movies and science, part 1
A pair of my friends here in Amsterdam have been hosting refreshingly thought-provoking movie nights for the past few months. Movies on the menu have included Zeitgeist, "How to Know God" by Deepak Chopra, Michael Franti's "I Know I'm Not Alone", and some short clips like Jill Bolte Taylor's "My Stroke of Insight" about how she (a neurobiologist) experienced a stroke, and what she learned from it. The post-movie discussion is one of the main features of the evening.
For the latter two I have nothing but praise. You should see them. They both have something wonderful to say and say it well.
The first two also have their strong points, but both stumble in the fact-checking department. I'll discuss Zeitgeist here and Chopra's movie in a second post.
Zeitgeist takes on three themes: Jesus as a myth, 9/11 as a conspiracy involving the US government, and the federal banking system.
Theme 1: Jesus was a myth
The first topic is well-covered, at the moment anyway, by Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historical_Jesus&oldid=210606402
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historicity_of_Jesus&oldid=210647918
There are plenty of parallels between the Jesus story and the mythology of other religions. There are plenty of resurrection myths and no shortage of virgin births. However, the movie focuses on parallels between Horus and Jesus. Horus was born on 25 December, but the similarity pretty much ends there. Horus was born after his mother, Isis, had sex with the reassembled body of his father, Osiris. Osiris was resurrected (by Isis) but Horus was not. In later myths, as his story became interwoven with Ra, he became his own father. According to the Wisdom of the Internet there is an Egyptian myth of a virgin birth presided over by three kings, but this is the birth of Pharaoh Amenophis III. The breaking of bread and sharing of wine was practiced by the Mithras cult, which was a contemporary competitor of the early Christian religion. Mithras is also credited with a miraculous birth (born from a rock) on 25 December, and ascention into heaven (in a firey chariot). Mithras' followers shared a meal of bread and water that was symbolic of Mithras' meal with his followers following a holy sacrifice, and Mithras' followers wrote of being "saved."
http://englishatheist.org/indexd.shtml (no primary source given)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithras
http://www.jstor.org/pss/300205
There is very likely at least one historical person that is responsible for some of the better-known Jesus quotations, particularly the ones that went against the prophesies about what the Messiah was supposed to be like. But some parts of the story are almost certainly later additions. Particularly, the story of Jesus' birth is almost certainly whole-cloth fiction: The gospels themselves have two very different versions of the story. There is no other record of a Roman census of non-citizens, and people were not required to travel to their ancestral homes to be counted. The censuses that did occur happened in 28 BC and 6 AD. The reign of Herod ended in 4 BC, and there is no other record of a mass slaughter of male infants (although Herod did kill three of his own sons). Furthermore, there is evidence that the town of Bethlehem was not inhabited at that time. But a Jesus of Bethlehem would have been a much more convenient messiah, pointing toward the idea that there was a real person's life that the gospels' authors were trying to squeeze into the Messiah mold. However, even Nazareth is problematic, as evidence of settlement in modern-day Nazareth disappears during the time of Jesus, showing up again a couple of centuries later. The title "of Nazareth" could be a misinterpretation of the Gnostic title "Nazarine," meaning "leader," putting Jesus' actual residence in the equally prophetically inconvenient Galilee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Census_of_Quirinius&oldid=209963459
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bethlehem&oldid=208709902
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nazareth&oldid=206173081
Theme 2: 9/11
The film presents footage and photos supporting the idea that the US government destroyed the WTC buildings and bombed the Pentagon in order to make it appear that the US was under attack from terrorists.
The killing blow to this conspiracy theory is the volume of explosives it would require to do a controlled demolition of the WTC buildings. It would take either dozens of people or many months of undetected preparation to bring down the buildings. Conspiracies involving dozens of people just don't happen. Someone would've gotten drunk and bragged by now. Much of the "evidence" presented in Zeitgeist is convincingly refuted in these sites:
www.debunking911.com/
www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
I still have not heard a good explanation of the little puffs of smoke in two parallel lines that precede the collapse of the WTC building... but given the weight of the other evidence, explosive charges of a demolition seem to be a highly unlikely explanation.
This is not to say that September 11th, 2001 was free of conspiracies. Unfortunately, though, the movie did not mention the conspiracies for which there is far stronger evidence:
First of all, the Bush administration used September 11th to propel an illegal war on Iraq. That is a conspiracy. It has been largely discovered, but too little and too late. Evidence for conspiracy over incompetence includes Rumsfeld's involvement in the Project for the New American Century, which had plans for going back into Iraq as early as 1992.
http://pnac.info/index.php/2003/rumsfeld-urged-clinton-to-attack-iraq/ (and others, there are plenty).
