What do you think about it?

Personaly, it just confirmed what I have always suspected. However it only comes with a general message and doesn't realy provide much practical knowledge and doesn't answere even a fraction of all the questions there are, but it is very enlightening.

However, reading the book Freedom of Choice by Dr. T.J. Chalko, I realy did not get much out of it. And I can't help feeling that he has alot to learn!

What are your opinions?

http://www.thiaoouba.com

It's rubbish.

Notice they are trying to sell stuff to you. It's a money making exercise.

4 books and a Chakra T-shirt. Plus a couple hundreds of $$ for workshops and retreats.

Your feelings may be very valid!

Originally posted by James R
It's rubbish.

Notice they are trying to sell stuff to you. It's a money making exercise.

Oh, come on, you can do better than that. You and I both suspect that it's rubbish not because they're selling things, but because the content is garbage. Pretty sad that the only reason some people will agree with you is because 'they're selling stuff, and that's spiritually eeevvvillll.'

TheERK:

That the content is rubbish is not immediately obvious. That they are trying to sell a product is.

I think I prefer the CELESTINE PROPHESY. I like my fiction to be listed as fiction.

Originally posted by TheERK
Oh, come on, you can do better than that. You and I both suspect that it's rubbish not because they're selling things, but because the content is garbage. Pretty sad that the only reason some people will agree with you is because 'they're selling stuff, and that's spiritually eeevvvillll.'

It's not that I agree with him, I am saying that his predisposition possibly could be well founded.
I have a bias against anyone who is becoming rich of 'selling' people spirituality.

Richdom is not an admirable virtue.:p

However, the person who is benefiting most from this is infact not the person who wrote the book but the guy selling it, namely this Chalko person.

"It's rubbish.
Notice they are trying to sell stuff to you. It's a money making exercise. "

Exercise your intellect. You can read the online book Thiaoouba Prophency for free. What if we give the book for free for people? Try and see yourself. You will find it in dusbin. We doesn't seem to appreciate what is given for free. I have to say there are lots of inportant information. People usually miss it. That's including myself at the beginning.

Our choice of life is determined and limited by our intellect. Look back your life, you will see that some choices you have made long times doesn't make any sense now. Do you know why?

Look back your life, you will see that some choices you have made long times doesn't make any sense now. Do you know why?

Clearly because he didn't read the Thiaoouba Prophency. Heh. :)

Welcome to Sciforums, The Light!

You pay for the "free" book with your email address. It's not free at all...

I got a few chuckles reading some of the information at that site like this:

"Q. What about toilets on Thiaoouba ?

A. On Thiaoouba they use a kind of device that looks similar to our toilet, but isn't. It simply disintegrates the waste as it comes out - into elementary particles I guess. No water, no paper, no smell, nothing. Michel was scared that this machine might disintegrate his private parts..."

I have a question for those of you who say its rubbish. Have any of you actualy bothered to read the book? Befor you pass it off as a rubbish or a work of fiction, at least take the time to actualy read the book. Preferably you should read it 3 times. So far I have read it twice. I think the book is absolutly mind blowing. Also, as far as the site selling stuff goes. Things aren't free. Someone has to pay the publisher of the book. But even then, they are nice enough to offer the book for free online and you can request that they send you a free copy.

Once again. Please take the time to actualy read the book befor you pass it off as rubbish.

May the spirit enlighten you -- The great Thaori

What did you find mind-blowing about it, in particular, purpleprincessts?

You don't, by any chance, have a financial interest in selling this, do you?

I have read the book and it's complete bullshit.

How do people fall for this crap? :b

and the whole buy clothes and various self-help books from our site and your life will be better, Christ :rolleyes: . I'm surprized Mr. Chalko hasn't jumped on the sect waggon yet, it's quite a lucrative business. Then again he probably has.

oh by the way, There are hundreds of these books out there, and if you were to read each 'true stroy about meeting enlightened beings' without pasing them off as rubbish you would spend a fortune and a whole lot of time. Turst logic and experience, not advertisment.

first off..... I have NO connection with the author of the book or Dr.Tom Chalko. As far as what I found 'mind blowing' about the book. The whole thing. Now if you have read the book and deem it to be crap. The author sugests reading it 3 times at least. Can any of you prove that any part of the book is false? The author was on a radio show with some physicists who had read the book. He challenged them to prove any part of it false. They couldn't. Also, as far as the website selling stuff. We live in a monitary world, stuff isn't free. Web hosting and domain names are not free. Getting a book published is not free. The website also points out that usualy when someone gives you a free book you just toss it asside. How many times have any of you taken literature from a Jehovas witness and just tossed in the trash? From those of you who have read the book at least 3 times I welcome any legitimat criticism of the book. But so far to my knowledge NO ONE has been able to disprove ANY part of the book. Even if you think the authors story is something he cooked up. I think the ideas presented in the book are good ideas. But realy, I don't think anyone on earth has the capacity to cook up such a story. The guy would have to be a brilliant science fiction writer, a brilliant thologan, a brillian historian, a brilliant biblican historian, a brilliant physicist ETC ETC. In my mind the story just fits to well to be the product of someones imagination. As the saying goes "the truth is sometimes stranger than fiction"

Go on then, tell us just one thing from the book that is definitely correct.

(I avoid taking anything like free books from religious people, theres no point throwing them in the bin after.)

I especially liked Michel knows which "abductees" are simply faking their experiences, but he is not allowed to speak about it. It is up to the people to find out who is right. Of course, he has been given evidence that he is not allowed to share. For something that claims not to be a religion, they're asking for a lot of faith...

Well the story would have credit if the 'historical' content of the story had some kind of correlation with scientific evidence.

I have read the book and it's complete bullshit.

How do people fall for this crap? :b

and the whole buy clothes and various self-help books from our site and your life will be better, Christ :rolleyes: . I'm surprized Mr. Chalko hasn't jumped on the sect waggon yet, it's quite a lucrative business. Then again he probably has.

This person has obviously not read the book, at least not completely. I quote directly from the postscript:

"Why do they want to form a new sect or religion with the contents of this book? The hundreds of religions we already have on this planet haven't done much good, have they?"

Even if you don't believe the physical descriptions contained in the book (which have lead to important scientific discoveries, see http://nujournal.net/) you can not fault the main message. Besides, what do Michel Desmarquet or Tom Chalko have to gain from this book? It is priced at minimum cost to cover the expenses of publishing, and is even offered for free to those who can not afford it. Have either of them gained or even attempted to gain any fame? On the contrary, both of them have tried to stay as much away from the public as possible. Michel clearly states that he is not trying and does not want to start a new sect or religion, since that would go against the purpose of writing the book. If this is completely fiction, if this whole thing is a hoax, what are they gaining from it? Why make up details about aliens that seem so fantastic while the main message of the book is so logical? A $1000 reward was offered to anyone who could disprove any sentence in the book. So far no one has taken up the challenge. The book explains so many things that are mysteries to us today.. are these all coincidences?

How do you know they haven't profitted. Because they say so?

Anyway, they don't need to be profitting from this to be false. They may believe this all to be true, and are acting accordingly. People are known to act 'selflessly' for different causes.

A perfect example is Christendom. Many become Nuns and Monks for their faith, others become volunteers and missionarys. Do their selfless deeds mean that the Christian religion is true and valid? Nope.

The book doens't need to be disproved, as the book is making a claim but without any proof. A proofless claim can be considered useless.

Therefore if I said that my dog lays eggs yet I do not show you the dog nor the eggs there is no need to consider my claim, the claim cannot be proved without the proof so to speak. But even though you can say that dogs don't lay eggs therefore it must be false, you actualy have no way of knowing that all dogs don't lay eggs because you haven't seen them all and you can't know if this particular dog does or not. So technicaly you can't disprove a claim that is proofless.

Essentialy disproving something involves showing that the proof (evidence etc..) is false or invalid.

But here we have no proof, hence it cannot be disproved.

It makes me feel sick when people say things like "It's rubbish.
Notice they are trying to sell stuff to you. It's a money making exercise."!!! The book fits almost all unproven theories and makes completely sence.... I KNOW that it e.g. exists psychic abilities like telekinesis! I f you wanna learn it, visit http://www.crystalinks.com/telekinesis.html ... If you doubt, I'm a living proof that it is true!!! I do it every day(am no, I'm neither a maniac, has any psychological injuries or on drugs, I've never used drugs).
And think about it. Do you think 1/4 of the worlds population actully FAKES out of body experiences(OBE, astral projecting, AP, near-death-experiences, etc.)(YES, so many people has OBE's)?
And don't you think that it's a reason that EVERY religion has souls, spirits and one major God and usually many(/some) lesser gods?

Well it is up to you. But if nothing, read the book as fiction! It's good! AFTERWARDS you can comment this article :p Okay?

PS. Archeologs has found a TOTALLY square-shaped piece of metal deep under many layers of clay, and the metal-peiece couldn't have been from Nature itself after what I read... That's a proof for earlier societies!

How do you know they haven't profitted. Because they say so?

I am simply going by the prices on the website. You on the other hand seem to know they profit because.... ?

Anyway, they don't need to be profitting from this to be false. They may believe this all to be true, and are acting accordingly. People are known to act 'selflessly' for different causes.

A perfect example is Christendom. Many become Nuns and Monks for their faith, others become volunteers and missionarys. Do their selfless deeds mean that the Christian religion is true and valid? Nope.

The book is validated not by the faith of its authors, but by its intrinsic logical value. Christianity will remain invalid as long as it contains logical fallacies and contradictions.

The book doens't need to be disproved, as the book is making a claim but without any proof. A proofless claim can be considered useless.

Therefore if I said that my dog lays eggs yet I do not show you the dog nor the eggs there is no need to consider my claim, the claim cannot be proved without the proof so to speak. But even though you can say that dogs don't lay eggs therefore it must be false, you actualy have no way of knowing that all dogs don't lay eggs because you haven't seen them all and you can't know if this particular dog does or not. So technicaly you can't disprove a claim that is proofless.

