James Cameron's BURIED PRODUCTION "Resurrection Tomb" (regards Jesus's Bone Box found). Discover

reply to post by vethumanbeing


The tomb "find" is what was debunked, not the production or cinematography in making the documentary. I don't think anyone is saying the documentary is bogus, but the tomb find itself.

Originally posted by stupid girl

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

So, You are saying based upon scholarship you have investigated yourself you are confident in your findings. Ton or tome of free time? You have not provided a sintile of evidence otherwise. PROVE IT (why do you believe that Google is the end al'be all? I did not think this would have been so fast/so quick). A Brainwashatarian Google drone.

Collect yourself, good man.
Your desperation is showing.

Problem all may be speaking of direct opposite talkumentaries, documentaries, lieing filmography. Hard to pin down what exactly we are defining (I know James Cameron is at the base of it and he gets my first arrow).

reply to post by vethumanbeing


You seem to be rather uninformed on the topic. And who knows, you could be quite new to ATS as well. Anyways, we all did this discussion in 2007. Most of the experts that were interviewed for the TV episode that aired came forward and stated that their testimonies were manipulated and they unanimously repudiated the show and it's producers.

Google isn't something to fear friend.

In both the film and book, a series of experts on archaeology, epigraphy, ancient names, DNA, statistics, and esoteric texts are interviewed. They are not told about the overarching thesis, but each is asked about a single component of the puzzle, which the producers skillfully edit into a compelling story. Confidentiality agreements must be signed for the sake of secrecy, jettisoning peer review, the gold standard of academic integrity. Only the principals involved had the whole picture, and scholars are made marionette-like to play their parts. But last week, after a press conference announced the "discovery," those scholars began to come forward, one by one, questioning or even repudiating the way their words or intentions had been manipulated.

Almost to a person, my colleagues in archaeology and biblical scholarship are condemning the thesis as fraudulent. Why? The case is simply not compelling, And in spite of The Lost Tomb of Jesus's insistence that the secret was buried and forgotten in the Israel Antiquity's Authority's storage facilities since 1980, just like Indiana Jones' ark, this is patently not true. Many scholars, including myself, had written about those names on the ossuaries years ago and concluded that that the discovery was indeed very important evidence about Jewish burial practices at the time of Jesus, but highly unlikely to be Jesus of Nazareth's burial.

here

Originally posted by stupid girl

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

So, You are saying based upon scholarship you have investigated yourself you are confident in your findings. Ton or tome of free time? You have not provided a sintile of evidence otherwise. PROVE IT (why do you believe that Google is the end al'be all? I did not think this would have been so fast/so quick). A Brainwashatarian Google drone.

Collect yourself, good man.
Your desperation is showing.

I am asking for help in that I am interested in the meaning behind whatever Cameron was trying to express. As an empath I suppose I am doing his job as to ask the simple question "true or not" nothing more what is believed or not? I just posited the query do not hang me for its sins or overrides.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

You seem to be rather uninformed on the topic. And who knows, you could be quite new to ATS as well. Anyways, we all did this discussion in 2007. Most of the experts that were interviewed for the TV episode that aired came forward and stated that their testimonies were manipulated and they unanimously repudiated the show and it's producers.

Google isn't something to fear friend.

In both the film and book, a series of experts on archaeology, epigraphy, ancient names, DNA, statistics, and esoteric texts are interviewed. They are not told about the overarching thesis, but each is asked about a single component of the puzzle, which the producers skillfully edit into a compelling story. Confidentiality agreements must be signed for the sake of secrecy, jettisoning peer review, the gold standard of academic integrity. Only the principals involved had the whole picture, and scholars are made marionette-like to play their parts. But last week, after a press conference announced the "discovery," those scholars began to come forward, one by one, questioning or even repudiating the way their words or intentions had been manipulated.

Almost to a person, my colleagues in archaeology and biblical scholarship are condemning the thesis as fraudulent. Why? The case is simply not compelling, And in spite of The Lost Tomb of Jesus's insistence that the secret was buried and forgotten in the Israel Antiquity's Authority's storage facilities since 1980, just like Indiana Jones' ark, this is patently not true. Many scholars, including myself, had written about those names on the ossuaries years ago and concluded that that the discovery was indeed very important evidence about Jewish burial practices at the time of Jesus, but highly unlikely to be Jesus of Nazareth's burial.

here

Elequantly said, I am a neophyte. Never human before.
And your answer is? Not True. As in Noahs ark not there found in Turkey.
Next Question.
Mermaid Found. Documentary NOAA. Discovery channel .Debunk it.

reply to post by vethumanbeing


I hope you'll understand and forgive me for refraining to engage a red herring.

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

You seem to be rather uninformed on the topic. And who knows, you could be quite new to ATS as well. Anyways, we all did this discussion in 2007. Most of the experts that were interviewed for the TV episode that aired came forward and stated that their testimonies were manipulated and they unanimously repudiated the show and it's producers.

Google isn't something to fear friend.

In both the film and book, a series of experts on archaeology, epigraphy, ancient names, DNA, statistics, and esoteric texts are interviewed. They are not told about the overarching thesis, but each is asked about a single component of the puzzle, which the producers skillfully edit into a compelling story. Confidentiality agreements must be signed for the sake of secrecy, jettisoning peer review, the gold standard of academic integrity. Only the principals involved had the whole picture, and scholars are made marionette-like to play their parts. But last week, after a press conference announced the "discovery," those scholars began to come forward, one by one, questioning or even repudiating the way their words or intentions had been manipulated.

Almost to a person, my colleagues in archaeology and biblical scholarship are condemning the thesis as fraudulent. Why? The case is simply not compelling, And in spite of The Lost Tomb of Jesus's insistence that the secret was buried and forgotten in the Israel Antiquity's Authority's storage facilities since 1980, just like Indiana Jones' ark, this is patently not true. Many scholars, including myself, had written about those names on the ossuaries years ago and concluded that that the discovery was indeed very important evidence about Jewish burial practices at the time of Jesus, but highly unlikely to be Jesus of Nazareth's burial.

here

Elequantly said, I am a neophyte. Never human before.
And your answer is? Not True. As in Noahs ark not there found in Turkey.
Next Question.
Mermaid Found. Documentary NOAA. Discovery channel .Debunk it.

very sad if true and if so the point of the lie? or simply a question posited to make ourselves think beyond outside the the box all of this is unsettling as I am shown something that I must understand yet in truth thereof cannot make any sense of it at all. I am a first time human no karma and searching.

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Simple.. people who are not Christians trying to disprove the resurrection of the Son of God.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

I hope you'll understand and forgive me for refraining to engage a red herring.

Why is a red herring a bad thing? It is the obvious answer to any age old question disquised as truth, hiding; something falsehoodian. Dickens, Austintonian.. Name in the blank.

reply to post by vethumanbeing


I don't mean this in a bad way, have you taken logic courses? One should never entertain a red herring rebuttal.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

Simple.. people who are not Christians trying to disprove the resurrection of the Son of God.

No calibrate. No idea. You cannot disprove something you have no imagination of; as in what if that happenend for real and true- if no majick, it did not, if so it did and the mystery schools tell the story.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

The tomb "find" is what was debunked, not the production or cinematography in making the documentary. I don't think anyone is saying the documentary is bogus, but the tomb find itself.

Who debunked it? The tomb ITSELF? Was the Tomb the ultimate Naysayer? (what is that camera doing here) and is this a documentary? all jokes aside?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

I don't mean this in a bad way, have you taken logic courses? One should never entertain a red herring rebuttal.

Odd you should ask that, IAM a more of a statistics personality; so should explain the Red Herring.

Originally posted by Obsrvr
Those boxes were proven to be hoaxes.

That's right. The box' were shown to be the right age but the etchings of the names on them were found to have been added later or at least suspect.

Originally posted by palg1

Originally posted by Obsrvr
Those boxes were proven to be hoaxes.

That's right. The box' were shown to be the right age but the etchings of the names on them were found to have been added later or at least suspect.

edit on 14-1-2013 by palg1 because: (no reason given)

Finally; a flashlight defines/illumates the dark. This makes sense.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Do a simple search, this has been discussed a few times on here. There is tons of info on the net you can find that completely debunks the "find". That's why the documentary was scrubbed, it was poor scholarship and archaeology.

Wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered. I think this applies to that bit of scripture. He's not in the desert, he's not in someone's basement, and he ain't in a dusty old tomb.

Matt. 24:23-28

23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.

26 “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.