Second, I don't buy for a heartbeat that the passengers of the 4th plane attacked the terrorists and brought the plane down. Odds are very good that the 4th plane was shot down... just like the 2nd and 3rd plane should have been shot down.
Third, there are 28 pages of the congressional investigation into 9/11 intelligence that are censored. It happens that those 28 pages were leaked to Greg Palast, a journalist for the Guardian. According to Palast, they essentially outline a systematic and intentional policy of *not* investigating terrorist threats originating from Saudi Arabia. This, of course, includes Bin Laden. Incidences of investigations being stopped with orders from on high begin in the Clinton administration and continue with Bush.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=20060
http://www.democracynow.org/2003/8/22/investigative_reporter_greg_palast_on_the
Fourth, the response from the government was, to say the least, sluggish. It happens that there were air exercises scheduled for that day which resembled the real event that was going on, it happens that a large group of planes were abroad and therefore not available, it happens that somehow NORAD was not notified until a half-hour (8:13 to 8:37 AM) after the first plane dropped radio contact and went off course, it happens that Bush continued with his plans to read a story book to school children even after being told that the country was under attack. This would not even require a conspiracy - Cheney had both the means and the motive to make this happen without any further assistance. It could be just coincidence and incompetence, or it could be that Cheney and a few others in the Bush administration knew that a terrorist attack was just what they needed to fuel war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_military_and_Department_of_Defense_ongoing_and_scheduled_operations_and_exercises_for_September_11%2C_2001&oldid=204557020
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/911_live_norad_tapes.htm
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a846noradnotified
There are certainly other bits of loose evidence that imply bungling and outright lies surrounding September 11th. Who was responsible, who was involved, and whether the US government ever correctly identified the people involved or simply cobbled together a convenient list in order to appear competent... we may never know. The hijackers' definite identities were incinerated on 9/11/2001. The men arrested in conjunction with 9/11 and held at Guantanamo will never get a fair trial, as it is by now far too late for the government to admit if it were holding innocent people. And that is the real tragedy of 9/11: that we've had seven years of adding to the count of ruined lives: in Iraq, in Guantanamo, in the US. That we've had seven years of the Bush administration pulling the scab off of the wound, never allowing the country to heal. It doesn't even need conspiracy: it's just policy.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080303/tuttle
As far as I know, the treatment of the third topic, the federal banking system, is accurate. But you'd be better off to watch "Money as Debt," which tells the story fairly well with just a bit of unwarranted opining.
For the latter two I have nothing but praise. You should see them. They both have something wonderful to say and say it well.
The first two also have their strong points, but both stumble in the fact-checking department. I'll discuss Zeitgeist here and Chopra's movie in a second post.
Zeitgeist takes on three themes: Jesus as a myth, 9/11 as a conspiracy involving the US government, and the federal banking system.
Theme 1: Jesus was a myth
The first topic is well-covered, at the moment anyway, by Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historical_Jesus&oldid=210606402
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Historicity_of_Jesus&oldid=210647918
There are plenty of parallels between the Jesus story and the mythology of other religions. There are plenty of resurrection myths and no shortage of virgin births. However, the movie focuses on parallels between Horus and Jesus. Horus was born on 25 December, but the similarity pretty much ends there. Horus was born after his mother, Isis, had sex with the reassembled body of his father, Osiris. Osiris was resurrected (by Isis) but Horus was not. In later myths, as his story became interwoven with Ra, he became his own father. According to the Wisdom of the Internet there is an Egyptian myth of a virgin birth presided over by three kings, but this is the birth of Pharaoh Amenophis III. The breaking of bread and sharing of wine was practiced by the Mithras cult, which was a contemporary competitor of the early Christian religion. Mithras is also credited with a miraculous birth (born from a rock) on 25 December, and ascention into heaven (in a firey chariot). Mithras' followers shared a meal of bread and water that was symbolic of Mithras' meal with his followers following a holy sacrifice, and Mithras' followers wrote of being "saved."
