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.

 

The Giza Pyramids were made in 2470 says new evidence.

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
mmiichael, show me a site that gives the numbers, percentages of his accuracy. Ive looked and could only find what I posted. Every one said 80-90%. I couldn't find any skeptics that bothered to research it. So you find one and post it. Your amazon links showed nothing.
James Randi thinks Nostrdamus is bogus because he spelled Hitler wrong.

No, James Randi thinks people like you are bogus because you claim Nostradamus had something to say about Hitler, when it is crystal clear he says Hister, which is the Latin name of the river we today call the Danube.

Randi, I'm sure, has other reasons for thinking Nostradamus was bogus. Not the least of which would be the fact that none of Nostradamus' so-called "predictions" have come true. It is only after an event has occurred that Nostro-believers strain his quatrains into fitting the event in question.

Harte




posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
mmiichael, Stop the nonsense, you and I both know if the skeptics could prove his accuracy was not above coincidence, they would have done so in a heartbeat. The guys at Skeptical Inquirer live for that kind of thing. The fact that no one has, proves his legitimacy. Sure there is a lot of crap out there but Cayce and Nostradamus aren't in that category.
There has always been secret societies and mystery schools down through history, and their teachings are hard to find and verify. D. Melchizedek is one of the few who have dared to bring Egypt's and others secrets forward to the masses. And what does he get, fools who mock and criticize without even taking the time to read the material. Why don't you go to a book store where you can look it over without buying it.
I don't blindly agree with all his or any ones material, believe it or not I've always been a skeptic, so take it from me his 2 books on the flower of life are worth it. I also suggest Sheldan Nidle's 2 books "Your First Contact" and "Your Galactic Neighbors" and Wayne Herschel's "The Hidden Records" and Gordon Scallion's "Notes From the Cosmos" You guys are making yourselves look like fools by saying they have 0% correct. If that were true they wouldn't have gained any notoriety at all.
The way some of you are talking, I doubt if you have seen a single program on them.

My challenge stands SHOW ME ONE LEGITIMATE STUDY THAT SHOWS EDGAR CAYCE'S ACCURACY NUMBERS TO BE NO MORE THAN COINCIDENCE.

I'm an expert in alternative health but my family members ignore much of my advice. So if people don't follow advice precisely, is it Cayce's fault? It's easy to take things out of context.





[edit on 29-9-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
mm, Stop the nonsense, you and I both know if the skeptics could have made Cayce look bad, or prove his accuracy was not above coincidense, they would have done so in a heartbeat. The fact that no one has, proves his legitamacy. Sure there is a lot of crap out there but Cayce and Nostradamus aren't in that catagory. There has always been secret societys and mystery schools down through history, and their teachings are hard to find and verify. D. Melchizedek is one of the few who have dared to bring it forward to the masses. And what does he get, fools who mock and criticize without even taking the time to read the material. Why don't you go to a book store where you can look it over without buying it.


There are a dozen websites for every unfounded belief on the planet. People interested in increasing their knowledge of history and science learn to recognize the junk science and junk history that pervades the Internet and is also available in junk books.

You want fantasy information - there are hundreds of con artists and delusionals pushing it. When you learn how to research a subject beyond the first few Google hits, usually crank sites and videos, you might be on the right path.

Mike



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Harte, You obviously know nothing about Nostradamus or your out of your mind. Many of his predictions were proved true. How about the one about the king who died from a jousting accident to his face, EXACTLY as he predicted. Or the ones about Napolean and Hitler being the 1st and 2nd Antichrist. Dismissing Nostradamus because he spelled Hitler Hister is absurd. He did it on purpose. Hitler was born on the Danube. Those quatrains on Hister refer to a person, the 2nd anti-christ not the river.

I will say that the interpretation is very important. Every word makes a huge difference. That's one thing that has always confused me, why such different translations?

One example, the one about "In the year 1999 plus 7 months, from the skies will come the great king of terror". I've read that they didn't count the years that ended in 0. So that would bring it into 2001. Now who at that time talked more about terror than any one else. George Bush of coarse. Just a thought.




