Skeptic Mangles ZEITGEIST

[Stout]

Some people I encounter will accept it outright because it makes sense to them, the a both the difficulty of knowing the resources to debunk the claims, or even where to look for them.

It might make sense to some people, especially those given to pagan/astrological beliefs and who are looking for a reinforcement of those beliefs in a " I told you so,,, my belief system is soooo valid that even Christianity ripped it off" kind of way. Anybody who'd spent more than a few minutes pondering why the Christian festival of Christmas "just happens" to overlay the older Jewish festival of Hanukkah isn't going to be all that surprised that Christianity might just be showing a little disrespect to other belief systems and may just figure that Egypt was a source of "inspiration" in the development of Christianity.

Now this whole Murdock being afraid of her critics thing is getting a little thick, so thick that I'm figuring it's something she just made up to boost her status as an underground, controversial author. I have no problems accepting that the name Dorothy Murdock might just be a pen name itself and it's no stretch of the imagination to assume that it doesn't lack the mysterious appeal of the later pen name...Acharya S.

Somehow, the name Dorothy doesn't fit well with her self described status as " The Coolest Chick on the Planet" ..see her MySpace page.

So Mills sees "thinly disguised misogyny" ? In the same paragraph he describes her as attractive ? Oh, to me, it looks like Mr. Mills has the hots for her. Is he somehow figuring that as a "single woman" she should be somehow exempt from criticism ?

Try as I did, I couldn't find any criticism of the book Mills is reviewing, ( Fingerprints of The Christ ) all I can find that critical of Murdock's work centers around the Jesus/Egypt stuff. maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Try as I did, I couldn't find any criticism of the book Mills is reviewing, ( Fingerprints of The Christ ) all I can find that critical of Murdock's work centers around the Jesus/Egypt stuff. maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

Most criticism is really general, mainly do to the fact that her books aren't going to get much review given their self-published nature. A lot of reviewers would just ignore them, and even if they wouldn't she would have to send the review copies.

In the academic world these wouldn't fly, but that is excused away by simply claiming that academia is out to get her.

 

[Ducky]

Please completely remove that name from this forum and CEASE and DESIST using the first name for future use as a females personal privacy and safety is at stake.

Or you'll do what? Post more all caps protestations?

 

[Ducky]

4. It's dangerous to her physical well being and her family.

This claim will not stand up. It's been explained why this claim is bunk. Get over it.

Please also tell Dorothy M Murdock to get over it as well. If you'd like to read up on why security by obscurity is not worth a damn, please go check out Bruce Schneier's blog and read up on the subject.

 

[remirol]

What is all this about Dorothy M. Murdock, aka Acharya S.?

I wasn't originally going to post in here, but I heard the screaming from three forums over and felt I should stop by.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

What is all this about Dorothy M. Murdock, aka Acharya S.?

I wasn't originally going to post in here, but I heard the screaming from three forums over and felt I should stop by.

D.M. Murdock is an author of several books on astrotheology. She also goes by the pen name of Acharya S. She got upset because Tim wrote a critical article about her ideas presented in Zeitgeist part 1. Well because her ideas are the main crux of part 1 she become the basis of much discussion. Anywho, it seems she gets a little upset when the wrong name is used. All and all it has become something of a huge derail, a funny derail, but a derail nevertheless.

I suppose you could follow one the many links being spammed on this thread. The look up some of GreMNE's stuff. In fact there are few good criticism of her work on the ok' interwebs.

 

[Ducky]

D.M. Murdock is an author of several books on astrotheology. She also goes by the pen name of Acharya S. She got upset because Tim wrote a critical article about her ideas presented in Zeitgeist part 1. Well because her ideas are the main crux of part 1 she become the basis of much discussion. Anywho, it seems she gets a little upset when the wrong name is used. All and all it has become something of a huge derail, a funny derail, but a derail nevertheless.

I suppose you could follow one the many links being slammed on this thread. The look up some of GreMNE's stuff. In fact there are few good criticism of her work on the ok' interwebs.

The wrong name being Dorothy M Murdock, just for remirol's edification. So don't post that, remirol, or Mothra may destroy a city.

 

[Dave31]

fullflavormenthol you nor GreMNE have debunked anything - neither of you have actually studied her works you both dishonestly pretend to be experts on the subject and her work when you are not. You're both a couple of punks who are large on opinion and small on knowledge. You nor GreMNE has had anything to offer here in this thread or any other on the topic of Achrya's works except trolling up the thread ruining any potential for discussion - that's what you're both best at.

I notice neither of you have any inerrant masterpiece to provide any scholarly work of your own. Where's your own books on the subject? All you have is the juvenile whining and Wikipedia. Rational or reasonable discussion is impossible with you both - you're both embarrassments to all Freethinkers everywhere. We'll get you both a gold star for that.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

The wrong name being Dorothy M Murdock, just for remirol's edification. So don't post that, remirol, or Mothra may destroy a city.

What have you done? Don't you know what happens when you mention the name Dorothy?

Oh and again for the clarification of any new readers of this thread. It is impossible to disagree with Murdock and have actually read her work. You see if you disagree than obviously you are really a woman-hater who is jealous. Somethng about inerrant masterpieces too, I never really got that one. But that point is we are all woman hating people who went to college or something.

 

[Kochanski]

What have you done? Don't you know what happens when you mention the name Dorothy?

I just wonder where the color is? We have had all caps, bold, and the same points repeated many times. All that is missing is the colored text.

 

[Dave31]

Oh and again for the clarification of any new readers of this thread. It is impossible to disagree with Murdock and have actually read her work. You see if you disagree than obviously you are really a woman-hater who is jealous. Somethng about inerrant masterpieces too, I never really got that one. But that point is we are all woman hating people who went to college or something.

We got fullflavormenthol you made your point - your HATRED for Acharya S and your misogyny against women has been made clear - you can take your toys and go home now. You're no longer needed as you clearly have nothing to offer this thread beyond your typical trolling up the thread

It's really quite simply - if you don't like the thread then don't post in it. What part of that do you not understand?

 

[thesyntaxera]

fullflavormenthol you nor GreMNE have debunked anything - neither of you have actually studied her works you both dishonestly pretend to be experts on the subject and her work when you are not.

Ok dave. I give. Here's a clue. I will present it to you.

Edited by Tricky: 

edited for civility.

You have history, Dave. Ok. Do you agree that Acharya S. Murdoch only writes about a particular interpretation of historical events? Ok. Now you do realize Dave that other people write about history too, don't you? And that they have also published papers and books? And that people who research and write about history share their data freely with each other in the form of peer review so that the greater body of knowledge is serviced and the great human endeavor to find out things about the world is advanced? And that they aren't just seeking a buck hocking self published diatribes. Ok. Are we still on the same page?

So here is the thing Dave...it would seem that the people who do the research both in the library and in the field have a different interpretation of the history of religion. Perhaps you are aware of it? Perhaps you are SO aware of it you could sufficiently refute it with your own independent sources? OR! Perhaps there is a reason why none of what {snip}, Acharya S Dorothy Murdoch, writes has much bearing in the greater scope of knowledge. This could be because it is some fantasy concoction created to satisfy a broken ego. Maybe not. Maybe so.

See Dave, if any of the BS you have spewed in multiple threads across multiple message boards on the interwebs had any kernels of truth to them, it would have been acknowledged. It would have been discussed. There would have been a discourse. The problem is, there isn't. Another problem is that there won't be ever.

See, if {snip} Acharya Murdoch Dorothy S., had actually tried to learn something about Egyptian history, and the history of religion she would have bumped into actual living people who know a thing or two about these topics. She would have also found out that her favorite pet theory was well on it's way to being refuted several decades ago.

People aren't just saying this to you just to be contrarian. They are saying it because it is the best interpretation based on the available FACTS. If you have a better FACT based analysis then please present it. If you do not, or if you never intend to bring something to the table, then please just leave. No one will begrudge you for it.

Edited for civility. Also, please remember that you should not change the usernames of members for the purpose of insulting them.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[Mercutio]

LOL, there are a great number of libraries that carry her books - You've never requested a book at the library before? You've never heard of an "inner library loan"? I thought you were the great scholar, Tim? What exactly are your credentials and qualifications Tim?

Interlibrary loan.




Sorry. I had to. It was killing me.

 

[Jeff Corey]

"It's really quite simply..."
Simply marvelous.
Who is this Dorothy M. Murdock?
And can I get an intralibrary loan?

 

[fullflavormenthol]

I just wonder where the color is? We have had all caps, bold, and the same points repeated many times. All that is missing is the colored text.

To answer your question it was red.

Dave:

I fail to see how my posts here amount to trolling. It seems to me that you are very uncomfortable with the fact I disagree with Murdock. You have now simply resorted to personal attacks, and have accused me of being sexist as a way to discredit mine and others criticism. It isn't working, and I am going to ask you to not do it anymore. Nothing in this thread points to misogyny on my part or anyone else.

If you feel my posting here is trolling, and derailing then I would suggest you hit the report button on the post and tell a moderator about it. That being said you do not own the thread, and I have posted in response to the original article written by Tim, which was spot on. The article in eSkeptic is an intelligent counter-point to the conspiracy movie Zeitgeist part 1.

I would recommend you re-read thesyntaxera's post to understand the futile nature of your accusations against me. Insulting my education or calling me names is not going to change the fact that Murdock's pet theories have no backing in the world of history and religious studies; I am not going to disregard the work of the academic world because some individual self-publishes several rants without evidence to back them up. A person I might add who is unable to defend her positions against criticism without resorting to the same personal attacks that you yourself have been engaging in.

So to review. 1.) You do not own this thread. 2.) You will have to accept that people can take up different opinions than yours, especially when the evidence backs up those different opinions. 3.) If you actually believe I am trolling than the solution is to report it to a moderator and not constantly bring it up in the thread.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Anybody who'd spent more than a few minutes pondering why the Christian festival of Christmas "just happens" to overlay the older Jewish festival of Hanukkah isn't going to be all that surprised that Christianity might just be showing a little disrespect to other belief systems and may just figure that Egypt was a source of "inspiration" in the development of Christianity.

This is a good point that I didn't get to before. Anyone who has taken some time to really study the history of the church will find that many of the holidays are on the surface very arbitrary in their placement. Under the surface they will see that the church has a history of replacing earlier holidays with their own versions to ease transistion and allow the people they are converting to keep some of their traditions in a church focused manner. One needs only look to the conflict among fundamentalist Christians today in regards to this situation to learn how the church behaved back in the day. Dec. 25th has nothing to do with anything specific other than replacing a previously celebrated Roman holiday, anything else is just reading bias into it.

 

[TimCallahan]

Okay, Dave, I will try interlibrary loan. That's a air enough challenge. However, my referring to her as Dorothy M. Murdock as opposed to D. M. Murdock is hardly the same as posting her personal address on the net. I am merely saying that very cursory search, which took minimal effort turned up 25 references to Dorothy M. Murdock as being the same person as Acharya S. Since it seems to be a big deal to you, I will be referring to her as D. M. Murdock in my article in Skeptic. Now would be a great time to give this issue a rest. I'll let you know what interlibrary loan turns up.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Okay, Dave, I will try interlibrary loan. That's a air enough challenge. However, my referring to her as Dorothy M. Murdock as opposed to D. M. Murdock is hardly the same as posting her personal address on the net. I am merely saying that very cursory search, which took minimal effort turned up 25 references to Dorothy M. Murdock as being the same person as Acharya S. Since it seems to be a big deal to you, I will be referring to her as D. M. Murdock in my article in Skeptic. Now would be a great time to give this issue a rest. I'll let you know what interlibrary loan turns up.

Her work is possible to find. I know that UMKC and UM St. Louis both have some of her books. Which means where ever you are you should be able to locate some of her work to review; given that you are probably in a larger liberary system than I am in. It is a little obscure to find.

 

[Ducky]

I just wonder where the color is? We have had all caps, bold, and the same points repeated many times. All that is missing is the colored text.

Now the cycle is complete Kochanski.

Incidentally, if you say "Dorothy M Murdock" to the mirror three times fast zombie ninjas appear and try to kill you. It's true. My wife and I just barely escaped with our lives.

 

[Dave31]

Okay, Dave, I will try interlibrary loan. That's a air enough challenge. However, my referring to her as Dorothy M. Murdock as opposed to D. M. Murdock is hardly the same as posting her personal address on the net. I am merely saying that very cursory search, which took minimal effort turned up 25 references to Dorothy M. Murdock as being the same person as Acharya S. Since it seems to be a big deal to you, I will be referring to her as D. M. Murdock in my article in Skeptic. Now would be a great time to give this issue a rest. I'll let you know what interlibrary loan turns up.

Actually your "search" is dishonest Tim you already had the full name to search thanks to some of the most disgusting people on the net spreading it around with intent to cause harm. So private information isn't hard find when it's already given to you.

Don't use "Acharya S/D.M. Murdock" for me Tim just do it because it's the right thing to do. At least for those who actually have a conscience - clearly many here do not. The fact that it had to be explained to you a dozen times doesn't say much for you either. YOU could've given it a rest after the FIRST time it was explained to you but you weren't capable due to severe comprehension issues. I thought the bold or larger size would help but instead it was just another reason to whine. Why are "skeptics" such whiners? There's an article for you to research for a next issue in Skeptic Magazine.

You never did say what your credentials or qualifications were Tim. I'm really curious to know how someone who is suppose to be any kind of authority on the topic of religious history goes through life without knowing how to use a library. An inter library loan is no "challenge" at all Tim. Neither is putting in a request for a new book like Acharya's Christ in Egypt.