Return Home
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2019 2:16 pm

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Tom Campbell "Debunked"
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:11 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:45 pm
Posts: 229
Has anyone else seen this happen?
When typing "Tom Campbell" into a google or youtube search, I sometimes see the autocomplete function suggest "debunked".

Autocomplete results are generally created due to the system recording many searches of [Your query] + [common additional terms]. Are there that many people looking for a quick "fix" so they can effectively ignore any argument or theory they don't find immediately palatable?
If you go down the rabbit hole, as I have a few times, generally all you can find is very dated posts on popular science and physics forums where someone asks what the hive-mind has to say about our guy, and generally the answers follow one of only a few formulas:
"Enlightenment for only $29.95? He must be a scam artist!"
"I can't find anything about his credentials anywhere, clearly a pseudoscientist with fabricated background!"
and on and on ad nauseum. Anyone brave enough to argue that the group is jumping to conclusions is universally bullied or ignored. Never mind the fact that his books are free on google, and that he in no way claims to have a Phd or active academic status.

I write this post for two reasons:
1: I want to hear your opinions on this matter. It may have been discussed in the past but it is an ongoing phenomenon that irks me, mainly due to the fact that no one has any real "debunking" argument beyond ad hominem, yet the autocomplete term itself persists.

2: If this post gets enough attention, it will be slowly pushed to the top of the search results for "Tom Campbell Debunked" and those searching for an easy "fix" will first find that a group of intelligent, like-minded individuals actively discuss and attempt to build support not only the big TOE ideas, but Tom's ideas of open-minded skepticism and each individual's responsibility to personal inquiry and research.
Thank you for your time.

_________________
"Then when he has become a man, let him return to his century as an alien figure; but not in order to gladden it by his appearance..."


Top
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:17 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 5771
Location: Ocala, FL
Yes, this has been discussed before here. As Tom has become better known some crazies have come out of the woodwork. And there are some disgruntled banned forum members.

We just ignore it. Either this material is useful to someone, or it isn't.


Top
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 10:14 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:05 am
Posts: 414
I noticed as well and was a bit interested...as these things usually are there when there are pertinent results, and i'd be interested in someone trying to debunk MBT.

It turns out that there are no websites and no videos specifically dedicated to "debunking" Tom or MBT. As you said, there may be a thread here and there on some boards, but that's about it.

I never thought it worth enough to talk about here. But thinking about it, what exactly is there to "debunk"? What outrageous claims does Tom make that need to be scrutinized? That he is a physicist? I'm convinced he is an applied physicist, even though I didn't sit next to him in class and have no direct experience of him getting his credentials. Even if he isn't a physicist, how does that make any difference as to the credibility of his theory?

_________________
What was it like to wake up after having never gone to sleep?


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 6:19 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:46 am
Posts: 94
Zarathustra , Yes I have noticed this and have a smile when I see it and notice how it just doesn't matter what people think as it isn't about what others think in the slightest.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:22 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:19 pm
Posts: 454
Zarathustra,

You have some good thoughts in that post. I do appreciate your attempt to create a more optimal Google search result for that auto-complete search, thank you. Here is my perspective.

As Tom repeatedly says in the book, we should approach his model with open-minded skepticism, scrutinize it, and develop our own model through our own experiences. To me, this is a sign of his authenticity: he exhorts us to use the information in the book as merely a stepping stone, not as a definitive or authoritative scripture, nor as a set of lifestyle choices that must be slavishly obeyed in order to attain something.

In my view, MBT is full of astonishing claims that we should interrogate and be (open-mindedly) skeptical of. The very bedrock of the model is shocking--that consciousness is fundamental--a dynamic, evolving system developing learning labs in which its individuated parts can become more organized and therefore continue the evolution of the whole. Add to that the existence of multiple physical and non-physical realities; the continuity of consciousness across incarnations, retaining only the "accumulated quality;" accessing past and future databases; modifying physical reality with focused intent; and many more astonishing claims. It is no wonder that people might be taken aback!