[edit on 30-9-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
Harte, You obviously know nothing about Nostradamus or your out of your mind. Many of his predictions proved true. How about the one about the king who would die from a jousting accident to his face. Or the ones about Napolean and Hitler being the 1st and 2nd Antichrist. Dismissing Nostradamus because he spelled Hitler Hister is absurd. He did it on purpose.


He also said the third antichrist would be Mabus. which is nearly Sadam backwards. The US got Sadam and killed him. He wasn't that powerful, then.

Antichrists (like christ) aren't real. Nostradamus was insane.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
You obviously know nothing about Nostradamus or your out of your mind.


Maybe this can be said for YOU.

For a long time, people have been cherry picking events in history trying to say they show he predicted them. Easy task when you have thousands of possibilities to choose from.

Read this from a once believer:



skeptico.blogs.com...

One of the things that set me on the skepticism road was Nostradamus. I first heard of him in the early 1970s, when his predictions began to be featured in several newspapers. I was fascinated by the idea, and decided to buy a book with all his prophesies, one by Erica Cheetham – a celebrated Nostradamus interpreter. It lists the entire ten “centuries”, in the original French, with English translations, and Cheetham’s interpretations. I remember being excited that I was going to know more than anyone else about these prophesies – I would be the expert, and couldn’t wait to read it.

As I read the book, it struck me that there was a big difference between Cheetham’s interpretations and what Nostradamus actually said. At least, I found it hard to see how the vague wording applied to the specific events ascribed to them. Sometimes I actually said out loud, “no he didn’t!” to one or another thing that Cheetham claimed Nostradamus meant. One of my favorites was 5:28, that Cheetham said was about the assassination of King Umberto of Italy in 1900. In Cheetham’s own words: “Nostradamus seems to imply that the assassin had his arm in a sling, which was not the case in this instance.” Then why does it predict the assassination of King Umberto of Italy in 1900?

I didn’t understand how it was that I didn’t get these predictions that everyone else seemed to be so sure about. It took me several years before I really accepted that Nostradamus didn’t predict anything, and that the books, newspapers, TV etc were just wrong. (I now know the media just goes with whatever is good for ratings.) But it’s obvious, really. Write up 942 vague four-line predictions, be sure to include plenty about war and pestilence, great leaders and armies rising and falling, natural disasters and the like, cover all known nations on Earth, use confusing symbolism, be as ambiguous as possible, wait 500 years, and many of your predictions will seem to have come true. Add bad translations from the French to English, and the huge liberties the interpreters allow themselves, and we’re off to the races. What finally did it for me was the realization that you couldn’t figure out any of Nostradamus’ so-called predictions until after the thing they were supposed to be predicting had actually happened. To me, that didn’t seem like much of a prediction. More of a post-diction, if that’s a word.

Still, I had to admit he made a couple of good guesses. He predicted the fire of London in 1666 (actually just 66 – but still good), and Hister is pretty close to Hitler. But, I figured, coincidence.

Then I read James Randi’s “the Mask of Nostradamus”, one of my recommended books. It’s a surprisingly interesting read, covering a lot of ground. Among other things, Randi examines the many predictions Nostradamus made for people during his lifetime. Included were some very rosy predictions for Catherine de Medici, the Queen of France, who wanted to know the fate of her children. He correctly said they would all be kings, but neglected to say that was because they would all die young, leaving no descendants. In fact, Nostradamus specifically predicted that Catherine’s son Charles, who would become Charles IX, would “live as long as (Milord Conetable), who (shall see his) ninetieth year”. Unfortunately, Conetable died three years later aged 77, and Charles IX died at age 24. Randi examines many other specific prophesies drawn up for people of the day, and finds that Nostradamus’ predictions, where they can be checked, were almost always wrong. It’s a telling indictment on his supposed ability to predict affairs even further in the future.