http://englishatheist.org/indexd.shtml (no primary source given)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithras
http://www.jstor.org/pss/300205
There is very likely at least one historical person that is responsible for some of the better-known Jesus quotations, particularly the ones that went against the prophesies about what the Messiah was supposed to be like. But some parts of the story are almost certainly later additions. Particularly, the story of Jesus' birth is almost certainly whole-cloth fiction: The gospels themselves have two very different versions of the story. There is no other record of a Roman census of non-citizens, and people were not required to travel to their ancestral homes to be counted. The censuses that did occur happened in 28 BC and 6 AD. The reign of Herod ended in 4 BC, and there is no other record of a mass slaughter of male infants (although Herod did kill three of his own sons). Furthermore, there is evidence that the town of Bethlehem was not inhabited at that time. But a Jesus of Bethlehem would have been a much more convenient messiah, pointing toward the idea that there was a real person's life that the gospels' authors were trying to squeeze into the Messiah mold. However, even Nazareth is problematic, as evidence of settlement in modern-day Nazareth disappears during the time of Jesus, showing up again a couple of centuries later. The title "of Nazareth" could be a misinterpretation of the Gnostic title "Nazarine," meaning "leader," putting Jesus' actual residence in the equally prophetically inconvenient Galilee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Census_of_Quirinius&oldid=209963459
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bethlehem&oldid=208709902
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nazareth&oldid=206173081
Theme 2: 9/11
The film presents footage and photos supporting the idea that the US government destroyed the WTC buildings and bombed the Pentagon in order to make it appear that the US was under attack from terrorists.
The killing blow to this conspiracy theory is the volume of explosives it would require to do a controlled demolition of the WTC buildings. It would take either dozens of people or many months of undetected preparation to bring down the buildings. Conspiracies involving dozens of people just don't happen. Someone would've gotten drunk and bragged by now. Much of the "evidence" presented in Zeitgeist is convincingly refuted in these sites:
www.debunking911.com/
www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
I still have not heard a good explanation of the little puffs of smoke in two parallel lines that precede the collapse of the WTC building... but given the weight of the other evidence, explosive charges of a demolition seem to be a highly unlikely explanation.
This is not to say that September 11th, 2001 was free of conspiracies. Unfortunately, though, the movie did not mention the conspiracies for which there is far stronger evidence:
First of all, the Bush administration used September 11th to propel an illegal war on Iraq. That is a conspiracy. It has been largely discovered, but too little and too late. Evidence for conspiracy over incompetence includes Rumsfeld's involvement in the Project for the New American Century, which had plans for going back into Iraq as early as 1992.
http://pnac.info/index.php/2003/rumsfeld-urged-clinton-to-attack-iraq/ (and others, there are plenty).
Second, I don't buy for a heartbeat that the passengers of the 4th plane attacked the terrorists and brought the plane down. Odds are very good that the 4th plane was shot down... just like the 2nd and 3rd plane should have been shot down.
Third, there are 28 pages of the congressional investigation into 9/11 intelligence that are censored. It happens that those 28 pages were leaked to Greg Palast, a journalist for the Guardian. According to Palast, they essentially outline a systematic and intentional policy of *not* investigating terrorist threats originating from Saudi Arabia. This, of course, includes Bin Laden. Incidences of investigations being stopped with orders from on high begin in the Clinton administration and continue with Bush.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=20060
http://www.democracynow.org/2003/8/22/investigative_reporter_greg_palast_on_the
Fourth, the response from the government was, to say the least, sluggish. It happens that there were air exercises scheduled for that day which resembled the real event that was going on, it happens that a large group of planes were abroad and therefore not available, it happens that somehow NORAD was not notified until a half-hour (8:13 to 8:37 AM) after the first plane dropped radio contact and went off course, it happens that Bush continued with his plans to read a story book to school children even after being told that the country was under attack. This would not even require a conspiracy - Cheney had both the means and the motive to make this happen without any further assistance. It could be just coincidence and incompetence, or it could be that Cheney and a few others in the Bush administration knew that a terrorist attack was just what they needed to fuel war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_military_and_Department_of_Defense_ongoing_and_scheduled_operations_and_exercises_for_September_11%2C_2001&oldid=204557020
http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/911_live_norad_tapes.htm
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a846noradnotified
There are certainly other bits of loose evidence that imply bungling and outright lies surrounding September 11th. Who was responsible, who was involved, and whether the US government ever correctly identified the people involved or simply cobbled together a convenient list in order to appear competent... we may never know. The hijackers' definite identities were incinerated on 9/11/2001. The men arrested in conjunction with 9/11 and held at Guantanamo will never get a fair trial, as it is by now far too late for the government to admit if it were holding innocent people. And that is the real tragedy of 9/11: that we've had seven years of adding to the count of ruined lives: in Iraq, in Guantanamo, in the US. That we've had seven years of the Bush administration pulling the scab off of the wound, never allowing the country to heal. It doesn't even need conspiracy: it's just policy.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080303/tuttle
As far as I know, the treatment of the third topic, the federal banking system, is accurate. But you'd be better off to watch "Money as Debt," which tells the story fairly well with just a bit of unwarranted opining.