In the News: James ossuary determined to have been "fake"

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Jason Spaceman

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 6:23:37 AM6/18/03
to
From the article:

"At a press conference held this morning in Jerusalem, officials from the
Israeli Antiquities Authority announced that an ancient stone box with the
inscription "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus," was a fake. The
authority also determined that the "Joash inscription," a stone tablet with
fifteen lines of ancient Hebrew detailing improvements at the Temple, was a
forgery. Israel Insider reported details proving the ossuary a fake last
November."

The rest at http://makeashorterlink.com/?A366217F4

J. Spaceman

Jason Spaceman

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 6:50:32 AM6/18/03
to
Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'

http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp


J. Spaceman


Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 11:35:45 AM6/18/03
to
Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism

> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'

> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp

I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
believing it's real anyway.

--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news

John Hattan

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 11:39:31 AM6/18/03
to
Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:

>Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>
>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>
>I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>believing it's real anyway.

Oh of course not. There's no precedent at all for Christians holding on
to religious totems that have been proven fake time and time again.

---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
jo...@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com

Jeff Jones

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 12:17:13 PM6/18/03
to

"Elroy Willis" <e...@airmail.net> wrote in message
news:jk11fvkuhc97ia5jh...@4ax.com...

> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>
> > Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>
> > http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>
> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> believing it's real anyway.
>

Well.. here is a quote from the article on cnn.com:

However, Oded Golan, the Israeli owner of the "James ossuary," dismissed the
findings.

"I am certain the ossuary is real, I am certain that the committee is wrong
regarding its conclusions," he said.

Golan had earlier said he had problems with the committee and its methods of
investigation saying they had "preconceived notions."

Does anyone else find it highly amusing when a xian accuses someone of
having "preconceived notions"?

Jeff Jones, Austin, Texas, aa #2044


Pro-Humanist FREELOVER

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 1:14:58 PM6/18/03
to
"John Hattan" <jo...@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:5s11fvccpk17e04an...@4ax.com...

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
> >Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast>
> >wrote in alt.atheism
> >
> >> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
> >
> >> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
> >
> >I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> >believing it's real anyway.
>
> Oh of course not. There's no precedent at all for Christians holding on
> to religious totems that have been proven fake time and time again.

This is the latest example of how reasonable skepticism
enables those with open and inquisitive minds to deal
with claims for which evidence is questionable. Believe
it or not, the owner of the ossuary at issue is still holding
on to the Biblical Archaeological Review's assertions of
its legitimacy (are financial issues at play? hmmm).

It will be interesting to see how BAR's Hershel Shanks
and Andre Lemaire (the original promulgators of the
claims the box was the legitimate ossuary of the bible
James, son of the bible Joseph, brother of the bible
Jesus) respond to the Israeli Antiquities Authority.

Quote from the Israeli Antiquities Authority:

'The inscription appears new, written in modernity by
someone attempting to reproduce ancient written
characters.'

- - - - - - - - - -

Reflections -- a few posts from the past on the ossuary
issues:

Following is an excerpt from a post on 10/28/2002
reflecting BAR's bias and raising legitimate questions
regarding their stance on this issue (and many other
archaeological / biblical issues):

---
BAR's Bone Box Bias ...
http://tinyurl.com/emvt
---

Is the Biblical Archaeological Review's position on the
James' bone box biased?

Well, the James' bone box is but one of their many
endeavors, but the following is worthy of consideration
as to assessing the reliability (or lack of same) regarding
their views.

The particular spin by the Biblical Archaeological Review
is but one of many possibilities. Did the BAR adequately
consider and research the many varying interpretations
of its find?

Its perspective is attested to by its founder and editor,
Hershel Shanks, in a recent interview regarding the
"Ya'akov bar Yosef akhui diYeshua" (James, son of
Joseph, brother of Jesus) ossuary ...

- - - end excerpt - - -

- - - - - - - - - -

A post regarding the original excitement over the find, on
10/21/2002:

---
"James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" - Q & A
http://tinyurl.com/emvy
---

- - - - - - - - - -

For reflection on how many persons of traditional faiths
deal with archaeological finds based on their precon-
ceptions, see the way traditional faiths responded to
the following legitimate "Jesus" ossuary find:

---
1980 - 1996 : Jesus / Joseph / Mary / Matthew /
another Mary / Juda Ossuaries (1 of 2)
http://tinyurl.com/emw7

1980 - 1996 : Jesus / Joseph / Mary / Matthew /
another Mary / Juda Ossuaries (2 of 2)
http://tinyurl.com/emwa
---

- - - - - - - - - -

¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤

~~~
Pro-Humanist FREELOVER
http://www.ghg.net/phf
(Freethinking Realist Exploring
Expressive Liberty, Openness,
Verity, Enlightenment, & Rationality)
~~~

Gregory Gadow

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 1:47:22 PM6/18/03
to
Elroy Willis wrote:

> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>
> > Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>
> > http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>
> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> believing it's real anyway.

