Top 10 Famous Hoaxes
- Published August 30, 2007 - 218 Comments
Throughout the years many people have perpetrated hoaxes – often for publicity, and sometimes just for the hell of it. Of all the hoaxes through history, the ten in this list are the most famous. In at least two cases (the Book of Mormon, and the Priory of Sion) millions of people have been fooled – or continue to be fooled! In no particular order, here they are:
1. The Book of Mormon 1830
The Book of Mormon is considered by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to be a divinely inspired book of equal value to the Bible. Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon religion, claimed that he was directed by an Angel to a hill near his home in which he found golden tablets containing the full text of the book. With the books he found two objects called the Urim and Thummim which he described as a pair of crystals joined in the form of a large pair of spectacles. Unfortunately, after Smith finished his translation, he had to return the tablets to the Angel, so there is no physical evidence that they ever existed.
The book refers to a group of Jews that moved to and settled in America where Jesus visited them. Some segments of the Book of Mormon contain sections copied directly from the King James version of the Bible – the Bible that was most popular at the time and used by Joseph Smith. One example is Mark 16:15-18 which is quoted nearly word-for-word in Mormon 9:22-24. In addition, the book mimics the literary and linguistic style of the King James Bible. Linguistic experts have stated that the entire book is written by one man, and is not written by a combination of authors (the prophets as claimed by Smith). Additionally, the book refers to animals and crops that did not exist in America until Columbus arrived: ass, bull, calf, cattle, cow, domestic goat, horse, ox, domestic sheep, sow, swine, elephants, wheat, and barley.
The most compelling proof that Joseph Smith was perpetuating a fraud is the Book of Abraham. In 1835 Smith was able to use his Urim and Thummim to translate some Egyptian scrolls that he was given access to (at that time no one could read hieroglyphics). Upon inspection, Smith declared that they contained the Book of Abraham. He promptly translated the lot and it was accepted as scripture by the church. The scrolls vanished and everyone thought the story would end there. But it didn’t – in 1966 the original scrolls were found in the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art. The scrolls turned out to be a standard Egyptian text that was often buried with the dead. To this day the Book of Abraham is a source of discomfort for the Mormon religion.
2. The Cottingley Fairies 1917
The Cottingley Fairies are a series of five photographs taken by Elsie Wright and Frances Griffiths, two young cousins living in Cottingley, near Bradford, England, depicting the two in various activities with supposed fairies. Elsie was the daughter of Arthur Wright, one of the earliest qualified electrical engineers. She borrowed her father’s quarter plate camera and took photos in the beck behind the family house. When Mr. Wright, upon developing the plates, saw fairies in the pictures, he considered them fake. After the taking of the second picture, he banned Elsie from using the camera again. Her mother, Polly, however was convinced of their authenticity.
In the summer of 1919, the matter became public and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (author of Sherlock Holmes) wrote an article for a leading magazine claiming that they were authentic. Not everyone was taken in by the fraud, as this statement from a leading Doctor at the time attests:
“On the evidence I have no hesitation in saying that these photographs could have been `faked’. I criticise the attitude of those who declared there is something supernatural in the circumstances attending to the taking of these pictures because, as a medical man, I believe that the inculcation of such absurd ideas into the minds of children will result in later life in manifestations and nervous disorder and mental disturbances…”
For fifty years the girls avoided publicity and the hoax continued to be believed by many. In late 1981 and mid 1982 respectively, Frances Way (née Griffiths) and Elsie Hill (née Wright), who took the photographs admitted that the first four pictures were fakes. Speaking of the first photograph in particular, Frances has said: “I don’t see how people could believe they’re real fairies. I could see the backs of them and the hatpins when the photo was being taken.” Both of the girls claimed, right up to their deaths, that the fifth photo was, in fact, authentic.
3. Alien Autopsy 1995
In 1995, Ray Santilli instigated a wide reaching “alien autopsy” controversy when he claimed to possess footage taken in a tent by a U.S. military shortly after the 1947 Roswell UFO incident. Santilli first presented his film to an invited audience of media representatives, UFOlogists and other dignitaries at the Museum of London on 5 May 1995. Although the broadcast version did not show the actual “autopsy”, video editions have the complete and unedited film, plus previously unreleased footage of wreckage presented as the remains of the alien craft reported to have crashed in Roswell. The show features interviews with experts on the authenticity of the film.
On April 4, 2006, two days prior to the UK release of Alien Autopsy Ray Santilli and fellow producer Gary Shoefield announced that their film was only partially real (a “few frames,” in their words), while the rest was a reconstruction of twenty-two rolls of film, averaging four minutes in length, which Santilli had viewed in 1992 but which had subsequently degraded from humidity and heat. According to Santilli, a set was constructed in the living room of an empty flat in Rochester Square, Camden Town, London. John Humphreys, an artist and sculptor, was employed to construct two dummy alien bodies over a period of three weeks, using casts containing sheep brains set in jelly, chicken entrails and knuckle joints.
4. Piltdown Man 1912
The “Piltdown Man” is a famous hoax consisting of fragments of a skull and jawbone collected in 1912 from a gravel pit at Piltdown, a village near Uckfield, East Sussex. The fragments were thought by many experts of the day to be the fossilised remains of a hitherto unknown form of early human. The Latin name Eoanthropus dawsoni (”Dawson’s dawn-man”, after the collector Charles Dawson) was given to the specimen.
The Piltdown hoax is perhaps the most famous archaeological hoax in history. It has been prominent for two reasons: the attention paid to the issue of human evolution, and the length of time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its exposure as a forgery. It was exposed in 1953 as a forgery, consisting of the lower jawbone of an orangutan combined with the skull of a fully developed, modern man. The identity of the Piltdown forger remains unknown, but suspects have included Dawson, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Arthur Conan Doyle as well as numerous others.
From the outset, there were scientists who expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find. G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 that “deliberate malice could hardly have been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking the fossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the parts together.” In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientists increasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with the path of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere.
5. Feejee Mermaid 1842
The Feejee Mermaid was presented as a mummified body of something, supposedly a creature that was half mammal and half fish (like a grotesque version of normal mermaid stories). The original exhibit was popularized by circus great P.T. Barnum, but has since been copied many times in other attractions, including the collection of famed showman Robert Ripley. The original exhibit was shown around the United States, but was lost in the 1860s when Barnum’s museum caught fire. The exhibit has since been acquired by Harvard University’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology and is currently housed in the museum’s attic storage area.
The Fiji mermaid came into Barnum’s possession via his Boston counterpart Moses Kimball, who brought it down to Barnum in late spring of 1842. On June 18, Barnum and Kimball entered into a written agreement to exploit this “curiosity supposed to be a mermaid.” Kimball would remain the creature’s sole owner and Barnum would lease it for $12.50 a week. Barnum christened his artefact “The Feejee Mermaid”.
In reality, the mermaid was a gaff, the work of an Indonesian craftsman using either papier-mâché and materials from exotic fish, or the tail of a fish and a torso of a baby orangutan, stitched together with the head of a monkey
6. The Priory of Sion 1956
The Priory of Sion has been characterized as anything from the most influential secret society in Western history to a modern Rosicrucian-esque group, but, ultimately, has been shown to be a hoax created in 1956 by Pierre Plantard, a pretender to the French throne. The evidence presented in support of its historical existence is not considered authentic or persuasive by established historians, academics, and universities, and the evidence was later discovered to have been forged and then planted in various locations around France by Plantard and his associates.
Between 1961 and 1984 Plantard contrived a mythical pedigree of the Priory of Sion claiming that it was the offshoot of the monastic order housed in the Abbey of Sion, which had been founded in the Kingdom of Jerusalem during the First Crusade and later absorbed by the Jesuits in 1617. Plantard hoped that the Priory of Sion would become an influential cryptopolitical irregular masonic lodge dedicated to the restoration of chivalry and monarchy, which would promote Plantard’s own claim to the throne of France.
The priory recently gained interest again (despite easily obtainable proof that it is a fake) through the publication of the book The Davinci Code which the author, Dan Brown, claims to be fact (proving that he lied outright about his alleged years of research for the book).
7. The Turk 1717
The Turk was a fake chess-playing machine of the late 18th century, promoted as an automaton but later proved to be a hoax. The Turk made its debut in 1770 at Schönbrunn Palace. Its owner, Kempelen addressed the court, presenting what he had built, and began the demonstration of the machine and its parts. With every showing of the Turk, Kempelen began by opening the doors and drawers of the cabinet, allowing members of the audience to inspect the machine. Following this display, Kempelen would announce that the machine was ready for a challenger.
Kempelen would inform the player that the Turk would use the white pieces and have the first move. Between moves the Turk kept its left arm on the cushion. The Turk could nod twice if it threatened its opponent’s queen, and three times upon placing the king in check. If an opponent made an illegal move, the Turk would shake its head, move the piece back and make its own move, thus forcing a forfeit of its opponent’s move. Observers of the Turk would state that the machine played aggressively, and typically beat its opponents within thirty minutes.
The Turk was in fact a mechanical illusion that allowed a human chess master to hide inside and operate the machine. With a skilled operator, the Turk won most of the games played. The apparatus was demonstrated around Europe and the Americas for over 80 years until its destruction by fire in 1854, playing and defeating many challengers including statesmen such as Napoleon Bonaparte and Benjamin Franklin.
8. Loch Ness – the Surgeon’s Photo 1934
One of the most iconic images of Nessie is known as the ‘Surgeon’s Photograph’ which many consider to be good evidence of the monster, although doubts about the photograph’s authenticity were expressed from the beginning. The image was revealed as a hoax in the 1990s. The photographer, a gynecologist named Robert Kenneth Wilson, never claimed it to be a picture of the monster. He merely claimed to have photographed “something in the water”. The photo is often cropped to make the monster seem huge, while the original uncropped shot shows the other end of the loch and the monster in the center.
Just a year before the hoax was revealed, the makers of Discovery Communications’ documentary Loch Ness Discovered did an analysis of the uncropped image and found a white object evident in every version of the photo, implying that it was on the negative. “It seems to be the source of ripples in the water, almost as if the object was towed by something”, the narrator said. “But science cannot rule out it was just a blemish on the negative,” he continued. Additionally, analysis of the full photograph revealed the object to be quite small, only about two to three feet long.
9. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion 1890
The Protocol of the Elders of Zion is a text that purports to describe a Jewish and Masonic plot to achieve world domination. It is one of the most well known and discussed examples of literary forgery. Numerous independent investigations have concluded it to be either a plagiarism or a hoax. The Protocols is widely considered to be the beginning of contemporary conspiracy theory literature, and takes the form of an instruction manual to a new member of the “elders,” describing how they will run the world through control of the media and finance, and replace the traditional social order with one based on mass manipulation.
Continued usage of the Protocols as an antisemitic propaganda tool substantially diminished with the defeat of the Nazis in World War II. It is still frequently quoted and reprinted by some anti-Semitic circles, and is sometimes used as evidence of an alleged Jewish cabal, especially in the Middle East. Elements of the text in the Protocols appears to be plagiarized from an 1864 pamphlet, Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, written by the French satirist Maurice Joly. Joly’s work attacks the political ambitions of Napoleon III using Machiavelli as a diabolical plotter in Hell as a stand-in for Napoleon’s views.
Interestingly, many of the protocols aims have been achieved. For example: Universal suffrage, wide acceptance of pornography, the spread of Darwinism, Socialism, and Materialism.
10. The Cardiff Giant 1869
The Cardiff Giant, one of the most famous hoaxes in American history, was a 10-foot-tall (3m) “petrified man” uncovered on October 16, 1869 by workers digging a well behind the barn of William C. “Stub” Newell in Cardiff, New York. Both it and an unauthorized copy made by P.T. Barnum are still on display. The Giant was the creation of a New York tobacconist named George Hull. Hull, an atheist, decided to create the giant after an argument with a fundamentalist minister named Mr. Turk about a passage in Genesis that stated that there were giants who once lived on earth.
Hull hired men to carve out a 10-feet-long, 4.5 inches block of gypsum in Fort Dodge, Iowa, telling them it was intended for a monument of Abraham Lincoln in New York. He shipped the block to Chicago, where he hired a German stonecutter to carve it into the likeness of a man and swore him to secrecy. Various stains and acids were used to make the giant appear to be old and weather beaten, and the giant’s surface was beaten with steel knitting needles embedded in a board to simulate pores. When the giant had been buried for a year, Newell hired two men, Gideon Emmons and Henry Nichols, ostensibly to dig a well. When they found the Giant, one of them has been attributed to saying “I declare, some old Indian has been buried here!”.
