Tuesday, March 3, 2026
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).
8:56 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?
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.
Monday, March 2, 2026
Saturday, February 28, 2026
Ibn Fadlan's View on Vikings
Ahmad ibn Fadlan's Encounter With the "Vikings"
Bjorn Andreas Bull-Hansen | 28 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi6hEI1uJr4
3:14 Free translation. Fadlan considers Muslim Ritual Purity as equal to normal hygiene.
Probably not too uncommon among Muslims.
4:11 I have, up to an attack of gout, diagnosed on 13th XII (St. Lucy), been drinking 1 pint (50 cl) of beer, strength 6.6 to 7.2 each evening before bed.
You can imagine how this relates to avoiding nycturia.
Now, there have been Muslims who have because of this stamped me as a drunkard.
4:24 Muslims probably have a ritual law reminiscent of Leviticus 15:16.
Fadlan probably meant that Vikings skipped the "unclean until the evening" part.
5:45 Probably there is some people group that has tattoos or are supposed to have had tattoos.
Fadlan finds the Vikings remind him of that, and so he applies the stereotype. Imagine he was more familiar with Lapps than with Tatters, learned that Tatters travel around and then he assumed (and wrote as eyewitness testimony) that Tatters live in roundish tents called goahti.
That's probably how Fadlan came to imagine Vikings wore tattoos. Of course, this could be a custom simply limited to the Novgorod area and using an East Slavic word ... from what I know about that, which is not much. I just know that unlike what you told me of Vikings, I don't know for sure Rus' Slavs didn't have tattoos.
9:40 No, being true to the Islamic culture wasn't so much part of his job as part of his Pavlovian reactions.
I Think This is Misinformation
Former Employee Ale Pretti Fired over Complaints ...
Beti Daily | 28 Jan. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAPCNBLFtQo
Do you have an actual link to the original statement?
I'm noting one of the hits I find for this clinic is:
Lake Shore Medical Ctr
Permanently closed
That's Lake Milton, Ohio.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)