Essentialy disproving something involves showing that the proof (evidence etc..) is false or invalid.

But here we have no proof, hence it cannot be disproved.


Your analogy is weak - dogs laying eggs does not logically make sense since animals of that family do not reproduce via eggs. If you could not demonstrate the dog physically laying eggs then you would have to demonstrate what makes your dog different from any other, or at least HOW this could come to happen. You can't just make a completely illogical statement and say "I have no proof that my dog lays eggs but you have no proof that my dog DOESN'T lay eggs". As evidence, I give the dictionary definition of proof:

proof Audio pronunciation of "proof" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prf)
n.

1. The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
2.
1. The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions.
2. A statement or argument used in such a validation.
3.
1. Convincing or persuasive demonstration: was asked for proof of his identity; an employment history that was proof of her dependability.
2. The state of being convinced or persuaded by consideration of evidence.


The evidence in the book is the explanation of mysteries long puzzled over by man, the completely logical analysis of our civilisation, as well as stated solutions. It lies in the common sense that every man shares concerning the truth about our 'civilisation' and our very existence.

It makes me feel sick when people say things like "It's rubbish.
Notice they are trying to sell stuff to you. It's a money making exercise."!!! The book fits almost all unproven theories and makes completely sence.... I KNOW that it e.g. exists psychic abilities like telekinesis! I f you wanna learn it, visit http://www.crystalinks.com/telekinesis.html ... If you doubt, I'm a living proof that it is true!!! I do it every day(am no, I'm neither a maniac, has any psychological injuries or on drugs, I've never used drugs).
And think about it. Do you think 1/4 of the worlds population actully FAKES out of body experiences(OBE, astral projecting, AP, near-death-experiences, etc.)(YES, so many people has OBE's)?
And don't you think that it's a reason that EVERY religion has souls, spirits and one major God and usually many(/some) lesser gods?

Well it is up to you. But if nothing, read the book as fiction! It's good! AFTERWARDS you can comment this article :p Okay?

I have experienced many things. I have no direct experience of Telekensis and I have no real reason to believe in it.

However I have had OBE's on several occasions. Infact I trained myself to "Astral project" however doing this with an open mind, ie not believing that I will actualy leave my body just concentrating on the meditation itself.

And yes it worked marvelously. I had bells and whistles and electrical surges throughout my body and bang I was out and there was me sleeping in my bed. I went on to do this on several occasions, practicing nightly.

But my dream-like feeling of leaving the body, despite being incredibly realistic still does not constitute the truth of the 'Astral dimention'. It could have been a very realistic lucid dream as I am a frequent lucid dreamer and I have had very vivid ones. I even tried proving it with different tricks on several occasions but failed inevitably.

And, yes there is a reason why all religions have a soul teaching, thats because I believe we have one. But this soul isn't neccesarily metaphysical, it can verywell be contained solely in our physical being as science ascribes it, but that doesn't make our concious awareness anyless amazing or wonderfull.

Anyway, this discussion is not about unexplained phenomena, it's about this book.

And yes I picked up the book as a possible explenation for my experiences, I read it, found it quite entertaining. A nice little science *fiction* new-age spiritualist story. Not the most enthraling language or the most creative plot or the most well thought out esoteric references. Just a nice little read.

There were some parts that I thought were clever but a bit too obvious, for example the mystery man in the suspended state whom I assume we are supposed to assume is Jesus. 'One day he will awake' or something like that.

The delving of the psychosphere was also an interesting read as I was entertaining the idea of a universal 'akhashic record'.

So infact I am very open to metaphysical claims about the nature of the universe. My OBE experience might be actual experiences of dimentions that are unaccounted for by science.

I am OPEN to them, this does not mean I believe in them.

The elementary yet strangely convincing language of 'You must not belive this book you must know' is very, very missleading. As there is NO POSSIBLE WAY of actualy KNOWING the truth of that book without experiencing it first hand. It's not an enlightenment or a feeling that 'Yes, yes it has to be that way.', because No, no it does not have to be that way.

I am simply going by the prices on the website. You on the other hand seem to know they profit because.... ?

I never said that I know they proffit, I just assume it from the context. No better than assuming that they don't profit from it I'd say.

The book is validated not by the faith of its authors, but by its intrinsic logical value. Christianity will remain invalid as long as it contains logical fallacies and contradictions.

The book contains metaphysical claims as explenations for the nature of the universe. This is as of yet untestable by scientific methods and cannot be considered from societys point of view as evidence for the validity of the book.

You cannot disprove metaphysical claims. But can't prove them either.


Your analogy is weak - dogs laying eggs does not logically make sense since animals of that family do not reproduce via eggs. If you could not demonstrate the dog physically laying eggs then you would have to demonstrate what makes your dog different from any other, or at least HOW this could come to happen. You can't just make a completely illogical statement and say "I have no proof that my dog lays eggs but you have no proof that my dog DOESN'T lay eggs". As evidence, I give the dictionary definition of proof:

Admittedly my analogy was quite crap, so to redeem it I will have to make it metaphysical...

Dogs in the 7th parallell universe lay eggs. My dog exists in the 7th parallell universe. Therefore my dog lays eggs.

Good luck disproving that statement. ;)


The evidence in the book is the explanation of mysteries long puzzled over by man, the completely logical analysis of our civilisation, as well as stated solutions. It lies in the common sense that every man shares concerning the truth about our 'civilisation' and our very existence.

An explenation that draws on metaphysical proof for it's own validity is certainly not viable or usable in a public situation in any way. And if I were you I wouldn't throw the 'common sense' arguement into this because of the nature of the statement 'common sense'.

Common sense implys a common consensus as to what is sensible and what is not. Today's common consensus of sensibility is to blindly accept the workings of our society. To be a passive goods-consuming cog in the clockwork of the system and to unqestioningly accept any claims of truth that our society imposes on us.

Do you want to be a cog? I don't think so.

PS. Archeologs has found a TOTALLY square-shaped piece of metal deep under many layers of clay, and the metal-peiece couldn't have been from Nature itself after what I read... That's a proof for earlier societies!

By the way I had to ignore this statement, as there is no source reference.

Google didn't help either.

Interesting that the only people who opposed my statement were people who seemed to make an account here for the sole purpouse of proving their support of this book.

I expect never to hear from any of them again on this thread.

I never said that I know they proffit, I just assume it from the context. No better than assuming that they don't profit from it I'd say.

If you look at the website's bookshop, you will see the price is US$19. I think you will find that this is pretty close to the minimum publishing cost. Here are a couple of websites I had a look at:

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2002/12/03/prices/print.html
http://216.183.124.100/bookpricing/chart2.pdf

If you can find cheaper publishing, I'd like to see it. Even disregarding the cost of the book - it is also offered for free online! There goes your profit motive.


The book contains metaphysical claims as explenations for the nature of the universe. This is as of yet untestable by scientific methods and cannot be considered from societys point of view as evidence for the validity of the book.

You cannot disprove metaphysical claims. But can't prove them either.

I agree that metaphysical claims regarding the wider nature of the universe are hard to prove. But what about real physical knowledge that was derived from the book's 'story'? What about consistent facts concerning the history of humans on this planet? Do you really think that the author - a farmer - has the knowledge or capability to lie about things as technical as this? Or is this a conspiracy between other people and the author is just a front-man (and again I ask why? Obviously not for money or fame. You can't fault the book's morality either? Where's the motive?)


Admittedly my analogy was quite crap, so to redeem it I will have to make it metaphysical...

Dogs in the 7th parallell universe lay eggs. My dog exists in the 7th parallell universe. Therefore my dog lays eggs.

Good luck disproving that statement. ;)

First you would have to prove that your dog exists in the 7th parallel universe. You have made an illogical statement with no supporting statements.


Common sense implys a common consensus as to what is sensible and what is not. Today's common consensus of sensibility is to blindly accept the workings of our society. To be a passive goods-consuming cog in the clockwork of the system and to unqestioningly accept any claims of truth that our society imposes on us.

Do you want to be a cog? I don't think so.

That's not called 'common sense', that's called 'apathy'. You seem to be confused.


Interesting that the only people who opposed my statement were people who seemed to make an account here for the sole purpouse of proving their support of this book.

I expect never to hear from any of them again on this thread.

Getting a little ahead of yourself there?


You have yet to disprove any statement made in the book - you can't even make a vague logical dent. I would suggest you try reading the book.

:D I have read the book.

It wasn't that amazing. Just some wild claims.

But what about real physical knowledge that was derived from the book's 'story'? What about consistent facts concerning the history of humans on this planet? Do you really think that the author - a farmer - has the knowledge or capability to lie about things as technical as this? Or is this a conspiracy between other people and the author is just a front-man (and again I ask why? Obviously not for money or fame. You can't fault the book's morality either? Where's the motive?)

What physical knowledge? What consistent facts about human history?

There was, as soon as Michel is beamed up all physical knowledge ends. I have yet to see any excavations of atlantis, ancient lemuria or any evidence whatsoever of civilizations existing 100,000 years ago.

Yes, the atlantis/lemuria myths exist, that is not evidence for your claim of the turth of the book rather these myths pre-exist the book by many many years. Anyone could write a book about them.

The journey to the 9th planet as physical knowledge? Please.

Furthermore I even consulted an astrophysics phD about the possibility of the moon being a body captured from space. And he quite quickly assured me that this was impossible according to the maths we have today.

Now. I am NOT and astrophysics phD, so I can't show you the mathematics. But I damn well respect the oppinion of those more educated in the field.

That goes for the faster-than lightspeed spaceships aswell. Since I don't know any better Einstiens hypothesis that nothing can travel faster than light still holds for me.

As for the existence of other dimentions. It is granted that qantum mechanics has proved some quite anomalous behaviour at the subatomic scale which has led to the theoretical mathematics of string theory which hypothesises the existence of subatomic dimentions, up to 21 (very unsure about this number) of them. The existence of these dimentions can not be tested. So they will forever remain theoretical.

Just like this book. It can't be tested. So. It will remain theoretical.

I have no need to question the motives of writing the book indepth. Maybe they just want the attention. But it's not that incredible a book. After a couple of years of research many people with a good creative mind could write this book. It's sometimes said that everyone has atleast one good book in them. I don't know if this is true, but I realy can't see what makes this book so much more incredible or true than any other fiction.

First you would have to prove that your dog exists in the 7th parallel universe. You have made an illogical statement with no supporting statements.

You have taken my point exactly. These are the kind of claims that this book makes. Yes it has a nice story for it all. The great thaori creating the universe and all that. But the story of the creation of the universe is all metaphysical shite, so worth nothing in the context. So the claims are there bare and alone with nothing to support them.



Do you know what I am doing here. I am exercising free thought. I am using my mind. Afterall thats what Mr. Chalko is asking the world to do. To THINK FOR THEMSELVES or something like that.

Well thats exactly what I am trying to do.

Am I making the WRONG CHOICE by questioning the book? Because I have, based on logical deduction, rejected the book will I be doomed to be stuck on this 1st grade rock for an eternity of life times?

What if I have exercised compasion and love for all sentient beings. Trained my mind in tought and meditation and the arts of astral projection. Had aenemas daily and never eaten meat and only wore clothes that match my aura. But still find this book to be a load of crap?

I think Chalko makes a certain statement in his book. The freedom of choice. The whole rest of the book builds on the negation of this one question.

Can a house build itself?

Well. The answere you see. Is quite simply.

A house doesn't need to build itself because it is already a house.

PS. Archeologs has found a TOTALLY square-shaped piece of metal deep under many layers of clay, and the metal-peiece couldn't have been from Nature itself after what I read... That's a proof for earlier societies!

As one who is actively studying the field of archaeology, I would greatly appreciate a citation or more information to that alleged artifact. I doubt it will be forthcoming, however, as most supporters of new-age nonsense and rubbish such as this rarely cite actual facts in their contexts. They stick to hyperbole, out-of-context tidbits of information, and outright fabrications instead.

But since archaeology is a sub-discipline of anthropology, I'm also actively studying the power of belief systems and "magical thinking" of man, past and present. So this is an interesting subject.

I can't help but notice that there are several posters with between 1 and 6 posts: the light; purpleprincessts; Vinay; and insight1234. One must wonder if they are all connected to each other or the author in ways that go beyond being mere advocates of the book, despite their instance otherwise. Doubtless, "thiaoouba prophecy" was googled and showed the sciforums link, perhaps they are (or "he/she" is) engaging in a public relations attempt in order to counter what other "googlers" might find in searching.

To those googlers... be warned.... if you really want the book for yourself, make up a hotmail/yahoo account then go here: http://www.bioresonant.com/freebooks.html to "apply" for a free ebook.

For more information on the rubbish in the Thiaoouba Prophecy, see this link (http://skepdic.com/comments/aurascom.html).

For a previous sciforums thread, click here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=6426&page=2&pp=20&highlight=Thiaoouba).

Here's another sf thread... at the end of this one, even crazymikey (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=10656&highlight=Desmarquet) thought it was hogwash.

Indeed, Desmarquet's marketing strategy seems to be to post to various webboards on the internet: yet another spam thread on this poppycock. (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=10785)

As to Dr. Chalko's paper, a student wrote a paper that concludes the following:
It seems that both Chalko’s model and a simpler model based on solution of the same partial differential equation, are way off the commonly accepted idea of core temperatures, presumably between 6000 and 7000 degrees. Chalko’s model is even less appropriate because it predicts an infinitely negative temperature for the core centre when less cooling is expected, a generally opposite trend to what is expected.
The paper was written by a student at the Univ. of Melbourne, the same Uni as Chalko. Looking at Chalko's paper (core.pdf) (http://www.nujournal.net/core.pdf), its easy to see that he's out of his field (lasers)... there's a lack of demonstrating discussion for his contention. A page and a half to demonstrate that if the Earth's core cools, it'll result in an explosion. Come on... even Paul W. Dixon would give us more than that!

after reading the book and giving it some serious thought i came to the conclusion that most if not all of your claims are somewhat valid.
there is a lot of logic behid this book (A LoT) and it will take quiet a lot of time for a person to research these materials, but it's still not impossible...
there is a contridicion in the phrase "it's not enought to believe you have to know since" since knowing involves experience, and he brings me no experience of any of the things writen about in his book,
the only reason we have for believing the book is because he told us so...
the thing that most intriuged me about this entire ordeal is that they (michael and dr.chalko) didn't do it for the money nor for fame
and it than seems pretty much pointless, unless there is some other reason' or perhapse their telling the truth.

Wow... yet another screen name for Desmarquet or his marketer(s).

SkinWalker

If you want a quick laugh you should try reading a little bit of the Chalko guys book "Freedom of choice." (Get it free form the Web)

Trust me, it's hillarious.

The logic in almost each and every line is simply invalid. And the rehtoric style it is written in, while far from convincing, will keep you looking for all the tricks he uses.

It's such bullshit that it resembles more a joke than a serious book.

i'm no working for Michel or anyone associated with him,
and i'm not trying to sell you the book or convience you that what it's saying is right...just giving you my opinion.
i'm really insulted that you automatically think that because i gave the impression i believe what is said in the book (which i'm not sure about yet) it means that i work for the guy who wrote it.
and even if you wrote it as a joke it still shows that your not really open to changing your mind about the book, which prevents any real conclusions to come out of this discussion (other than the ones you came in with).

You said, "there's a lot of logic behid (sic) his book."

Anyone that would make that statement is either working for the guy, is the guy, or doesn't understand logic.

ok um well im kinda neutral in this whole prophecy thingy, im just reading it, so i'll will start with pros to the propechy and cons

pros

1. we have seen ufo's i mean there are other civilisations around the huge galaxy, otherwise ppl wo think were alone, have a very shallow prespective of life

2,people CAN DO KI/CHI/PSI, chinese people have been teaching about it for centuraries,

3, In egypt, People have done the pyramids with laser precision, sure aint can do it with a hammer,

cons

1, How does micheal know if they are good? maybe they are telling him lies? i mean do we have proof that they tell the truth?

2. Cant they check if hes lieing, um lie detactors maybe?

3.you cant expect 6 billion people to stop using tvs, cars and other technological devices, i mean we are doing progress, eg recycling, and ppl do care about natrue in a big or small way,

4. You cant just say one day, everything is free, from pda to tvs!!!!! i mean it would be chaos, i mean people would stop working, ppl would die from hunger,

5. about the moon crashing to earth theory, well the moon is moving precisely 1,2345 cm a year

6, they havent found a second big crater on earth just one, so were's the second one,

7, if the aliens are so smart and stuff, they should know that no one would believe micheal right? and that we woudnt change our ways right?









one thing i tthink everybody agrees on is that we dont need any politicians lol or govermentlol the guy here in ontario who wants to ban pit bulls dont know how a pit bull looks like(till they showed him lol) on tv they asked him to show a pitbull from photos, and he pointed to a german shepherd lol talk about national embarrsment

*5. about the moon crashing to earth theory, well the moon is moving precisely 1 cm a way from the earth

So far, a total of 6 accounts have been created on sciforums solely in order to post 1 or 2 replies to this single thread. All of these have defended the book to a larger or smaller degree.

Convenient coincidence, eh. The most likely explanation is, of course, that they are supporters requested by the author to search google and support his fiction as fact wherever they find it. Or that it is the author himself.

well, I don't know about the rest of those guyz...
I DID in fact only come here to talk about the book
after reading it I googled the name thiaoouba and found this forum.

after reading everything you had to say I posted my opinion
and btw i'm not saying that the book is true, i'm still undecided about that.

if you automatically think the book is wrong of course you'll think anyone defending it is working for chalko...

now here is my onest opinion after reading chalko's "meaning of life"...
chalko is either a fraud or an idiot (no offence if anyone really is working for him) possibly both.... the guy really has a lot to learn yet.
on the other hand micheal doesn't seem to me as anyone I should be worried about.
i want you guyz to answer a question of mine -
what does micheal stand to gain if he really gets a big audience for his book?
(let's assume they all downloaded the book for free online)
and what does anyone stand to lose by following the advice writen in the book?

oh...and another thing
what can i possibly do or say (besides telling you i decided that i don't believe what the book has to say) that will prove i'm not working for anyone related to that book?

If after having read some of Chalkos material and upon agreeing that he is as you say either a complete moron or a complete fraud, I have no doubt that you are a sensible person.

Now simply putting down people only for the sake of doing it is not much of a pass-time. But when people buy into certain things that quite obviously just wrong, it becomes a more serious issue.

Now who justifies right and wrong you may ask, I think the answere to this is something we need to discover by ourselves. Not by the word of someone else.

well, I can't prove the book is either true or not, so everything written in it remains as "possibly true"...or not
for me it means that I wont do anything purely for the sake of what is written in the book.
what intrests me the most right now is the fact the micheal seems to have no motive to write this book.
If the book is available for free online than he makes no money out of it...
the only other reason I can think of to write this book would be out of general concern for society (this has no implications on whether what is written in it is true or not).
but if it is false than why add all kinds of other useless 'information'
e.g. how sound can hurt our astral body and things of the sort

Money, status, and prestige are powerful motivators.

http://www.meanwell.com.au/page2.html

For AUD $95, you can attend workshops by the only two people authorized by the Thiaouba author to teach the material:
Some of the topics covered include:

• Who is God?
• Reincarnation and Life after Death
• Categories of Evolution
• Intelligent Life on other Planets
• Destiny & Free Will
• Soul Mates
• Deja Vu
• How to communicate with your Higher Self
• The Great Pyramid - a cosmic tool
• The Bermuda Pyramid - a parallel universe
• The Real You (your Astral Body - Soul)

You can even get a 3 cd set of interviews with Michel Desmarquet for AUD $65 ($55 if you live in Australia).

