Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Recently watched movies

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Doctor X, the board's king of bias, is not telling the complete truth about Graham Hancock. The commission AND the BBC fully acknowledged doing him a wrong.

    Stan,

    Are you sure the movie you called 'Borderland' is not actually 'Borderline Cult'? That's the movie I was thinking of and said looked like an el cheapo. Let me k now so I don't rent the wrong one!

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Gideon Fell View Post
      Doctor X is one of my favorite movies.
      Mine too GF - love that two-color look

      Tom - It is Borderland directed by Zev Berman and is based on Matamoros. I believe that Borderline Cult is a cheapo and is based on Juarez. It won't be on my play-list anytime soon.
      This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

      Stan Reid

      Comment


      • #93
        Thanks, Stan. You just saved me from renting a bad movie. Is Borderland a new release?

        Yours truly,

        Tom Wescott

        Comment


        • #94
          Borderland is a 2007 release. It might be a Blockbuster exclusive, I'm not sure.
          This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

          Stan Reid

          Comment


          • #95
            Borderland



            Regards Mike

            Comment


            • #96
              Thank you Stan and Mike Covell. Yes, it's probably a Blockbuster exclusive, which is why I haven't seen it at Hollywood.

              Yours truly,

              Tom Wescott

              P.S. Will Farrell movies are way funnier than Monty Python.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
                P.S. Will Farrell movies are way funnier than Monty Python.
                I want to see him in a Merchant Ivory production, or in a Bronte type picture!!

                His face just cracks me up, he doesn't even have to open his mouth, he just has a funny face!!

                I love The Holy Grail and Life of Brian, "Blessed are the cheesemakers"
                Regards Mike

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Gideon Fell View Post
                  Doctor X is one of my favorite movies.
                  I wanted Rathbone, but I accepted Bogart. . . .

                  --J.D.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Doctor X

                    You are right.

                    Immanuel Velikovsky has been dead only a few years in the 1970´s I think and he was elderly when he died, and I agree with you that he got the collision with Jupiter and a chunk of it being Venus as highly unlikely, but he did get the collision of asteroids with planets right.

                    But what I was trying to say is that this was not a concept Newton would not have aproved of.

                    - Maria
                    Last edited by Maria; 04-17-2008, 01:16 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Will Farrell is also way cooler than Immanuel Velikovsky. Any Will Farrel fan will love the movie 'Walk Hard', even though Will's not in it. His dad wrote the Partridge Family theme.

                      Yours truly,

                      Tom Wescott

                      Comment


                      • I was talking about the 1932 Doctor X not that mediocre Bogart film which is neither a remake or a sequel.
                        This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

                        Stan Reid

                        Comment


                        • Doctor X and Tom:

                          I also forgot to say, that some of these stories which appear in ancient Greece, Japan or The Middle East, are not necessarily written stories but oral ones which have been repeated from generation to generation about places or events. You only have to see Troy. That was just a story, until it was found by archaeologists.

                          Another one, was Pompeii, no one really believed it existed, until an engineer decided to dig a channel to bring water to Naples and during the digging, they actually found a stone with the word : Pompeii written on it and this is how it was finally discovered, by chance !

                          How about Sodome and Gomorra ? Those two cities were only stories from the Bible, but now archaeologists have found those two cities as well, exactly as it was was written in the Bible, with a thick layer of salt and the other one with what it looks like dried magma.

                          So it is not wise to discount these stories off hand as the evidence shows quite a lot of these cities or places really did exist.

                          I know that the legend of the turtle is not true, and cannot be true, nevertheless, there are others like Pompeii, Troy, Sodom and Gomorra which really did exist.

                          And I did see Hanckok on T.V. when he went to Japan, as he swam under the water with a scientist who in the end, acknowleged that circular structures do not happen like that in nature, however he disputed the straight walls do happen as a natural occurance, I was rather convinced by the symetry of the steps, these did not look like a random occurrence of nature, they were too perfect and the whole structure looked like a stadium to me. There were also cobbled straight roads leading to this stadium. Very interesting anyway.

                          - Maria
                          Last edited by Maria; 04-17-2008, 02:06 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Maria View Post
                            . . . but he did get the collision of asteroids with planets right.
                            As did a lot of scientists before him who understood it better. That he got something obvious--like, look at the Moon . . . look at craters on the Earth--does not make him less of a crackpot.

                            But what I was trying to say is that this was not a concept Newton would not have aproved of.
                            And?

                            See, Newton was around ~200 years before. That science evolves and develops based on evidence does not lend credibility to a crackpot like Velikovsky who ignored evidence contrary to his beliefs or a fraud like Hancock. Actually, Velikovsky committed the same error you castigate Newton for. One critical difference is that Newton did not have access to the contrary data that Velikovsky ignored.

                            The world and universe is sufficiently interesting not to muddy them up with cranks.

                            Yours truly,

                            --J.D.

                            Comment


                            • Oh and Maria, this is not personal. Sometimes discussion/debate on Al Gore's Interwebs may appear that way. I assure you it is not.



                              Yours truly,

                              --J.D.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Maria View Post
                                . . . are not necessarily written stories but oral ones which have been repeated from generation to generation. . . .
                                Not really. Oral stories have certain qualities, and Japanese legends tend to lack those. Nevertheless, given the quality of passage of Ripper stories in modern times, what reliability does oral passage have for the ancients?

                                You only have to see Troy. That was just a story, until it was found by archaeologists.
                                And Johnny Tremain takes place in Boston. The Usual Suspects takes place in New York and California. Does not make it true. Furthermore, that does not make Paris, the Apple of Discord, Amazons, Nestor "that old man," Zeus and Hera "dancing the light fantastic" with phenomenal results--"Did the Earth move for you?!"--Achilleus, or large wooden horses exist.

                                Another one, was Pompeii, no one really believed it existed, . . .
                                Uh . . . what? Nevertheless, again I must stress you cannot justify "wrong" through past mistakes.

                                "They laughed at Einstein!! They laughed at my claims to be Nicole Kidman's Snuggle-Bunny!"

                                Well, they did laugh at Einstein's violin playing which, sadly, has not convinced Nicole to drop the restraining orders. . . .

                                You see, they found evidence for Pompeii. They have not for Velikovsky's delusions, which run counter to evidence already extant.

                                How about Sodome and Gomorra ? Those two cities were only stories from the Bible, but now archaeologists have found those two cities as well, . . .
                                Not . . . really . . . biblical archaeologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries tended to, as the old saw goes, "wander about the desert with a Bible in one hand and a shovel in the other." It is not surprising someone would write a story about cities--look at old Meggido! However, the cities appear in other stories no less for wear. However, no, they have not found the cities "exactly as written." Sorry.

                                Modern biblical scholarship is fascinating, and I am happy to discuss it--maybe in another thread. Nevertheless, the findings rather contradict Velikovsky. You are dealing with a mythic past--no Patriarchs, no Sojourn, no Exodus, no Conquest, and, it appears, no true United Monarchy. Those stories were put together to ground the contemporary society into the past--there are some wonderful anachronisms that help date the stories. However, that is a HUGE topic--well beyond this one. Happy to explore it.

                                And I did see Hanckok on T.V. when he went to Japan, as he swam under the water with a scientist who in the end, acknowleged that circular structures do not happen like that in nature, . . .
                                And he was wrong.

                                --J.D.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X