesis 2:7

So, the way I see it, the breath of life is basically Oxygen. I can cleary see a connection here that is scientific.

Do you think god blew from his mouth some magical dust?



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   
The raelian mouvement is a sect

end of story

no one is going to believe rael's pseudo-scientific nonsense except influencable people



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkSide
The raelian mouvement is a sect

end of story

no one is going to believe rael's pseudo-scientific nonsense except influencable people


Pseudo-scientific?

Is this is the definition of pseudoscience?:
A pseudoscience is set of ideas based on theories put forth as scientific when they are not scientific.

If so, from the investigation that you've done, what are these set of scientific theories put forth from the Raelians that cannot be scientifically proven or at least not being able to be testable as science?



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by roybass
...

Rael is just the mail man. He was given a message and asked to spread it around the world. The rest is up to the humanity to decide.



www.raelianmovement.org...


bY VOLUPTUOUS female robots and a Green alien with dark wavy hair?


No offense intended, but basically, anything that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and lays ducks eggs, cloned or otherwise imbued by his/her creator is, to all intent and purpose, a duck.

Never ceases to amaze me that people need to have a gimmick or hook or somesuch, to buy into a religion that provides "ALL" the answers.

Someday, probably not in my lifetime, and maybe not ever, man will be able to stand on his own two feet, come to logical conclusions of truth, and declare, "THIS IS HOW IT IS" ... Without relying on wine and wafers, plaster icons of virgins and divine people who have died for the cause, etc. etc. etc.

I look forward to the day that humankind can, of it's own volition, stand up, and have a one-on-one interface with God and the universe, in whatever form that may be to them. And all without having robots with large hooters and green aliens with Elvis Presly hair, virgin births, jihads, and so on.

Hmmm.... Mayhap I should sit down and write a book based on input from aliens with golden tablets from the planet munimula, that resides in a place no one will ever be able to get to, except my chosen acolytes, who must wear a blindfold, sit in the back of an old Ford pickup truck and humm hymns for the duration of the trip? Naaahhhhh..... I'm afraid I'd find too many people who want to believe it for me to deal with. Id' hate to get rich by taking everyone elses wallets and purses.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   


Why is it so hard to believe that God created everything? Neither belief is any more valid than the other. What rational justification do you have for accepting one over the other? None as far as I can tell.


Rational justification for accepting my version than yours? Honestly, mine makes more sense.



I'm questioning the validity of the belief of a God that no one seems to figure out how exactly this superior being/force created all things. The truth behind creation of life on earth and humanity is my biggest concern. That means addressing how valid and logical your concept of God really is.


You may have missed my point:

- There is no rational justification for believing in God.
- There is also no rational justification for believing in Rael's assertions.

Both require the suspension of rational thought to believe in. In other words, both require faith. To believe in God, you have to faithfully believe in the message of the Bible. To believe in Rael, you have to faithfully believe in his claims. Neither provides any real evidence, so each belief is just as valid as the other. (And by valid, I mean morally valid. Rationally, both are totally invalid.)

I asked how you could choose one over the other, but your latest post answered that:


Intelligence that had physical form had to have intervened at some point with a thought process much more advanced than ours in figuring out how man and nature on this planet would turn out. It is a design, an experiment, a work of art, call it what you will, but it gives me more comfort in leaning to this explaination.


So, the belief system you adopt will be the one you are most comfortable with. That criterion is very subjective and personal. Because it's subjective and not objective, you can't expect others to believe in Rael as you do, and they can't expect you to believe in God because they do for the same reasons.

Your original question was why isn't the Raelian message taken more seriously? I'd answer that by saying that most people are simply more comfortable with the more established religions. And coupling the message to empty claims about cloning didn't help.


Well, the evidence that your talking about with the findings of natural evolution isn't proof that we derived from apes. It's an assumption, and a rather silly one. An explaination by man's imagination for his disregard of the existance of other life in the universe.


You are right that it is not a proof. That's why they don't call it "Darwin's Proof of Evolution". It is very hard to scientifically prove something outside of theoretical mathematics. Basically impossible.

But it is by no means an assumption. Unlike religious belief, scientific theories are supported by objective evidence.

A lot of people don't realize how much evidence there is. They often dismiss evolution as "just a theory". This is an unfortunate result of a confusion about the word theory imparted on the public by religious establishments who feel threatened by Darwin's idea.

In the popular sense, a theory is baseless speculation. Dismissing baseless speculation is acceptable. But a scientific theory is a hypothesis that is well supported by evidence. It is not acceptable to casually dismiss a scientific theory. Refute it with better evidence, yes, but not dismiss it.

Many religious organizations want people to think the theory of evolution is a theory in the popular sense so that they can dismiss it. But it's actually a scientific theory, which means we cannot do that.


Evolution or the big bang theory is a hopeless and dangerous idea. Do you honestly believe that our way of existance as we have it today was out of chance or luck? Or that at one single moment in time an ape came along and POOF, man evolved from this animal.


Evolution is not based on chance and luck. Nor does it claim man spontaneously evolved from apes. If you were taught that, your teacher did not do the subject justice. I'd suggest a good book to learn from but I don't know any off the top of my head. But I'm sure they're out there.