Of course. After all, the Shroud of Turin was proven to be a medival
hoax more than a decade ago.
--
Gregory Gadow
tech...@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear

If it is the act of a traitor to speak out against the
unConstitional acts of my government, to excercise my
rights guaranteed by that Constitution -- the right to
publish my opinions and speak my thoughts, the right
to petition for a redress of grievances, the right to
be secure in my person and property against search and
seizure without due process of law -- then I am a traitor.
And God grant us many, many more traitors, for we are in
dire need of them.


Pro-Humanist FREELOVER

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 1:54:18 PM6/18/03
to
"Jeff Jones" <je...@NOSPAMaustin.rr.com> wrote in
message news:dg0Ia.36016$rb4.2...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
> [...]

>
> Well.. here is a quote from the article on cnn.com:
>
> However, Oded Golan, the Israeli owner of the "James ossuary,"
> dismissed the findings.
>
> "I am certain the ossuary is real, I am certain that the committee
> is wrong regarding its conclusions," he said.
>
> Golan had earlier said he had problems with the committee
> and its methods of investigation saying they had "preconceived
> notions."
>
> Does anyone else find it highly amusing when a xian accuses
> someone of having "preconceived notions"?

Technical note - isn't Golan Jewish? Of importance
will be the way the Biblical Archaeological Review's
Hershel Shanks and Andre Lemaire respond to the
Israel Antiquities Authority in that BAR was *the*
entity that went out on a limb and despite all the
doubts and refutations, dismissed them all and
actively promoted the ossuary as the legitimate
burial box of the bible James who was claimed
to be the son of the bible Joseph and who was
clamed to be the brother of the bible Jesus.

Currently, as 12:40 pm, ct, 06/18/2003, the following
links are at BAR's website ( http://www.bib-arch.org/ )
under the "Breaking News" section:

---
Reuters - Burial Box Not from
Jesus Brother, Experts Say
http://tinyurl.com/en0n

CBC - James ossuary a fake, experts declare
http://tinyurl.com/en0d

Israeli Insider - James ossuary
determined to have been "fake"
http://tinyurl.com/en15
---

However, of interest, to the right of the "Breaking News"
stories on the ossuary's illegitimacy, they're showing
the ossuary with the caption "The earliest evidence of
Jesus...set in stone! Read press release and news
update" (their original story which promoted the ossuary
as legitimate) ...
http://www.bib-arch.org/bswb_BAR/bswbbar2806f1.html
Evidence Of Jesus Written In Stone
Ossuary Of Jesus' Brother Backs Up Biblical Accounts

- - -

¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤ - ¤

~~~
Pro-Humanist FREELOVER
http://www.ghg.net/phf
(Freethinking Realist Exploring
Expressive Liberty, Openness,
Verity, Enlightenment, & Rationality)
~~~

>

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 1:57:43 PM6/18/03
to
John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism

>>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'

>>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp

>> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>> believing it's real anyway.

> Oh of course not. There's no precedent at all for Christians holding on
> to religious totems that have been proven fake time and time again.

You left off a <cough>. Shame on you.

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 2:04:06 PM6/18/03
to
Jeff Jones <je...@NOSPAMaustin.rr.com> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote in message

>> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism

>>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'

>>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp

>> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>> believing it's real anyway.

> Well.. here is a quote from the article on cnn.com:

> However, Oded Golan, the Israeli owner of the "James ossuary," dismissed the
> findings.

> "I am certain the ossuary is real, I am certain that the committee is wrong
> regarding its conclusions," he said.

If it's a fake, he's probably gonna be out some money, eh?

> Golan had earlier said he had problems with the committee and its methods
> of investigation saying they had "preconceived notions."

Is Golan a Christian?

> Does anyone else find it highly amusing when a xian accuses someone of
> having "preconceived notions"?

I find it pretty normal behaviour actually. It used to be amusing to
me, but now it's so typical that I don't really blink an eye when I
see such accusations.

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 2:06:59 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 17:57:43 GMT, Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net>
wrote:

>John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>>>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>
>>>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>
>>> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>>> believing it's real anyway.
>
>> Oh of course not. There's no precedent at all for Christians holding on
>> to religious totems that have been proven fake time and time again.
>
>You left off a <cough>. Shame on you.

Shame on both of thee for not qualifying 'Christians.'

Not all of us worship idols.

Lizz 'Idle, yes. Idol, no' Holmans

Pro-Humanist FREELOVER

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 2:50:40 PM6/18/03
to
Of interest, in the forefront of criticism regarding the Lemaire
and Shanks ossuary claims was Dr. Rochelle Altman.

Her brief and humble reply regarding the Israel Antiquities
Authority report on the ossuary follows:
http://listserv.lehigh.edu/lists/Archives/ioudaios-l/0006.html

The IAA reports on the two artifacts were issued this morning,
Wednesday, June 18, 2003. Available at the moment in Hebrew:
Both fakes.

For an article in English on the reports, see the Front Page of
today's Jerusalem Post.

For a review of: "James the Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic
Story & Meaning of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus
& His Family," by Hershel Shanks & Ben Witherington III --
see, "Jesus for Suckers," Friday, June 13, 2003, Jerusalem
Post; Section B, page 13.

While vindication is very pleasant in the face of particularly
vile libels against, among others, Chadwick, Goren, Lupia,
Basser, Eisenmann, and myself, can we please now consider
the subject closed on this list.

Thank you,

Rochelle

--
Dr. R.I.S.Altman, co-coordinator,
IOUDAIOS-L rocha...@yahoo.com

--- end of Dr. Altman's reply ---

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The Jerusalem post article she referred to, Jesus for Suckers,
is only available via purchase. Following is a brief abstract from
which the article may be purchased:
http://tinyurl.com/en7s

Excerpt:

Jerusalem Post; Jerusalem; Jun 13, 2003; CALEV BEN-DAVID;

Abstract:

The latest of these "finds" came last autumn, when [Hershel
Shanks], publisher/editor of Biblical Archaeology Review (BAR),
called a press conference in Washington DC to announce that
the ossuary of James, brother of Jesus and head of the so-
called "Jerusalem Church," had been found. Shanks claimed
that the ossuary had been in the possession of an anonymous
Israeli antiquities collector for years. ...

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 5:26:24 PM6/18/03
to
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>> John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com> wrote in alt.atheism
>>> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:

>>>> Jason Spaceman wrote in alt.atheism

>>>>> Also see 'Israel says ? James Ossuary? is a fake'

>>>>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp

>>>> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>>>> believing it's real anyway.

>>> Oh of course not. There's no precedent at all for Christians holding on
>>> to religious totems that have been proven fake time and time again.

>> You left off a <cough>. Shame on you.

> Shame on both of thee for not qualifying 'Christians.'

Is that actually possible without getting into an endless debate
about the definition of a true Christian? It's a lot easier to just
stereotype them all into the same group of god-soaked goomers
in my opinion. Yep, you're in there too. Oh well.

You're just a step away from the Calvinists who speak of themselves
in the third person while they're on their way to insanity.

> Not all of us worship idols.

Idols, ideals, an ideal idol, what's the difference?

> Lizz 'Idle, yes. Idol, no' Holmans

I dare you to reply and leave off some witty sign off.

Can you do it? <eg>

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 5:28:14 PM6/18/03
to
Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis wrote:
>> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism

>>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'

>>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp

>> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>> believing it's real anyway.

> Of course. After all, the Shroud of Turin was proven to be a medival
> hoax more than a decade ago.

I guess I was out of my mind when I asked that question. :-)

Douglas Berry

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 7:01:07 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 10:39:31 -0500, a wanderer, known to us only as
John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com> warmed at our fire and told this
tale:

>Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
>>Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>>
>>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>>
>>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>>
>>I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
>>believing it's real anyway.
>
>Oh of course not. There's no precedent at all for Christians holding on
>to religious totems that have been proven fake time and time again.

Damn it, this was a brand new sarcasm meter!
--

Douglas Berry grid...@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com
Athesist #2147, Atheist Vet #5

When in trouble, or in doubt
Eun in circles, screa, and shout.

Douglas Berry

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 7:01:50 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 19:06:59 +0100, a wanderer, known to us only as
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> warmed at our fire and
told this tale:

>Shame on both of thee for not qualifying 'Christians.'


>
>Not all of us worship idols.

Have a crucifix in your house or at your church?

