<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Phantom Time Hypothesis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/</link>
	<description>A collection of legitimately fascinating information culled from the past, present, and anticipated future.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 01:30:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: AdamEvenson</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-26986</link>
		<dc:creator>AdamEvenson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 21:22:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-26986</guid>
		<description>@Alan Bellows still again:

The &quot;few extra years&quot; that you, Alan, discussed above, were &quot;slipped in&quot; as follows:

We must take biblical history into account when considering secular calendrical efforts and what time, years and days meant in prophecy.  This is because a &quot;prophetic year&quot; of the Bible (referring to the King James type), was 360 days, which year biblical prophets called &quot;a time.&quot;  A time and times and a-half, were 3 1/2 years of 360 days each. Total days of such an amount of time would be 360 x 2 + 180 = 1260 days in ancient prophetic biblical reckoning.  

When the Gregorian calendar came into being, the prophetic &quot;time,&quot; or 360 day year, was changed to an average of 365.25 days per year. This added an average of 5.25 days to every secular year thereafter.  This could easily be interpreted as a fulfillment of the biblical prophecy that, &quot;the beast would seek to change the times...,&quot;  as said reference to &quot;times&quot; was a 360 day &quot;prophetic&quot; year that was changed by Pope Gregory. The change in time to a secular year could, would and did booger any prophetic calculations that were later made with reference to &quot;The Holy Bible,&quot; UNLESS the change of total yearly days from 360 to 365.25 were taken into account and calculated in, which has not been done until I began doing it in 1968. 

Thus, without entering into any other kind of &quot;time boogering&quot; as the Germans have done, just changing over from the prophetic calendar to that of the secular added 10500 days to the secular calendar every 2,000 years.  This amounts to 29.16 &quot;prophetic&quot; years of 360 days each that were added to the secular calendar, or 28.75 secular years every 2000 secular years.  I don&#039;t believe I have ever read or known of any biblical scholar taking this particular time discrepancy into account even though it has, since effected, been standing directly &quot;in yo&#039; face.&quot;  But isn&#039;t this precisely what Bible prophets reported the case would be regarding so many items, including the correct interpretations of the very words of the prophecies?  

And so it is literally these amounts of time (reckoning here in 2000 secular years): 29.16 years of prophetic and 28.75 years of secular, that render the hour these very days to be &quot;later than you think.&quot;  This time alteration takes no speculation, deep investigations, or faith at all.  It is a plain historical, mathematical fact, whose meaning was hidden inside the pupil of every eyeball, just waiting for the owner of the thing to open the eyelid covering that pupil and look through it.  It is pretty much the exact amount of time discrepancy it required to booger humankind&#039;s ability to interpret exactly when the prophecies related in the Bible would be fulfilled.  

It means that right now, today, the year is within a few days or weeks of 1983 according to both prophetic and secular counting from Zero AD because this is how many years were added by Pope Gregory&#039;s new secular calendar that supplanted the prophetic one. 

When one calculates the times from many thousands of years ago, when many of the prophets wrote, the time discrepancy gets increasingly longer.  In 5000 years, for example, would be 26250 days, which are nearly 72 secular years and nearly 73 prophetic ones.  It&#039;s a bunch of years.  It could blow a nice prophetic calculation into the incomprehensible.     

The time discrepancy above was revealed to me when I Awoke in August 1968 in a cataclysmic moment that virtually wiped out my ordinary existence and replaced it with something almost non-human, which has endured to the present. I am definitely not entirely human any longer. Individual days have meant very little to me since that Awakening (which I capitalize to differentiate from the ordinary variety), as days and times became one enduring moment of Super Consciousness the instant my eyes opened in life for the first time in 28 years. 

Yes, the above Awakening for me occurred in the very same 28 prophetic year period that Pope Gregory created by the time change, calculated from the day of my birth on earth, right down to the exact hour and minute.  My physical body was born 28 prophetic years after the birth of my parents and my Waking State was born exactly 28 prophetic years after that. When I Awoke so powerfully I realized I had not been born in 1940 at all, but in the year I Awakened in 1968, as my physical body was little more than an uncomprehending shell when it was created, until 28 years had lapsed.  Each 28 years of my life has been of earthshaking importance, both for me and the earth.  A little more about this below.

When biblical scholars and other researchers calculate prophetic times from the Bible, they count ENTIRELY in terms of a secular 365.25 day year all the way back from the biblical event forward to the proposed secular year it is &quot;calculated&quot; to occur.  But it doesn&#039;t occur, right?  It is basically because of  a nearly thirty year discrepancy just in the past 2000 years that anybody ought to be able to see but &quot;magically&quot; cannot and have not been able all these thousands of years until I Awoke in 1968 and saw the significance of the error.  Scholars have not calculated prophetic biblical statements in terms of 360 day years (correcting for the added 5.25 days) even though the biblical prophets plainly stated the prophecies related to a 360 day year.

Only now, in this very blog, I reveal this information for the first time (potentially to the world at large) because I feel the time is becoming ripe.  I&#039;ve kept the secret to myself for a little over 42 years, mainly because the world was not ready for it.  I&#039;ve checked all along to see, as I am doing now.  It still may not be ready and may have to be scrunched into a ball of tinfoil without ever knowing.  But it is not my judgment to make.  I move pretty much 100% by intuition since Awakening, instead of by concrete personal judgments that usually are plainly incompetent, not just within me but all flesh.  

I have done quite a lot of calculations using the system above, which reveals (as briefly mentioned above) that my Spiritual Birth occurred exactly 28 prophetic years since my secular birth on March 15, 1940, which in turn was exactly 28 prophetic years to the center point of the secular births of my parents.  Twenty-eight secular years in the other direction after I Awoke in 1968, I typed my first words into a computer, which meant that I was at least potentially connected now to the entire world and it was necessary only to wait a little longer until the world matured into the convenience of it.  

Since that fateful moment (Internet functionality), the world is beginning to show signs that it may be ready for the whole truth pretty much any time.  I would be happy to reveal all I know about the above time discrepancy reported above (and related items), for any consciousness capable of demonstrating the capacity to grasp realities of a higher order without getting bogged down in ego monsters and screaming and hollering in pain. It will only take a few words for me to find out.  If my &quot;contactee(s)&quot; can&#039;t cut the mustard, I will know right away and no time will be wasted battling the ego monsters that assumed control of this whole planet a long time ago.  

I&#039;ll monitor this note for a while to see if folks that possess the requisite degree of demonstrable enlightenment would like to continue this conversation.  If so, I&#039;ll provide an email address upon request.  Let me caution the reader that it takes a &quot;heads above the herd&quot; kind of enlightment.  Any less is a waste of time and energy and I won&#039;t let it happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Alan Bellows still again:</p>
<p>The &#8220;few extra years&#8221; that you, Alan, discussed above, were &#8220;slipped in&#8221; as follows:</p>
<p>We must take biblical history into account when considering secular calendrical efforts and what time, years and days meant in prophecy.  This is because a &#8220;prophetic year&#8221; of the Bible (referring to the King James type), was 360 days, which year biblical prophets called &#8220;a time.&#8221;  A time and times and a-half, were 3 1/2 years of 360 days each. Total days of such an amount of time would be 360 x 2 + 180 = 1260 days in ancient prophetic biblical reckoning.  </p>
<p>When the Gregorian calendar came into being, the prophetic &#8220;time,&#8221; or 360 day year, was changed to an average of 365.25 days per year. This added an average of 5.25 days to every secular year thereafter.  This could easily be interpreted as a fulfillment of the biblical prophecy that, &#8220;the beast would seek to change the times&#8230;,&#8221;  as said reference to &#8220;times&#8221; was a 360 day &#8220;prophetic&#8221; year that was changed by Pope Gregory. The change in time to a secular year could, would and did booger any prophetic calculations that were later made with reference to &#8220;The Holy Bible,&#8221; UNLESS the change of total yearly days from 360 to 365.25 were taken into account and calculated in, which has not been done until I began doing it in 1968. </p>
<p>Thus, without entering into any other kind of &#8220;time boogering&#8221; as the Germans have done, just changing over from the prophetic calendar to that of the secular added 10500 days to the secular calendar every 2,000 years.  This amounts to 29.16 &#8220;prophetic&#8221; years of 360 days each that were added to the secular calendar, or 28.75 secular years every 2000 secular years.  I don&#8217;t believe I have ever read or known of any biblical scholar taking this particular time discrepancy into account even though it has, since effected, been standing directly &#8220;in yo&#8217; face.&#8221;  But isn&#8217;t this precisely what Bible prophets reported the case would be regarding so many items, including the correct interpretations of the very words of the prophecies?  </p>
<p>And so it is literally these amounts of time (reckoning here in 2000 secular years): 29.16 years of prophetic and 28.75 years of secular, that render the hour these very days to be &#8220;later than you think.&#8221;  This time alteration takes no speculation, deep investigations, or faith at all.  It is a plain historical, mathematical fact, whose meaning was hidden inside the pupil of every eyeball, just waiting for the owner of the thing to open the eyelid covering that pupil and look through it.  It is pretty much the exact amount of time discrepancy it required to booger humankind&#8217;s ability to interpret exactly when the prophecies related in the Bible would be fulfilled.  </p>
<p>It means that right now, today, the year is within a few days or weeks of 1983 according to both prophetic and secular counting from Zero AD because this is how many years were added by Pope Gregory&#8217;s new secular calendar that supplanted the prophetic one. </p>
<p>When one calculates the times from many thousands of years ago, when many of the prophets wrote, the time discrepancy gets increasingly longer.  In 5000 years, for example, would be 26250 days, which are nearly 72 secular years and nearly 73 prophetic ones.  It&#8217;s a bunch of years.  It could blow a nice prophetic calculation into the incomprehensible.     </p>
<p>The time discrepancy above was revealed to me when I Awoke in August 1968 in a cataclysmic moment that virtually wiped out my ordinary existence and replaced it with something almost non-human, which has endured to the present. I am definitely not entirely human any longer. Individual days have meant very little to me since that Awakening (which I capitalize to differentiate from the ordinary variety), as days and times became one enduring moment of Super Consciousness the instant my eyes opened in life for the first time in 28 years. </p>
<p>Yes, the above Awakening for me occurred in the very same 28 prophetic year period that Pope Gregory created by the time change, calculated from the day of my birth on earth, right down to the exact hour and minute.  My physical body was born 28 prophetic years after the birth of my parents and my Waking State was born exactly 28 prophetic years after that. When I Awoke so powerfully I realized I had not been born in 1940 at all, but in the year I Awakened in 1968, as my physical body was little more than an uncomprehending shell when it was created, until 28 years had lapsed.  Each 28 years of my life has been of earthshaking importance, both for me and the earth.  A little more about this below.</p>
<p>When biblical scholars and other researchers calculate prophetic times from the Bible, they count ENTIRELY in terms of a secular 365.25 day year all the way back from the biblical event forward to the proposed secular year it is &#8220;calculated&#8221; to occur.  But it doesn&#8217;t occur, right?  It is basically because of  a nearly thirty year discrepancy just in the past 2000 years that anybody ought to be able to see but &#8220;magically&#8221; cannot and have not been able all these thousands of years until I Awoke in 1968 and saw the significance of the error.  Scholars have not calculated prophetic biblical statements in terms of 360 day years (correcting for the added 5.25 days) even though the biblical prophets plainly stated the prophecies related to a 360 day year.</p>
<p>Only now, in this very blog, I reveal this information for the first time (potentially to the world at large) because I feel the time is becoming ripe.  I&#8217;ve kept the secret to myself for a little over 42 years, mainly because the world was not ready for it.  I&#8217;ve checked all along to see, as I am doing now.  It still may not be ready and may have to be scrunched into a ball of tinfoil without ever knowing.  But it is not my judgment to make.  I move pretty much 100% by intuition since Awakening, instead of by concrete personal judgments that usually are plainly incompetent, not just within me but all flesh.  </p>
<p>I have done quite a lot of calculations using the system above, which reveals (as briefly mentioned above) that my Spiritual Birth occurred exactly 28 prophetic years since my secular birth on March 15, 1940, which in turn was exactly 28 prophetic years to the center point of the secular births of my parents.  Twenty-eight secular years in the other direction after I Awoke in 1968, I typed my first words into a computer, which meant that I was at least potentially connected now to the entire world and it was necessary only to wait a little longer until the world matured into the convenience of it.  </p>
<p>Since that fateful moment (Internet functionality), the world is beginning to show signs that it may be ready for the whole truth pretty much any time.  I would be happy to reveal all I know about the above time discrepancy reported above (and related items), for any consciousness capable of demonstrating the capacity to grasp realities of a higher order without getting bogged down in ego monsters and screaming and hollering in pain. It will only take a few words for me to find out.  If my &#8220;contactee(s)&#8221; can&#8217;t cut the mustard, I will know right away and no time will be wasted battling the ego monsters that assumed control of this whole planet a long time ago.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;ll monitor this note for a while to see if folks that possess the requisite degree of demonstrable enlightenment would like to continue this conversation.  If so, I&#8217;ll provide an email address upon request.  Let me caution the reader that it takes a &#8220;heads above the herd&#8221; kind of enlightment.  Any less is a waste of time and energy and I won&#8217;t let it happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AdamEvenson</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-26985</link>
		<dc:creator>AdamEvenson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 18:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-26985</guid>
		<description>@Alan Bellows again:

Sorry, but my comment posted on its own before I had finished.  I would like to go ahead and post this one just to let the author of the above article, Alan,  know that I had not finished my comment, as the only thing Alan could be wondering about would be, &quot;So how did it happen?&quot;  I was busy telling it when my comment posted without my consent.  :)  The remainder of my first comment will follow shortly.  

Thank you, Adam.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Alan Bellows again:</p>
<p>Sorry, but my comment posted on its own before I had finished.  I would like to go ahead and post this one just to let the author of the above article, Alan,  know that I had not finished my comment, as the only thing Alan could be wondering about would be, &#8220;So how did it happen?&#8221;  I was busy telling it when my comment posted without my consent.  :)  The remainder of my first comment will follow shortly.  </p>
<p>Thank you, Adam.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AdamEvenson</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-26984</link>
		<dc:creator>AdamEvenson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-26984</guid>
		<description>@ Alan Bellows: &quot;...but I don’t completely discount the possibility that a few extra years have been slipped into the calendar at some point.&quot;

Indeed, such &quot;extra few years&quot; have actually been slipped into the calendar &quot;at some point.&quot;  It happened when the Julian Calendar came about and was compounded when the Gregorian replaced it.  One could call these calendars &quot;secular,&quot; as opposed to those that were used in what is referred to as &quot;biblical times.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Alan Bellows: &#8220;&#8230;but I don’t completely discount the possibility that a few extra years have been slipped into the calendar at some point.&#8221;</p>
<p>Indeed, such &#8220;extra few years&#8221; have actually been slipped into the calendar &#8220;at some point.&#8221;  It happened when the Julian Calendar came about and was compounded when the Gregorian replaced it.  One could call these calendars &#8220;secular,&#8221; as opposed to those that were used in what is referred to as &#8220;biblical times.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: puzzlesphere</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-26580</link>
		<dc:creator>puzzlesphere</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jul 2011 06:19:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-26580</guid>
		<description>I see the last comment was over a year ago, but just thought I would add my 2 cents.
There are heaps of arguements on here, all using a range different types of documentary evidence, but to me the most obvious point has never been mentioned....
People!
... People have been counting for a long time, and forget calendars and major events (that can all be adjusted to suit someone&#039;s needs), your average farmer, and his descendants, in the field has known the year he is in for for a long time, and adding a &quot;1&quot; sometime during the following year is easy enough. It is hard to believe that whole continents could have been convinced to add a couple hundred years instead of a 1.
 lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see the last comment was over a year ago, but just thought I would add my 2 cents.<br />
There are heaps of arguements on here, all using a range different types of documentary evidence, but to me the most obvious point has never been mentioned&#8230;.<br />
People!<br />
&#8230; People have been counting for a long time, and forget calendars and major events (that can all be adjusted to suit someone&#8217;s needs), your average farmer, and his descendants, in the field has known the year he is in for for a long time, and adding a &#8220;1&#8243; sometime during the following year is easy enough. It is hard to believe that whole continents could have been convinced to add a couple hundred years instead of a 1.<br />
 lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tcart87</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-26086</link>
		<dc:creator>tcart87</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:51:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-26086</guid>
		<description>Blah tract Halleys comet sightings dated back to 584 a.d. as well as several sightings before and after again in 841 meaning intervals of 75-79 years blah blah you get the point your wrong. im sorry, nice try though :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blah tract Halleys comet sightings dated back to 584 a.d. as well as several sightings before and after again in 841 meaning intervals of 75-79 years blah blah you get the point your wrong. im sorry, nice try though :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alucin Veritas</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-25610</link>
		<dc:creator>Alucin Veritas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 08:24:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-25610</guid>
		<description>By this point there have been many refutations of the conspiracy. I have one more to add. A recent method to date Jesus&#039; birth that came to my attention relies on astronomical occurrences. It is explained in depth at http://www.eclipse.net/~molnar/ (I don&#039;t know how to link). Since the process of finding the occurrence uses computers, I assume it starts rewinding from current astronomical charts and uses modern dates as a starting point. The computers found the occurrence at about 6 BC, a reasonable time for Jesus to have been born considering that the precise date has been lost for a long time. Since modern christian calendars are based on Jesus&#039; birth as an origin point, the fact that there isn&#039;t a 300 year discrepancy between the original estimations and the possible Star of Bethlehem would be in direct contrast to the conspiracy. We are a little over 2000 years from his birth date, not a measly 1700.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By this point there have been many refutations of the conspiracy. I have one more to add. A recent method to date Jesus&#8217; birth that came to my attention relies on astronomical occurrences. It is explained in depth at <a href="http://www.eclipse.net/~molnar/" rel="nofollow">http://www.eclipse.net/~molnar/</a> (I don&#8217;t know how to link). Since the process of finding the occurrence uses computers, I assume it starts rewinding from current astronomical charts and uses modern dates as a starting point. The computers found the occurrence at about 6 BC, a reasonable time for Jesus to have been born considering that the precise date has been lost for a long time. Since modern christian calendars are based on Jesus&#8217; birth as an origin point, the fact that there isn&#8217;t a 300 year discrepancy between the original estimations and the possible Star of Bethlehem would be in direct contrast to the conspiracy. We are a little over 2000 years from his birth date, not a measly 1700.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: smeik</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-25449</link>
		<dc:creator>smeik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:50:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-25449</guid>
		<description>Two thoughts on this subject by someone who has read Illig &amp; Co. in German:
1. On radiocarbon dating: It doesn&#039;t matter how exact it is. The point is, it&#039;s relative. If you determine the age of something by radiocarbon dating as, let&#039;s say, 1.250 years, you might say it&#039;s from 759. But if the numbering of years has leaped in between, e. g. in 600 everybody decided it should be 900, the correct year of your something is 459. 
2. A similar problem arouses comparing datings of different cultures. It is not quite easy to find events or persons from the Middle (or older) Ages that can be dated in two or even more cultures. So there is very little in christian sources that corresponds with the arab ones about islamic expansion. A lot of deduction is made by simply declaring both timelines as complete and correct and then comparing them. But we know that there is a lot of, well, fiction within the chronicles of both cultures. Almost worse is the case when the chronicles of different cultures have influenced themselves among each other. Arab historians might have read christian or jewish sources and vice versa.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two thoughts on this subject by someone who has read Illig &amp; Co. in German:<br />
1. On radiocarbon dating: It doesn&#8217;t matter how exact it is. The point is, it&#8217;s relative. If you determine the age of something by radiocarbon dating as, let&#8217;s say, 1.250 years, you might say it&#8217;s from 759. But if the numbering of years has leaped in between, e. g. in 600 everybody decided it should be 900, the correct year of your something is 459.<br />
2. A similar problem arouses comparing datings of different cultures. It is not quite easy to find events or persons from the Middle (or older) Ages that can be dated in two or even more cultures. So there is very little in christian sources that corresponds with the arab ones about islamic expansion. A lot of deduction is made by simply declaring both timelines as complete and correct and then comparing them. But we know that there is a lot of, well, fiction within the chronicles of both cultures. Almost worse is the case when the chronicles of different cultures have influenced themselves among each other. Arab historians might have read christian or jewish sources and vice versa.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: michaeljlogin1988@lycos.com</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-23993</link>
		<dc:creator>michaeljlogin1988@lycos.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:19:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-23993</guid>
		<description>love it.

love this article. love it,     love it,     love it,     love it,    love it,    love it,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>love it.</p>
<p>love this article. love it,     love it,     love it,     love it,    love it,    love it,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: michaeljlogin1988@lycos.com</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-23992</link>
		<dc:creator>michaeljlogin1988@lycos.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:16:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-23992</guid>
		<description>carbon dating, i think refers to millions of years, or at least many many thousands.
they use it for dinosaurs, so i dont know if you can use it for this

huh, i like living in the 1700&#039;s.

of course that is based on what i think of the 1700&#039;s
early guns, chivalry. thats all what we think of the 1700;&#039;s thats really the 1500&#039;&#039;s
aha, 

well i like it

i dont like the year 205, so i;ll buy this shit.

its now, what 1785, was 2005, so 2008 is 1788, and 2009 is 1789, so its 1789

awesome. whoops, i mean, how very wonderful a day we are in, my lady. cause I dont knopw what that w0rd awesome is</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>carbon dating, i think refers to millions of years, or at least many many thousands.<br />
they use it for dinosaurs, so i dont know if you can use it for this</p>
<p>huh, i like living in the 1700&#8242;s.</p>
<p>of course that is based on what i think of the 1700&#8242;s<br />
early guns, chivalry. thats all what we think of the 1700;&#8217;s thats really the 1500&#8221;s<br />
aha, </p>
<p>well i like it</p>
<p>i dont like the year 205, so i;ll buy this shit.</p>
<p>its now, what 1785, was 2005, so 2008 is 1788, and 2009 is 1789, so its 1789</p>
<p>awesome. whoops, i mean, how very wonderful a day we are in, my lady. cause I dont knopw what that w0rd awesome is</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt_2304</title>
		<link>http://www.damninteresting.com/the-phantom-time-hypothesis/#comment-23613</link>
		<dc:creator>matt_2304</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 18:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164#comment-23613</guid>
		<description>Sigh, another jab at JustAnotherName for being just another child born into a religious background...

You&#039;ll never read this, but perhaps this is just +1 social point to those who also go &quot;Religion? Are you serious?&quot;, and perhaps another line of argument for those who do. Oh, I&#039;ll try and tie this into the topic of the article too. 

JustAnotherName, if the deity you personally were taught to love and obey regardless of your intellect did create the Earth and people 6000 years ago, why is there evidence of stuff going on for millions of years? Is that just a cruel joke? You&#039;d have to believe carbon dating is flawed, that the whole field of genetics is flawed (ie, how much genetic diversity can we expect from a single pair of animals that started breeding 6000 years ago) and also believe that someone who created this whole planet will condemn you to hell for having your life saved via a blood transfusion. I know some religious people who think God cares for everyone, but has them raped and tortured and molested and is generally perverse to teach them a lesson, which I assume is the default position to circumnavigate people natural logical response to the conundrum. That sort of argument certainly gets tossed around, and is believed all too often. End rant. 

Oh, yeah, tying it to the topic. 

JustAnotherName - &quot;Now, KEEP AN OPEN MIND and the next JW that is at your door, or one you work with, or there is a family member that is a JW or you know a friends&#039; cousins&#039; inlaw is one, ask him or her about the date of 1914. You will make their day and possibly several one hour a week visits for a few weeks, as I am sure, as it did all JW&#039;s and those who just wanted to know, it takes a bit of Biblical and Historical research to understand the counting of prophetic years and the significance of 1914. &quot;

The Earth was supposed to explode or something wasn&#039;t it? Maybe you should support the missing years theory so your branch of religion can lay claim to predicating the next man-made catastrophe like some cheap fairground charlatan. I assume there are considerably more reliable sources than a single 2000 or so year old text, and, if there is, to imply it has all the answers and encourage others to read it and perhaps add them to your stock (i mean flock), is clearly an intellectually blinded point of view.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sigh, another jab at JustAnotherName for being just another child born into a religious background&#8230;</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll never read this, but perhaps this is just +1 social point to those who also go &#8220;Religion? Are you serious?&#8221;, and perhaps another line of argument for those who do. Oh, I&#8217;ll try and tie this into the topic of the article too. </p>
<p>JustAnotherName, if the deity you personally were taught to love and obey regardless of your intellect did create the Earth and people 6000 years ago, why is there evidence of stuff going on for millions of years? Is that just a cruel joke? You&#8217;d have to believe carbon dating is flawed, that the whole field of genetics is flawed (ie, how much genetic diversity can we expect from a single pair of animals that started breeding 6000 years ago) and also believe that someone who created this whole planet will condemn you to hell for having your life saved via a blood transfusion. I know some religious people who think God cares for everyone, but has them raped and tortured and molested and is generally perverse to teach them a lesson, which I assume is the default position to circumnavigate people natural logical response to the conundrum. That sort of argument certainly gets tossed around, and is believed all too often. End rant. </p>
<p>Oh, yeah, tying it to the topic. </p>
<p>JustAnotherName &#8211; &#8220;Now, KEEP AN OPEN MIND and the next JW that is at your door, or one you work with, or there is a family member that is a JW or you know a friends&#8217; cousins&#8217; inlaw is one, ask him or her about the date of 1914. You will make their day and possibly several one hour a week visits for a few weeks, as I am sure, as it did all JW&#8217;s and those who just wanted to know, it takes a bit of Biblical and Historical research to understand the counting of prophetic years and the significance of 1914. &#8221;</p>
<p>The Earth was supposed to explode or something wasn&#8217;t it? Maybe you should support the missing years theory so your branch of religion can lay claim to predicating the next man-made catastrophe like some cheap fairground charlatan. I assume there are considerably more reliable sources than a single 2000 or so year old text, and, if there is, to imply it has all the answers and encourage others to read it and perhaps add them to your stock (i mean flock), is clearly an intellectually blinded point of view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

