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.

 

Wow, Just wow

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


1) don't know who richard feynmans is
2) I never said you were wrong, just trying to clarify points you made about the flags
3) I don't believe everything I am told... if people did that, we'd all still think the the sun revolved around the earth on fear of death for herasy

and I know a bit about the universe, being that I live in it. I also know that many people have different opinions on how it works, so I like to get all points of view




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by sremmos
The Professional, I find it interesting that he got the number of soldiers correct because from what I understand 960,000 men would have been an incredibly large invasion force at around 1000 AD.

It could be that my notion of history is just wrong and that it was in fact common for forces this large to assemble in his region of the world, but my own memory tells me that's a force quite a bit larger than what was normally seen.

I find that interesting because if he was trying to bull# a prediction you'd think he'd just use a more tame number.


Yes excellent point. Two sources say the population of the world at the year 1000 was 310 million and 275 million, so just say it was 300 million.

web.ukonline.co.uk...
geography.about.com...

A 960,000 man army is about 1 mil, so it is 1/300 of the year 1000s population. It is the equivalent of saying that an army of 1/300 of Current pop (7 billion) = 23 million man army will attack in the year 3200.

And mods, put this thread back to where it was originally, it is not a fringe theory. I am taking what was written in a book and corroborating it.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by THE_PROFESSIONAL]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL


It is saying that there will be 80 flags each with 12,000 soldiers that will attack.
80 x 12,000 = 960,000

The coalition forces = US + 31 countries:
US = 50 flags (each state has a flag)
Therefore 81 flags total (off by one??)



If you are counting the 50 state flags of the USA, then why arent you counting the state flags of the coalition forces ?

Australia's mainland has 7 alone, then there's the islands of Australia with their own. You could also say that as there are aboriginals in the Australian Army, you could also include their flag.

Not sure you thought that through too well.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by SNAFU38
 


Exactly, just look at the UK. Here each "state" is even much more considered independent than in the USA, but the OP did not consider this in his 80 countries theory.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by SNAFU38

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL


It is saying that there will be 80 flags each with 12,000 soldiers that will attack.
80 x 12,000 = 960,000

The coalition forces = US + 31 countries:
US = 50 flags (each state has a flag)
Therefore 81 flags total (off by one??)



If you are counting the 50 state flags of the USA, then why arent you counting the state flags of the coalition forces ?

Australia's mainland has 7 alone, then there's the islands of Australia with their own. You could also say that as there are aboriginals in the Australian Army, you could also include their flag.

Not sure you thought that through too well.


Is Australia called the United States of Australia? No in the US the states have their own laws and share power with the federal governemtn, therefore each basically can be its own soverign country. You seem to have skipped over all my previous posts.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by nagabonar
reply to post by SNAFU38
 


Exactly, just look at the UK. Here each "state" is even much more considered independent than in the USA, but the OP did not consider this in his 80 countries theory.


how do you explain 960,000 troops predicted by an ILLITERATE man 1200 years ago. You feeling lucky? How bout you get one Illiterate man right now, find anyone and have him write down with the same accuracy something that will happen in the year 3200.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
So no rebuttals? And mods you still have not given me an answer as to why this was moved. I will keep posting one post a day to keep this at the top until I get a clear answer as to why it is in the fringe theory section, when there is clearly a prophecy and I am verifying its claim.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


It has most likely been moved because you are the only person here that believes what you are saying, & a simple check of this post (dont care about your past posts) will confirm that fact IS irrefutable.

If you wish to jump to big conclusions, you must apply the same rules to all aspects of it, you cant just pick & choose which country has certain rules apply to it.

As for each state running its own laws, SAME DOWN HERE, learn about other countrys before you make assumptions on our sovereignty.

Additionally, there are some parts of Australia, & no doubt other coalition nations, that have had people declare their land sovereign. They have their own currency, & their OWN FLAG.

Do you consider the English flag as one of these flags ? From my understanding, Englands flag is made up from the Scottish, Irish etc. They are all sovereign nations & yet each can fight under two flags, their countrys & the British flag.

Your theory is completely wrong, sorry, nice idea to try & make anchient writings relevant to today, but wrong in this case. Your theory is so flawed, as many has pointed out, Im not even going to bother checking for your response as I know it will be illogical.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SNAFU38
 


Australia was not significant player in the war. Thats like dividing an australian soldiers head into belonging one part of australia, and the legs belogning to another part of Australia. They were a small contributer and the fact that Australia has a separate flag does not matter. All that it matters was that the Most powerful nation (us) has its 50 flags, and the remaining countries are on par with each each state of the US.

You still haven't answered my question about 960,000 troops, how did someone from 1400 years ago know that number?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Ok this is a prophecy that has actually come true with regards to the 1991 Gulf War:

Sahih Bukhari, Book 53, Volume 4


Volume 4, Book 53, Number 401:

Narrated Auf bin Mali:

I went to the Prophet during the Ghazwa of Tabuk while he was sitting in a leather tent. He said, "Count six signs that indicate the approach of the Hour: my death, the conquest of Jerusalem, a plague that will afflict you (and kill you in great numbers) as the plague that afflicts sheep, the increase of wealth to such an extent that even if one is given one hundred Dinars, he will not be satisfied; then an affliction which no Arab house will escape, and then a truce between you and Bani Al-Asfar (i.e. the Byzantines) who will betray you and attack you under eighty flags. Under each flag will be twelve thousand soldiers.



