Accountability Now

Sorry...jumped on this one late. I won't pretend to know much about black history or US history but if my movie memory is correct and the writers of the Lincoln movie are correct, then wasn't it the Republicans that abolished slavery against the will of the Democrats? I remember watching this movie thinking how weird it was that the Democrats were so against it but yet now they have the first black President. If what I'm saying is factual, then wouldn't you think these white voters would tend to side more with the Democrats?

Yes...perhaps like the chart from the NOAA site which also shows a flat (even a slightly declining trend) over the last 15 odd years. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/global-land-ocean-mntp-anom/201201-201212.png

I think everything is happening later in life for youths/early adults. They stay in school longer, they travel, get married later, have kids later. I guess the reality is that the life expectation is now longer and people are working longer which is passed down to our kids who then delay growing up knowing there is lots of time to do all the adult things. Back in my parents generation, it was get a job, get married and have kids all around 18. Now we feel sorry for a girl who gets pregnant before 21.

We did have a recording. There was nothing else that was inaccurate. Some other items were slightly more generalized but still a lot more direct that anything I've seen before. Thanks for trying to rationalize it but the reality is that this woman is just freaky to me. Perhaps one day she will be exposed but until then I'm left in awe of her abilities.

The guy was 30 years old, no health problems and was killed at a house party. You feel like making that call? My point is that the other 99% will make vague claims that are usually feel good statements....you are going to come into money, you will have a big change, etc. Who wants to hear devasting news that is this specific? Who could have predicted that? The 'freaky' part is that she has been accurate on a number of other assessments or predictions that were just as direct. I have no intention of trying to prove anything to you guys. I understand that reason for skeptism as I was that same skeptic 5 years ago and I am still highly skeptical when it comes to these situations. However I can't explain this lady no matter how hard I try. As such I am forced to keep an open mind about them.

I was able to browse through the videos but don't have time to watch them all right now. With that being said, these videos show no more than what I learned from a university class on Witchcraft and the Occult where we were taught to debunk the same things. I already have a strong basis and skeptism for such parlor tricks which is why I have been so amazed by these recent encounters. So as I said in an earlier statement...these people are freaky because they either have a real connection or an inate abilty to read people ( the latter being how Derron Brown chooses to characterize them) With that being said, I will note the massive difference between the mediums that my family has seen and the ones in the videos. The ones on the videos will pan to many people in a crowd and hope that their indirect statements make sense. When they don't make sense, they quickly change the name or the topic to something that does. The mediums my family have seen are all one on one. There isn't thirty people there to 'make it work'. You have one person to say yes or no. Furthermore, the statements this medium makes are not vague but are rather direct. A few examples....your husband will be dead in two years, you will be diagnosed with an autoimmune disease in the next year....not exactly heart warming things to hear but things that actually happened. Any of the TV mediums give that feel good story which isn't the case with the ones I'm talking about. I have said it a few times already....there are thousands of people who falsely claim to have these abilities and are able to trick people. These are the 99%. But I do believe there are few people out there that either have a connection to an afterworld or some extra earthly integlligence that allows them to see such things. Perhaps these few are humans from the future who have invented time travel and come back. I don't know but I also doubt anyone who says they know for sure!

So I guess you are the judge here on logic then? Is that becasue you are all knowing? Seriously....debates on afterlife and our earthly connection to them have gone on since the beginning of times but all we really needed was for Guyser to step up and set us straight. Any other long standing issues that you would like to put an end to? (Sorry...perhaps your logic doesn't know sarcasm) The only think logical in this equation is to say we don't fully know. Neither side can be proven or disproven until we die and at that point its a little too late for 'logic' to prevail. Since we don't fully know then its not possible to set a 100% tag to it which is why I have repeatedly stated 99%.

Like I said....99% are false and the ones that I believe to be "freaky" and part of the less than 1% do not seek the public eye. One of the mediums has even commented on how this 'gift' is more of a curse and wished she didn't have it. With that being said....I am not out to prove they are real or not. My anecdotal evidence would never hold up in the Court of MLW anyway! Lol.

Are you serious? There are a million people in our surrounding area and you think she knows us? Sorry....wrong on this one Bonam.

Say what you want Guyser but I know that a few of them are freaky when it comes to this stuff. I am a pure skeptic and I would consider myself very logical and everytime my family goes to one of the two mediums its like they are reading a book of their life story. Not vague stuff at all but VERY specific. The funny thing is that two mediums I know of are not glory whores rather its tough to even get them to see you.

