|
|
Post by godlesspanther on Oct 19, 2010 19:15:43 GMT -5
There was a movie that came out several years ago but it has been coming up in discussion recently i.e. Ask an Atheist, Atheist Experience, Friendly Atheist, more.
What the (Bleep) Do We Know?
Many have pegged this movie (which was quite popular on its release) as some goofy new-age shit. It is that; but most folks don't seem to be aware of its origin. This movie was created and produced by members of a strange new-age cult from Washington state. Ramtha's School of Enlightenment. The leader of the cult is JZ Knight. She claims to channel the spirit of an ancient warrior from the lost city of Atlantis. Ramtha speaks through JZ in English with some phony accent. Ramtha provides ancient Atlantisian wisdom to JZ's followers. This is a comparatively small cult but wealthy. It contains more professional and older members than most other cults. This is not a group of spotty teenagers who have nothing else to do.
The starring role in WTBDWK was played by the deaf actress Marlee Matlin. She is a member of that cult -- the most well-known member the cult has. The movie mixes legitimate science in with new-age goo-goo-thwap.
Who else has seen this pile of Ramtha?
|
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Oct 19, 2010 19:41:49 GMT -5
Oh my god, I remember that movie! I was shown that movie in my, get this, World Religions class in my freshman year in college.
|
|
|
|
Post by godlesspanther on Oct 19, 2010 21:17:04 GMT -5
Oh my god, I remember that movie! I was shown that movie in my, get this, World Religions class in my freshman year in college. Did they consider Ramtha to be a significant world religion or was it used as an example of a strange little cult? I could see providing examples of recent and small religious movements in a World Religions class to compare and contrast the belief systems of some more recent cults with the major religions. All the major religions of the world were, at one time, little cults, unheard of by most people and generally looked upon as kooky. And they are kooky. We are just used to them. |
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Oct 19, 2010 22:42:43 GMT -5
Oh my god, I remember that movie! I was shown that movie in my, get this, World Religions class in my freshman year in college. Did they consider Ramtha to be a significant world religion or was it used as an example of a strange little cult? No, he never mentioned who created it. I had to look it up online after I saw it, or most of it. I think the reason we watched it was because my professor was a former acid-dropping hippie. And no that's not an exaggeration. |
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Oct 19, 2010 22:51:52 GMT -5
Oh my god, I remember that movie! I was shown that movie in my, get this, World Religions class in my freshman year in college. \All the major religions of the world were, at one time, little cults, unheard of by most people and generally looked upon as kooky. And they are kooky. We are just used to them. Honestly, I feel the same way. How is Scientology or Factology or the Nation of Islam any nuttier than Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Hinduism? What makes the idea of dropping atom bombs in volcanoes to kill frozen aliens any weirder than an invisible being creating man and dinosaurs in six days 6,000 years ago? Or the idea of a mad scientist creating the white race 6,600 years any nuttier than a man who almost murdered his son but only stopped because an angel forced him to? |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Oct 20, 2010 0:07:40 GMT -5
We got shown that movie in physics class during high school. I think it was for the few and far between quantum physics referrences. Yeah, the whole thing was fucking nutty. It reminded me of "The Secret", really.
|
|
|
|
Post by godlesspanther on Oct 20, 2010 3:42:39 GMT -5
I know a professor who showed clips of this movie in a "New Religious Movements" class as an example of cult propaganda. I myself showed clips of this to students in a section of a class in a section dealing with propaganda and critical thinking skills.
The idea that it could be shown in a world religions college class without naming the source is repugnant enough.
That it could be shown in a high school physics class is utterly unacceptable.
I am outraged by the number of people who took that piece of crap seriously.
Godlesspanther -------> [smashes some things]
I'm OK now.
But really now, talking to water in order to change the ice crystals, the natives "could not see the approaching ships because it was too far out of their experience." GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!
sonofabitch!