The giant drew such crowds that showman P.T. Barnum offered $60,000 for a three-month lease of it (in his memoirs he said he wanted to buy it). When the syndicate turned him down he hired a man to covertly model the giant’s shape in wax and create a plaster replica. He put his giant on display in New York, claiming that his was the real giant and the Cardiff Giant was a fake. On February 2, 1870 both giants were revealed as fakes in court. The judge ruled that Barnum could not be sued for calling a fake giant a fake.























August 30th, 2007 at 11:27 am
big foot video
August 30th, 2007 at 11:41 am
mix: good addition – did they prove it a hoax?
August 30th, 2007 at 11:48 am
What about the bible or the Qu’ran?
August 30th, 2007 at 11:50 am
eddy: Bible is tough because half of it is at least 3 thousand years old – and we the Quran was written down after the fact without the use of magic glasses
I am working on a top 10 Christian Sects and their origins though – so that will cover at least reformation and later Christianity.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:54 am
jfrater:yea they did prove it to be a fake they guys who shot the video said so on there death bed they did a special on it on the discovery channel
August 30th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
mix: heh typical
August 30th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
I think the Book of Mormon hasn’t been proven a hoax any more than any other religious text.
August 30th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Yeah, the bible says the earth is 6000 years old. And the sun orbits the earth?
August 30th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Christopher: I don’t think it says the earth is 6000 years old – that is a calculation made by modern religious people. Not sure about heliocentricity either – can you quote a verse?
Robert: umm – did you read the item?
August 30th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
people fooling people. what is real?
i vaguely remember the construction of the earth in “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” where workers install fossils into the earth, heh.
August 30th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Whenever I want a laugh, I read something about PT Barnum. The guy was a hoot and a half. Showman and conman, with a good sense of the ridiculous all mixed up into one. Whenever the word hoax is used, Barnum is the first person I think of.
August 30th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Christ
August 30th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Eddy: Whether you believe the bible or not, the text has been corroborated by several independent non-christian sources. While many of these texts don’t refer to Jesus as God or the Messiah, they also don’t deny that he performed the works he did. Most just say he used magic or sorcery. Red the book “The Case for Christ.” It gives a good general picture of how much of at least the New Testament is based on history. And it references several other books if you want to get more in-depth on a specific detail.
August 30th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Sumerian texts are way older than the bible and it is viewed as fantasy … Hey I guess we are living in a hoax – who is first to laugh ?
August 30th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
The problem is that when something becomes so historical that it loses focus, proof is just not possible. In a way that makes some of these lists easier to write
August 30th, 2007 at 11:55 pm
“In at least two cases (the Book of Mormon, and the Priory of Sion) millions of people have been fooled – or continue to be fooled! ”
~ I noticed the omission of a another religion that was created recently by a single man.
One that likes to sue detractors?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:36 am
Mark: are talking Scientology? If so, I have done two articles on them already
http://listverse.com/bizarre/top-10-problems-with-scientology/
http://listverse.com/miscellaneous/top-8-levels-of-scientology/
August 31st, 2007 at 5:30 pm
There are a few more big ones you missed:
11. Stonehenge in England
Supposed to have been built by ancient Britons centuries ago, in fact it was created by 19th century entrepreneur, Baron Greville with the intention of attracting tourism to the region. As recently as 2006 a UK opinion poll found that 92 per cent of Britons still believe it to be an ancient structure.
12. Howard Hughes’ biography
In the ’70s author Clifford Irving claimed he had exclusive access to the billionaire Howard Hughes and sold the rights to his biography to a major publisher. It was only when the normally reclusive Hughes surfaced to deny Irving’s claims that the truth was uncovered.
13. Roman numerals
In fact the Romans didn’t have a standard counting system, but adopted different methods at different stages in their history. The system we now know as Roman numerals was actually devised by Lithuanian monk, Irma Ferhar in the 12th century
14. Picture postcards
Probably one of the biggest hoaxes to be perpetrated upon holidaymakers is the idea that anyone is interested in what you did on your holiday, or that you should waste valuable holiday time writing about it, or that you should stress yourself before your holiday making sure you have the addresses of all your friends and relatives.
15. Australia
Cartographers drawing up the first maps of Australia were shocked to discover that its shape closely resembles an embarrassing part of the human anatomy. To spare the blushes of the then somewhat straitlaced society they slightly stretched and distorted the actual shape. Although we live in less prudish times the hoax continues today giving rise to occasional misjudgements by sailors and airline pilots.
16. Musical scales
For centuries musicians have been hoaxing non musicians by making them believe there are more scales than there actually are. For example C flat major is exactly the same scale as B major, D flat major is exactly the same as C sharp major and F sharp major is identical to G flat major, but you won’t find many musicians owning up to this.
17. Icelandic
As anyone who has ever visited Iceland or inspected an Icelandic dictionary will quickly discover the native language of Iceland is French. This was a source of embarrassment within the country for years until 1911 when Iceland’s Prime Minister Björn Jónsson decreed that his people spoke ‘Icelandic’, which he claimed was a unique language in its own right. The hoax backfired big time when major French companies withdrew from the country in protest causing significant job losses.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:00 pm
@anton
ooook…..
(Apart from 12…)?????????
August 31st, 2007 at 8:10 pm
The Bible is the “Word”!!!! Period! Scientists needs proof for Everything that they cant explain,,,,so they “invented” the “Big Bang” as to how our world came into being
August 31st, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Crazygal: I agree. And it’s interesting because there’s no proof of the “Big Bang.” Stupid scientists…
I think I’d rather believe in a GOD then that a big explosion created the universe.
September 1st, 2007 at 12:55 am
Anton: I am guessing you are posting for a joke, but just so people don’t get confused:
11. Stonehenge is ACTUALLY a prehistoric monument – erected around 2200 BC.

12. Fake Howard Hughes biography: this is true
13. Roman Numerals were used by the romans – check out some monuments in Rome. They grew from the Etruscan numbering system.
14. Postcards: this is more of a conspiracy
15. Australia: we can see it on the globe now – it looks pretty much the same there as it did on every map I have seen of it. Are you talking about a very early map?
16. Musical Scales: I studied music – there are definitely different scales
17. Icelandic is a very ancient language – speakers and readers of Icelandic can still read their ancient books. It has no relation to French at all which is a Romance language. Icelandic is a Germanic language.
September 1st, 2007 at 12:59 am
you said stonehence instead of stonehenge…
and also, anton…how the hell did you get all of that?
im going to get out of character here really quickly and say that anyone who believes that is a gullible moron
September 1st, 2007 at 1:06 am
Fruckert: thanks
September 1st, 2007 at 10:42 am
Crazygal: a fitting name.
Stephen: Interesting you say you would “rather” believe that there was a god than a big bang.. Scared of hard facts? And there is indeed evidence of it, contrary to your beliefs.
And “stupid scientist”???? – you mean those guys who find cures for fatal illnesses, make long distance calls possible, people like that famous “stupid” guy Einstein? Yeah, right, I can see where you are coming from…
Read the God Dillusion by Richard Dawkins if you haven’t already done so..
September 1st, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Book of Mormon is not a hoax. That doesn’t mean it’s true. It is extremely likely Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon from various references such as the Bible and the Qu’ran, however Smith and his brother both were lynched for their beliefs and there are several million Mormons who believe it’s real. So, it doesn’t seem very “hoax” like.
September 1st, 2007 at 12:15 pm
You’d think that if there was one true god then there would only be ONE religion…and that god its self would punish the morons who changed his original word…..just had to get that off my mind..PS i know i used its self to referance god ..its because we do not know if it is a he, she or something else
September 1st, 2007 at 4:46 pm
James: Really, where is this “evidence” that a big explosion created the galaxy. Did they find a video on YouTube?
If there is no God, then how did things exist in the first place? Atoms and Molecules popped into existence with no cause?
September 1st, 2007 at 7:49 pm
The Swiss Spaghetti Harvest of 1957 was the first of its kind, i’m told.
Though you might want to keep it for a future “Top
10 April Fools” list…
September 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 am
The most famous hoax isn’t listed here.
For a Hoax to be real, it must never be discovered.
All listed here are just pretenders to the throne.
The greatest hoax isn’t famous yet, because nobody has uncovered it.
September 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 am
kmuzu: whether something is a hoax or not has no relation to whether people believe it. If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it fall – it still fell. The fact is that scientific study and time have shown that the book of Mormon is not what Smith claims it was. Therefore, it is a hoax – he intentionally created the book in to tricking people. The only difference is that his hoax has been very successful.
Che: hilarious! Thanks for posting that.
September 2nd, 2007 at 12:38 am
China tattler: so true, but it would be a boring list if I wrote only about the top 10 undiscovered hoaxes
September 2nd, 2007 at 5:21 am
Stephen: After aproximately 10 seconds of research on wikipedia I found this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_big_bang#Observational_evidence
To answer your question of how things came about would take too long and nobody really knows for sure.
However just because there is no certain answer as yet does not mean there is a god. Every time science cannot provide an answer religion immediately claims that as eveidence for god. That makes no sense Stephen.
Finally if god did make the universe it poses the more complex question – who made god? To answer a question with something that creates an even bigger question is no way to form an argument.
In time science will find the answer, just as it did about the world being flat. Until then lack of evidence is no proof of god.
September 2nd, 2007 at 8:58 pm
“The priory recently gained interest again (despite easily obtainable proof that it is a fake) through the publication of the book The Davinci Code which the author, Dan Brown, claims to be fact (proving that he lied outright about his alleged years of research for the book).”
First of all, he deliberately did not specify which parts were fact or not. He also admitted he put the infamous disclaimer at the front of the book to get people to consider the story presented with a “what-if” frame of mind, not to claim When people asked him later why he’d lied to them, he basically said he was telling a story and people could take it how they wanted. Of course he did research…for story material. He is a novelist. This is a good list. Don’t let cheap editorializing ruin it.
September 2nd, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Elle Rayne: in 2003, on CNN, Dan Brown said:
The problem is that the background is not true – the Priory of Sion is a hoax and if he had done his research he would have known that.
There is more information on what he has wrong on the Top 10 Errors of the Da Vinci Code
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Hwy, mix, the patterson bigfoot movie hasnt been proven to be a hoax, infact rather the opposite. Noone of Gimli or Patterson has said it was a haox and the only people who officialy claim it is are lying and have all been disproved.
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
“The problem is that the background is not true – the Priory of Sion is a hoax and if he had done his research he would have known that.”
My point is, he doesn’t CARE it’s a hoax. It makes for good fiction. And he was true to legend. He didn’t say the legend was true. And again, this is part of his tongue-in-cheek humor in putting the disclaimer in front of the book. So, you still can’t say he didn’t do his research, because obviously he read about the Priory to include in his FICTIONAL BOOK. It’s still cheap editorializing.
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:47 pm
Elle: I do see your point, but he insists on claiming that it is real and in doing so has deceived a lot of people who believe him. Someone quoted the Da Vinci code on the unsolved mysteries top 10 to prove his point. And what about the other points? Describing Windows overlooking certain areas which you would only think if you had only seen tour guides and not actually been the place? What about the French geography that was completely wrong? There are so many errors. If he told people it was tongue in cheek then fine – but he doesn’t – he insists that it is all factual.
September 4th, 2007 at 6:26 am
jfrater: It sounds like you have some personal issues with Brown that I can’t help you with.
September 4th, 2007 at 7:08 am
Elle Rayne: I have never met Dan Brown, so I don’t have any personal issues with him at all. I just take issue with him stating that his book is truth when it isn’t. Frankly, if you think I have issues, so does the New Yorker, and the New York Times
September 5th, 2007 at 1:24 am
This is the weirdest list ever. Do you have something personal against Mormons? Because that’s the only reason I can see for putting a bunch of things that have been conclusively proven to be hoaxes in with the Book of Mormon, which… may be a hoax or may not be a hoax, but hasn’t been proven either way. The evidence you provide here is completely lacking in anything even vaguely resembling proof. And contains one outright falsehood, seeing as how I’ve never heard of a Mormon being embarrassed about the book of Abraham, they’re still printing it, endorsing it as scripture, and teaching from it. How is that “a source of discomfort”? If you want to convince people that the book is a fake, you might try sticking to facts and not inventing things.
September 5th, 2007 at 2:52 am
spark: I don’t have anything against Mormons – I do have something against Joseph Smith because he was a trickster. Wouldn’t it be considered an embarrassment because of the fact the Book of Abraham is one of the most commonly pointed out errors of Mormonism? There are millions of pages on the internet dedicated to trying to explain away the realities of the Papyrus to support Smith’s view.
