The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-03-2014, 01:16 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
Yes, you are right. The particular article I quoted is referring to later manuscripts so I have deleted and replaced the post, which you might want to re-read.

The piece about removing documents after the seige of Rome was by Joe Atwill which was either on his site or on a youtube video.

I don't intend to find it because this forum isn't worth the candle, as they say, and, Bucky, I am only surprised by your background in the sense that it has left you with a particularly foul mouthed, know it all attitude.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2014, 01:37 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
Funny how every twit who comes through here feels the need to tell us what dimwits we are when we fail to buy their bullshit... It's bullshit, I didn't buy it, therefore *I'm* dumb? Weirdo.

Anyway DB, like everyone else has said, we chatted to Ralphie *ourselves*, not even you, His Representative on Earth, have more authority. And many of us adjudged him to be a charlatan. You can look up the threads if you want. He does not acquit himself well. Lots of appeals to how much time he spent studying, not a lot of referencing, not a lot of peer review, in fact precisely zero, if his answer to me quoted below is correct.

(06-11-2013 11:22 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  Have I been peer reviewed?
No

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like morondog's post
02-03-2014, 01:43 PM (This post was last modified: 02-03-2014 02:28 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
(02-03-2014 10:10 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Bucky,

The problem you are having is that you don't understand that some people, like myself, can read someone elses ideas and be interested in talking about them without adopting them as their own, or committing to them. Ralph Ellis brings out various correspondences between stories, myths, legends and real people and real places. It is not he who is building these into something which he claims is supported by definitive, written evidence. It is you and others who takes his theory and try to suggest that when he says is a coincidence of characteristics between two historical figures, for instance, he is saying there is "written" evidence of this. It is always a hypothesis but you and others here are trying to discredit him by making out that he is saying the evidence is different than what he say sit is. It is quite clear how he develops his hypothesis and the documents and facts he bases it on.

If, like David Icke, he took this and said that as a result of this, the English Royal Family were descended from reptilian space invaders, then that would be a different matter, but to hypothesize that a Jewish leader was shipped off to England and imprisoned in Dewa, is speculation and a possible explanation of Authurian legends. There isn't anything particularly astonishing about that. People travelled from the Near East to Britain by ships in those days. It isn't that far. I have driven it and it takes a few days. Sailing it would take a few weeks.

It is a hypothesis and if you read what he says, the underpinnings of it are set out quite clearly so I don't have a problem with it.

It seems to me that on this forum it is ok to be foul mouthed and abusive but it isn't acceptable to discuss openly a novel theory. One is immedicately jumped on, insulted and abused. I don't find that to be a sign of intelligence or open-mindedness. It is just bullying and I associate bullying with stupid people who can't control their emotions and just shoot off at the mouth at people they disagree with.

Sorry, but that is the way I see you and a few others here. If someone comes along next week, or next year and shows me something that says that there is some historical document that suggests Jesus was actually Simon Magnus or some other 30s AD character, I would just listen to what they said. I don't have anything invested in Ralph Ellis and I had never heard of him before I joined this forum so I find all this abuse to be pointless.

It is quite clear that this, like many other forums, suffers from a "herd" mentality problem in that a group of people get to know each other and when someone comes along who has different ideas, there is a tendency to lash out at them because on an internet forum it is easy just to poke fun at people you don't agree with, particularly when you have the support of a lot of other people who all like each other. It doesn't seem to be about intellectual curiosity, just socializing with friends and making fun of people for amusement.

So, no, I don't like this forum. I am not impressed by anyone on it except Mark, who has shown he is intelligent and open minded. Also, I have got in touch with Ralph Ellis and had some pleasant exchanges with him and I find him completely straightforward about his views and doesn't push any argument beyond what the evidence shows.

And, as I am not liked here and I find nothing of interest here, I don't intend to hang around.

I have other things in my life to do which are far more rewarding than exchanging unpleasantries with you and your buddies.