I'm OK now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Oct 20, 2010 3:52:40 GMT -5
That it could be shown in a high school physics class is utterly unacceptable. We had finished everything for the year and we only really watched it for shits 'n' giggles. It's not like it was a part of the syllabus and nobody took it particularly seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by godlesspanther on Oct 20, 2010 4:01:16 GMT -5
That it could be shown in a high school physics class is utterly unacceptable. We had finished everything for the year and we only really watched it for shits 'n' giggles. It's not like it was a part of the syllabus and nobody took it particularly seriously. I.... Uh.... over-reacted? Well, that might be the second time that I've done that in my life. |
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Oct 20, 2010 7:42:25 GMT -5
We got shown that movie in physics class during high school. I think it was for the few and far between quantum physics referrences. Yeah, the whole thing was fucking nutty. It reminded me of "The Secret", really. I wish I could've used that argument for playing Pokémon in bio class. Hey, it mentions evolution! |
|
|
|
Post by Julian on Oct 20, 2010 8:01:22 GMT -5
\All the major religions of the world were, at one time, little cults, unheard of by most people and generally looked upon as kooky. And they are kooky. We are just used to them. Honestly, I feel the same way. How is Scientology or Factology or the Nation of Islam any nuttier than Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Hinduism? What makes the idea of dropping atom bombs in volcanoes to kill frozen aliens any weirder than an invisible being creating man and dinosaurs in six days 6,000 years ago? Or the idea of a mad scientist creating the white race 6,600 years any nuttier than a man who almost murdered his son but only stopped because an angel forced him to? To answer the question of how are they nuttier, depends upon perspective... Factually they're all wrong, but creation myths across the world were a genuine attempt to answer one of life's mysteries - albeit with an extraordinarily limited and primitive understanding of the universe and man's position in it. As for Scientology, well that's just a cynical lie by someone who should've known better. Half of religion's nonsense crap was by starting with the result and working backwards, Scientology was engineered as a scam. Creationism is only absurdly nutty in lieu of the overwhelming weight of evidence collected in the last few centuries (dinosaurs for instance). Scientology never made sense, but preyed on ignorance, illness and gullibility. So while, as your point stands believing literally in either is particularly willfully ignorant, desperate wishful thinking or just downright nutty, the fact is one set of stories, was wrong but genuine, and the other was genuinely wrong. But yes, indoctrination in either now is a serious abuse of trust. |
|
|
|
Post by Old Viking on Oct 20, 2010 15:25:57 GMT -5
Ramtha's School of Enlightenment has yet to turn out a competitive football team.
|
|
|
|
Post by godlesspanther on Oct 20, 2010 16:34:35 GMT -5
Ramtha's School of Enlightenment has yet to turn out a competitive football team. Stay tuned. Ever seen JZ Knight? Tough old girl, she is. She just might make a half-decent QB. |
|
|
|
Post by godlesspanther on Oct 20, 2010 16:56:30 GMT -5
Honestly, I feel the same way. How is Scientology or Factology or the Nation of Islam any nuttier than Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Hinduism? What makes the idea of dropping atom bombs in volcanoes to kill frozen aliens any weirder than an invisible being creating man and dinosaurs in six days 6,000 years ago? Or the idea of a mad scientist creating the white race 6,600 years any nuttier than a man who almost murdered his son but only stopped because an angel forced him to? To answer the question of how are they nuttier, depends upon perspective... Factually they're all wrong, but creation myths across the world were a genuine attempt to answer one of life's mysteries - albeit with an extraordinarily limited and primitive understanding of the universe and man's position in it. As for Scientology, well that's just a cynical lie by someone who should've known better. Half of religion's nonsense crap was by starting with the result and working backwards, Scientology was engineered as a scam. Creationism is only absurdly nutty in lieu of the overwhelming weight of evidence collected in the last few centuries (dinosaurs for instance). Scientology never made sense, but preyed on ignorance, illness and gullibility. So while, as your point stands believing literally in either is particularly willfully ignorant, desperate wishful thinking or just downright nutty, the fact is one set of stories, was wrong but genuine, and the other was genuinely wrong. But yes, indoctrination in either now is a serious abuse of trust. I see your point. There was a time when thunder and lightning being caused by some pissed off giant in the sky smacking things with an enormous hammer was just as good an explanation as any other. But such explanations are still being introduced despite concrete evidence to the contrary. The evidence for a supernatural explanation is always the same -- because I said so. That has never changed. Those who employ an authoritarian belief structure are always going to be with us. It is likely a hard-wired survival mechanism. That said; I don't think that those who established the authoritarian belief structure were any more noble at the time that scientific evidence was lacking then they are now. That is, there is no difference in demanding belief in an explanation that is contrary to evidence and demanding a belief in an explanation where evidence is unavailable. Religious leaders of old were just as cynical and self-serving as the leaders of cults today. |
|
|
|
Post by scotsgit on Oct 21, 2010 12:53:35 GMT -5
There was a movie that came out several years ago but it has been coming up in discussion recently i.e. Ask an Atheist, Atheist Experience, Friendly Atheist, more. What the (Bleep) Do We Know? Many have pegged this movie (which was quite popular on its release) as some goofy new-age shit. It is that; but most folks don't seem to be aware of its origin. This movie was created and produced by members of a strange new-age cult from Washington state. Ramtha's School of Enlightenment. The leader of the cult is JZ Knight. She claims to channel the spirit of an ancient warrior from the lost city of Atlantis. Ramtha speaks through JZ in English with some phony accent. Ramtha provides ancient Atlantisian wisdom to JZ's followers. This is a comparatively small cult but wealthy. It contains more professional and older members than most other cults. This is not a group of spotty teenagers who have nothing else to do. The starring role in WTBDWK was played by the deaf actress Marlee Matlin. She is a member of that cult -- the most well-known member the cult has. The movie mixes legitimate science in with new-age goo-goo-thwap. Who else has seen this pile of Ramtha? Atlantian Wisdom - if you see a wall of water coming towards you, run like ****? |
|