September 5th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
BTW, the word is “proved” — ‘proven’ is an adjective.
September 6th, 2007 at 3:19 am
BTW, nobody cares
September 6th, 2007 at 4:48 am
Now now boys
September 6th, 2007 at 9:55 am
I don’t know what this has to do with anything, just going to throw it out there….. The only reason Jesus isn’t remembered as the Greatest Magician in History is because the Deck of Cards hadn’t been invented yet.
September 7th, 2007 at 9:09 am
Miguel, please don’t bore us with your ignorance of acceptable english grammar.
September 8th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Ok I only have one comment for anyone who references where did matter aka. atoms, proton, neutrons, electrons, ect. come from and that is where did your god come from. Just poof mystical being somehow appears. So believe whatever you want to believe but do not undo your own logic with a stupid idea.
September 9th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
FYI, icelandic, as mentioned in another post, is not french. It is essentially the same language the vikings spoke. However, vikings settled in normandie in france, Which is why its called Normandie. The name refers to men from the north. So, Vikings have connection to france. French has no connection to iceland.
September 9th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Anthropogenic Global Warming, the biggest hoax of our time.
September 9th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Bill – I am considering a list related to that. We shall see.
September 10th, 2007 at 11:08 pm
mcp39: exactly!
September 11th, 2007 at 8:41 am
Michael – indeed. Vikings have connections to most west european countries. They have also found ancient chinese coinage in archaelogical excavations in Denmark. They also traded with Asia.
Makes you think, huh ?
But the one thing about the Vikings that really impresses me is – the Normand kingdom of Sicily.
Amazing.
/Scots
//from Largs : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Largs
///We won – don’t worry about it, it was a long time ago.
////vive l’Europe.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:03 am
Mark Hoffman deserves a spot on this list. he was able to produce fake historical documents that sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars and fooled even the library of congress. Coincidently, one of his favorite marks was the Mormon Church.
A book called: The Poet and the Murderer chronicles his exploits.
link to book at amazon
September 11th, 2007 at 11:23 am
you missed the biggest hoax of all…
the holocaust
September 11th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Michael: I have heard of him – he is a good addition to the list.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:24 am
and the biggest most dangerous hoax of the 21st century….
The Iranian president said he wants nukes to wipe israel off the map…
total lies and propaganda… this lie is going to start ww3.
September 11th, 2007 at 11:34 am
Interestingly, many of the protocols aims have been achieved. For example: Universal suffrage, wide acceptance of pornography, the spread of Darwinism, Socialism, and Materialism.
….
what about the Jewish control of media and finance?
September 11th, 2007 at 11:41 am
sakul: Considering that Rupert Murdoch owns a huge amount of the media, and he is Australian, I would say that Jewish control of the media is a conspiracy theory.
September 11th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Rupert Murdoch’s mother was jewish, which, just like my own son… makes him jewish according to the talmud.
September 11th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
have a look here jfrater…
http://www.rense.com/general60/stun.htm
September 11th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
sakul: I think you need to read websites that are not about the Jewish conspiracy – they are misleading you. Rupert Murdoch’s mother (Dame Elisabeth Murdoch) was born of a Irish protestant father and an upper class English mother whose roots trace back to the 17th century in England and Ireland and there is no mention of Jewish background (including in the names of her predecessors – maternal or otherwise). And frankly, the Talmud is hardly an authority on whether a person is a Jew – if they do not practise the religion and do not believe in its tenets, they are not Jewish.
September 11th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
looks like I am cut off from posting… my link to the hundreds of jewish execs in the media today, is n’t getting posted.. do a search for this…
‘ Stunning Jewish Success
Dominates American Media’
September 11th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
And frankly, the Talmud is hardly an authority on whether a person is a Jew – if they do not practise the religion and do not believe in its tenets, they are not Jewish.
…
oh, but you are wrong there. extremely. My ex is a christian-jew.. With israeli citizenship.. are you saying that Israel was WRONG to say she is jewish? but she is christian…. ahhhh… there it is… do a search for that search term, and then you come and tell me that it is ‘tin foil hat’ conspiracy.
September 11th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Sakul: you weren’t cut off from posting – your link was picked up as spam – I just authorized it so it is included above. Regardless of what you say, if a person denounces Judaism by not practising or believing, they are not jewish (by religion at least – they may still be ethnically jewish).
The fact is – Murdoch does not have Jewish heritage at all. Oh – and that site you listed – he is wrong – Wikipedia article on Murdoch’s mother. How can you believe a site that has articles on psychic powers, and ufo sightings? Rense is a conspiracy theorist (Wikipedia article).
September 11th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
thats ad hominem attack, abut the rense website… you will notice also that it is just a document picked up from another website.. the data is factual though… Are you saying that if the moon exploded, and david dukes website had a link or story that said ‘the moon exploded’.. does that mean the moon DIDN’T explode, just because david duke said it? Didn’t think so. if you want to discuss the ‘quality’ of sources… we can discuss wikipedia at length, as wikipedia is easily shown to be a propaganda site, with edits coming from foxnews, etc… but hey, it is your site..
according to Jews, being a jew is a race, like being chinese. Converts aren’t ‘really’ jews.
September 11th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
So,… how many people died in the German Concentration Camps according to the international Red Cross which was allowed into the camps after they were liberated?
Red Cross
September 20th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Um sakul, you sound very much like an ignorant fool who believes everything he reads, save that which is actually credible. as much as good jfrater has tried to explain to you where you erred and with ample back up and research at that, you still persist in being a classic thick headed fool-of-a-Took.
September 20th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Hey Jeff… where did good jfrater show that I erred? I didn’t see that. And guess what dude, MY AMPLE BACK UP AND RESEARCH was REMOVED by the good jfrater.
And it is you folks that believe everything you read, or hear. You just aren’t reading the right things.. Such as the MSM and memri.org.
And I think my 2 degrees and 6 figure engineering career disagree with me being an ignorant fool. I’ll give you a tip… facts require evidence and proof. Something that was strangely amiss at the Nuremberg trials… If you actually took the time to research it.
Einstein… answer the question about why the walls on the supposed gas chamber at aushwitz aren’t stained blue, when the delousing chambers that used the the same ‘gassing’ all have blue-stained walls, which is a chemical by product of cyanide and water/air? Also answer why it is illegal in many countries just to ask questions? Why don’t they want anyone to ask questions? I can ask questions about Stalin, I can ask questions about japanese imperialism in the 20s, I can even ask questions about agent orange in vietnam, or the kennedy assasination, or pretty much anything else on earth.. But I can’t ask questions about the gas chambers… hmmm…..
September 20th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
I am not getting involved… but… A Study of the Cyanide Compounds Content In The Walls Of The Gas Chambers in the Former Auschwitz and Birkenau Concentration Camps by the Institute of Forensic Research in Cracow, Poland.
September 20th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
at least leave this up for a minute or two jfrater.. so some people at least have the opportunity to see the information..
http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gaschamb.html
and that link you posted… a little biased dont ya think? With a bit of an agenda?
September 20th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
sakul: my links have an agenda but yours don’t? Tsk tsk
I won’t delete your comment – just don’t turn this in to another triumphalist diatribe!
September 20th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
I looked at the site you posted, and actually read a lot of it… Did you happen to read mine?
Anyways, I give up.. however, one thing to note.. in your reference it is notable that it does acknowledge that the chemical samples of the camps has little or no positive analysis… however, they say it is because the residue was washed away by rainwater.. the elements etc.. Look for some picture of the only remaining chamber at auschwitz… IT HAS A ROOF and is fully enclosed..
touche..
September 22nd, 2007 at 5:42 pm
Christopher,
It was Isadore of Seville, a 7th C historian who came up with numbers for the age of the earth.
September 24th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
maybe this will settle the arguement ,,what if both sides are right,, god vs big bang, in the begining there was nuthin then god created the heavens and the earth,,,, now i’m sure that made one hell of a noise ,think about there it was nothin then there was everything
September 26th, 2007 at 1:56 am
Last night, I stayed up until about 4 AM listening to the top recordings list. Neither the creepy exorcism caught on tape nor the crying children of the Jonestown massacre frightened me more than just now reading Sakul’s frightening logic and the fervor with which he/she delivers it.
September 26th, 2007 at 3:06 am
Boris: I love your comment
September 26th, 2007 at 8:50 am
booga booga!
BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!
What drama Boris……
And you should change your comment a bit… ‘frightening logic’ should be changed to ’scientific evidence’, that way it would fit better with the discussion. And you all come back after ww3 starts, and talk about ‘fervor’. When your kids are sent off to fight for Israel, then ask yourself why YOU weren’t trying prevent it.
what a joke saying my comments are scarier than jonestown kids being force fed poison…
September 26th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
-Sakul-
you are an angry person. Boris was simply making a joke about that fact. and if you are making six figures thats awesome, and if you are brilliant thats awesome too, but that doesn’t mean that you are not a fool-of-a-Took. Look at out president for example, good ole G.W. Bush has got plenty of credentials, yet has proven to be the biggest fool-of-a-Took this country has ever put in power. so in conclusion please refrain from causing such an upstart in a peaceful humorous website such as this.
thank you much good sir/miss
September 26th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
The Moon Landings anyone??
Watched a program the other night about it and based on the photographic evidence I’m leaning towards the first landing at least being fake.
oh and the Loch Ness Monster is real, it has to be, I’m Scottish and we need to be famous for more than just Whiskey!
September 26th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
netexile: There are some great websites about the moonlandings which explain the anomalies in the photos from a scientific point
September 27th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Thanks jfrater, I’ll check it out
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:38 am
Much as I hate to get involved . . .the Jewish conspiracy should earn its own spot on a new list “Top 10 Conspiracies the Conspirators Know Nothing About”. I’m jewish and I’ve never been brought into this conspiracy, neither has any other Jew I’ve known. I did, however, lose all but three members of my father’s family (my dad’s dad, uncle and aunt) and all history and knowledge of family prior to my maternal grandparents and paternal great-grands in the Holocaust. I also have a memorial book detailing the experiences of the people of my grandfather’s village at the hands of the Nazis. I once worked with a man who still had the numbers the Nazis tattooed him with. So go ahead and tell me it was a hoax.
If you read the Torah, or the jewish version of the old testament, you’ll be surprised to find that g-d didn’t claim to be the ONLY g-d, that other gods were mentioned as if they did exist. The Jews were not to worship them, however gentiles were free to do so, according to g-d. I always wonder why, in the one truth argument, the focus is on how religions differ and therefore, how can they all be true. Why don’t people ever notice what they have in common, since that might be what is the One Truth. If you are wondering, some variation of the Golden Rule, as it is often called, is found in 99% of the worlds religions. (Source: Dear Abby column. Can be found in her archives)
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:10 am
rae: thanks for the comment. I agree that there could be a whole list dedicated to revisionist history and its flaws. I will add that to my list of lists to write – thanks
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Well done, Rae.
October 4th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Wow, I live just down the road from Uckfield and I’d never even heard of the Pitdown man! There’s strange things afoot in deepest darkest East Sussex……….
October 4th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Cazz: I remember reading about Piltdown Man as a kid – it caused quite a furore when it was discovered to be a hoax. Some very important people were suspected to be involved.
October 4th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
This sakul person…because everything on the net is believable. =/
October 24th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Psshh! Mormons, what a bunch of low lives.
October 26th, 2007 at 5:30 am
The Immaculate Conception.Like i said before,Mary was an unwedded,pregnant female.She would have been stoned to death.
November 3rd, 2007 at 1:38 pm
We have family in Fort Dodge, Iowa, and have visited the Fort Museum. You can see one of the copies of the Cardiff Giant in the Museum and he’s a hoot.
One of the reasons I think he was just a huge draw for crowds of that time is that the carvers made him anatomically correct…. and generously sized. Very generously. (He’s not, well, aroused, so the kids just giggled that they could see man parts.)
My husband and I snorted and snickered and tried to keep from falling over with laughter. I attempted to be all adult and mom-like. “Look, kids, there’s some Indian arrowheads in this other room of the museum!”
Thanks for the list, jfrater. Please think about banning Sakul. I feel like showering the filth off me after reading his comments. I would hate to think he would hang out at your lovely and non-political site, stinking it up for the fun people who post here. Just my opinion.
November 4th, 2007 at 8:37 am
Bonnie_: that is hilarious – thanks for sharing
November 6th, 2007 at 8:19 am
What if God planted the bible, the Quaran, the Tora, etc. etc. as a hoax, just to fuck with us?
