The Book with Seven Seals - FOUND

[TheSearcher]

Ah Eddy my man, still trying to flog your book and CD? You do realize that your arguments have been refuted several times already by many other members of this forum? Also it seems your Mr. Pegg has disapeared, because the only people I can find any trace of it yourself. See this link : http://www.care2.com/news/member/542365320/617087

Btw, it's public records, so no need to colplain, I didn't hack anything. To see this picture up close, I'm not even sure that is a real beard.

[WoIverine]

Anyone else think this guy looks like the Macho Man, Randy Savage?

Edited January 3, 2013 by WoIverine

[Quaentum]

You must have missed the given link.

One step is to identify what TYPE of ‘book’. (From the texts themselves, and not from repeated religious tradition and rhetoric - as you seem to have quoted.)

The next step is to find a ‘book’ of that type and cross-check its CONTENTS with the over 200 extracted descriptions from the Bible.

Once that is done, and the evidence shows it is more than just wishful thinking or a coincidence, then a conclusion can be made, which then IDENTIFIES the modern book seen back in the past.

Here’s a direct link: http://www.tt2012.co...eals/index.html

I suggest you visit the “Book Identified” page then the “Contents Compared” page.

Between the two you will see that the ‘book’ described by three writers from the Bible (Ezekiel, Daniel, and John) was a mid 1990s cd-rom entitled Ancient Civilizations of the Mediterranean.

Over a 90 percent match of details is not coincidence.

Thus there is no coincidence here, just logic, common sense, critical thinking and evidence.

(btw. ‘Matching pictures from a modern cd-rom to ancient biblical descriptions’ is just one set of examples from a series of eight. More:

http://www.worldbrea...m.au/index.html

Lets look at some of that supposed evidence shall we.

Greek word book #975 means 'a roll'. The English meaning of 'roll' is 'to move by turning on an axis'.

The origin of the English word "roll" (a noun, in senses referring to round objects) was around 1175-1225 CE, and came via < Old French rolle < Middle Latin rotulus < Latin rotula small wheel, a diminutive of rota meaning 'wheel'.

Its original reference, to a rolled up parchment or scroll, is what they would have meant and not a cd, especially in light of the fact that the cd would only spin inside the cd drive and you can't see it spin while it is in there.

Hebrew word David #1732 was originally without vowels, written as dvd In English those letters are DVD.

Thus the "root of David" = the 'root of DVD'.

A cd is not a dvd and a time traveler would have known that. Also you made the mistake of using modern Hebrew as opposed to the earlier Hebrew that was used at the time the books of the bible were written. In modern Hebrew it is VAV with a V sound in the older Hebrew it is WOW with a W, O or U sound. So it would not be DVD but one of the following DWD, DOD or DUD. DUD I think is more accurate for this part of your evidence.

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/28_chart.html

In the root directory of the Ancients cd-rom, the main file {seal} that

starts the program has a numerical value (rounded up) of 144,000.

Depending on the program there was either a batch file that was run or you would change the directory to where the program was and type the name of the program to run it. The file structure would not have been shown when running the program.

Rev 7:4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed, one hundred and forty-four thousand sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:

The bible talks of 12,000 from each of 12 houses while the directory structure has nothing like that.

There are seven 'animal' icons that are the doorways {seals} which

take us to the various civilizations:

The seals listed in order in the Bible are White Horse, War, Famine, Death, Martyrs, Terror and Trumpets. They are not animal images with the possible exception of the 4 horsemen and they certainly have nothing to do with various civilizations.

The "Ancient Civilizations of the Mediterranean" cd was released in 1995. It makes no sense to get the cd and an antiquated 386 computer when pentiums were available at that time.

What we see is not the use of common sense, logic or critical thinking but IMO coincidence, sloppy research and wilful misinterpretation of what has been found. The supposed evidence can be compared to clay and the theory to a mold. The clay evidence is pushed into the theory mold then removed, held up and a declaration of "see it does support the theory" is made.

Just in the evaluation of some of the material from your own site it can be seen that your "90% match of details" statement is a grossly inflated number.

[JesseCuster]

lol Encarta, I remember that, horrible piece of software it was.

I thought it was the dog's b******s back in the day.

This was before I ever had an Internet connection and was using my first Windows PC (my previous computer was a Amiga 1200 (R.I.P.) ) and when I loaded up Encarta for the first I was gobsmacked.

Growing up we had a set of Colliers encyclopedias from the 1960s at home. That was neat because it formed a handy source of reference for school projects, but having all that and more on a single CD? Wow! It even had (itsy bitsy low-res very compressed but the state of the technology at the time) video footage for some of the articles!

But it's horribly dated now compared with what you can do on the Internet with a hand-held smartphone or tablet. Which is why it confuses me and others in this thread why someone advanced enough to go back in time would take some crappy clunky 386PC with Windows 95 when you could instead go back with an iPad (or Android tablet) preloaded with historical apps far superior to what was available on CD-ROM in the mid 1990s. It's just so bizarre.

Even if this particular CD-ROM was what was needed, you could stick it on a netbook running Windows 95 in a virtual machine with no need for the crappy old 386, or even just convert the softare to be iOS or Android friendly and go with the tablet. I mean, if you can travel through time, you can update software to run on a modern device far superior to the original crap it was designed to ran on, right?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

I thought it was the dog's b******s back in the day.

We all did.

I can remember being mesmerised by the original Command and Conquer. It's not that we were easily impressed, it was just that we had less to be impressed by back then!

[JesseCuster]

We all did.

I can remember being mesmerised by the original Command and Conquer. It's not that we were easily impressed, it was just that we had less to be impressed by back then!

Absolutely, which is why retro-gaming is very hit and miss. Every so often I go back and play some old Amiga or NES I was addicted to, and realise it's horribly dated now and wonder what I saw in it in the first place (apart from some exceptions).

[Eddy_P]

This whole thread is a book sell.

No.

It provides you with the opportunity to word by word, verse by verse, examine the original context and meaning of three biblical writers who had encounters with a time traveller (they perceived to be an ‘angel of god’) by conducting an hour long on-line Evaluation. It includes a specific examination page where over 200 ancient descriptions are compared to the contents of a modern cd-rom.

Based upon the evidence presented, the conclusion is yours.

If people are interested, they may if they so desire go to the ‘reports’ page, and yes, if they feel the need, they can purchase a summary report and gain further understanding.

The ‘book’ is just incidental as the personal evaluation was the aim of the OP.

So where is Ronald Pegg now?

That was covered in Q1 on the FAQ page:

www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/ref/faq.html

I do not know.

[+DieChecker]

I wish instead of a DVD, that these time travelers had taken back D&D. Then maybe the Bible would require a d20 roll whenever you wanted to make a prayer request. Every church would have basins of dice sitting out for parrisoners to use.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Only if I can take my +1 Umbrella of Educating.

[Eddy_P]

That is not a CD. It cannot be construed as a CD.

It's a roll of paper, with the text of a book written within the role, sealed with seven wax seals.

The language is torturous, I admit and somewhat recursive and a little confused, but it's a book written on a roll of paper.

No, that is what religious ‘tradition’ says.

Taking into account that “the language is torturous” and “somewhat recursive and a little confused” this itself demands that we look at the earliest texts for the original meanings.

eg.

1. Original Hebrew Word Meanings from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance;

roll #4039 means 'a roll' but comes from Hebrew word #1556 which meant 'to roll'. Thus the etymology shows that the noun itself was ‘rolling’ and not necessarily ‘rolled up’.

2. The English meaning of 'roll' is 'to cause to revolve; to move by turning on an axis'. Again, the object itself is revolving, specifically turning on an axis, and not just being ‘rolled up’.