Randi explains the “fire of London” prediction. Nostradamus hadn’t forecast the year “66”. In the original French, Nostradamus wrote (2:51) “vingt trois les six”. Cheetham had translated that as “three times twenty plus six” (66). Looking at it again, even I know enough French to say that vingt trois is twenty three, not three times twenty (which would be trois fois vingt). Nostradamus was writing about the execution in his lifetime of 23 protestant heretics, in groups of sixes.

As for Hister, a Google search of Hister and Danube will reveal 25 pages of links informing you that “Hister” was the old name of the lower Danube. Nostradamus was writing about events that happened in his day, on or by the Hister, not of Adolf Hitler in the future. Of course, the Nostradamus interpreters on the TV show said that Nostradamus, when writing about Adolf Hitler, decided to write the name of the river Hister, as a kind of “anagram” (which it isn’t) of Hitler. If you think that makes any kind of sense then you’ve never heard of Occam’s Razor. Or as Penn said, “why wouldn’t Nostradamus have just written Hitler?” Why indeed?

Randi goes on to debunk another eight of the more popular interpretations, including (not) predicting the death by jousting of Henry II of France, (not) predicting the Montgolfier balloons, and (not) predicting Napoleon.




Mike



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   
I'll tell you exactly why he didn't just name things correctly. If he did he would help to make it happen thereby receiving the negative Karma for it. It's that simple. That's why they are all so hard to decipher.
Mabus was most likely Suddom H. IMO, But he didn't say Mabus was the Anti-Christ. I think there is a good possibility that George W. Bush was the 3rd. Anti-Christ. All his numbers come up 666. IMO the divine intervention of the Galactic Federation of Light has changed things and the massive disasters that would have happened (natural and man-made) have been nutrilized.


www.kamar.ch...

cannonfire.blogspot.com...




[edit on 30-9-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
I'll tell you why he didn't just name things correctly. If he did he would help to make it happen thereby receiving the negative Karma for it. It's that simple. That's why they are all encoded and hard to decipher.



Why didn't he see into the near future and put down specifics if they weren't supposed to be read? What was the point of predicting in the first place? Why did he write them down if he was concerned about repercussions?


M



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   
don't understand your first question. I can't speak for him. Don't know why he did what he did. I am amazed he could do the things he did. Maybe he was a remote viewer. I don't think it could be done using Astrology. He definitely had psychic abilities.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
don't understand your first question. I can't speak for him. Don't know why he did what he did. I am amazed he could do the things he did. Maybe he was a remote viewer.


Not in the mood to look through books in the basement, but have read historians who provide compelling evidence Nostradramus's work were not intended strictly as future predictions. There are deliberate obfuscation and attempts at amusment, for one thing.

His works have enver been satisfactorily decoded, and in fact what is under discussion her we should call the Nostradamus Industry.

People making hay trying to force feed future predictions. Thousands of books, articles, websites - often contradicting each other or retro-engineering current events and personalities back to a line of his.

An excerpt from an interesting article by someone who has studied Nostradamus for decades:




THE NOSTRADAMUS CODE??? Forget It!

John Hogue

... Nostradamus' obscurity conjures many results. For one thing, his writing is muddled enough to be taken any way one wishes. It befuddled the Church Inquisitors to the extent that Nostradamus accomplished something rare for authentic seers of his day -- he avoided torture and execution as a magician and died peacefully in his bed. His ambiguities have kept the controversy of his prophecies alive, and even enhanced his stature as a seer in the centuries following his death (just as he predicted).

What Casey Stengle once said about managing a baseball team can be applied to Nostradamus' success as an obscurer: "The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided."

Nostradamus' cryptic chronicle of the future has succeeded in distancing his attackers from the majority of his undecided readers. Defining his nebulous narrative is not unlike lying on your back in the grass and gazing at the shapes of puffy clouds. You see a giraffe. Your friend sees an elephant. You can argue with him. Your success at convincing the other depends on your eloquence, not on the reality of the cloud. People keep playing the same game with the misty mentality of Nostradamus. He understood that people love to project their prejudices onto the canvas of the obscure and that this passion in human nature for giving shape to ambiguities will always survive a skeptic's attack. Nostradamus ensures his cloudy credibility by injecting moments of brilliant clarity that occasionally burn an opening in the general overcast of his narrative. We suddenly see names, dates, and intimate details of events as they happened -- or will happen.