Wbarwell

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 7:30:04 PM6/18/03
to
Lizz Holmans wrote:


The way to test this is simple. let Matt Giwer stand next to the ossuary.
If his face melts llke the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark, its real.


--
Cheerful Charlie

--
When I shake my killfile, I can hear them buzzing!

Cheerful Charlie

Meteorite Debris

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 8:49:02 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 15:35:45 GMT the ET form known as Elroy
Willis<e...@airmail.net> sent a radio signal across the vast expanse of
deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.

> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>
> > Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>
> > http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>
> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> believing it's real anyway.

I am sure a true believer will never let a few facts get in the way of
a good story.

--
apatriot #1, atheist #1417, rot-13 on email reply
Chief EAC prophet -
Evil Atheist Conspiracy
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/

Shhh. Be very quiet, I'm hunting automorons. Heh heh.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever
conceived." - Isaac Asimov

Fingerprint for PGP Keys at key server or go to
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
RSA - 71 BA 7C 45 B5 4A 5F EA 72 DB EC 7F 7F A8 70 99
DSS - 9217 21A9 9C3F EB0B E302 AD0E 69C5 0F06 402E 0943


Budikka

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 8:57:44 PM6/18/03
to
Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote
news:<J4XHa.11348$111....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...

[snip]

Does that make it a so-so-uary now?

Let's face it - it *had* to be a fake since there was no Jesus to begin with!

Budikka

Dr. Smartass

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 8:51:56 PM6/18/03
to
Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote in
news:jk11fvkuhc97ia5jh...@4ax.com:

> Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>> Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
>
>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
>
> I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> believing it's real anyway.
>

Three words:

Shroud.
Of.
Turin.

--
Dr. Smartass

What the Church needs now is a pedocure!

There are three kinds of men:
--The ones that learn by reading.
--The few who learn by observation.
--The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence.
-- -- (Will Rogers)

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 10:02:24 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 21:26:24 GMT, Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net>
wrote:


>


>Is that actually possible without getting into an endless debate
>about the definition of a true Christian? It's a lot easier to just
>stereotype them all into the same group of god-soaked goomers
>in my opinion. Yep, you're in there too. Oh well

Is typing the nasty four-letter word 'some' too difficult? Or you
could just stop crossposting to sci.skeptic, where this topic is
pretty much off-charter anyway. Then I'd mind my own bidness.

It works out nicely for you that I don't stereotype atheists as
pseudo-philosophical masturbators, cos yep, you'd be in there, too.
But I know too many non-believers, and too many non-Xian believers, to
do that--for the most they're perfectly nice, tolerant folks who
manage not inflict their prejudices on others. But thanks for letting
me know now that you're a bigot--for who else but a bigot would take a
whole group of folks and dismiss them as less clever, less evolved,
less logical, less talented--but we shore got that nacheral rhythm,
don't we?

Elroy, the assbugs are gonna get ya if ya don't watch out.

>You're just a step away from the Calvinists who speak of themselves
>in the third person while they're on their way to insanity.

Is Bob Dole a Calvinist? I leave the question of whether he's insane
to the reader.

>Idols, ideals, an ideal idol, what's the difference?

A lot, when one is not being deliberately obtuse.

If you're trying to tell me that only theists have ideals,I've got a
whole list of folks that would like to discuss that idea with you.
>

I dare you to reply and leave off some witty sign off.
>
>Can you do it? <eg>

Give me one good reason why, after that salvo, I should do anything
you ask me to do. And appealing to my faith is right out.

Lizz 'so there, Elroy' Holmans

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 10:03:10 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 16:01:50 -0700, Douglas Berry
<grid...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 19:06:59 +0100, a wanderer, known to us only as
>Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> warmed at our fire and
>told this tale:
>
>>Shame on both of thee for not qualifying 'Christians.'
>>
>>Not all of us worship idols.
>
>Have a crucifix in your house or at your church?

Nope. Quakers don't go in for that sort of thing.

Lizz 'no bells, no smells' Holmans

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 10:04:27 PM6/18/03
to
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 18:30:04 -0500, Wbarwell
<Wbar...@munnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote:


>
>The way to test this is simple. let Matt Giwer stand next to the ossuary.
>If his face melts llke the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark, its real.

Ooh, can I watch, discreetly, through a Shekinah-proof glass?

Lizz 'I'd pay you a nickel' Holmans

Richard

unread,
Jun 18, 2003, 10:20:42 PM6/18/03
to

"Meteorite Debris" <cx1...@bcghfarg.pbz.nh.ROT13> wrote in message news:MPG.195b9064d...@news.optusnet.com.au...

> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 15:35:45 GMT the ET form known as Elroy
> Willis<e...@airmail.net> sent a radio signal across the vast expanse of
> deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
>
> > Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
> >
> > > Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
> >
> > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
> >
> > I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> > believing it's real anyway.
>
> I am sure a true believer will never let a few facts get in the way of
> a good story.
>

That comment basically sums up the entire history of Christianity.

Richard


Matt Giwer

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 12:57:15 AM6/19/03
to

After spending years reciting "bible archaeology" is a fraud because
everything of interest in the OT is a fantasy including a kingdom of
Israel and not having succomb to WWW* syndrome, I assume I am on the
right track.

*Wicked Witch of the West

--
2003 May 12: Israel rejects roadmap to peace.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 2675

johac

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 2:22:39 AM6/19/03
to
In article <3EF0A5AA...@serv.net>,
Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net> wrote:

> Elroy Willis wrote:
>
> > Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote in alt.atheism
> >
> > > Also see 'Israel says ?James Ossuary? is a fake'
> >
> > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/928121.asp
> >
> > I wonder if the people who believe it's real will just keep on
> > believing it's real anyway.
>
> Of course. After all, the Shroud of Turin was proven to be a medival
> hoax more than a decade ago.


Longer than that. The shroud was known to be fake back in the middle
ages, eg:

http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/webcourse/lost/shroudpage.htm

"The first historical evidence of the Shroud of Turin dates back to
1389, where it is first written about in a letter from the bishop of
Troyes, France to Pope Clement VII. The bishop complains of a piece
of linen, approximately 14 feet long and 3 feet wide with the front
and back images of a crucified man, being falsely displayed in the
village of Lirey since the year 1355 as the true burial shroud of
Christ. The bishop continued, stating that the image was "cunningly
painted" and that he had already received a confession from the
artist. In a time when forgery of relics was common due to the great
money brought in by pilgrimages, the shroud was determined to be a
hoax for monetary gain. Pope Clement VII permitted the continued
exhibition of the shroud with the stipulation that an announcement was
continually made which denounced the authenticity of the shroud as
Christ's burial cloth, referring to it as an artist's rendition of the
crucifixion. "

They had a confession from the guy who painted it, yet many true
believers continued to believe only what they wanted to believe.
>
--
John Hachmann, aa #1782

"In those parts of the world where learning and science has prevailed,
miracles ceased; but in those parts that are barbarous and ignorant,
miracles are still in vogue." -Letters of Ethan Allen to Thomas Jefferson

johac

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 2:26:16 AM6/19/03
to
In article
<J4XHa.11348$111....@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
Jason Spaceman <I...@eat.spammers.for.breakfast> wrote:

> From the article:
>
> "At a press conference held this morning in Jerusalem, officials from the
> Israeli Antiquities Authority announced that an ancient stone box with the
> inscription "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus," was a fake. The
> authority also determined that the "Joash inscription," a stone tablet with
> fifteen lines of ancient Hebrew detailing improvements at the Temple, was a
> forgery. Israel Insider reported details proving the ossuary a fake last
> November."

Faked? I am shocked! So very shocked...................Not!


>
>
>
> J. Spaceman

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 5:54:24 AM6/19/03
to
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy, the assbugs are gonna get ya if ya don't watch out.

Sorry for those comments. I was in a particularly virulent mood when
I made that post. Dunno what came over me.

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 7:32:05 AM6/19/03
to
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 09:54:24 GMT, Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net>
wrote:

>Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism


>
>> Elroy, the assbugs are gonna get ya if ya don't watch out.
>
>Sorry for those comments. I was in a particularly virulent mood when
>I made that post. Dunno what came over me.

I wasn't too sweet, either. I think we're even. No blood, no foul.

Lizz 'if I *really* wanted to piss you off, I'd have told you I was
praying for you' Holmans

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 8:27:17 AM6/19/03
to
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>> Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

>>> Elroy, the assbugs are gonna get ya if ya don't watch out.

>> Sorry for those comments. I was in a particularly virulent mood when
>> I made that post. Dunno what came over me.

> I wasn't too sweet, either. I think we're even. No blood, no foul.

> Lizz 'if I *really* wanted to piss you off, I'd have told you I was
> praying for you' Holmans

That wouldn't have phased me in the least. Really. No more so
than someone threatening to stick some pins in a voodoo doll
of me.

