Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
My friend, you are missing the point of my legal arguments of Preponderance of Evidence. For instance, when a witness appears in court to testify about something he saw, the opposing counsel has his chance to impeach the credibility of that witness. After he has done so, and the witness has passed certain legal standards of reliability, his testimony is considered reliable and true. Obviously, you can not examine and verify what he has actually seen cause he was the only one who has seen it. But we have a process, rules to qualify a witness to see if he can be accepted as a realible witness. For instance, the opposing counsel might attempt to question him about something in his life to see if he would lie or not. If found to have lied, his credibility is diminished and he is not considered a reliable witness for the things he saw. But if he told the truth and the opposing counsel can not impeach his honesty, the judge will accept his testimony as reliable. In our justice system, we call that a reliable witness. This my friend is the standard I want you to apply when evaluating the Bible. See, if you can impeach the Bible's honesty on some other thing. If you can, then the Bible's credibility is diminished. If you can't, then the Bible should be considered reliable. How can you say for sure that Ezekiel did not actually see a wheel in the sky, after all, no one else was there. And how can you go about evaluating his honesty? and his reliability as a witness, cause after all, that's what he was - a witness to the wheels in the sky. You say Exekiel must have been lying or hallucinating. What is your baiss for that? You baiss is simply that there were no flying machines at that time; whcih is an extension of your initial assumption that there is NO God. You see, you assumed there is No God, then reason from that that there are no flying machines, and then reason from that that Exekiel must have been lying or hallucinating. If you use a chain of logic like this in court, the judge will throw you out. You can not use an assumption to be the basis of your argument. If however, you look at other parts of Exekiel's life and found him to be a liar, then you have impeached his honesty and has a legal basis to throw his testimony out. There's a big difference in the 2 approachs my friend. So, I am saying, evaluate the Bible and see if it has been lying about other things. If it has, its other statements may be dismissed. If not, then by our legal standard, we should accept it as reliable. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 01/01/2013 05:59 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: No, I am suggesting that you count the facts written in the Bible that have found to be true. Then count the facts found to be false and then count the facts that have not be found true or found false yet. If the number of facts that have found to be true is 51% or greater, then the Bible has satisfied the principle of preponderance of evidence and should be treated as a verified document, and a reliable witness. Shall we do this? To be fair, I will count the facts found to be true, you count the facts that have been found to false and the facts found to be neither true nor false. Jojo But no, that's not the way to ascertain truth. Each assertion has to be evaluated on its own merits. You can have a book that contains many truths, along with many un-proven assertions. This is why books, per-se, cannot be used to ascertain truth. They can only add to available evidence. But notice, that when an assertion is made, that the truth of the assertion has to be evaluated within the context of existing, known, truths. So when we hear of stories that a wheel came down from the sky, as in Ezekiel, we have to immediately dismiss it as hearsay, unless there is other evidence that such a thing occurred. If it turns out that numerous other sources confirmed the event, then we have to interpret the event in the context of known truths. So the immediate explanation would be that it's an illusion. If there was enough evidence that such a thing was NOT an illusion, then the best interpretation is that the event was conducted by an alien species with superior technology. What you cannot do is manufacture an explanation which defies metaphysics and epistemology. You cannot say that such an event was the act of a God -- because the concept of God cannot be defined and does not exist within the Universe, as I've mentioned before. So when you allude to the idea that we have to interpret words, written in a book, in such a way that the explanation defies metaphysics and epistemology, then you are on very thin ice. If such a thing could be absolutely ascertained to have occurred, (such as a wheel coming down from the sky in an era
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Tell me Chan or Ny Min, what degrees do you have? Jojo - Original Message - From: leaking pen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 9:11 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age if at least half the facts are true, its a reliable witness and we can treat them all as true? Please, take a logic course at your local community college. From the sounds of things, its the most true education you would ever have had in your life. On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: No, I am suggesting that you count the facts written in the Bible that have found to be true. Then count the facts found to be false and then count the facts that have not be found true or found false yet. If the number of facts that have found to be true is 51% or greater, then the Bible has satisfied the principle of preponderance of evidence and should be treated as a verified document, and a reliable witness. Shall we do this? To be fair, I will count the facts found to be true, you count the facts that have been found to false and the facts found to be neither true nor false. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 5:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Jaro, are you suggesting that we meet here, in this forum, and vote as to whether you have presented a 'preponderance of evidence' that your assertions are true? And if we vote 'no', will you then agree that the Bible has not been proven to be true, and is considered, therefore, to be false? Craig On 01/01/2013 02:58 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Aha, but there is this concept of Preponderance of Evidence. While this is a legal concept, we can nevertheless apply its principles in our discussion. Basically, what Preponderance of Evidence says is that if one side can present a preponderance of evidence to support his side, what he is saying may be considered true. If one side can present 51% evidence, his argument may be construed as true. This is the standard of Preponderance of Evidence. While absolute 100% certainty may not be reached, it is acceptable to acknowledge its truth based on the amount of evidence one has supplied. Preponderance of Evidence is a legal standard that a Judge in a civil case may use to decide a case. If it is acceptable in our legal system, I submit to you that it should be acceptable in our discussion. We can apply the standard of Preponderance of Evidence when we evaluate the integrity of the Bible. Has the Bible stated facts that can be proven and does that constitute 51%. If so, the Bible may be considered a verified and reliable source in our legal system. In other words, it is considered a reliable witness. Has the Bible satisfied the Preponderance of Evidence criteria. I submit to you that it has. There are thousands of scientific, historical, archeological, literary, etc facts that can be and has been verified. Based on that, we can not legally say that the Bible is an unverified source. By law, it is considered a verified source by virtue of Preponderance of Evidence. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 01/01/2013 11:59 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: But this is exactly where you're wrong. You can in fact verify the Bible. It's very simple. find one, just one fact that has been categorically found to be false. This one erroneous fact alone would sink the entire credibility of the Bible. With regard to epistemology, it's not up to anyone to disprove a source. Rather, it's up to the proponent of an idea to PROVE his assertions. There is nothing to disprove here. You can't take a source and claim that all the wild assertions in it are true, just because you can't find anything wrong with it. I can write a book about life on Pluto, and you won't be able to prove it wrong. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Tell me Chan or Ny Min, what degrees do you have? leaky pen is not Chan. AAMoF he has been around a lot longer than you have.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Who is leaky pen? Do you mean leaking pen? Who is leaking pen? Jojo - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 11:49 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Tell me Chan or Ny Min, what degrees do you have? leaky pen is not Chan. AAMoF he has been around a lot longer than you have.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 12:13 AM 1/2/2013, Craig wrote: You can have a book that contains many truths, along with many un-proven assertions. This is why books, per-se, cannot be used to ascertain truth. They can only add to available evidence. As a general principle, one of the known techniques of deception is to put together a series of statments that will be accepted as true, and only introduce the desired deceptive statement after the habit of agreement is established. Basically, no statement can be assumed to be true merely because it was preceded by true statements. Legal principles were asserted, but out of context. The common-law principle is that testimony is presumed true unless controverted. But there are basic principles involved. They are: 1. Legal accountability for perjury. 2. An ability to cross-examine a witness, to determine *how the witness knows* what the witness claims to know. 3. The lack of contrary evidence (as implied by controverted) God is not an explanation for anything, except within certain narrow parameters. To say that God did something is no more explanatory than to say that something is real. When we want explanations, and we think of God as Reality, we are seeking to know *how* God did or does something. That may or may not be accessible to us, it depends on the something. Generally, I assume that if a thing happens in the observable world, it has observable causes. That doesn't negate that God did it, because God can act through observable causes. God is not limited by time, which is an illusion that appears to limited consciousness. (To light, there is no time, it all happens at once. That's how Einstein reasoned, in fact.) no more original text below. But notice, that when an assertion is made, that the truth of the assertion has to be evaluated within the context of existing, known, truths. So when we hear of stories that a wheel came down from the sky, as in Ezekiel, we have to immediately dismiss it as hearsay, unless there is other evidence that such a thing occurred. If it turns out that numerous other sources confirmed the event, then we have to interpret the event in the context of known truths. So the immediate explanation would be that it's an illusion. If there was enough evidence that such a thing was NOT an illusion, then the best interpretation is that the event was conducted by an alien species with superior technology. What you cannot do is manufacture an explanation which defies metaphysics and epistemology. You cannot say that such an event was the act of a God -- because the concept of God cannot be defined and does not exist within the Universe, as I've mentioned before. So when you allude to the idea that we have to interpret words, written in a book, in such a way that the explanation defies metaphysics and epistemology, then you are on very thin ice. If such a thing could be absolutely ascertained to have occurred, (such as a wheel coming down from the sky in an era when there was no flight), and it could be absolutely ascertained that it was not an illusion, and was not the product of alien manufacture... Then if all this could be ascertained, then we would simply be stumped as to the explanation. It still could not be the produce of a God because 'God' cannot be defined, as I've mentioned in a previous post. Without an explanation which exists in this Universe, you simply have no reference by which you could tie such an event to another Universe. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Works of fiction can blend reality and the craziest of fictions, to make it look plausible. Take as an example zombie stories: they are thrilling to many people precisely because the authors makes the dead raising plausible by setting it in the real world, with common people, not heroes or kings. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Date: 2013/1/1 Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Now, we are getting into Philosophy. OK, I'll bite since I am not too busy yet. As to the issue of unverfiiable source. You need to define what you mean by unverifiable. How does one go about verifying a history book like the Bible? You call it unverifiable because you choose to not believe it despite evidence as to its integrity. Archeologists have verified many of the statements in the Bible. Long lost cities, locations, practices and cultures have been verified to have existed according to what is written in the Bible. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On 01/01/2013 01:38 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: As to the issue of unverfiiable source. You need to define what you mean by unverifiable. How does one go about verifying a history book like the Bible? You can't... and that's the point. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
OK, who in this forum doubts the existence of Julius Ceasar, the Roman Emperor. No one in his right mind would. But, people call the existence of Jesus Christ a myth. When in fact, the existence of Jesus Christ is supported by a hundred times more literary, archeological and historical evidence compared to Julius Ceasar. My friends, it is not about facts, why people don't believe. It's about choice. People reject what they don't want to believe. That is why no matter how the Bible is verified, how many facts I present, it would still be fiction to some people. Acknowledging otherwise would upset their belief system so much as to be untenable for them. If Jesus Christ were to physically show up in front of Daniel Rocha, he would still find a way to rationalize it. Heck, maybe it was just that heavy bologna sandwich he had for dinner. That was nothing more than indigestion. It's sad but true. Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 10:37 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Works of fiction can blend reality and the craziest of fictions, to make it look plausible. Take as an example zombie stories: they are thrilling to many people precisely because the authors makes the dead raising plausible by setting it in the real world, with common people, not heroes or kings. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Date: 2013/1/1 Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Now, we are getting into Philosophy. OK, I'll bite since I am not too busy yet. As to the issue of unverfiiable source. You need to define what you mean by unverifiable. How does one go about verifying a history book like the Bible? You call it unverifiable because you choose to not believe it despite evidence as to its integrity. Archeologists have verified many of the statements in the Bible. Long lost cities, locations, practices and cultures have been verified to have existed according to what is written in the Bible. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
You assume I was talking about Jesus and that is not rational. I mentioned an example of how a genere iction can be blend with real facts to make it look more real. For example, the whole creation business, paradise story, tower of babel, flood, are all fiction, but as story progresses it starts to blend with reality or (pseudo) historical record. 2013/1/1 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com ** If Jesus Christ were to physically show up in front of Daniel Rocha, he would still find a way to rationalize it. Heck, maybe it was just that heavy bologna sandwich he had for dinner. That was nothing more than indigestion. It's sad but true. Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
But this is exactly where you're wrong. You can in fact verify the Bible. It's very simple. find one, just one fact that has been categorically found to be false. This one erroneous fact alone would sink the entire credibility of the Bible. I issued a challenge to anyone reading to do this. I think this might be a worthwhile little project for you, instead of just complaining all day long. If you want to prove that the Bible is an unverfiable source, find one fact that has been proven to be wrong. It's very simple; very straitforward and very effective at shutting those people who believe in the Bible. Find something and If I do not have an answer, I'll research it. Doing this is the only way one can verify for himself that the Bible is indeed an accurate book when it comes to science. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 10:40 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 01/01/2013 01:38 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: As to the issue of unverfiiable source. You need to define what you mean by unverifiable. How does one go about verifying a history book like the Bible? You can't... and that's the point. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On 01/01/2013 11:59 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: But this is exactly where you're wrong. You can in fact verify the Bible. It's very simple. find one, just one fact that has been categorically found to be false. This one erroneous fact alone would sink the entire credibility of the Bible. With regard to epistemology, it's not up to anyone to disprove a source. Rather, it's up to the proponent of an idea to PROVE his assertions. There is nothing to disprove here. You can't take a source and claim that all the wild assertions in it are true, just because you can't find anything wrong with it. I can write a book about life on Pluto, and you won't be able to prove it wrong. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 11:48 AM 1/1/2013, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, who in this forum doubts the existence of Julius Ceasar, the Roman Emperor. No one in his right mind would. Me. Where does he exist? I don't only have a right brain, I have a left brain as well. Now, what does this have to do with Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age. Yes, Jojo has an excuse, he said the above for a reason, but that reason was an introjection of a new topic, the fairytale Jesus trope. Of course Caesar exists, in our imaginations. The name and stories exist in books. None of that is real. It's interpretation, explanation, theory, conclusion. Human stuff. Epistemology and ontology. Don't leave home without them.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Do you have evidence that all this things you mentioned are fiction? I don't believe you have. You just decided not to believe it so in your eyes it is fiction. As a matter of fact, there is evidence of these things you call fiction. There is scientific evidence for a young Earth consistent with the creation story. There is evidence for the existence of Eden (Paradise). There is evidence for the tower of babel. In fact, archeologists are excavating this site as we speak. There is surely evidence for the flood. The grand canyon is a gorge created by the great flood. Fossil Graveyards are accumulation of fossils from different animals swept by the flood into a single location. My friend, there is evidence. The Bible is not fiction. Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 12:56 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age You assume I was talking about Jesus and that is not rational. I mentioned an example of how a genere iction can be blend with real facts to make it look more real. For example, the whole creation business, paradise story, tower of babel, flood, are all fiction, but as story progresses it starts to blend with reality or (pseudo) historical record. 2013/1/1 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com If Jesus Christ were to physically show up in front of Daniel Rocha, he would still find a way to rationalize it. Heck, maybe it was just that heavy bologna sandwich he had for dinner. That was nothing more than indigestion. It's sad but true. Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Contradictory news/rumours re Mr X are circulating. Some tell he is dead but the others say he is still alive. The truth as usual, is someway in the middle. Peter On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Aha, but there is this concept of Preponderance of Evidence. While this is a legal concept, we can nevertheless apply its principles in our discussion. Basically, what Preponderance of Evidence says is that if one side can present a preponderance of evidence to support his side, what he is saying may be considered true. If one side can present 51% evidence, his argument may be construed as true. This is the standard of Preponderance of Evidence. While absolute 100% certainty may not be reached, it is acceptable to acknowledge its truth based on the amount of evidence one has supplied. Preponderance of Evidence is a legal standard that a Judge in a civil case may use to decide a case. If it is acceptable in our legal system, I submit to you that it should be acceptable in our discussion. We can apply the standard of Preponderance of Evidence when we evaluate the integrity of the Bible. Has the Bible stated facts that can be proven and does that constitute 51%. If so, the Bible may be considered a verified and reliable source in our legal system. In other words, it is considered a reliable witness. Has the Bible satisfied the Preponderance of Evidence criteria. I submit to you that it has. There are thousands of scientific, historical, archeological, literary, etc facts that can be and has been verified. Based on that, we can not legally say that the Bible is an unverified source. By law, it is considered a verified source by virtue of Preponderance of Evidence. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 01/01/2013 11:59 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: But this is exactly where you're wrong. You can in fact verify the Bible. It's very simple. find one, just one fact that has been categorically found to be false. This one erroneous fact alone would sink the entire credibility of the Bible. With regard to epistemology, it's not up to anyone to disprove a source. Rather, it's up to the proponent of an idea to PROVE his assertions. There is nothing to disprove here. You can't take a source and claim that all the wild assertions in it are true, just because you can't find anything wrong with it. I can write a book about life on Pluto, and you won't be able to prove it wrong. Craig -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
It must be sad when when it's impossible to even get anyone remotely serious about science that you are right. Everyone that listen to you are people that hold to religious fundamentalism to overcome emotional problems. 2013/1/1 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com ** Do you have evidence that all this things you mentioned are fiction? I don't believe you have. You just decided not to believe it so in your eyes it is fiction. As a matter of fact, there is evidence of these things you call fiction. There is scientific evidence for a young Earth consistent with the creation story. There is evidence for the existence of Eden (Paradise). There is evidence for the tower of babel. In fact, archeologists are excavating this site as we speak. There is surely evidence for the flood. The grand canyon is a gorge created by the great flood. Fossil Graveyards are accumulation of fossils from different animals swept by the flood into a single location. My friend, there is evidence. The Bible is not fiction. Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Jaro, are you suggesting that we meet here, in this forum, and vote as to whether you have presented a 'preponderance of evidence' that your assertions are true? And if we vote 'no', will you then agree that the Bible has not been proven to be true, and is considered, therefore, to be false? Craig On 01/01/2013 02:58 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Aha, but there is this concept of Preponderance of Evidence. While this is a legal concept, we can nevertheless apply its principles in our discussion. Basically, what Preponderance of Evidence says is that if one side can present a preponderance of evidence to support his side, what he is saying may be considered true. If one side can present 51% evidence, his argument may be construed as true. This is the standard of Preponderance of Evidence. While absolute 100% certainty may not be reached, it is acceptable to acknowledge its truth based on the amount of evidence one has supplied. Preponderance of Evidence is a legal standard that a Judge in a civil case may use to decide a case. If it is acceptable in our legal system, I submit to you that it should be acceptable in our discussion. We can apply the standard of Preponderance of Evidence when we evaluate the integrity of the Bible. Has the Bible stated facts that can be proven and does that constitute 51%. If so, the Bible may be considered a verified and reliable source in our legal system. In other words, it is considered a reliable witness. Has the Bible satisfied the Preponderance of Evidence criteria. I submit to you that it has. There are thousands of scientific, historical, archeological, literary, etc facts that can be and has been verified. Based on that, we can not legally say that the Bible is an unverified source. By law, it is considered a verified source by virtue of Preponderance of Evidence. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 01/01/2013 11:59 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: But this is exactly where you're wrong. You can in fact verify the Bible. It's very simple. find one, just one fact that has been categorically found to be false. This one erroneous fact alone would sink the entire credibility of the Bible. With regard to epistemology, it's not up to anyone to disprove a source. Rather, it's up to the proponent of an idea to PROVE his assertions. There is nothing to disprove here. You can't take a source and claim that all the wild assertions in it are true, just because you can't find anything wrong with it. I can write a book about life on Pluto, and you won't be able to prove it wrong. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