Nostradamus' 36,200 weird words of prophecy are the molecules that compose the dark surface of his magic looking glass. On rare occasions we can peer into its surface and see the seeds of humanity harvested in tomorrow's field of dreams. But the magic doesn't end there. Nostradamus' "glass" reflects both ways. His strange language, symbols, barbarisms, and insights can also be used as a projector of the hidden secrets of his interpreters, be they the commentators or the readers of his oracular opus. A study of Nostradamus is more than just another examination of fulfilled and yet-to-be-fulfilled prophecies; it can be an exploration into how we project our thoughts, feelings, hopes and fears on the future.

[…]

Contrary to the claims of many imaginative dilettantes and a few sincere theorists, no one has yet found the key to any single all-encompassing code that unlocks his secrets. After 22 years of study [make that 33 years, now] I conclude that a magician of Nostradamus' intelligence would not be so stupid as to forge a weak link in the chain of his future legacy. At best there may be random devices and codes, but as we will see, even unlocking a random code conjures up more questions and mysteries than answers. It seems to be Nostradamus' rule to keep'em guessing.

Some of the most entertaining books on Nostradamus' boast about discovering some secret code. For instance, in 1991 authors Peter Lorie and V. J. Hewitt boldly claimed that they had made a complete scientific decodification of the prophet, from his chapeau of anagrams down to his syllable toes. With such a marketing hook I wondered why the promised "detailed" and scientific instructions were tucked away in the back of the book. The instructions brazenly asked the reader to comprehend Hewitt and Lorie's "scientific" theories by taking a leap of faith beyond objectivity. The back cover boldly declares that Hewitt herself was foreseen by the prophet as the one who would unlock his secrets. So far this book is only remarkable in its remarkably detailed failures, such as Prince Charles' failing to become king of England in 1993, George [H.W.] Bush failing to win a second term as president of the Untied States, and California not sinking into the Pacific Ocean at exactly 7 pm on 8 May, 1993.

Since that time Hewitt has struck out on her own and her declarations are far more cautious and open to interpretation. One no longer sees the dates for "decoded" prophecies listed on the cover of her books. There is much more use of "could" than "will" in her declarations these days.

I would cordially suggest to Hewitt, Lorie, or any future code-busters that they submit their claims to an impartial test. Anyone who believes he or she has decoded Nostradamus' quatrains should send their selection of decoded quatrains, with down-to-the-day-and-minute declarations for the coming year, to a reputable metaphysical organization such as the American Society for Psychical Research. After one year those interpretations can be unsealed before an audience of debunkers, journalists, and true believers to test their veracity. After predictions are verified, then, and only then, should that author publish his or her book claiming to decode Nostradamus.

Rather than play hide-and-seek for some code to dispel all mystery, future translators might consider that Nostradamus may have intended that we apply the perspectives of our own era to his prophecies.

His own astrological makeup indicates that Nostradamus was not an ego wishing to be found out. But he was an alchemist of controversies. His obscurity has worked to keep alive for centuries what may be a practical joke or a true prophetic gift, or some combination of the two. Debunkers and blind believers alike ought to be aware that attempting to make the prophet fit their own preconceived ideas and prejudices and calling it his "real" intention, are futile.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
You may have misunderstood me. I didn't mean that there is some special code to understand his quatrains. I simply meant that he purposely made them ambiguous, or hard to figure out, open to many interpretations. Especially the ones dealing with mass destruction. Some of them were way overboard in that respect.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
You may have misunderstood me. I didn't mean that there is some special code to understand his quatrains. I simply meant that he purposely made them ambiguous, or hard to figure out, open to many interpretations. Especially the ones dealing with mass destruction. Some of them were a way overboard in that respect.


Bad communication. Accept my apology.

I just react strongly to the perpetuation of the mythology of Nostradamus predicting all these modern events. Which he didn't.