Drinking Beverage

Sorry you decided to waste your time on this. I don't care. At all. So please, stop whining. Ellis proved here he cannot support anything he claims. Your continued whining here is totally irrelevant to me. Mark Fulton also asked Ellis to support his claims. He didn't, and couldn't. You chose me as your scape-goat. I really could care less. You demonstrated YOU are no historian of the Ancient Near East. You demonstrated you have not even BASIC knowledge of the Hebrew or Christian Bible with your quote from the Gospel of John, or that you could even BEGIN to discuss it in its cultural historical context. You further made a fool of yourself first claiming there were Jewish DOCUMENTS in the Vatican, then linking me to an article about a couple pieces of missing temple ARTIFACTS, (which you actually have not a shred of evidence for). When Ellis first came here, I backed off, as I was unaware of his crazy, even though he sounded liked a wacko...I thought, "hmmm, let's see what he's got". It was many months before we had ANY interaction, and even then I said almost nothing. He continued to make preposterous links between things were totally unrelated, and unsupported. He has no training , (and is VERY angry about the way he's been treated by professionals, ...which is HIS OWN FAULT... if he wants to be taken seriously in 2014, one needs a credential), and he thinks they are all professionals out to get him. It's called raving Paranoia, not unlike YOURS. The fact is there have been successful "amateurs", (such as Albert Sweitzer, who was an MD and also a respected Biblical Scholar and musician). Ellis is not one of these. Nor are you, apparently. He never learned "process" from a professional about how they work. IF he wanted his claims to stand up, there are things he could do, but is unwilling to do them. David McLellan (a real scholar) clued us in to how insane he was. Your implication that there is a "gang of thugs" here is utterly false. We all disagree about many things. Mark Fulton and I don't even agree about what Jebus was up to. BUT, he has support for his arguments, in their historical context. You do not. The Ellis nonsense has ALREADY been debunked here. Sorry you missed it. We've moved on, and don't care. Your and Ellis' *conspiracy theory* ("oh they're all out to get me") is crap. Show us the evidence for anything, and we'll look at it, in light of KNOWN FACTS.

You want to operate in a fantasy land, about your fantasies, go right ahead.

If I need some patronizing asshole to tell me what "problem I'm having" I be sure and ask. Meanwhile, go fuck yourself with a cactus, sideways.

I.
Don't.
Give.
A.
Shit.


Facepalm

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
02-03-2014, 01:50 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
Well, Morondog, the reason people come here and conclude that some of you are that way is that you use foul language and act like a posse of vigilantees who want to psychologically beat anyone who the little group here doesn't like.

You and the others like you are "pseuds". I haven't read anything of interest here from any of you. It is very boring reading the same insults and swear words over.

You remind me of small children who have discovered a swear word and think it is funny to use it.

It is interesting you use "we" because it confirms you "part of the gang" mindset which isn't something I am the slightest bit interested in but which is the downfall of most of these chatboards which tend to turn from whatever topic they are devoted to into somewhere for people to go who just like bullying newcomers and exchanging what they think are "witicisms" with other members of their group.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2014, 01:53 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
Anyone coming to this forum who had a modicum of good sense and manners would think atheists are a bunch of foul mouthed bullies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2014, 01:57 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
(02-03-2014 01:53 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Anyone coming to this forum who had a modicum of good sense and manners would think atheists are a bunch of foul mouthed bullies.

Only to idiot followers of a known charlatan. Ellis himself was run off from this forum when he was shown to be utterly incompetent so his lackey has no chance of convincing anyone. We have seen what Ralph claims and it is bullshit unsupported by facts and in no way scientific or academic. It is merely the lunatic ravings of a very delusional and paranoid know nothing.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
02-03-2014, 02:00 PM (This post was last modified: 02-03-2014 02:13 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
(02-03-2014 01:53 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Anyone coming to this forum who had a modicum of good sense and manners would think atheists are a bunch of foul mouthed bullies.

Waaa waaa waaa.
And whiners. Don't forget the whiners.
(*Of course* YOU count yourself among those with "sense and manners").
Of course.

Piss off, church lady.
Your pathetic attempt to change the subject to manners and swearing instead of the CONTENT of your arguments is one gigantic fail, whiner.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-03-2014, 02:10 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
(02-03-2014 01:53 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Anyone coming to this forum who had a modicum of good sense and manners would think atheists are a bunch of foul mouthed bullies.

No, you are very incorrect. All are welcome here, but the difference is we do not suffer fools.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
02-03-2014, 02:28 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
(02-03-2014 01:53 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Anyone coming to this forum who had a modicum of good sense and manners would think atheists are a bunch of foul mouthed bullies.

Patently false.

Look to yourself.

"If you're going my way, I'll go with you."- Jim Croce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Kestrel's post
02-03-2014, 03:05 PM
RE: The Ralph Ellis v. Thomas Verrano debate
(02-03-2014 01:50 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Well, Morondog, the reason people come here and conclude that some of you are that way is that you use foul language and act like a posse of vigilantees who want to psychologically beat anyone who the little group here doesn't like.

You and the others like you are "pseuds". I haven't read anything of interest here from any of you. It is very boring reading the same insults and swear words over.

You remind me of small children who have discovered a swear word and think it is funny to use it.

It is interesting you use "we" because it confirms you "part of the gang" mindset which isn't something I am the slightest bit interested in but which is the downfall of most of these chatboards which tend to turn from whatever topic they are devoted to into somewhere for people to go who just like bullying newcomers and exchanging what they think are "witicisms" with other members of their group.

Did you have a rebuttal to the various points I raised, in particular that Ralph admits *himself* that his work has not been peer reviewed? 'Cos you sure made a strawman about being polite very quickly.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: