Thursday, March 26, 2026
Do you recall Assisi 1986 and Pachamama 2019? Sharing
Do you recall Assisi 1986 and Pachamama 2019? Sharing · What's the Alternative? Here is One
Leo XIV Worshipped A Pagan Goddess – What It Means
vaticancatholic.com | 25 mars 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQRN6854zws
Monday, March 23, 2026
All Human Languages are Human, None are "Primitive"
I used the wikipedian article Tahitian language.
- Q I
- Can you explain how the duality of patterning allows complex language systems to be built from simple sounds?
https://www.quora.com/Can-you-explain-how-the-duality-of-patterning-allows-complex-language-systems-to-be-built-from-simple-sounds/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- amateur linguist
- Mon 23.III.2026
- Duality of patterning or double articulation as I have heard it called in previous decades means this.
Let’s first take the sound system of Tahitian.
/a/, /aː~ɑː/, /e/, /eː/, /f/, /h/, /i/, /iː/, /m/, /n/, /o~ɔ/, /oː/, /p/, /r/, /t/, /u/, /uː/, /v/, /ʔ/.
That’s 19 sounds. If Tahitians were apes, this would perhaps allow them 19 messages, plus a few more by gestures.
However, Tahitians are men. From three of the sounds you make ʼUa, from four ʼamu, from three vau, from one i, from two te, from three i’a.
There is a limit to how much you can combine these 19 sounds to, but four sounds with no repetition would theoretically be up to 93,024 words. Add some more of three, two or one sound.
However, the words are not the limit, there is another articulation on top of the previous.
ʼUa ʼamu vau i te iʼa = I have eaten the fish.
ʼUa = perfect
ʼamu = eat(en)
(v)au = I
i = presumably object
te = presumably the
i’a = fish.
- Q I
- Why can even the most "primitive" languages have the same complex features as those in modern societies?
https://www.quora.com/Why-can-even-the-most-primitive-languages-have-the-same-complex-features-as-those-in-modern-societies/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl-1
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- amateur linguist
- Mon 23.III.2026
- There are no “primitive languages” known to linguistics.
There are languages of what some would call “primitive societies” … all human languages have double articulation or as it is also called dual patterning. No language could exist for human purposes where words weren’t made up from sounds, each sound lacking meaning in itself. There would be too few words. In Tahitian, there are 19 sounds (each vowel counted twice, for long and short version). With only 4 sounds and no repetitions, that would be over 93,000 words, add words of three or two sounds and add words of one vowel sound, then subtract words that violate Tahitian phonotactics or simply don’t exist.
Again, the other articulation is needed too, since without it, one could not distinguish “I have eaten the fish” from “you have eaten the fish” except by two totally different words expressing all of it. That would be very many totally different words expressing “have eaten the fish” and “will eat the fish” … with the second articulation, it’s sufficient to substitute “I” for “you” or “have -en” for “will -” and keep both the verb (“eat”) and the object (“fish”) the same.
So, double articulation is needed in all human languages, no exceptions possible. But how “I” and “have -en” is added to “eat” can happen more than one way. ‘Ua before main verb for the perfect, ‘amu for the concept of eat, au or after vowel vau for I is Tahitian. In Latin a short ed- becomes a long ēd- for perfect, the first of these adds “I” by adding “-o”, “edo”, the second adds “I” by adding “-ī”, “ēdī”.
This kind of possibility is not reduced by the people living in a society that’s in the anthropological sense considered primitive.
On the Biblical or Young Earth Creationist view, these societies don’t even correspond to primitive man, since Adam farmed and wasn’t a hunter gatherer. Primitive is a misnomer. They have gone through technology loss, not simply got on from apeman technology but not reached as high as we. But whichever view you take, you have societies that can be classed as “primitive” but no languages that can.
Friday, March 20, 2026
I Use AD and BC (and if that bothers you, maybe my content isn't for you)
Here is a man who has the CE / BCE system, my parenthesis is borrowed with adaptation from his last line:
The Real Reason We Stopped Saying BC
Archaeologist Ed Barnhart | 19.III.2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEhkYWloW3o
1:07 "each had its own system and start date"
No. Ab urbe condita was a fairly unique way of counting and wasn't used in current dating.
You dated things to "the year of Cicero and Hybrida" not to "63 BC" or to "690 aUc".
Greeks, Egyptians, diverse realms of Mesopotamia, all lacked this system. OK, I'll need to make a caveat about Greeks: they had a somewhat close thing to an exception, the Olympiads. But even so, you dated in current dating to "the year of Solon" for 594 BC and not to "third year of the 45th Olympiad" ...
2:00 I'll have wiki correct you on China:
An epoch is a point in time chosen as the origin of a particular calendar era, thus serving as a reference point from which subsequent time or dates are measured. The use of epochs in Chinese calendar system allow for a chronological starting point from whence to begin point continuously numbering subsequent dates. Various epochs have been used. Similarly, nomenclature similar to that of the Christian era has occasionally been used: [list of five alternative epochs] No reference date is universally accepted. The most popular is the Gregorian calendar (公曆; 公历; gōnglì; 'common calendar').
Similarily, there are several Anno Mundi calendars concurrently : Jewish, Samarian, Byzantine. If you like, Yasidi too. It would seem none of them was in current use in BC times. To be fair, AD also wasn't in current use in early AD times.
2:29 I think the earliest reference to Kaliyuga is from 499 AD:
Astronomer and mathematician Aryabhata, who was born in 476 AD, finished his book Aryabhatiya in 499 AD, in which he wrote "When the three yugas (satyug, tretayug and dwaparyug) have elapsed and 60 x 60 (3,600) years of kaliyug have already passed, I am now 23 years old." Based on this information, Kali Yuga began in 3102 BC, which is calculated from 3600 - (476 + 23) + 1 (no year zero from 1 BC to 1 AD).
4:36 Before AD was used for common reckoning of everyday events, we are already in c. 1100 AD.
BC came into common use in the Renaissance.
You haven't replaced it.
If Muslims and Jews are OK with using it, I don't see why they shouldn't use AD and BC too, but if they don't, I don't see why the rest of us should follow suit.
- Magister Mortran
- @magister.mortran
- Muslims have a lunar calendar. Their civilization would need to evolve a few millennia first and develop their own solar calendar system. They use the Christian calendar, because they have no alternative that could work in an agricultural or even industrial society. Their culture stopped evolving at a nomadic, pastoral stage.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @magister.mortran I'm very sorry, but while I'm not a Muslim, I can't relate to memes about "X stopped developing" ... not even with people I don't particularly enthusiastically like.
For Arabic peninsular nomads, a lunar calendar works fine. Outside that area, they supplement with other calendars (including the standard Christian one) for agriculture.
I'm not sure when they started to do current dating in Anno Hegirae, but it could be some time before Christians of the Latin West took on Anno Domini (while Byzantines were doing Anno Mundi, variously 5500 or 5510 BC for the epoch).
6:39 The Beowulf poet and I have a different view on how we respect pre-Christian cultures.
From you.
Wikis used:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicero
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympiad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_calendar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_Yuga
In the quote from the last, I corrected CE and BCE to AD and BC. For convenience, I don't always do that, though.
Thursday, March 19, 2026
Conservative Bible Scholars Should Care More About Paganism
I don't say they should be Pagans. But I say they shouldn't ignore it. Like some Protestants will pretend Matthew 6:7 condemns repetitive prayers, because they imagine a typical Greco-Roman prayer was a Hindu mantra. (Or because they mistranslate battalogein). They weren't. The stuttering image (of battalogein) comes from the nervousness of someone negotiating from an inferior position. Here are a few other issues:
'Conservative' Bible methods... are a fraud.
C. J. Cornthwaite | 18 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7uMnYmZaTE
As you can note from his title, C. J. Cornthwaite comes from a uselessly hostile pov. But below are my answers to his points:
4:25 Number 44 is not miraculous, it's improved digestive health due to life style changes.*
We don't know if the changes kept up past the inscription or the improvement did.
As to "the god told me" we don't know if it refers to the priest of Aesculapius saying things or if it refers to an inner voice or a dream vision. In the latter cases, there may be some supernatural involved, demons would not be able to instantly cure what's an organic fault, but they would be able and sometimes allowed to tell people what would improve their health.
All the other ones are pre-Christian.
Now, why is this significant?
Because they were Gentiles and the time for their conversion hadn't come yet. God wrought some miracles for people invoking other gods than Him. And when it comes to Aesculapius, he may have been a saint, sth not unlike the metuentes (a theory I also hold about Hippolytus, son of Theseus). So, God could have healed people due to his intercession.
The most famous of the disciples of the family Apollo, Aesculapius, Salus and Panaceia was obviously St. Luke.
4:41 In fact we do.**
There is a work about Doomsday that says that that day of wrath will dissolve the centuries into ashes "on the witness of David and the Sibyl" ...
Dies irae, dies illa
solvet secla in favilla
teste David cum Sibilla.
4:49 The oracle of Delphi, given the stories of Croesus, Oedipous, Orestes, was expert at destroying people's lives with self fulfilling prophecies.
The oracle of Delphi therefore is a prime indictment in favour of "all the gods of the gentiles are demons" (which apparently isn't quite what the Hebrew says, but still true enough).
4:55 Oh, by the way, the one who made good decisions after hearing the oracle of Delphi, a certain Socrates, did so as setting out to disprove that oracle.
8:11 I would not place Pauline authorship in the category of things where reasonable people would reasonably differ (except Hebrews, where one ancient voice says it's St. Barnabas).***
8:41 I sense it you have a bias against actual believers actually doing scholarship to defend the faith?
9:41 I don't respect someone who claims the pastorals are inauthentic because that° would make the early decades of the Church too hierarchical for Protestant tastes against Catholic hierarchy or anti-Christian counter-apologetic tastes against an early Church having an organised way of transmitting information, as opposed to the telephone game.
* Priests of Asclepius, Epidaurus Cure Inscriptions (IG+IV²,1+121)
https://topostext.org/work/648
** By "conservative Bible scholars" I obviously mean Roman Catholics. Most Protestants passing as such even believe Marcan priority (ugh!)
*** Matthean priority is also beyond reasonable dispute between the faithful. It's common ground between Papias, Clemens of Alexandria and Augustine of Hippo.
° That = the genuinity disputed.
Sunday, March 15, 2026
Beginning a Video by Shad M. Brooks (To Prove I'm Not a Mormon)
Beginning a Video by Shad M. Brooks (To Prove I'm Not a Mormon) · Being Un-Catholic is Not a Solution · Answering Testify Cafe on Catholicism
His best known channel is Shadiversity, but he also has "The Latter-day Knight".
ALL Christians teach FALSE GOSPELS except the LDS/Mormons
The Latter-day Knight | 4 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZMEfXkZf_U
Matthew 28, verses 16 to 20.
What does "all days" mean?
All days until you die, and then, once again, all days until Moroni dies, and then, a third time, all days from Joseph Smith to Doomsday?
Or does "all days" mean literally "all days" as in no gaps?
- SlavicChautauquan
- @SlavicChautauquan
- That's actually a really good assessment, and worth addressing.
I'd argue that we have to ask who is being addressed here. Christ's love is eternal, and he is addressing his apostles here. His physical presence isn't there, obviously, so we have to consider what he meant by "I am with you always".
I'd argue His love extends eternally, and certainly has no gaps within. I'd also argue that if we take the broadest possible interpretation, that could work. But that's the sort of broad interpretation which has folks looking for the political messiah, the kind which had people asking, "Art thou a King, then?" a few days prior.
We have to consider that there were warnings about apostasy--Arguably, Paul's entire body of work is trying to prevent apostasy. These are issues not unique to the ancient Christian church, and they still persist today. But we can see that there are disconnects. For me, the connection from Peter to Linus is pretty tenuous at best, at least as tenuous as believing in modern miracles.
So we have to choose where we place our faith, ultimately.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @SlavicChautauquan The warnings about Apostasy are about a Great one, not about a Universal one.
"But we can see that there are disconnects."
Oh?
"For me, the connection from Peter to Linus is pretty tenuous at best,"
That's taking away from the arguments for believing in Jesus in the first place.
"at least as tenuous as believing in modern miracles."
Is your problem, they are through the intercession of Mary, as at Cana?
- SlavicChautauquan
- @hglundahl Oh, no, I just see no biblical evidence of Linus being the one to handle the succession from Peter. We know that Peter died long before many of the other Apostles, especially John, and so making the connection that Linus ought to have primacy over John seems tenuous at best.
I'm not taking away from the belief that Jesus is Christ because I deny the authority of Linus. That's a jump in logic which could reach world records. I'm saying that if you're going to put as much trust in Linus when he ascended above apostles who were at the feet of the Son of God and chosen by Him to minister, you should be willing to accept angelic ministrations in latter times.
I'm interested in a revelatory, not political church. Just because Linus was parked in Rome, does not mean he had authority over John or Andrew or Thomas.
But that's a schism with the Orthodox, more than anything. A political schism.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @SlavicChautauquan Supposing Peter retained authority over every other Apostle up to his death and Linus inherited that authority. What makes you think the Bible would spell that out?
"I'm not taking away from the belief that Jesus is Christ"
Is this the only credendum?
I would in principle be open from Matthew 28:16—20 to any kind of succession of the twelve that would last to today and beyond that to Doomsday.
But I would settle for the one we find.
When you speak of Apostles living so and so long, you are introducing extra-Biblical evidence quite as much as I do.
But you are also presuming the Apostle John who is a Hagiographer was also one of the twelve, i e the Son of Zebedee. This is disputed and not just by sceptics. No early Church Father from Asia Minor (except St. Irenaeus who didn't stay there but went to Lyon when he was 16) identified John the Gospeller with John the Son of Zebedee.
Again, you are second guessing what a succession should look like and rejecting the one we have attested because it doesn't look like that.
I cannot prove from the passage you are wrong on how it was meant to look. I can prove from the passage and Church history you are wrong, supposing Christianity is true.
2:13 I would say, the Gospel is all that Jesus gave His disciples.
Matthew 28, verses 16 to 20 or John 14, specifically verses 16 and 26 (verse divisions of a Catholic Bible).
2:52 Excellent point.
The Gospel was already known, by oral tradition.
Before you add "this was lost and then restored by Joseph Smith", how about rereading my verse recommendations from Matthew 28 and John 14.
Thursday, March 12, 2026
An Apology Owed to Metatron
Metatron Somewhat Incorrect in Detail · An Apology Owed to Metatron
Was I Wrong About This Ancient Roman Fact?
Metatron History | 10 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGQk5XQdD2Q
Overall, I think I owe you an apology for 2022.
I wrote then:
16:22 I looked up Varro, De Re Rustica, and you seem to have given a fake or incomplete reference.
First there are three books. Within each book there are both chapters and paragraphs - what you cite is the length of a paragraph, so should have given three numerals.
I have been over 1.1 and it had no § 11, and I have also been over 1.12, all 4 §§.
I would say that you have faked the reference, since 1.12 does talk of healthy and unhealthy places to put buildings.
None of the paragraphs say what you say, though.
I do not know why I said this in total confidence, but I think I came across a translation, and it doesn't translate as on the Lacus Curtius site currently.
Looking it up again:
Advertendum etiam, siqua erunt loca palustria, et propter easdem causas, et quod crescunt animalia quaedam minuta, quae non possunt oculi consequi, et per aera intus in corpus per os ac nares perveniunt atque efficiunt difficilis morbos. Fundanius, Quid potero, inquit, facere, si istius modi mi fundus hereditati obvenerit, quo minus pestilentia noceat? Istuc vel ego possum respondere, inquit Agrius; vendas, quot assibus possis, aut si nequeas, relinquas.
...
Precautions must also be taken in the neighbourhood of swamps, both for the reasons given, and because there are bred certain minute creatures which cannot be seen by the eyes, which float in the air and enter the body through the mouth and nose and there cause serious diseases." "What can I do," asked Fundanius, "to prevent disease if I should inherit a farm of that kind?" "Even I can answer that question," replied Agrius; "sell it for the highest cash price; or if you can't sell it, abandon it."
Sure, you are definitely right as per the site Lacus Curtius.
[Side issue:
6:08 The doctor with the plague mask was not Medieval but 18th C.
My bad, already 17th C.
The garments were first mentioned by a physician to King Louis XIII of France, Charles de Lorme, who wrote in a 1619 plague outbreak in Paris that he developed an outfit made of Moroccan goat leather, including boots, breeches, a long coat, hat, and gloves modeled after a soldier's canvas gown that went from the neck to the ankle.
...
The Genevan physician, Jean-Jacques Manget, in his 1721 work Treatise on the Plague written just after the Great Plague of Marseille, describes the costume supposedly worn by plague doctors in Rome in 1656.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_doctor_costume]
Miracles Chapter III, from Another POV
First third of a video by Mr. Zod against CSL as Apologist · Same Video on CSL as Apologist, Roughly Up to Rest of First Half · Coming to Lunatic, Liar or Lord in the End ... and Breaking Off, as Comments Get Invisible · Lunatic, Liar or Lord ... Resuming · Miracles Chapter III, from Another POV
An 1800 BC Babylonian Clay Tablet Solved What Took Google 30 Years..
Spacialize | 11 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhv6HYElfyY
"Maybe they are a record of what this universe requires"
Logic and morals seem to fill that criterium too.
If we evolved from Ramapithecus, which couldn't talk, where did we get that from?
The only possible answer is a transtemporal or non-temporal reality that had logic, morals, and presumably "regular numbers" since forever, there was no time when it didn't have it.
But that transtemporal or non-temporal reality is not man as we know.
The question brings us to concepts of God.
Pantheism, Dualism, these are less coherent than Theism.
Wednesday, March 11, 2026
"Do you believe Pagan myths too?" — I actually do, but not the theology in them
I tried an apologetic method. And it proved Romulus' resurrection?
C. J. Cornthwaite | 2 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1Llctl2sKY
I don't think it proved Romulus' resurrection.
First, no one saw Romulus die, as far as I recall, he disappeared in a battle.
Second, no one saw him face to face in normal discourse after this, but one man claimed to have seen a theophany of Romulus in a dream.
It can be mentioned, that overall, divinity obviously excepted, I think Romulus is historic.
Here are a few dates for Jesus' birth in prior epochs:
ab unctione David in Regem, anno millesimo trigesimo secundo; Hebdomada sexagesima quinta, juxta Danielis prophetiam; Olympiade centesima nonagesima quarta; ab urbe Roma condita, anno septingentesimo quinquagesimo secundo; anno Imperii Octaviani Augusti quadragesimo secundo, toto Orbe in pace composito,
Did you notice "from the founding of Rome, the year seven hundredth, fiftieth and second"?
(By the way, Jesus is "traditionally" — prior to modern scholarship— born 1 BC, hence 752 from Rome, while Rome is founded 753 BC).
Third Livy's story about Romulus isn't the oldest version about the founding of Rome. Plenty of time for Quirinus worship to have tampered with the story.
"But probability calculations are meaningless if your method can't distinguish myth from history in the first place."
Your problem is you think the history of Romulus is "mythical" in one of the more prevalent modern senses, i e fictional.
Yes, I am Catholic, in case you wonder.
3:22 "the fictional founder of Rome"
Proton pseudos here.
6:48 At this time, Senators were exclusively taken from Patricians.
8:57 Given the demographics of Rome, at this time, an untutored peasant could have weight even in matters of the greatest importance.
10:51 Alba Longa would have had men of the noblest birth who were untutored peasant ... at this time.
12:10 The Latin would be Caprae Palus for all three texts. Goat's Marsh or She-Goat's Marsh are correct translations.
14:26 This is the version I recalled, I had maybe read Plutarch too.
Livy was part of my Latin.
17:39 We know it's no longer eyewitness accounts in Livy or Plutarch.
Tradition based on such accounts is however an option.
18:31 In the case of the five writers, it is not shared personal history.
But you can't rule out that the tradition they share is historic.
Now, the thing that would be bad for Christianity is not if Romulus is historic, but if Romulus is a god. And this story, taken as fully historical, gives too little indication of that.
- A demon could have fooled Julius Proculus (or Proculus Julius)
- He could have been a shrewd peasant who knew what the Patricians wanted to hear (and what he would be rewarded for)
- The Patrician Senators could even have told him.
Now, we know this because 18:43 we know this is fiction. But if you 18:45 lived in a world hundreds of years later 18:47 where two stories talked about platform 18:49 9 and 3/4, it doesn't mean that there's 18:52 actually a place there where you can go 18:53 to catch a train to Hogwarts.
For Hogwarts, we know it's fiction.
But we know that from the tradition from the first readers.
That's a kind of knowledge of fictionality we do not have for the Gospel accounts, and we do also not have for the Romulus accounts.
Both were from the earliest mentions we have taken as historic accounts.
Noah's Flood is True — And Universal
Is Noah's Ark Historically True?
Shameless Popery | 10 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwT2gYvCGIE
5:09 Drawing on partially true tellings actually is going beyond what Pope Pius XII allowed for.
Because he said, popular ... now a popular telling necessarily tells only part of the truth, because an exhaustive telling would be too bulky for most to read. If Little Red Riding Hood had really happened (to take an extreme and counterfactual example, it's a Kunstmärchen, not a Sage), and exhaustive telling of it would be longer than Lord of the Rings, and even that for too little drama to go with it, so no one would read it.
But telling only part of the truth isn't what is meant by "partially true" since that basically implies "partially false" and that means telling things also that aren't true.
And Pius XII specifically said that Moses was preserved by the Holy Ghost from error in the selection of his (if so) sources.
5:25 "employing the language of Greek mythology" ...
I think the Tartarus is mentioned more than once in Greek works, not just in the Theogony. Greek mythology is not one story and that one fictional or only partially true. Concepts "of Greek mythology" may be entirely true, even if they reappear in stories that aren't.
And casting down fallen angels is described where in the OT?
Book of Henoch is not exactly universally accepted as canonic. Book of Jubilees (if there's anything there to that point) isn't canonical.
5:47 Would you mind defining "mythological language"?
You appeal to it as if it were a common sense concept that everyone agrees on.
No, when Justin Martyr says (correct me if it was someone else) that "Hercules was a strong man, not (a) god" he is not stating anything about the language of Hercules stories, he is distinguishing what is true (like killing Nemean lion) from what is false (being engendered by Zeus and received on Olympus after death). Nothing in that is "mythological language" but it's everyday language for true and for false ideas about Hercules. By the way, there actually is a tholos tomb in Tiryns with no corpse (unusually, there is a parallel in Jerusalem) and (also unusually) an altar inside.
I'd say Hercules' disciples (i e fawning admirers) actually stole that body and the High Priests later made a fake parallel between the real Resurrection and a fake mounting to Olympus.
6:52 Eretz, like Latin terra, can be used for both Earth and Land.
In principio creavit Deus caelum et terram.
invenerunt campum in terra Senaar
bereshît barâ Elohîm et ha-Shamayim we-et ha-Eretz
weyimseû biqah be-eretz Shinâr
Had to look these two up, for the Hebrew, had no idea that field or plain is biqah. Now, in Genesis 1:1, it clearly means "Earth" and in Genesis 11:2 as clearly it means "Land".
You cannot say from that word that it "actually" means the one and not the other.
There is a huge problem with translating "it covered the whole land" namely, you don't find any land which can be covered in water without this happening to neighbouring lands. You don't find a land surrounded by mountains on each side while all the mountains within it are still very high, but lower than the lowest part of the rim. Valleys don't work that way. Hugh Ross (or someone on his institute) has suggested Shinar / Mesopotamia was this land, but the valley around the two rivers doesn't involve that high mountains ... except in Turkey, too close to the sources for this gigantic flooding to happen.
You are basically requiring a miracle, like when God made walls of water surround a path through the Red Sea, but the other way round, surrounding a non-path, where only the Ark could live.
The other problem is, such a land would need to be the source of post-Flood mankind, not just because of Genesis 10:32, but also because of Flood stories around the world.
So, for these reasons it makes much more sense that the disputed meaning refers to "earth" as in "whole world" or "globe" ...
7:08 Pretty obviously, Abraham and Lot were not given the view Jesus was given when Satan invented TV (or plagiarised it from angels communicating to Daniel or Ezechiel, or to Moses when showed the creation days). They were standing at the Holy Land, and viewing that.
Since "terra" and "eretz" are known to have a double meaning, where Germanic languages would distinguish "Earth/ Erde/Jord" and "Land" (same spelling in all of them), it's useless to give examples of "eretz" meaning "land" in a context to prove it doesn't mean "earth" in the context of the Flood.
8:01 I think your lawyer got the better of your Exegete.
"they are just assuming" sounds great in a court case when defending a client. But on this one, God and the Church Fathers aren't yours.
It may seem a bit wooden to make distinctions like "eretz means land when a specific geography is delimited" and "eretz means earth any other occasion" ... but it's a way to make sense of text, it was used by Renaissance scholars.
We cannot go by what "land" means in German or Swedish without geographic specification, like "country" in English, because "rus" doesn't translate "terra" or "eretz." I'm not sure the Bible even has the concept explicitated in one word. "outside the city" or "on the road" (to Jericho or to Emmaus) are concepts that come to my mind.
So, if you'd like to make an argument for "they are just assuming" I'd challenge you to make a word study in English, with "land" even "country" and "earth" and stipulate it must not mean "countryside" and come up with a land, when there is no geographic delimitation. Use as many texts as you like.
8:37 I would say it means in context "from every nation under heaven, that had devout Jews" ...
10:01 The global interpretation, apart from involving less difficulty about walls of water (that isn't frozen to ice) actually also removes difficulty about the viability of the Ark.
It's safer to be on the Pacific than in the Bay of Biscay, in bad weather. There is a physical reason for that. Let's first deal with the waves that are created by the wind flowing on the water.
The waters in the wave are actually moving in a kind of circle. The thing about it is, the centre cannot physically be lower than the sea bottom. This makes the circle smaller and the waves more abrupt the shallower the water is.
Now to rogue waves or giant waves. They are created by a kind of resonance within the waters, and given the bigness of them in the Pacific, such resonances are also less likely to be abrupt and dramatic events that threaten ships. Check Thor Heyderdahl and Kitín Muñoz who have crossed large portions of the Pacific in rafts.
Check the schooner Wyoming that broke up in the shallow waters of Nantucket Bay.
Check why the North Sea is dangerous, like the Baltic.
It also makes little to no sense to assume that Noah stayed and waited for the Ark to be lifted on waters for 120 years, just so as to preach, if he could have avoided the Flood by a journey to another "land" (whereever that would have been).
It also makes little to no sense to say the three sons only spread over the region where the Flood had happened. It would seem to be physically impossible to get a Flood reaching from Ethiopia to Armenia when it was just regional.
Again, if you want the time for the Flood to match (up to c. 1000 years before Abraham was born), there is no good option for a purely local flooding, unless you want one in just Mesopotamia, which would not explain why Noah's sons came to inhabit Egypt (Mitzraim) and Ethiopia (Kush). And that one would certainly have been too shallow for the Ark.
10:43 You are mixing apples and oranges.
At an Easter Sermon, if the priest wants to mention Flood or Exodus (both of which are readings of the Easter Vigil), he should definitely take a cue from St. Paul.
But, if you want to discuss the extent of the Flood or logistics of the camp of the Israelites in the desert in some other, less solemn, context, you are obviously free to do so.
That Biblical history is meant for spiritual instruction is not under dispute. The dispute is rather whether this means, we are "missing the point" if we read it as history and explore it as history.
"Don't force your reading on someone else"
As a writer, I am enjoying the attention of loads of readers who are either voluntary (or if drafted, they were so by someone else, so it's not my fault). 36 784 last Saturday, not sure yet if that's a non-recurrent exception.
I am not an Inquisitor. I am not an actual active cult leader and if someone is trying to treat my blogs as instructions for a cult, they are doing so behind my back and over my head. The best way to avoid it is not to stop writing, nor to stop being a writer who's not an actual preacher, with blog posts that are not laws or sermon, but for Catholics to start treating me as what I'm doing or trying my best to do.
13:17 Who's making it a fight?
1) Atheists and Communists have taken issue and campaigned to get people out of Christianity by pretending the Biblical account taken literally (and with the Flood, universally) is impossible. Fundies, including Catholic ones (even if Karl Keating didn't know any of us in San Diego when he started Catholic answers) have responded. Oh, yes, there is evidence for the Flood, you can spell it Permian, Cambrian or Jurassic, but it's there.
2) For those who argue that we are taking the wrong approach, let me remind you that the "right" approach became very popular among Russian Orthodox of the Patriarcate of Moscow in the 1970's, and it was controlled then, as now by Kirill, by KGB men. They are shouting to the four winds (and shutting the ears to all responses) that our tactic will ruin Christianity. Their tactic will at least ruin the study of Creation Science and Flood Geology, which would have preserved quite a lot from apostasy.
So, I've tried to keep it a civil discussion, and get treated as if picking a fight, and I'm always presumed to be "spared a humiliation" I alone would not have foreseen, when people on the other side, above a certain social level, as dismissable as I, refuse to answer it. I'm "spared" readers who admit to reading me and would therefore increase the chances of my texts hitting the printing press and making me an income. Of those 36 784, lots chose 4 to 6 AM (French time) to view me, as if decided to let no one know they were doing so.
13:28 No, we don't risk it. City of God, book 15, chapter 27 tells us:
Yet no one ought to suppose either that these things were written for no purpose, or that we should study only the historical truth, apart from any allegorical meanings; or, on the contrary, that they are only allegories, and that there were no such facts at all, or that, whether it be so or no, there is here no prophecy of the church. For what right-minded man will contend that books so religiously preserved during thousands of years, and transmitted by so orderly a succession, were written without an object, or that only the bare historical facts are to be considered when we read them? For, not to mention other instances, if the number of the animals entailed the construction of an ark of great size, where was the necessity of sending into it two unclean and seven clean animals of each species, when both could have been preserved in equal numbers? Or could not God, who ordered them to be preserved in order to replenish the race, restore them in the same way He had created them? |
What are Creation Scientists and Flood Geologists doing other than updating the precise questions and updating the precise answers that St. Austin gave?
Saturday, March 7, 2026
Two Apologetic Issues (Matthew, in Video, and Genesis, in Comments)
Scientists CONFIRM the Earthquake at the Crucifixion?!
Capturing Christianity | 28 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmLf5MWs7IQ
One item in the right ballpark gives you confidence. I agree. What about 4 items?
1) It is probable that Campi Flegrei was during the Flood. Without Flood waters it would have been too damaging (and people were already around).