No, I am suggesting that you count the facts written in the Bible that have found to be true. Then count the facts found to be false and then count the facts that have not be found true or found false yet. If the number of facts that have found to be true is 51% or greater, then the Bible has satisfied the principle of preponderance of evidence and should be treated as a verified document, and a reliable witness. Shall we do this? To be fair, I will count the facts found to be true, you count the facts that have been found to false and the facts found to be neither true nor false. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 5:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Jaro, are you suggesting that we meet here, in this forum, and vote as to whether you have presented a 'preponderance of evidence' that your assertions are true? And if we vote 'no', will you then agree that the Bible has not been proven to be true, and is considered, therefore, to be false? Craig On 01/01/2013 02:58 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Aha, but there is this concept of Preponderance of Evidence. While this is a legal concept, we can nevertheless apply its principles in our discussion. Basically, what Preponderance of Evidence says is that if one side can present a preponderance of evidence to support his side, what he is saying may be considered true. If one side can present 51% evidence, his argument may be construed as true. This is the standard of Preponderance of Evidence. While absolute 100% certainty may not be reached, it is acceptable to acknowledge its truth based on the amount of evidence one has supplied. Preponderance of Evidence is a legal standard that a Judge in a civil case may use to decide a case. If it is acceptable in our legal system, I submit to you that it should be acceptable in our discussion. We can apply the standard of Preponderance of Evidence when we evaluate the integrity of the Bible. Has the Bible stated facts that can be proven and does that constitute 51%. If so, the Bible may be considered a verified and reliable source in our legal system. In other words, it is considered a reliable witness. Has the Bible satisfied the Preponderance of Evidence criteria. I submit to you that it has. There are thousands of scientific, historical, archeological, literary, etc facts that can be and has been verified. Based on that, we can not legally say that the Bible is an unverified source. By law, it is considered a verified source by virtue of Preponderance of Evidence. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 01/01/2013 11:59 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: But this is exactly where you're wrong. You can in fact verify the Bible. It's very simple. find one, just one fact that has been categorically found to be false. This one erroneous fact alone would sink the entire credibility of the Bible. With regard to epistemology, it's not up to anyone to disprove a source. Rather, it's up to the proponent of an idea to PROVE his assertions. There is nothing to disprove here. You can't take a source and claim that all the wild assertions in it are true, just because you can't find anything wrong with it. I can write a book about life on Pluto, and you won't be able to prove it wrong. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On 01/01/2013 05:59 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: No, I am suggesting that you count the facts written in the Bible that have found to be true. Then count the facts found to be false and then count the facts that have not be found true or found false yet. If the number of facts that have found to be true is 51% or greater, then the Bible has satisfied the principle of preponderance of evidence and should be treated as a verified document, and a reliable witness. Shall we do this? To be fair, I will count the facts found to be true, you count the facts that have been found to false and the facts found to be neither true nor false. Jojo But no, that's not the way to ascertain truth. Each assertion has to be evaluated on its own merits. You can have a book that contains many truths, along with many un-proven assertions. This is why books, per-se, cannot be used to ascertain truth. They can only add to available evidence. But notice, that when an assertion is made, that the truth of the assertion has to be evaluated within the context of existing, known, truths. So when we hear of stories that a wheel came down from the sky, as in Ezekiel, we have to immediately dismiss it as hearsay, unless there is other evidence that such a thing occurred. If it turns out that numerous other sources confirmed the event, then we have to interpret the event in the context of known truths. So the immediate explanation would be that it's an illusion. If there was enough evidence that such a thing was NOT an illusion, then the best interpretation is that the event was conducted by an alien species with superior technology. What you cannot do is manufacture an explanation which defies metaphysics and epistemology. You cannot say that such an event was the act of a God -- because the concept of God cannot be defined and does not exist within the Universe, as I've mentioned before. So when you allude to the idea that we have to interpret words, written in a book, in such a way that the explanation defies metaphysics and epistemology, then you are on very thin ice. If such a thing could be absolutely ascertained to have occurred, (such as a wheel coming down from the sky in an era when there was no flight), and it could be absolutely ascertained that it was not an illusion, and was not the product of alien manufacture... Then if all this could be ascertained, then we would simply be stumped as to the explanation. It still could not be the produce of a God because 'God' cannot be defined, as I've mentioned in a previous post. Without an explanation which exists in this Universe, you simply have no reference by which you could tie such an event to another Universe. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On 12/30/2012 11:09 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked, do not call me a troll by answering this. Genesis chapter 6 is the source of this. This passage is the reason why God destroyed the Earth I think this is the source of the conflict: Epistemology dictates that all knowledge comes from observation. When we converse with each other in an attempt to exchange knowledge, we use the Universe around us as a reference point in the exchange of truth. There is no such thing as communication without this common reference point. Words refer to existents and communication is act of exchanging observations about the Universe. There is no other source for knowledge since the Universe is all that exists, by definition. This epistemology is at the foundation of science. Using a book, such as Genesis, as a source of information is not valid. It is heresay from an unverifiable source. Likewise, faith is not a means of cognition, since there is no independent way of ascertaining which faith is correct -- and what correct even means without a reference to the Universe. So Jaro, what you're seeing as insults, are challenges to your epistemology. They are not insults, but you may interpret them as such since such challenges rip at core beliefs. I also see a problem with definitions you use. You use terms like 'God' and 'Angels' without defining these terms. When I've spoken with Christians before on such terms, they have never provided a definition. With 'God', they will typically say that he is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-present, but such descriptions defy definition. To define something is to delimit it from other existents. Without a way to delimit its characteristics, it simply cannot exist. There is no difference between something that is 'everything' and something that is 'nothing'. Which characteristics would be different? There can't be a difference when there are no identifiable characteristics. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Thanks, Jojo, I appreciate your response to my query. It seems to me that you have faith that Genesis is literally accurate. How did you find your way to this faith? Was it difficult? Easy? How unshakeable is your faith? Again,thank you for your response. On Dec 30, 2012, at 11:09 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked, do not call me a troll by answering this. Genesis chapter 6 is the source of this. This passage is the reason why God destroyed the Earth with the flood. 6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. The Hebrew word translated as Giants is Nephilim. The Hebrew words for Sons of God literally means sons of Elohim. In the Old Testament, only direct creations of God are referred to as Sons of God. Only Adam, Eve and Angels are direct creations of God; but Eve is not a son, so that leaves Adam and Angels. So, clearly this passage refers to fallen angels mating with human females producing giants and mighty men of renown. Men of renown means these men are known by the various histories of the region. Throughout history and in every culture - Romans, Greeks, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Sumerian, etc, there is mythology relating to gods mating with human women producing extraordinary hybrids. The Sumerians have their Annunaki. The Greeks with their pantheon of gods which the Romans adopted wholesale more or less. In these mythology, there is Hercules, half god half man with great size and strength. There is Perseus, half god son of Zeus. There is Atlas, half god, big and strong depicted as carrying the Earth on his back. These are the men that are renown. Google the video Return of the Nephilim by Chuck Missler. Chuck used be in the Defense Industry. He was an insider. In his videos, he tries to document the link between Nephilims and modern UFOs. Watch it and judge for yourself. Of course, there are also other videos when you google UFOs, Nephilim, Annunaki, NWO, illuminati, etc. Some good some crazy. Judge for yourself. There are books about this subject. I do not play video games so I do not know if there are. I'm pretty this is as this is a common theme the illuminati wants to desensitize people on. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:19 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Thanks. This is fascinating. What are the sources for this information? There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. What are the sources for this information, and for the rest of your statements in this email? Books? Are there any movies or video games that depict these themes? On Dec 27, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Thanks, Jojo, I appreciate your response to my query. It seems to me that you have faith that Genesis is literally accurate. How did you find your way to this faith? Was it difficult? Easy? How unshakeable is your faith? Again,thank you for your response. On Dec 30, 2012, at 11:09 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked, do not call me a troll by answering this. Genesis chapter 6 is the source of this. This passage is the reason why God destroyed the Earth with the flood. 6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. The Hebrew word translated as Giants is Nephilim. The Hebrew words for Sons of God literally means sons of Elohim. In the Old Testament, only direct creations of God are referred to as Sons of God. Only Adam, Eve and Angels are direct creations of God; but Eve is not a son, so that leaves Adam and Angels. So, clearly this passage refers to fallen angels mating with human females producing giants and mighty men of renown. Men of renown means these men are known by the various histories of the region. Throughout history and in every culture - Romans, Greeks, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Sumerian, etc, there is mythology relating to gods mating with human women producing extraordinary hybrids. The Sumerians have their Annunaki. The Greeks with their pantheon of gods which the Romans adopted wholesale more or less. In these mythology, there is Hercules, half god half man with great size and strength. There is Perseus, half god son of Zeus. There is Atlas, half god, big and strong depicted as carrying the Earth on his back. These are the men that are renown. Google the video Return of the Nephilim by Chuck Missler. Chuck used be in the Defense Industry. He was an insider. In his videos, he tries to document the link between Nephilims and modern UFOs. Watch it and judge for yourself. Of course, there are also other videos when you google UFOs, Nephilim, Annunaki, NWO, illuminati, etc. Some good some crazy. Judge for yourself. There are books about this subject. I do not play video games so I do not know if there are. I'm pretty this is as this is a common theme the illuminati wants to desensitize people on. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:19 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Thanks. This is fascinating. What are the sources for this information? There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. What are the sources for this information, and for the rest of your statements in this email? Books? Are there any movies or video games that depict these themes? On Dec 27, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Now, we are getting into Philosophy. OK, I'll bite since I am not too busy yet. As to the issue of unverfiiable source. You need to define what you mean by unverifiable. How does one go about verifying a history book like the Bible? You call it unverifiable because you choose to not believe it despite evidence as to its integrity. Archeologists have verified many of the statements in the Bible. Long lost cities, locations, practices and cultures have been verified to have existed according to what is written in the Bible. Most notably, the existence of theAssyrian Kingdom have recently been verified. For decades, nobody can find proof of the existence of the Assyrian Empire and its capital Nineveh. The Bible stood alone in its defense for the existence of the Assyrian Empire and its capital Nineveh. People scoofed at the Bible because it was wrong. Well, lo and behold, Nineveh has been found and replete with amazing cultural and archeological finds that establishes once and for all that it existed at the time period and location that the Bible said it was. But, did that increase you belief in the integrity of the Bible? I do not believe so. You still call it a fairy tale and unverifiable. Despite this kinds of discovery occuring hundreds and thousands of time, in all fields of science, you still call the Bible unverifiable. The Bible has verifed that the Earth was round in 3 different locations in the Bible. Yet, that is not enough to verfiy it. There are literally hundreds of statements about scientific facts we did not discover until recently, that is in the Bible. Yet, that is not enough to verify it. What will it take to verify the Bible for you my friend? You will finally believe that the Bible is true when you see Demons and fallen Angels descend down on you. But by then, it would be too late for you. You see my friend, you do not believe the Bible because you chose not to believe it; not because you CAN NOT believe it. Facts are there if you choose to believe it. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 10:19 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 12/30/2012 11:09 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked, do not call me a troll by answering this. Genesis chapter 6 is the source of this. This passage is the reason why God destroyed the Earth I think this is the source of the conflict: Epistemology dictates that all knowledge comes from observation. When we converse with each other in an attempt to exchange knowledge, we use the Universe around us as a reference point in the exchange of truth. There is no such thing as communication without this common reference point. Words refer to existents and communication is act of exchanging observations about the Universe. There is no other source for knowledge since the Universe is all that exists, by definition. This epistemology is at the foundation of science. Using a book, such as Genesis, as a source of information is not valid. It is heresay from an unverifiable source. Likewise, faith is not a means of cognition, since there is no independent way of ascertaining which faith is correct -- and what correct even means without a reference to the Universe. So Jaro, what you're seeing as insults, are challenges to your epistemology. They are not insults, but you may interpret them as such since such challenges rip at core beliefs. I also see a problem with definitions you use. You use terms like 'God' and 'Angels' without defining these terms. When I've spoken with Christians before on such terms, they have never provided a definition. With 'God', they will typically say that he is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-present, but such descriptions defy definition. To define something is to delimit it from other existents. Without a way to delimit its characteristics, it simply cannot exist. There is no difference between something that is 'everything' and something that is 'nothing'. Which characteristics would be different? There can't be a difference when there are no identifiable characteristics. Craig
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Yes, I believe Genesis and the Bible to be literraly true. (Not that I believe Jesus was a chicken because he said he would like to gather Jerusalem under his wings.) I believe it is true because I have verified it to be true. Beleive it or not, I was and am an engineer. I studied science. And I have found that the Bible is a science book. Not that it is exclusiviely a book about science, but it does contain enough science for one to verify. If the Bible had said that the Earth was a big plate standing on the backs of 4 elephants, then you would have a valid reason to call it a fairy tale. But every statement made by the Bible about science has been found to be true. After having read it over 29 times, I have still to encounter a statement in the Bible that science has found to be categorically false. I challenge you or anyone to prove me wrong on this. But do it one at a time so that I can respond properly to it. Do not cut and paste a blog from an Atheist web site. I won't have time or the capability to respond to that in a meaningful way. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 12:35 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Thanks, Jojo, I appreciate your response to my query. It seems to me that you have faith that Genesis is literally accurate. How did you find your way to this faith? Was it difficult? Easy? How unshakeable is your faith? Again,thank you for your response. On Dec 30, 2012, at 11:09 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked, do not call me a troll by answering this. Genesis chapter 6 is the source of this. This passage is the reason why God destroyed the Earth with the flood. 6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. The Hebrew word translated as Giants is Nephilim. The Hebrew words for Sons of God literally means sons of Elohim. In the Old Testament, only direct creations of God are referred to as Sons of God. Only Adam, Eve and Angels are direct creations of God; but Eve is not a son, so that leaves Adam and Angels. So, clearly this passage refers to fallen angels mating with human females producing giants and mighty men of renown. Men of renown means these men are known by the various histories of the region. Throughout history and in every culture - Romans, Greeks, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Sumerian, etc, there is mythology relating to gods mating with human women producing extraordinary hybrids. The Sumerians have their Annunaki. The Greeks with their pantheon of gods which the Romans adopted wholesale more or less. In these mythology, there is Hercules, half god half man with great size and strength. There is Perseus, half god son of Zeus. There is Atlas, half god, big and strong depicted as carrying the Earth on his back. These are the men that are renown. Google the video Return of the Nephilim by Chuck Missler. Chuck used be in the Defense Industry. He was an insider. In his videos, he tries to document the link between Nephilims and modern UFOs. Watch it and judge for yourself. Of course, there are also other videos when you google UFOs, Nephilim, Annunaki, NWO, illuminati, etc. Some good some crazy. Judge for yourself. There are books about this subject. I do not play video games so I do not know if there are. I'm pretty this is as this is a common theme the illuminati wants to desensitize people on. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:19 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Thanks. This is fascinating. What are the sources for this information? There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
OK, since you asked, do not call me a troll by answering this. Genesis chapter 6 is the source of this. This passage is the reason why God destroyed the Earth with the flood. 6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. The Hebrew word translated as Giants is Nephilim. The Hebrew words for Sons of God literally means sons of Elohim. In the Old Testament, only direct creations of God are referred to as Sons of God. Only Adam, Eve and Angels are direct creations of God; but Eve is not a son, so that leaves Adam and Angels. So, clearly this passage refers to fallen angels mating with human females producing giants and mighty men of renown. Men of renown means these men are known by the various histories of the region. Throughout history and in every culture - Romans, Greeks, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Sumerian, etc, there is mythology relating to gods mating with human women producing extraordinary hybrids. The Sumerians have their Annunaki. The Greeks with their pantheon of gods which the Romans adopted wholesale more or less. In these mythology, there is Hercules, half god half man with great size and strength. There is Perseus, half god son of Zeus. There is Atlas, half god, big and strong depicted as carrying the Earth on his back. These are the men that are renown. Google the video Return of the Nephilim by Chuck Missler. Chuck used be in the Defense Industry. He was an insider. In his videos, he tries to document the link between Nephilims and modern UFOs. Watch it and judge for yourself. Of course, there are also other videos when you google UFOs, Nephilim, Annunaki, NWO, illuminati, etc. Some good some crazy. Judge for yourself. There are books about this subject. I do not play video games so I do not know if there are. I'm pretty this is as this is a common theme the illuminati wants to desensitize people on. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:19 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Thanks. This is fascinating. What are the sources for this information? There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. What are the sources for this information, and for the rest of your statements in this email? Books? Are there any movies or video games that depict these themes? On Dec 27, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has to come as a man (pure human) can not come. They would have effectively thwarted God's plan for redemption. The recent spate of UFO activity and the more blatant abduction of women seems to support this speculation. In almost all UFO abduction experience, what is the most common theme that these abductees are experiencing? It almost always has to do with the human reproductive system. Women's eggs
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
I forgot movies. Yes, there are movies. And any movie of this genre always facinate me. It gives me a chance to peer into the minds of the illuminati. The themes they portray are the themes they would like to desensitize people on. Watch The Lightning Thief, where a kid, half son of Zeus is depicted as an ordinary boy. This is how the illuminati wants you to view hybrids. Watch The wrath of the Titans. where Zeus is depicted as a benevolent god with limited powers. Satan fancies himself as a god. And depicting Zeus as having limited powers is an attempt to insult God insinuating He has limited power. This is the work of the Illuminati. I find movies like Blade runner, The 4400, Limitless particularly instructing. It tells me the illuminati plans to enhance man with bioengineering and drugs. Then of course there are the Sexual Theme movies. I don't watch these as I already know what they are promoting. Remember, movies today are not just for entertainment anymore. They contain subliminal messages, themes, belief systems, trends and plans on what the illuminati is doing or plan to do. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:19 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Thanks. This is fascinating. What are the sources for this information? There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. What are the sources for this information, and for the rest of your statements in this email? Books? Are there any movies or video games that depict these themes? On Dec 27, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has to come as a man (pure human) can not come. They would have effectively thwarted God's plan for redemption. The recent spate of UFO activity and the more blatant abduction of women seems to support this speculation. In almost all UFO abduction experience, what is the most common theme that these abductees are experiencing? It almost always has to do with the human reproductive system. Women's eggs are removed, men's sperms are collected, women are impregnated, etc. If these were truly biological beings - as in ET, why the preoccupation with the reproductive system . When we study lower lifeforms, are we preoccupied with how they reproduce? Yes, we study their reproduction but we also study their other systems. This is the normal behavior of a curious higher being studying a lower lifeform. But these UFO's are almost always studying human reproductive systems. Curious. There is reason to believe that these malevolent spiritual entities are trying to breed a super race of humans. Abduction have been going on for thousands of years and it is reasonable to speculate that they have successfully breed hybrids almost indistinguishable from normal humans. These hybrids have now risen to power worldwide and have infiltrated all of our institutions. These hybrids are the powers behind the Illuminati. So powerful and so entrenched are these hybrids that even presidents fear crossing them. They sent a clear lesson to all future presidents when they assasinated JFK. These illuminata satan worshippers and their hybrid handlers are the shadow government parasites bleeding our society dry. No one can oppose these hybrids. They can drive you mad with a thought - telepaths or they can squeeze your heart - Telekenetic. You can not oppose TEPs and TEKs. Only God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit is holding them at bay. When the Holy Spirit is removed from this Earth at the Rapture of Christians, the floodgates of hell will literally open and these demonic hybrids will consume all life. This my friends is what you are looking forward to if you are not a saved believer. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Faith is the most precious of God’s gifts. I envy the faith of the fundamentalist who can see beyond the human failings and cardinal sins of the men that seem to have come to universally affect the establishment, doctrine, practice, and liturgy of most established religions. As a human endeavor, religion is tainted by the weaknesses of man. I find it overwhelming to parse out God’s truth from the perversions that man has insidiously injected into the worship of God since the very dawn of history. This work to discover God’s truth is more than a lifelong pursuit that leaves little time for other important things. With this having been said, I view engineering in all it varied forms as an unselfish expression and practice of a high religion well-grounded in the golden rule, one of the most noble, yet simple philosophical concepts that has been revealed directly by God. The Ethic of Reciprocity -- often called the Golden Rule in Christianity -- simply states that we are to treat other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves. Almost all organized religions have such an ethic. In this teaching, this ethic is normally intended to apply to the entire human race. Unfortunately, due to the frailty of human nature it is too often applied by some people only to fellow believers. If engineering is practiced at a minimum to advance the human condition for the benefit of our neighbor, to eliminate poverty and ignorance, to enable contact, understanding, and dialog among people, to encourage reasoning, innovation and evaluation of theory, to feed, clothe, house, and nurture man in all his needs and wants, to cure his illnesses, discomforts and infirmities; and in general, to advance the assent of man, in every sense and context, engineering can be practiced as a high art in selfless praise and worship of God. To my way of thinking, Edison and Tesla are now raised to archangels in the heavenly host and the viceroys of the heavens. Rossi, Papp, Ed Storms, Leclair among many others may be someday canonized as saints if their work comes to its intended fruition for the benefit of all mankind who rightfully deserve to sit at the right hand of the Father. So now let us redirect our conversations to the only true religion that glorifies both man and God. Cheers: axil On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Zell, Chris chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote: ** How about some Klonopin or other treatments for OCD? That's what I'm seeing here ( yes, from my own experience). I can't imagine anything more pointless than arguments about religious dogma. Time would be better spent discovering/developing free energy - by which means the entire Middle East would become gloriously irrelevant. Build a Golden Age and forget about these distractions forever.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Faith is the most precious of God’s gifts. I envy the faith of the fundamentalist who can see beyond the human failings and cardinal sins of the men that seem to have come to universally affect the establishment, doctrine, practice, and liturgy of most established religions. As a human endeavor, religion is tainted by the weaknesses of man. I find it overwhelming to parse out God’s truth from the perversions that man has insidiously injected into the worship of God since the very dawn of history. This work to discover God’s truth is more than a lifelong pursuit that leaves little time for other important things. With this having been said, I view engineering in all it varied forms as an unselfish expression and practice of a high religion well-grounded in the golden rule, one of the most noble, yet simple philosophical concepts that has been revealed directly by God. The Ethic of Reciprocity -- often called the Golden Rule in Christianity -- simply states that we are to treat other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves. Almost all organized religions have such an ethic. In this teaching, this ethic is normally intended to apply to the entire human race. Unfortunately, due to the frailty of human nature it is too often applied by some people only to fellow believers. If engineering is practiced at a minimum to advance the human condition for the benefit of our neighbor, to eliminate poverty and ignorance, to enable contact, understanding, and dialog among people, to encourage reasoning, innovation and evaluation of theory, to feed, clothe, house, and nurture man in all his needs and wants, to cure his illnesses, discomforts and infirmities; and in general, to advance the assent of man, in every sense and context, engineering can be practiced as a high art in selfless praise and worship of God. To my way of thinking, Edison and Tesla are now raised to archangels in the heavenly host and the viceroys of the heavens. Rossi, Papp, Ed Storms, Leclair among many others may be someday canonized as saints if their work comes to its intended fruition for the benefit of all mankind who rightfully deserve to sit at the right hand of the Father. So now let us redirect our conversations to the only true religion that glorifies both man and God. Cheers:Axil On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Zell, Chris chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote: ** How about some Klonopin or other treatments for OCD? That's what I'm seeing here ( yes, from my own experience). I can't imagine anything more pointless than arguments about religious dogma. Time would be better spent discovering/developing free energy - by which means the entire Middle East would become gloriously irrelevant. Build a Golden Age and forget about these distractions forever.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The Ethic of Reciprocity -- often called the Golden Rule in Christianity -- simply states that we are to treat other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves. Almost all organized religions have such an ethic. In this teaching, this ethic is normally intended to apply to the entire human race. Unfortunately, due to the frailty of human nature it is too often applied by some people only to fellow believers. This nice passage is also found here: http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm. Eric
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21 days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3 piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I am lying about this. In fact, if you read pig breeding books, they would recommend that you wait until the second estrus to mate that gilt. This my friends are facts. In fact, in fact, in fact. The older the gilt is when you first mate her, the more and bigger your piglets. This is easy to understand. An older gilt's body is more mature and will support more piglets compared to a young gilt on her first cycle. The same is true with human girls. Everyone agrees that exhibiting menstrual cycle at 9 years of age is unusually early for a little girl. Normal menstrual age is about 11-12, most even don't cycle until they are 14. Ask any doctor. Now here comes Lomax and argues that a 9 year old little girl is sexually mature because she has had her first cycle. Apparently, she was not because we have no documented pregnancy of A'isha when she was 9. Her body was simply not mature enough to carry a full term baby to delivery, much like a young gilt. My friends, despite what Lomax would like you to believe, nature and experience tells us an early menstruating girl of 9 is clearly not sexually mature. BTW, Lomax claims that a little girl's mammary glands would develop if she has a baby. Apparently, Lomax has not seen mammary glands of first cycle gilts who became pregnant. They are not developed despite having piglets. It contains little milk. Piglets of young gilts need to have supplemental milk. This my friends is the truth of the normal order of things. But Lomax, twist it, to justify the actions of his retrograde HOLEY prophet. (Lomax still has not caught on why I spell Holy - HOLEY. Contrary to what Lomax would like to believe, I do know how to spell Holy. LOL ...) Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support, here, for Jojo's viciousness. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know that she was sexually mature. That has consequences. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments. The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was abhorrent and retrograde *then*. And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much older. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Reliable for what? Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21 days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3 piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I am lying about this. In fact, if you read pig breeding books, they would recommend that you wait until the second estrus to mate that gilt. This my friends are facts. In fact, in fact, in fact. The older the gilt is when you first mate her, the more and bigger your piglets. This is easy to understand. An older gilt's body is more mature and will support more piglets compared to a young gilt on her first cycle. The same is true with human girls. Everyone agrees that exhibiting menstrual cycle at 9 years of age is unusually early for a little girl. Normal menstrual age is about 11-12, most even don't cycle until they are 14. Ask any doctor. Now here comes Lomax and argues that a 9 year old little girl is sexually mature because she has had her first cycle. Apparently, she was not because we have no documented pregnancy of A'isha when she was 9. Her body was simply not mature enough to carry a full term baby to delivery, much like a young gilt. My friends, despite what Lomax would like you to believe, nature and experience tells us an early menstruating girl of 9 is clearly not sexually mature. BTW, Lomax claims that a little girl's mammary glands would develop if she has a baby. Apparently, Lomax has not seen mammary glands of first cycle gilts who became pregnant. They are not developed despite having piglets. It contains little milk. Piglets of young gilts need to have supplemental milk. This my friends is the truth of the normal order of things. But Lomax, twist it, to justify the actions of his retrograde HOLEY prophet. (Lomax still has not caught on why I spell Holy - HOLEY. Contrary to what Lomax would like to believe, I do know how to spell Holy. LOL ...) Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support, here, for Jojo's viciousness. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know that she was sexually mature. That has consequences. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments. The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was abhorrent and retrograde *then*. And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much older. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Reliable for what? Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals of Islam. They are collections of stories, which require interpretation. They are, in Wikipedia terms, primary sources. Use with care. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. No. Sahih Muslim has an account attributed to Ayesha that she was taken to the Prophet's house when she was nine. Not that they had intercourse. However, that can reasonably be inferred. Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. There is no isnad (which is typical for my edition of Sahih Muslim). Muslim narrates a series of traditions on Ayesha, which are unattributed. He did not hear this from Ayesha! Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. I didn't say she was a different age. One page gave arguments she was. I was citing this to show the range of opinion among Muslims. It wasn't a blog. Which of us is more credible with better evidence? Lomax seems to think that his evidence is stronger because he writes lengthy tiresome essays to confuse the issue. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. What Jojo is effectively lying about would be that I claimed Ayesha was *not* nine. I pointed to evidence that she was, and evidence that she wasn't. I wrote that I don't know how old she was, but that she was sexually mature, regardless. Jojo wants to quibble on that, but a sexually mature woman is not barely out of diapers, which he's said over and over, unless there is some problem! I write lengthy essays because I actually do research and report it, and I discuss the issues. Jojo hates that. He just wants to toss his mud and be done with it. Someone who actually checks his claims? Horrors! OK, show of hands, which of us would follow our neighbors to commit an abhorrent act. *What abhorrent act?* Jojo has never been specific. And nobody here is proposing that girls be married at nine. What I've been saying, though, is that this *was not an abhorrent act* in the culture, the time and place where it occurred. Nobody cared about her age, they care about her *maturity*. And Islamic law, in some places, is still the same. Maturity, by the way, one of the sources I cited noted, includes her reasoning and sound judgment. But that's dicta, in a way, because only one aspect of marriageability is being considered here. Heck, if all our neighbors practiced beastiality, does that make our practice of it OK? Straw man argument. And nobody has claimed that a practice is OK. Rather, if a practice is universally accepted in a time, we cannot condemn
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
As a matter of fact my friend, the practice of Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and other old testament Jews are in fact Abhorrent and retrograde. And you will never hear a Christian justifying these acts. Jesus corrected these retrograde acts. In the New Testament, you will never hear of a Christian having multiple wives ever again. That is the act of a real God and teacher. He corrects and ends retrograde practices. Now, what did muhammed do? Instead of ending it, he embraced it and justified it. His propaganda book the koran, teaches that a man must only have 4 wives. He had 12 according to Lomax. History tells us that he had dozens of wives and concubines and sex toys. But instead of condemning this erroneous act of his HOLEY prophet, he justifies it and try to spin it away. How enlightened and progressive of you Lomax. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. Once again, Just because it was done by all peoples, does not mean it is right. God's intention has always been 1 man to 1 wife. It's as simple as that. I promise you, you will never find me justifying the actions of David by saying that it is OK, because that was the culture at that time. Both David and Solomon are some of the most admired teachers of Christians. But we do not justify their wrong actions. We do not justify their sins. We tell it as it is. That my friends, is the action of honest men. Contrast that to the acts of Lomax. He comes up with various spins, irrelenvancies and lies, to confuse the issue. He then justifies the retrograde acts by claiming that that is the normal cultural thing that people do. I'm not surprised. Lomax feels he is justified in doing this because what he is doing is for the good of islam and muhammed. One prominent Christian once said: (and I quote to the best of my recollection.) A muslim will lie if he feels his lie will serve islam. Remember this fact when you are debating with a muslim. And now, the truth of this statement is evident for all to see. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:23 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 02:43 AM 12/28/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK Lomax, let's agree to disagree. No, because Jojo lies about what we supposedly disagree about. In this agree to disagree post, he again lies, after having been corrected many times, about what I say. I haven't said what he opposes to his positino. In one case, in this series, he says for himself, what he has not prevously said. He says that polygamy is abhorrent and retrograde. Retrograde it might be, that's arguable, but abhorrent, not. Here is a Christian effectively claiming that what Abraham did, with the support of his first wife, Sarah, is abhorrent. Yet it was within the customs of the time. Nobody telling the story, which is how we know it, thought it was abhorrent. The analogy with what Muhammad did and Jojo's claims about it is clear. In another thread, Re: [Vo]:[OT]Birther Myth? or Lomax lies , Jojo lies about what he, himself, quoted, included in the mail, the Executive Order from President Obama, and continues to lie about it. This is perfect, because he lies about what is in his own mail. When he lies about the truth, and doesn't provide sources -- the norm for him -- it's possible to imagine he is merely mistaken, or, for some, that he's telling the truth, *unless one investigates.* But where the subject he's lying about is right in front of us, that's no longer possible -- unless, of course, what he's claimng is there is actually there. There are only a few possibilities remaining here. 1. Jojo is high-functioning, in certain ways, but insane. Hallucinating. 2. Jojo is a troll, and lies because it continues the trolling. I had an excuse for responding to some of his posts. Most of what he's written consists of things that are believed by a substantial number of people, or at least many think that what he's saying is possible. He's asserting common ignorant tropes. So responding to them places information about these subjects in a public record, apposite to the claims. It's been suggested by someone I respect that the job is done. Jojo has revealed his complete insanity, and that takes us to a possible understanding of the second possibility above. Jojo's mission has been to discredit all the positions he takes. It's called a straw puppet, a combination of straw man and sock puppet. It's rare, but I've seen it. In the thread on FGM, I came upon and acknoweldged a tragedy, that Muslim scholars had inadequately educated the Muslim public about the true meaning of female circumcision as found in the classical sources for Islam, but have allowed ignorance and fundamentalist populism to hold sway. There is a parallel tragedy here, that sane Christian
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - From: Peter Gluck To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21 days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3 piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I am lying about this. In fact, if you read pig breeding books, they would recommend that you wait until the second estrus to mate that gilt. This my friends are facts. In fact, in fact, in fact. The older the gilt is when you first mate her, the more and bigger your piglets. This is easy to understand. An older gilt's body is more mature and will support more piglets compared to a young gilt on her first cycle. The same is true with human girls. Everyone agrees that exhibiting menstrual cycle at 9 years of age is unusually early for a little girl. Normal menstrual age is about 11-12, most even don't cycle until they are 14. Ask any doctor. Now here comes Lomax and argues that a 9 year old little girl is sexually mature because she has had her first cycle. Apparently, she was not because we have no documented pregnancy of A'isha when she was 9. Her body was simply not mature enough to carry a full term baby to delivery, much like a young gilt. My friends, despite what Lomax would like you to believe, nature and experience tells us an early menstruating girl of 9 is clearly not sexually mature. BTW, Lomax claims that a little girl's mammary glands would develop if she has a baby. Apparently, Lomax has not seen mammary glands of first cycle gilts who became pregnant. They are not developed despite having piglets. It contains little milk. Piglets of young gilts need to have supplemental milk. This my friends is the truth of the normal order of things. But Lomax, twist it, to justify the actions of his retrograde HOLEY prophet. (Lomax still has not caught on why I spell Holy - HOLEY. Contrary to what Lomax would like to believe, I do know how to spell Holy. LOL ...) Jojo - Original
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
2 questions. First' Which statement specifically do you think I am just making up? Second, Are you serious in wanting to know, or are you just intending to insult me? If you are serious, I will answer you and explain to you where I get these. Jojo - Original Message - From: Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 9:44 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On 12/27/2012 11:12 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has to come as a man (pure human) can not come. They would have effectively thwarted God's plan for redemption. You know you're just making this stuff up, right?
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Excellent analysis of my motives there Lomax. Hmmm, could it be? might it be possible? that I just don't want people to be deceived by your propaganda - that's why I am responding so vigorously to your lies. KISS, my friend. Keep It Simple Stupid! Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 11:23 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 02:43 AM 12/28/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: OK Lomax, let's agree to disagree. No, because Jojo lies about what we supposedly disagree about. In this agree to disagree post, he again lies, after having been corrected many times, about what I say. I haven't said what he opposes to his positino. In one case, in this series, he says for himself, what he has not prevously said. He says that polygamy is abhorrent and retrograde. Retrograde it might be, that's arguable, but abhorrent, not. Here is a Christian effectively claiming that what Abraham did, with the support of his first wife, Sarah, is abhorrent. Yet it was within the customs of the time. Nobody telling the story, which is how we know it, thought it was abhorrent. The analogy with what Muhammad did and Jojo's claims about it is clear. In another thread, Re: [Vo]:[OT]Birther Myth? or Lomax lies , Jojo lies about what he, himself, quoted, included in the mail, the Executive Order from President Obama, and continues to lie about it. This is perfect, because he lies about what is in his own mail. When he lies about the truth, and doesn't provide sources -- the norm for him -- it's possible to imagine he is merely mistaken, or, for some, that he's telling the truth, *unless one investigates.* But where the subject he's lying about is right in front of us, that's no longer possible -- unless, of course, what he's claimng is there is actually there. There are only a few possibilities remaining here. 1. Jojo is high-functioning, in certain ways, but insane. Hallucinating. 2. Jojo is a troll, and lies because it continues the trolling. I had an excuse for responding to some of his posts. Most of what he's written consists of things that are believed by a substantial number of people, or at least many think that what he's saying is possible. He's asserting common ignorant tropes. So responding to them places information about these subjects in a public record, apposite to the claims. It's been suggested by someone I respect that the job is done. Jojo has revealed his complete insanity, and that takes us to a possible understanding of the second possibility above. Jojo's mission has been to discredit all the positions he takes. It's called a straw puppet, a combination of straw man and sock puppet. It's rare, but I've seen it. In the thread on FGM, I came upon and acknoweldged a tragedy, that Muslim scholars had inadequately educated the Muslim public about the true meaning of female circumcision as found in the classical sources for Islam, but have allowed ignorance and fundamentalist populism to hold sway. There is a parallel tragedy here, that sane Christian evangelists (I do not think that an oxymoron) have not spoken up to distance their faith from people like Jojo. The result is a discredit to the religion, as a social phenomenon. Islam has suffered from the same, to a degree, but that's ending. Scholars *are* speaking up against the often violent and brutal -- and ignorant -- fundamentalists. End of topic. Jojo has claimed that he'll let [me] have the last word on this topic. He has said the like of that before and was lying -- or if he wasn't lying, he did not honor his word. Let's see what he does this time. He can keep his word or not, I'm done here. I say intercourse between a 50 year old man and a 9 year old little girl is abhorrent and retrograde. You say it is justified because people around him were not offended. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say marrying multiple wives is abhorrent and retrograde, you say it is OK because other tribes do it. Let's allow the reader to decide if this is abhorrent. I say worshipping a 2nd rate moon god of muhammed's tribe is retarded, you say it is not, Let's allow the readers to decide if the mood god is their cup of tea over a the Universal God of Judaism and Christianity. I say a 9 year old little girl is not sexually mature to be a mother, you say she is because she has had her first menstrual cycle. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say the practice of FGM is abhorrent, since it does not have any redeeming or medical value, you say it is OK. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say the truth and cite quality evidence, you tell lies and cite wikipedia and Internet blogs as your evidence. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I tell the truth
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21 days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3 piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I am lying about this. In fact, if you read pig breeding books, they would recommend that you wait until the second estrus to mate that gilt. This my friends are facts. In fact, in fact, in fact. The older the gilt is when you first mate her, the more and bigger your piglets. This is easy to understand. An older gilt's body is more mature and will support more piglets compared to a young gilt on her first cycle. The same is true with human girls. Everyone agrees that exhibiting menstrual cycle at 9 years of age is unusually early for a little girl. Normal menstrual age is about 11-12, most even don't cycle until they are 14. Ask any doctor. Now here comes Lomax and argues that a 9 year old little girl is sexually mature because she has had her first cycle. Apparently, she was not because we have no documented pregnancy of A'isha when she was 9. Her body was simply not mature enough
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Unfortunately I sense lots of bad mojo behind many of the posts in this exchange On Friday, December 28, 2012, Mark Gibbs wrote: Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - *From:* Peter Gluck *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show the
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Mark, how far back have you followed this exchange. Were you here 6 months ago? 1 year ago? Before you even start to insult me, please please please study up on the history of this. Abd responds politely Come on, either be objective or just go ahead and start insulting. Abd started this round of insults as he did a few months ago. Please refrain from making these hurtful comments until you've investigated the matter more closely. For crreps sake, you're supposed to be an investigative reporter. So investigate properly. Jojo - Original Message - From: Mark Gibbs To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 1:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - From: Peter Gluck To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21 days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3 piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I am lying about this. In fact, if you read
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Mark, has it occured to you or to Peter or to others that it is precisely these kinds of biased hurtful insults that cause me to lash out at you, Peter and Lomax. I am capable of discussing rationally with civility as many in this list can attest. But I will not suffer insults like this. Please consider this as my final warning. If you have investigated this properly, you will conclude that I was discussing calmly and politely with some members here before Lomax, SVJ and others started their round of insults. Please be objective before you start mouthing off. Jojo - Original Message - From: Mark Gibbs To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 1:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - From: Peter Gluck To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21 days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3 piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I am lying about
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
I have set this thread to auto-delete, but I noticed this -- Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. I don't suppose it is that bad, but the conversation should be moved to the alternate list VortexB-L. That is what the second list is for. See: http://www.amasci.com/weird/wvort.html VORTEX B: Besides vortex-L, there is also 'vortexB-L.' This is a secondary forum which has no rules. We use it for extremely off-topic discussions, and also as a flameproof place for any groups who feel a need to engage in verbal fisticuffs. Speaking of B lists and B-this-or-that, I have learned that you can get influenza-B even after getting an influenza shot. You get both the needle and the disease, or what the Japanese call a bee stinging a crying face (adding insult to injury). If it isn't going to work, they could at least make it a nasal spritz. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Of course there's a lot of bad mojo. How would you feel if you are insulted at every turn? by people ignorant of the real situation. First Lomax, then SVJ, then Rocha, then Craig, then Walker then Jouni then Peter and now Mark. All openning their comments with insults. ( I have not included those people who made mild insults like you.) I am capable of discussing with civility as I have with David and a few others. If people want to insult, an insult is what they will receive back. Jojo - Original Message - From: ChemE Stewart To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Unfortunately I sense lots of bad mojo behind many of the posts in this exchange On Friday, December 28, 2012, Mark Gibbs wrote: Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - From: Peter Gluck To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show the
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Does anyone know how to get William Beaty to manage the conduct on this list? If you look at the recent messages on this list ( http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/maillist.html) the ration of science to squabbling is ridiculous and mots of the traffic comes from just a few people going seriously off topic. If Beaty isn't willing to moderate and push the OT stuff over to Vortex B then someone (Jed?) should seriously consider starting an alternative list. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Of course there's a lot of bad mojo. How would you feel if you are insulted at every turn? by people ignorant of the real situation. First Lomax, then SVJ, then Rocha, then Craig, then Walker then Jouni then Peter and now Mark. All openning their comments with insults. ( I have not included those people who made mild insults like you.) I am capable of discussing with civility as I have with David and a few others. If people want to insult, an insult is what they will receive back. Jojo - Original Message - *From:* ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:24 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Unfortunately I sense lots of bad mojo behind many of the posts in this exchange On Friday, December 28, 2012, Mark Gibbs wrote: Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - *From:* Peter Gluck *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e reasonable if you do not comment to this message. Peter On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience. I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show the
RE: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
How about some Klonopin or other treatments for OCD? That's what I'm seeing here ( yes, from my own experience). I can't imagine anything more pointless than arguments about religious dogma. Time would be better spent discovering/developing free energy - by which means the entire Middle East would become gloriously irrelevant. Build a Golden Age and forget about these distractions forever.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: Does anyone know how to get William Beaty to manage the conduct on this list? He is probably busy with the holiday season stuff. He'll get around to responding by and by. Frankly, I don't understand why people are worked up about this. Maybe it is just me floating along in a mellow decongestant stupor but I don't see a problem. (Pseudoephedrine decongestants are the second best medical mood enhancers, after alcohol. You get a sense why they make such potent illegal drugs.) This is why God gave us e-mail filters. You click a few times and presto, the messages and Joro Jaro vanish into the cybernetic continuum. It is one of the great features of life in the 21st century. Better than book clubs in 1965 when you could not escape the boors. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
The only problem with filters is that they are a blunt tool so when someone you're filtering out is in a thread that you're interested in you can miss out on something useful. Sure, you might assume that there's really not much you'll miss by using filtering but it's not really an optimal solution. What's needed is a moderator who can enforce adult, civilized behavior. [m] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: Does anyone know how to get William Beaty to manage the conduct on this list? He is probably busy with the holiday season stuff. He'll get around to responding by and by. Frankly, I don't understand why people are worked up about this. Maybe it is just me floating along in a mellow decongestant stupor but I don't see a problem. (Pseudoephedrine decongestants are the second best medical mood enhancers, after alcohol. You get a sense why they make such potent illegal drugs.) This is why God gave us e-mail filters. You click a few times and presto, the messages and Joro Jaro vanish into the cybernetic continuum. It is one of the great features of life in the 21st century. Better than book clubs in 1965 when you could not escape the boors. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Yes, please Jed, why don't you start an alternative list. Isn't that what I've been calling for all along. That way, you can flood it with off-topic posts and make it into a social club. Leave the science in Vortex-L. Play in your own list. Jojo - Original Message - From: Mark Gibbs To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 3:31 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Does anyone know how to get William Beaty to manage the conduct on this list? If you look at the recent messages on this list (http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/maillist.html) the ration of science to squabbling is ridiculous and mots of the traffic comes from just a few people going seriously off topic. If Beaty isn't willing to moderate and push the OT stuff over to Vortex B then someone (Jed?) should seriously consider starting an alternative list. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Of course there's a lot of bad mojo. How would you feel if you are insulted at every turn? by people ignorant of the real situation. First Lomax, then SVJ, then Rocha, then Craig, then Walker then Jouni then Peter and now Mark. All openning their comments with insults. ( I have not included those people who made mild insults like you.) I am capable of discussing with civility as I have with David and a few others. If people want to insult, an insult is what they will receive back. Jojo - Original Message - From: ChemE Stewart To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Unfortunately I sense lots of bad mojo behind many of the posts in this exchange On Friday, December 28, 2012, Mark Gibbs wrote: Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to his credit, (mostly) responds to Jojo politely, Jojo responds with more outrageous assertions and endless ad hominem attacks, and the circle of ridiculousness repeats. Now Peter has been sucked in ... It's one thing to have an off-topic discussion but quite another when a list is hijacked by little else besides off-topic posts. Really, the Vortex list-Mom needs to manage this list a whole lot better if it's to have any relevance to its original goal ... this is why lists die. [mg] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Peter, I consider this an insult. To the best of my recollection this is your 4th insult to me. In all that time, I have not retaliated. Please refrain from this behavior; unless you want me to retaliate. And please, do not use you response to me as an excuse to promote your site again. It's bad taste. One does not go to other people's site to promote and recruit members. There is no insult intended with this. But if you feel that this is an attack, I will now apologize in advance. Jojo PS. Peter seems to be offended that I used a real life example to illustrate the fallacies of Lomax. I don't believe I have written anything particularly nasty with my real life example. - Original Message - From: Peter Gluck To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Dear Jojo, Even in my weirdest dreams I have not imagined that one day I will read about the sexual reproductive life of Sus scrofa domestica on Vortex a site dedicated to new energy. Pigs have not much to do with Vortex see the first proverb here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/08/two-proverbs-trying-to-support-what-i.html I thought you are a spammer prozelytizing, attacking your re-elected President, trying to demonstrate that Darwin was a poor stupid individual, you don't care for religious freedom and for respect for the other 11,499 religions except yours and so on but all these are only illusions and errors. Practice shows you are like Jack London's inevitable white man:unstoppable and it is useless to ban you or to boycott you, you are the fatum of Vortex. I have serious doubts Vortex will survive intellectually and will not be converted in an anything goes Forum. Be happy, I am accepting your presence and all I wish is that some people will not forget LENR completely. It would e
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
what I'm saying. There is no substitute for developing an intimate relationship with Reality, which requires being willing to set aside all that we have believed, to find out what is Real. Not because someone told us, but because Reality is recognizable. If not, it would be hopeless. And there are signs of the recognition. Really, any real Christian could fill out the rest of this. Love, hope, generosity, trust, serenity, compassion that is effective in the world, and peace of mind. Get a cranial enema my friend. He's now speaking to Daniel. If Daniel ever wants his brain washed -- it's actually not a bad idea -- I can help, I know where the services can be obtained. Nothing is removed, and this isn't sectarian or religous in nature, though there are certainly impacts on how we understand religion. I.e., fuzzy thinking, fuzzy religion. Clear thinking, clear religion. You have been mesmerized by Lomax's excessive verbal diarrhea. I've been trained in hypnosis, but I'm not using the techniques here. It's not easy in writing. All the crap is getting into your head and Lomax is laughing at you for swallowing his spin and lies lock, stock and barrel. LOL. That's got to be Jojo's belief, that I'm a troll like him. It is *possible* that he doesn't believe anything he writes, and that he is enjoying *any* response, and he does write LOL a lot. Some of what he writes is so preposterous that I occasionally laugh, but not out loud. Jojo is in hell. I'm not *ever* going to laugh about that. It's tragic. There's a door for him, ready at any time. I don't know what Christians he hangs out with, but that door is available to him always, and Jesus is waiting. Just speaking to him through someone he doesn't expect. He could get it right now. Really. Jojo - Original Message - From: mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comDaniel Rocha To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comJohn Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age He actually rebuted evertything. It's just that you are crazy religious fundamentalist and cannot see beyond your prejudices. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro mailto:jth...@hotmail.comjth...@hotmail.com I provided sources from Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. Two of the most respected and venerated muslim scholarly works ever. I even provided the actual arabic in Sharia that shows that FGM mutilation of the clitoris is required in Sharia. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comdanieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
I think the intended reference may have been to Zeta Reticuli. At 09:55 PM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: My goodness, you have no idea how close to the truth you are with this joke. Yes, residents of Eta Reticuli. Except that they are not aliens from another world as in ET - biological aliens. They are in fact residents of another dimension beyond our 4 dimenstions - as in Fallen angels, jinns, demons and all sorts of malevolent spirits. This my friend is who has you mesmerized. Jojo - Original Message - From: mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comDaniel Rocha To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comJohn Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age I think It's more likely that the inhabitants of Eta Reticuli mesmerized me! 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro mailto:jth...@hotmail.comjth...@hotmail.com Get a cranial enema my friend. You have been mesmerized by Lomax's excessive verbal diarrhea. All the crap is getting into your head and Lomax is laughing at you for swallowing his spin and lies lock, stock and barrel. LOL. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comdanieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 08:05 PM 12/26/2012, you wrote: Liar liar liar . I'm not surprised after all I know who you are and your religion. There is an executive order. Obama issued it on the day he took power. It covers his BC in Hawaii, his Occidental College records and his other thesis records from Harvard. Cool. I cited that Executive Order. It has zero effect on his birth certificate or other pre-Presidential papers. It's an order covering Presidential papers. That order has *nothing* to do with the documents Jojo mentions. He's lying, and he keeps lying. For some time, it was possible to claim that he was merely mistaken. No, he's lying, he's responsible, because he has turned away from the most obvious opporunties to notice error. Like right now, let's see if he takes advantage of it this time. Here is a copy of the order. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-01-26/pdf/E9-1712.pdf By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows [...] (e) ''Presidential records'' refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records. Because it's obvious that some people have looked at it and jumped to conclusions, here is a page that goes into great detail: http://www.thefogbow.com/birther-claims-debunked1/other-stuff/#EO Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. I say what I say openly, in plain sight. There is nothing to hide. I am a known person, I have a reputation to maintain, my future depends on it. Jojo PS. Expert spin with Naudin. I am not, never have, and never will be associated with Naudin. This is guilt by association. A well known debating technique to spin the issue. I did not claim or imply that Naudin and Jojo are associated. Jojo is not responsible for Naudin, nor Naudin for Jojo. Rather, I related these discussions to matters which are of list import. That is, I said similar things about Naudin. I'm making a general argument, that when one is in egregious disregard of the truth, is informed and has a clear and extended opportunity to correct false statements of weight, one becomes a liar even if it was not originally intended that way. Ignorance *is* an excuse when it comes to the sin of lying. But when ignorance becomes wilful, out of pride or arrogance or hatred, or any of the other niceties, the excuse vanishes. Liars lose credibility, as Naudin has lost credibility, and as Jojo has lost whatever credibility he might have had. I was suprised, but I received mail today from one of the top cold fusion scientists in the world, thanking me about my comments about Islam here. Apparently they were found interesting. I received another mail today from a prominent activist in the field, pretty much the same. I wasn't seeking this. But I don't mind it. Don't worry, I have no intention of turning this list into a Muslim tract. I've only been responding to gross misinformation, of a kind that has some credence in some segments of society in the U.S. I would not bring this stuff here, without that reason, and I would not use this list to generally try to correct society on these topics. This whole birther thing was brought here by Jojo, entirely. He thinks that some of us like Obama, so he's trying to get us riled up. Now he's off onto the Illuminati, [Z]eta Reticuli, and what else? - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:51 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that Jojo Jaro believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively and with evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. I've said similar things about Naudin, because he made blatant errors in his MAHG investigation, stonewalled friendly inquiries, and eft the page with those major errors (that totally reverse his conclusions) without corrections, thus continuing to mislead the public. That's culpable. Until he fixes this, he's a *liar*. If Naudin were a serious investigator, he'd do it in a flash. He made a mistake. Embarrassing. So what? All it takes is Oops! and it is almost entirely over. And if Jojo were interested
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Jojo: However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. I am curious. Please elaborate. On Dec 26, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: The Illuminati satanic occultic pagan group of powerful men and bankers behind everything in our society, including the President, Congress, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve, the Smithsonian and other institutions. The Illuminati is the shadow government that FDR was alluding to and the reason JFK was assasinated. He spoke too much when he called for the dissolution of secret societies. This above is not speculation. However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press conference. Not a white house press conference which is questionable to begin with. This is very simple and the Birther movement will die an untimely death and I will apologize and tuck my tail between my legs in shame and go away. Lomax lies when he says we have seen the official BC. We have not; no one has. What we've seen which Lomax claims is the official BC is a scanned photoshop file. No one except Obama and alledgedly snopes have seen it. Why? Is anybody buying Lomax's argument? It's very simple my friends, if there is an officially issued BC, complete with seal, and signature of the official representative of the State of Hawaii, just show it. No amount of spin or eloquence or tiresome lengthy essay will overcome this very strong argument. Just show it. Period. Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. This is the first time it has ever happened to a sitting president. What the heck is wrong with seeing the original vault copy BC? If he has alledgedly issued an official copy, what's wrong with verifying it with the vault copy? Why does Obama feel the need to go out of his way to issue an executive order to block access? You know, only corrupt and lying leaders find the need to hide their history. Obama is a corrupt lying usurper. And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 11:15 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. David is addressing this to Jojo. However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. And I have not used the list to propagandize Islam. But Jojo has used the list to propagandize a whole series of issues that are not actually Christian, per se, but specifically Evangelical Christian tropes, intensely anti-Muslim, in ways that have offended other list members, apparently non-Muslim. These are not necessirly favoring the Muslim faith, rather
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Hey! I'm the one living in the snowy mountains, and looking out the windows of my office at a fine winter storm, large dry flakes tumbling out of the sky, dancing with the breeze, playing hide-and-go-seek among the aspens smile On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Alright, so you are living under a snowy barricade on a very high mountain. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. Theodore Roosevelt Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Brrr.. I don't know how one could live in such cold climates. But to each his own. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:56 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Hey! I'm the one living in the snowy mountains, and looking out the windows of my office at a fine winter storm, large dry flakes tumbling out of the sky, dancing with the breeze, playing hide-and-go-seek among the aspens smile On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Alright, so you are living under a snowy barricade on a very high mountain. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. Theodore Roosevelt Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. Which of us is more credible with better evidence? Lomax seems to think that his evidence is stronger because he writes lengthy tiresome essays to confuse the issue. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. OK, show of hands, which of us would follow our neighbors to commit an abhorrent act. Heck, if all our neighbors practiced beastiality, does that make our practice of it OK? Lomax and a few others seems to think that because all the tribes surrounding muhammed practice child molestation of 9 year old little girls, that muhammed's practice of it was OK. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. 'Nuff said. I can never convince a retrograde moon god worshipper about his abhorrent acts. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:44 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 09:41 PM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What has he rebuted? Has he rebuted that A'isha was 9 years old when muhammed had intercourse with her? I've shown that the age is uncertain. What Muslim and Bukarhai show that there was a rumor that she was nine. Other sources indicate that the age may have been different, nine is the *youngest* of the possible ages. We don't actually know, from Muslim and Bukhari, that they had intercourse at this time but that's the usual assumtion. What it actually says is that she went to live with him. What is universally accepted, however, in all sources, is that she was sexually mature when the marriage was completed. I presented source like Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari saying that this was true. No, they quote two stories, that slightly contradict each other, that say that she was nine. They actually don't say that it is true that she was nine. They don't even address the issue. Hadith are not assertions of truth, generally, they are reports of testimony, usually at least third-hand. Jojo assigns an authority to hadith that he imagines Muslims must assign, because he thinks that way about the Bible. Some Muslims do think that way, in fact, but the position I'm stating is that of Muslim scholars, not the multitides, who sometimes know less about the Qur'an and the sources for Islam than the ordinary Christian knows about the Bible. Lomax presented wikipedia and blogs and he rebuted what I said? Yes. I presented far more than that. But Jojo has acknowedged that he doesn't read what I've written. I have some land in Florida I'd like to sell you for cheap. Very close to the beach? LOL And we expect that it would be like everything else Jojo offers. A lie. Trust, not me or him, but the balance of the evidence, and know that our judgement is easily flawed. What has he rebuted? Like nearly everything expect certain obvious facts that were never in question. That Muslim and Bukhari report 9 at marriage is fact. That was never in question. How old Ayesha actually was is controversial, we do not actually know. So what was refuted was the idea that the actual age is known, as if this were a certainty merely because it's found in certain hadith. Muslims disagree about the age, but it's also true that many Muslims, from far back, have accepted nine as the age. And that's not impossible, nor, personally, do I consider it outside of the bounds of possiblity. But this does *not* establish nine as some clearly permitted age, because, in fact, the law was not about age, though later sources do mention ages.(I have another 13th century treatise on marriage that shows the modern tendency to use age rather than specific condition). The traditions cited were not *interpreted*. They are just reports of what people said that people said had happened. He said that pre-islam tribes practiced child marriage