Furthermore, the predominant paradigm of most people alive today is scientific materialism, positing that nothing exists outside of objective physical reality, the universe came out of nothing from nowhere, and there is no underlying, metaphysical reason for human existence. As Tom says, scientists are the "high priests" of today's society. So, since MBT challenges these beliefs, believers will seek to "debunk" it, in the same way that religions have attempted to "debunk" science that challenges religious beliefs. Some people will be completely closed-minded, refusing to even consider any of the model and debunking it solely on the basis that it is not scientific materialism. Others will be open to parts of the model, but drop other parts that do not make sense to them or that they cannot verify. All of this is fine, and even healthy.

Through observation and experimentation, scientific models have developed providing evidence that, for instance the earth is neither fixed, nor the center of the universe, nor is the sun pulled across the sky by Apollo's chariot. Multiple data points are collected (telescopic observations, mathematical calculations and analyses, etc.), and a heliocentric model emerges which explains the data better than a geocentric model. The old beliefs are let go--sometimes gently, sometimes after persecuting and trying to silence and shut down the heretics. In any case, as knowledge displaces ignorance, we study the old beliefs fondly, as indicators of the evolution of human understanding.

MBT provides a coherent, thorough, comprehensive, and deep model for reality. It draws on Tom's own experience, and builds on mystical insights from ancient religions and modern scientific understanding, and can be a more accessible and complete account than either of those things. It is really not our business here in the MBT forum to force a great awakening on the people. Everyone is on their own path, as a flower bud blooms in its own way, without being forced. So as Sainbury said, we do not worry about people "debunking" Tom or MBT. We are more concerned with presenting clear information about the model, and providing assistance in interpreting the model to people who are ready to bloom.

_________________
Everything is simpler than we can imagine, at the same time more complex and intertwined than can be comprehended--Goethe, Maxims & Reflections


Top
PostPosted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 2:48 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 8:10 am
Posts: 189
Close minded skeptics and materialists often type into google the name of their hate object and then add 'debunked' behind it in hopes for finding enough material where this person is then ... well ... being treated like sh..., because that's what they want and hope to read to confirm their state of close-minded little-box thinking and cognitive dissonance.

That's why google creates these automated seach suggestions, because it collects these. If more people have typed this combination, you can be sure it gets added after a few.

Or they just appear now automatically after every scientist, book author, etc.

Not sure.

_________________
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness."
- Max Planck


Top
PostPosted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 6:42 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:45 pm
Posts: 229
Thank you for the replies everyone. I've seen the google bot trawling the forum, so I know that with some luck we may eventually show up in the results. I am certainly not surprised by the fact that the hard-nosed skeptics will refuse to even entertain notions not from mouth of our Lord and Savior Neil Degrasse Tyson.
In response to scientists as the "high priests" of western culture, skepticism does strike me more and more as being just as guilty of the dogmatic thinking of religion, as religion. As soon as a claim or argument of any type is "debunked" with the most insignificant piece of counter-argument or contradictory evidence, that will forever be the "holy scientific artifact" that the skeptic community will hold up as the be-all end-all debunker.
The first page of Graham Hancock's "Fingerprints of the Gods" (arguing for the existence of advanced civilization before Sumer) details the facts that there exist maps that correctly detail the continental landmass of Antarctica long before the continent was meant to have been discovered, let alone analyzed with ground penetrating radar to actually probe the landmass underneath the ice sheet. If you look up the Rational Wiki (a place to ridicule anyone who doesn't fit into the mainstream doctrine) page on Mr. Hancock, one of the very first entries is an argument stating that cartographers of early history would simply fabricate lands and continents to fill in empty places on maps. I can just imagine the sigh of relief a skeptic would have upon reading this, no longer burdened with the struggle of a new paradigm.
Similar tactics are used in many areas- all UFO sightings are all reported by drunks in trailer parks, all bigfoot sightings are propagated only by drunks in the woods, and so on. I'm not necessarily arguing for the existence of bigfoot here, but these arguments persist and serve to remove the burden of independent research on an individual, when in some cases there are insurmountable worlds of credible research.
Luckily at this point there is no simple thought experiment or piece of rhetoric to completely blow off Tom's ideas, not that it will stop those who seek such things to equate charging for books to charlatanism. If I could say anything to someone stumbling on this forum, it would be to take away, if nothing else, the idea of open-minded skepticism, and the burden of research on an individual basis.

_________________
"Then when he has become a man, let him return to his century as an alien figure; but not in order to gladden it by his appearance..."


Top
PostPosted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:29 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:05 am
Posts: 414
Zara, there are so many things about the sumerians that don't make sense. They knew about all of the planets and their relative sizes in our solar system, and western science didn't figure it out until they invented telescopes that could see them. They knew what color the planets were. Crazy stuff.

_________________
What was it like to wake up after having never gone to sleep?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:45 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:45 pm
Posts: 229
UPDATE: By my eye, we seem to have broken onto the first page of google results. Everyone get in here!

Radagast, I am familiar with the work you are referencing. It is a matter of reductionist vs. literalist translation of ancient myth and there is no easy answer. The scholarly status of the translations you speak of are hard to refute. As other with other things, it would be best for every person to research the topic on their own and come to their own truth, and not just what they find on websites mocking the subject outright.

_________________
"Then when he has become a man, let him return to his century as an alien figure; but not in order to gladden it by his appearance..."


Top
PostPosted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 8:26 pm 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Are you familiar with the Antikythera mechanism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

If you search for that name you will find results which claim to have the mechanism explained by science.
Quote:
Scientists have finally demystified the incredible workings of a 2,000-year-old astronomical calculator built by ancient Greeks.

A new analysis of the Antikythera Mechanism, a clock-like machine consisting of more than 30 precise, hand-cut bronze gears, show it to be more advanced than previously thought—so much so that nothing comparable was built for another thousand years.

"This device is just extraordinary, the only thing of its kind," said study leader Mike Edmunds of Cardiff University in the UK. "The design is beautiful, the astronomy is exactly right…In terms of historical and scarcity value, I have to regard this mechanism as being more valuable than the Mona Lisa."

The researchers used three-dimensional X-ray scanners to reconstruct the workings of the device's gears and high-resolution surface imaging to enhance faded inscriptions on its surface.

Precise astronomy

The new analysis reveals that the device's front dials had pointers for the sun and moon — called the "golden little sphere" and "little sphere," respectively—and markings, which coincided with the zodiac and solar calendars. The back dials, meanwhile, appear to have been used for predicting solar and lunar eclipses.

The researchers also show that the device could mechanically replicate the irregular motions of the Moon, caused by its elliptical orbit around the Earth, using a clever design involving two superimposed gear-wheels, one slightly off-center, that are connected by a pin-and-slot device.

The team was also able to pin down the device's construction date more precisely. Radiocarbon dating suggested it was built around 65 B.C., but newly revealed lettering on the machine indicate a slightly older construction date of 150 to 100 B.C. The team's reconstruction also involves 37 gear wheels, seven of which are hypothetical.

"In the face of fragmentary material evidence, such guesswork is inevitable. But the new model is highly seductive, and convincing in all of its detail," wrote Francois Charette, a researcher at the Ludwig-Maximilians University in Germany who was not involved in the study, in a related article in the journal Nature.
http://www.livescience.com/1166-scienti ... chine.html

In the following link is still more information.

http://www.antikythera-mechanism.gr/

It is easy to find ruins pictured on the Internet which imply much more advanced civilizations than are connected to them in scholarly works. Also maps which are beyond the supposed understanding of the time or depict land hidden under permanent ice within our time range.

We don't want to get into conspiracy theories and such here, but there is a lot that we do not know as science and scientific research. Once these things have been figured out fully, links to this information would be of value.

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Sun Dec 27, 2015 8:32 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:45 pm
Posts: 229
Ted- I am familiar with the device. Stonehenge itself is said to be a sort of astronomical computer as well. Our ancestor's fascination with the night sky seems to have a duality of being necessary in both utility and myth.

Just another example of how our understandings of science, the past, and the future all evolve and develop over time. This generation's self-evident truth is the last generation's hilarious nonsense. Theories must change to suit the evidence, not the other way around.

_________________
"Then when he has become a man, let him return to his century as an alien figure; but not in order to gladden it by his appearance..."


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:13 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:05 am
Posts: 414
Quote:
UPDATE: By my eye, we seem to have broken onto the first page of google results. Everyone get in here!

Radagast, I am familiar with the work you are referencing. It is a matter of reductionist vs. literalist translation of ancient myth and there is no easy answer. The scholarly status of the translations you speak of are hard to refute. As other with other things, it would be best for every person to research the topic on their own and come to their own truth, and not just what they find on websites mocking the subject outright.
Yikes...well it seems my information on Sitchin's works has been outdated. Seems there have been some good arguments against his ideas besides "he's not a scientist so don't listen to him." I don't really think we can know the whole truth when it comes to things that happened so long ago anyway. There still remains a lot of unexplained things, like how 1,000 ton stone blocks were moved miles. Cranes that could lift that kind of weight or more have only been invented in the last decade or so, and are still called supercranes. It must have been amazing, however they did it.

_________________
What was it like to wake up after having never gone to sleep?


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:01 am 
Offline
Curator
Curator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Moving large stones was done by many men and using various means to ease the way. There is much information on this on the Internet. This one site for instance has a lot of information on how this process was achieved. http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/extremasonry.htm Modern persons have demonstrated some of these methods themselves and with ingenuity, surprisingly little manpower is required applying leverage, rollers and reportedly simply poring water ahead of the runners of a sledge which supposedly reduced friction greatly. Like the statues on Easter Island which were said to walk to their final locations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpNuh-J5IgE I have used some of these techniques as a contractor in setting boiler sections or myself alone getting a small boiler into a storage house 2 ft above the ground.

What specifically do you mean by the first page of google results? Please provide the search terms that you used. If you search for My Big TOE, you get that the last time I looked and just rechecked. The whole page is about Tom's various sites. That is with the exception of My Big Toe Designs which is apparently riding on Tom's coat tails to give some advantage to their cross stitch sewing site. So what are you searching for that surprisingly brings us to the top?

Ted


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:28 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:45 pm
Posts: 229
Ted-
The specific search term I'm referencing would be "tom campbell debunked", "tom campbell debunk", or "tom campbell debunker" verbatim in a vanilla google web search. Such things are a commonplace search phrase when looking for skeptical criticism of certain topics. You can try any of these, although "my big toe debunked" works too. This thread, in my observation, is slowly creeping up the results as more people post. However these things are often subjective based on past use so I'm interested to see what you come up with.
The link about extreme masonry of the ancients you posted is interesting. It seems to me that article still allows for tools and techniques many classical archeologists deny existed at such times, such as semi-precious-tipped implements. I think there are still questions to be answered regarding time frames, number of workers, transportation, and precise curvature and replication, but it's an excellent insight.

Radagast, I am not saying Sitchin's work is completely without novelty- most of his prolific debunkers seem to take issue with his translations of recurring terms, and a single cylinder seal supposedly depicting the solar system-without delving into the rest of his translational work. I do not understand cuneiform, so as of yet I do not know where I stand on the matter.

_________________
"Then when he has become a man, let him return to his century as an alien figure; but not in order to gladden it by his appearance..."


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2016 1:11 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:05 am
Posts: 414
Quote:
Moving large stones was done by many men and using various means to ease the way. There is much information on this on the Internet. This one site for instance has a lot of information on how this process was achieved. http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/extremasonry.htm Modern persons have demonstrated some of these methods themselves and with ingenuity, surprisingly little manpower is required applying leverage, rollers and reportedly simply poring water ahead of the runners of a sledge which supposedly reduced friction greatly. Like the statues on Easter Island which were said to walk to their final locations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpNuh-J5IgE I have used some of these techniques as a contractor in setting boiler sections or myself alone getting a small boiler into a storage house 2 ft above the ground.

What specifically do you mean by the first page of google results? Please provide the search terms that you used. If you search for My Big TOE, you get that the last time I looked and just rechecked. The whole page is about Tom's various sites. That is with the exception of My Big Toe Designs which is apparently riding on Tom's coat tails to give some advantage to their cross stitch sewing site. So what are you searching for that surprisingly brings us to the top?

Ted
Correct me if i'm wrong, but the largest moved stone at easter island weighed 86 tons. Even then, the idea that the stones were moved via levers and rollers is only a theory(albeit a good one). It's probably a correct theory, but there's no way to prove exactly how they did it. It was also done in the common era(AD) around 800 years ago or so. I'm talking about megaliths of 200-1000+ tons, moved miles across land and sea approximately 4000 years ago.

_________________
What was it like to wake up after having never gone to sleep?


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited