I have not the slightest doubt that that's what you think you've been doing. However, when you're asked by nuimerous people numerous times to supply a little bit of homework, it's probably a clue that there's something lacking. Especially when you say that you don't have a problem with doing so.

Let's flip the script for a moment. If someone else replied to every question and counterpoint with the equivalent of RTFM, what would you think of them?

(January 5, 2016 at 12:35 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(January 5, 2016 at 10:27 am)Drich Wrote: Again this is addressed very simply by the movie. What is disturbing is how quickly you rush to a conclusion when you don't have 1/2 the information.

This is you believing your own in house hype about yourself, and made to look the fool when it's pointed out how far off you are.

Drippy, you dumb fuck, this is why any pretense at 'scholarship' is wasted on a moron like you.  You don't care that the opinions presented by your gallant xtian researchers are rejected by mainstream archaeology and other jesus freaks.  All you want is someone, anyone, to tell you that your fucking bullshit fairy tales are true.  Once you get that you think that everything is fine no matter what the actual evidence shows.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  Drippy, stick with your fucking bible.  It's all you can handle and leave the heavy thinking to people who are equipped for it.

Go fuck yourself.

do you call toeing the line heavy thinking? Is this truly your idea of "scholarship?' (parroting back what others think?) That is exactly what your doing. how much thought does it take to cut and paste the work of the popular world view and defend it the way it is normally attacked??? This is ALL you have done.

You will not/can not/Are unable to address the points the movie (or I actually make.) you do little more than talk to the points you have "predicted" (wrongly) which by the way is call a starwman fallacy and is not a 'prediction.' Creating and defeating strawmen are the signs of a weak mind minnie, not a strong one.

You can huff and puff, posture and pretend to be intellectually superior all you want, but until you actually address the topical points I and this movie have made, your only putting on a show for yourself and your fans. Nothing you have done or have said to this point actually has any topical merit.

so do you want to reset and try again, or will you just keep pretending to intellectually superior by surrounding yourself with your strawmen??

(January 6, 2016 at 11:36 am)Stimbo Wrote: I have not the slightest doubt that that's what you think you've been doing. However, when you're asked by nuimerous people numerous times to supply a little bit of homework, it's probably a clue that there's something lacking. Especially when you say that you don't have a problem with doing so.

Let's flip the script for a moment. If someone else replied to every question and counterpoint with the equivalent of RTFM, what would you think of them?

Again I have prefaced this thread with the title 'for those of you who WANT proof of the exodus.' Then I provide the source material. For those who want 'proof' they will indeed have to do some homework, unless they already have it. If I was apart of a discussion about a given manual then would it not be expected that I read the manual? Because again the primary discussion is about the manual not about what the manual describes.

Like wise the point of this discussion is about the movie and the 'proof' it provides more so than the exodus itself.

It would be like having a discussion about the new star wars movie with someone who refuses to watch the movie, because he saw all the other movies and thinks he can guess what happens in the latest one.
And yes I have no issue describing the movie, but at the same time no one can argue watching it and listening to my description will be two completely different things. If we are going to have a discussion on the movie, then at some point you will have to watch the movie.

Twenty pages. Impressive. I wonder what percentage of these posts are by members sincerely interested in the topic -vs- members who are curious to see what little counts as evidence for you -vs- members who enjoy mocking you -vs- posts you make yourself just to enjoy hearing your own voice.

I think from the responses you've been getting that at least some of your respondents have watched the movie, and have taken the trouble to comment their thoughts on it. But I see where the miscommunication is coming from: they were commenting on how the material presented in the video corresponds - such as it does - to factual history, whereas you want to talk about the video itself. To borrow your analogy, you want to talk about Star Wars, we want to talk about who Supreme Leader Snoke is.

(January 6, 2016 at 12:01 pm)Stimbo Wrote: I think from the responses you've been getting that at least some of your respondents have watched the movie, and have taken the trouble to comment their thoughts on it. But I see where the miscommunication is coming from: they were commenting on how the material presented in the video corresponds - such as it does - to factual history, whereas you want to talk about the video itself. To borrow your analogy, you want to talk about Star Wars, we want to talk about who Supreme Leader Snoke is.

do you have examples?

(January 6, 2016 at 11:55 am)Whateverist the White Wrote: Twenty pages.  Impressive.  I wonder what percentage of these posts are by members sincerely interested in the topic -vs- members who are curious to see what little counts as evidence for you -vs- members who enjoy mocking you -vs- posts you make yourself just to enjoy hearing your own voice.

you can speculate or you can read and decide for yourself based on the evidence.. either way my task remains.

(January 6, 2016 at 12:05 pm)Drich Wrote:

(January 6, 2016 at 11:55 am)Whateverist the White Wrote: Twenty pages.  Impressive.  I wonder what percentage of these posts are by members sincerely interested in the topic -vs- members who are curious to see what little counts as evidence for you -vs- members who enjoy mocking you -vs- posts you make yourself just to enjoy hearing your own voice.

you can speculate or you can read and decide for yourself based on the evidence.. either way my task remains.

Well I'll leave you to sow those seeds then.

(January 6, 2016 at 12:04 pm)Drich Wrote:

(January 6, 2016 at 12:01 pm)Stimbo Wrote: I think from the responses you've been getting that at least some of your respondents have watched the movie, and have taken the trouble to comment their thoughts on it. But I see where the miscommunication is coming from: they were commenting on how the material presented in the video corresponds - such as it does - to factual history, whereas you want to talk about the video itself. To borrow your analogy, you want to talk about Star Wars, we want to talk about who Supreme Leader Snoke is.

do you have examples?

Perhaps read the thread.

[/Drich]

Quote: I do not have the CG or chart's/graphs used in the movie to illustrate the point the movie makes so easy to understand. So the easy answer would be to simply watch the movie.

It does not matter if you have them or not.  One cannot simply ( and arbitrarily!) move history by 300 years for the sole purpose of attempting to rescue one farcical bible tale without upsetting the entire history of the region.  Example.  You cannot move the reign of Ramesses II up by 300 years without also moving the Hittite Empire up by the same 300 years since they fought each other at Kadesh and identical copies of the peace treaty have been found in Egypt and Hatusa.  But the Hittite Empire ceased to exist as a result of the depredations of the Sea People c 1190 BC and this is securely dated by non Egyptian or biblical means.  Rohl does not give a flying fuck about that because all he is trying to do is give fools like you a reason to cling to your absurd exodus tale.  He is a charlatan and has been denounced as a charlatan for a generation already.

The fundies object to Rohl because his revised chronology trashes the part of the story which has "Solomon" building a temple in the 10th century "480 years after the Israelites came out of Egypt."  The problem there is that if you add 480 to 970 you get 1450 BC and that is the reign of Thutmoses III who just happens to have been the greatest pharaoh of the time and the man who built ( not lost ) the maximum extent of the Egyptian empire of the New Kingdom. 

The movie is shit.  And so is your fucking bible.