133 replies to this topic

[Eddy_P]

Hello all.

I will quickly tell you what has been discovered, investigated, and confirmed.

I normally do this in person, but here I will first write an introduction then talk to you via a video presentation.

Religious people have been MISLEAD for over 5,000 years.

Documented accounts by their prophets with ‘gods, God, or Angels’ were encounters with human time travellers - NOT divine supernatural beings.

So in the Bible and other ancient sacred texts, where it says ‘an Angel’, now know they were referring to a human time traveller.

Australian researcher  RONALD PEGG  discovered and confirmed that at least two modern cd-roms were taken back along with a computer and were seen back in the past, with their contents being described in Ancient Texts by certain named prophets.

Just quickly…

In a Sumerian Account they were named Tablet of Destiny and Tablet of Fate.

In Egyptian Mythology they were known as the RA-Disk and the Aten disk.
Moses called them the Tablets of Testimony and named them the Urim and Thummim.

Nostradamus was visited by time travellers and called the cd-roms Wheel of Destiny of Nations and Wheel of Time.

The Queen of France called them ‘magic circles’ and the information was seen on a ‘magic mirror’ (the monitor).

The rod of Moses and the wand of Nostradamus = a computer’s mouse and cable.

The 'End Time' Book with Seven Seals as documented by Daniel and John (Old Testament and Revelation respectively) is specifically referring to one of the two cd-roms.

Ezekiel, Daniel, and John each describe their encounter with time travellers: and what they saw and heard from the cd-roms are what are religiously known as ‘dream’ and ‘vision’ prophecies. (see video)

The ‘future history’ (aka. prophecy) documented in ancient texts is also taken from the second cd-rom.

AGNOSTICS  are  WRONG  - as there IS evidence that there is/was No God *

(* The Abrahamic GOD as documented in the Old Testament at Genesis 1:1.)

ATHEISTS  are  WRONG
the Creation Theory IS a scientific theory - as such it has now been proven False.

Genesis Chapter One is an account by Moses of the start up sequence of pictures from one of the cd-roms shown to him by a time traveller. (see video below)

The Creation vs Evolution debate has been resolved.

The voice of GOD heard by Moses was of the male narrator from a second cd-rom.

The Moses and the Burning Bush story is an account of what and who was seen on this second cd-rom’s Persian Gulf War picture.

KJV Bible reads as (Exodus 3:2) “And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush and he looked and behold the bush burned with fire and the bush was not consumed”.

Correcting for syntax, that verse originally read as and meant: ‘A fire flame above the Angel of the LORD: appearing in the middle - Bush: Looked and beheld - Bush was burning with fire: Bush was not consumed.’

Original Hebrew meaning of “Angel” is simply ‘a human messenger, a deputy or envoy’.

The Hebrew word LORD (YH-WH) is the ancient vocalization of the name of the United Nations when sounded as ‘U-N’. The letters ‘UN’ are seen during the disk presentation and the words ‘United Nations’ are spoken.

The ‘angel of the Lord’ ie. the messenger/envoy of the UN (during the Persian Gulf War) was General Norman Schwarzkopf.

On the cd-rom’s PGW picture, is an image of General Norman Schwarzkopf and above him - is what appears to be a red flame. (It is actually the colours of Iraq and Kuwait on the map, but it does look like a flame.)

In the middle of the picture is president George Bush. He is burning with fiery rage.

A still screen shot of this picture can be found at the 5:22 (min.sec) mark on the video below.

It clearly shows the messenger of the United Nations with what looks like a flame above his head, and in the middle, president George Bush is seen burning with fiery anger.

Here is the link to the VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/v/hqQKH66BAR4

Here is a report on the CREATION Myth from Genesis Chapter One: http://www.worldbrea...ws/genesis.html

For more information please visit: http://www.worldbrea...om.au/index.php

[thewatchman7]

oh dear im not going to get into this one but i recommend getting some aloe vera because the burns are coming.

[Left-Field]

Ah, yes! Now it all makes sense!

[Peter Cox]

All I have to say is well nothing how can you comment on such brilliance "Peter's sarcastic voice". Good luck trying to pass that here bud.

I think you way off key and where are the "time machines" also you basis is a little wonky too.

Good luck again man.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

other then the fact that as far as physicits are concerned time travel i impossible until we invent time travel, and even then we can't travel back to before we had time travel(so if tt is invented at G and we live at V, we can go back to T, L or even G, but never F or A)

[Abramelin]

More here:

http://www.unexplain...pic=184370&st=0

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Not a single person commented on atheists and creationism... lmao.... its theists and only some that believe creationism.. ff. Sakes... LOL
And WH as the N sound... oh it hurts... it hurts so bad... OK stretch the syllable waaaaaaay out and give up at the end closing your mouth and an N sound might come forth....
Oh I haven't giggled like this in a long time...
That is a good one.
to the OP I tip my hat ... thank you. I wish I could buy you a drink.
creationism as a scientific theory.... snicker... I can't stop myself.

[Eddy_P]

Aus Der Box Skeptisch, on 28 June 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

creationism as a scientific theory.... snicker.

The point I am making is that a scientific theory CAN be proved false.

Let’s give the religious people some rope, and acknowledge that their ‘Creation Theory’ is now a scientific one.

NOW that both sides have common ground, the serious fun can begin.

Evidence now HAS to be produced by religious people to prove their case.

On the other hand, if contradictory evidence can be found that shows the account in Genesis Chapter One was of something else REAL and can be CONFIRMED by anyone - then they immediately loose their claim and case.
The Creation vs Evolution debate would be over.

That is the point I am making with the ‘scientific theory’ comment.

btw. The evidence that proves it FALSE has been found.

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Hey ill still buy you a drink.... LOL

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Creation theory is not a science. It is, at best, an explanation for events outside our understanding ("God did it") and at worst drivel.

I'd really like to see evidence of these CDs throughout history. And if they are time travellers, why no consistency of naming? If I call it the Book of Days, and I meet two dozen tribes, surely they'll be two dozen tribes referring to something called either sirwctly repeati g or in their own languge "the book of days".

[Rlyeh]

Eddy_P, on 28 June 2012 - 07:54 AM, said:

Religious people have been MISLEAD for over 5,000 years.

Documented accounts by their prophets with ‘gods, God, or Angels’ were encounters with human time travellers - NOT divine supernatural beings.

So like John Titor knocked up Mary?

[lightly]

ok.    One thing i have always found absolutely fascinating is that the first thing created, according to God , in the book of Genesis ,  was *LIGHT*.     I'm not sure if that exactly agrees with the 'scientific' notion of the Big Bang..., as photons may not have been the very first energy to emerge ?  from the famous  "singularity" ..  BUT,  according to that theory,  *LIGHT* was, for all intents and purposes,  the first thing 'created' ?   To me, that is an amazing coincidence.
    Not only that,  but then the light was DIVIDED!   ...  light energy/dark energy??    Positive/Negative??   It just makes me wonder how and why the writer of the book of genesis came up with that idea!?!?!?!? ...  or where the writer may have borrowed the idea from ??  
  Does anyone know of earlier or other creation accounts in which *LIGHT*  is the first creation?

Interesting that in the Egyptian creation account  Ra emerges out of a giant blue lotus on the similar preexisting darkness and WATER.. then  Light was created by RA on the first day.

This Apache creation story is also an interesting parallel ?  
http://www.indians.o...er/creation.htm
   . . . "In the beginning nothing existed--no earth, no sky, no sun, no moon, only darkness was everywhere.

Suddenly from the darkness emerged a thin disc, one side yellow and the other side white, appearing suspended in midair. Within the disc sat a small bearded man, Creator, the One Who Lives Above. As if waking from a long nap, he rubbed his eyes and face with both hands.

When he looked into the endless darkness, light appeared above. He looked down and it became a sea of light. To the east, he created yellow streaks of dawn. To the west, tints of many colours appeared everywhere. There were also clouds of different colours."

Or the Greek version in which Light is born of Love :
http://www.desy.de/g...h/creation.html
. . . "In the begining there was only chaos. Then out of the void appeared Erebus, the unknowable place where death dwells, and Night. All else was empty, silent, endless, darkness. Then somehow Love was born bringing a start of order. From Love came Light and Day. Once there was Light and Day, Gaea, the earth appeared.
Then Erebus slept with Night, who gave birth to Ether, the heavenly light, and to Day the earthly light. Then Night alone produced Doom, Fate, Death, Sleep, Dreams, Nemesis, and others that come to man out of darkness."
  
  Anyway,  I think it's fascinating that creation stories the world over share that idea with  the "scientific" version of creation!!
Let there be *LIGHT*

[Arbenol68]

lightly, on 28 June 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

ok. One thing i have always found absolutely fascinating is that the first thing created, according to God , in the book of Genesis ,  was *LIGHT*.

Or not:


1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  ² Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
³ And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.  ⁴ God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.  ⁵ God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning —the first day.

Looks like heavens and earth (including water) first. You'd have thought he would have created light first. At least then he could have seen what he was doing - he might have made a better job of Wales.

Edited by Arbenol68, 28 June 2012 - 12:14 PM.

[lightly]

Arbenol68, on 28 June 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

Or not:


1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  ² Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
³ And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.  ⁴ God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.  ⁵ God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning —the first day.

Looks like heavens and earth (including water) first. You'd have thought he would have created light first. At least then he could have seen what he was doing - he might have made a better job of Wales.

Well,  yeah.... I've noticed that.     But the earth was "formless and empty"    Until Light happened.    There was only darkness  and the mysterious "waters" upon which his spirit "moved".       None of the former things were worth mentioning lol .. God didn't speak until he created LIGHT  (according to the book of Genesis) .  Not until then was anything revealed..  including Wales

[Timonthy]

Surely with a belief as far-fetched as yours you would be able to make room for the possibility that God and creation are true?

Do you believe what you believe 100%? Or can you leave room for other possibilities?

And also, to blow your theory out of the water: IF THEY WERE FROM THE FUTURE, TIME TRAVELERS, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE CD-ROMS!!! Soon we will probably not use any type of disc media, streaming media or downloadable media will make it redundant. But that doesn't matter.

Why didn't they take a few thousand 5 1/4 inch floppy disks instead?

Edited by Timonthy, 28 June 2012 - 01:13 PM.