November 7th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
i’m not sure if this story is known outside of Germany, but back in the 80s a big german news magazine claimed to have found hitler’s diaries – which of course had been produced.
please look at this link for further info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_diaries
November 7th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
Sakul, anyone that really has a six figure income knows that it’s tacky and very low class to talk about money. This is a friendly and intelligent site where most people know what they’re talking about, or are curious to learn. Please leave the nastiness and propaganda to sites like TMZ.
November 22nd, 2007 at 7:11 pm
All religions should be on this list.
November 24th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Nice list, but you forgot MacPherson’s Ossian and the Hitler diaries.
December 3rd, 2007 at 6:08 pm
the alien looks pregnate lol
awesome list
if it was more then 10, the taco liberty bell one would have to be on here lol
December 8th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
I don’t think ridiculing someone’s religion is a hoax, and the fact that you are constantly putting down mormons is sad.
December 25th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
how can any of you say that a religion is a hoax? have you ever studied any of these religions? you dont really have any room to talk if you dont understand what youre talking about….also who really has the right to say what religions are real or which ones are right? and as far as the millions or people “fooled” by these “hoaxes”… atleast theyre making an attempt to follow the lord which im sure is getting them bonus points with the big guy upstairs
December 28th, 2007 at 10:48 am
It’s interesting the more I read this site the more anti-LDS stuff I find. I think it’s funny actually. Thanks for pointing out the Book of Abraham. I never actually knew about that (being raised a good ol Mormon boy).
In response to the argument “Who created God” I’ve found that most Christians reply “God has always existed and is the same yesterday, today and forever.” To which I ask, “Then why did God create humans?” Did he get lonely? Why did God create Earth? Why did God create Angles? Why, really, did God create anything?
I think it’s worth noting that there is no justifiable evidence that there is any reason God would want to create anything at all. If God existed forever before Creation then He would have to have been happy with the way things were.
As far as the Big Bang goes, leading scientists now believe the universe has always existed . . . just not in it’s current state. Here are a couple excellent articles.
http://discovermagazine.com/2007/feb/cover
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover
If you have trouble imagining that, just think about every single particle in, say a basketball, colliding with another basketball. The difference between this and two basketballs colliding in our world is that the second basketball is multidimensional thus “squeezing” between all the other particles until the actual collision. Oh yeah, and the two basketballs are each traveling at a billion km/second.
Though it should be noted that there are alternate theories to the Big Bang, http://discovermagazine.com/2005/nov/two-against-the-big-bang/
December 28th, 2007 at 10:50 am
hmmm . . . my comment didn’t get posted . . . did it get marked as spam? I included a few links to the Discover Magazine website . . .
December 28th, 2007 at 10:50 am
Oh nevermind . . . I’m just impatient.
January 12th, 2008 at 5:58 am
I do have something to add about the Book of Mormon- technically speaking the book was indeed written by one man, Moroni. He took the writings of the other prophets in North America and rewrote them on the Golden Plates. It’s somewhere in the Book of Moroni when he was hiding out in the Appalachia he rewrote all that he had because he feared the apostasy of the Nephites and Lamanites would destroy the “word of God.”
So there is an explanation for jfrater pointing out that the book seems to have been written by one man.
Now, one thing I want to know is how Nephi killed Laban with an steel sword 2000 years before the first iron was forged.
* Note: I’m just playing devil’s advocate here. I was once Mormon…that is until I reached the age of reason, but I still graduated from seminary with as much knowledge about Mormon scripture as my seminary teachers.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:40 am
Ginger: That’s interesting. I was always taught that Moroni compiled the golden plates, not rewrote them. I’m not saying you’re wrong, just that I was taught differently. I’d also like to point out that the bible was compiled by a few men and it’s still painfully obvious that it was written by different hands. Even if it was rewritten that would make it all the book of Moroni.
I also think JFrater has a point, even when something is transcribed and the language is cleared up by the scribe, many of the idiosyncrasies of the original author remain.
January 15th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Don’t put down religions just because you don’t happen to believe what they say. Stick to the things you can actually prove are hoaxes and leave religion out of it.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Mystern: That’s just what they drilled into my head during my dark ages in the LDS church. That was the explication I was given when I was about 15. As Moroni translated the writings of the NoAm prophets, so did Joesph Smith translate the BOM. One of the reasons I left, there was never a cohesive answer to anything that wasn’t related to sex.
I’m of the mind that most religious scriptures have a genuine connection to the “source” of all this mess we call Earth. I love the Qur’an, Bible, etc as much as I love the BOM, but in the end they both contain a whole lot of bullshit that is unreasonable.
January 18th, 2008 at 6:38 am
Ginger: Yeah I’ve pretty much given up on religion. I would still say that I believe in God but I don’t believe in mankind or mankind’s interpretation of God.
January 19th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Of course it’s true,the fundamental premises of the “Holocaust” story are demonstrably false:
1. there was no extermination order or intent
2. there was no extermination policy
3. there was no extermination industry(or “homocidal gas-chambers”)
3. 6 million “Jews” were not “exterminated”.
What there was was persecution, forced emigration and war-industry labor, and eventually, system-breakdown and disease epidemics.
One does not have to think that the Nazis were right or heroes, nor does one have to be “nuts” to reject the accuracy of the Official History. The idea of Nazis(and Germans) as the ultimate personification of evil and man’s inhumanity towards man, and the “Jews’ as the world’s most innocent victims is a useful political/legal tool for individual and groupings of “Jews” to eliminate effective opposition from non-”Jews”.
Oh, the Official Version of what HIV/AIDS is is also so much HOGWASH too.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-266890172132861595
Of course, these aren’t famous yet.
January 20th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
I think the funniest, most successful hoax of all time has to be Einstein. While working full time as a third class patent clerk in Switzerland, this university drop out, without a lab, previous experience or success in the field , claims to have done the work, all by himself, that took the world’s greatest scientists over 50 years to do. When questioned about this miracle he could only say that it all came to him while asleep.
His thesis, in truth, was just a layman’s summary of the previous work of the giants in the field but without the footnotes or complex mathematical equations which he, in fact, did not understand. Furthermore, once he came to America, where he had all the opportunities he lacked in Switzerland, he discovered nothing. Moreover, he was considered so out of it that he was not even asked to help build the bomb. And yet his myth lives on. Amazing. He made P.T. Barnum look like a piker.
January 25th, 2008 at 3:01 am
I think that it is pretty funny how there is just an all out war on the lds church. How is it that you who claim to have been mormon can say that at 15 you graduated from seminary with “all” of the knowledge of your seminary teachers? So now 15 year old’s who don’t pay attention in school and even less in a religion calss are going to know as much as the teacher? Pa-lease! Who are any of you to criticize something of value and importance, when you do nothing to research other than doing a wikipedia search to find all of your “credible” information. Have you studied? Would anyone who is an “expert” take your opinion as something more than a grain of salt? Who are any of us to critize any religion?
All of these claims that Joseph Smith was a trickster and created the book of mormon for his personal gain are rediculous. Do you even know how the man lived? Do you know how impoverished and persecuted he was? What did he gain? The man was beat, tortured, tarred and feathered. For what? For translating a book that has never been proved to be written by one person as so many of you claim.
If you are going to claim that it is a hoax and that the book of abraham is this common scroll that was commonly burried with corpses… show some proof. It shouldn’t be too hard. I mean the internet is a very reliable source of information.
January 25th, 2008 at 3:11 am
Derek: http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/BOA/BOA_TOC.html
That URL is for a very indepth study of the original papyrus done by an Egyptologist. He presents the Mormon “translation” beside the Egyptologist’s translation – it doesn’t get much simpler really – the Book of Abraham is not about Abraham – not even remotely. That means that Joseph Smith lied when he said it was – he knew that he had no idea what it meant – he simply made it all up.
January 25th, 2008 at 3:59 am
jfrater-
Why don’t you take some time and look through this site: http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Abraham.shtml
January 25th, 2008 at 4:37 am
Derek: thanks for the link – I have read parts of that site before. Unfortunately it is all speculation and even refers to some “unorthodox” history keeping by the LDS in order to validate parts of the argument in favor of the book. Putting aside whether the papyrus is the same one Smith translated, the ACTUAL translation made by Smith contains a great number of chronological errors – it could not have been written at the time of Abraham because it refers to things that simply did not exist at that time. For example:
If you had read the site I suggested you would have known that
I must only presume that you did not read the site as you are probably so strong in your beliefs that nothing will shake it. That is fine.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Derek: I will admit that I did not graduate from seminary (which happens at the age of 18 here in UT, not 15), but I did attend for 3 years straight. Now, I’m not saying that I know more about religion than the teachers, but I will say that what the teachers said varied from classroom to classroom. I will also say that when it comes official canon and doctrine, I know a hell of a lot more than most people. I was always that kid who was first to offer a prayer or raise his hand in Sunday school. I’ve become disillusioned with the church, not because of any single great thing, but rather a number of little things that just don’t add up.
The church is not a bad thing. It helps a great many people. All I’m saying is that it didn’t add up for me.
If you have unshakable faith, I applaud you, for I could not maintain mine.
February 1st, 2008 at 3:42 pm
As an Australian musician, I feel a duty to respond to anton lefevre’s comment (18.)
It’s quite clear that he is attempting and succeeding to create some humour but people who are ignorant of these matters could easily become confused.
Firstly, Australians are not embarrassed by any part of their bodies. Australians are tall, bronzed Adonis or Aphrodite lookalikes who are, nevertheless, still humble in the presence of those with inferior physiques.
Secondly, the musical scale is far more fascinating than his post suggests. Middle C on a piano happens to be a sine-wave at a frequency of 256Hz. The C one octave up has a frequency of 512Hz and the one below has a frequency of 128Hz. Anyone familiar with base-2 mathematics will instantly recognise those numbers as all being powers of 2. Each octave doubles the frequency. Not only is there a powers-of-two sequence in the musical scale but there also exists the Fibonacci sequence. The Fibonacci sequence goes 1,1,2,3,5,8,13 and you will find that there is 1 white key between every 1 black key on a piano keyboard, the black keys are grouped in groups of 2 and 3, there are 5 black keys and 8 white keys in every scale which makes a total of 13 notes in a chromatic scale.
Best of all, the western musical system as we know it was defined by one of our most well known and gifted mathematicians: Pythagoras.
Given all of this, it is clear that with eight alphabetic letters to denote the different notes of the scale, each one having flat, natural and sharp modifications and yet only thirteen individual notes in a chromatic scale that there would have to be some doubling up. It is very rare in music to find a B# or an Fb because those notes are more commonly known as C and E. Strangely enough, Cb is still reasonable common whereas E# is not.
Nonetheless, I have never seen a musician trying to convince anyone that there are actually 24 different notes in an octave or that there are 24 available scales. Therefore it is inconceivable that anyone else could have seen such a thing and furthermore the claims that the fictitious musician’s claims are not true are not true.
QED.
February 7th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Being a reader of conspiracy sites, I would like to supplement sakul’s angry diatribe with some of the info that I have accrued over months of reading among the insane and interesting world of conspiracy theory, specifically what one would call the jewish conspiracy that sakul was speaking of.
Disclaimer:
I don’t know if any of the information I am presenting is true.
I don’t care if it is true, I am just reprinting what I have read.
Even if it is true I still don’t care, I am amazingly apathetic.
Many conspiracy theoriest beleive in what is often mislabled a “jewish conspiracy” while in reality they believe in a “zionist conspiracy”
Zionism is school of thought that Jewish people should have their own nation.
Not all Jews are zionist, and not all zionists are jews, many people accuse George W. and most of the presidents of the last half century of being zionists due to their support of israel. This is a major point of contention between the middle-east and the western world.
Holocaust deniers believe that around 500,000 jewish people died during the early 40s, as opposed to the 6 million that is accepted by mainstream history.
They site a red cross census done in 1938 and 1948 in which the number of jewish people in europe rises from like 8.6 million to like 9.4 million in ten years, or something like that. And claim that this makes the 6 million figure impossible.
They also claim that the red cross was allowed in the camps after 1942 to bring medical supplies in.
They claim that the Jewish Talmud gives Jewish people the right to do anything they would like to non-jewish people, as they are not considered to be human beings. (A very common theme in all monotheistic religious texts)
They claim that all of the movie studios in hollywood, except united artists, were started by jewish people.
They also claim that the 3 main media companies are owned by Jewish people.
And last but not least, they claim that there is no law against slavery in israel, only two guidelines, that anyone enslaved may not be jewish, and that anyone enslaved may not be from Israel.