Dangerous? Ignorance is dangerous, and rejecting evolution because you don't like it is exactly that. It's important to realize that the theory of evolution is neither good nor evil. It's merely knowledge that you can use towards good or evil as you choose.

Hopeless? Well, science isn't really about hope. For that, I suggest you turn to religion.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   
I just think Rael is a nutcase, nothing personal.....

based of freaky factual videos from his website that makes no sense



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by eudaimonia
Not sure when the idea of ETs creating life on earth was first ever presented.


Sumeria. 3800 BCE. Retranslated and abridged into the Book of Genesis of the Hebrew Bible.

And undoubtedly presented earlier as oral history.

Is there any truth to this ancient legend?

I don't know. But I do know Rael reminds me of Exidor from Mork and Mindy.

And I hated that show.

Score:



ET origin- maybe. Rael- not.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 12:42 AM
link   
'Cause their not believed and are discredited by mainstream society. Why add to lifes' frustrations when you can assume there aren't any relating to ufology.

Dallas



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarkSide
The raelian mouvement is a sect

end of story

no one is going to believe rael's pseudo-scientific nonsense except influencable people


Not unless the aliens do come to come to his embassy.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Hmm lots of questions and accussations going on here.

First , it is Raelian policy to never try and convince. Yes we do have a message , but are driven to spread it because we see it as a way to help end suffering on the planet.

Now the Raelian Movement never claimed to have cloned humans.
This was done by the company cloniad , who has a director that is Raelian.

Why did the Raelians align themself with Clonaid ?

Well in the message Rael was given in 1973 by Yahwe eloha , the ET he had his encounter with. Yahwe said that when they resurected Jesus , they used a technique similar to cloning , to send him back and deliver the message of the revelation. Also that simliar science is used to allow beings to live eternally through successive bodies. This is why we have followed the science of cloning and were at the fore front when these announcements were made.
Point. Dolly the sheep , lived longer than its mother !

The Raelian Movement has over 60,000 members worldwide. We have people of all proffessions. To say we dont have the expertise is a joke. We have Chemical engineers , geneticists , astrophysicists , Neurobiologists , imunologists , doctors of all specialisations. We have Scientists working in labs in Japan , Europe , Korea and other countries. But they are all people working in their field in their own bussiness or company.
Interestingly the majority of our members seem to be artists and musicians etc. But you name it we have all walks of life.

Now on some other points .

The word "religion" comes from latin "religere" and means "to link" . Religion has always been the link between humanity and the creators.

No worries , Eudaimonia for putting my short reply about the issue of spirit .

Its interesting that when we study the etymology of a word we can gain better understanding of it.
What should be made clear though is that there maybe some phenomenon taking place but the terminology to describe it can create misunderstanding.

The word "spirit" comes from the Latin "spirare" which means "to breath".
the word 'soul" comes from the root of the french word "souffle" meaning "breath".
The DNA is what makes us unique , it comprises matter and energy and is in harmony with the infinite universe.

Rael was just given a message and asked to spread it around humanity , which he has. What is interesting and important is the message itself and those who sent it. Rael is just the messenger.

You may suggest that he uses all the other reigions and just mixes them up together and has made all this up.

But if you study the other religions , you will see the link yourself.
Also if you studied the Raelian movement you would find there is nothing sinister. In fact we have done many things that havent made the media sensasions like Clonaid did , but have helped the growth in human consciousness towards a world of peace.

But I dont invite you. You make your own choice.
The internet has broken the barriers which seperated people before , so now me in Australia can chat with you and likewise.
Its these discussions that help to better understand our differences and as well respect them.
That means also people right not to believe in anything.







posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 09:41 AM
link   
The word "sect" means subdivision of a larger religion.

Therefore every Christain religion other than Catholicism and the Mormons is a sect.

The Raelian Movement is an original movement and did not break away from any other group so therefore is not a sect.

The word "cult" means "to worship" which is what most CHristain religions do.
The Raelians dont worship anyone one but maybe love. So maybe we could be called a love cult





posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 04:11 PM
link   


(posted by roybass)
Point. Dolly the sheep , lived longer than its mother !


The facts:

Celebrity Sheep Has Died at Age 6

"Dolly ( A Sheep), the first mammal to be cloned from adult DNA, was put down by lethal injection Feb. 14, 2003. Dolly had been suffering from lung cancer and crippling arthritis. Although most Finn Dorset sheep live to be 11 to 12 years of age, postmortem examination of Dolly seemed to indicate that, other than her cancer and arthritis, she appeared to be quite normal. The unnamed sheep from which Dolly was cloned had died several years prior to her creation. Dolly was a mother to 6 lambs, bred the old-fashioned way. "

Premature aging was a fact for this cloned animal & others, so inevitably it is suspected that there is a link between this & cloning. But this is irelevant, & also that Dolly may have lived longer than the mother. So the mother died before that age? So what? And where did you read that?



(posted by ditto)
The word "religion" comes from latin "religere" and means "to link" .


Your etymology is weak, too. "Re-ligare" (two ees, not three) means "to link AGAIN", & referrs to the idea that the purpose of all religions is supposed to be to help people to establish a connection to that with which the connection has been lost.
*



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join