Interesting guy, but his accomplishments are elsewhere.

New Agers twist the historical record at every opportunity to promote their wares.


Mike



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   
No apology necessary. I agree the world is over running with lying bullshi_ artists, corrupt politicians, etc. but IMO Nost. was accurate enough in certain areas (pre 1990s) I think he and Cacy's world predictions went off track in the 1990s, because of the GFL. I guess we wont see eye to eye on that score but that's life. We should all get back to the pyramids cause we've beat this subject to death.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sargoth
No apology necessary. I agree the world is over running with lying bullshi_ artists, corrupt politicians, etc. but IMO Nost. was accurate enough in certain areas (pre 1990s) I think he and Cacy's world predictions went off track in the 1990s, because of the GFL. I guess we wont see eye to eye on that score but that's life. We should all get back to the pyramids cause we've beat this subject to death.


Well i don't want to go into it. Nostradamus was a fascianting character, but wasn't any more successful at prediciting the future than anyone who would write a lot of vague one-liners open to interpretations. Anyone trying hard enough can find something somewhere that they can call a prediction of sorts.

Cayce was one of many hundreds of homeopathic healers of his day. His trance act helped set a tone of otherness. As a healer he doesn't seem to have done much better than placebo and natural recovery rates would account for. Sick people for get better, for the most part, given time.

His son, Hugh Lynne Cayce promoted the Cayce mythology and created a franchise. The past and future visions all turned out to be worthless. One or two might seem like hits, by random chance. But 99% are totally off the mark. He wasn't even a good guesser.

And I don't think there's been much testing, but I don't think applications of pigeon's blood or frog gizzards work too well curing osteoporosis or multiple sclerosis either.

Mike




[edit on 1-10-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Sargoth
 


Howdy Sargoth

I kinda hate to ask but what is GFI?



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   
I can't say I've researched Cayce's files myself, so I can only go by the google searches I've done and all say he was 80-90% accurate. I think your exaggerating mm. Where are the cynic's scientific studies of his record? But I understand where your coming from. I'm not a believer in Homeopathy. But there are legitimate alternative cures for Cancer and many other diseases the orthodox medical business will tell you are incurable. I know cause I've done them. If Cayce and Nostradamus were as lousy as you say, they would never have lasted this long. I will say this, there is such contradictory info. on Nost. it's ridiculous. I can see how so much confusion is created and how difficult his material is to quantify.
Hans the GFL is The Galactic Federation of Light.

www.michaelmandeville.com...

www.drkelley.info... (Cure for Cancer and many other chronic disorders)
cancertutor.com...
www.drkelley.com...
www.healthexcel.com... (latest still available version of Kelley program)

www.luisprada.com... (GFL)
www.paoweb.com... (GFL)
www.paoweb.com... (GFL)
www.youtube.com... (GFL)

telemetro.com... (photo of an ET that looks like the amphibian species drawing in Nidle's book)







[edit on 1-10-2009 by Sargoth]



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Sargoth
 


Thanks for the answer, I think

Briefly: Cayce, his files are controlled by the company set up to control them - they are the source of that number. Most are of health related claims that cannot be verified as almost all the folks are now aged-there were no scientific protocols in place for these of course, so its hearsay. However he did make some historical/archaeological claims and to date he has been 100% wrong.

Nostie, his vagueness allows for a large range of adaptation. Example I can predict the future too:

A king in the north shall fall
A messiah will come from the south
The rising of the moon will bring down a country
An earthquake will sink the city of sin
Great wealth will be found by the righteous

All of these have come true and will come true again at some point. Its a well known trick amongst 'predictors' predict what normally happens anyways.



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   
So what did you think of the links? or did you all totaly ignore them?



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Sargoth
 


Yes I looked at the Mandeville one. I didn't look at the health claims or GFI as they are not related to th original OP.

[edit on 2/10/09 by Hanslune]



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
How about the rest of you mm, Harte, Win 52, any body? Don't be shy. I really want to know all your opinions.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join