3. The origin of the English word "

roll" (a noun, in senses referring to round objects) was around 1175-1225 CE, and came via < Old French rolle < Middle Latin rotulus < Latin rotula ‘small wheel’.

The Bible you are reading is probably an English one translated somewhere in the last 400 years, some 2200- 2600 years since Ezekiel wrote down what he witnessed.

The Roman Vulgate Bible was conceived over 1600 years ago, but only 1000 years after Ezekiel’s original words.

Recently, from reading the English translation of the Bible, some people believe that Ezekiel was describing ‘a book written on a roll of paper’.

The Romans knew it was a rotula a ‘small wheel’.

A book written on a roll of paper is NOT a small wheel.

A compact disk IS a small wheel.

When the original meanings and context of the ancient words used are employed (and not the modern Old English to English to American Evangelist English, etc. given meanings), the ‘type’ of book is revealed and from the over 200 extracted descriptions cited (there are hundreds more not included in the brief on-line evaluation) the contents can be reconstructed.

This was explained on the ‘Book Identified’ and ‘Contents Compared’ pages.

[Eddy_P]

Then in posts you say its a DVD but i can promise you that no 428 or 386 could read a DVD. Maybe a CD but 100% sure they couldnt read a DVD.

This was explained on the ‘Contents Compared’ page (extract used with permission)

Ronald Pegg discovered that the 'Book' was a small wheel and the root of the DVD opened it. ( This was explained on the 'BOOK Identified' page )

"DVD" is short for 'Digital Versatile Disc' and although what we know as a DVD was introduced in 1995, earlier 'discs' included the 1993 released Video CD (VCD), Multimedia Compact Disc (MMCD), and the Super Density (SD) disc (all being digital data discs).

I always thought that a DVD meant a movie disk, but that is not so.

DVD was the generic name for any disk that included more and different data that what was playing on the earlier musical compact disks.

also why did they take all the floppys and cds with software to run the PC? Surly this was pre-installed before they left to go back in time?

I would have thought so too.

BUT the only account pertaining to the number of ‘setup’ disks (that I have come across) is the one in the Book of Mormon cited on the FAQ page.

They are reporting finding these ‘plates’ as part of their historical writings.

They found something, they reported it in their chronicles, then Ronald Pegg made his discoveries regarding what they have reported.

I personally do not know the why, why not, etc.

and it still begs the querstion, you have time travel yet you take the worst form of technology with you in the form on an outdated 386PC? that does not make sence. If a race had time travel technology (assumiong they were hunman here) they would have definitly had a better means of showing the people in history the cd/dvd.

I have answered this MANY times.

It is as if people do not read my words nor follow the links I provide,

I thought I had already answered this.

“Why did they take back a 386 personal desktop computer ?”

.

It was the minimum system that would run the four particular cd-roms.

At some time in the future, someone was going to notice that the images from a certain cd-rom that run on a certain computer match to the described imagery by nearly all the ancient prophets. (From a religious perspective, this was the foretold 'unsealing of the Book with Seven Seals'.) That someone was Ronald Pegg from Queensland Australia (the biblical Second Witness). In contrast to all the previous ancient people who were shown the images on a computer due to some type of time travel encounter (ie. visions in a bright light by an angel), Pegg just went out and bought the current 'modern' computer package from his local shop - which just happened to include one of the cd-roms.

If a different type of computer was taken back to the past each time, then there would not be a consistent trail of clues documented in ancient texts that could be traced back (forward) to a particular computer system.

As Pegg was using the same computer and cd-roms that were documented in ancient texts, it was easy for him to identify the technology being described and the contents of the cd-roms.

“Why did 'time messengers' keep taking back the same computer and cd-roms to the past ?”

.

The computer and cd-roms were the means by which certain information, particularly pictures, of the same modern events could be shown to ancient people in an attempt to make them document in their texts what will happen in their distant future.

When it was discovered that a time experiment and visit to Mesopotamia was the initial cause of Religions, it was decided to show ancient people a particular future war (the 1991 Persian Gulf War) that will be fought in the name of Religion in the same country (now known as Iraq), in an attempt to persuade them that what the previous prophets saw was not from a divine God or gods .

..

“Why were those particular cd-roms chosen ? “

Specifically, the Grolier cd-rom shows an audio-visual presentation of the future Mesopotamian (ie. Iraq) war. As previously noted, the Ancients cd-rom was relevant to neighbouring regions from which future civilizations would emerge. The RedShift2 cd-rom contains an astronomical event that occurred in 1992/4, being the comet ShoemakerLevy 9 incidents.

They all contain particular historical information (ie. modern historical events and people) that provide a combined datable set of resources. While this data was shown to ancient people, it meant nothing to them, and as such, would not change or destroy the time line (ie. change our historical past). But because these (future) details were written down in ancient texts, when they actually occur (in the future), certain people would be able to recognize these events and literally decode the Bible (and other ancient texts).

A more basic answer is that they are all of the same era, and as such, run on the same desktop computer system. One of the disks (Grolier) came with the PC386 cd-drive up-grade package.

Source: http://www.worldbrea...ref/faq.html#Q5

In a post you say Ronald Pegg is the 2nd biblical; witness, please explain this further

Yes I did, but as part of the overall context of discoveries. This is off topic so I will have to direct you to general information on that.

Basically, May 1997 is a TIME KEY, being the start of the 1,260 days until the unnamed Second Witness' activities begin, where it is announced that another code is contained within the Bible which reveals evidence of time travel.

Finding 2 introduces the ‘1st biblical witness’ while Findings 5 provides the associated ‘biblical Signs’.

Adding 1,260 days onto May 2 1997 derives the day that Ronald Pegg’s work was first made public in Australia.

The Second Witness® work has not yet been released.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Eddy_P

[+DieChecker]

It was either a 386PC that had to have a 2x cd-drive and sound card added, or a 486PC that came with the upgrade.

Why are you insistant on it being a 386? That disc could have been played on a modern computer if it was done right. And the data could easily be ripped to put on a hand held unit. Thus, the disk could much, much more easily be some kind of ipod, or ipad mini, in a circular shape.

It seems you are jumping to conclusions off first impressions, and not off logic or research.

As someone pointed out, this DVD is still available, so it is not like you need a 386 to run it.

Eric: Actually almost all ipods (Many have some internet ability) come with a circle on them...

Edited January 4, 2013 by DieChecker

[Eddy_P]

You do realize that your arguments have been refuted several times already by many other members of this forum?

Actually they have not.

Many people disagree with what Pegg says he has found.

Many people do not follow his methodology.

Many people do not read the threads fully.

Many people do not follow the given links (by their own admissions).

Many people only skim read (by their own admissions).

Some people take only 10 to 15 minutes to complete a hour long evaluation which includes a 12 minute video of 41 key points (ie. they actually haven’t read the work nor viewed the video carefully).

These are the types of people who you say have ‘refuted’ Pegg’s arguments.

Then there are the ones who would rather take personal digs.

So no, Pegg’s work has not been refuted. Violently disagreed with yes, not wanting to accept Pegg’s conclusions, yes, but not refuted.

Of the 14 people* who have completed the evaluation (some taking over 45 minutes to read ALL pages plus the Evaluation) the average match of ancient descriptions to the contents of the 1995 produced ancient Civilixations of the Mediterranean compact disk is 94.92 percent (as at 4^th Jan 2013).

That is more than coincidence. That is a YES.

* 2 people who took under 13 minutes to complete the website, and did not view the video, and changed all or most of the responses to zero have been excluded, as it is obvious they did not take the test in good faith.

(Including them still gives 83 percent, still more than a coincidence, and still a probably.)