What say we switch the topic to the Raelians? I've changed the
thread title and would like to hear some current opinions from some
of the people over there on sci.skeptic.

I just finished watching a video and reading about some of their
plans, and I'd like to hear yours and other skeptics opinion about
them. Have you done any sort of research on them yet?

Here's their website:
http://www.rael.org

Maybe it's already been discussed to death over there on sci.skeptic
but I haven't seen much discussion about it around here on alt.atheism
lately.

Therion Ware

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 8:56:20 AM6/19/03
to

On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:27:17 GMT in alt.atheism, Elroy Willis (Elroy
Willis <e...@airmail.net>) said, directing the reply to alt.atheism

>Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>> Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism
>
>>>> Elroy, the assbugs are gonna get ya if ya don't watch out.
>
>>> Sorry for those comments. I was in a particularly virulent mood when
>>> I made that post. Dunno what came over me.
>
>> I wasn't too sweet, either. I think we're even. No blood, no foul.
>
>> Lizz 'if I *really* wanted to piss you off, I'd have told you I was
>> praying for you' Holmans
>
>That wouldn't have phased me in the least. Really. No more so
>than someone threatening to stick some pins in a voodoo doll
>of me.

Heh. When Liz says she's "praying for you," you might want to think of
that in a rather more, ah, fleshy sense that is customarily the case.

Which thought, I trust, scares both of you ahahahahahahaah.....

>What say we switch the topic to the Raelians? I've changed the
>thread title and would like to hear some current opinions from some
>of the people over there on sci.skeptic.
>
>I just finished watching a video and reading about some of their
>plans, and I'd like to hear yours and other skeptics opinion about
>them. Have you done any sort of research on them yet?
>
>Here's their website:
>http://www.rael.org

Let's have a look then!

>Maybe it's already been discussed to death over there on sci.skeptic
>but I haven't seen much discussion about it around here on alt.atheism
>lately.

--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 **

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 9:26:25 AM6/19/03
to
Therion Ware <autod...@city-of-dis.com> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis said, directing the reply to alt.atheism

>> Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism
>>> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>>> Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

>>>>> Elroy, the assbugs are gonna get ya if ya don't watch out.

>>>> Sorry for those comments. I was in a particularly virulent mood when
>>>> I made that post. Dunno what came over me.

>>> I wasn't too sweet, either. I think we're even. No blood, no foul.

>>> Lizz 'if I *really* wanted to piss you off, I'd have told you I was
>>> praying for you' Holmans

>> That wouldn't have phased me in the least. Really. No more so
>> than someone threatening to stick some pins in a voodoo doll
>> of me.

> Heh. When Liz says she's "praying for you," you might want to think of
> that in a rather more, ah, fleshy sense that is customarily the case.

She's dreaming of me during sex?

> Which thought, I trust, scares both of you ahahahahahahaah.....

Now now.

>> What say we switch the topic to the Raelians? I've changed the
>> thread title and would like to hear some current opinions from some
>> of the people over there on sci.skeptic.

>> I just finished watching a video and reading about some of their
>> plans, and I'd like to hear yours and other skeptics opinion about
>> them. Have you done any sort of research on them yet?

>> Here's their website:
>> http://www.rael.org

> Let's have a look then!

Take a look at the requirements for some "embassy."

Near to Jerusalem and free from any type of radar surveillance?

Good luck on that one.

One of my questions for Lizz was what she thinks of Rael himself.

A con man? Delusional? A businessman out to make a buck?

Or did YHWH and the Elohim really contact him one day?

Gregory Gadow

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 11:14:11 AM6/19/03
to
Lizz Holmans wrote:

I've been on vacation, so I missed your introduction. Welcome! I have
always found Friends to be honest and forthcoming in their beliefs
without being aggressively pushy. Most actually live the Gospel instead
of pull the far too common screeching of "Do what I preach, not what I
do!"

I assume you are posting from sci.skeptic; feel free to contribute to
alt.atheism from time to time. We sometimes get threads you might enjoy
participating in.
--
Gregory Gadow
tech...@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear

If it is the act of a traitor to speak out against the
unConstitional acts of my government, to excercise my
rights guaranteed by that Constitution -- the right to
publish my opinions and speak my thoughts, the right
to petition for a redress of grievances, the right to
be secure in my person and property against search and
seizure without due process of law -- then I am a traitor.
And God grant us many, many more traitors, for we are in
dire need of them.


Gregory Gadow

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 11:15:32 AM6/19/03
to
johac wrote:

I sit corrected. I only became familiar with the Shroud in the early 1980's,
when that now infamous photographic negative "proved" the supernatural origins
of the image.