Well done SkinWalker, you seem to have found the missing link in the puzzle.

Is it possible that some of the money raised could one day be put into university library of pay for college courses. Maybe some of the so called capitalist scheme money may actually go towards a foundation or eco-system project. Helping world understand about pollution and remedies would cost a great deal would it not..It is not all about cash in the till my friends. Lets not judge about the excessive cash unless you see these guys driving mercedes benz and living lifes of opulance and excess.
Instead remember if at the very least we have a greater understanding about the fragile world we live in, or possible enhanced spirituality, the book(which I have read) could be the starting point to help change the same old life as we have been accustom to. I for one believe in much of it, and maybe that is really all that counts.
Peace I am out!

Sure. That's all possible. But isn't it possible that the so-called "capitalist scheme" is going to booze, weed and chicks?

But, hey, as long as you believe in it, that's all that matters.

Please by all means...anybody...salaries and company spending is a thing which is recorded. Go and find the reports of these people and bring up a charge of alligation if there is one. First let us start with the federal earning sheets and income tax reports for persons, and business. It would be very interesting to find out if there is substance to some clouds of doubt. :D

Well...I think i'm finally resolved.
and not because i came to a conclusion on whether the book is true or not, but because I realized that it is irrelevant.
I consider most of the advice in the book to be good advice, although I don't know about things such as noise and sound pollution.
you can always find excuses to prove the book is true or false, it might be a self-help book with a twist(money making scam),
or it can be a description of actuall events and michael just decided it can be *profitable* (against the purpose of the book).
the book's perspective on the monitery system is actully in my opinion quite advance, perhapse too advance for us,
because making a new system that does not require trade will require a lot, and I mean A LOT of good will from people,
in other words it will require people to work without being paid (at least not directly, now how many people are willing to do that?).
on the other hand...you wont have to pay for anything, but again you'll have to have good will and use other people's efforts moderatly.

I think i got a little of subject...a word of advice to anyone who reads this book -
always use wise discrimination, don't accept anything that doesn't seem logical, and remember the difference between belief and knowledge -
knowledge is something you experienced therfore you know it is true
belief is an idea of something you did not experience and you can accept or reject it according to your knowledge.
always remember that knowldege is stronger than belief.

Whats if the worst thing that happens is we download the free book and some how become more aware of our planetary circle and this fragile rock we live on. If we become more spiritual and aware because of this book.....it was free....not to dam shabby if you ask me. Hell the french revolution started when someone was giving away cake ...what do ya say! This single book weither true or not could make all of us think just a little harder about this planet and each other..hell just for once think of the big picture instead of your wallets.

In just the first six pages, Desmarquet makes several fallacious comments and un-testable, but pseudoscientific, appeals to the reader's intellect. He might as well state that there exists in his garage a dragon and that it cannot be disproved because he can give a reason for every test conceived: invisible, weightless, non-corporeal, etc. To those that have read it, I'm borrowing Dr. Sagan's analogy in Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

Desmarquet relies heavily on pseudoscience to make his point right from the beginning. There's a dialog between he and Thao where she points out that Desmarquet arrived at a "parallel universe" through a "warp" such as that which exists at the Bermuda Triangle.

It should be noted that the so-called Bermuda Triangle has never been demonstrated to be anything more than a region of increased ship/airplane traffic due to its geography: warm climate, high population among the Caribbean islands, historically important agricultural center, tourism, etc. Statistically, there is no more significance of catastrophic loss of ships, planes, and people than any other region of the world when the level of traffic is considered. This, however, is lost to significance junkies who only see a large number of "unexplained" losses and cling to the stories told by those who love a good mystery.

The Bermuda Triangle anecdote is Desmarquet's first fallacious statement.

But his convenient use of "parallel universes" and "warps" to them is a pseudoscientific attempt at appealing to the un-testable. This is the dragon in his garage.

The Parallel Universe anecdote is Desmarquet's first pseudoscientific appeal to the un-testable.

Before even arriving at page 6, Desmarquet says that Thao informs him that he is in a world where "time has stopped" and the people there (some for as long as 15,000 years) don't age and their bodies don't rot. Moreover, the people that Thao has to kill who are approaching he and Desmarquet, and are have been there 15,000 years, apparently don't have language facilities but utter "guttural sounds." Perhaps Desmarquet is under the impression that 15,000 years ago, people on Earth were cave men and without language or culture and were "stuck" this way upon entering the "warp" to the "parallel universe."

This is a fallacious assumption since we have an archaeological record that demonstrates that not only were H. sapiens capable of language, they apparently lived in villages and some creative abilities. In addition, these people had art. Moreover, one would not be presumptuous to assume that they would have developed this culture and technology in the 15,000 years that they were away from their home universe.

The a priori assumption that people didn't have enough culture to speak 15,000 years ago is Desmarquet's second fallacious statement.

The notion that time can simply "stop" is Desmarquet's second pseudoscientific appeal to the un-testable.

And that is only before page 6! The rest of the book continues on the same grain. They travel "several times faster than the speed of light," etc.

But not a shred of evidence to any of it. That leaves only a few possibilities:

1) Desmarquet is telling the truth and the events did occur as he retold them.
2) Desmarquet is telling the truth as he believes it, and the events did not occur at all.
3) Desmarquet is telling the truth as he believes it, and some of the events occurred.
4) Desmarquet is lying.

I think we can rule out number 1 based solely on the Bermuda Triangle statement. The Bermuda Triangle is not a mystery and there is nothing more mysterious about it than most other places ships go. But I can see where there would be an argument against my position on that, since it's human nature to be a 'significance junkie' and be impressed with numbers. Otherwise, politicians wouldn't attempt to appeal to voters with them, ad agencies wouldn't live and breath them, and baseball would be boring.

I also think we can dismiss number 4, though not quite as readily as number 1. To tell a story this detailed and say it's true, you have to believe some part of it. If not, you must really think the rest of the world is more gullible than even P.T. Barnum did.

That leaves 2 and 3. If it's 3, then perhaps Desmarquet had an experience that seemed mystical to him, but occurred right her on solid Earth. There are numerous recorded instances in both contemporary times as well as in ancient history in which people were duped into believing that they "passed into another world." These types of events usually occur after the participant partakes in rituals of repetition, physical stress, and/or ingestion of chemical agent. For some, these events have been so real, so vivid, and so "enlightening," they believed them to be religious experiences. And they probably were religious. If not with some actual deity, then by some stimulation of the alleged "god module" of the brain.

But number 2 is my bet. I think Desmarquet started his fantasy as a fiction but then "went native." He came to believe that he was a part of something "bigger than himself." Something grandiose. This is where he satisfies that need for fulfillment and achievement of status that is present in us all, particularly in those that claim not to covet it. In short, he's delusional.

Consider this passage (p. 148):

‘Man, like a piece of rock, is made of matter, but, by neutralising the cold magnetic force by raising certain high frequency vibrations, we become ‘weightless’. Then, in order to move and direct our movement, we introduce vibrations of a different frequency. As you can see, the apparatus that accomplishes this is for us quite simple. This same principle was used by the builders of the pyramids of Mu, Atlantis and Egypt.

Pure bunk. "Neutralising the cold magnetic force by raising certain high frequency vibrations" is nothing but pseudoscientific gibberish. It sounds scientific, but only to the undereducated. Vibrations are present in matter, but their frequency doesn't affect their "weight." Raising vibrations to higher frequencies doesn't negate the attraction that the mass of the given bit of matter has on the mass of other matter. Indeed, the methods by which monumental architecture was built in Mesoamerica or Northern Africa (several thousand years and even more thousand miles apart, I might add) are relatively well known and understood. There was no "levitation" as Desmarquet suggests. It wasn't needed.

But the most significant bit of information that Desmarquet cites in that passage is the mythical city of Atlantis and the fictional city of Mu. The former is mostly a modern myth, not even an ancient one. Plato invented it for his dialogs Critias and Timaeus when he criticized the state of Athens for its incursions against the Persians. It was not until Ignatius Donnelly wrote Atlantis: the Antediluvian World in1882 that Atlantis actually gained any popularity.

Mu, however, is an entirely fictional city that was created in the mind of “Colonel” James Churchward. He stated that Mu was a highly advanced civilization that existed on a continent in the Pacific Ocean, which sank after the "explosion" of "gas pockets," leaving only Hawaii, Samoa, Tahiti, and Easter Island. When Mu sank, massive worldwide earthquakes caused all civilization to collapse into savagery. Not surprisingly, the good "colonel" provides not a shred of evidence, only his "word" that he translated correctly the stone tablets that told the tale; the same tablets that have never been seen by anyone except the good "colonel."

His word from 1924 doesn't stand up to even the most rudimentary of scientific examinations today. The islands he mentioned are created by well-understood volcanic process that involves "hot spots" under the crust and plate tectonics. If a continent ever existed in the region, it would be extremely obvious and quite visible to magnetometer examinations of the sort that have occurred extensively in the region he suggested.

So Desmarquet is piggybacking the fictions of at least two sources independent of him: Plato and Churchwood. That alone, validates numbers 2 and 3 above.

And we haven't even discussed the nonsense about the world exploding due to man's poor stewardship of the planet. Such grandiose delusions have been associated with UFO nutters for over 50 years. Indeed, Heaven's Gate and the Raelians adapted this theme within their own "manifestos."

It seems clear that Desmarquet is simply a cult of personality. It is no accident that there is a cottage industry around his book.

hehe.

If you accept the 'logic' and unfounded claims in this book. Then you should try reading some of Aleister Crowlys work, Helena P. Blavatskyies theosophy, Anton LaVey's Satanic Verses. Have you read about Scientology?