2) It is probable that Göbekli Tepe is Babel (fits direction and which is outermost and innermost of plain and Mesopotamia), and so end of GT = end of Babel, if there is a beginning to Babel distinctly known, that would be beginning of GT. (I'll deal with 2 a and b)
3) It is certain that Amorrhaeans in Asason Tamar, Genesis 14 are the Chalcolithic population that at a certain time evacuated archaeologic En Geddi. Neolithics are too early, and those later than Chalcolithic too late. II Chron. 20:2 clinches identity of geography.
Now, if carbon 14 rose, older items dated from along that rise will be older than they are and spread out more than they are. Carbon 14 levels would also come in rising order.
Let's check:
1) Flood in 2957 BC, Campi Flegrei 39000 BP = 37 050 BC, a little more than 34 000 extra years = 1.628 pmC
2 a) Babel began 350 after Flood, at Noah's death, so 2607 BC, GT begins 9500 BC, 6900 extra years = 43 pmC
2 b) Babel ended 401 after Flood, at Peleg's birth, so 2556 BC, GT ends 8000 BC, 5500 extra years = 51 pmC
3) Abraham was older than 75 (chapter 12, vocation) but younger than 86 (chapter 16, Ismael born), so 2015 BC and then c. 80 years more recent, c. 1935 BC. En Geddi's evacuation involves reed mats carbon dated to 3500 BC, so 1565 extra years = 82.753 pmC.
1.628 pmC < 43 pmC < 51 pmC < 82.753 pmC QED.
Friday, March 6, 2026
Allie Beth on Trump—Iran war, My Comments on Some Aspects
Prophecy Fulfilled? Iran Strikes & the End Times | Ep 1312
Allie Beth Stuckey & BlazeTV | 4 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOQvlwqs-Sg
27:31 The Crusades were not a preventive war.
Muslim oppression of Christian Palestinians (who were still speaking Aramaic) and Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land was already ongoing, not just as a threat. Muslim attacks on the ally in Constantinople too.
30:09 The OT violence was an exception.
God is Lord over life and death. He is the origin of each life in Jericho in Joshua's day, down to the smallest child. He has a right to take life back in whatever way He choses, and that particular moment His choice was Joshua's army (and a miracle to give them access to the citizens).
This does not mean that a Christian has a right to participate in massacres of even little children. It does not even mean Jews in Persia had a right to kill small children in response to Haman's plot, because God hadn't ordered it. So, some OT violence is clearly exceptional.
Next time Jesus' followers do a fullscale massacre will be Apocalypse 19, and even then it seems: a) it's only on armies, not on civilians and b) those doing this are already in Heaven, whether they are martyrs raised for the occasion a little before doomsday or angels (both have white robes).
So, while I'm not a pacifist, I also cannot take OT conquests as a role model for the Christian today, other than as to very much more general items, like war as such sometimes being licit and courage being preferrable to cowardice (if you recall Joshua and Caleb were the only ones left from the adults 40 years earlier, the ones who hadn't dared to walk into the land).
32:30 It so happens, I didn't catch the Antipope being a total pacifist.
If he spoke about peace in the current situation, that's a prudential judgement. And by the way, preventive war is illicit. World War I, the Protestant country Deutsches Reich invaded neutral Belgium as a preventive measure, lest England and France do so. That heavily escalated the war beyond what the shots in Sarajevo and the Czar backing Serbia would have done.
However, I'll have to go back to verify, if he was a total pacifist, that would mean he was a heretic on yet another count.
He's already heretic on issues like Evolution and Adam and Eve, at least highly suspect as long as he doesn't take a firm distance from his three predecessors (more explicitly so) and abolishes CCC § 283.
However, the real Pope, Michael II, was asking for prayers for peace.
39:04 Here I differ, not so much on geography as on tribe.
Christian Palestinians, Samarians, Mitsrahi Jews, Druz and Muslim Palestinians are all very pure descendants of 1st C Jews and Samarians.
The only ones of these in God's current covenant are Christian Palestinians.
That covenant won't be revoked by a pre-tribulation rapture.
This makes the state of Israel a candidate for God and Magog, as aggressors of Biblical Israel (or parts of it).
40:19 "if Magog is Russia"
You are aware that modern Israel was to a high degree politically run by Jews from the Russian Empire?
40:52 Four corners of the Earth, these can now be identified.
NW clockwise to SW, they are NW Alaska, NE Siberia, SE Australia, Cape Horn.
There are Ashkenaz Jews at these points.
Or, at least near.
41:55 The Millennial rule of Christ started in AD "33" (29 to 33 or maybe even later, depending on what scholar you ask).
The Millennial rule of His saints is why we ask for their intercession.
The first resurrection is Justification, by Baptism, Penance.
42:20 St. Augustine (City of God) didn't believe the Tribulation has already occurred, he believed Apoc. 16—19 match to the end of Apoc. 20.
42:28 I'm far from sure the releases of Satan is still in the future, though.
I'd say the katekhon was taken out of the way in 1918, when Nicolas of Russia was murdered and when Charles of Austria left the Hofburg. (Some would consider there were two more Roman Emperors, William II and Mehmet VI, I tend to consider Calvinists and Muslims as not fully Christian, so ...).
50:25 Are you sure, given the trans ideology, that Satan's release to deceive nations is just upcoming?
Thursday, March 5, 2026
Internet Phobia (for non-AI Content) is Clerical Envy
Bloggers today are doing work similar to essay writers like Chesterton, Belloc, perhaps on occasion Sheed and Ward too, though my only reading of them is long form. Never a hint of Pope Pius XI being envious of their influence. Very much on the contrary. So, if Prevost warns against content creators, he is not in continuity with his supposed predecessor Pius XI.
WE REACHED A NEW LOW!!!
Metatron | 1 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8ji7qZufGg
2:23* I'm very sorry, while I do not consider Prevost as Pope, I was prepared to say "a broken clock is right twice a day" for the occasion. Wrong.
No to homilies prepared with Artificial Intelligence
Pretty correct. I'd except translating three word phrases** with for instance Google translate if you are adressing someone (sermon or blog post) in a language you don't fully master, but that's miles from using ChatGPT to write a sermon.
BUT
The deceptions of the internet
I'm worried.
In this regard, “a life of prayer” is fundamental—not merely “the routine of reciting the breviary as quickly as possible,” but “time spent with the Lord,” the Pope explained.
For anyone who's actually primarily an Apostle in some sense, I'd agree.
As he's adressing people supposed to be Catholic priests, no problem so far.
With a “life authentically rooted in the Lord,” one can offer something different, he explained, adding that often “an illusion on the internet, on TikTok,” is to think one is offering oneself and gaining ‘likes’ and ‘followers’ in that way.
Latet anguis in herba, right?
This is a huge topos about a problem that might be marginal, and at least is so in my consumption of other content providers. Metatron, Shoe, Creation Ministries International, Shameless Popery, Dimond Brothers, none of these strike me as out there primarily to gain likes.
This huge topos is also very unfairly targetting content providers. While he mentions TikTok, the actual scope is larger.
* Metatron is referring to this article:
Pope in dialogue with Rome's priests: Be friends, beware of envy and the internet
By Salvatore Cernuzio | 20 February 2026, 14:27
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2026-02/pope-dialogue-priests-rome-young-people-internet-prayer-study.html
** Like I do when writing Spanish: Génesis 1—11: tipo de texto · Génesis — la epistemología · Génesis — más sobre la epistemología
Wednesday, March 4, 2026
Abolition of Man
S9E18 – Abolition – Ch. 3, Pt. 1 ("Man's Conquest of Nature")
Pints with Jack | 3 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJP-JBNg1P4
19:02 Further reading? Chesterton. ALL you can get across.