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Eddy, are you seriously telling me that instead of translating the word "roll" as in a roll of paper from the Hebrew it's trnalating roll as in wheel from the Latin.

I'll see what word my King James uses .. because it IS translated from the Hebrew....

ohh look - it says BOOK.

[Eddy_P]

Its original reference, to a rolled up parchment or scroll, is what they would have meant and not a cd…..

This is just your opinion based upon traditional religious words.

I would rather seek the original word meanings, as Pegg has done.

A cd is not a dvd and a time traveler would have known that.

Just an assumption by you.

Elsewhere the time traveller (aka angel) is quoted as telling technical information, such as the file size in the ‘root of the dvd’ (ie. digital versatile disk) and the twelve lots of time stamps.

“dvd” is associated with the words “the root of” giving ‘the root of the dvd’ gains access. (technical terms)

Also you made the mistake of using modern Hebrew as opposed to the earlier Hebrew that was used at the time the books of the bible were written….. So it would not be DVD but one of the following DWD, DOD or DUD.

No mistake has been made.

Pegg (and myself) are using the decoding book entitled Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.

It shows the vocalization as ‘daw-veed’ (your W sound) and the letters as ‘dvd’.

Source:

http://biblesuite.com/strongs/hebrew/1732.htm

Depending on the program there was either a batch file that was run or you would change the directory to where the program was and type the name of the program to run it. The file structure would not have been shown when running the program.

This is why John specifically says “I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000” Revelation 7:4.

The time traveller TOLD him.

The FM screen was seen and reported by John when the time traveller asked ‘why John had crashed the computer’. (but this is another set of research)

Rev 7:4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed, one hundred and forty-four thousand sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:

This was shown on the ‘Revelation Verses’ page that in English the sentence syntax has been altered during the translation process.

What we have been led to believe the texts were saying is incorrect.

The bible talks of 12,000 from each of 12 houses while the directory structure has nothing like that.

You really did not read the website carefully, did you.

This was shown on the ‘Content Compared’ page in the screen shot of the file Manager Window (Windows 3x).

That default window (which contains the 144,000 file rounded up) HAS twelve lots of “12:00:00am” time stamps thereon.

Visually seen ARE 12 lots of 12:00:00, being exactly what the time traveller told John and what he recorded in Revelation 7:4.

Why they have been related as ‘tribes of Israel’ may have something to do with what was religiously related earlier by Old Testament writers, but at this stage I do not have the answer.

The seals listed in order in the Bible are White Horse, War, Famine, Death, Martyrs, Terror and Trumpets.

You are citing religious traditional rhetoric, then telling me that I am not using ‘common sense, logic or critical thinking’.

LOL

Just in the evaluation of some of the material from your own site it can be seen that your "90% match of details" statement is a grossly inflated number.

You may not have read my earlier reply where the responses are actually running at 94.92 percent, so 90% is actually a conservative low figure.

[Eddy_P]

Why are you insistant on it being a 386?

or it could have been a 486PC (as previously mentioned).

The answer to your question is - research followed by conclusions based upon the evidence.

See the ‘Findings 6’ page for a summary of computer parts found described in the Bible and depicted elsewhere:

http://www.worldbreakingdiscoveries.com.au/index.html

[Eddy_P]

Ok, so I just read through the website and the posts here at UM and I'd like to kind of paraphrase to see if I'm understanding all of this correctly.

Sorry, I have run out of time today to answer you.

Didn’t want you to think I was ignoring you.

Will try to post tomorrow.

[Eddy_P]

I'll see what word my King James uses .. because it IS translated from the Hebrew....

ohh look - it says BOOK.

LOL

I really, really hope you are joking.

You are taking the English translation of the KJV Bible as accurate ?!

Because they tell you they translated it from the Hebrew, you believe them !

btw. Pegg’s work uses Strong’s Concordance as a decoding tool, to seek out what the original Hebrew and Greek words meant, NOT what religious scholars said they thought what the Hebrew and Greek words meant.