I'm certainly not talking about the TV ones! There are a couple locally who my family and friends have gone to and it's sick how much they are able to know. I can only deduce it to them having some innate ability to read people or that they are actually communicating with people from another world.

What do you think about mediums? I know that 99% of them are crap but I have to admit that I have family and friends that have gone to see them (not me as I'm too scared) and these people are dead on about things that have happened or will happen. I know what you are going to say....they speak so generally and its up to interpretation. The ones that I'm talking about are very specific and don't blow smoke up your butt. If its good news they tell you and if its bad news they do the same. There honestly is very little to no interpretation with their comments. In these meetings the medium is always conversing with someone from your past who has died. Apparently these people follow you somewhat like angels. Again...some of the crap they know is FREAKY. It leads me to believe there is something out there but as you say...its not exactly compelling evidence.

Sorry...I worded that poorly. I don't mean our plan for leaving earth. I meant do you think there is something outside of earth in terms of an afterlife of any type (reincarnation, heaven, or something totally different that we can't even fathom right now)?

So what do you believe? We are all alone here destined to be food for worms? Or do you believe in some plan beyond earth?

You don't think you are trivializing this in the slightest? Religous events have been tied back for thousands of years with many people being persecuted and willing to die for it. Do you honestly think its as simple as deciding to worship a gummy? Please cite a few examples of humanity disproving an "uncountable" number of religous claims. I trust its not uncountable.

If that works for you...then great. However, there are 90% of the worlds population that would choose to pray. As for ladders, black cats and broken mirrors....they were shown to be supersitions as history was able to prove their faulty origins. Relgion is FAR from being proven as a superstition. Very far.....

I wasn't comparing his skeptism to the Holocaust denial...I was comparing what I thought was his denial to Christians being persecuted to Holocaust denial. As shown in my post back to dre, I realized that he wasn't denying that.

That is true. Christians are even told to give away their riches if they have them.

Sorry....you're right. I didn't pay enough attention to the part about the power these 'suggested' writers would have held. I went off after you said "You are taking a leap of faith to believe the writers of these gospels faced death". I should have read the rest more clearly. Having said I still question your theory. If this theory was true, then they would have been living in the time of Nero and would have still been writing these in fear as Nero is very well know for his persecution of Christians. Unless you think Nero was in on it too? That seems a little far fetched...but ok.... I will question you on where you say some scholars have arised at this theory. It appears this idea was presented by one author (Albert Reuchlin) and is now being parroted across the internet on numerous second rate websites. I have yet to see any scholarly input here in fact Christian scholars aren't even wasting their time with it. Here is the webpage that I'm going to go off of (http://reuchlina.tripod.com/). It seems like all of them seem to say the same thing so let me know if there is something different. So this theory is comprised by the Jewish people who of course over the years were accused and hated for being the ones who killed Jesus (even though it was really the Romans). The Jews have faced backlash over the years even after a formal exoneration from the Vatican in 1963 and again by Pope Benedict. After years of hatred, a holocaust....Do you possibly think there is an agenda here? This is where your theory falls apart. Whether you believe Jesus was the son of God or a magician or just some carpenters son, the fact is that he did walk this earth. On first pass I will ask the question.....why were Christians being persecuted before and around Jesus' death if he wasn't even created until 60 years after? You have already said that Christians were being persecuted....but are you suggesting that it didn't start until 60 years after? I think history would disagree with you and so do I. Perhaps the Roman's did have this master scheme to invent this other religion to oppose the Jews. However, if that were true then why would a first century Jewish scholar, Josephus, mention him...if he was just made up? I thought all the Jews were in on this? http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm Like I said....I'm not a religious scholar so I don't know enough to disprove your theory on my own however to me it sounds like a rebuttal to years of Jewish persecution. Seriously...."We Jews and Church Leaders have known since the beginning of Christianity" and its only coming out now? It appears the 'truth' came out in the Jewish Rabbi Albert Reuchlin's novel "The True Authorship of the New Testament" with the actual realease date being controverisal too. Of course, there would be no monetary gain for such an individual to write this book...would there? I don't know...maybe ask Dan Brown. I found his stories entertaining too. Sorry dre...I think you've been taken in on this one.

I guess it makes sense that religion and the lack of income/power go hand in hand. Let's face it....who needs God when things are rocking and you're at the top of the world? Conversely, what to people do when things go sideway? Pray. So I guess it makes sense that you may see this correlation.

Leap of faith? So I guess the Edict of Milan was made up then too? Why would Constantine make a law protecting the Christians if they were already safe and in power? What about Nero and the historical facts about his persecution (http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/christians.htm) The fact that Jesus Christ was killed was well documented by many historians...not just the bible....how do you explain that? Come on...even modern day accounts of people in Ireland being persucuted by the Protestant English....that was made up too? I'm guessing you think the holocaust didn't happen either? What other conspiracy theories would you like to subscribe tell us about? Lol. You say they were looking for a religion to replace Judaism? You realize they didn't actually start accepting Christians until Constantine and the Edict of Milan which was 300 years after the death of Jesus. A good 200 years after the gospels were written. But in the actual time of the gospels being wrtiten you have the persecutions by Nero. Can't say I agree with you here. I agree that certain facts when it comes to the finer details are harder to find however I find it foolish to think that Chrisitans weren't persecuted. There is WAY too much historical evidence to suggest otherwise.

Nice work on the rebuttal. Looks like you have your ducks in a row....lol. The teenage pregnancy one makes sense. You have people that due to religious beliefs that don't use contraceptives. Ok. The other factors that your studies try to bring into play don't make sense. They are based on a "Relgiousness Factor"? That hardly sounds comprised. Can you show me the formula for that? RF = Hours at Church x Number of Bibles divided by Income? Lol. According to your first link it implies religiousness is based on a people who say religion is an important part of their daily lives. That in itself is a VERY subjective statement. I feel that I'm religious but I'm not at church every day or saying prayers all the time. My daily life consists of tasks that I need to get through and although I feel that religion has helped me prepare for those tasks I wouldn't say I am focused on it all the time. So...according to this study I would be on the lower end of 'religousness' when the reality is that I am religious. So is this essentially stating that religiousness factor = fanatiscm? I do also find it sketchy to isolate a direct relationship to relgiousness and crime. Let's face it....these studies focused on a large black population being religious. Just look at the numbers....high religiousness in the south...not so much in the northeast or northwest? I'm sure American history will gladly show you the different class struggles that blacks have faced that will have played a much more significant role in why they exist in situations of poverty thus leading to crime. I can see poverty and crime leading to religion....but not the other way around! One very key point for you to remember about my argument....I am not advocating for religious fanatsism. I don't propose we sit around all day and worship a heavenly creator. I fully understand and can see how people who follow religion to a tee will find themselves in trouble. What I'm advocating is that religion doesn't need to be locked away. There doesn't need to be a trade off. We can advance our science, our technology and lives without having to compromise the message that all relgions in their purest form teach.

Why does it have to be trade off? Why can we advance with our science but not with religion? I agree that our phyiscal heath and life expectancy is much stronger and better but what about our mental health? What about our family health? Is science going to give us a pill to solve that too?

You seem to nitpick at the points that you want but overlook the important points. These gospels were written at a time when it was NOT ok to be a Jesus lover. They were written at times when it was punishable by death which is the very reason they were written 40-50 years after his death. Hell....I can't remember exact details of when my kids were born and that was less than 10 years ago. Yet these documented accounts are written up to 200 years later based on oral recreations which have now lasted thousands of years and you can't find that the least bit interesting? I have yet to say they are 100% fact rather I have been quite upfront with the notion that it is very possible that some details or even the authors names or many other things are not correct. But that still does not take away from the point that various people wrote a very close depiction of what happened and regardless of what you are trying to argue, the events being depicted have been backed up by non-regligious historians of the time. You also claim that most Christian texts were burned. What about the notion that these authors were meticulous with their copies? Its even well documented about Constantine ordering numerous copies to be made to ensure longevity. You can burn the originals but it doesn't matter when there are copies around. You claim that the bible is a political document. Really? When's the last time you had some politician write a document under the fear of death?Again...you make the common mistake of modernizing the situation. These writers weren't bloggers with freedom of the press and only risked not getting paid. They actually had to give up everything to make this happen. They weren't pushing a political agenda...there were pushing a message that continually gets lost on people like you trying to pick a part the trivial points. Again... you get stuck on the anonymity of the authors. Hey news flash....Mark Twain wasn't his real name but I'm sure you've enjoyed and never questioned his work. Having said that, Samuel Clemens was never really in fear for his life when writing Tom Sawyer. I am the furthest thing from a religious scholar so I will never try to argue that things are fact or not. However, here we are in 2013 and still 90% of people believe in a higher power. With all our science and critical thinking we are still yet to debunk religion. Does that not compel you in the least?

Ok...I need to call you on this one. Do you have a link to prove this?