posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 07:52 PM
hounddoghowlie "you have failed to provide a single link that is not a blog, or a self promting a book selling web site. "
LOL, just another dishonest tactic to dismiss & deny. I will not apologize as most people who are honest understand that there are more details and
sources in the books that they are discussing, which you've obviously never read - perhaps it's about time you did because your utter ignorance on
this subject is as transparent as glass.
hounddoghowlie "name them, for every one you name i will name one christian or non christian that agrees"
LOL, what they've *EVER* been able to do is provide CREDIBLE evidence to substantiate the claims. The 'burden of proof' rests in their hands and
they've failed miserably.
hounddoghowlie "RH: Yes, I think there is. The evidence comes from the Bible itself"
Baaahahaha, how hypocritical of you to use to bible to prove the bible, which is precisely what you accused me of previously - which I'm not actually
doing at all. They're always selling the bible and proselytizing Christianity based on no credible evidence to support the claims. There's no
credible evidence to back up the claims by Rachel Havrelock. Typical.
hounddoghowlie "can your girl say that she was invited to host a broadcasted documentary, on a international television network? "
First of all, she's not "my girl" and second, she did much better by having her work viewed by over 200 million people worldwide in over 30
languages all without even trying to do so, it just happened and went viral. Plus, it was free and still is so, there goes your dishonest hypocritical
theory about selling & promotions.
Me: "That's just a cheap hand-waving dismissal - the fact remains that in those blogs or whatever are posted credible evidence from primary sources
and scholar commentary on them - you obviously didn't actually read anything you merely skimmed for something to complain about to dismiss it all,
which further demonstrates your severe biases and lack of objectivity. "
hounddoghowlie "no it's not it's her blog defending her self. show me one link in those blogs that doesn't include her or someone promoting
every link leads back to one of her sites in one from or the other, or some other "scholar" salesman promoting her and her books or their own. show
us some other links that do not lead back to her. sales pages don't count "
Baaahaha, how absurd can you be? Are you home-schooled? You have no clue how ridiculous you sound right now claiming she's not allowed to defend her
work from critics or promote or sell her work. Do you tell your boss not to pay you? If you don't like the promotion & books simply over-look them
like anybody else would do. The fact remains there's a mountain more information throughout her books, which you've never read, so, just get over
it. It's not ANY kind of argument. It's just a dishonest way to dismiss her entire body of work without ever having to actually study the subject at
hounddoghowlie "of course i'm biased with my belief, just as you are biased in yours. "
LOL, not so but, nice try. I'm a former saved, baptized Christian of many years who rigorously studied the bible so, I am far from "one-sided" as
I've also actually read many, many works including all of Acharya's and many of her sources. So, this line of crap will absolutely not work on me.
Acharya now has 5 books totaling over 2,100 pages of text with over 5,700 footnotes/citations to primary sources, references & scholar/expert
commentary on them from a wide variety of backgrounds, including Christian, specifically because the subject is so contentious, utilizing over 1,600
bibliographical sources by respected authors/ publishers and peer-reviewed scholarly journals and over 300 illustrations.
hounddoghowlie "she can defend her own work, just not doing it with her own work."
Baahaha, think about how stupid you sound right there. you have no clue what you're talking about at all. Your claim that she defends her work with
her own work is inaccurate, misleading and a total distortion of the facts. Most all of the time when she cites her own books it's to primary sources
and/or scholar commentary on them so, you sir, are completely full of # because you just don't know what the hell you're talking about because
you've never read a single book of hers.
Now, just stop lying or Jesus will make sure your burn in hell for all eternity.
hounddoghowlie "i just had to look at your members profile. talk about the pot calling the kettle black. not bias much hunh?
GoldenKnight Member Profile
you have been a member for a year and a half.
98 posts and all of them are on threads about zeitgeist. "
Care factor = 0.
It happens to be a subject that I study and find interesting.