In the Lexicons of the concordance this is clearly seen; first comes the original root meaning (plus often the etymology), then the given religious meaning, followed by other religious uses of the word.

Pegg (and myself) go with the original intended meanings.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

LOL

I really, really hope you are joking.

You are taking the English translation of the KJV Bible as accurate ?!

Because they tell you they translated it from the Hebrew, you believe them !

Well there's using my understanding of the usage of words - a roll with a book inside sealed with seven seals parsing to me as tortured English saying "a roll of paper, with seven wax seals", my understanding of what the ancients meant when they said "book" or "roll" or "scroll", "seal" and my understanding of the prevailing imagery of the Book of Revelation.

btw. Pegg’s work uses Strong’s Concordance as a decoding tool, to seek out what the original Hebrew and Greek words meant, NOT what religious scholars said they thought what the Hebrew and Greek words meant.

So it's a choice between what Pegg thinks and what scholars think.

You're making it hard for me to choose here Ed!

In the Lexicons of the concordance this is clearlyseen; first comes the original root meaning (plus often the etymology), then the given religious meaning, followed by other religious uses of the word.

So you mean you base it on your interpretation of what you think people 3000+ years dead meant.

Pegg (and myself) go with the original intended meanings.

You mean how the word used by the Hebrew meant "roll" and in "roll of paper"?

[Peter Cox]

Eddy, lets get to the bottom of all this shall we?

The number 12 appears in the bible often, 12 diciples, 12 opostiles, 12 tribes of Israle etc etc. So you saying that this all equates to the time factor on a computer? 12 lots of 12:00? Im not sure what your point here is are you saying that 12 x 12:00 is the 144 000 rounded up? what is the relavance of that to the root file allocation size or 144 000 rounded up? I could say 77 000 x 2 is 144 000 but it holds no bearing. Why would your time traveller have told John this? Were they not in relavations talking about the end days?

Time Travellers were "Angels in the bible" so what did they show the 3 wise men? As an angle of the lord appeared to them, also Mary what did they show her?

So please explain these for me the "angels" visits

Angel visited Abraham to tell him that he and Sara would have a child

Angel visits Abraham to tell him not to kill his son as a sacrafice

Angel visited Daniel during vision

Angel visited Mary regarding Jesus

Angel visited Joseph to tell him Mary was carring a child conceived of Holy Sprirt

Angel visited Joseph to tell him to escape with Mary & child to Egypt

Angel tells Mary at the tomb God has risesn up

Angels Visit the 3 wise men

Here are some names of angels and where they are in the bible can you explain what purpose these "Time travellers served?"

1. Michael-Daniel 10:13,21 & 12:1, also Jude 9 and Revelation 12:7

2. Gabriel-St.Luke 1:19,26

3. Satan or Lucifer-Isaiah 14:12, and Ezekiel 28:11-19

4. Abaddon-Revelation 9:11

Gabriles visists: please explain purpose of them

Dan 8:15-19 Interprets a vision of Daniel

Dan 9:20-23 Instructs Daniel

Luke 1:11-20 Appears to Zechariah (father of John the Baptist)

Luke 1:26-38 Appears to Mary, wife of Joseph

Micales apperances (excluding his appearance in Enoch) again what purpose

Dan 10:13 "one of the chief princes"

Dan 10:21 "No one supports me against them except Michael"

Dan 12:1 Great prince

Jude 1:9 Archangel Michael

Rev 12:7 War in heaven against Satan

The "Devil"

Isaiah 14:12-20

"Morning star" is translated as "Lucifer" in KJV

Ezekiel 28:12-19

Satan once had a special place of honor guarding the throne of God

Luke 10:18

"I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven."

2 Peter 2:4

Angels that sinned are placed in hell, awaiting judgment

Jude 1:6

Fallen angels are held in darkness for Judgment Day

Revelation 12:4

May indicate that Satan took a third of the angels with him

Revelation 12:7-12

War in heaven between Archangel Michael and Satan

The end of Satan and his angels

Mat 25:41 "Eternal fire" was prepared for Satan and his angels

Rom 16:20 God will crush Satan under the feet of the Church

Rev 20:1-3 Satan thrown into the abyss for 1000 years

Rev 20:10 Satan thrown into lake of burning sulfur forever

Raphael

Raphael is mentioned only in the Apocrypha (in Tobit, as well as the apocalyptic book of Enoch). Tobit seems to identify that Raphael is one of seven angels that have special status:

"I am Raphael, one of the seven angels who stand ready and enter before the glory of God" (Tobit 12:15; NRSV)

The term "archangel" ("chief", or "first" angel) appears only twice in the Bible. No name is assigned in 1 Thess 4:16, but in Jude 1:9, Michael is designated as an archangel. (In the Apocrypha, Gabriel is also identified as an

The bible also makes refrence to thousands of angels that reside in Heaven, and fgallen angles that fall out of grace with Lucifer. Are all of these time travellers? If not then how can you explain the refrence to them?

Angles appreaded to people in both the old and new testament can you explain each encounter, what they showed the people, why they did it and make any refrence at any point to a picture of the CD used and the computer, also any account of the time machine would be good too.

Please explain this if you can.

Then there is the mystry of moden angel visits in modern times, there are 100's of accounts. Some about solidures, some about a plane that was going to crash and an angles saved them. Just google it. Below is one account with a few interventions. Are these Angles or time travellers?

http://www.naqshbandi.org/naqshbandi.net/www/haqqani/sufi/angels/angels_40.html

Can you not see the logic here Eddy? your argument is flawed by the very nature of it, you argue that the bible is not a religious book as there is no religion but time travellers that created it but then use it to back your argument? Contradicitive to say the least.

Please answer the above if you can, so we can all under stand the purpose, information shared, whenre on the CD this information is, where the historical evidence is and what the evidence is and then explain modern visits, are these by our great great grand children?

Thanks

Peter

[TheSearcher]

Actually they have not.

Many people disagree with what Pegg says he has found.

Many people do not follow his methodology.

Many people do not read the threads fully.

Many people do not follow the given links (by their own admissions).

Many people only skim read (by their own admissions).

Some people take only 10 to 15 minutes to complete a hour long evaluation which includes a 12 minute video of 41 key points (ie. they actually haven’t read the work nor viewed the video carefully).

These are the types of people who you say have ‘refuted’ Pegg’s arguments.

Then there are the ones who would rather take personal digs.

So no, Pegg’s work has not been refuted. Violently disagreed with yes, not wanting to accept Pegg’s conclusions, yes, but not refuted.

Of the 14 people* who have completed the evaluation (some taking over 45 minutes to read ALL pages plus the Evaluation) the average match of ancient descriptions to the contents of the 1995 produced ancient Civilixations of the Mediterranean compact disk is 94.92 percent (as at 4^th Jan 2013).

That is more than coincidence. That is a YES.

* 2 people who took under 13 minutes to complete the website, and did not view the video, and changed all or most of the responses to zero have been excluded, as it is obvious they did not take the test in good faith.

(Including them still gives 83 percent, still more than a coincidence, and still a probably.)

Of course and you should keep telling yourself that. However, people who live in reality, have often and many times over, refuted the entire thing, point by point. You seem to forget that you have posted the same stuff over and over again in the last few years and we are quite used to your ignorance of facts and figures and your blatant refusal to admit when you have been found wanting.

Also, I saw you mentioning Strong's Concordance a few times, I feel the need to quip in here. Strong's Concordance is not a translation of the Bible, nor is it intended as a translation tool. The use of Strong's numbers is not and never was intended, as a substitute for professional translation of the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into English, by those with formal training in ancient languages and the literature of the cultures in which the Bible was written. (And yes, the latter applies to you, since as far as I know, you are not a proffessional translator.)