I'm more interested in the other parts of this prediction...

you are focusing on the flags and troops, but what is this about a plague that will afflict man and sheep?
which conquest of Jerusalem was the one that the is being spoken of?

you are addressing but a small part of this prediction and ignoring the bulk of it.

can you elaborate on the rest?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by SNAFU38
 


Australia was not significant player in the war. Thats like dividing an australian soldiers head into belonging one part of australia, and the legs belogning to another part of Australia. They were a small contributer and the fact that Australia has a separate flag does not matter. All that it matters was that the Most powerful nation (us) has its 50 flags, and the remaining countries are on par with each each state of the US.

You still haven't answered my question about 960,000 troops, how did someone from 1400 years ago know that number?



In the autumn of 512 BC a great army of nearly 700000 warriors — one of the largest armies of antiquity — was encamped on a rolling, grassy plain on the Steppes of southern Russia, somewhere north of the Sea of Azov.

-

Xerxes set out in the spring of 480 BC from Sardis with a fleet and army which Herodotus claimed was more than two million strong with at least 10,000 elite warriors named Persian Immortals

- at this point, I'm not that impressed by the army you are saying was way beyond any armies of the time

www.google.com...:1,tll:600BC,tlh:401BC&prmd=df&ei=rBViTO3TNsP68Aa75cyv CQ&ved=0CGkQyQEoAQ


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by kalisdad
 


Im not talking about the size. I'm saying how did one guess it with 0.04% error 1400 years ago. It is you making the same guess to the same accuracy, while being illiterate about the year 3200. I have yet seen any other prediction come as close as this.

If you look at the ratio of error/time the result is even more impressive. Yes you could say 10 persons will die tomorrow, but your timespan of prediction is very small...now talk 1400 years into the future and say it with the same accuracy.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


you are the only one saying that he was looking 1200 years into the future...

what if what he saw was only 300 years, or 30 for that matter...

and what about the bulk of the prophacy that you are ignoring?

your premise that the 80 flags consisted of 50 Us flags and 31 other countries has been highly questionable, and I've shown that the number of troops was nothing out of the ordinary historically.

please show what the other parts of the prophecy have to do with the 1st gulf war.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


you are the only one saying that he was looking 1200 years into the future...

what if what he saw was only 300 years, or 30 for that matter...

and what about the bulk of the prophacy that you are ignoring?

your premise that the 80 flags consisted of 50 Us flags and 31 other countries has been highly questionable, and I've shown that the number of troops was nothing out of the ordinary historically.

please show what the other parts of the prophecy have to do with the 1st gulf war.


it was recorded in the year 800, which was 1200 years ago. which means he saw 1200 years into the future. but this is an account of muhammed which means it is actually being seen 1400 years into the future. And Im not ignoring the rest of the prophecy. I have stated how it is.

Which army was historically documented as being 960,000 strong in the year 600+300, like you said, or 600+30 like you said. None, there is no recorded evidence of another army that matches. This is one prophecy in a set of prophecies which are true at this time only, not during the year 600, or the year 900. This prophecy is a Sign of the end, and is valid when it states it to be valid. The author said that the end will be near when a few of these signs will appear as such..but they had not occured in teh year 900 or 630 like you said, but only in the 20th century they became valid, thereofre this prediction was talking about this war.

I am not the only one who is saying this The University of Southern California (USC) site is saying this. Look at my sources.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by THE_PROFESSIONAL]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

The coalition forces = US + 31 countries:
US = 50 flags (each state has a flag)
Therefore 81 flags total (off by one??)


Why do you ignore the state flags for the other 31 countries in the coalition, but include the USA state flags? That just shows how easy it is to manipulate data to make any silly "prophecy" come true!



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

The coalition forces = US + 31 countries:
US = 50 flags (each state has a flag)
Therefore 81 flags total (off by one??)


Why do you ignore the state flags for the other 31 countries in the coalition, but include the USA state flags? That just shows how easy it is to manipulate data to make any silly "prophecy" come true!


because the other state flags are not major, its like counting the hairs on a soldiers head and saying that this soldier was bald during the war, and this one was not. Major players are given. Read ALL of my posts before answering any questions.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONALuntil I get a clear answer as to why it is in the fringe theory section, when there is clearly a prophecy and I am verifying its claim.


There is no clear prophecy as has been pointed out, you distorted the facts to fit And of course such silly claims as this should be in the fringe area, as they are just made up stories



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

because the other state flags are not major,


Nor are the US state flags....

why count them but miss all the other state flags?


[edit on 10/8/10 by dereks]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONALuntil I get a clear answer as to why it is in the fringe theory section, when there is clearly a prophecy and I am verifying its claim.


There is no clear prophecy as has been pointed out, you distorted the facts to fit And of course such silly claims as this should be in the fringe area, as they are just made up stories


USC says that it is a prophecy. No facts have been distorted. It is in a book called sahih Buhkari (i provided you with a wiki link) and the USC website link, I am not distorting any facts. which facts am I distorting? can you show me which numbers I smudeged, or which book I falsely distorted?

let me refresh your reading skills:



These prophetic traditions, or hadith, were collected by the Muslim scholar Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari (810–870) (about 200 years after Muhammad died)

en.wikipedia.org...

Therefore it is a prophecy

He is speaking about the signs of the end of the world, coming from a prophet...duh its a prophecy, as wiki clearly states. Are you going to say that the words out of a prophet are not prophecy?

If you still cant read, let me highlight a screenshot for you then:



I did not make any of this up. USC just happend to make this book digital for you to read.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by THE_PROFESSIONAL]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
No facts have been distorted. ......which numbers I smudeged, or which book I falsely distorted?


You distorted the number of flags, as has been pointed out to you

As to the USC posting it, you will find MIT has posted stuff on Harry Potter, that does not make it true...



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join