Once again, I do not know if any of this is true. If anyone would like to do research into this and post it I would love that, but I am too lazy to do it my self.
I read these things for entertainment purposes, and am reposting them as such.
And whether they are true or not , although I am highly interested in knowing the validity of these things, I really dont care because it does not really affect me.
February 10th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
What about the Y2k “Hoax”
February 16th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Well… I think those schoolgirls were pretty clever to have fooled all those people with the fairies. (Although admittedly one can tell they are paper if one looks hard enough.) They got Arthur Conan Doyle with their hatpins and childrens book illustrations, you know!
March 5th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Sakul: A snap shot.
Probably an Iranian, Palistinian or Hamas terrorist.
Not very bright.
Very angry.
Somewhat disturbing.
Not a scientist (NO WAY).
Very gullible.
A bigoted liar.
May 5th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Wow That Book Of Morman Thing Is Racist Take It Off
May 5th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Religious Boyz911: Definition of Race: “Prejudice or discrimination based on an individual’s race” – the Book of Mormon thing is not racist.
May 10th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Jfrater: How do you even write these lists? I should think it’s almost a frightening task to write about religion and stuff especially, when so many people believe in what you write. It seems like it would be very easy to write something that’s wrong and have a few hundred people complaining about it.
What kind of sources do you use? Just the internet or books too?
May 17th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Mormon was the editor and compiler of the book, as Joseph Smith was the translator. Many different ancient prophets and seers recorded the different parts of the Book of Mormon. As the Bible has different authors for different books and epistles within it, so does the Book of Mormon.
John L. Hilton and his group have done detailed stylometic analyses of parts of the Book of Mormon “based on the somewhat surprising fact that every author studied thus far subconsciously uses sixty-five identifiable patterns, involving words like “and,” “the,” “of,” and “that,” at a statistically significant different rates from others.” (Welch, “Reexploring the Book of Mormon” pg. 221.)
This statistical analysis estimates the odds of one person writing the “Nephi” and “Alma” sections evaluated to be one in one thousand. Neither Joseph Smith nor any other single person could have written the Book of Mormon.
May 17th, 2008 at 11:47 am
*wikipedia*
The Book of Mormon witnesses are a group of contemporaries of Joseph Smith, Jr. who said they saw the golden plates from which Smith said he translated the Book of Mormon. The most significant witnesses are the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses, who each signed statements in 1830 included with the Book of Mormon.
here is the site
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_witnesses#Other_Witness
also note:
Apologists note that Harris and Cowdery later returned to the fellowship of the church. Additionally, it is widely cited by leaders of the LDS church that none of the witnesses ever denied their testimony as it was written in the Book of Mormon, or denied that Smith was a true prophet when he translated the book
May 17th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
i am not trying to “convert” anyone, just do proper research before you make your lists.
and the other thing you mentioned, that the Book of Mormon quotes the bible, well here’s why..
many sections in the Book of Mormon resemble Bible passages because many direct quotes are used. Just as much of the New Testament consists of citations from the Old, so the Book of Mormon writers regularly cite the ancient Hebrew scriptures. Lehi and the group that left Jerusalem in 600 B.C. carried with them a set of brass plates that contained many Old Testament writings, such as those of Moses and Isaiah, as well as some writings that have since been lost. These scriptures – especially Isaiah – are heavily quoted.
May 18th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I think i speak on every nice person in heres behalf when i say that we dont have anything personal against mormons, its just there book sounds really fake, i mean come on, some random guy meets an angel, rewrites this book off “golden” tablets with special glasses and then he doesn’t get to keep the evidence? please
PERSONALLY i dont believe in any religion, because theres no hard core proof the bible is the greatest story book of all time, no proof that jesus performed these awesome miracles, if these magical people trully existed then why aren’t there any today, no angel sitings,and such. The fact is that all this stuff makes great entertainment, they didnt have tv, computers, news networks or hot shot technology.
As for Sakul: you make me sick, not believing in the Holocaust, whats wrong with you, we have evidenc; pictures, eye witnesses, all sorts of stuff, if Hitler wasn’t killing the jews then wtf was with all “kill all the jews” and concentration camps, he wasn’t fucking hiding them in the siberian desert cuz he didn’t actually want to kill them.
June 5th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
You left out a neat bit of trivia about the Cardiff Giant. When P.T. Barnum learned that the thing was a hoax (and saw how monstrously successful the showings of the thing was), he coined one of the most famous sayings of all time – “There’s a sucker born every minute”.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Interesting list. I’d heard of most of these before, but not The Turk or the Priory of Sion. I did read The Da Vinci Code but can’t remember anything about the Priory – it wasn’t a particularly memorable book though.
July 24th, 2008 at 8:05 am
forget who is Jewish,or Mormon……….anyone ever read any background on the jesuits? they are responsible for forming the federal reserve,ww1,ww2,wtc,Titanic,JFK,etc……terrorists for Papal Rome…….who funded the bolsheviks to overthrow protastant Russia? American taxpayers,thru the federal reserve…..its the jesuits bank,to fund any and all forms of attacks on Americas morals…..before you scoff,do some background research………..
July 24th, 2008 at 10:14 am
crazygirl and Stephen (20,21)
As far as the big bang goes, it wasn’t some random huge explosion, it was the precise moment that energy became matter. That is a fascinating thing to contemplate. Read about fundamental particles and the Standard Model. The SM is the most precise mathematical formula ever.
July 24th, 2008 at 10:16 am
RE Sakul
People like this are scare me. Their thinking is toxic. I hope he never has children. I don’t think he posts here anymore (I am coming to this list very late). Was he blocked like S_R?
July 31st, 2008 at 11:35 am
This list was written by an idiot wasn’t it?
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:43 am
In relation to the comment posted regarding the map of Australia, (Anton – 18 [15]) I believe the reference is actually regarding the map of Tasmania, a state of Australia. It is Australian slang and if used in context would sound something like this – Crikey Shazza, put some clothes on, I can see your map of Tasmania!
August 20th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
I have read this thread and I have a comment.
My dad came home from WW2 with all these photos he had taken of various death camps he had been to while serving in the US military as it rolled across Europe in 1944. There were hundreds of photos of dead bodies piled 2 or 3 stories high. The soldiers took plenty of photos because they were told to record what they saw so the world would not forget. I know some holocaust survivors. This genocide of Jews and other people that the Nazis considered subhuman actually happened. There is no way this could be a hoax.
I was raised a Mormon and left the church as soon as I was old enough to choose, about 14. I agree that Smith made up just about all that he put into the Book of Mormon. But my point is that this does not make the LDS church a hoax. There are millions of people in this church, including some hundreds of my relatives and even though I do not agree that the BOM is historic or accurate I would say that these Mormons are some of the nicest and most generous people I know. Judge them by the fruits of their actions someone once said.
August 20th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
just a little background on me before i get started. I don’t believe in religion. It’s man made and has killed many people. I do how ever believe that jesus, son of god, died so that i can get into heaven. i am a spiritual person.
as far as the book of mormon: watch the southpark episode on mormans and that’s pretty much how i feel. “i don’t care if it’s true or not. I have a great life and a great family and i have the book of mormon to thank for that.”
I don’t know much about mormons so i’m not really one to say but that’s my two cents. I’m happy for those of you who are truley happy.
as far as the no god thing: obviously i feel very strongly about that. lack of proof doesn’t disprove something. that’s why it’s called faith. i have faith that god exists and loves me and all of the people on here that don’t believe.
again with the southpark (matt stone and trey parker are definatly two of the greatest modern phylosiphers) : “couldn’t evolution be the answer to how, not the answer to why” i took this statement as meaning that god may have created the first spark of life that eventually caused humanity. you may think i’m retarded but i don’t take the bible literraly. I believe it is a tool to help us live by. again i have faith and my faith isn’t blind, but i also know that not every thing always adds up. I have faith that when i die it will be explained to me.
i liked very much what rae (83) had to say about god. now i don’t want to be like all those confused “cristians” by saying that you’ll burn in hell if you don’t believe, but i will say this to the non-believers: i WILL go to heaven when i die, i will not rot in a box for all eternity(even though my body might).
on my final thought. everyone here has the right to their own opinions. you have the right to choose to believe in god or not. and mormons you have the right to believe this list or not. all i hope for humanity is that we can be civil in our disagreements.
August 20th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
another thing i should add is that if any of you had taken a simple statistics or speech class you would know how to search for CREDIBLE SOURCES. (MAINLY FOR SAKUL). unfortunatly i do agree that although most of wiki is for real it can be changed by anyone so it is therefor not credible. jfrater does a great job of recognizing the challenge of his sources and then producing more credible ones than wiki.
August 21st, 2008 at 7:24 am
all you are retarded
there is no god, its like believing in the tooth fairy
it doesnt matter if 50 000 000 people believe in the tooth fairy, does that mean she exists?
maybe there are 1 000 people who claim to have see her and to have gotten $5 from her under their pillow, and they can show you the evidence. that doesnt mean Sh*t, but in this world everyone is so inseccure and needs something to ‘believe’ in, so people latch onto anything. as they did thousands of years ago when a few men got together and decided they wanted people to follow them.
and yes, lack of evidence along with lack of logic DOES prove lack of existance. you can be nieve and cross your fingers and hope to find a higher meaning in life, but like everyone else you will live and die and all you will have to show for it is a nice funeral where people read from the same story book that u spend years believing in.
ps. science is the truth. anything not proved by science is theorized by science and will be proved in due time.
mormans and scientology are great people to have around… i enjoy the humour that they provide. keep up the good hoaxing guys
how about you all just take a little break from ur internet chats and have a life, instead of debating history, these debates will be going on long after you’re dead and your posts will soon be forgotten.
cheers
August 21st, 2008 at 7:25 am
i hope i didnt offend anyone
August 21st, 2008 at 7:38 am
i would put more faith in Dr. Seuse or R.L. Stine than i would put in Joseph Smith and the Morman community… and scientology is barely worth validifying in a discussion about religion, its more like a fan club
August 26th, 2008 at 3:07 am
Honestly, at a young age I was compelled to study theology. I am 21 years old and I have been a part of numerous religions. I have been baptist, catholic, morman, muslim, sufi, seventh day advent, ect ect. There are many more. But you get the idea.
I agree with jfrater, because his logic, AND evidence is sound. I have looked it up myself ages ago. Religion is a beast, and it will eat you alive if you let it. There is nothing wrong with unshakable faith, or belief in the unprovable. But you have to keep your own mind. Dont let them tell you what to believe. It will ring true to your heart, or it wont. Take your life in your own hands, dont lash out at people for not believing what you do. Religion has cost the world more lives than you can count.
August 26th, 2008 at 5:40 am
90. Peggy – October 26th, 2007 at 5:30 am
The Immaculate Conception.Like i said before,Mary was an unwedded,pregnant female.She would have been stoned to death.
Dear Peggy (Post #90) Do try to know what you are discussing before you post. The Immaculate Conception does not refer to the birth or conception of Christ. Accoridng to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church it refers to Mary’s birth. She was purported to be born without “Original Sin”. I personally would like to now how anybody could tell that!
August 26th, 2008 at 6:15 am
There is no God. How could you all be so arrogant as to believe that one human entity created the universe? Go to college. I can’t stand all the religious freaks out there, waving their hands toward the ceiling in cult-like gatherings every Sunday. What a waste of time, gas, money, and life. Religion is a crutch for the weak minded. “The devil” is a creation of ancient ego–to blame someone else for sinning.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:24 am
I enjoyed the article. I will do the research and draw my own conclusions.
For all of you who state that you KNOW the truth, I’d like to ask one thing of you. Have some respect for other people’s beliefs thoughts and opinions. We understand how you fee. You’ve made that perfectly clear. We want to believe in God. Let us. It shouldn’t matter to you that we have faith.
As for the Holocaust…I am stunned. I’ve always known that some people didn’t believe that it existed, but to see it argued was truly mind-boggling. Again…show some respect. If you choose to believe this horror didn’t occur, look at it as a way humanity polices itself. If we forget…it happens again. It makes me weep.
I’ll let you believe what you choose and you allow me the same right.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:55 am
People, people, people! Why are you all so hopped up to get everyone on the planet to believe your individual beliefs, and regardless of where you get your “facts”, they are mostly just beliefs. Yes, there is evidence that the Big Bang and evolution are real, but what I don’t understand is why religions can’t accept those methods as being of God, too. How do we know how Deity did anything or why or how long it took? Not one of us was there.
Why is it so necessary for atheists to “proclaim” there is no God to assuage their own faith or lack thereof? Why does somebody else’s belief in Deity make them so uncomfortable or even angry? Chill! As you are entitled to your opinion, so are they. This is why people kill in the name of religion, not in the name of faith. “Do as I do,” seems to be the most common creed.
As far as the Holocaust, moon landing, etc. goes, why do the facts that these things happened frighten some of you? Learn and move on. I know and love many Jews and quite frankly, the only conspiracy I see is against them!
Live and let live. Mind your own nose. Believe what you will. The pagans have a credo, “An you harm none (including yourself) do what you will.”
I have found this discussion to be largely entertaining and quite a bit frightening, so I am going to follow my own advice. Live long and prosper, and don’t get bent out of shape if your neighbor seems to be doing a bit better than you. Use his success as inspiration, not a motive for fear, envy, etc.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:34 am
“There is no God. How could you all be so arrogant as to believe that one human entity created the universe? Go to college. I can’t stand all the religious freaks out there, waving their hands toward the ceiling in cult-like gatherings every Sunday. What a waste of time, gas, money, and life. Religion is a crutch for the weak minded. “The devil” is a creation of ancient ego–to blame someone else for sinning”
What if you are wrong?
August 27th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Peggy: The term Immaculate Conception is a proper noun which refers to Mary herself. This is what she called herself in her apparition to St. Bernadette, at Lourdes. This event sent some of the great minds in the Church reeling and they intellectualized a lot of doctrine since; which you can read all about, if you care to. Jfrater: I really enjoyed this list. I had forgotten about the Mechanical Turk. Boy, Amazon sure named their work forum right! Also, I was surprised and thrilled to see The Book of Mormon right were it belongs, but shouldn’t “New Coke” be in the list, too? Thank you for the entertainment. Now everybody sing…Moroni boboni banana fana so phony…
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:56 am
1> My Grandfather served in WW2 in the USArmy. He saw the camps. He ain’t Jewish, in fact he has some very interesting pre-war stories about the Jews that lived in the area(American South(ie Not Pro-Jew)) when he was a child. Holocaust a hoax, I don’t think so, unless you are a Neo-Nazi. Yeah, he told about German POWs, Regular Army, no problem, SS/NAZIs-Fanatics would not be taken alive. Just like those who call the Holocaust a hoax.
2> The Book of Mormon. Like all cults, they don’t tell you the “Story” of the Books discovery until you are so deep you don’t know what is going on. Read the story of it’s discovery, without the enticing hooks(multiple, servile wives/concubines, large family oriented organization) and it would be dismissed out of hand.
3> It’s going to be pretty difficult to Scientifically “PROVE” the Big Bang. Any experiment on that scale(note: I am not talking about deconstructing a quark or two) has the potential to supplant this universe. And then the experiment has to be sufficiently repeated, supplanting that new universe, which would have no knowledge of this universe) I suppose God could be a survivor of a previous universe-Slideresque. Anyway there are scriptures that refer to God as the Source of Dynamic Power. Look up the word Dynamic sometime, especially considering the Bible was given to a group of Nomadic sheepherders. I don’t think explanations of modern scale would have really resonated with them. Besides the LAW of Conservation of Energy and Mass would be violated from a sudden explosion of matter and energy from nothing. How God did it, maybe the Unified Theory may have something to it, the unified force-God’s Holy Spirit.
Yes The Tirades may begin.
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:07 pm
St. Michael, consider for a moment, if YOU are wrong. You are kind of Frakked. Been to college. Fortunately, I took away from it to analyze many points of view, and to play the Devil’s Advocate now and again, oh wait, can’t use the word Devil. Sorry.
September 22nd, 2008 at 2:09 pm
mormanism was concocted less than 200 yrs ago. that alone is suspicious. add in the details and its quite unbelievable. human beings can be made to believe almost anything with enough guilt and childhood indoctrination. all religions are a stretch but mormanism in particular is ludacris. people never cease to amaze
September 24th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
’shopped.
October 16th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Anyone who is looking for quantifiable facts should check out a scholarly periodical not the internet.
Regarding (1) the, “Book of Morman” many independent studies have made it the focus of great scrutiny. People have been looking into its origin since its first publication in 1830. From everything I have read scholars who don’t believe the book was divinely inspired are baffled that an indigent uneducated young man could have known so much about middle eastern culture, mesoamerican architecture, hebrew & egyptian linguistics, to write a 500 page book of scripture, using at least 14 different pseudonyms each with their own unique prose/idiosyncrasies. Regardless of your thoughts on the LDS church, you can’t deny that it is pretty amazing that for 178 years myriads of the academic elite have sought to discredit the book and failed.
October 16th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Is There A Supreme Being?
Science slaps Atheists in the face!
I borrow part of my argument from Emanuel Kant.
Science teaches us the law we call, “Entropy”. Thanks to Chinua Achebe and some time logged on this sphere we know that, “Things fall apart.” Everything is seeking the path/point of least resistance. All electrons are seeking a vacancy in the lowest orbital.
Science gives us the law of, “the conservation of matter”. Matter has always (Infinity) existed and can’t be destroyed, only changed.
Now for the argument:
If there was no power or God stirring things up by pumping energy back into the system via heat, light, stars, bangs (big or small) our universe and all others would have already reached a thermal equilibrium. The lowest form of energy is heat. We should be at absolute zero or approaching the elusive asymptote.
Interesting how the Sun is the only thing that counters entropy and is the source of all light. It is similarly interesting Christians believe that the Son of God is the only thing that counters sin. Funny little homonym.
October 16th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
The Book of Morman is another testament of Jesus Christ.
It has brought me closer to him and makes me want to be more like him.
It makes me want to treat people the way he did.
To shun discord and treat others with love.
-Ryan Stowell
November 1st, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Hmmm what about the Beatles hoax that Paul had died?
November 11th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
the zinoviev letter – possibly had a significant impact on 1920s british politics, resulting in the labour party losing the election on the day of its publication
November 12th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Not wanting to interrupt the stellar debate on religion, I would like to add The Amityville Hoax. It has been proven the family made up the stuff that happened to them for what ever reason. The most common reason given is because they were financially in over their heads and needed to get out of their house payments. What better way than to flee the house in fear? I know many people believe Amity to be real but if you go to snopes.com you can read all about it.
Now.. back to your regularly scheduled debate on religion….
January 3rd, 2009 at 1:56 am
Hey, happy new year guys and gals. Hope everyone is greatful for seeing another 52 weeks, which isn’t an easy task by any means. Now, just for the fun of it, here’s a little challenge for those who care to except it. Create something. Anything. Anywhere. Go on. An ant. A spider. A cockroach. You know, something small like that. I’ll be patient and wait a while. Maybe I’ll even wait a year. Or a decade. Or a century. Because, in case you scholarly types didn’t know this, humans don’t “create” a damned thing. We “take”, “use” “construct”, “m-a-n-u-f-ac-t-u-r-e” what was put here “by design” for us to survive on. And just for the record, for all the Mensa wanna be’s out here, here’s a clue: energy can’t be created or destroyed. So where the hell did it come from? Science, as great as it is, is man’s tiny, small way of understanding something that The Creator “created” with the back of his cosmic hand. But, hey, don’t believe in anything other than man’s own greatness. We’ve done a bang up job on earth these twenty thousand years or so. We really, really have. Peace.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:19 am
Would just like to take a moment to point out Australia’s shape is in no way comical or shaped like a part of the anatomy, and Tasmania is just a triangle…
Also a big solid LOL to the debate over Mormons, Zionists and Jewish Conspiriacies. Some people have way too much time on their hands. It’s a list on a website. Chill the Fuck Out.
-
Sam
January 18th, 2009 at 7:16 am
We might not know what caused the big bang but ill prove its stupid to say god did it. Two simple equations below
Science’s View
Unknown cause of big bang=Big bang=creation of universe
Religious view
Unknown cause of god=god causes big bang=Big bang=creation of universe
How does a god make it have no loose ends if there is a god who created him if there isn’t what created big bang there is still an unanswered question no matter what happened!!!
February 2nd, 2009 at 5:11 am
about sceintists
February 19th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
PC, I’m an engineering major and your equations aren’t technically correct. One does not equal to the other, its a cause and effect thing. The big bang, as given by scientists, cannot come after the creation of the universe, nor before the unknown cause of the big bang. The same logic goes with your “equation” on religion. You need to use arrows, which would denote a cause and effect relationship. Though technically they are still equations. Also, you didn’t really give a good reason for God causing the big bang to be idiotic. Either way, if God was the cause, or if humanity did make Him up, there is an unknown and at the moment unquantifiable thing that did. Sorry for the rant, but if you are going to say people are stupid for faith, give a clear concrete reason. Don’t just say they are. That would be like me saying you are stupid for not believing in God. Have more respect for your fellow man for that. We all have inconsistencies in our logic, understand that and you will be a much happier person.
February 21st, 2009 at 7:15 am
WOW. A lot of people arguing here. Thats good, sometimes. Just to let you know, I don’t really care, because I think we don’t really exist, but I still believe in God. How messed up is that?
March 9th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
what about the orson welles war of the worlds radio broacast in the thirties
March 24th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
your bible is a hoax
jesus is a hoax
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com
http://www.godisimaginary.com
http://www.whywontgodhealamuptees.com
March 31st, 2009 at 11:48 am
As a believer in the Book of Mormon, allow me address you three criticisms.
1- The book contains verses that are copied.
The Book of Mormon begins in 600 AD, after much of the old testament had been writing. Book of Mormon writers reference the Old Testament the same way the Gospel writers in the New Testament do. Just because Mathew quotes extensively from the Psalms doesn’t mean it’s not an original text.
Further more, the short section you sited from the New Testament isn’t exactly proof of plagiarizing either. I think it’s not unlikely that two religious writers came up with the sentence ‘go into the world and baptize the believers.’
2- Linguistic experts have stated that the entire book is written by one man.
I’d love to read the research of these linguistic experts. Here is a study of experts that says the opposite is true:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon_wordprint_studies
3- Animals
There are several possibilities regarding these animals:
A) Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. Just because there isn’t current proof that these things were there doesn’t mean they didn’t exists 2000 years ago. Many elements that are in the Book of Mormon and were conventionally thought to not exist in the Americas have since been proven that they in fact were there.
B) Translation. The Book of Mormon says that it’s a translation. It is possible that the words that are translated as a specific animal or grain was a native grain that has since been lost. The closest thing we would know is the English word that was chosen.
I realize there are critics of the Book of Mormon, but it hardly has been conclusively proven as a hoax.
March 31st, 2009 at 11:48 am
Edit … 600 BC
March 31st, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Pretty funny that people who still believe the Book of Mormon hoax would post here.
But here’s a response to G anyways.
1- The book copies the King James Version of the bible, complete with it’s translation errors, which did not exist in 600BC.
2- Try not to use apologists for a source to prove something, it only helps to prove that there are still deluded folks out there.
3-a) That’s a catchy phrase, but pretty meaningless. Under that premise, nothing can ever be proven false.
And no, many elements that are in the Book of Mormon have not been found in the Americas.
b) Translation errors do not account for stories of a civilization of millions which left no evidence that it had ever existed. I mean other than non-existant plates of gold that dissapeared.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:12 pm
So the Book of Mormon is a “hoax” because some other book ended up in a museum in New York?
Let me guess. Logic wasn’t your best subject in school?
March 31st, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Thanks for sharing your perspective. I’m not saying you have to believe me. I just don’t think the evidence you present is strong as you think you it is.
1- I feel like you’re overstating the amount of Book of Mormon verses that quote from the Bible. If you read the book you will find that most of it is original writing, but it does reference other scripture (much like the new testament). You can read what Mormons think of your translation error assertion here http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/bom_plagerize_kjv.htm
2- Who is allowed to speak and research the Book of Mormon, then? Only the people who fanatically believe it’s a hoax? They dumped the text into a computer and ran word-pattern test … it’s pretty standard stuff. Also at least I posted a LINK to the study i referenced. Maybe we should criticize people who make arguments without sources before we start labeling people as apologists?
3- No. You can prove things false … as long as you have the proof that they actually false.
I just want you to accept that it’s a little egotistical to think that you know EVERYTHING that EVER existed on the American continent. Also, it’s funny how scientists *know* so much about archeology, until they find something that changes what they know.
There is evidence of ancient civilizations that existed on the continent at the time the book of Mormon says they should be there. Is that 100% solid evidence that the book is true? No.
You can say it’s convenient, but a lot of the civilization describes in the book destroys it self a good 1000 years before Columbus arrives.
Oh, and finally, yes, the plates are not here for you to see and touch, but there have been a couple recent discovers of ancient writing on metal plates (like biblical scripture or legal documents). Again, it doesn’t prove the Book of Mormon to be true, but I hope all those people who used to say that no evidence exists that ancient legal documents were written on metal plates find it interesting. You can read more about that here (or you can blow it off as apologist, your call).
http://romanplates.byu.edu/about/what_significance.html
March 31st, 2009 at 2:45 pm
I think the best hoax of the Book of Mormon is the original title page.
http://byustudies.byu.edu/januarybomcharts/charts/165.html
“authored by”
and the fact that:
“There is evidence of ancient civilizations that existed on the continent at the time the book of Mormon says they should be there”
overlooks the fact that they aren’t the civilzations that the Book of Mormon talks about.
March 31st, 2009 at 2:54 pm
“I feel like you’re overstating the amount of Book of Mormon verses that quote from the Bible. If you read the book you will find that most of it is original writing, but it does reference other scripture (much like the new testament). You can read what Mormons think of your translation error assertion here ”
You’re not understanding the problem. It’s not that it quotes the old testament(although it does quote parts of Isaiah that were written after 600BC), it’s that it has translation errors that are in the King James edition that are only there because it used the Septuagint. The errors would only make sense if Joseph Smith had translated the old testament into Greek, then into English.
“Oh, and finally, yes, the plates are not here for you to see and touch, but there have been a couple recent discovers of ancient writing on metal plates (like biblical scripture or legal documents).”
Unless you find evidence that this process was used in North America, this is just noise.
Keep believing your fantasy, but excuse the rest of reality when they laugh at your expense.
March 31st, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Wow. You should probably read what you link to before you post it. It might help you from posting links that completely undercut your argument.
From the text below the image:
“he named himself the ‘author and proprietor’ consistent with federal law only to secure a copyright for the Book of Mormon, thus making illegal any alteration of text by those who do not hold the copyright.”
Here are some more details on the copyright law
http://byustudies.byu.edu/januarybomcharts/charts/167.html
I’m sorry? Did I say that there was definitive proof that those civilizations were the one that the Book of Mormon talks about?
I didn’t over look anything … i also didn’t overstate anything, either … that makes for a poor argument. (It’s like finding one verse that’s quoted from the Bible in a book and then arguing that the whole book only quotes from the Bible).
March 31st, 2009 at 3:08 pm
You didn’t read the explanation. It’s not as simple as you think:
(from the link you probably didn’t read)
“These variants find support in other Biblical texts and cannot be explained by slavish copying of the King James Version nor by random guesswork from Joseph Smith.”
Some of the text is from the King James (understandable since that’s what Joseph Smith grew up reading). When he translated verses in the book of Mormon that also quoted the Bible some of the king james language he as familiar with was used, but like i said, it’s not that simple. The text isn’t verbatim and in fact the book of mormon’s translation has been shows to be consistent with other ancient biblical sources.
“Unless you find evidence that this process was used in North America, this is just noise.”
Yes. Evidence of this process in North America would be stronger evidence. The Book of Mormon says their people came from the middle-east, so I would be so quick to dismiss the fact that there is evidence that people wrote legal records on metal plates.
First people go from saying the golden plates must be a hoax because there’s NO EVIDENCE ANYWHERE of writing on gold plates … and once evidence of ancient legal writing on metal plates turns up … well, then, it has to be hoax because there’s no evidence in NORTH AMERICA of ancient legal writing on metal plates.
March 31st, 2009 at 3:10 pm
edit: middle-east, so I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss
March 31st, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Oh, also, since your so big on biblical translation error, how do you explain the parts of the Book of Mormon where a bible verse actually quotes the ancient sources correctly?
(again from the link you didn’t read)
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/bom_plagerize_kjv.htm
One important example involves Matthew 5:22, which reads (KJV) “Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment.” The Book of Mormon version lacks the troublesome phrase “without a cause.” Likewise, many early New Testament manuscripts lack that phrase.
How do you explain 2 Nephi 12, which quotes Isaiah 2. Verse 16 in the King James version says that the day of the Lord will be “upon all the ships of Tarshish.” The Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament says that it would be upon the “ships of the sea” but does not mention the ships of Tarshish. The Book of Mormon version has both phrases: “upon all the ships of the sea, and upon all the ships of Tarshish….”?
March 31st, 2009 at 6:59 pm
How do I explain the quote from 2 Nephi 12? Simple, Smith was making it up as he went along, a bit of Isaiah here and a bit of Smith here.
After all, whatever he didn’t plagiarise from the Bible, he made up. Or are you saying that *any* Book of Mormon artefact or site has ever been identified. And if so – name it
I know – they’ve identified the White Lamanite Zelph? or they’ve discovered the Kinderhook plates were genuine?
Writing on metal plates proves that some people, somewhere wrote on metal plates. It does nothing to prove that the Book of Mormon was so written.
March 31st, 2009 at 8:26 pm
He guessed? Thats it? He guessed and added exaclty the phrase that was in the septuigant but not in the KJV? He guessed and dropped exactly the phrase that is the KJV but not supported by original texts? That’s some pretty good guessing.
This posts claims that the book is a definative hoax and despite the lack of the lack of universally accepted geographic evidence, it looks to me that the ‘proof’ offered here that the book is a hoax is no better.
March 31st, 2009 at 9:55 pm
G,
What it comes down to is that any scholarly source that is not apologetic, will come down on the side that it is a hoax. If you can come up with one, link to it.
Nothing can explain why there are quotes from the Book of Isaiah that were written after 600 BC. Nothing can explain how there are quotes from the King James New Testament. Period.
By your definition of hoax, nothing here could be a hoax, because someone believes it. You’ve been duped by a treasure-seeking con artist who used religion to marry 14-year-old women. If you have non-mormon scholarly source, then bring them on. Otherwise you’re just making yourself look more deluded than before.
April 1st, 2009 at 6:57 am
-I’m interested to learn how Isaiah was still writing the Book of Isaiah 100 years after he died. Here’s another one my apologetic, Mormon sources for you to dismiss:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Isaiah.html
-You’re right. For a person who refuses to read any explanation, there is no explanation.
-I didn’t say that. You can prove things are a hoax (like many of the other things on this list), but in this case the burden of proof is on you. You are trying to PROVE that the Book of Mormon is a hoax. You haven’t.
April 1st, 2009 at 7:41 am
Isaiah was written by more than one person. Since you’ve posted that experts can prove that more than one person wrote a book, lets defer this one to the experts as well.
http://www.answers.com/topic/isaiah-
“The Book of Isaiah is generally regarded as two works combined under one name. First Isaiah (or Isaiah I), chapters 1-39, written in the late 8th century B.C. focuses primarily on prophecies of woe to Judah. Second Isaiah (or Deutero Isaiah), composed of Isaiah chapters 40-66, dates from the early post-exilic period, and, in contrast to Isaiah chapters 1-39, presents prophecies of weal and consolation.”
“The author of chapters 40-66 is unknown, but is clearly not identical with the writer of the first 39 chapters. Historical background, prophecies and theological perspective all point to a different author.
The historical background of Isaiah chapters 40-55 is reflected in references to the victorious Babylonians (Chaldeans) who did not rise to power until 605 B.C., and to their demise which took place in 538 (cf Is 43:14; chaps. 46-47; esp. 47:1-3); the Israelites have been conquered, their Temple is in ruins but will be rebuilt (44:24-28) and they are to return from captivity in Babylon (48:20). All of this points to events which occurred after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.c. There are two references to Cyrus, king of Persia (44:28; 45:1) who defeated the Babylonians in 539 and allowed the Israelites to return to their homeland and rebuild their Temple. This indicates that the author’s historical frame of reference was the early post-exilic period.”
Wait, oh no. In “this” case, if the experts are right, your whole premise falls apart, so I guess you’ll have to go against the experts in this case. That’s the basis of apologetics. Assume that your case is true, and then accept only information that is in support of your position.
From your last post:
“I didn’t say that. You can prove things are a hoax (like many of the other things on this list), but in this case the burden of proof is on you. You are trying to PROVE that the Book of Mormon is a hoax. You haven’t.”
Tell me then, what evidence would prove that the Book of Mormon is false? Given that there is no evidence to support it, what else would be needed to prove that this civilization did not exist?
April 1st, 2009 at 8:50 am
The support for assuming that the last chapters of Isaiah were written after 600 BC is that Isaiah (or whoever wrote it) referred to events that hadn’t happened yet, and also referred to a person (Cyrus) that hadn’t been born yet. The assumption is that Isaiah (or whoever) could not have known these details unless they had already happened. With that assumption, let me give you a much easier way to disprove the Book of Mormon. The first prophet, Nephi prophesied of Jesus by name almost 600 years before his birth. Their is also a prophecy in the Book of Mormon from Joseph (son of Jacob or Israel) about Moses, again by name.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:00 am
“That’s the basis of apologetics. Assume that your case is true, and then accept only information that is in support of your position.”
How is that different from what you’re doing? I mean, if you’re going to start with the premise “Given that there is no evidence to support it” … I don’t see how your so far above the fray on this.
Like the KJV quotations, I just don’t think your Isaiah premise is as strong as you think it is.
If you read through what’s there, your own link says things like “One of the most critically debated issues in Isaiah is the proposition that it may have been the work of more than a single author.” and “These and other considerations have led most modern critical scholars to conclude that the book of Isaiah, in its present form, is the result of an extensive editing process.”
All of Isaiah is not quoted verbatim in the Book of Mormon. If most modern critical scholars conclude that the book is the result of heavy editing over a long period of time, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to me to believe the sections quoted were written before 600 BC.
Interestingly, the Book of Mormon never quotes from anything after Isaiah 55, verse 2.
http://byustudies.byu.edu/januarybomcharts/charts/97.html
April 1st, 2009 at 9:20 am
“Interestingly, the Book of Mormon never quotes from anything after Isaiah 55, verse 2.”
Actually, the Book of Mormon quotes at least one entire chapter of Malachi.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:23 am
Again, given that there is NO evidence in support of the book of mormon, what would you require as evidence that it is not the truth? If you can’t answer that question, then you’re showing that you are not following the evidence.
You’ve shown that you won’t believe the experts who say that the book of Isaiah was written by more than one person because that contradicts your view.
You will believe your apologetic experts who say that the Book of Mormon was written by more than one person because that supports your view.
What evidence would prove to you that it is a hoax? That’s a very simple question.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:29 am
You are correct Malachi. I could have been more clear about what i meant. I should have said:
The Book of Mormon never quotes from anything *from Isaiah* after Isaiah 55, verse 2.
The quotation of Malachi is (like the verses similar to Mathew) purported to be delivered by the resurrected Jesus. Believers in the Book of Mormon would tell you that since Jesus delivered those words to Malachi and Mathew, he could have said them also to the people in America. Critics will take issue with that I’m sure, and they’re free to do so.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:34 am
“Interestingly, the Book of Mormon never quotes from anything after Isaiah 55, verse 2.”
Interestingly, all the Chapters of Isaiah after book 39 were written after 600BC.
Again, you fail to answer the question of what evidence would prove that it is a hoax to you.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:46 am
Stop putting words in my mouth.
I reject your premise that no evidence exists in support of the Book of Mormon.
I didn’t say I don’t believe the experts. I just asked you to read what they actually say, which is that the book was probably written and edited over a long period of time … much of which was before 600 BC. Just because some of Isaiah was written after doesn’t mean that all of it was. Also, I asked you to look at what is actually quoted rather than assuming the Book of Mormon quote the whole the book of Isaiah, and then concluding that since some of Isaiah was written after it is 100% conclusive proof that the Book of Mormon is a hoax.
I think the experts who say the Book of Mormon was written by more than person’s study was interesting because I’ve actually read it! You’re the one who is dismissing evidence simply because it was written by someone who doesn’t support your view.
Uh, that questions not that simple. How am supposed to know what evidence you’re supposed to discover that will convince me (or anyone else) that the Book of Mormon is definitively a hoax? What evidence will prove the Bible is a hoax? Are you looking for a stone box in Jerusalem that says “Jesus didn’t live here”. I’m sorry you don’t understand the difference between critique and proof.
Let me leave you with this to consider:
“Many things mentioned in the book still have not been verified archaeologically, but this was true just a few years ago for some items just reviewed. The trend over the last 50 years is one of convergence between the Book of Mormon and Mesoamerican archaeology. Book of Mormon claims remain unaltered since 1830, so all the accommodation has been on the archaeology side. If the book were fiction, this convergence would not be happening. We can expect more evidence in coming years.”
http://farms.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=14&num=2&id=376
Really, you should read the whole talk, but since your an apologists who rejects things that don’t agree with your premise before you read them, i suppose reading something is a lot to expect.
April 1st, 2009 at 2:29 pm
” Just because some of Isaiah was written after doesn’t mean that all of it was.”
Again, the chapters 40-66 were written afterwards according to scholars. That’s the conclusion.
What is also funny to note is that Joseph Smith mixes up the names Isaiah(old testament), and Esaiah(new testament reference to the same guy) which is just the Greek translation of the name Isaiah. Joseph Smith lists them as separate prophets in the Book of Mormon.
“Uh, that questions not that simple. How am supposed to know what evidence you’re supposed to discover that will convince me (or anyone else) that the Book of Mormon is definitively a hoax?”
What it boils down to, is that you believe that it is true without any(read ZERO) evidence to support it. Therefore there is nothing that can prove it wrong to you.
“Really, you should read the whole talk, but since your an apologists who rejects things that don’t agree with your premise before you read them, i suppose reading something is a lot to expect”
Here is an excerpt from the article:
“Let us consider the anti-Mormon position first. If Joseph Smith made the book up, then its peoples did not exist, its events did not happen, and there should be no trace of them anywhere. If, after a reasonable period of diligent searching, material evidence is not found, then the Book of Mormon would be shown to be imaginary, and by implication Joseph Smith would be exposed as a liar and the church he founded unveiled as a hoax. ”
After almost 200 years of searching, not one artifact of any of the cities/civilizations listed in the book of mormon have been found. How long is reasonable to you? Oh, that’s right, you don’t require any evidence, therefore no time is reasonable.
April 1st, 2009 at 3:15 pm
“Again, the chapters 40-66 were written afterwards according to scholars. That’s the conclusion.”
I think conclusion is too strong of a word. See comment 182 about their assumption, which is false. Also, see comment 125 if you want some evidence. You’re willing to take these scholars’ ‘conclusion’, but completely dismiss the fact that several people saw and touched the original book.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Of COURSE the Book of Mormon is a hoax. No way in hell did some angel bury golden plates and thousands of years later a farm boy digs them up, translates them by hiding his head in a hat and then some mysterious angel takes them back to heaven. What a bunch of shit. Hoax. The millions of members are idiots to believe such a hoax.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:48 pm
you know so many people here have to have something in their own hand and they will still yet deny that it is there so all of these arguments on this are based upon your ideals and opinions even these “experts” its all just opinion and ideas thats what a majority of science is based on but because they have the title of Expert you believe what they have to say in that context if God went by the title of expert of the earth or in earth studies or to that extent would it be easier for you to believe that evolution is a flawed attempt to explain why we are here of course he isn’t going to just say oh here i am do as i say its for us to learn and become as good and the best that we can be but rather then having a “open mind” like so many proud themselves on claiming you shut out the possibility that it may not be what the “Experts” say and that there is a whole lot more and i am sure there will be a lot of negative comments about this because when you bring stuff up that are like this people have to rip it apart and i mean its a good sign of the quality of the person and it shows their true self and i will never look at this site again so it wouldn’t bother me
May 1st, 2009 at 9:17 pm
I am mormon and probably way out of my league in this debate. Why are people so concerned with others beliefs? Why couldn’t Joseph Smith see God and revelation… doesn’t the pope claim this too? Why can’t God try to reach people through inspiration? Experts say this, experts say that… I couldn’t care less. So the BOM is a hoax… why does it concern you… it teaches good just like the Bible. I have found evidence on my own to support my belief. And people want evidence of my religion… what is faith for then? The world has been caught up in “prove this or explain that”. Why does man have to know everything, faith isn’t enough anymore? I haven’t been brainwashed into thinking this way, I go to school I drink i have raised hell just like any other teen. I have found that the LDS church, for myself, is the right. But it shouldn’t be a matter of who is right and who is wrong, every person should be judged on their character. And the point of “there is no God” is sad. Because when all is said and done, no matter how rough things have been… I can confide and believe in something. Just knowing there is more after death is comforting. I am not a spiritual person, just got back from a Hollywood Undead Concert! But I know the difference between a normal person who strives to make it and a broken soul who has to find fault in everything. Word.
May 2nd, 2009 at 9:02 am
I support JFunk on this. He/She has a point. Stop concerning about others and focus on yourself. Who made you people in charge to judge someones beliefs or thinking?
May 6th, 2009 at 9:09 am
“The priory recently gained interest again (despite easily obtainable proof that it is a fake) through the publication of the book The Davinci Code which the author, Dan Brown, claims to be fact (proving that he lied outright about his alleged years of research for the book). ”
Dude, the fook is listed under fiction. did you REALLY have to go there? the book is not completely based on fact, but more or less based on this other book i think it’s called the holy blood the holy grail…
either way, the comment is totally unnecessary
May 12th, 2009 at 8:10 am
A hoax is when someone tries to get someone else to believe in something by providing half truths or just plain makes up evidence. This is clearly what has been done in this post. It is both irresponsible and disrespectful. Add you own article to the list of hoaxes.
May 12th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Ok, as far as religion goes, and I mean ANY!! religion. Religion was formed to simply divide people so people in power can maintain control over the masses. Why do you think there are so many different religions? Religion has caused more death and suffering in the anals of history than any other single entity. God? Invisible man in the sky?? Yea, and Humpty Dumpty can’t be put back together again. That’s because there is no God. Not now, not ever.
May 12th, 2009 at 10:48 am
G, JFunk: It never ceases to amaze me how people will fight to disprove something – in this case, a book…yet never take the time to read the book and truly investigate for themselves. People, in general, are quick to form opinions based on heresay or popular opinion – just because their case appears in print or WikiPedia, they take it as fact. How sad. We sit at the feast while they are content with saltenes.
May 12th, 2009 at 11:00 am
they forgot god and angels and satan and hell
May 12th, 2009 at 11:00 am
they forgot god and angels and satan and hell
May 12th, 2009 at 11:10 am
This list is OBVIOUSLY A HOAX ITSELF.
May 12th, 2009 at 11:50 am
General Isenhower was correct when he had Pictures taken of concentration camps and said “because some day some one will say this never happened”.
May 12th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Sorry for the spelling, been up all night.
May 12th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
You forgot one myth. The myth that people are born homosexual and the gay agenda. That is a modern day huge hoax.
May 12th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Hoax #11 is the list entitled the Top 10 Famous Hoaxes. It really brings the wackos out of the woodwork. I think that the list of #11-17 puts it all in perspective. Jfrater, get off of your soap box!!
May 12th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
lol-as a former scientologist, a dweller amonst Mormons and a born-again Christian I must say the religious debate is interesting. I will only add that unless the infinite communicates with the finite, how would the finite ever know the infinite exists? and can the finite ever know anything but boundaries?
May 12th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
As I sit here and read all of your posts, I cannot help myself feelin a bit in disbelief. How is is every time someone even mentions the word religion it has to stir a pointless debate. POINTLESS. One is not going to believe what the other says merely on words or meaningless links alone. Don’t you people remember ANY of ALL the wars and countless lives that have been claimed and sacrificed in the name of “God”? If there is a God, I am sure that he weeps for all of our small minded behaviors.
May 12th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
What about Y2K?
May 12th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Hey gurney200 fuck you. I was trying to put my thoughts in a way that people would understand where I was coming from. I had a conversation with a lawyer who said the truth is often found where the most persacution is. The LDS is one of the most scrutenized religions out there. Its not the people that don’t believe in my religion that offend me; it is the assholes that no nothing about it or understand it and act high and mighty. (sorry bad spelling).
May 13th, 2009 at 9:40 am
dance puppets dance
May 13th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Let me first introduce myself: I am a former LDS member. I did complete and graduate seminary. I grew up in the church, and many of my family members and even some of my friends are still active in the church. I have no problem with that fact. It is what it is.
When I was about 16, I started asking questions of my religious leaders. Very difficult questions… Questions they either could not or would not answer. Questions that seemed too important for me to ignore. I’m not going to go into detail on all of these, because it would just take too long. But there are a few major fallacies of Mormon doctrine that I take serious issue with. Note: This does NOT mean that I have anything against the religion, or its followers. It simply means that there are things that in my mind do not make any sense, are amoral and against their own doctrine, or are historically inept/inaccurate.
Probably the biggest problem for me, as a young man looking to expand my intellectual (and spiritual) horizons, was the issue of the Priesthood. This has been discussed ad nauseam by countless haters, non-believers, apologists and so on. But I think it comes down to basic decency, which had to be forced in this case…
The idea that black people were the direct descendants of Cain, and therefore “marked” with their color, and unworthy of holding the priesthood. If this were true, then how would one explain all of the other types of ethnicity that currently (and historically) inhabit the Earth? Were the Asians somehow linked to some Satanic misdeed?
What really bothered me about the situation, though, was the absolute lack of integrity. If you TRULY believe that Africans are the descendants of Cain and somehow unclean as a result of it, that’s fine. You’re entitled to your racist views. However, the LDS church did not alter their stance on holding the priesthood until threatened with class-action litigation. Integrity? Sticking to one’s beliefs no matter the cost? I think not.
I take serious issue with any racist views, especially those based on what was probably nothing more than metaphor/parable. I take an even greater issue with revising those racist policies because it is no longer politically viable to cling to them. The legal action commences and then all of a sudden God speaks to the “prophet” and says, “Oh, nevermind about the blacks holding the priesthood thing. My bad. You can do a 180 on that now”.
Sorry, but that just stinks of hypocrisy and blind ignorance, not to mention arrogance.
While we may not be able to definitively prove any of these things (or disprove for that matter), I’m a person who likes to hear all sides and then make up my own mind. After all that I’ve seen and witnessed with regards to the BoM (and yes, I’ve read it thoroughly several times), I’m inclined to take it as a guidebook of principles as opposed to historical FACT.
In closing, I believe the LDS church teaches many valuable lessons and most members’ hearts are in the right place. I simply reached a point where reason prevailed over wishful thinking.
May 13th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Uh didn’t the catholic church do a 180 spin on if a baby wasn’t baptized it would go to hell or limbo?
May 13th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Clyde has a mangina.
Honestly I just wanted to see what people thought of LDS church. I don’t really care I am just bored. And some of this information has been helpful. We can go on about how it is true or it isn’t but get nowhere. Nothing good ever comes from fighting about religion. Even if the LDS church is false I really wouldn’t have a problem with it. It has changed and helped people for the better. It keeps me a good person as do most religions. I love what it has taught me and I see good in it.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Clyde is right though this is nothing more than the worlds way of getting us all to turn on each other. Good things do come from religion yet so do evil things like war and muder. we are just puppets on strings just being controled by a higher figure. the strings control us all
May 17th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
It is very hard to re-shape certain beliefs, especially after many years of practice. With that said, it is hard to believe that anyone can say there is little or no proof of a ‘big bang.’
If you study the formation of the universe from a ’scientific’ point of view, you will see there are many facts that support this theory. The only facts that support accounts such as the book of mormon, are stories and word of mouth tales that are based more on hearsay than on actual facts.
It is great to have ‘faith’ in something you believe, but to turn your back on science in this world is a mistake.
June 14th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
normally i read all the comments before making my own, however, the ignorant rantings of sakul have me too riled up.
1. the reason many of the gas chambers did not have blue residue marked on the walls, is because they were washed off in between killings, since there would have been blood on the doors as people tried to claw their way out, and bled profuesly.
2. the talmud does not exactly specify that the child is jewish because the mother is, this was brought up as a belief after the many pogroms in eastern europe during the late 18th and early 19th centuries…as jewish women and girls were habitually gang raped and left practically for dead…as children were born to these women (as dna testing was not yet invented) the children were raised as jewish because the religion of the mother is ALWAYS known, while the identity of the father (who could just as well have been the husbands as well as the rapists) was not proven.
AND 3. if you dare insinuate that the holocaust was a hoax, you should take your bullshit, worthless degrees and do a little research, maybe then you might be able to find out what happened to 6 million jews. were they shipped off somewhere? did they convert to scientology? did aliens come and abduct them to help them refinance their own dwindleing economy? if you can answer this question, then you would never need worry about jews “taking over the world” because you would KNOW IT ALL…You pompous, ignorant, imbacilic, antisemetic asshole.
July 5th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Neither Religion nor Science has the Earth‘s true History “ALL KNOWED UP.”
Continental Drift is the Earth’s Greatest Hoax
And the site listed below, will prove it to any open-minded person.
See: HTTP://PlanetEarthRevisited.blogspot.com/
For the only true story, of our Earth‘s trek through time, ever written.
I DARE YOU TO READ IT.