A question for all the "2012" non-believers

reply to post by stereologist


Mckenna wasn't a hoaxer. He didn't ask any money after his lectures...
He didn't ask anyone to believe him...
He only explained a THEORY, his ideas on the nature of the universe...
He didn't focused about gaining money...
He focused about explaining some concepts to people...

Don't call him a hoaxer...He never tried to fool anyone...He made some suppositions and theories, that's it.

Originally posted by Zagari
reply to post by stereologist

 

Mckenna wasn't a hoaxer. He didn't ask any money after his lectures...
He didn't ask anyone to believe him...
He only explained a THEORY, his ideas on the nature of the universe...
He didn't focused about gaining money...
He focused about explaining some concepts to people...

Don't call him a hoaxer...He never tried to fool anyone...He made some suppositions and theories, that's it.

You can't call it a theory if there's zero objective evidence to support it. At best, it's a hypothesis...and much of it has already been debunked numerous times.

But who cares about facts, right?

reply to post by MrXYZ


The facts are on the thread...There are 152 pages of research and more in other threads...
These are facts, WRITTEN PROOF of the reliability of the graph...

There is no worst deaf person of someone who doesn't want to listen...

You deny 152 pages of research with proof...

But who cares...? In a few months everyone will know the truth, isn't it? Why argue about something that will be evident in a few months?

I don't think the theory will be wrong...

My recent updates on the graph thread explain some undeniable truth about the graph...

People have the choice to look at them and think whatever they want to think...

I only care about posting them for people who understand the graph...

The other ones will see for themselves at the end of next year...

And NO dude... no one as of now came to debunk with success the graph...NO ONE

You confuse debunking with DENYING the evidence...

Denial doesn't make a theory inexact...

Every truth in the history of man has been firstly denied, than laughed at, than accepted as undeniable evidence...

Maybe if you could use all the time you spend debunking threads you know little about...for making some real research about things you want to debunk...

Its undebunkable until the end of 2012...

reply to post by Zagari


That info isn't objective evidence. It equals shooting a barn door, and then painting a bullseye around the spot where you hit the most

Hell, he also came up with a new evolutionary theory that has been ripped to shreds by facts

The other ones will see for themselves at the end of next year...

Fine, let's make a deal:

If the world ends, and I can for some reason still post, I will post "I'm a complete retard and should have trusted Zagari's irrational belief".

If the world doesn't end, you'll post "I'm a complete retard for ever believing in that nonsense and waisting so much precious time".

reply to post by MrXYZ


I am wasting my time with you...
Mckenna was smarter than 99% of people on this Earth...

Your science book says the things one person sees after taking drugs is false because fabricated by the mind...

But I don't think this is correct...Is not someone's mind's fabrication...

Its all real

Your science at this stage of technological evolution is unable to explain what these people saw while taking drugs and prefere to call it all a hoax or fabrication...

This is because no one can explain something that NEVER experienced PERSONALLY in his own body and with his own eyes...
What these scientists pretend to know is not reliable ...They haven't got any personal experience...

Its like death...No scientist can really say if there is something after death because they haven't got direct experience of it with their own bodies...

If only they thought differently maybe we wouldn't be at this stage of technology...

We search for life in the space at unimaginable distance and we don't realize there is life in a shape we can't conceive of...And its not in space...

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by Zagari

 

That info isn't objective evidence. It equals shooting a barn door, and then painting a bullseye around the spot where you hit the most

Hell, he also came up with a new evolutionary theory that has been ripped to shreds by facts

The other ones will see for themselves at the end of next year...

Fine, let's make a deal:

If the world ends, and I can for some reason still post, I will post "I'm a complete retard and should have trusted Zagari's irrational belief".

If the world doesn't end, you'll post "I'm a complete retard for ever believing in that nonsense and waisting so much precious time".

edit on 7-6-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)

The world will not end...TIMEWAVE IS NOT ABOUT END...Is about new beginning...

There will be an event that will forever change our culture and the way we see and understand time...

SEE? this post of you made me understand that you know little to nothing about timewave...

Timewave is not about doom...

The theory suggests that time is fractal and historical events repeat themselves in patterns in the future...

That is in a single sentence the explanation for the graph...

And you can't debunk that time MAY BE fractal...
You haven't got the way to debunk this concept.

reply to post by Zagari


We know VERY well what drugs to people's minds, and it's certainly not increasing knowledge

I've taken enough drugs to know that they give you the IMPRESSION of having some special insight into how stuff works...but if you look at the chemical reactions taking place, you realize it's all nonsense. For the longest times I was seriously convinced that pot helps me study, because I am calmer and "more focused". As much as I enjoyed smoking pot, in reality, I was most definitely not more focused than a sober person...just a lot more hungry for chips and chocolate

Now, even if he did find out something through drug use, he still failed at providing objective evidence to back up his claims. And when it comes to his theories, such as his evolutionary theory claiming 10k years ago homo sapiens lived in a paradise-like state in Africa eating only fruit, you realize it's all nonsense. 10k years ago homo sapiens was demonstrably roaming Europe and happily eating meat. So how about looking at facts for once, just once...try it

reply to post by Zagari


It doesn't make a difference...whether his claim is that the world as we know it ends, or more specifically how we see the world changes, he still didn't back up his claims with objective evidence.

reply to post by Zagari

Mckenna wasn't a hoaxer. He didn't ask any money after his lectures...

The NJ hoaxers that wanted to see if they could test the reliability of UFO investigators by putting up obvious flares on balloons were hoaxers. Money is not a requirement. Besides didn't he sell books?

He didn't ask anyone to believe him...

So why did he do lectures?

He only explained a THEORY, his ideas on the nature of the universe...

A theory is based on facts and there are no facts to support the claims he made.

He didn't focused about gaining money...

So are you saying he was not as good at swindling as he was at hoaxing/

He focused about explaining some concepts to people...

And he didn't want anyone to believe him?

Don't call him a hoaxer...He never tried to fool anyone...He made some suppositions and theories, that's it.

Of course he tried to fool people. He pushed the TWZ baloney that no supporting evidence.

reply to post by MrXYZ


That was a metaphora...The whole story of the monkeys was a metaphora...He made many of them on his books...
Like when he wrote about the story of 2 universes, one with religions and the other one in which no religion ever begun, so technology evolution was incredibly faster...

But all these things are metaphoras about concepts in the world...

He didn't really believe in any of these things...

In fact he suggested to people this: " You shouldn't believe in anything " , " You should have no belief "...

Its my understanding ( I read everything about him ) that those were metaphoras, myths, stories, not his personal beliefs.

reply to post by stereologist


He told everyone "My technique is don’t believe anything. If you believe in something, you are automatically precluded from believing its opposite."
- Terence McKenna

This is only one example of his wisdom...If you believe something you cannot change your opinion...

So he suggested not to believe in anything...

reply to post by Zagari

The facts are on the thread...There are 152 pages of research and more in other threads...
These are facts, WRITTEN PROOF of the reliability of the graph...

Zagari you've gone 152 pages of silly shoehorning and nothing more. It's not proof. It isn't even evidence. The plot claims that a value is changing. You can't even quantify the value. All you do over in that thread is made up guess were you claim things are going up or down or matching up historical events and it is laughable. You latch onto something and go aha and you overlook over issues of the time.

When I asked if people could tell me if certain years were novel everyone backed off because they knew that they were in trouble. As long as you stick the phoney claims of novelty and ever changing rules of what is novel or not you simply delude yourself into thinking that any research at all is being done.

I don't think the theory will be wrong...

How about a public apology to everyone when it is clear that you wasted the time of many readers of the TWZ thread?

My recent updates on the graph thread explain some undeniable truth about the graph... /quote]
Are you still shoehorning?

You confuse debunking with DENYING the evidence...

You confuse shoehorning and cherry picking with evidence.

Every truth in the history of man has been firstly denied, than laughed at, than accepted as undeniable evidence...

You need to stop watching so many bad videos and learn a little about the history of science. That is utter nonsense.

Maybe if you could use all the time you spend debunking threads you know little about...for making some real research about things you want to debunk...

Its undebunkable until the end of 2012...

Just because you have wasted countless hours toying with this ludicrous claim and countless hours of others people's time doesn't make it so. In fact, it is very clear that the "acceleration" claimed by that hoaxer McKenna is not happening.

reply to post by stereologist


Clearly this is you job and you have an agenda for debunking everything, every sentence that mentions 2012 in it...

You are always ready to enter threads about 2012, it seems like you live on your seat, ready to debunk every person's sentence making it in pieces...

AND STILL...You exclude from your posts every single opinion that could be your PERSONAL opinion...

Everything that you post is someone else's opinion...Not yours...

When will be the time when we will see YOUR opinion and not something written in a book?

You write like a book, even like a robot, where is your personality, your opinion is not existing in this website...

Really, relax...

You explained to THOUSANDS of people how 2012 is a complete hoax, so WHY, oh why can't you move on to post in some other section of this website?

At the end who is the one obsessed with 2012 in here???

I don't live on 2012 threads section trying to debunk every little concept one says.

reply to post by Zagari

I am wasting my time with you...
Mckenna was smarter than 99% of people on this Earth...

Wow you have been duped. He was a druggy that came up with odd ideas. I know a few of them. Reminds me of the dope scene in Animal House.

Your science book says the things one person sees after taking drugs is false because fabricated by the mind...

But I don't think this is correct...Is not someone's mind's fabrication...

Its all real

Are you using McKenna's claims to justify your lifestyle. I've seen that before.

Here is the typical druggy question. "Is it possible I can only remember this when I am in the same state?" The answer is no. They've been mumbling the same question endlessly as if you have amnesia.

We search for life in the space at unimaginable distance and we don't realize there is life in a shape we can't conceive of...And its not in space...

You've got it. That is the scene from Animal House.

reply to post by stereologist


In 1945, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin[27] introduced the term Omega Point.[28][25]
14 February 1946: the day of the unveiling of the first electronic general-purpose computer (ENIAC), regarded as the birth of the Information Age.[29][30]
In 2005, information was doubling every 36 months. IBM data—see page 41
In June 2008, information was doubling every 11 months. IBM data—see page 41
On 4 August 2010, Google CEO Eric Schmidt said: "Every two days now we create as much information as we did from the dawn of civilization up until 2003." Source
In the end of 2010, information was doubling every 11 hours. IBM data—see page 2

No acceleration in the technological evolution, eh? Tell it to someone else...

What a joke

reply to post by Zagari

There will be an event that will forever change our culture and the way we see and understand time...

Wasn't that the claim made about the Segway?

The theory suggests that time is fractal and historical events repeat themselves in patterns in the future...

See you don't understand the plot. It is not fractal. The fractal dimension of the plot is 1, hence it is not a so-called fractal plot.

That is in a single sentence the explanation for the graph...

Ooops. You need to figure out what it is. It isn't fractal.

well for one, how many mayans books or codices survived the invasion of the spanish? not many.

secondly your applying our language and beliefs to their system. who says the world is to literally end?
in the same way we consider one revolution around the sun to be a year, we can consider the completion of this cycle as a galactic year? Theres so much bullcrap associated with this and so many people selling stuff related to this. Not to mention self fufilling prophecies. I would say not to many people know the true intentions of this system....

reply to post by Zagari

He didn't really believe in any of these things...

In fact he suggested to people this: " You shouldn't believe in anything " , " You should have no belief "...

That should be applied to TWZ more than his other nonsense claims.

reply to post by Zagari

You exclude from your posts every single opinion that could be your PERSONAL opinion...

That's because Stereo and I seem care about OBJECTIVE evidence rather than subjective evidence. In science, subjective evidence is worthless!

reply to post by stereologist


I know very well his explanation about " time is fractal "...

And from what I can see you don't understand his concept of fractal time...

Time is a spiral always with the same patterns and we are near to the center point of the spiral...

Anyway, it can be fun for a while, but I feel its useless to talk about these concepts with you guys...

Your mind cannot get these concepts...Because you stop and think " this is a hoax "...

Instead you should think more openly...

One person that wants to understand a concept must first get rid of all pre-concepts and focus on the new concept...Otherwise you stop and think its bunk...

You guys, you all debunkers in general ( when the debunkers don't know a thing about the concept they try to debunk )
You guys are too rigid in your beliefs and claims...