Not least What's Wrong with the World?
22:10 Anyone of you saw Snarky Jay's video on how Hollywood degraded the mentor archetype?
1977, Obi Wan Kenobi. Death of a mentor is major trauma (confer Gandalf in Moria, 1954). 2025 films, death of mentor is a sigh or relief.
I compared US statistics for 1977 and 2025 (yes, they were already in), and given the shrinking percentage of a typical mentoree age (20 to 24) and the increase in percentage of typical mentor age (all from 60 up), anyone in mentoree age is up against, not sure I recall the US stats correctly, but this was the case for France between 1968 and 2025, twice as many potential mentors. And any oldie defining otium cum dignitate, especially the cum dignitate part, as being a mentor, only has half as many mentorees to pick from.
So, yes, CSL was on spot. People contracepting are opting to get the next and overnext generations more subdued than they were.
(When we speak of generations, what CSL predicted about a "generation X" if I recall correctly, has been diluted over two generations, boomers and the ones called X).
26:57 Eugenics was alive and well before the Nazis.
Pope Pius XI condemned it in 1931, before the Machtübernahme. Casti connubii.
Lenin had a research project, which fortunately Stalin and Lysenko cancelled.
If Britain didn't get forced sterilisations, in the 20's or 30's, it was not thanks to CSL who came to the forefront in WW-II, it was thanks to Chesterton and Belloc. But some states of Canada already had it and four Nordic countries at least had it. Dito some states of the US.
31:08 The internet, unusually, actually gives us more freedom ... for as long as no admin disconnects one.
[Unlike Malcolm Guite, I'm actually offline most of each 24 hours, since I access internet on borrowed computers, cybers and libraries]
Tuesday, March 3, 2026
Fr. Stephen De Young Mangles Catholic Theology
Uncreated Grace vs Created Grace Explained by Fr. Stephen De Young
Pseudo-Stephen | 2 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjgu0VBDHvE
"Divine energies":
Unless I leave you for the Father, the Paraclete will not come to ye. This Trinity is of distinct persons, united in substance, indivisible, indifferenta in virtue and power and majesty. Beyond this we believe no nature to be divine, whether angels whether spirits, whether of some virtue*** that would be believed to be God.
My third footnote to my translation of the topical creed of Toledo I is:
***virtue=energeia? Was Gregory Palamas a Priscillianist in a way?
So, it's possible that the very idea of "uncreated energies" is condemned in advance by Toledo I, which is not just a regional council, but one specifically approved by Pope St. Leo I.
God Himself in action
So far no problem doctrinally, you may have steered clear of Priscillianism.
We don't come to know God in His essence
Hmm ... when we go to Heaven, or when He comes to judgement day:
Dearly beloved, we are now the sons of God; and it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. We know, that, when he shall appear, we shall be like to him: because we shall see him as he is.
[1 John 3:2]
It seems that God's very essence will become the object of a spiritual vision.
how the Beatific Vision works with the bodily resurrection
What would be the problem?
Grace becomes an intermediary between God and Creation
Sounds like a fairly fake resumé ...
1) Sanctifying grace is "a created participation in God's Trinitarian inner life" ... what's created isn't the essence of grace, but how we participate.
2) Actual graces are also God in action, but more like God prompting a sinner or a saint, one without or one with, sanctifying grace, to the good works by which he or others approach God.
Because it isn't God Himself
It isn't God in His eternal being, as it is without respect to creation. It's our participation in the life of ... God Himself.
It has to be created
Well, tell me one Catholic who says the inner life of the Trinity is created? I don't know any.
Or tell me one Orthodox who says my own participation in it, as it is on Earth, before final glory, is eternal? I don't know any.
Baarlam Palamas
Now, Baarlam was on the Eastern side of this schism during the conflict. He only became "a Latin" after it.
It is quantifiable
[confer]
And Jesus advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace with God and men
[Luke 2:52]
προκόπτω
1. to drive forward (as if by beating)
2. (figuratively and intransitively) to advance
3. (in amount) to grow
4. (in time) to be well along
Seems there is some kind of quantifiable to it.
God is working in your life
Is it meritorious to give Him the occasion by taking the pilgrimage?
There is grace deposited in that stone
Is that what Gnadenort means? Can you give a reference?
My first hit with this word for a theology behind this word is the 1989 to 1999 apparition of Queen of Peace to the priest (who became such during the apparitions) France Spelic, Kuruscek, says:
Der Friede des Herzens ist eine Frucht der Bekehrung und der Versöhnung mit Gott. "Das wird ein Gnadenort sein, ein Ort der Heilung von seelischen Krankheiten und Wunden. Wer an diesem Ort gläubig zu meinem und meines Sohnes Herzen seine Zuflucht nimmt, der wird geheilt werden und teilhaben am Frieden, den nur der Himmel geben kann."
This will be a Place of Grace, a Place of Healing from the soul's and body's wounds. Who on this place with faith takes his refuge to my heart and that of my Son (Mary speaking) will be healed and participate in the peace that only Heaven can give.
[Kuruscek message was quoted]
Receives a portion of that grace
Not what I have learned from five Roman Catholic Catechisms, none of which the modernis "CCC" ... I'd like a reference, other than for instance Baarlam or for instance Seraphim's of Sarov treatise against the Latins.
Which has the effect of forgiving a certain amount of temporal guilt
Oh, sorry, you are mangling together our theology of grace with our theology of partial indulgences. Your bad.
A certain amount of merit towards salvation
A certain increase (see Luke 2:52!) of sanctifying grace, which is our salvation, is God living in us, what increases is how involved God is in this particular person. (Who is created).
If You Are Afraid of Satan, Seek God, Seek God's Mother!
Russia's Satanic Panic is Insane
NFKRZ | 2 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KodsWx823go
3:18 I recall the occasion of Pussy Riot.
They were not put in prison for blasphemy (non-extant crime in Russia), but for hooliganism. Probably a Christian picketting an abortion clinic could have got the same penalty, especially if he or she was NOT Russian Orthodox.
By the way, I recall, on Crimea, there was a Gothic Orthodox Church (in memory of Crimean Goths, actual ethnicity, not a musical aesthetics), and it was not just banned, but its bishop was, if I recall correctly, put in prison.
5:47 As a Fascist I'm taking note. I'm therefore an enemy of official Russia, of Putin's establishment.
Noted. Good to know.
Wait, after Fascists, Satanists and Nazis, he didn't mention Communists, Bolsheviks? Why do they get a free pass?
8:29 Has Putin done even one single move to consecrate Russia to the Blessed Virgin, to the Bogoroditsa Mary?
I mean, when Mary asked that in 1917, She knew Lenin wasn't going to do it, Stalin wasn't and so on, so, that's why She asked the Pope who could override the sovereign. Especially together with all the bishops of the world.
But Putin pretends to be Christian, still hasn't done it (though it's normally for the head of state to do such a thing, like Lewis XIII of France made a consecration of France and Navarre).
He hasn't made a reference to Fatima and also hasn't made a reference to the consecreation to Mary of the Kievan Rus, despite being so fond of talking of that.*
And obviously, he also hasn't made a move to actually ban abortions (on the contrary, he called Fascists forces of evil, and they all banned abortion).
8:29 bis Has Putin done even one single move to consecrate Russia to the Blessed Virgin, to the Bogoroditsa Mary?
Here is how Poland did it:
Jesus Christ officially enthroned the King of Poland Nov 19, 2016 English subt
hburlmk | 7 May 2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJDpotcji_w
8:56 Banned Social Media?
Sounds like Communist China, which invented the diagnosis internet dependence in 2004.
9:30 I have aesthetics that are not esoteric or demonic or anything, just Pirates, Hungarian Cavalry**, Austrian normal Sunday wear, Medieval Hoods are better than Modern Hoodies.
Think I'm on the watchlist of some Russophiles.
* Of Kievan Rus, not of the consecration.
** Speaking of the mente, another man who wore capes, to the point of being a model for Tomb of Dracula, was Bishop Fulton Sheen.
When a Saint Showed Up on 'What's My Line?'
Christine Niles | 3 March 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9fRXiBijqU
It may be added, even if he was in the Vatican II sect, which has "canonised" him, he had died before Assisi 86 and before the anti-Fundie decisions of the early 1990's, like the 1992 speech. Maybe one can hope he's in Heaven? By the way, this is not where he wore the cape, but other clips do exist./HGL
My bad, so far only a "beatification" decree, no declaration yet, it seems./HGL
Creaky Blinder Has a Video ...
Creaky Blinder has an Admirer (No, Not That Kind) · Creaky Blinder Has a Video ...
KENT HOVIND Has the Most EPIC CRASHOUT I've Ever Seen
Creaky Blinder™ | 23 janv. 2026
https://youtu.be/RknASkqhfHQ?si=A5D4loMpY-j20_5t
2:35 You'll have to admit, given his views on where taxes go, he might have had a motive for that tax evasion.
A bit like some guys have a motive to get where they risk meeting ICE.
3:22 Given not even light can escape, we are not observing them.
We might be observing their contours, but we are not observing them.
Given this is the case, how are we supposed to know this much about them?
- Guilherme Castro (the omen)
- @guilhermecastro9893
- We know because of red light and eletromagnetic energy emanating from the black holes and through theoretical phisics
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @guilhermecastro9893 OK .... sounds like you don't know, but your theoretical physics interprets an observation of red light and electromagnetic energy.
- Guilherme Castro (the omen)
- @hglundahl ya no its not interpretation, its the use of advanced complex math to create a tangible mathmatical model of the universe...its not interpretation its the universe in mathmatical form
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @guilhermecastro9893 Mathematical models = interpretation.
I have a mathematical model (which due to Douglas Petrovich I might be needing to rework) of the Biblical dates giving erratic carbon dates, the more you go back, the more erratic.
I highly doubt that you would consider that as "the history of Earth and atmospheric carbon 14 in mathematical form", what we can (assuming you are half and half reasonable) agree on is, it's an interpretation of carbon dates (so is the standard calibration, by the way).
3:40 How would you be sure matter (in black holes or in general) didn't come from God?
If matter came from mind, it didn't come from our mind, but a superior and eternal one.
Usual definitions of God (especially Christian but also Jewish or Muslim ones) would fit that part of it.
If mind came from matter, how did it learn to reason about things supposedly 1,560 light years away?
[Everything below this down to pause was taken away]
4:07 Telescopes, yes, they work.
Mathematical models seem to be so bad at working they have to be reworked every decade.
Wasn't there recently one that was overturning previous views on dark matter and dark energy?
4:31 Matter and energy being, supposedly, two sides of the same coin, sounds about as sensible as light being waves and particles at the same time.
I e not very.
It also doesn't answer where they came from, except if you presume they are eternal, meaning mind isn't, which poses questions for our reasoning capacity.
The afterglow being photographed is one interpretation of that photograph (and similar ones). With normal fires, we can recognise an afterglow, as such. But we don't have a similarly wide experience with Big Bangs. (Was that the understatement of the year?)
4:40 "the Big Bang caused space to come into existance, not God"
I agree it certainly didn't cause God to come into existance.
Or did you mean God didn't? There I'd disagree on your Creation story, Genesis 1:1 is better.
5:47 Keep rewinding?
OK, that is an admission that Big Bang is Big extrapolation, epistemologically-wise.
So, why would this extrapolation be reliable?
Why would the forward film not have started at a "later" stage than the one you are "rewinding" to?
5:55 Yes, I know you interpret Cosmic Background Radiation as heat leftover from back then.
Robert Sungenis interprets patterns in it like Earth is actually central and the Copernican principle doesn't hold.
6:25 "Earth is 4.5 billion years old"
Dated per Uranium lead which is such a small sample Earth wouldn't burn up if God speeded the decay up to get some mud into rock solidity.
"and we can see stars that are more than 13 billion years old"
Supposing that the distance of 13 billion light years plus are proven, which they aren't unless conventional distances to Vega and alpha Centauri are proven, which they aren't if parallax is a misinterpretation of the phenomenon observed in 1838.
6:56 For that star to be 1 light day rather than 13 billion light years away, you don't need to rewrite the laws of physics, you only need to admit they aren't necessarily all that affects things visible things on the cosmic scale.
Like angels doing the parallax and similar as a dance with the stars they move. Like the Sun's angel does one in relation to the Zodiac.
7:16 Unless the speed of light is wrong ... or the distance of 13 billion light years is.
"And you also 8:12 said that you believe what you believe 8:14 by faith, which means by its very 8:17 definition that what you believe is 8:19 based on spiritual conviction rather 8:21 than proof or evidence."
Oh, like you think angels are absent from stars and planets by your spiritual or anti-spiritual conviction (which cannot account for reason or language as we know it).
Or that different decay speeds and build up speeds are absent from Earth history.
Despite God maybe having a point of using rapidly decaying K-40 to heat out the water from what post-Flood became the rocks, or that making a certain contribution to the build up of Carbon 14 more rapidly than now ...
Again, because of your antispiritual and "anti-mythical" conviction, which cannot account for reason or for even pagan mythologies very well.
Pot calling kettle. Pot calling kettle. Can you hear me saying "black"?
[tried to add]
More seriously, take a look at whose definition of "faith" you are using.
You seem to take one polemical one from modern or less modern atheists. We maybe don't subscribe to that, try St. Thomas Aquinas, instead (Second Part of Second Part of the Summa Theologiae, Questions 1 to 7, and you can go on to question 16).
[pause]
9:38 He says the Earth is spinning.
I disagree.
10:12 King James does mistranslate Matthew 6:7.
Repeated prayers aren't condemned. Nervous prayers are. Stuttering (the image behind the composite verb battologein) and wordiness both are symptoms of nervousness, and that's a huge quality of Pagan prayers that are actually preserved, like the ending of Velleius Paterculus from basically the same year.
"The 10:40 problem is you're ramming your personal 10:42 beliefs down other people's throats 10:44 while simultaneously complaining that 10:47 real science is taught in schools."
Apart from "real science" (remains to be shown), schools are tax funded. DAL isn't.
"Not only 11:21 have we seen a black hole, Kent, but we 11:24 took a picture as well."
As with the CMB as "afterglow of the Big Bang" there is a problem of interpretation.
[Those after the pause are automatically deleted]
Creaky Blinder has an Admirer (No, Not That Kind)
Creaky Blinder has an Admirer (No, Not That Kind) · Creaky Blinder Has a Video ...
Creaky Blinder VS Kent Hovind
Pedro McPherson | 24 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPvcfjtMKEc
2:32 Why would the velociraptor be domesticated?
Have you found that sharks and jackals are ideal to domesticate?
They still exist the same time as we do, but we do a pretty good job of avoiding them, and with jackals, if not sharks, I think it's mutual.
I think dinosaurs found in rocks are mostly pre-Flood. I don't know where they went after the Flood, those who survived on the Ark, but if they are found in rocks, I think they are mostly pre-Flood. So were the Neanderthals. Do you know what? Places where we've found Neanderthals, we haven't found Dinos. Places where we did actually find Dinos, we didn't find Neanderthals.*
2:40 Radiometric?
Do you mean inorganic, like what God used in speeded up decay to warm the mud to make it rock after the Flood?
Or do you mean organic, where I find it credible the C-14 rose after the Flood, by more rapid production, both than before and than since? By the way, feel free to check the math on those, my latest version was from Christmas 2024 on my blog Creation vs Evolution.**
- Uni-Byte
- @uni-byte
- No, he means radiometric. Look up what that is.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @uni-byte I know it better than you. What it means, that is.
It comes in two flavours, inorganic and organic, the latter known as Carbon 14.
There are pretty different problems in each for Creationism and there are different solutions in each for Creationism.
3:02 Independent? Currently from each other, yes.
From Evolutionism, no. And that one is historically not independent of Carnegie funding. I don't mean the Carnegie porter brew in Sweden, I mean Andrew Carnegie.
From Dunfermline, made money in steel, and placed money in scientific institutions, with a clear bias for the Evolution story.
He died August 11, 1919, so the common thing these 1000's of researchers are dependent on, while not of each other, is some while back.
But I thought Scotsmen were interested in keeping memories alive. Are you a true Scotsman? I recall, a certain McPherson wanted to keep the memory of Oisin Mc Finn alive, and that was more than several centuries earlier .... indeed, more than a millennium earlier.
- Uni-Byte
- Evolutionism? Were you dropped on your head? Evolution is not an 'ism' it is a scientifically developed theory. It's not a belief system, it's a tool.
- Rise of the lion
- @uni-byte Where you dropped on your head ?, science is the tool that develops such theories, the word theory is a clear indication that something has not been proven yet and may never be, and yes evolution is a belief system as it can't be proved.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @uni-byte "Evolution is not an 'ism' it is a scientifically developed theory."
Definitely no more than Creationism.
Now, -ism is not just about beliefs totally disconnected from science (if such a thing exists), it's also about opposing positions between scientists. Like Robert Carter and (correct me if I'm wrong) Jerry Coynes are both Geneticians. Carter is Creationist and Jerry Coynes is an Evolutionist.
"Were you dropped on your head?"
How about dropping this excessive courtesy, I'm quite fine without such concerns!
- Uni-Byte
- @hglundahl You're hilarious. Where's the science in Creationism? "Me read da book!" Never mind. I tire of this inane dribble.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @uni-byte In fact you seem totally ignorant of the field of Creation science.
One postulate is, results have to agree with the book. None is, no info can be gathered from elsewhere or tested scientifically.
So, you are mirroring a bit how Evolutionist Science works. One postulate is, explanations have to agree with Materialism. And unfortunately another one is, information about events can't be gathered from books, at least not when "we" are doing "our" work.
- Uni-Byte
- @hglundahl There is no such thing as creation science. there is only creationism. Look up what the term "science" means. There are Wikipedia articles on science, scientific theory and scientific laws. Go read them.
Besides creationism required evolution. It can't exist without it and it demands that evolution be far quicker and stronger effect than does the scientific version. Both Ken Ham and Kent Hovind claim that canids and bears are the same "kind". That only one pair of that "kind" had to be on the ark. I think the presentation in the "Ark Experience" shows a bear. So, that means in mere 4,000 years, that pair of bears had to evolve into the all the species bears, wolves, foxes, dogs, dholes, jackals etc. and spread across the planet. In scientific reality that took 40 million years. Actually, in your ridiculous belief it would have had to happen much quicker than 4,000 years as there is written evidence that al those bears, wolves, foxes, dogs, dholes and jackals existed thousands of years ago. In fact, they are all mentioned in your bible. So, at some point a bear must have given birth to a dog, or a wolf. Something you creationists claim could never happen.
What a bunch of morons.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @uni-byte "Both Ken Ham and Kent Hovind claim that canids and bears are the same "kind". That only one pair of that "kind" had to be on the ark."
I'm not sure you are right about them, but I'd disagree. The Ark had room, not just spatially but also in loaded weight, for at least 2,032 couples, divided among reptiles, birds, mammals, possibly amphibians, and then palaeocritters.
Apart from paleocritters, dinos, pelykosaurs and so on, this corresponds roughly to the level "family" of Linnean classification.
Apart from dogs and wolves, it means foxes and jakkals. Animals a bit further apart than modern dog breeds.
None of them have functions over the others comparable to vertebrates having an eye when worms haven't, or locomotions as different as fish from foul. The "evolution" in this case after the Ark simply means creating reproduction barriers.
- I didn't notice
- "What a bunch of morons."
This is where I blocked him.
4:05 Given how Hovind's enemies conspired to get him out of circulation, back when he was half decent and showed a photo of his first*** wife, I can't blame Hovind for pronouncing the conspiracy part a bit louder than it deserves.
Common culture misleading its adherents is quite adequate for the most part.
I mean, Epstein repeating the Andrew Carnegie move is a bit beyond that, I think, but that doesn't mean noone taking his money was naive.
- Uni-Byte
- Did Hovind's enemies commit his crimes for him? Do they lie for him about his diploma mill degree? If you are a Hovind fan, I feel very sorry for you. He's a liar and a fraud. He does not believe the crap he grifts off. Meaning .. you have been fooled. You know hat kind of person allows themselves to be fooled, don't you?
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @uni-byte Diploma mill degrees are perfectly legal.
His crimes (or counts of one?) was tax evasion. On his view, there shouldn't have been even a taxation, I'm not sure he was given an opportunity to fill in the paper work for tax exemption afterwards, any more than ICE is now allowing people entering without visa to do so.
- atro-boffin
- @astro-boffin
- @hglundahl hook, line, and sinker smh
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @astro-boffin / "atro" ... are you implying that Kent Hovind only makes a show of being indignated over conspiracies?
I don't think that's plausible.
- Citizen Gold
- @CitizenGold
- @hglundahl "Diploma mill degrees are perfectly legal..." ...and worthless. Which is the point.
Finished that for you.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @CitizenGold Thank you for your input, but the point was someone mentioned the degrees as part of what he got in prison for.
Not correct.
As to your position on them, depends on what you are looking to do with them. Teach at Oxford? Worthless as you said. Open a consulting bureau for homeschoolers? Not so.
- Citizen Gold
- @hglundahl Whoever claimed he went to prison for the worthless degree?
If you're referring to when @uni-byte said "Did Hovind's enemies commit his crimes for him? Do they lie for him about his diploma mill degree?" then you're reading comprehension is about that of someone that would defend Hovind.
Those are 2 separate questions. One about his crime, the other about his lies.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @CitizenGold In context, as answer to what got him into prison, both were given in the same answer.
Yes, I referred to that, and I pointed out that it was totally irrelevant as an answer.
I can also say that the Diploma mill degree was not lied about, and I'm very far from impressed by it, his thesis was atrocious. But the reference to that has nothing to do in an answer about who was so eager to get him behind bars.
4:54 Would you mind directing me to the video with Creaky Blinder vs Kent Hovind?
I'd like a go at answering Creaky's questions.°
- Pedro McPherson
- @Thehaggisman
- KENT HOVIND Has the Most EPIC CRASHOUT I've Ever Seen°°
Creaky Blinder™ | 23 janv. 2026
https://youtu.be/RknASkqhfHQ?si=A5D4loMpY-j20_5t
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- @hglundahl
- @Thehaggisman Thank you!
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- Pedro, on that one, Kent didn't challenge Creaky and Creaky respond, Kent challenged Tyson, and Creaky responds.
For that one, how about hosting one between Kent and Tyson?
You know what?
I'm 11:24 into the video you linked to. So far from Creaky responding to questions and criticism, all my comments past 3:40 have been taken down.
* I think this post is what I'm referring to: Neanderthal Pre-or Post-Flood? ** Newer Tables: Preliminaries · Flood to Joseph in Egypt · Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy. *** Or, given Matthew 5:32, his actual one. The one whose picture he showed with the words "this is not my wife" [pause] "it's just a picture of her". ° It seems there was no debate so far, but Creaky replied to Hovind's challenged on this one: The Creationist Kent Hovind Challenges Me, I Respond °° I was wrong. I guess I'll have to watch both.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)