More even, since Strong's Concordance identifies the original words in Hebrew and Greek, Strong's numbers are sometimes misinterpreted by those without adequate training, to change the Bible from its accurate meaning simply by taking the words out of cultural context. Like you and Pegg are doing.

PS : I still think that this Ron Pegg and you are in fact one and the same person. This is what he writes :

"I am not the issue. My Discoveries and Research, and the Evidence will speak for itself. Please focus on my Discoveries and personally examine all the Evidence for yourself, and do not come to a conclusion based upon preconceived ideas given to you by other people."

Sounds familiar, no?

[Peter Cox]

Quote

Ronald Pegg discovered that the 'Book' was a small wheel and the root of the DVD opened it. ( This was explained on the 'BOOK Identified' page )

"DVD" is short for 'Digital Versatile Disc' and although what we know as a DVD was introduced in 1995, earlier 'discs' included the 1993 released Video CD (VCD), Multimedia Compact Disc (MMCD), and the Super Density (SD) disc (all being digital data discs).

I always thought that a DVD meant a movie disk, but that is not so.

DVD was the generic name for any disk that included more and different data that what was playing on the earlier musical compact disks.

an extract on DVD's - this is from a computer technology website. http://www.techterms.com

You will notice I have highlighted the part that says to play a DVD you need a DVD rom not a standard CD rom. As you should know a DVD rom was not compatible with a 386PC or was not redably avalible in 1995 for any PC for that matter. So no DVD is not a CD its diffrent in various forms including the technology needed to read it.

Stands for "Digital Versatile Disc." It can also stand for "Digital Video Disc," but with the mulitple uses of DVDs, the term "Digital Versatile Disc" is more correct. Yep, the technology naming people just love to confuse us. A DVD is a high-capacity optical disc that looks like a CD, but can store much more information. While a CD can store 650 to 700 MB of data, a single-layer, single-sided DVD can store 4.7 GB of data. This enables massive computer applications and full-length movies to be stored on a single DVD.

The advanced DVD formats are even more amazing. There is a two-layer standard that doubles the single-sided capacity to 8.5 GB. These disks can also be double-sided, ramping up the maximum storage on a single disc to 17 GB. That's 26 times more data than a CD can hold! To be able to read DVDs in your computer you'll need a DVD-ROM drive. Fortunately, DVD players can also read CDs. To play DVD movies on your computer, you'll need to have a graphics card with a DVD-decoder, which most computers now have.

[Quaentum]

Absolutely, which is why retro-gaming is very hit and miss. Every so often I go back and play some old Amiga or NES I was addicted to, and realise it's horribly dated now and wonder what I saw in it in the first place (apart from some exceptions).

At the time that those games came out many were state of the art. It's like the first 3d Mario game that came out. I thought it was fantastic but it pales in comparison to today's games and 20 years from now we will be wondering what we saw in today's games.

[TheSearcher]

I think I found the time travellers that Eddy is on about........

Sorry, but it just made me think about this topic way to much.

[KainFall]

The Book with Seven Seals - FOUND and Identified

Religious condemnation is echoing around the world as believers come to terms with new research that shows the origins and source of the God stories were not of a divine nature.

AUSTRALIA: Queensland, researcher Ronald Pegg.

He located and identified the ‘book of the future, sealed with seven seals’ (as documented by Daniel and John in the Bible) as being a certain mid 1990s DVD, taken back to the past by time travellers (known as ‘Angels’ in the Bible).

Over 200 biblical descriptions match to the contents of that 1990s DVD.

Full details and research: http://www.tt2012.co...bservation.html

Tell me what 1990a DVD it is an i might be able to prove your story...

If theres anything on a 60's tripper known as the king of time, or prefurably America.. I can vow for you through extensive unrealistic proof that everyone claims.. lol

Edited January 4, 2013 by KainFall