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.
Wow That Book Of Morman Thing Is Racist Take It Off
Religious Boyz911: Definition of Race: “Prejudice or discrimination based on an individual’s race” – the Book of Mormon thing is not racist.
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?
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 *****yses 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 *****ysis 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.
*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
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.
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 *****ing hiding them in the siberian desert cuz he didn’t actually want to kill them.
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”.
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.
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………..
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.
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?
This list was written by an idiot wasn’t it?
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!
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.
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.
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.
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
i hope i didnt offend anyone
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
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
“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?
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…
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.
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 *****yze many points of view, and to play the Devil’s Advocate now and again, oh wait, can’t use the word Devil. Sorry.
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
‘shopped.
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.
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.
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
Hmmm what about the Beatles hoax that Paul had died?
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
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….
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.
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 ***** Out.
-
Sam
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!!!
"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!!! "
I think we all know the answer to that question.
about sceintists
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.
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?
Who is it that believes in God? You? But you don't exist, so…
what about the orson welles war of the worlds radio broacast in the thirties
Was that really a hoax? I don't think they really intended the consequences that resulted. They don't seem to have been actually trying to fool anyone.
your bible is a hoax
jesus is a hoax
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com
http://www.godisimaginary.com
http://www.whywontgodhealamuptees.com
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.
Edit … 600 BC
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.
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?
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
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.
“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.
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).
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.
edit: middle-east, so I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss
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….”?
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.
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.
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.
-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.