Nassim Haramein 9/45

[s3v3rdl0ck]

Uploading a vid about 19.47 / 19.5 now :D it will be named '19.47 - 19.5 Solar Body discussion - Art Bell - Hoagland - Wilcox - Part 1'

[steeltable218]

@s3v3rdl0ck Is this the same David Wilcox who believes he's the reincarnation of Edgar Cayce and that the US has military bases on Mars? Just checking - is it the same guy?

[s3v3rdl0ck]

Other planets have locations / storms @ 19.47 etc, according to Richard Hoagland. Although, anyone could look that info up.

[EleanorHandcart]

@s3v3rdl0ck Richard Hoagland is a fraud. Anyone can look that info up too.

[steeltable218]

@EleanorHandcart Yes, another charismatic delusional with a massive new age following. His Wikipedia entry gives a lot of info.

[blasphemylolz]

@steeltable218 So you can explain every mystery he talks about in these 45 posts? You know theres something wrong man, embrace new ideas :D

[steeltable218]

@blasphemylolz No, I can't - and neither can he. Be wary of any person who claims to. But he creates mysteries by dismissing mainstream research and conclusions out of hand, appealing to the ignorance and credulity of his audience. Like an illusionist, he sets up 'mysteries' then supplies pat answers that support his 'thesis'. Yes, there's something seriously wrong here, and when you say 'embrace new ideas', do you mean that we should accept them without question?

[blasphemylolz]

@steeltable218 He dismisses them with good proof, and his explanations are very elegant and simple. Something science always strives for. No question till you're blue in the face :)

[TheBobathon]

@blasphemylolz Proof? Where does he give proof? I'd like to see him give a proof, that would be interesting

[blasphemylolz]

@TheBobathon Well not proof as in forensic proof, but its a way simpler and more elegant way of explaining and it makes a lot of sense to me.

[steeltable218]

@blasphemylolz Forget forensics, proof is proof, applicable universally. It's not a relative concept. And something making a lot of sense to you isn't proof of anything. And what, exactly, is he explaining so elegantly?

[steeltable218]

@s3v3rdl0ck No, they're situated at a fairly broad range of latitudes.

[AirFiveR]

Dude, what are you talking about? Be specific here. Why SPECIFICALLY are Nassims postulations "full of errors" Your point has not been well made by picking an obscure piece of subject matter that has no relation to any specific point. No offense but why do you care so much about another human beings opinion being different from yours? Is there something else you find error with here?

[TheBobathon]

@AirFiveR Strangely enough, I picked the "obscure piece of subject matter" that this video is about. That's usually the point of comments.

I could have said that Pluto wasn't discovered in the '20s either, but that's just a basic mistake and doesn't undermine anything. My point is that he's making outlandish claims about tetrahedrons in the Earth with absolutely nothing to back it up aside from locations of places that are wrong anyway - why would anyone see this as any more than a fairy tale?

[AirFiveR]

Seansalvador1-you really can't get away with just saying someone is "off the mark". What mark? Put up or shut up. Debunkers are most often just emotionally charged and without any intelligent observation or comment. Just derogatory remarks. Why does someone knowing more than you offend you. Ego maybe? Try reading Living in the Now by Eckert Tolle he has great advice on taming the ego and allowing others their opinion. Live and let live friend.

[TheBobathon]

@AirFiveR He is talking nonsense tho. This video - like all his others - is full of errors. If one point of a tetrahedron is on Hawaii, the others are in the Atlantic and in the Bay of Bengal (they should be 120 deg lat apart). The temples are many hundreds of miles away. Mexico City isn't close, and even the mid-point he mentions is hundreds of miles out in the Gulf of Mexico. It's a pretty idea in soft focus, but it's all his fantasy world. The closer you look the emptier & messier it becomes.

[seansalvador1]

If you truly believe this man you are a lost hope i'm afraid. He's so far off the mark when it comes to facts, science and reality in general...

[Pandamanrr]

@ttopperr Maybe the video is from before the new definition of planets.

[ttopperr]

Yes I have contemplated that fact and what he is speaking of sounds correct but, he is speaking with out acctual evodance its to hokey-pokey, mythical if I must. If he is a true Scientist then he would not have done this so untill it is proven this is appraisement of what has been proven; I am rebuttling him saying he is a Scientist.

[stevemac11]

You're so prententious in the way you are trying to speak to validate you might know what you are talking about, but your awful spelling, grammar, and sentence structure destroy that.

[ttopperr]

Canadian hate; similar to Canadian bacon. Sounds good, but really is just an ersatz.

[IAmFromEarth]

This clip doesn't seem to be starting, but if you move the progress indicator a bit it playiscorrectly