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
OK, since you asked. Don't say I am trolling. There is reason to believe that fallen angels are trying to breed with humans to create a hybrid race. The Bible called these hybrids Nephilims. They were universal during the days of Noah. They interbred with human women to give birth to giant hybrids - Hercules, Persues, Atlas etc. They interbreed with normal animal to give birth to hideous dinasaurs and loathsome creatures. This was the primary reason why God had to wipe out the entire race of life on Earth with a global flood. Fallen angels and demons wanted to subvert the plan of God by corrupting man. If human DNA are all tainted with demonic DNA, the messiah, which has to come as a man (pure human) can not come. They would have effectively thwarted God's plan for redemption. The recent spate of UFO activity and the more blatant abduction of women seems to support this speculation. In almost all UFO abduction experience, what is the most common theme that these abductees are experiencing? It almost always has to do with the human reproductive system. Women's eggs are removed, men's sperms are collected, women are impregnated, etc. If these were truly biological beings - as in ET, why the preoccupation with the reproductive system . When we study lower lifeforms, are we preoccupied with how they reproduce? Yes, we study their reproduction but we also study their other systems. This is the normal behavior of a curious higher being studying a lower lifeform. But these UFO's are almost always studying human reproductive systems. Curious. There is reason to believe that these malevolent spiritual entities are trying to breed a super race of humans. Abduction have been going on for thousands of years and it is reasonable to speculate that they have successfully breed hybrids almost indistinguishable from normal humans. These hybrids have now risen to power worldwide and have infiltrated all of our institutions. These hybrids are the powers behind the Illuminati. So powerful and so entrenched are these hybrids that even presidents fear crossing them. They sent a clear lesson to all future presidents when they assasinated JFK. These illuminata satan worshippers and their hybrid handlers are the shadow government parasites bleeding our society dry. No one can oppose these hybrids. They can drive you mad with a thought - telepaths or they can squeeze your heart - Telekenetic. You can not oppose TEPs and TEKs. Only God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit is holding them at bay. When the Holy Spirit is removed from this Earth at the Rapture of Christians, the floodgates of hell will literally open and these demonic hybrids will consume all life. This my friends is what you are looking forward to if you are not a saved believer. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Jojo: However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. I am curious. Please elaborate. On Dec 26, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Jojo Jaro wrote: The Illuminati satanic occultic pagan group of powerful men and bankers behind everything in our society, including the President, Congress, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve, the Smithsonian and other institutions. The Illuminati is the shadow government that FDR was alluding to and the reason JFK was assasinated. He spoke too much when he called for the dissolution of secret societies. This above is not speculation. However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support, here, for Jojo's viciousness. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know that she was sexually mature. That has consequences. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments. The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was abhorrent and retrograde *then*. And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much older. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Reliable for what? Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals of Islam. They are collections of stories, which require interpretation. They are, in Wikipedia terms, primary sources. Use with care. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. No. Sahih Muslim has an account attributed to Ayesha that she was taken to the Prophet's house when she was nine. Not that they had intercourse. However, that can reasonably be inferred. Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. There is no isnad (which is typical for my edition of Sahih Muslim). Muslim narrates a series of traditions on Ayesha, which are unattributed. He did not hear this from Ayesha! Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. I didn't say she was a different age. One page gave arguments she was. I was citing this to show the range of opinion among Muslims. It wasn't a blog. Which of us is more credible with better evidence? Lomax seems to think that his evidence is stronger because he writes lengthy tiresome essays to confuse the issue. If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be deceive by lies. What Jojo is effectively lying about would be that I claimed Ayesha was *not* nine. I pointed to evidence that she was, and evidence that she wasn't. I wrote that I don't know how old she was, but that she was sexually mature, regardless. Jojo wants to quibble on that, but a sexually mature woman is not barely out of diapers, which he's said over and over, unless there is some problem! I write lengthy essays because I actually do research and report it, and I discuss the issues. Jojo hates that. He just wants to toss his mud and be done with it. Someone who actually checks his claims? Horrors! OK, show of hands, which of us would follow our neighbors to commit an abhorrent act. *What abhorrent act?* Jojo has never been specific. And nobody here is proposing that girls be married at nine. What I've been saying, though, is that this *was not an abhorrent act* in the culture, the time and place where it occurred. Nobody cared about her age, they care about her *maturity*. And Islamic law, in some places, is still the same. Maturity, by the way, one of the sources I cited noted, includes her reasoning and sound judgment. But that's dicta, in a way, because only one aspect of marriageability is being considered here. Heck, if all our neighbors practiced beastiality, does that make our practice of it OK? Straw man argument. And nobody has claimed that a practice is OK. Rather, if a practice is universally accepted in a time, we cannot condemn those who practiced it, it was their culture. The practice itself could be awful, but obviously was not from theirs. If we are going to judge
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
OK Lomax, let's agree to disagree. I say intercourse between a 50 year old man and a 9 year old little girl is abhorrent and retrograde. You say it is justified because people around him were not offended. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say marrying multiple wives is abhorrent and retrograde, you say it is OK because other tribes do it. Let's allow the reader to decide if this is abhorrent. I say worshipping a 2nd rate moon god of muhammed's tribe is retarded, you say it is not, Let's allow the readers to decide if the mood god is their cup of tea over a the Universal God of Judaism and Christianity. I say a 9 year old little girl is not sexually mature to be a mother, you say she is because she has had her first menstrual cycle. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say the practice of FGM is abhorrent, since it does not have any redeeming or medical value, you say it is OK. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I say the truth and cite quality evidence, you tell lies and cite wikipedia and Internet blogs as your evidence. Let's allow the readers to decide if this is abhorrent. I tell the truth about islam and highlight the corruption of a retrograde and violent religion, you lie and lie for the good of muhammed and islam. Let's allow the readers to decide. Frankly, I grow tired of reading you boring lengthy tiresome lies of an essay. I guess you've found a way to shut me up. Just bore me with tiresome spin and lies. So, I bow out and let you have the last word on this topic. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or 10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde. No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual. If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a sexually mature woman. Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother. Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this. No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support, here, for Jojo's viciousness. OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually mature. Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know that she was sexually mature. That has consequences. For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the corruption of islam for all to see. The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments. The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was abhorrent and retrograde *then*. And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much older. OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more reliable. Reliable for what? Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs. For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals of Islam. They are collections of stories, which require interpretation. They are, in Wikipedia terms, primary sources. Use with care. One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or thereabouts. No. Sahih Muslim has an account attributed to Ayesha that she was taken to the Prophet's house when she was nine. Not that they had intercourse. However, that can reasonably be inferred. Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. There is no isnad (which is typical for my edition of Sahih Muslim). Muslim narrates a series of traditions on Ayesha, which are unattributed. He did not hear this from Ayesha! Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age. I didn't say she was a different age. One page gave arguments she was. I was citing this to show the range of opinion among Muslims. It wasn't a blog. Which of us is more credible
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press conference. Not a white house press conference which is questionable to begin with. This is very simple and the Birther movement will die an untimely death and I will apologize and tuck my tail between my legs in shame and go away. Lomax lies when he says we have seen the official BC. We have not; no one has. What we've seen which Lomax claims is the official BC is a scanned photoshop file. No one except Obama and alledgedly snopes have seen it. Why? Is anybody buying Lomax's argument? It's very simple my friends, if there is an officially issued BC, complete with seal, and signature of the official representative of the State of Hawaii, just show it. No amount of spin or eloquence or tiresome lengthy essay will overcome this very strong argument. Just show it. Period. Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. This is the first time it has ever happened to a sitting president. What the heck is wrong with seeing the original vault copy BC? If he has alledgedly issued an official copy, what's wrong with verifying it with the vault copy? Why does Obama feel the need to go out of his way to issue an executive order to block access? You know, only corrupt and lying leaders find the need to hide their history. Obama is a corrupt lying usurper. And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 11:15 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. David is addressing this to Jojo. However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. And I have not used the list to propagandize Islam. But Jojo has used the list to propagandize a whole series of issues that are not actually Christian, per se, but specifically Evangelical Christian tropes, intensely anti-Muslim, in ways that have offended other list members, apparently non-Muslim. These are not necessirly favoring the Muslim faith, rather, they are, first, noting the inappropriateness of such highly sectarian and abusive expressions here, and, secondly, supporting a list member who is a relatively long-time participant here, who has never used the list to promote Islam. The anti-Muslim material was completely off-topic, not necessary for any discussion here, on-topic or off-topic, except to establish Jojo Jaro's thesis, that I'm a liar, and to him, Muslim means liar. The real thing that is happening is that he argued other topics, like the whole birther myth, kept up an anti-Obama drumbeat, and on the birther issue, specifically, I researched his claims and reported them as being utterly bogus. Not as a prejudgment, but as the result of research. And he could not tolerate that, and, I believe, that's where his attack came from. Essentially, I disagreed with him and provided evidence. That's intolerable to him, so he then attacked with everything he could
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
On Dec 25, 2012, at 21:41, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. Bingo. As members of modern, pluralistic societies, we shouldn't allow hate propaganda. We shouldn't allow it in relation to Jews, and we shouldn't allow it in relation to Muslims. I personally do not mind the occasional snarky comment about religion; but in that instance it is generally about *all* religion and does not single out one group. There is no off-topic problem. This is a manufactured issue meant to serve as a pretext for what is essentially parasitic behavior. The one proposing that such an issue exists has shown little to no interest in providing a meaningful contribution to the on-topic threads. He is no doubt here primarily to get attention and to stir the pot; ie, whatever he was here for a year ago, he is now here to troll. Once this is recognized, we can deal with the matter in the way that this kind of thing is normally dealt with -- summarily and with little comment. Eric
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age--for the education of Jojo
At 07:34 PM 12/25/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Once again, Lomax diverts the issue and attempts to spin it away. The issue is not A'isha actual age, it is irrelevant what her actual age was. She could have been 5 years older and what muhammed did would still be an abhorrent sex perverted act. That's fascinating. Presumably he's referring to the commonly stated age of 9. So she'd be 14. That's commonly been a legal age of marriage in the U.S. It's still legal in many states. What's the abhorrent sex perverted act? I went over the hadith, it looks like Jojo may be imagining something that is not there. There is nothing there remotely perverted, except in Jojo's mind. The issue is not A'isha mentrual cycle, it is irrelevant that she has had a menstrual cycle. A girl of 9 is clearly an immature child not prepared for the rigors of being subjected to sex, being a wife and starting a family. We don't actually know her age. We know some stories about it. What we *know*, relatively speaking, is that she was sexually mature. That, by the way, is completely sufficient to kill the pedophile argument. Actual pedophiles lose interest in the objects of their attention when they sexually mature. The issue is not whether muhammed's tribe considered this as wrong or not. People can clearly see that it is wrong. is. What is wrong. This all happened 1400 years ago. It happened under radically different circumstances. The issue is not that pre-islam tribes do it. The issue is that islam does it. Does it? First of all, only a few Muslim countries allow early marriage. The trend in Muslim countries is pretty much the same as everywhere, toward an emphasis on extending childhood, for extended education, basically. The great prophet should have corrected this practice. He should have disavowed this retrograde practice, not assimilate it and embrace it with gusto. He repeats phrases that he's used before, that have been shown to be inapplicable. It's actually a characteristic of trolling. What someone should have done depends on context. Above, Jojo says that it all would have been the same if she'd been 14. Perverted, allegedly. Now, some sources say she was 18. Still perverted? He said 14, but didn't really mean it. Just compare the behavior of the real true God Jesus Christ compared with a sex perverted HOLEY prophet like muhammed. Uh, if Jesus was God what are you doing comparing him to a man? Hey, if you are going to call the Prophet holy, how about spelling it correctly? If you are going to call him sex perverted, how about an example of a sex perverted act, because the diagnostic standards of modern psychiatry -- or older psychiatry -- do not recognise sex perversion simply for an attraction by a man to a sexually mature woman -- of any age -- as perverted. It's *normal*. That is *not* pedophilia if she's sexually mature. For *other reasons,* we now limit marriage to a higher age, but U.S. law still, in many places, readily contemplates marriage at 14. And marriage laws do not have any upper limit. Consider the marriage of Woody Allen to the adopted daughter of his wife. That certainly raised eyebrows, and Islamic law would generally consider that a prohibited relationship, that would be my judgment. (I won't go into the reasons, but it makes sense, if you think about what's behind the prohibited degrees.) But Woody Allen isn't a pervert. He's a normal man to be attracted to his wife. When Jesus came on the scene, the practice of multiple wives to one man was still prevalent and Jews practiced it contrary to the original intent of God. But it was a retrograde and abhorrent practice and what did Jesus do? He put a stop to it. Hence, Christians now do not have multiple wives, even when their predecessors the Jews had. Jesus did not establish that law. He didn't bring law, remember? He didn't change law, remember? He said precisely that. I come not to change the law, but to fulfill it. Now, were the Jews practicing something abhorrent? Be careful, Jojo, for Abraham had two wives, right? And it appears God approved of that, didn't he? This is what the real God Jesus Christ or real progressive prophets do. They correct abhorrent practices. No, but not muhammed, he enjoyed it too much. Ayesha accused him of that! Feisty one, she was. Having dozens of wives and concubines and a 9 year old little girl BARELY OUT OF DIAPERS. He now puts it in capital letters, it's pure trolling, because he *likes* that I point it out as a lie. (He could claim that if she was nine, but when was she out of diapers. Barely would surely mean that it was close to nine. Like 8, 7, what? But -- Arabs almost certainly didn't use diapers then, and even if they did, she'd have been out of them by two or three if the parents were really unfortunate.) No, this is my point, and Jojo has acknowledged it. He's writing what he's writing, not because it
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
just said that for myself. Your turn. Don't say it if you are not sure. And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. If over 60% of Americans believe that, there is something they could do. How does Jojo know what 60% of Americans believe? I believe that President Obama should come clean on this, if there is anything hidden. I don't get that there is anything hidden, so how I'd answer a survey would depend on the question, and, as well, on when it was asked. This post is separately sent, I have not yet verified or falsified the claim that Abercrombie, the governor of Hawaii, could not access the Obama birth records because of an executive order. I will follow up. Jojo (I am now removing copies of prior posts in the thread, per list rules. Jojo was respondng to the following post.) - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that Jojo Jaro believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively and with evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. I've said similar things about Naudin, because he made blatant errors in his MAHG investigation, stonewalled friendly inquiries, and eft the page with those major errors (that totally reverse his conclusions) without corrections, thus continuing to mislead the public. That's culpable. Until he fixes this, he's a *liar*. If Naudin were a serious investigator, he'd do it in a flash. He made a mistake. Embarrassing. So what? All it takes is Oops! and it is almost entirely over. And if Jojo were interested in truth, he'd do the same. From long experience, now, I concluded he isn't interested in truth. He is interested in *insult* and *winning.* At 02:24 PM 12/26/2012, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: At 01:07 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. Fascinating. Is there such an Executive Order? That would be quite odd. Legally, the President has no authority over Hawaiian officials, unless a federal issue could be shown. and this would not qualify. Jojo went on to repeat the Executive Order claim that Obama is preventing access to the vault certificate. Is that true? Is there an Executive Order to block access. What can be found on this? The basis for the claim might be covered here: http://www.politifact.com/subjects/obama-birth-certificate/ Is Politifact results from checking claims. It's remarkable how many claims are shown as flaming lies, and how many of the rest are shown as false. There really are only a few related claims that they show as true. This is not one of them: http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/feb/27/leo-berman/state-rep-leo-berman-says-hawaii-governor-cant-fin/ The claim: State Rep. Leo Berman says Hawaii governor can't find anything that says Obama was born in Hawaii They consider the claim by Berman to be false. What they found showed that Berman apparently misinterpreted statements by Abercrombie. What had actually happened? ... The Associated Press reported that Abercrombie's office had ended its effort to make public more information about Obama's birth. The story does not say that Abercrombie had failed to find evidence of Obama's birthplace, but that the state's attorney general had told the governor that he can't disclose birth documentation without the person's consent. There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said. We wondered whether Abercrombie sought Obama's permission to obtain more proof of his birth. The White House wouldn't comment, but Abercrombie told CNN on Dec. 27 that we haven't had any of those discussions. Per the authenticity of the document posted online by Obama, our colleagues at PolitiFact National pointed out July 1, 2009, that FactCheck.org, a respected fact-checking unit at the University of Pennsylvania, had traveled to Chicago to examine the document and concluded that it's legitimate. Unfortunately, that would be a reference to the short form certificate. This page was written before the long form was released. Abercrombie had apparently not requested permission.. My speculation about why he'd not look at the vault certificate himself, and announce it, turns out to be confirmed as the reason. It's illegal without consent! Were there later developments on this? (Sure: Obama requested the long form, and then released copies of it, both as direct copies, given to the media, and on-line, as a readable, but compressed copy, as would be a necessity.) Was there an Executive Order? Jojo claims it. That's a specific kind of document, and is not informal, and obviously is not binding on anyone not informed of it (and may not be binding, period, but that's another issue.) I was concerned about Jojo's claim of such an Order, which is why I'm investigating. The claim is common. There was an Obama Executive Order that is commonly asserted to prevent release of his birth certificate. That's a totally naive and imbalanced understanding of the Order. http://www.thefogbow.com/birther-claims-debunked1/other-stuff/ covers it and links to the Order itself. However, is there *another* Executive Order? To get the real poop (or genuine bullshit), I'll need to go to birther sources, perhaps. http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=246370
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 11:54 AM 12/26/2012, de Bivort Lawrence wrote: illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. I actually missed that. Illuminati. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminati Yes, very consistent.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 12:30 PM 12/26/2012, Eric Walker wrote: On Dec 25, 2012, at 21:41, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. Bingo. As members of modern, pluralistic societies, we shouldn't allow hate propaganda. We shouldn't allow it in relation to Jews, and we shouldn't allow it in relation to Muslims. I personally do not mind the occasional snarky comment about religion; but in that instance it is generally about *all* religion and does not single out one group. There was one unfortunate comment that made a reference to Christians, an indirect reference to Jojo. It was relatively mild, had a similar comment been made about me, I'd certainly not have dived in to argue with it. An equivalent might be, talking about some irrelevant topic, say some terrorist event involving Muslims, Will we hear from our resident fanatic Muslim. Well, I hope I'm not fanatic, but that's really only a minor interpretive error. So what? But some extended rant about, say, ignorant creationists, would be provocative, such discussions, if they are to take place at all, should not be allowed to become uncivil. There is no off-topic problem. This is a manufactured issue meant to serve as a pretext for what is essentially parasitic behavior. The one proposing that such an issue exists has shown little to no interest in providing a meaningful contribution to the on-topic threads. He is no doubt here primarily to get attention and to stir the pot; ie, whatever he was here for a year ago, he is now here to troll. Once this is recognized, we can deal with the matter in the way that this kind of thing is normally dealt with -- summarily and with little comment. Eric The evidence support's Eric's interpretation, generally. It might be enough to issue a specific warning, though, and then only deal with it summarily if the warning is ignored. It's up to the list owner, how much effort he wants to put into this. I've recommended the warning route.
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 01:12 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: My friend, just because your morality allows you to troll and lie in wikipedia does not mean that I am like you. I never lied on Wikipedia. I did one action that I allowed as a form of trolling. It's more like what a soldier might do in a war, present himself as a target so that a sniper betrays his position. There was no lying involved, and the purpose wasn't actually to outrage. The action itself was completely legitimate. In fact, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cold_fusiondiff=prevoldid=306930963 A talk page edit, not actually controversial, just providing information. It worked. The admin took the bait, following his ego. And he lost his privileges as a result. My purpose was to allow him to do that, to take himself out of the Wikipedia adminstrative corps, where he'd been doing damage for years. Mostly, Jojo's not realized this, he'd been acting to harass and ban global warming skeptics, but he was also generally allied with the pseudoskeptics when it comes to anything fringe or psychic. He was famous, probably the most famous abusive Wikipedia administrator. There was no purpose to insult him. The edit had nothing to do with him, except that he'd declared a total ban, something he did not actually have the authority to do. And we were in the middle of a case, over whether the ban was legitimate. His action showed a total loss of balance, and even his friends were backpedalling, distancing themselves from it. Stop the off-topic posts and I will go away never to post here again, but I will read. I am sacrificing my participation, my chance to ask questions if the chronic off-topic violators would simply stop their abuses. JUST DO IT. Off-topic posts are not going to stop, period. These threads might stop. But these threads are maintained by Jojo's continued insistence on the points he makes in them. Clearly you understood Bill's no off-topic rule cause you quoted parts of it here and still claim that I am lying about it. You are such a blatant liar. I'm not surprised. I quoted the rules, and I didn't just quote parts, I quoted the entire set, as far as I know. I don't recall having say that Jojo was lying about the rules, only that they don't contain what he claimed. Since I don't know if he even read the rules recently, I have no idea whether he lied or not. He was merely incorrect or misled. I'm leaving the relevant part of the post to which Jojo was responding, so that it can be seen that he is incorrect in his claim that I said he was lying about the rules. I don't see any reference to lying. When he said I still claimed that he was lying, was he lying, or was he so engaged in his anger and attack that he wasn't aware of what was in front of him? Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age [...] If Bill changes the rules, I will follow. But in the meantime, people should follow his rules and not make it up as we go - as famously said by one chronic off-topic poster here. Jojo So, what are the rules? I don't know if they have been changed, but below is what I was sent. There *are* rules that could easily be applied to this situation. Some of the rules were obviously written long ago, because behind some of the rules are conditions that used to apply, that hardly ever apply any more. Off-topic isn't a rule, per se. What is there related to that is 3. Small email files please. The limit is set to 40K right now, those exceeding the limit will be forwarded to Bill Beaty. If you wish to start extremely off-topic discussions, please feel free to exchange initial messages on vortex-L, but MOVE THE DISCUSSION TO PRIVATE MAIL IMMEDIATELY. Some members are on limited service, or have to pay for received email. Diagrams and graphics can be mailed to me and posted on a webpages for temporary viewing. In other words, starting extremely off-topic discussions is specifically allowed, but the instruction is to move these to private email immediately. That does not resolve a certain problem, where a poster has posted something to the list which is broadly offensive. It assumes what is really a private discussion that merely starts here. I'm not discussing with Jojo, not any more. I responding to his egregiously offensive claims here that attack all Muslims and what they believe, that attack the President of the United States, that attack almost the entire community of climate scientists, and that personally attack and deliberately insult anyone who dares to disagree with him, including many long-term participants on this list, such as Jed Rothwell. He's acknowledged it, even today. This is what he does. He escalates. I have *not* started
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Liar liar liar . I'm not surprised after all I know who you are and your religion. There is an executive order. Obama issued it on the day he took power. It covers his BC in Hawaii, his Occidental College records and his other thesis records from Harvard. Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. Jojo PS. Expert spin with Naudin. I am not, never have, and never will be associated with Naudin. This is guilt by association. A well known debating technique to spin the issue. - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:51 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Conclusion, there is no such Executive Order. It appears that Jojo Jaro believes birther myths, long after they have been conclusively and with evidence debunked. If he fails to apologize, or point to an actual order doing what he claimed, he is, effectively, a liar. I've said similar things about Naudin, because he made blatant errors in his MAHG investigation, stonewalled friendly inquiries, and eft the page with those major errors (that totally reverse his conclusions) without corrections, thus continuing to mislead the public. That's culpable. Until he fixes this, he's a *liar*. If Naudin were a serious investigator, he'd do it in a flash. He made a mistake. Embarrassing. So what? All it takes is Oops! and it is almost entirely over. And if Jojo were interested in truth, he'd do the same. From long experience, now, I concluded he isn't interested in truth. He is interested in *insult* and *winning.* At 02:24 PM 12/26/2012, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: At 01:07 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. Fascinating. Is there such an Executive Order? That would be quite odd. Legally, the President has no authority over Hawaiian officials, unless a federal issue could be shown. and this would not qualify. Jojo went on to repeat the Executive Order claim that Obama is preventing access to the vault certificate. Is that true? Is there an Executive Order to block access. What can be found on this? The basis for the claim might be covered here: http://www.politifact.com/subjects/obama-birth-certificate/ Is Politifact results from checking claims. It's remarkable how many claims are shown as flaming lies, and how many of the rest are shown as false. There really are only a few related claims that they show as true. This is not one of them: http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/feb/27/leo-berman/state-rep-leo-berman-says-hawaii-governor-cant-fin/ The claim: State Rep. Leo Berman says Hawaii governor can't find anything that says Obama was born in Hawaii They consider the claim by Berman to be false. What they found showed that Berman apparently misinterpreted statements by Abercrombie. What had actually happened? ... The Associated Press reported that Abercrombie's office had ended its effort to make public more information about Obama's birth. The story does not say that Abercrombie had failed to find evidence of Obama's birthplace, but that the state's attorney general had told the governor that he can't disclose birth documentation without the person's consent. There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said. We wondered whether Abercrombie sought Obama's permission to obtain more proof of his birth. The White House wouldn't comment, but Abercrombie told CNN on Dec. 27 that we haven't had any of those discussions. Per the authenticity of the document posted online by Obama, our colleagues at PolitiFact National pointed out July 1, 2009, that FactCheck.org, a respected fact-checking unit at the University of Pennsylvania, had traveled to Chicago to examine the document and concluded that it's legitimate. Unfortunately, that would be a reference to the short form certificate. This page was written before the long form was released. Abercrombie had apparently not requested permission.. My speculation about why he'd not look at the vault certificate himself, and announce it, turns out to be confirmed as the reason. It's illegal without consent! Were there later developments on this? (Sure: Obama requested the long form, and then released copies of it, both
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Here is how guile is defined: Noun 1. guile - shrewdness as demonstrated by being skilled in deception craftiness, cunning, foxiness, slyness, wiliness, craft astuteness, perspicaciousness, perspicacity, shrewdness - intelligence manifested by being astute (as in business dealings) 2. guile - the quality of being crafty deceitfulness, craftiness disingenuousness - the quality of being disingenuous and lacking candor 3. guile - the use of tricks to deceive someone (usually to extract money from them) chicanery, wile, shenanigan, trickery, chicane dissimulation, deception, dissembling, deceit - the act of deceiving dupery, hoax, put-on, humbug, fraud, fraudulence - something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage jugglery - artful trickery designed to achieve an end; the senator's tax program was mere jugglery My friend, what you did is known as guile. Guile is a form of lying. It is condemed in the Bible and equated to outright lying. But apparently, by your own testimony of having commited it in Wikipedia, you have no problem with it. OK. I'm not surprised. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 6:55 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 01:12 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: My friend, just because your morality allows you to troll and lie in wikipedia does not mean that I am like you. I never lied on Wikipedia. I did one action that I allowed as a form of trolling. It's more like what a soldier might do in a war, present himself as a target so that a sniper betrays his position. There was no lying involved, and the purpose wasn't actually to outrage. The action itself was completely legitimate. In fact, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cold_fusiondiff=prevoldid=306930963 A talk page edit, not actually controversial, just providing information. It worked. The admin took the bait, following his ego. And he lost his privileges as a result. My purpose was to allow him to do that, to take himself out of the Wikipedia adminstrative corps, where he'd been doing damage for years. Mostly, Jojo's not realized this, he'd been acting to harass and ban global warming skeptics, but he was also generally allied with the pseudoskeptics when it comes to anything fringe or psychic. He was famous, probably the most famous abusive Wikipedia administrator. There was no purpose to insult him. The edit had nothing to do with him, except that he'd declared a total ban, something he did not actually have the authority to do. And we were in the middle of a case, over whether the ban was legitimate. His action showed a total loss of balance, and even his friends were backpedalling, distancing themselves from it. Stop the off-topic posts and I will go away never to post here again, but I will read. I am sacrificing my participation, my chance to ask questions if the chronic off-topic violators would simply stop their abuses. JUST DO IT. Off-topic posts are not going to stop, period. These threads might stop. But these threads are maintained by Jojo's continued insistence on the points he makes in them. Clearly you understood Bill's no off-topic rule cause you quoted parts of it here and still claim that I am lying about it. You are such a blatant liar. I'm not surprised. I quoted the rules, and I didn't just quote parts, I quoted the entire set, as far as I know. I don't recall having say that Jojo was lying about the rules, only that they don't contain what he claimed. Since I don't know if he even read the rules recently, I have no idea whether he lied or not. He was merely incorrect or misled. I'm leaving the relevant part of the post to which Jojo was responding, so that it can be seen that he is incorrect in his claim that I said he was lying about the rules. I don't see any reference to lying. When he said I still claimed that he was lying, was he lying, or was he so engaged in his anger and attack that he wasn't aware of what was in front of him? Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age [...] If Bill changes the rules, I will follow. But in the meantime, people should follow his rules and not make it up as we go - as famously said by one chronic off-topic poster here. Jojo So, what are the rules? I don't know if they have been changed, but below is what I was sent. There *are* rules that could easily be applied to this situation. Some of the rules were obviously written long ago, because behind some of the rules are conditions that used to apply, that hardly
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Lomax uses guile and deception again to spin the issue. It's very simple friends. Supposedly, they showed an original to snopes with the seal, the folding and other distinctive marking. Snopes then certified it to be true and original and posted a blog about it. Just show that to a respected Tea Party member or some respected individual. Finished. End of the Birther movement. But no, Lomax has to spin it with his verbal diarrhea. Typical and I am not surprised. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 01:07 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. No. It is not OK for me to lie for a supposedly noble goal. I wrote about when it's permissible to lie, and it's only permissible to prevent serious physical harm. And islam and muhammad can't be harmed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? I'll answer that. What is a birth certificate? I had to supply oodles of them to the U.S. government, to the Chinese government, and the Ethiopian government. What they actually wanted was something that is legally *completely equivalent* to the original birth certificate. That is, a copy that is signed and sealed by a state employee as being a true copy of the original. But perhaps Jojo means the original. Okay, it's been seen by the clerk who filled it out. The doctor who signed it. The state agency that filed it. Any employee of that agency who made a copy of the birth certificate had to see it, legally, to verify that the copy was a true copy. And the original sat in an archive, being occasionally accessed to make copies. Then Hawaii computerized. Apparenty all the birth certificates in the state were computerized. They entered the data into a secure computer system. Did they enter all the data? No. They only entered the legally relevant data that is needed for what birth certificates are needed for. The date and time of birth, the parents, the location of birth, and other information, but not such things as the name of the delivering physician. Once that was done, providing a birth certificate for Hawaii then became a matter of accessing the computer record and printing it out, and certifying the copy. That's what Obama originally provided, *the same as everyone else needing to certify a birth in Hawaii.* But the birthers demanded to see the vault certificate. It was legally insane. If someone really suspected that the ordinary certificate was forgery, the appropriate action would be to make a complaint under Hawaiian law (and to knowingly provide a false birth certificate for federal purpose could also violate federal law). Hawaii does not routinely provide a copy of the vault certificate, and the reason is obvious: they want to limit access to those highly valuable original documents. Obama eventually requested a copy. He *cannot* request the original. Members of the public cannot view these, access is restricted. A court could order inspection, to be sure. If there were a criminal investigation, where fraud were suspected, the original is there, and that is the very reason it is so protected. So it will be there. I would assume tight access control. The Hawaiian Secretary of State, who has authority over the records, decided to allow a certified copy of the vault certificate to be made. This is all covered in news reports, by the way. An offical signed the copy, and it was provided to Obama. Obama then held a press conference. He showed the certified copy. He also provided ordinary copies to the press. A scan was put up on the internet. Had the scan been a full, high-resolution scan, it would have been an enormous file, and given the demand for the copy, it would have crashed the server. Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. There copy on the internet is altered. Not in a way that you can casually see, though, because the alteration is simply file compression, using standard procedures, it's done automatically by PDF programs. What they do is to search the document for areas that are similar enough to each other that they can be replaced by a single image, with the other similar instances becoming *exact* copies of that. You see this all the time, most images on the internet have been compressed. It's subtle, you have to closely examine these similar areas -- which have become *exact* areas -- and notice that the fine detail, pixel by pixel, is identical -- which is highly unlikely in an original scan of typewritten material. Letters are very similar, but not exact on a pixel scale. So people looked at the internet images
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
He is reasoning and lying correctly. He gives links, provides reasonable arguments that should prove beyond any reasonable doubt the he is correct and you are not accepting his arguments, thus, being unreasonable beyond doubt. You clearly show your lack of arguments by making childish comments without any base. 2012/12/26 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
sorry, arguing correctly, not lying correctly'. 2012/12/26 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com He is reasoning and lying correctly. He gives links, provides reasonable arguments that should prove beyond any reasonable doubt the he is correct and you are not accepting his arguments, thus, being unreasonable beyond doubt. You clearly show your lack of arguments by making childish comments without any base. 2012/12/26 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Really, no off-topic problem? I don't understand how you can say that. History has shown it to be a problem. Many have left Vortex-L because of it., Many have complained about it. You simply choose to see what you want to see. OK, Let's agree to disagree. Jojo - Original Message - From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 1:30 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age On Dec 25, 2012, at 21:41, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. Bingo. As members of modern, pluralistic societies, we shouldn't allow hate propaganda. We shouldn't allow it in relation to Jews, and we shouldn't allow it in relation to Muslims. I personally do not mind the occasional snarky comment about religion; but in that instance it is generally about *all* religion and does not single out one group. There is no off-topic problem. This is a manufactured issue meant to serve as a pretext for what is essentially parasitic behavior. The one proposing that such an issue exists has shown little to no interest in providing a meaningful contribution to the on-topic threads. He is no doubt here primarily to get attention and to stir the pot; ie, whatever he was here for a year ago, he is now here to troll. Once this is recognized, we can deal with the matter in the way that this kind of thing is normally dealt with -- summarily and with little comment. Eric
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
The Illuminati satanic occultic pagan group of powerful men and bankers behind everything in our society, including the President, Congress, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve, the Smithsonian and other institutions. The Illuminati is the shadow government that FDR was alluding to and the reason JFK was assasinated. He spoke too much when he called for the dissolution of secret societies. This above is not speculation. However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. Jojo - Original Message - From: de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age illimiati? On Dec 26, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press conference. Not a white house press conference which is questionable to begin with. This is very simple and the Birther movement will die an untimely death and I will apologize and tuck my tail between my legs in shame and go away. Lomax lies when he says we have seen the official BC. We have not; no one has. What we've seen which Lomax claims is the official BC is a scanned photoshop file. No one except Obama and alledgedly snopes have seen it. Why? Is anybody buying Lomax's argument? It's very simple my friends, if there is an officially issued BC, complete with seal, and signature of the official representative of the State of Hawaii, just show it. No amount of spin or eloquence or tiresome lengthy essay will overcome this very strong argument. Just show it. Period. Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. This is the first time it has ever happened to a sitting president. What the heck is wrong with seeing the original vault copy BC? If he has alledgedly issued an official copy, what's wrong with verifying it with the vault copy? Why does Obama feel the need to go out of his way to issue an executive order to block access? You know, only corrupt and lying leaders find the need to hide their history. Obama is a corrupt lying usurper. And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 11:15 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. David is addressing this to Jojo. However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. And I have not used the list to propagandize Islam. But Jojo has used the list to propagandize a whole series of issues that are not actually Christian, per se, but specifically Evangelical Christian tropes, intensely anti-Muslim, in ways that have offended other list members, apparently non-Muslim. These are not necessirly favoring the Muslim faith, rather, they are, first, noting the inappropriateness of such highly sectarian and abusive expressions here, and, secondly, supporting a list member who is a relatively long-time participant here, who has never used the list to promote Islam. The anti-Muslim material
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
The elders of zion? :D 2012/12/26 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
I provided sources from Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. Two of the most respected and venerated muslim scholarly works ever. I even provided the actual arabic in Sharia that shows that FGM mutilation of the clitoris is required in Sharia. So, I provided the highest quality of evidence and Lomax provided links to wikipedia and blogs, and you have the audacity to complaim that I do not have any base. How can I not consider you to be the dumbest of the dumb when you can not evaluate simple evidence quality like this. Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 9:22 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age He is reasoning and lying correctly. He gives links, provides reasonable arguments that should prove beyond any reasonable doubt the he is correct and you are not accepting his arguments, thus, being unreasonable beyond doubt. You clearly show your lack of arguments by making childish comments without any base. 2012/12/26 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Ha ha ha ROTFL. I did not even notice this but it sure seems that the truth eventually came out. NO NO NO you were right the first time. Lomax was lying correctly. LOL LOL LOL Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 9:24 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age sorry, arguing correctly, not lying correctly'. 2012/12/26 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com He is reasoning and lying correctly. He gives links, provides reasonable arguments that should prove beyond any reasonable doubt the he is correct and you are not accepting his arguments, thus, being unreasonable beyond doubt. You clearly show your lack of arguments by making childish comments without any base. 2012/12/26 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Lomax is getting blatant in his lies hoping that Vorticians reading are dumb. He has such a low opinion of the intelligence of Vorticians, or a superior sense of his intelligence, that he does not even bother to hide the lies. He lies outright. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
He actually rebuted evertything. It's just that you are crazy religious fundamentalist and cannot see beyond your prejudices. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com ** I provided sources from Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. Two of the most respected and venerated muslim scholarly works ever. I even provided the actual arabic in Sharia that shows that FGM mutilation of the clitoris is required in Sharia. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. Theodore Roosevelt Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 9:40 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age The elders of zion? :D 2012/12/26 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com However, if you want speculation, I have some other speculations about who these people are. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Alright, so you are living under a snowy barricade on a very high mountain. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com ** Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. *Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. *Theodore Roosevelt Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
What has he rebuted? Has he rebuted that A'isha was 9 years old when muhammed had intercourse with her? I presented source like Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari saying that this was true. Lomax presented wikipedia and blogs and he rebuted what I said? I have some land in Florida I'd like to sell you for cheap. Very close to the beach? LOL What has he rebuted? He said that pre-islam tribes practiced child marriage and therefore muhammed's practice of it was acceptable? OK, whatever. Progressive religions need to correct abhorent retrograde practices, not embrace it with gusto. LOL What has he rebuted? That FGM is not required in Sharia Law. I presented the actual arabic text of what it says in Sharia. The female's clitoris needs to be cut off. I presented actual Sharia Text and Lomax presented internet blogs. LOL What has he rebuted? That Birthers are crazy. He can't even answer a simple challenge. Tell me who has actually seen the originally issued BC of Obama. Lomax presented links to internet blogs and he has rebuted me? LOL ... Get a cranial enema my friend. You have been mesmerized by Lomax's excessive verbal diarrhea. All the crap is getting into your head and Lomax is laughing at you for swallowing his spin and lies lock, stock and barrel. LOL. Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age He actually rebuted evertything. It's just that you are crazy religious fundamentalist and cannot see beyond your prejudices. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com I provided sources from Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. Two of the most respected and venerated muslim scholarly works ever. I even provided the actual arabic in Sharia that shows that FGM mutilation of the clitoris is required in Sharia. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
I think It's more likely that the inhabitants of Eta Reticuli mesmerized me! 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com ** Get a cranial enema my friend. You have been mesmerized by Lomax's excessive verbal diarrhea. All the crap is getting into your head and Lomax is laughing at you for swallowing his spin and lies lock, stock and barrel. LOL. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Not quite, but that's a good idea. Not a snowy mountain though, I hate snow. Hey. maybe some land in the Texas Pecos region. Sounds good, thanks for the advice. Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:28 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Alright, so you are living under a snowy barricade on a very high mountain. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Ridicule all you want. There's nothing the Illuminati wants more than ignorant sheeple like you. Here is what Theodore Roosevelt has to say about a shadow government. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. Theodore Roosevelt Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Basically the Demon and his fallen companions. 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com ** My goodness, you have no idea how close to the truth you are with this joke. Yes, residents of Eta Reticuli. Except that they are not aliens from another world as in ET - biological aliens. They are in fact residents of another dimension beyond our 4 dimenstions - as in Fallen angels, jinns, demons and all sorts of malevolent spirits. This my friend is who has you mesmerized. Jojo -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
My goodness, you have no idea how close to the truth you are with this joke. Yes, residents of Eta Reticuli. Except that they are not aliens from another world as in ET - biological aliens. They are in fact residents of another dimension beyond our 4 dimenstions - as in Fallen angels, jinns, demons and all sorts of malevolent spirits. This my friend is who has you mesmerized. Jojo - Original Message - From: Daniel Rocha To: John Milstone Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age I think It's more likely that the inhabitants of Eta Reticuli mesmerized me! 2012/12/27 Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com Get a cranial enema my friend. You have been mesmerized by Lomax's excessive verbal diarrhea. All the crap is getting into your head and Lomax is laughing at you for swallowing his spin and lies lock, stock and barrel. LOL. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 08:12 PM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Here is how guile is defined: Noun 1. guile - shrewdness as demonstrated by being skilled in deception craftiness, cunning, foxiness, slyness, wiliness, craft astuteness, perspicaciousness, perspicacity, shrewdness - intelligence manifested by being astute (as in business dealings) 2. guile - the quality of being crafty deceitfulness, craftiness disingenuousness - the quality of being disingenuous and lacking candor 3. guile - the use of tricks to deceive someone (usually to extract money from them) chicanery, wile, shenanigan, trickery, chicane dissimulation, deception, dissembling, deceit - the act of deceiving dupery, hoax, put-on, humbug, fraud, fraudulence - something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage jugglery - artful trickery designed to achieve an end; the senator's tax program was mere jugglery My friend, what you did is known as guile. Who was deceived? Guile is a form of lying. It is condemed in the Bible and equated to outright lying. But apparently, by your own testimony of having commited it in Wikipedia, you have no problem with it. OK. I'm not surprised. Right. Not only have I no problem with what I did, it's one of the best things I did that year. The administrator in question had written: I can demonstrate functional evidence of my bans existence. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abd-William_M._Connolley/Workshopdiff=prevoldid=306819768 I saw that and knew immediately what to do. He was saying that he could prove that his ban existed, and how was obvious: if I violated it, he'd block me. So I announced my intention: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Abddiff=prevoldid=306978541#Notice_regarding_the_editing_of_Cold_fusion_and_its_talk_page. The core of it: I now withdraw that voluntary ban extension. Nobody objected. And the next day, about 24 hours later, a question was asked on the Cold fusion talk page that I could answer, and so I answered, and the rest followed like clockwork. Guile? Only by some of the first meaning. I wouldn't mind perspicacious. I knew what I was doing, and there is no harm in that. I simply stopped cooperating with an improper ban, declared by a highly involved adminstrator, against policy. The policy, in fact, was clarified by this case, bans like he'd issued became known as improper. I looked him in the eye, openly, and said, No. Really, I was not a powerful editor, directly. This was David and Goliath. But I didn't take him down, he took himself down. I knew he would do it. He'd committed himself, and he was proud, very proud. He was not about to make an empty threat. He said he'd prove it, he'd prove it. I did not hate him. I said nothing about him that I could not absolutely prove. He was far from the worst Wikipedia administrator, but he was doing damage. And he'd come after me. (He didn't give a fig about cold fusion, but he was a friend of JzG, who'd blocked and banned Pcarbonn, and Jed Rothwell. He was really just supporting his friend. I had taken JzG to the Arbitration Committee, successfully getting him reprimanded, over the blacklisting of lenr-canr.org, and that was not to be allowed. These people strongly disliked any challenge to their authority., and they retaliated.) I'm being reminded that I'm a Muslim. We are not pacifists, we are permitted to establish justice, we are permitted to defend the weak and stand for freedom from oppression, and sometimes we are even commanded to do these things, where we are able. This never excuses going beyond limits, the verses on fighting are very explicit, it is not allowed to attack those who don't attack us, and responding in kind is *the limit*, and forgiveness is better *if justice is established.* Hmph. End speech. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 6:55 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 01:12 AM 12/26/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: My friend, just because your morality allows you to troll and lie in wikipedia does not mean that I am like you. I never lied on Wikipedia. I did one action that I allowed as a form of trolling. It's more like what a soldier might do in a war, present himself as a target so that a sniper betrays his position. There was no lying involved, and the purpose wasn't actually to outrage. The action itself was completely legitimate. In fact, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cold_fusiondiff=prevoldid=306930963 A talk page edit, not actually controversial, just providing information. It worked. The admin took the bait, following his ego. And he lost his privileges as a result. My purpose was to allow him to do
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Yes, you are right of course, but It would even be better if all off-topic threads be terminated and brought to Vortex-B. I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. For why should the Vortex-L membership only be subjected to off-topic threads you consider interesting. In other words, why are you the arbiter of what off-topic posts should be discuss or not? They are all off-topic and should be banished from Vortex-L forever. Isn't that what I've always asked for only to be insulted, ridiculed and ignored? No offense intended, just asking your thinking process on this. I consider this discussion with Lomax interesting. So, on that aspect, this thread has as much right to be discussed in Vortex as any other off-topic thread you consider interesting. Or are you saying that because you are an longer time member of Vortex-L, that you opinion carries more weight than mine? Isn't that what the chronic off-topic posters are essentially saying? It's all or nothing my friend. No off-topic threads or ALL off-topic threads allowed. Am I not being fair? Is what I'm saying unfair? Jojo PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate incessant off-topic posts. - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands (electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or something else more interesting. I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Of course you have the right to be offended by the off topic threads that seem to show up often. I tend to be more concentrated on the LENR subject than many, but it is refreshing to have my attention averted on occasions. Do not consider my opinion as any more valid than that of yours or others when seeking off topic offense levels. I find vortex-l a location where a number of intelligent and science minded individuals hang out that I can utilize as a sanity check for many unusual concepts. The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. This in itself is a good thing and I say nothing against the religious beliefs of you or anyone else. The world has enough conflict over religion already and it is of little practical use for us to continue that tradition here. As I said, neither side to this argument appears to be capable of giving an inch toward a common resolution. For this reason, all I see within the arguments presented is a repetition of the same disgusting issues. Why waste so much energy toward this type of discussion when it is known ahead of time that nothing will change? Most of the off topic subjects do not result in the amount of conflict that is seen within the religious type. As you have noted, there has been awful and unwarranted name calling engaged in and insults which I find offensive. I would not object if you or anyone else suggests an off topic subject that encourages discussions as long as they do not result in that sort of behavior and they were at least related to science. You will find me objecting if these unrelated threads begin to become too long or cause serious personal attacks. The recent discussions concerning global warming came close to that threshold due to the sometimes heated exchanges that resulted from what some perceive as a world endangering situation. I can understand the passion since there are some convinced that the fate of the world is in the balance unless something is done quickly. Of course you and I fall on the same side of this issue where we seek reasonable, cautious, and thoughtful preparation. I am attempting to understand the nature of the religious issues that keep this and other threads like it alive and so passionate. Do both sides of the argument believe that they must prevail and have the last word? Is God watching the debate and pushing each side forward in a manner that seems a little less than brotherly? For some reason I do not believe so. Why don't both parties to this discussion realize that they will never make headway in convincing the other side and just stop the insanity? I find both sides equally guilty and plead for each to abandon the discussion. Forgive me if I offended anyone as that was not my intent. Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:04 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Yes, you are right of course, but It would even be better if all off-topic threads be terminated and brought to Vortex-B. I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. For why should the Vortex-L membership only be subjected to off-topic threads you consider interesting. In other words, why are you the arbiter of what off-topic posts should be discuss or not? They are all off-topic and should be banished from Vortex-L forever. Isn't that what I've always asked for only to be insulted, ridiculed and ignored? No offense intended, just asking your thinking process on this. I consider this discussion with Lomax interesting. So, on that aspect, this thread has as much right to be discussed in Vortex as any other off-topic thread you consider interesting. Or are you saying that because you are an longer time member of Vortex-L, that you opinion carries more weight than mine? Isn't that what the chronic off-topic posters are essentially saying? It's all or nothing my friend. No off-topic threads or ALL off-topic threads allowed. Am I not being fair? Is what I'm saying unfair? Jojo PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate incessant off-topic posts. - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated. It is apparent
RE: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Dave, First you post an opinion that this particular conversation thread, a conversation which I would agree has been extensively researched, should be taken elsewhere. But then, in your next post you begin to participate in the conversation! Perhaps you have succumbed the dark side of The Force, my young Jedi Knight! Season's Greetings! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks From: David Roberson Of course you have the right to be offended by the off topic threads that seem to show up often. ... [snip]
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
for the community. And on many other lists, where I'm an owner, I have another owner, who can then take over if something happens to me. (And there are other ways to handle this.) No more original comment below. Jojo PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate incessant off-topic posts. - Original Message - From: mailto:dlrober...@aol.comDavid Roberson To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands (electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or something else more interesting. I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Dave, I honestly respect the amount of thought and consideration you have given to your response. But, let me clarify a few more things with you. First, I did try what you are saying. I did try to start an off-topic posts regarding a subject matter that seems to be of interest to a lot of people here. After I started the New Data . thread, a few of us were exchanging thoughts and I thoroughly found that enjoyable. Although one individual started a single insult, I actually let that pass and did not retalitate. After telling him to stop insulting me, he did stop and the discussion continued in a civilized manner with no one able to convince the other. That was expected. The point is, it was a civilized exchange of opinions. Exactly what Vortex-L was meant to be, except that the topic was a little off-topic. But then, Lomax started his new round of insults out of the blue. What he posted has absolutely nothing about the New Data thread, but instead was a renewal of him calling me a troll and a liar and called for my banning. That level of bullying has to be answered with the same level of nastiness. Hence, I started calling his god a moon god, which of course is true, but is quite offensive to muslims; simply because they like to pretend that their god is the same as the universal God of Judaism and Christianity. Of course, that insult involve identifying his great prophet as a sexual pervert with dozens of wives and a child molester molesting a 9 year old little girl barely out of diapers. All of which is true. No lies, just truth intended to insult. Most muslims find these truths embarassing, so I used these to retaliate. Everyone can see that and it did have the intended effect on Lomax. He was insulted. Of course he was, it was intended to be more an insult than an openning of the discussion about religion. Mind you, this was intended to be a response to his blatant insult out of the blue. And the rest is what you see here in this thread. Of course, this all stated a long time ago when he and a couple of other bullies here started their round of insults, when I started the Darwinian Evolution series of posts, to try to highlight the problem of Off-topic trolling here. These bullies feel that my Darwinian Evolution fallacies threads were inappropriate. Of course, they were inappropriate, they were off-topic intended to highlight a problem here. I believe you are seasoned enough to see the truth as I believe you have been following this saga from the beginning. Me and Terry even had a friendly bet as to the outcome of this ( which I lost, so I'll be buying Terry, and he said Jed, lunch at the Officer's club, when I get back there.) But to me, this was all about trying to fix a problem. But instead of being more sensitive to how they are destroying this forum, these chronic off-topic posters and gang of bullies started insulting and calling for my banning. This of course I found to be an insult and started retaliating. That my friend is the problem. And my friend, I am not the problem.. Just that a gang of bullies have started coming out of the woodwork and team up to gang up of me. I have said it before, have said it for close to a year now, and will say it again. My off-topic posts will stop as soon as the blatant off-topic posts destroying this forum stops. And while I'm at it, I will respond to insults, with insults equally insulting. I hope you are honest enough to acknowledge that what I am saying is true. But as for Lomax, I did not really expect him to be honest. What I am about to say is also true. Muslims will lie, can lie according to their religion, if their lie will serve the good of muhammed or islam. This my friend is the truth. Jojo - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 12:15 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Of course you have the right to be offended by the off topic threads that seem to show up often. I tend to be more concentrated on the LENR subject than many, but it is refreshing to have my attention averted on occasions. Do not consider my opinion as any more valid than that of yours or others when seeking off topic offense levels. I find vortex-l a location where a number of intelligent and science minded individuals hang out that I can utilize as a sanity check for many unusual concepts. The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. This in itself is a good thing and I say nothing against the religious beliefs of you or anyone else. The world has enough conflict over religion already and it is of little practical use for us to continue
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Interesting how Lomax believes that off-topic posts are not harmful. Essentially the same position as one of the other chronic off-topic posters have said. This of course is wrong and selfish. Of course, off-topic posts are harmful. It started way before I joined here and I am not the first or the only member to complain about it. Though I am the most vocal about it. Other members simply choose to leave instead of highlighting the problem, leaving Vortex-l a lot less intelligent because the membership left are simply not as smart as those who left due to excessive noise.I am currently in communication with several members (very old members) of this list who expressed agreement with what I am saying though they may not agree with what I am doing to solve the problem. They simply choose to not participate anymore, which is such a lost to this community. Lomax and other chronic posters here simply do not think of the greater good; it's all about them and gabbing with friends instead of fostering a greater community trying to solve the Cold Fusion problem. Lomax claims that my attempts to stop off-topic posts are coercive. I'm not sure which twilight zone Lomax live in, but of course they are coercive. People must be coerced to follow the rules. We have laws in this country where people must be coerced to follow. This forum has rules that people must follow. It's that simple. Lomax claims that I am the troll here. But have you ever found a troll willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good. I am willing to sacrifice my participation here, which I find useful especially for my Carbon Nanotube research, for the greater good of more signal and less noise in this forum. If you ask me, Lomax and the other chronic off-topic posters are the real trolls cause they insist on doing it their way or ban those who disagree or don't like their off-topic trolling like me. Their solution is a gang solution. Do it our way or we will insult you or better still, we will ban you. It's fortunate that Bill appears to be more reasonable and more objective than these gang of bullies. If Bill changes the rules, I will follow. But in the meantime, people should follow his rules and not make it up as we go - as famously said by one chronic off-topic poster here. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 04:03 AM 12/25/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. There is no general off-topic problem. Judging posts as off-topic is, itself, hazardous, and is impractical. Most mature mailing lists create a community, that chats a bit, including off topic chatting. That's not the problem here. The problem is trolling for outrage. There has been some level of teasing of Jojo Jaro, but trolls *always* attract some level of that. As I've reported in posts covering the history of these conversations, and to respond to David, Jojo originally attracted my respose to his information about the location of Obama's birth. I have a habit of taking fringe positions seriously, of giving them some benefit of the doubt, so I actually researched this, and reported what I found which was essentially that what Jojo was telling us was very old hat, claims that had been made, and thoroughly debunked, with Obama having provided -- without any legal necessity -- what was called the archival certificate. He had to go through a special process to get that, the Hawaii department of public records does not ordinarily provide it. Jojo then began attacking me, on many fronts. At one point, he loudly resigned from the list, as a last comment. I responded, and left it at that. (If you want to make a last comment, that doesn't prohibit the other person from responding! Making a last comment as a way to shut people up is obviousy abusive. Jojo came back and continued. So then I said that I was going to stop responding, and I did, for quite a long period of time. When he kept it up, kept mentioning the Moon God thing, kept referring to me as a self-declared expert and whatever he could think of as something that might be irritating, and when he turned to others and similarly attacked them, I started to comment again, simply to document the history. He's promising to stop responding if others respond. That did not work, because he doesn't stop. He makes very few posts here which are on-topic. The people he tangles with are regular posters, who occasionally comment off-topic. He obviously watches the list for anything he disagrees with, and dives in with extreme commentary, most of the time
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age--for the education of Jojo
Once again, Lomax diverts the issue and attempts to spin it away. The issue is not A'isha actual age, it is irrelevant what her actual age was. She could have been 5 years older and what muhammed did would still be an abhorrent sex perverted act. The issue is not A'isha mentrual cycle, it is irrelevant that she has had a menstrual cycle. A girl of 9 is clearly an immature child not prepared for the rigors of being subjected to sex, being a wife and starting a family. The issue is not whether muhammed's tribe considered this as wrong or not. People can clearly see that it is wrong. The issue is not that pre-islam tribes do it. The issue is that islam does it. The great prophet should have corrected this practice. He should have disavowed this retrograde practice, not assimilate it and embrace it with gusto. Just compare the behavior of the real true God Jesus Christ compared with a sex perverted HOLEY prophet like muhammed. When Jesus came on the scene, the practice of multiple wives to one man was still prevalent and Jews practiced it contrary to the original intent of God. But it was a retrograde and abhorrent practice and what did Jesus do? He put a stop to it. Hence, Christians now do not have multiple wives, even when their predecessors the Jews had. This is what the real God Jesus Christ or real progressive prophets do. They correct abhorrent practices. No, but not muhammed, he enjoyed it too much. Having dozens of wives and concubines and a 9 year old little girl BARELY OUT OF DIAPERS. My friends, God created Adam and one wife - Eve. Not Adam and Eve, Ethel, Ally, Mary, Courtney, Elizabeth, Martha etc. and certainly not Adam and Steve and most certainly not Adam and little A'isha. Progressive religions correct retrograde acts; and islam is certainly not a progressive religion. In fact, it is the retrograde religion itself. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 8:35 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age--for the education of Jojo At 01:48 PM 12/24/2012, de Bivort Lawrence wrote: A discussion of the issue of Ayesha and her age and condition at the time of marriage, and some related descriptions. Thanks. I had not discussed this issue for probably almost a decade. I've been rummaging around and found three web sites that address the age of Ayesha at marriage. http://www.misconceptions-about-islam.com/muhammad-married-young-girl.htm links to the other two sites for a discussion of the issue of Ayesha's age. For itself, it's concerned with what the Qur'an says about marriage. The points to take away: There is mention of marriageable age. It is not given in years, and the context makes it clear why: different people mature at different times. It appears, as we would sanely expect, that sexual maturity -- which might be the meaning of marriageable age in some contexts-- might also not be the only criterion, i.e., sound judgment is also mentioned. Marriageable age is also the age of consent. The traditional material I cited yesterday made it clear that if a marriage is contracted before marriageable age, it is not final until the parties, having reached the age of consent, have confirmed it personally. Consent before that is considered moot, except that traditions mentioned considered it offensive to even contract a marriage, as for a very young girl, *absent her request,* and, of course, this could only be done with parental permission. The web site above also points to two pages, each taking a very different position. The first page is http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_151_200/ayesha_age_the_myth_of__a_prover.htm It takes the position that, yes, marriage at nine would be offensive, but it didn't happen. It addresses and purports to debunk the traditions that establish the age of consummation of Ayesha's marriage as nine. It makes many points that might seem to be solid. However, it's sociologically naive, assuming that marriage at sexual maturity -- which can happen before nine -- would be offensive to anyone. One thing is clear about the widespread story that Ayesha was nine: this only arouses rage or disgust among people from different cultures, often unaware of the history of their own culture, certainly what the culture of their ancestors might have been fourteen hundred years ago. In the other direction is http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7ID=4604CATE=1 I may know the author of this page fairly well; the position is highly conservative. The author uses polemic, and dismisses the concerns of the questioner -- which match those of the first page above -- as ignorant. On the other hand, it's also fairly clear that the depth of knowedge of the writer of this page is greater. Unfortunately, the page quotes material (from the first site above
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
It's obvious that the goal here is not agreement. It's also obvious that there will be no handshake (though I'd not refuse to agree, no matter what I say now; the Qur'an actually says, Do not let your oaths keep you from doing what's right.) Okay, the Qur'an does not actually say that. I lied. The Qur'an says something in Arabic. That's merely a translation, my own. I made it up. But anyone who knows the Qur'an will recognize it. At 12:45 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands (electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or something else more interesting. I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion. I'm sure. Thanks for sharing. I've acted to make sure that these seriously off-topic threads have the [OT] tag. Others keep expanding this, with new threads, but I'm continuing to make sure that the [OT] designation is maintained. I would also respect *whatever* the list owner requests. That's a promise. If somehow that made my participation here untenable (I doubt that), I simply would go away. Perhaps people here are familiar with the cartoon of the fellow who is being called to dinner by his wife. I can't come now, Someone is Wrong on the Internet. I get it. Been there, done that. I have the T-shirt. That way lies madness. I'm close enough to madness, routinely, as it is.
RE: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 01:44 AM 12/25/2012, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: Dave: Couldnt agree more, that there will never be agreement and thats ok, but take the debate elsewhere, guys -Mark This forum is being abused to host material that is (1) not relevant and (2) highly offensive. This isn't just the anti-Islamic stuff, it's whatever topic the troll brings. The birther stuff had no place here at all. The global warming stuff, some justification, but again taking discussion completely out of the realm of our collective interest, and blaming regular list paticipants for making relatively non-controversial comments, and the anti-Islamic comments had zero justification, they were pure trolling and deliberate offense. All this goes into the archive, which is internet searchable, and these posts come up in searches, even prominently. So I've answered here, because there is no other place more appropriate to answer. If this forum were being abused to promote Islam, for example, then there would be at least some level of excuse for Jojo Jaro's claims. But it hasn't been. Those anti-Muslim claims were *entirely* gratuitous, and highly offensive to about a billion people. Who increasingly are internet-savvy. If this list permits those posts, and if they are left in the archive without answer, they will impugn the list. The whole list will be judged by the lack of response. Jojo many times has promised to stop if others stopped. He lied. He's brought these materials back in the total absence of response to his earlier posts. He was allowed to have the last word, and that was not enough, because he's really looking for something other than what he says. And that's obvious, to anyone who has actually followed his posting here. Just looking at the latest thread, say, you can easily come up with a pox on both your houses. I get that. However, until the list owner makes some decision, or delegates it to someone or some process, it might continue. Hence my recommendation: ignore whatever does not interest you. I will continue to make sure that any posts that are clearly off-topic have [OT] in the subject header. I will continue to have subject headers indicate that the debate or discussion is the kind of material that some object to. But I don't intend to stop unless the drumbeat from the troll stops. I've done this before, by the way, on Wikimedia Foundation web sites. I've been effective. Some people didn't like it, but it did get the attention of those with superuser powers, and they handled the situation, whereas other administrators had been asleep. I was, in fact, enforcing policy, with the tools available to me. And I did not care about personal consequences. I'm not that important. Should I be banned here -- I don't think that's likely, but it's also not impossible -- there are plenty of people who would forward a post from me to this list, if I ever need to post here in the future. To an extent, this list is a distraction from my work elsewhere, particularly the CMNS list, and my actual research. I could write more about being banned, because I was ultimately banned on Wikipedia, but actually I'd rather not. It's not something I'd encourage everyone to do. Yet I accomplished exactly what I set out to do, and discovered exactly what I needed to know. Story of my life. From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 9:46 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands (electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or something else more interesting. I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion. Dave
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
hide, but *that is a religious position.* Happens to be Qur'an. I know that if I were to lie, there would be no place I could hide from my own corruption. (no more original content below) Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:04 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Yes, you are right of course, but It would even be better if all off-topic threads be terminated and brought to Vortex-B. I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. For why should the Vortex-L membership only be subjected to off-topic threads you consider interesting. In other words, why are you the arbiter of what off-topic posts should be discuss or not? They are all off-topic and should be banished from Vortex-L forever. Isn't that what I've always asked for only to be insulted, ridiculed and ignored? No offense intended, just asking your thinking process on this. I consider this discussion with Lomax interesting. So, on that aspect, this thread has as much right to be discussed in Vortex as any other off-topic thread you consider interesting. Or are you saying that because you are an longer time member of Vortex-L, that you opinion carries more weight than mine? Isn't that what the chronic off-topic posters are essentially saying? It's all or nothing my friend. No off-topic threads or ALL off-topic threads allowed. Am I not being fair? Is what I'm saying unfair? Jojo PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate incessant off-topic posts. - Original Message - From: mailto:dlrober...@aol.comDavid Roberson To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands (electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or something else more interesting. I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion. Dave
RE: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 12:27 PM 12/25/2012, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: Dave, First you post an opinion that this particular conversation thread, a conversation which I would agree has been extensively researched, should be taken elsewhere. But then, in your next post you begin to participate in the conversation! Perhaps you have succumbed the dark side of The Force, my young Jedi Knight! This is exactly what trolls do. That's why, in fact, ignore them, sometimes, while it's a reasonble first response, may fail to suffice. Trolls love it when they can get people fighting with each other. It's exactly what they want. Season's Greetings! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks From: David Roberson Of course you have the right to be offended by the off topic threads that seem to show up often. ... [snip]
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
. But that's not Islam, and it's prohibited. (No more original material below) Jojo - Original Message - From: mailto:dlrober...@aol.comDavid Roberson To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 12:15 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Of course you have the right to be offended by the off topic threads that seem to show up often. I tend to be more concentrated on the LENR subject than many, but it is refreshing to have my attention averted on occasions. Do not consider my opinion as any more valid than that of yours or others when seeking off topic offense levels. I find vortex-l a location where a number of intelligent and science minded individuals hang out that I can utilize as a sanity check for many unusual concepts. The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. This in itself is a good thing and I say nothing against the religious beliefs of you or anyone else. The world has enough conflict over religion already and it is of little practical use for us to continue that tradition here. As I said, neither side to this argument appears to be capable of giving an inch toward a common resolution. For this reason, all I see within the arguments presented is a repetition of the same disgusting issues. Why waste so much energy toward this type of discussion when it is known ahead of time that nothing will change? Most of the off topic subjects do not result in the amount of conflict that is seen within the religious type. As you have noted, there has been awful and unwarranted name calling engaged in and insults which I find offensive. I would not object if you or anyone else suggests an off topic subject that encourages discussions as long as they do not result in that sort of behavior and they were at least related to science. You will find me objecting if these unrelated threads begin to become too long or cause serious personal attacks. The recent discussions concerning global warming came close to that threshold due to the sometimes heated exchanges that resulted from what some perceive as a world endangering situation. I can understand the passion since there are some convinced that the fate of the world is in the balance unless something is done quickly. Of course you and I fall on the same side of this issue where we seek reasonable, cautious, and thoughtful preparation. I am attempting to understand the nature of the religious issues that keep this and other threads like it alive and so passionate. Do both sides of the argument believe that they must prevail and have the last word? Is God watching the debate and pushing each side forward in a manner that seems a little less than brotherly? For some reason I do not believe so. Why don't both parties to this discussion realize that they will never make headway in convincing the other side and just stop the insanity? I find both sides equally guilty and plead for each to abandon the discussion. Forgive me if I offended anyone as that was not my intent. Dave -Original Message- From: Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:04 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Yes, you are right of course, but It would even be better if all off-topic threads be terminated and brought to Vortex-B. I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. For why should the Vortex-L membership only be subjected to off-topic threads you consider interesting. In other words, why are you the arbiter of what off-topic posts should be discuss or not? They are all off-topic and should be banished from Vortex-L forever. Isn't that what I've always asked for only to be insulted, ridiculed and ignored? No offense intended, just asking your thinking process on this. I consider this discussion with Lomax interesting. So, on that aspect, this thread has as much right to be discussed in Vortex as any other off-topic thread you consider interesting. Or are you saying that because you are an longer time member of Vortex-L, that you opinion carries more weight than mine? Isn't that what the chronic off-topic posters are essentially saying? It's all or nothing my friend. No off-topic threads or ALL off-topic threads allowed. Am I not being fair? Is what I'm saying unfair? Jojo PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate incessant off-topic
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Again, brilliant. At 07:11 PM 12/25/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: [...] Lomax claims that my attempts to stop off-topic posts are coercive. I'm not sure which twilight zone Lomax live in, but of course they are coercive. Like Jojo can't bring himself to agree with me. I.e., he acknowledges that what he's proposing and doing is coercive, but wants to assert that I'm delusional. People must be coerced to follow the rules. We have laws in this country where people must be coerced to follow. This forum has rules that people must follow. It's that simple. Sure. It's that simple. However, what are the rules? I just re-read them. Some of them are routinely violated. I've violated some of them. I intend to stop that immediately. Lomax claims that I am the troll here. I've said that. But have you ever found a troll willing to sacrifice himself for the greater good. Frequently. That is, this is how a troll justifies his behavior to himself, and attempts to so justify it to others. And I've seen this from trolls who very openly admitted being trolls. They believe that they are serving a greater good. And I've trolled, and actually accomplished what I set out to do, on Wikipedia. There was a certain abusive administrator. He banned me from cold fusion, unilaterally. I took him before the Arbitation Committee. During the case, he claied that his ban was still in effect. Now, generally, I respected administrative decisions, and did not violate them, instead following due process, which can take months, even for a minor matter, sometimes. I decided the time was right for direct action. I announced that I had no more intention to honor his ban. This was on a Talk page presumably seen by Arbitrators and many administrators, in direct response to his boast that I was still banned and he could prove it. Essentially, I invited him to prove it, by deciding to ignore the ban and give him the opportunity. I waited until a simple question was asked on the Cold fusion talk page, and I knew a clear answer. It wasn't a controversial edit, and the only thing *wrong* with it was that he'd banned me. It took me a couple of minutes. I went to bed. When I woke up in the morning, all hell had broken loose. I'd been blocked by him, and my edit had been reverted. An arbitrator had unblocked, restored my edit, and the Arbitration Committee was considering an immediate revocation of his administrative privileges. They didn't -- he was very popular -- but, in the end, they did revoke the privileges when the decision was issued. He'd gone over the edge, blocking a participant in a case involving him. They could not ignore that, it would have been way too obvious. They also wanted to get rid of me, that became obvious later, when their private mailing list was hacked. I made them *very* uncomfortable, I was *not one of them* -- they are all administrators, and, while I almost was made an admin on Wikipedia, I was quite new then. Later, it would have been completely impossible, by that time the cabal knew what I was up to and they can easily torpedo any candidacy that they don't like. It's part of the problem with Wikipedia process. But I didn't consider my own right to edit to be important. I was far more concerned about a biased admin who would cheerfully block people because they disagreed with him. This is an irony here. That administrator was a climate scientist, and was famous as abusive. People had complained about him for years, but every attempt to sanction him was blocked by the cabal. A discussion would start, they would pour in with enough comments rejecting the complaint that the discussion would show no consensus, and they would then claim vindication. Nope. Any sane judgment would have shown there was a serious problem. Adminstrators had resiged in disgust over what this guy had done. I fixed it, with an edit trolling to be blocked, took a couple of minutes. It was probably the most efficient thing I ever did on Wikipedia. And eventually I handled a lot of situations, but, eventually, the Wikipedia problem was not ultimately addressed, and what had long been expected came to pass, I was community banned. That's what they do when the Arbitration Committee won't do it. All it takes is a handful of editors showing up on an obscure page, mostly not watched by the general community, and it's done. Theoretically, you can appeal to the Arbitration Committee, but the politics are such that the Arbitration Committee will bail. It will reject the case, refusing to second guess the Community. Really, more than half of the Committee is sympathetic to the abusive administrators, but they can't let that be seen. It would look bad! I am willing to sacrifice my participation here, which I find useful especially for my Carbon Nanotube research, for the greater good of more signal and less noise in this forum. If you ask me, Lomax and the other chronic
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Lomax is lying again. I'm not surprised. It is OK for him to lie as long as his goal are honorable and good for islam and muhammed. OK, let me ask anybody here. Who has actually seen Obama's Birth Certificate in actuality? Not the scanned and altered copy posted on the Internet. Not snopes which is a political hack job. If Obama supposedly was issued an official Birth Certificate by the State of Hawaii as Lomax claims, that originally issued BC should be in the possesion of Obama, right? OK, if Obama wants to kill the Birther movement, just show it to one, only one, highly respected individual. Let's say, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or the like. Just one well respected Tea Party member or a well respected Republican congressman or senator. Let him handle that original BC, feel the official seal, look at the folds, and make an official scan open to the public and call an open honest press conference. Not a white house press conference which is questionable to begin with. This is very simple and the Birther movement will die an untimely death and I will apologize and tuck my tail between my legs in shame and go away. Lomax lies when he says we have seen the official BC. We have not; no one has. What we've seen which Lomax claims is the official BC is a scanned photoshop file. No one except Obama and alledgedly snopes have seen it. Why? Is anybody buying Lomax's argument? It's very simple my friends, if there is an officially issued BC, complete with seal, and signature of the official representative of the State of Hawaii, just show it. No amount of spin or eloquence or tiresome lengthy essay will overcome this very strong argument. Just show it. Period. Funny thing is, the new governor of Hawaii Ambercrombie - a democrat, strong supporter of Obama, wanted to silence the birther movement once and for all. So, he sought to dig into Obama's vault BC. Guess what? Even he can't penetrate the veil of corruption Obama has put up to block access to his vault records. Why is there an executive order to block access to Obama's vault BC. This is the first time it has ever happened to a sitting president. What the heck is wrong with seeing the original vault copy BC? If he has alledgedly issued an official copy, what's wrong with verifying it with the vault copy? Why does Obama feel the need to go out of his way to issue an executive order to block access? You know, only corrupt and lying leaders find the need to hide their history. Obama is a corrupt lying usurper. And Lomax's is really naive to think that only Republicans are concerned with this issue. Over 60% of Americans feel Obama should come clean on this issue. But of course, the illiminati finds it convenient to forcibly reintall their puppet president. And they have found willing sheeple in Lomax. LOL.. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 11:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 11:15 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim faith to an equally strong degree. David is addressing this to Jojo. However, there is a difference here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. And I have not used the list to propagandize Islam. But Jojo has used the list to propagandize a whole series of issues that are not actually Christian, per se, but specifically Evangelical Christian tropes, intensely anti-Muslim, in ways that have offended other list members, apparently non-Muslim. These are not necessirly favoring the Muslim faith, rather, they are, first, noting the inappropriateness of such highly sectarian and abusive expressions here, and, secondly, supporting a list member who is a relatively long-time participant here, who has never used the list to promote Islam. The anti-Muslim material was completely off-topic, not necessary for any discussion here, on-topic or off-topic, except to establish Jojo Jaro's thesis, that I'm a liar, and to him, Muslim means liar. The real thing that is happening is that he argued other topics, like the whole birther myth, kept up an anti-Obama drumbeat, and on the birther issue, specifically, I researched his claims and reported them as being utterly bogus. Not as a prejudgment, but as the result of research. And he could not tolerate that, and, I believe, that's where his attack came from. Essentially, I disagreed with him and provided evidence. That's intolerable to him, so he then attacked with everything he could muster. This in itself is a good thing and I say nothing against the religious beliefs of you or anyone else. The world has enough
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
My friend, just because your morality allows you to troll and lie in wikipedia does not mean that I am like you. Stop the off-topic posts and I will go away never to post here again, but I will read. I am sacrificing my participation, my chance to ask questions if the chronic off-topic violators would simply stop their abuses. JUST DO IT. Clearly you understood Bill's no off-topic rule cause you quoted parts of it here and still claim that I am lying about it. You are such a blatant liar. I'm not surprised. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age Frequently. That is, this is how a troll justifies his behavior to himself, and attempts to so justify it to others. And I've seen this from trolls who very openly admitted being trolls. They believe that they are serving a greater good. And I've trolled, and actually accomplished what I set out to do, on Wikipedia. There was a certain abusive administrator. He banned me from cold fusion, unilaterally. I took him before the Arbitation Committee. During the case, he claied that his ban was still in effect. Now, generally, I respected administrative decisions, and did not violate them, instead following due process, which can take months, even for a minor matter, sometimes. I decided the time was right for direct action. I announced that I had no more intention to honor his ban. This was on a Talk page presumably seen by Arbitrators and many administrators, in direct response to his boast that I was still banned and he could prove it. Essentially, I invited him to prove it, by deciding to ignore the ban and give him the opportunity. I waited until a simple question was asked on the Cold fusion talk page, and I knew a clear answer. It wasn't a controversial edit, and the only thing *wrong* with it was that he'd banned me. It took me a couple of minutes. I went to bed. When I woke up in the morning, all hell had broken loose. I'd been blocked by him, and my edit had been reverted. An arbitrator had unblocked, restored my edit, and the Arbitration Committee was considering an immediate revocation of his administrative privileges. They didn't -- he was very popular -- but, in the end, they did revoke the privileges when the decision was issued. He'd gone over the edge, blocking a participant in a case involving him. They could not ignore that, it would have been way too obvious. They also wanted to get rid of me, that became obvious later, when their private mailing list was hacked. I made them *very* uncomfortable, I was *not one of them* -- they are all administrators, and, while I almost was made an admin on Wikipedia, I was quite new then. Later, it would have been completely impossible, by that time the cabal knew what I was up to and they can easily torpedo any candidacy that they don't like. It's part of the problem with Wikipedia process. But I didn't consider my own right to edit to be important. I was far more concerned about a biased admin who would cheerfully block people because they disagreed with him. This is an irony here. That administrator was a climate scientist, and was famous as abusive. People had complained about him for years, but every attempt to sanction him was blocked by the cabal. A discussion would start, they would pour in with enough comments rejecting the complaint that the discussion would show no consensus, and they would then claim vindication. Nope. Any sane judgment would have shown there was a serious problem. Adminstrators had resiged in disgust over what this guy had done. I fixed it, with an edit trolling to be blocked, took a couple of minutes. It was probably the most efficient thing I ever did on Wikipedia. And eventually I handled a lot of situations, but, eventually, the Wikipedia problem was not ultimately addressed, and what had long been expected came to pass, I was community banned. That's what they do when the Arbitration Committee won't do it. All it takes is a handful of editors showing up on an obscure page, mostly not watched by the general community, and it's done. Theoretically, you can appeal to the Arbitration Committee, but the politics are such that the Arbitration Committee will bail. It will reject the case, refusing to second guess the Community. Really, more than half of the Committee is sympathetic to the abusive administrators, but they can't let that be seen. It would look bad! I am willing to sacrifice my participation here, which I find useful especially for my Carbon Nanotube research, for the greater good of more signal and less noise in this forum. If you ask me, Lomax and the other chronic off-topic posters are the real trolls cause they insist on doing it their way or ban those who disagree or don't like
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
, you accuse me of lying for not providing proof that allah is the mood god of muhammed beduin tribe. Are you prepared to eat your words and apologize for that? Are you prepared to see proof that allah was the moon god of muhammed's beduin tribe that is the same moon god who got promoted to the universal god of islam. One look at the islamic moon crescent would have tipped people off to this history, yet Lomax finds the audacity to accuse me of lying. So, shall I present proof from muslim sources?Of course not, why waste people's time, eh? LOL At least I give you credit for recognizing that I was about to give you a cargoship full of whupass. ROTFL. But, enough of this. I'm bowing out of this insanity correctling your lies and spin. Let the readers decide whether they find it acceptable for muhammed to have fondled a 9 year old little girl, and yes, barely out of diapers. I'm bowing out at least until after Christmas. You have a few days to really set up a good spin of the truth. I hope you make the most out of your time? Quickly, off to the library to do some real research. LOL - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 2:27 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age At 10:30 PM 12/23/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: Lomax accuses me of cherry picking what I read, but he does that even better than I. Quite honestly, I have never met anyone with such an innate skill at spinnng the truth. Excellent work Lomax. The point is, Lomax conveniently ignores that the 2 muslim works I quoted are some of the most respected and venerated works of any muslim. That's sort-of true. I did not deny the works. Rather, I simply pointed out that there exists controversy on the age. And then I mostly responded assuming the age. Yet, he finds it convenient to ignore what it says in favor of his spin. To any sane man, these works are clear. They tell of a story of a sex perverted child molesting prophet.. If Jojo is sane, give me insanity. Please. There is nothing in the stories to indicate sex perversion. That's a conclusion, not truth. How would Jojo know? And is a sexually mature woman, capable of becoming a mother, a child? Do child molesters openly marry the child, with the parent's permission, the knowledge of the whole society? Lomax criticizes me for using diapers to describe A'isha. Of course, I know there were no diapers. My point, actually. I used that term to describe the situation in a more descriptive fashion. Right. It's called spin, i.e., what he accuses me of. Just imagine your daugther just barely out of diapers still preoccupied with dolls being fondled by a 50 year old fart. Again, fart? And why should I imagine such an image? How is a *six-year-old just out of diapers? Even modern kids, with delayed toilet training that seems to be common, most are out by two. SPIN. That's really what the whole set of claims is about. Just imagine if you would consider that acceptable? Of course I wouldn't. Just barely out of diapers, i.e., maybe three? In this case, it's quite clear, Ayesha wanted to be married; and the marriage would not have been consummated later if she'd changed her mind. That's what the Muslim sources show, and *there are only Muslim sources on this.* So what people like Jojo do is to spin those sources, to try to create something that is definitely not in them. A child-molester. Lomax justifies the holey prophet's actions I have not justified anything. I've described what we can know about the situation, and about Jojo's claims. by saying that it is acceptable because the little girl has reached menstrual cycle. Sexually mature, it's called. Puberty. The dividing line between an immature human female and a mature one. That, my friends is exactly the point I am trying to make. Islam is the only religion that would justify and condone and celebrate this kind of child molestation just because the little girl is already menstruating. I cited a Christian source for medieval Christian practice. The dividing line is puberty. Ages are *arbitrary*, and tribal societies don't even know ages with any rigor. That's why there is doubt about Ayesha's age, we don't know that she even knew how old she was. Neither Judaism, nor Christianity does this. Even Hinduism who used to have this retrograde practice, renounced it thousands of years ago. Long long long time before muhammed came to the scene. I cited plenty of evidence to the contrary. The age of consent begins with puberty. Modern societies have added additional conditions. Tribal societies likewise typically required parental consent. (Muslim tradition is no different on that; indeed, it's mostly considered that marriage without the consent of a wali (guardian) isn't lawful
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age--for the education of Jojo
Greetings, everyone, It would seem that Jojo is finding comfort in repeating assertions on the historical marital mores of the Arabian peninsula that are flat-out incorrect. I am worried that other readers on this list may take repetition for reality, and so will summarize things here. There are several themes to be comprehended: 1. Marital patterns of contemporary Arabia 2. The difference between betrothal, marriage, and consummation 3. The several differing roles of marriage in tribal and other society 4. Muhammad and A'isha. I'll take these one by one. 1) The man who eventually came to be recognized as a prophet and the institutional founder of Islam, Muhammad, lived in the late sixth and early seventh centuries, C.E. Like everyone else, he and his family abided by the marital customs of the time and place. These identical customs were practiced by the Jewish, Christian, and pantheistic communities that inhabited the peninsula at that time. Islam had yet to emerge. At that time, there were no limits to the number of wives a husband could take, other than his ability to provide for each of them and to protect them. (Solomon is reputed to have had 99 wives.) Again, this was true for all Christians, Jews and pantheists. And there were no limits to the age at which a girl could become betrothed, that is, entered by her family into an agreement for eventual marriage. 2) This brings us to the second theme -- betrothal, marriage and consummation. The way marriages took place was first with a betrothal -- an agreement for eventual marriage when and only when the girl became a woman, that is, had her first period -- and then with the marriage itself. This consisted of a formal contract providing, typically for a dowery payment to the bride and other conditions as were desired, the explicit consent of both the bride and the husband-to-be, and typically the bride's move along with her possessions (which remained her property) into the husband's household. Typically, the marriage was then consummated. Besides the evident pleasures of the moment, this was also important in demonstrating the virginity of the bride. A long amount of time might elapse between the betrothal and the marriage. Pre-pubsecent betrothal was not uncommon, but marriage itself and consummation could only occur after the bride had her first period. If a girl was betrothed by her family she retained the right to eventually reject the pending marriage. In other words, regardless of the betrothal the woman retained the right of consent or refusal. To reiterate, these practices were common to all the communities of the Arabian peninsula-- whether Jewish, Christian, pantheistic, or, with the emergence of Islam, Muslim. Child molestation did not enter into these practices of any of these communities. For purposes of comparison, please note that in New Hampshire in the USA, girls can with parental consent be married as young as thirteen years old. Until recently repealed by statute, girls in Colorado could by common law be married as young as 12 years old. 3) In the West, today, the common motive for marriage is love. But this is atypical of the human experience. Marriages are routinely also made for reasons including: a) extending protection to widows and orphans b) cementing commercial alliances c) consolidating land holdings d) creating political alliances 4) A'isha and Muhammad were betrothed when she was young and pre-pubescent. It is not clear when their marriage and consummation became official, but all accounts, including hers, specify that she was eligible for marriage, that is, that she had 'become a woman' with her first period. A'isha was the daughter of Abu Bakr, one of Muhammad's companions. A'isha was nineteen when Muhammad died, and lived to the age of sixty-three. She was highly respected among the emerging Muslim community, becoming both a Muslim scholar and a rich source of information about Muhammad and his household. Before he died, Muhammad instructed his followers to Take your religion for A'isha. When Muhammad asked Abu Bakr for his daughter in marriage, she was already betrothed to another man. Her father sought and received the man's agreement to end their betrothal, as his interest had moved elsewhere. Muhammad had a total of twelve wives during his life-time (not the dozens that some mistakenly allege), and at one point in time had nine at the same time, prior to the revelation that a Muslim could have no more than four. Muhammad was not required to divorce five of them. This is the source of some understandable confusion as to whether Muhammad himself abided by the (new) limit of four among Muslims. Those Christian, Jewish and pantheistic communities that chose not to convert to Islam of course could stay with the practice of unlimited wives. Muhammad's marriages were motivated often by the need to extend protection