The logic provided in these works are usualy even better founded than this so called thiaoouba (perhaps with the exception of LaVey. For example pick up Blavatskies 'The Secret Doctrine' and then try to disprove one thing in it.

yes good points Skinwalker, well put...I am also very familiar with the Bermuda triangle. I kinda live close to it. I don't believe that stuff about some sort of portal. It is a very dangerous area where 2 major currents collide off Cape Hatteras and continues down. The atlantic and Labridor current. Also Cape hatteras was always known by us here in the mid atlantic for a place of unfortunate nautical events.

Maybe I should say about this book more clearly is we could benefit from a closer look at our present conditions here on earth and our self is the essense of what I gather.There are many hockie things about it..when I make the comment I believe ..I believe the good that could come out of people concentrating on self improvement and global issues.

The world is fucked no matter what I do.

But I'm still going to go live in a tree. The world no longer concerns me! :b

4 books and a Chakra T-shirt. Plus a couple hundreds of $$ for workshops and retreats.

Your feelings may be very valid!

Indeed, money making exercises are not very welcome. What do you suggest?

It's not that I agree with him, I am saying that his predisposition possibly could be well founded.
I have a bias against anyone who is becoming rich of 'selling' people spirituality.

Richdom is not an admirable virtue.:p

However, the person who is benefiting most from this is infact not the person who wrote the book but the guy selling it, namely this Chalko person.

Noone can say that has become more spiritual just because he/she has spent money on it, anyway.

Well the story would have credit if the 'historical' content of the story had some kind of correlation with scientific evidence.

Maybe there is something wrong with your scientific evidence? (I would like to become informed of it and discuss it)

In general The scientific evidence that you are talking about must be seriously inhibited by the way they are found and the limits of the technology available for searching and finding such evidence.

What is your outlook on "where to" the scientific establishment that we have today is leading us?

I find it intrestingly amusing that those who consider the book to be "crap and bullshit" are not "really" intrested to find out if any of the content of the book that is possible to make subject to research and verification is true or not.

Such kind of people are really hopeless since they seem unable to imagine the impact, effect and the result of changes, the information given in the book can make on the whole humanity on earth, providing that "if" what is written in the book is "true" meaning that the spiritual/technological way of progress explained in the book can really be achieved.

The world is fucked no matter what I do.

But I'm still going to go live in a tree. The world no longer concerns me! :b

I think you should if you say so... :bugeye:

Such kind of people are really hopeless since they seem unable to imagine the impact, effect and the result of changes, the information given in the book can make on the whole humanity on earth, providing that "if" what is written in the book is "true" meaning that the spiritual/technological way of progress explained in the book can really be achieved.

Pascal's Wager applied to the Thiaoouba "Prophecy?"

Desmarquet uses the fictional tools of "Mu" and "Atlantis" and expects his readers to accept that his own fictions "might" be true?

I'm all for protecting and conserving our environment and our humanity, but Desmarquet is still either lying or a nut.

Pascal's Wager applied to the Thiaoouba "Prophecy?"

Desmarquet uses the fictional tools of "Mu" and "Atlantis" and expects his readers to accept that his own fictions "might" be true?

I'm all for protecting and conserving our environment and our humanity, but Desmarquet is still either lying or a nut.

It is simply a logical fact that any fiction "can/might" be true. I don't answer for Desmarquet, what he expects is his own business. Each reader of his books has his/her own collections of links to what they understand as "reality", "truth" etc. what they do with what they read is their business not yours and not mine.

You don't even seem to see that you even can't say "Desmarquet is a liar" your claim is not backed up with proof...so is the book...

Please understand that even if the stories about "Mu" and "Atlantis" are true. We will need thousands of years to verify if such a thing can be reached through a very well balanced spiritual/material development. And that is if we deliberately aim at it.

It doesn't seem to me that it is a bad idea anyway, even if there is a 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000001%chance that we might learn to get rid of money and monetary systems, rationality and morality tells me to take the chance.

Convenient coincidence, eh. The most likely explanation is, of course, that they are supporters requested by the author to search google and support his fiction as fact wherever they find it. Or that it is the author himself.

I doubt the author of such a "fiction" is as stupid as you think he is. Another explanation can be that people are researching to either "approve" or "disqualify" the book.

If after having read some of Chalkos material and upon agreeing that he is as you say either a complete moron or a complete fraud, I have no doubt that you are a sensible person.

Now simply putting down people only for the sake of doing it is not much of a pass-time. But when people buy into certain things that quite obviously just wrong, it becomes a more serious issue.

Now who justifies right and wrong you may ask, I think the answere to this is something we need to discover by ourselves. Not by the word of someone else.

You contradict yourself

So, the author says unto you:

"Jump off of this cliff and there is a 0.00000000000000000000000001%
chance that you might learn to get rid of money and monetary systems."

:m: Will you jump?

As long as humans have the innate capacity to believe in that which they cannot affirm, money and monetary systems will remain and endure. The original capitalists, the Assyrians, have proven the enduring nature of capitalism; and it is wealth that provides people with status and legitimacy according to their belief systems. And it is wealth that provides order among the many different belief systems, each of which is competing for legitimacy and often status.

Hey that fish looks like an idiot

As long as humans have the innate capacity to believe in that which they cannot affirm, money and monetary systems will remain and endure. The original capitalists, the Assyrians, have proven the enduring nature of capitalism; and it is wealth that provides people with status and legitimacy according to their belief systems. And it is wealth that provides order among the many different belief systems, each of which is competing for legitimacy and often status.

yes, SO?

Now that was an intellectual response.

What people cannot affirm to you and what you cannot affirm to yourself, is not what others believe in and what you don't believe.

Hey that fish looks like an idiot

So, you think it's worth the chance as long as there is no personal risk to yourself, right?

:m: Peace.

More than that, I think it's worth it as long as I can conclude with high probabilities, the chance of gaining a profit. In this case a GREAT profit!

Probabilities are determined by applying the frequency and accuracy of past observations to a given hypothesis. When I flip my switch on and my light doesn't come on, I can say that "it is probable that the bulb is burned out." This is because in the past this has been the case. It is also possible that someone broke into my home and unscrewed the bulb, that the bulb unscrewed itself, that a mouse chewed through the wires, that the switch is broken, etc. But these simply aren't as probable as the burned out bulb hypothesis due to past observation.

I would then ask you, what past observations do you use to "conclude" what you do about Desmarquet's fantasies?

Which one, of his "fantasies"? :)

Robanan you sound suspiciously like mr T.J. Chalko himself, who is possibly the biggest fraud in the entire lie of all that is Thiaoouba.

How is it so evident:

1. Great undoubting devotion to the thiaoouba cause.

2. An argument style that is purely rhetorical and lacks all forms of logical consistency.

3. Curt, almost rude remarks on posts a style consistent with what he displays on the Q&A forums of his website.

It should be noted that the so-called Bermuda Triangle has never been demonstrated to be anything more than a region of increased ship/airplane traffic due to its geography: warm climate, high population among the Caribbean islands, historically important agricultural center, tourism, etc. Statistically, there is no more significance of catastrophic loss of ships, planes, and people than any other region of the world when the level of traffic is considered. This, however, is lost to significance junkies who only see a large number of "unexplained" losses and cling to the stories told by those who love a good mystery.

:cool: I think maybe GOD has taken them to put them in hell for their sins. :eek:

Do you even care that people sometimes get lost? Imagine you have lost a loved one and nobody can "explain" how!
You have no reasons to think that all the stories are just and "only" made by those who love to make mysteries.

The Parallel Universe anecdote is Desmarquet's first pseudoscientific appeal to the un-testable.
I know that "You", at "This" moment cannot test it and you think it's untestable. Why? One could very well test that.

Before even arriving at page 6, Desmarquet says that Thao informs him that he is in a world where "time has stopped" and the people there (some for as long as 15,000 years) don't age and their bodies don't rot. Moreover, the people that Thao has to kill who are approaching he and Desmarquet, and are have been there 15,000 years, apparently don't have language facilities but utter "guttural sounds." Perhaps Desmarquet is under the impression that 15,000 years ago, people on Earth were cave men and without language or culture and were "stuck" this way upon entering the "warp" to the "parallel universe."

What we know about time is merely a little bit more than what our watches seemengly show. Moreover, Our common "understanding" of "Time" is so feeble that many are starting to believe that what is written in the book is actually "True". Many others are starting to understand that "re-evaluating" and "improving" our common understanding of "Time" is inevitable.

Robanan you sound suspiciously like mr T.J. Chalko himself, who is possibly the biggest fraud in the entire lie of all that is Thiaoouba.

How is it so evident:

1. Great undoubting devotion to the thiaoouba cause.

2. An argument style that is purely rhetorical and lacks all forms of logical consistency.

3. Curt, almost rude remarks on posts a style consistent with what he displays on the Q&A forums of his website.

1. Great undoubting devotion to the thiaoouba cause or great intrest into learning something new?

2. An argument style that is purely rhetorical and lacks all forms of logical consistency or crude logical reasoning?

3. Curt, almost rude remarks on posts a style consistent with... or using your own words?

Moreover, Our common "understanding" of "Time" is so feeble that many are starting to believe that what is written in the book is actually "True".

Many? How many? Where are these declarations? Is there a list of them somewhere? I just want to get a feel for this "many" you speak of...



Many others are starting to understand that "re-evaluating" and "improving" our common understanding of "Time" is inevitable.

This is always happening, it's a function of the scientific community. That's what scientists do! My search-fu is weak today, but I'm sure people have been studying and questioning our understanding of time since before this book was written.

Many? How many? Where are these declarations? Is there a list of them somewhere? I just want to get a feel for this "many" you speak of...

Imagine as many as would make you feel agitated.


This is always happening, it's a function of the scientific community. That's what scientists do! My search-fu is weak today, but I'm sure people have been studying and questioning our understanding of time since before this book was written.

Very good, so Do we know enough to conclude that for example time cannot stop?

And true to Desmarquet's style of creating speculations that cannot be tested, so does his cohort Robanan toss out "esoteric" terms and conditions.

The failure of Desmarquet to present a story that is even interesting as fiction is excused to the notion that it must be true because it cannot be disproven. Robanan wants us all to accept his invisible dragon.

Before you know it, Levia and Dina will join him in this discussion group, each presenting their "testimonials" to the veracity of the Thiaoouba Fantasy, a story without any real substance that isn't even passable as fiction.

I would then ask you, what past observations do you use to "conclude" what you do about Desmarquet's fantasies?

Let's take the fantasy of a system that does not "entrap" individuals into a materialistic monetary system.

please correct me if Im wrong:
*1 In any given system I can "profit" under specific conditions.
*2 When I see that people who meet these conditions frequently "profit". I realize that the probability of me to "profit" -providing that I meet those specific conditions- is higher than the probability of me to profit under conditions, other than those specific ones given in the statement *1.

Probabilities are determined by applying the frequency and accuracy of past observations to a given hypothesis.

This model for determining probabilities has always been taken into consideration and was mainily formed for researching situations when a given hypothesis has a randomness factor of measurable and/or understandable proportions. Because of their natural bounds. Such hypothesis are merely good enough for making computer games, nothing more.

When you have red glasses on and consider how you see everything with your red glasses only. You might never understand why, someone who has black glasses on believes he has green glasses on and thinks that you have black glasses on.

There isn't a "system" that entraps people into monetary concerns. "Money" is merely the symbol of status, legitimacy and order that people impose upon themselves due to the hardwired nature of belief within the human brain.

Even though it is a hypothesis, perhaps even theoretical, there is significantly more evidence of this hardwiring of belief than there is that Desmarquet was actually in the company of aliens that want humanity to give up money. The very fact that these "aliens" believe that money is a root of problem for humanity speaks of Desmarquet's ignorance. Surely an advanced species of alien that has observed humanity for as long as Desmarquet claims would understand that it is the power of belief that affects us more than the power of money.

Desmarquet and Chalko are still full of rubbish. QED.

And true to Desmarquet's style of creating speculations that cannot be tested, so does his cohort Robanan toss out "esoteric" terms and conditions.

The failure of Desmarquet to present a story that is even interesting as fiction is excused to the notion that it must be true because it cannot be disproven. Robanan wants us all to accept his invisible dragon.

Before you know it, Levia and Dina will join him in this discussion group, each presenting their "testimonials" to the veracity of the Thiaoouba Fantasy, a story without any real substance that isn't even passable as fiction.

I see, you are trying to frame me as Desmarquet's cohort?

I never said that any part of the book is true and never mentioned that you have to believe in things which noone cannot prove wrong. You totally made that conclusion by yourself, since you yourself "believe" that the book is "not true" and all these talkings touches your personal belief system. I openly say that I don't know since I can't either prove or disprove it. So far it has been "you" and "your" cohorts who have kept claiming that the book is "crap", "nonesense", "bullshit", etc. would you have said any of this if you were really sure that you have stomped on a casual scifi? No, So who has his invisible dragon in the cellar? And who is really trying to prove either the book is false or it is true? ME? No my dear I'm trying to tell you that you don't even have a clue so stop mabbling about things that you don't know ok? You don't even know me! And whoooop! I'm Desmarquet's cohort? Who is blinded by his belief system here?

Cohort - A group of individuals (subjects) who share a common experience or condition.

The common experience or condition is clearly the book, "Thiaoouba Prophecy." Otherwise, why take the name that Thao ascribes to the Biblical Adam as your handle in this forum? That you are Desmarquet's cohort is clear.

And "stomp" on a "casual scifi" show? You haven't been around to hear me go on about The Day After Tomorrow or Star Trek... can't stand that crap.

I know you. You're obvious to everyone who reads here.

There isn't a "system" that entraps people into monetary concerns. "Money" is merely the symbol of status, legitimacy and order that people impose upon themselves due to the hardwired nature of belief within the human brain.

Even though it is a hypothesis, perhaps even theoretical, there is significantly more evidence of this hardwiring of belief than there is that Desmarquet was actually in the company of aliens that want humanity to give up money. The very fact that these "aliens" believe that money is a root of problem for humanity speaks of Desmarquet's ignorance. Surely an advanced species of alien that has observed humanity for as long as Desmarquet claims would understand that it is the power of belief that affects us more than the power of money.

Desmarquet and Chalko are still full of rubbish. QED.

*1 In any given system I can "profit" under specific conditions.
*2 When I see that people who meet these conditions frequently "profit". I realize that the probability of me to "profit" -providing that I meet those specific conditions- is higher than the probability of me to profit under conditions, other than those specific ones given in the statement *1.

True/False?

What I said about the monetary system was just to link the above to that part of the story of the book...you don't reason like a human, you reason like a machine. You just pick up keywords and frame them without considering the meaning of sentences and paragraphs, not talking about patterns. I don't wonder why you seem so lost in desmarquet's book. You don't simply get messages as a whole. The whole thing seems to you as a cocktail of "unverifiable" Data. You force your belief system and then say that, "it is the power of belief that affects us more than the power of money" ?

Cohort - A group of individuals (subjects) who share a common experience or condition.

The common experience or condition is clearly the book, "Thiaoouba Prophecy." Otherwise, why take the name that Thao ascribes to the Biblical Adam as your handle in this forum? That you are Desmarquet's cohort is clear.

And "stomp" on a "casual scifi" show? You haven't been around me go on about The Day After Tomorrow or Star Trek... can't stand that crap.

Wrong! again...
You want to say that I experienced the book the same way Michel did?

ohohoho my dear how could you make such a mistake? Again you are considering that the book is "crap" first, before making other assumptions and conclusions. Even though that would make me a fantastic story teller, So where is what you call a fantastic story now eh? And you are still trying to prove that I fit into your equations? How pathetic...

I know you. You're obvious to everyone who reads here
As if you are not. Do you even know how sad it sounds?

Imagine as many as would make you feel agitated.


Nice avoid of the question. The fact that you can't produce such lists lends to your fanaticism.



Very good, so Do we know enough to conclude that for example time cannot stop?


Do we know that time can stop? No. Relative time can slow down when approaching the spead of light to the point where it APPEARS to stop to other refernce points, but it doesn't really stop.

The fact that you can't produce such lists lends to your fanaticism
The fact that you "want" to frame me lends to your total failure in bringing up any valid argument.

I just invested ten or fifteen minutes in reading this entire thread. Robanan, help me make that investment worthwhile. You have been at pains to counter objections by Squeak and SkinWalker and others. I know, therefore, what you are against. It is not at all clear what you are for. Care to elucidate.
[And thanks for spelling monetary correctly. The illiteracy of some of the posters was bringing me close to vomiting.]

You want to say that I experienced the book the same way Michel did?

The definition also included the term "condition," but when you want to troll message forums, why bother with completeness. But, yes, I think you want to experience the pulp you call a "book" the way Desmarquet did. Why else would you chose the screen name that Desmarquet claims Thao called the mythical Judeo-Christian figure Adam?

And you are still trying to prove that I fit into your equations?

No need. Your trolling and inability to communicate with a riposte of intellect and instead resort to one of child-like banter proves my point nicely.

How pathetic...

Indeed.


As if you are not. Do you even know how sad it sounds?

It is my hope and desire to be obvious to all who read what I write here.

Your next step will probably be to go around to a few other threads and post there so you can argue that you weren't here just for the Thiaooba threads.

I just invested ten or fifteen minutes in reading this entire thread. Robanan, help me make that investment worthwhile. You have been at pains to counter objections by Squeak and SkinWalker and others. I know, therefore, what you are against. It is not at all clear what you are for. Care to elucidate.
[And thanks for spelling monetary correctly. The illiteracy of some of the posters was bringing me close to vomiting.]

"Learning" has always been a wonderful experience for me, throughout my whole life. The point that I'm making is very simple. "None" of us, no matter how intelligent we think we are can say: "Hey, I've learnt everything, I know everything, and everything I've learnt and everything I know is true".

The reason is also very simple. The more you learn, the more you understand that you have to learn, new horizons appear in front of you. I agree with everyone who says and understands that "we are only limited by our own intellect and imagination" since the more I've learnt in my life the more I've understood that I really have an unlimited potential to learn

I demand elementary respect to and/or understanding of the fact that anyone may decide to experience conscious learning at any moment of the life they are living. Let me add that It "also" depends on the "thing(s)" that can give you a good motivation to start with.

Currently there is not enough phisical "evidence" to justify that what is written in the book we are discussing is either "truth" or "lies". The "proof" may never be enough... (to either prove the contents of the book to be "truth" or "lies")

By considering "all" the information written in the book (fantasy or not), I think of it as a good motivator toward very specific things. The lable "Believing is not enough, you need to know" is more of a warning rather than a claim. The book covers a vast amount of topics, and it's readers naturally are not experts of all those topics and in most cases the information and knowledge they have is either limited or it doesn't match with what is written in the book. So throughout reading the whole book they are "naturally" led to believe in some of it. Some people notice it right away some people don't. In general It is relied upon the individual responsibility of the reader toward him/her own self so as to take care about what they understand from the book as "fiction" , "knowledge", "belief", "reality" etc.

SkinWalker doesn't know what I had for breakfast today, If I tell him/her by phone or in a post, he/she will need to believe in me, If he/she trusts me there is a relatively high probability that he/she will, If he/she does not trust me there would be a relativelty little probability that he/she would believe me. But if we had breakfast together he/she would have had known, no matter he/she trusts me or not.

[It was the first time in my life ever, that I came across the word "Elucidate", English is my third language, I speak five languages and I understand more than 8 languages in written form, I found the word a very beautiful one, thank you...]

The definition also included the term "condition," but when you want to troll message forums, why bother with completeness.

So the book is the "experience" or the "condition"? You can use both expressions, only when you can't say the difference. So you can't even tell me why and how was I wrong in considering the book as an "experience" and not as a "condition"?

But, yes, I think you want to experience the pulp you call a "book" the way Desmarquet did.

How can I? Don't you see that your own formula's are taking your arguments down down deeper into unreal impossible nonsense?

Why else would you chose the screen name that Desmarquet claims Thao called the mythical Judeo-Christian figure Adam?

You show your lack of imagination limited by your own egoism. If to tell the truth I wanted to be "Omic" on this forum. I found it misleading since I was first motivated to discuss the "Thiaoouba Prophecy" book. Would it have made any difference? You and your cohorts would have tried to frame me in some other way, anyway.

Your trolling and inability to communicate with a riposte of intellect and instead resort to one of child-like banter proves my point nicely.

You and me clearly have a different understanding of "What is Intellect" to say the least. It is not clear what you call "child-like banter" and it is not clear also what is the point that you want to make so desperately.

It is my hope and desire to be obvious to all who read what I write here.

Good

Your next step will probably be to go around to a few other threads and post there so you can argue that you weren't here just for the Thiaooba threads.

I might make a few posts to the "Intelligence & Machines" forum though as myself am a specialist of computer sciences. That is totally up to me and clearly none of anyones business. It is enough for everyone on this forum to know that I have an Intrest in discussing the "Thiaoouba Prophecy" book. I'm open to such discussions all the time. I'm a researcher willing to learn. You will know when I would want to argue something with you...rest assured!

SkinWalker, I have read your analysis of the book over and over, The information you included in your assumptions as excerpts from the book is simply "not complete". If I was to use the words I learnt from you, it means that you didn't bother yourself and "trolled" the book? You really expect people to trust you and the "results" of your analysis?

You show your lack of imagination limited by your own egoism.

Because I'm skeptical of the book's premises as well as the motivations of those that would defend it as a source of knowledge I'm the one guilty of "egoism?" Perhaps. But I've yet to see either you or your cohorts (you know, the other Thiaoouba Fantasy proponents, Desmarquet, et al) give a legitimate reason for accepting the work as anything more than poorly contrived fiction.

You and me clearly have a different understanding of "What is Intellect" to say the least. It is not clear what you call "child-like banter"

Then perhaps we got off on the wrong foot. I must admit it was a set of posts from you early on in this thread that included:

Hey that fish looks like an idiot - which was to a moderator of the sciforums.

yes, SO? - in response to my opinion about the nature of belief as it relates to the drive for status and thus the use of money as a tool to obtain that status and satisfy beliefs.

I just want to get a feel for this "many" you speak of... - Squeak asking how "many" people believe the book to be true...

Imagine as many as would make you feel agitated. - you giving an answer I perceived as "child-like."

and it is not clear also what is the point that you want to make so desperately.

The point I'm making is that Desmarquet is lying to all readers by saying that his book is a true account. If he marketed it as a fantasy, I'd probably not have commented on it at all.

If I've been unfair in my posts to you because I've misunderstood your intentions, then accept my apologies. But if you are, as I've believed to date, a proponent of the "Thiaoouba Prophecy," then I've always subscribed to the notion that there are those for whom it is one's duty to offend.

Because I'm skeptical of the book's premises as well as the motivations of those that would defend it as a source of knowledge I'm the one guilty of "egoism?" Perhaps. But I've yet to see either you or your cohorts (you know, the other Thiaoouba Fantasy proponents, Desmarquet, et al) give a legitimate reason for accepting the work as anything more than poorly contrived fiction.

You have all rights to confront the book with skepticism. Everything that goes around, comes around...

Then perhaps we got off on the wrong foot. I must admit it was a set of posts from you early on in this thread...


1.I didn't have anything special to respond about your opinion toward the nature of belief. I thought that you are right and correct as long as I considered the context of your idea; though I cannot agree with you, if you tried to say that the author of the book wants to gain status by using money as a tool to satisfy a belief system. Be aware that one can make terrible mistakes while trying to intercept who belives in what.

2. I didn't want to answer the question Squeak asked. Since even if I could give an exact and correct answer to him, it wouldn't have been a "proof" of anything at all. It turns out that "A childish question, was given a childish answer", fair enough.

3. The moderator understood that I'm not going to answer his question either. I emphasized that none of us are idiots here. His contribution toward making this point clear was precious.

The point I'm making is that Desmarquet is lying to all readers by saying that his book is a true account. If he marketed it as a fantasy, I'd probably not have commented on it at all.

About 6 years ago I had the same problem with the "Celestine Prophecy" series of books. No matter what James Redfield says about his series of books, I still took the risk of duplicating a similar scenario (as in those books) in my life. I don't regret it since I was led to find out more about aura's and the nature of energy in general. I found the "Thiaoouba Prophecy" exactly at this moment...coincidence? Now I'm led to find out more about Nature itself and the essence of information processing in general. I'm not suggesting anything.

If I've been unfair in my posts to you because I've misunderstood your intentions, then accept my apologies. But if you are, as I've believed to date, a proponent of the "Thiaoouba Prophecy," then I've always subscribed to the notion that there are those for whom it is one's duty to offend.

Same here :)

2. I didn't want to answer the question Squeak asked. Since even if I could give an exact and correct answer to him, it wouldn't have been a "proof" of anything at all. It turns out that "A childish question, was given a childish answer", fair enough.


I was hoping seriously that you would either produced a list of a few people so I could look through their work, and then your answer just made me mad. To me it seemed that you were making up information to support your opinion about this book, without and basis for the statements/comments. I work with people who do this all day, and it's probably one of my biggest pet peeves, which is why the next comment happened. They should really get rid of this quick reply option. :p

meep

I was hoping seriously that you would either produced a list of a few people so I could look through their work, and then your answer just made me mad. To me it seemed that you were making up information to support your opinion about this book, without and basis for the statements/comments. I work with people who do this all day, and it's probably one of my biggest pet peeves, which is why the next comment happened. They should really get rid of this quick reply option. :p

I never wanted you to get mad I wanted us all to resolve all our issues first, prior to moving any further. I can recommend to you a good advice of my own father: "Never Stop, not even on your own ideas" in other words it could help you as it helped me to make a clear definition of what you want to find by yourself and google it! :D

[it seems that I also made a mistake in my interpretation of your intentions]

There isn't a "system" that entraps people into monetary concerns. "Money" is merely the symbol of status, legitimacy and order that people impose upon themselves due to the hardwired nature of belief within the human brain.

Even though it is a hypothesis, perhaps even theoretical, there is significantly more evidence of this hardwiring of belief than there is that Desmarquet was actually in the company of aliens that want humanity to give up money. The very fact that these "aliens" believe that money is a root of problem for humanity speaks of Desmarquet's ignorance. Surely an advanced species of alien that has observed humanity for as long as Desmarquet claims would understand that it is the power of belief that affects us more than the power of money.

Desmarquet and Chalko are still full of rubbish. QED.


On the contrary, if one would study how, not physically, but psychologically how the monetary system started, it would still boil down to the fact that it is the power of belief how it started. Specifically the belief of having personal items of value, and the feeling of greed.

The fact the early man started as a communal individual, that is, what one has is not just for that individual, but the society, can attest to that point. You can still see this evidence in existing tribes even today. Males hunt for the whole society and so forth. Some tribes in the Philippines still has those qualities. There is lack of monetary system, which makes the society harmonious. The sense of value does not specifically arise from material things, but rather on the abstract, like skill and wisdom. It is fascinating that we can learn so much from the simple.

So money may be a symbol of order that arises from need. But this need is ideological. That idea comes from the belief that the world will be a better place if we started to have things on our own and thus we must develop items to measure the value of things. But why do we need to? Why did early man developed it? For the main reason that they fought tooth and nails when greed arises. So they developed it, not to supress greed, but to satisfy it without fighting. And that is just Humanities I.

So I think some people who have read Thiaooba Prophecy may have misinterpreted it at that point. What the book is trying to tell is that the problem is not the set of monetary rules, the symbol, or even the physical money. It is the intent of having the system. The idea behind. Which is quite simple. Greed.

What the aliens are trying to say is that having the monetary system drives humanity to greed. But of course, humanity has a choice. To be greedy with the monetary system or not. It is obvious what most of humanity chose.

But without the system and belief, how then can you be greedy without suffering the persecution of the society?

And greed is a bad thing right? =)

We must look deeper than the surface. Always.

Thank you very much!

^ This is your first post here??

Well, while the old thread has been dug up, lets not waste it.SkinWalker doesn't know what I had for breakfast today, If I tell him/her by phone or in a post, he/she will need to believe in me, If he/she trusts me there is a relatively high probability that he/she will, If he/she does not trust me there would be a relativelty little probability that he/she would believe me. But if we had breakfast together he/she would have had known, no matter he/she trusts me or not.Just to point out a common fallacy made by the credulous about people who argue that they want better proof, who make comparisons like this who tells who had what breakfast scenario. The crucial difference between believing what Robanan had for breakfast and believing that the Thiahouba guy travelled instantly to distant stars and had meetings with aliens (and do please correct me on any detail I have wrong) is, surely, more than obvious. We don't believe Desmarquet because what he says is incredible and fantastic.

Again you are considering that the book is "crap" first, before making other assumptions and conclusions. Even though that would make me a fantastic story tellerI haven't read the book, only the web site, and I'm afraid it's not really the work of a "fantastic" story teller in the sense of "superlative". Nothing worse than science fiction by people who are not regular science fiction authors and consumers. Two films as cases in point, The Stepford Wives - as if the inventors of the sex robot would hide them away and keep for themselves, instead of selling the perfect wife robot to the world and making themselves billionaires, and Donnie Darko which was based on a seriously scientifically-illiterate concept of time travel.

[It was the first time in my life ever, that I came across the word "Elucidate", English is my third language, I speak five languages and I understand more than 8 languages in written form, I found the word a very beautiful one, thank you...]Yes, indeed one of the most beautiful in the English language, comparable to "cellar door" for euphony.

On the contrary, if one would study how, not physically, but psychologically how the monetary system started, it would still boil down to the fact that it is the power of belief how it started. Specifically the belief of having personal items of value, and the feeling of greed.

Thank you for your post, Spirit. I would have to agree with that statement above. I do think that belief is the origin of the monetary system and probably a progenitor of the rise of complexity in human society as a whole. I humans didn't actually believe that some of their fellow humans were deserving of higher status in their societies, then chiefdoms and kingdoms couldn't have formed. If they hadn't believed in seeking prosperity as a human right (the inalienable right to seek happiness); others believing that their position a birthright -be it one of lowly status or elite, then we might never have had rulers that organized labor for agricultural needs, irrigation, or creation of public and monumental architecture. We sure wouldn't have had warfare -at least not on the scale we see in humanity.

But I would have to disagree that "greed" is an evil thing.

I think greed simply is. It is neither good nor evil, but a characteristic of humanity that is a motivating factor in nearly everything we do.

The mother who drowns in an attempt to save her toddler who has fallen in a river isn't necessarily altruistic: she's acting on a primal emotion, which has the purpose to motivate procreation. She's being "greedy." That isn't necessarily evil.

^ This is your first post here??

Well, while the old thread has been dug up, lets not waste it.Just to point out a common fallacy made by the credulous about people who argue that they want better proof, who make comparisons like this who tells who had what breakfast scenario. The crucial difference between believing what Robanan had for breakfast and believing that the Thiahouba guy travelled instantly to distant stars and had meetings with aliens (and do please correct me on any detail I have wrong) is, surely, more than obvious. We don't believe Desmarquet because what he says is incredible and fantastic.

I haven't read the book, only the web site, and I'm afraid it's not really the work of a "fantastic" story teller in the sense of "superlative". Nothing worse than science fiction by people who are not regular science fiction authors and consumers. Two films as cases in point, The Stepford Wives - as if the inventors of the sex robot would hide them away and keep for themselves, instead of selling the perfect wife robot to the world and making themselves billionaires, and Donnie Darko which was based on a seriously scientifically-illiterate concept of time travel.

Yes, indeed one of the most beautiful in the English language, comparable to "cellar door" for euphony.


Well, yes. I recently joined just to make that post. And more.

I understand why Desmarquet and Chalko receives such a negative, if not violent, impact on people, eventhough with 'seemingly' selfless intent on their works. This is mainly due to the fact that their works Thiaooba Prophecy and Freedom of Choice by Desmarquet and Chalko respectively, is such a belief shattering experience, even if you chose to accept it or not.

So that does it have to do with the reactions? Well, our belief system is so inherently tied to us, if not define us. The belief system is actually connected to our ego. Not the connotational ego, but the ego in terms of psychology. The ego that defines us. The ego that is us. Now, shattering your belief system is like shattering the ego, and thus, is like shattering the person.

Now most of us will have to resist. The defense mechanism that all of us have is to resist completely, leading to biased judgements in favor of our belief system, the preservation of our ego.

Why do I say that those who completely resist have biased judgments? Well the case is how can you say that a piece of work is a total piece of crap and rubbish? Do these people actually mean that one cannot find any logical premise that Chalko wrote in Freedom of Choice? Do these people didnt see any logic in the suggestions of the aliens in Thiaooba Prophecy? To say that the entire work is purely shit? Even if you consider Thiaooba Prophecy as a fraud and purely fiction, you still have to admire the remarkable fictional work and the lesson it is attempting to preach.

An OPEN MIND has room for UNDERSTANDING and DEVELOPMENT. Preferring to close your mind for the preservation of the ego is not the way to go anymore. It's like why they don't want to believe that the earth is round way back in history.

I'm not saying that I am a total believer on the works of these authors. I'm more of a neutral. 90% of the time I agreed on Chalko. And I find Thiaooba Prophecy a worthwhile read. The issue if I BELIEVE in it or not is not WHAT MATTERS to me. What matters is if the suggestions and the lessons it is trying to preach may be beneficial/feasible for us. It requires study. Not biased opinions.

Now if some of you are truth-seekers like me. The idea is to separate the gold from the ore. We are bombarded with data all the time, and we want the truth. The truth is always there, mixed with all the lies and deceit. What matters is our intent to find it.

FOR SILAS: Well I suggest you read the book. It is not really that good to tell the story of a movie to your friends by just watching the trailer right? =)

So that does it have to do with the reactions? Well, our belief system is so inherently tied to us, if not define us. The belief system is actually connected to our ego.

I always assumed it to be more connected with the Id than the Ego. But either way, our belief systems can be balanced by forcing ourselves to think critically and use reason instead of blind "faiths" that reflect our hopes and wishes rather than reality. Looking for the truly qualitative and quantitative observations and forcing oneself to be open-minded to possibilities that the results are outside our belief systems is necessary. I apply this to all things religious, paranormal, pseudoscientific, political, etc.

Now most of us will have to resist. The defense mechanism that all of us have is to resist completely, leading to biased judgements in favor of our belief system, the preservation of our ego.

But you have to admit that human beliefs generally include a predisposition to engage in magical thinking, as evidenced by the multitude of religious and cult practices worldwide that use "magic."

An OPEN MIND has room for UNDERSTANDING and DEVELOPMENT.

I would agree with that. But if you are implying that those that heavily criticized Desmarquet's work are not open-minded, then I would have to disagree. It is precisely because my mind was open that I bothered to read and subsequently because my mind was open that I was able to critically see through it and point out the flaws that I did. I noted many other flaws as well, but the ones I posted were sufficient, I believe.

What matters is if the suggestions and the lessons it is trying to preach may be beneficial/feasible for us. It requires study. Not biased opinions.

I think you would do better to find the same lessons in Jarod Diamond's work... I'm reading his latest, Collapse, and find it fully engaging and thought provoking in the current and future human conditions.

Apologies for my rudeness, spirit, and welcome to the forums!

Why do I say that those who completely resist have biased judgments? Well the case is how can you say that a piece of work is a total piece of crap and rubbish? Do these people actually mean that one cannot find any logical premise that Chalko wrote in Freedom of Choice? Do these people didnt see any logic in the suggestions of the aliens in Thiaooba Prophecy? To say that the entire work is purely shit? Even if you consider Thiaooba Prophecy as a fraud and purely fiction, you still have to admire the remarkable fictional work and the lesson it is attempting to preach.It's message is totally undermined by the supposed veracity of the events and the purported reality of the aliens. Fiction as fiction has a lesson to teach us. Fiction disguised as fact is a priori suspect. And if the whole thing derives from a delusion or madness, then it can hardly be taken seriously, can it?

An OPEN MIND has room for UNDERSTANDING and DEVELOPMENT.But understanding and development has to be based on actual stuff that is right, rather than concepts or beliefs that are demonstrably wrong. I admit I haven't read the prophecy or "alien advice" in any detail, but I understand there is one prediction that the moon is going to collide with the Earth in some thousands of years (is it 150k years?) I then read Chalko's apologia of that, and it simply made a nonsense of any kind of proper scientific investigation. He was claiming that errors in laser beam distance measurement could hide the fact that the moon was moving towards earth instead of away from it. This is palpable nonsense that doesn't stand up to (informed) scrutiny for more than five minutes. Unless it's based on a catastrophic event, which Chalko did not suggest, the prediction is just plain wrong. Consequently there is no reason to place any credence in anything else they have to say, whether it be scientific or just philosophical. I do have an open mind, but it's not so open that I let my brains fall out.

The a priori assumption that people didn't have enough culture to speak 15,000 years ago is Desmarquet's second fallacious statement.

Actually you made the fallacy of FACTUAL ERROR. This is concerning if the prehistoric humans that attacked Desmarquet has language facilities or not. You said "apparently don't have language facilities but utter guttural sounds". First of all, the exact quote is "Suddenly, this woman got up and began, it seemed to me, to issue orders in a guttural voice to the others". It was a voice not a sound. Why do I rant about this? Well, you might say that if it was written as sound, then maybe it was not speech. Secondly, the woman was giving orders. Now, I cannot say that I can give an order to you without common language between us perhaps? :). In prehistory, matriarchy rules, so the woman making the orders is not surprising at all. The woman giving orders says a lot. It says that their culture suggests a form of hierarchy, and also the fact that she gave orders means there is language. Unless she is telepathic. :)

I'll concede to that point quite readily. "Gutteral" invoked an immediate bias in my mind that I now see. But I still imagine that the author's intent was to provoke that bias in the reader. Otherwise, wouldn't he simply say, "a prehistoric woman got up and issued orders," -sans "gutteral?"

Still, I see your point.

How about the Atlantis/Mu conundrum that the author creates by borrowing from the mythology of Greek dialogs and the fabrications of a Victorian antiquarian? Each of these topics has many serious reasons to completely dismiss their factual basis when viewed in their original contexts. When combined in the same work of literature that purports to be "non-fiction," they become doubly incredulous, do they not?

Pure bunk. "Neutralising the cold magnetic force by raising certain high frequency vibrations" is nothing but pseudoscientific gibberish. It sounds scientific, but only to the undereducated. Vibrations are present in matter, but their frequency doesn't affect their "weight." Raising vibrations to higher frequencies doesn't negate the attraction that the mass of the given bit of matter has on the mass of other matter. Indeed, the methods by which monumental architecture was built in Mesoamerica or Northern Africa (several thousand years and even more thousand miles apart, I might add) are relatively well known and understood. There was no "levitation" as Desmarquet suggests. It wasn't needed.


The exact quote from the book is Man, like a piece of rock, is made of matter, but, by neutralising the cold magnetic force by raising certain high frequency vibrations, we become ‘weightless’. Weight is an illusion. We established weight as a property of things that concerns its push against the ground. The reality is, we have a larger body, which is the earth, pulling the lesser bodies, which us, towards it.

I know you all know that but wh