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 11:28:43 AM6/19/03
to
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:26:25 GMT, Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net>
wrote:


>


>> Heh. When Liz says she's "praying for you," you might want to think of
>> that in a rather more, ah, fleshy sense that is customarily the case.
>
>She's dreaming of me during sex?

Um...no. I'm afraid you don't enter into my dreamscape, but that's OK,
cos it's not always a nice place.


>
>> Which thought, I trust, scares both of you ahahahahahahaah.....
>
>Now now.

Scared of Elroy? Why on earth would I be?
>

>
>Take a look at the requirements for some "embassy."
>
>Near to Jerusalem and free from any type of radar surveillance?
>
>Good luck on that one.
>
>One of my questions for Lizz was what she thinks of Rael himself.
>
>A con man? Delusional? A businessman out to make a buck?
>
>Or did YHWH and the Elohim really contact him one day?

A possibility, however remote the probability, is a possibility. But I
put my vote on con man, followed by delusional. He is apparently quite
charismatic in the lay sense of the word. I don't like to decide about
folks I don't know, but I do suspect their 'science' of cloning is a
con. It's their pseudo-science and playing on folks with the cloning
issue that gets up my nose. Otherwise let 'em believe what they like.

Somebody said 'By their fruits thou shalt know them.' So we'll see how
they behave.

Lizz 'And a little nut shall lead them' Holmans

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 11:53:17 AM6/19/03
to
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:14:11 -0700, Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net>
wrote:

>
>
>I've been on vacation, so I missed your introduction. Welcome! I have
>always found Friends to be honest and forthcoming in their beliefs
>without being aggressively pushy. Most actually live the Gospel instead
>of pull the far too common screeching of "Do what I preach, not what I
>do!"

Don't forget that we're human. We sure don't. Sloth is one of my seven
favorite things. But we do try. And we're not pushy because it's one
of our rules not to proselytize. You want us, we're in the phone book.


>
>I assume you are posting from sci.skeptic; feel free to contribute to
>alt.atheism from time to time. We sometimes get threads you might enjoy
>participating in.

I've been in and out (ooer, missus) of alt.atheism for years, but
always as a result of xposting to sci.skeptic. I can't subscribe--I
don't have a life with the newsgroups I read right now--but I confess
to enjoying the occasional tilt at the windmill.

Lizz 'Sancho Panza was a friend of mine' Holmans

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 11:56:20 AM6/19/03
to
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:15:32 -0700, Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net>
wrote:


>I sit corrected. I only became familiar with the Shroud in the early 1980's,
>when that now infamous photographic negative "proved" the supernatural origins
>of the image.

Fascinating program on the Discovery Channel (here in the UK at least)
about possible origins of the shroud. The theory that Leonardo da
Vinci did it (or rather, redid it to improve on the clumsy earlier
forgery) was persuasive.

Lizz 'Didja know da Vinci was crap at math? At last, something in
common with genius!' Holmans

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 5:09:43 PM6/19/03
to
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:

>>> Heh. When Liz says she's "praying for you," you might want to think of
>>> that in a rather more, ah, fleshy sense that is customarily the case.

>> She's dreaming of me during sex?

> Um...no. I'm afraid you don't enter into my dreamscape, but that's OK,
> cos it's not always a nice place.

I think someone was talking about a different Lizz up above.

>>> Which thought, I trust, scares both of you ahahahahahahaah.....

>> Now now.

> Scared of Elroy? Why on earth would I be?

Because I'm a minion of Satan, remember? Hiss hiss!

>> Take a look at the requirements for some "embassy."

>> Near to Jerusalem and free from any type of radar surveillance?

>> Good luck on that one.

>> One of my questions for Lizz was what she thinks of Rael himself.

>> A con man? Delusional? A businessman out to make a buck?

>> Or did YHWH and the Elohim really contact him one day?

> A possibility, however remote the probability, is a possibility.

What might convince you that he's not just delusional or a liar or
con man?

> But I put my vote on con man, followed by delusional. He is apparently
> quite charismatic in the lay sense of the word.

Dunno if you watched the first video on his Rael-TV page, but he does
a pretty good job of laying on the bullshit. If someone didn't know
much about science and religion and had an interest in UFO's and
living forever, they might find the new cult believable and appealing.

> I don't like to decide about folks I don't know, but I do suspect their 'science'
> of cloning is a con. It's their pseudo-science and playing on folks with the
> cloning issue that gets up my nose. Otherwise let 'em believe what they like.

I think a lot of people have given up on the "immortal soul" idea, and
cloning is the next best thing in some of their minds. It's probably
a bit more appealing than having your head/brain frozen. It's the
transfer of all your memories into some new clone's brain that's the
problem. I see that as a near impossibility right now and in the near
future.

Rael seems to be counting on people not knowing how hard such a thing
would be and all of the other problems that go along with such an
idea.

> Somebody said 'By their fruits thou shalt know them.' So we'll see how
> they behave.

What exactly are these fruits?

How well they get along with other people?
How many kids they produce?
How happy they are?
How much hope of immortality they spread to others?

Here's some Raelian fruits/melons:
http://www.rael.org/raelianwomen/8-March-57%20pictures/index.htm

Lizz Holmans

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 6:40:50 PM6/19/03
to
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:09:43 GMT, Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net>
wrote:


>


>> Um...no. I'm afraid you don't enter into my dreamscape, but that's OK,
>> cos it's not always a nice place.
>
>I think someone was talking about a different Lizz up above

Ah, a one z Liz. There's no telling what *those* kind of people will
do.

>> Scared of Elroy? Why on earth would I be?
>
>Because I'm a minion of Satan, remember? Hiss hiss!

Nah, you're not. By the way, there's either a leak in your tire or
there's a snake in your trousers.
>

>
>> A possibility, however remote the probability, is a possibility.
>
>What might convince you that he's not just delusional or a liar or
>con man?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It's going to
have to be pretty damned extraordinary to persuade me. I'm a skeptic,
remember?


>
>
>Dunno if you watched the first video on his Rael-TV page, but he does
>a pretty good job of laying on the bullshit. If someone didn't know
>much about science and religion and had an interest in UFO's and
>living forever, they might find the new cult believable and appealing.

I'm sure there are a lot of folks out there who would love to buy into
it. Hope always sells--and sometimes the higher the price, the more
people think it's worth. Ah, look at all the lonely people.
>

>I think a lot of people have given up on the "immortal soul" idea, and
>cloning is the next best thing in some of their minds. It's probably
>a bit more appealing than having your head/brain frozen. It's the
>transfer of all your memories into some new clone's brain that's the
>problem. I see that as a near impossibility right now and in the near
>future.

I don't think it will be possible in the far future, either. The brain
is a very, very tricky thing, and very easy to break.


>
>Rael seems to be counting on people not knowing how hard such a thing
>would be and all of the other problems that go along with such an
>idea.

I agree. There is so much ignorance about science in the general
public it's frightening.

>What exactly are these fruits?

If they can do what they say they can do, proving it scientically and
replicably, I might be impressed. Otherwise I'll stay skeptical.

My word. I do hope none of them caught cold.

Lizz 'Has no one noticed that they kiped their name from the Who?'
Holmans

Elroy Willis

unread,
Jun 19, 2003, 8:59:29 PM6/19/03
to
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism

> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:

<snip>

>> I think a lot of people have given up on the "immortal soul" idea, and
>> cloning is the next best thing in some of their minds. It's probably
>> a bit more appealing than having your head/brain frozen. It's the
>> transfer of all your memories into some new clone's brain that's the
>> problem. I see that as a near impossibility right now and in the near
>> future.

> I don't think it will be possible in the far future, either. The brain
> is a very, very tricky thing, and very easy to break.

Who knows what kind of compression schemes it uses or how an
actual image or word or bit of memory is stored in it?

>> Rael seems to be counting on people not knowing how hard such a thing
>> would be and all of the other problems that go along with such an
>> idea.

> I agree. There is so much ignorance about science in the general
> public it's frightening.

Imagine what it was like 2000 years ago.

>> What exactly are these fruits?

> If they can do what they say they can do, proving it scientically and
> replicably, I might be impressed. Otherwise I'll stay skeptical.

I'm not sure how important the cloning thing is to each individual
Raelian. I've heard Christians say that they hardly ever think about
heaven and that the afterlife belief isn't the main reason they
believe in Christianity, so maybe some of the Raelians don't make
a big deal of the cloning thing, who knows.

johac

unread,
Jun 20, 2003, 1:13:07 AM6/20/03
to
In article <3EF1D394...@serv.net>,
Gregory Gadow <tech...@serv.net> wrote:

What's weird is that even though the pope himself declared the shroud
to be phoney back in the 14th century, believers have spent an
inordinate amount of time and money ever since trying to prove that it
was real.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages