Debunking Lies & Other Sectarian Myths FAQ
Daniel Min, Ph.D.
"a frvctibvs eorvm cognoscetis eos nvmquid colligvnt
de spinis vuas avt de tribvlis ficvs sic omnis arbor
bona frvctvs bonos facit mala avtem arbor frvctvs
malos facit non potest arbor bona frvctvs malos
facere neqve arbor mala frvctvs bonos facere omnis
arbor qvae non facit frvctvm bonvm exciditvr et in
ignem mittitvr igitvr ex frvctibvs eorvm cognoscetis
eos"--Matthevs 7:16-20
"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather
grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so
every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a
corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good
tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can
a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree
that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down,
and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits
ye shall know them.--Mat 7:16-20
E.g. some of the most popular lies--that are propagated
by those who find it easy to lie--are easily identified
then properly, honestly, factually, solemnly, corrected.
You may not always like the facts but the facts survive
the test of time. It's like James van Praagh is fond of
saying, "forget what you know and believe what you see".
Show me, don't tell me! After you've shown me, then, by
all means, do tell me. Knowledge must withstand reality.
The facts are often in conflict with orthodox science...
Q1 Did Nasa's Apollo men-to-the-moon rockets really
send and return living human beings to and from
Earth's Moon like they claim they did six times?
A1 No, not even once. They couldn't make it so they
faked it. For what purpose they did this is open
to conjecture, but the facts prove they faked it.
It is much too radioactive in outer space beyond
the Van Allen Belt of the Earth. That's why they
have never sent any manned mission more than just
a few hundred miles above the Earth's surface, as
to do otherwise would mean death for any lifeform
were it exposed to the solar wind for more than a
few hours at most. The government has "covered-up"
a lot of embarrassing and incriminating activities
over the years, but trying to fake the manned moon
landings turned out to be an abject failure. There
were too many problems resulting in myriad obvious
lies, blunders and blatant contradictions in their
story to hold water under conscientious inspection.
It's sad in a way, since so many people were duped
into believing that they actually sent astronauts
to the Moon but it never happened. They never went
in the first place; yes, unmanned missions went to
Moon to place laser reflectors, and gather samples,
to take remote earthrise pictures and videos, etc.,
but no manned vehicle of any kind has ever made it
into outer space--except those few who died trying.
Sorry to break it to you, but if you believed that
Nasa put men on the Moon, you've believed in a lie.
Q2 Were the three main pyramids and the sphinx at
the Giza plateau in Egypt really built by slaves
about the time of Khufu, Khafre, Djedefre, or at
any time between 2000-3000 BC as they've claimed?
A2 No, not even close. These monuments were designed
and built more than twelve thousand years ago--by
extraordinarily gifted artisans. Not using slaves,
but by methods described by the "sleeping prophet"
Edgar Cayce, or as this architect & builder wrote:
"I have discovered the secrets of the pyramids,
and have found out how the Egyptians and the
ancient builders in Peru, Yucatan, and Asia,
with only primitive tools, raised and set in
place blocks of stone weighing many tons!"
-Edward Leedskalnin (Latvia 1887-Miami 1951)
Cayce said that the Great Pyramid took a hundred
years to build, and dated its actual construction
from 10,490 BC to 10,390 BC. Cayce also said that
the Sphinx was built around the same time. Recent
investigations have proven the Sphinx is thousands
of years older than previously thought by orthodox
egyptologists. You can bet these adjacent pyramids
were built at around the time Cayce said they were.
And so it'll be a cold day in hell before orthodox
academia breaks down and admits that they were off
by more than eight thousand years in dating these.
But the fact of the matter is, they're over twelve
thousand years old by now. The "khufu" association
is a complete myth, a fabrication of the orthodoxy.
Q3 Is it true that, before the days of Copernicus, no
astronomer in history realized that the difference
between heliocentric and synodic orbits of planets
is self-evident? Erudite ancient astronomers, such
as the Babylonian, Persian, Parthian, Mayan, Aztec,
Inca, Celt, Egyptian and doubtless many others who
carefully and methodically watched the heavens and
kept records of their observations--over centuries,
millennia, ages of civilizations lost to antiquity,
with the ever-precessing seasons, heliacal risings,
not one ever knew the difference between the helio-
centric and synodic (i.e., earth-centric) orbit of
the planets, but only thought of them as wanderers,
strange lights or some such other foolish nonsense?
A3 Yes, it is nothing but foolish nonsense to believe
that ancient astronomers were so utterly imbecilic
that they couldn't tell the difference between day
and night, or star from a planet, the Sun from the
Earth! What's that tell you about the conventional
wisdom of today's orthodox scientists? It seems to
me that they're projecting their own feeble-minded
inanities onto ancient peoples vastly more capable
of independent thought than they will ever be. You
know that's why they can't understand the ancients,
but instead mock them as if they were deaf & blind.
Fortunately, not all of today's astronomers are so
brazenly ignorant of astronomy's *great* antiquity.
Ancient astronomers numbered the planets according
to their sidereal - not synodic - orbits. Even the
days of the week were explicitly named for planets
by diatonic fifths of their sidereal orbital order.
This was called the "ethos" or muse of each planet,
what is called a diatonic modality in modern music.
The ancients plainly understood this. Even so, the
quasi-scientific modern orthodoxy flat-out refuses
to acknowledge any such understanding...since they
were taught just as their own teachers were taught,
that only modern scientists were born with a brain.
I quote an ancient astronomer noted for his wisdom:
"Vanity of vanities; all is vanity. What profit hath
a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?
One generation passeth away, and another generation
cometh: but the earth abideth for ever. The sun also
ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his
place where he arose. The wind goeth toward the south,
and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about
continually, and the wind returneth again according
to his circuits. All the rivers run into the sea; yet
the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the
rivers come, thither they return again. All things
are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is
not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with
hearing. The thing that hath been, it is that which
shall be; and that which is done is that which shall
be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is
there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is
new? it hath been already of old time, which was be-
fore us. There is no remembrance of former things;
neither shall there be any remembrance of things
that are to come with those that shall come after."
--Eccl 1:2-11 AV
Q4 It is claimed by orthodox scientists that there is
no real evidence for prehistoric civilizations, as
called "antediluvian". They claim that there is no
archaeological or geological evidence to prove the
contrary. Is that really true? Are humans so young
that they were not civilized before recent history,
with no developing culture or language, no science,
no higher brain function until just a few thousand
short years ago? Evolution takes millions of years
so I'm told. When did the evolutionary "quick jump"
promote man from ape to adept? Was prehistoric man
little more than an unsophisticated brute, or even
retarded as compared with the brains of modern man?
A4 This raises a larger and broader question. Why are
orthodox science and orthodox religion so close to-
gether on this issue of mans earthly existence and
civilization? One claims that man was created just
six, or maybe seven, thousand years ago, while the
other claims that man was incapable of learning or
higher thought patterns before about the same time.
This is no coincidence, but is a reminder that the
church and the state parted company only yesterday
by geological standards of time. Human beings have
lived on the Earth for tens, possibly hundreds, of
millions of sidereal years. Apparently it's deeply
ingrained into mans collective unconscious than we
are very young as a species and but an "infant" as
having the brain capacity for higher thought. Even
the term "higher thought" infers intelligence only
recently recognized by man since the schism in the
church. Exemplary of this "modern-man-is-smart-but-
ancient-man-was-dumb-as-an-ox" was written by none
other than Bertrand Russell in "Wisdom of the West",
in which he boldly pronounces that "philosophy and
science began with Thales of Miletus, in the early
sixth century BC". At least the prophet Daniel has
a place in "all-of-a-sudden-genius-people" history!
But before the sixth century BC, just about twenty
seven hundred years before the present, man wasn't
imbued with higher brain functions, but was doomed
to roam the Earth in abject blindness, like fellow
amoeban lifeforms, the trilobite, or perhaps up to
the intelligence of a common garden slug? Bertrand
proved one thing for sure. He had an extremely low
opinion of mankind and even less consideration for
the aeons of evolution that man has survived. What
evidences are there for antediluvian civilizations?
The flood myth is universal among ancient cultures,
to begin with. Recent undersea discoveries off the
westernmost tip of Cuba almost half a mile beneath
the ocean waves is another example, and especially
when you consider that ADC's amazing testimony was
quickly discounted then buried once the mainstream
media got a hold of it. The orthodoxy doesn't want
to look like LIARS in the face of incontrovertible
evidence for antediluvian civilization now do they?
Thus such evidence is censored, leaving the masses
to conjecture about "unsubstantiated rumor" of the
wondrous lost city, hiding under 2100' of seawater
and miles of superficial bureaucratic redtape. The
evidence for prehistoric human civilization is not
difficult to identify, but is virtually impossible
to get it verified and recognized by the orthodoxy.
They can't even admit to how old the Sphinx is and
the great pyramids are, but they cling desperately
to a hopelessly inadequate compressed-time history
of the human race--particularly of the "civilized"
variety. No such animal ever existed before a mere
few 1000 years BC. The orthodoxy is rapidly losing
their foothold on modern thought about ancient man,
thanks to the digital age of global communications.
Edgar Cayce dated the biblical flood & the time of
Noah circa 28,000 BC, with the "second destruction"
of Atlantis. Nostradamus writes "& this deluge was
universal on earth", and dates it similarly. There
is overwhelming evidence of undersea monuments but
even this is ignored and rejected by the orthodoxy
ad hoc. They've made up their minds that we humans
are but a very recent invention of secular science.
And no one dares discuss those anomolous monuments
apparent on the surface of Mars or the alleged UFO
crashing at Roswell back in '47. You see these are
too much for the orthodoxy to bear, no doubt since
their highly-evolved brains have no room for error,
and even less capacity for learning from a mistake.
Q5 Why does orthodox science automatically reject out
of hand anything deemed to be "paranormal" as they
call it? They don't recognize the existence of the
soul, they don't believe in God, and don't believe
in life, or any form of consciousness, after death.
They don't seem to celebrate or appreciate life as
human beings. They've got a chip on their shoulder.
A5 Indeed, they can't acknowledge anything that isn't
nailed to the floor, so to speak; with an icy-cold,
robot-like lack of imagination, virtue, or dignity
often accompanied by a vicious disdain for xianity
or for that matter, for any serious investigations
into the paranormal, as with supernatural activity.
They say that all true scientists must be atheists,
since any religious scientists can't be that smart,
after all. If you want to fit in, you must disavow
any knowledge of or experience in the supernatural.
E.g. as soon as a scientist comes out publicly and
admits that he or she believes in Atlantis: that's
the death nil for their career. Everybody knows it.
And what makes secular science faithful in atheism
as some religion? It's like they worship disbelief,
effectively excommunicating any proponent of faith
in higher powers and intelligences from their peer
group. They depend heavily on each other for their
continued support. They're afraid to rock the boat
of secular academia, afraid of being labeled "kook"
or a "crackpot" or any similarly vacuous aspersion.
Their biggest fear seems to be rejection; they are
deathly afraid of ostracism. They need to fit into
the group, to feel wanted, to be validated, like a
diffident grammar school student who fears sitting
in the cafeteria alone but since they are disliked
by their "friends", they sit alone...some "friends",
the most malicious, unfriendly souls in the entire
school. Thus atheists in fear of rejection abandon
moral judgment for a mere modicum of companionship.
They're afraid of being alone, afraid of isolation.
You have to wonder what they think about death and
dying? What a dull, godforsaken existence atheists
must lead having no communication with the spirits,
no memory of past lives, no hope for the afterlife,
no salvation from God, no study of the occult. The
life and death of an atheist isn't something to be
admired. Far from it--I'm glad I am not an atheist.
I suppose one would have to have a lot of problems
before they could renounce belief in God. Like the
story of Job, such problems could happen to anyone.
Maybe atheists led difficult lives in the past, in
past lives by having falling outs against those of
holy Roman church authority, ergo, the protestants
against the Roman Catholic and/or Eastern Orthodox,
the sector of sects. Maybe that's why atheists are
so vehemently antechrist since they really do hate
God, or more appropriately, they hated those who'd
presumed to speak on God's behalf, leading them to
apostacy in their confusion between the Infallible
and fallible, between Jesus-Christ and ante-christ,
ascribing the will of God to the will of evildoers.
Whatever the reason, I'm glad NOT to be an atheist!
Q6 I realize this is a touchy subject, especially now-
adays with the on-going Christian crusades against
the infidel Islamic jihad (not to misinterpret, as
the great Muslim religion or the prophet Muhammad),
but there is a long-standing and profound division
between judeo-xianity and judaism. In particularly,
the rift between we who devoutly belief that Jesus
is literally the embodiment and personality of God,
the greatest Hebrew rabbi of all time, the genuine
source of eternal life and Jehovah's perfect truth,
and the sacrificial lamb of God: whose crucifixion
on the passover is the salvation of every believer
therein and thereof--and the brilliant white light
of God of the Gods--who is our true teacher within;
to reiterate, the rift between xianity and judaism,
the latter of who were initially among those first
disciples and apostles of Christ, with many myriad
fallen souls finding their salvation in the gospel
of Christ crucified as is true of the Greco-Romans,
and those from other extant race-cultural heritage.
This gospel would eventually be preached worldwide,
and xianity would become the most popular religion
in the world...but what of judeo-xianity & judaism?
When did this chasm between Judeo-Christianity and
Judaism occur? Jesus' mother was Hebrew as was his
adoptive father. God created man, all men, thus it
is logical that God qualifies as our Hebrew father
of the highest order being father of Autumn & Even.
Who among us was NOT born out of the sixth evening-
morning of the Gods' creating? What made this rift
within the ancient & modern creed of judeo-xianity?
A6 In fact, the daily sacrifice ceased and the second
temple was burned (Jerusalem was nearly razed flat
excluding only several landmarks to wit "but Titus
spared the western wall and three towers, Hippicon,
Phasaelus and Mariamme, for their great beauty and
strength "Ussher's Annals4073bAM,4783JP,70AD#6978),
nearly forty years after the crucifixion of Christ
at Calvary. This culminated in the diaspora, which
began after the Babylonian exile when considerable
numbers of captive tribes descended from Judah and
Benjamin were settled and remained in Babylon, and
many of them eventually dispersed into surrounding
regions, long-since being assimilated into various
cultures over the centuries. This post-exilic time
began with the priestly scribe Ezra's journey from
Babylon to restore law and order to Jerusalem, and
restore the daily sacrifice, and festive offerings
to the second temple, and was by imperial edict of
achaemenid Persian king, Artakhshathra (Artaxerxes
Longimanus; Ezr 7:6-9ff). Thus was the going forth
(Dan 9:24-27) of Daniel's 7 plus 62 weeks-of-years
to messiah the prince, the "70 Weeks" countdown to
John the Baptist's 30th year of life and testimony.
Jesus' ministry began likewise from Ezra's Jubilee,
i.e. exactly four hundred eighty-three years later:
"REPENT!...O generation of vipers, who hath warned
you to flee from the wrath to come?"(Luke 3:1,2ff).
Indeed, God's wrath was to come and is yet to come
in these latter days of pestilence, war and famine
of biblical proportions that is called tribulation.
All of you "pre-trib", and "mid-trib", apocalyptic
millenarianists can rest easy. You got hell to pay!
The schism between ancient and modern judeoxianity
can be traced to Jesus' crucifixion & resurrection.
It would be almost two thousand years before those
dispersed descendants of the tribes of the kingdom
of Israel would return to their ancestral homeland,
just as Ezekiel had prophesied [Ezek 37:1ff]. This
long-awaited prophetic fulfillment was preceded by
the initial discovery of the "dead sea scrolls" by
Bedouin shepherds in 1947 (essene & qumran), along
the northwest shores of the salt sea, which is the
lowest point on Earth at more than 1,300' or -411m
below sea level. In a cave they discovered ancient
lampoil jars stuffed with ancient scrolls, some of
which were remnants of extant sacred scriptures of
the codified bible. The great significance of this
discovery was first reported by Prof. E.L. Sukenik
of Hebrew University, on November 29th, 1947...the
same exact date that the UN General Assembly voted
thirty-three to thirteen, in favor of partitioning
Palestine into the Jewish and Arab states, and the
international zone for Jerusalem proper. Amazingly,
Nostradamus foretold these events in his quatrains,
dating them within a few years, ref. C1Q25 & C8Q66.
The diaspora had finally reached its fruition, but
there had been a dark history of anti-semitism and
persecution against the Jews, with Hitler's regime
inflicting the NAZIs "final solution" thereagainst.
Again, Ezekiel had prophesied this chain of events
from his exile in Babylon some twenty-five hundred
years before the end of WWII; with the atomic bomb
which made the latter-day state of Israel possible,
and has maintained her sovereignty against enemies
the world over--by virtue of MAD, mutually-assured
destruction. Thus the USA has likewise enjoyed her
sovereignty against the very same group of enemies
and then some, albeit our mutual enemies have also
reaped the benefit of our modern nuclear age, cold
war and subsequent variations thereof; with Russia,
China and the USA all keeping "tabs" on each other.
But newer weapons of mass destruction have demoted
nuclear nations to a lesser threat under terrorism,
with unconventional weapons such as ebola-smallpox,
vx nerve gas, and any sort of unscrupulous devices
as the now-desperate Iraqi army is sure to unleash.
Terrorists will use any and all means to terrorize.
As for irreconcilable religious antitheses between
judeo-xianity & judaism, the culprit is none other
than Jesus-Christ, and his enemies who'd crucified
him! This is often called the "astonishment" since
it is astonishing how such a dreadful event as the
arrest, torture, and exceedingly painful murder of
God-in-the-flesh is also good news ergo the gospel
of Christ crucified: the very salvation of mankind
from our fallen nature! It's no wonder, then, that
theologians have for centuries disagreed about the
intricacies of biblical doctrine even to the point
of warfare, all leading up to WWIII and Armageddon.
So you see it's nonsequitur and inconsequential to
attempt any definition of the religious difference
between judeo-xianity or judaism, since neither of
these mundane religions are in agreement with them-
selves much less with any other sects or divisions
within their own ranks. True xianity is a personal
relationship with God. Orthodox Jews would say the
same thing, more or less--as would Muslims, Hindus,
Buddhists--as would most all other religious cults
of the world depending on how they define god/gods.
Man didn't define God, much rather God defined man.
Man would define religion yet God requires no such
definition from man. God requires no less than our
soul. God did not make varied and sundry religions,
man did. God created the heavens and the earth and
all that exists universally therein. Jehovah gives
life to the dead and man gives death to the living,
acting as avenging angels to the wrath of the Gods!
Man didn't save humankind from extinction, God did.
It's better to be humble before God, than it is to
identify with any worldly religion. Jesus truly is
the Son of God. That's not religion, but is a fact
of life. It's like gravity, in that no matter what
you believe, you'd do well not to jump off a cliff
unless you have a good parachute or a bungee chord.
God is to man, what safety is to the thrill-seeker.
Thus you see the rift is not between judeo-xianity
and judaism, but is ultimately between God and man,
between the rock of ages and the dust of the earth.
Daniel Joseph Min
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBPtGOyJljD7YrHM/nEQJqHwCfRH4SL/gw1WWUn719tliUcMruqhEAn3Rw
rqwRIi5tQvaHVBI5n1Fs0qZm
=bfHc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Mary
Daniel Min, Ph.D. <profes...@astro.physics.edu> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> "a frvctibvs eorvm cognoscetis eos nvmquid colligvnt
> de spinis vuas avt de tribvlis ficvs sic omnis arbor
>
Translation: I don't have the balls to setup a real web site or even
quit morphing like the cowardly asshole that I am.