it's deja vu all over again...

[william.scherk]

-- Greg also mentions a red-letter date, September 13, 2015 September 28, 2015. This is the day of a total lunar eclipse,

That's incorrect, William...

in your eagerness to find something wrong you're making errors of your own.

Thanks for the correction. It was a clerical error (the link goes to the correct date)

We are invited, by suggestion, to believe that there was a similar total lunar eclipse on both days from 2001 and 2008.

Again, the prissy leftist queenly "we"... you revert to that a lot. And you're assumption is wrong again. This coming event just happened to be under an eclipse. The 29th of Ulel in a seventh year occurs because it's on the Jewish lunar calendar, not because it's an eclipse.

The prissy, leftist, queenly "we"? Hilarious. I am speaking to the Objectivist Living community. "We" are your readers, Greg. Simple stuff, really. No need to tighten that sphincter.

Someone could ask for the name and we can move on to the actual predictions of that worthy gentleman/crank.

I'll put an end to your wild guessing game now... his name is Jonathan Cahn.

Hilarious once more. The names I mentioned are all proponents of the Blood Moon Triad Apocalypse Hooga Booga. Rabbi Pastor Cahn is not the originator of the astrological whoopee. He is no better or worse that any other phony prophet of doom who looks to the sky for signs of end times.

That "crank" gave a speech at Obama's Inaugural Prayer Breakfast in 2013, and has just addressed the UN recently. What have you done lately, bureaucratic blind scribe?

And by the way, you're wrong again. The lunar eclipse will be total over Jerusalem.

No, Greg. The sun is 93 million miles away from Earth. The Moon is 225,000 miles from Earth. The Earth has a diameter of 8000 miles. The Moon has a diameter of 2100-odd miles.

In a total lunar eclipse, the Earth's shadow covers the moon momentarily. It is obvious, but not to you, apparently, that the extent of the eclipse can be seen only on the side of the Earth pointing at the Moon. As I stated, correctly, the total lunar eclipse is visible beyond the Middle East. There is no persistent 'centre' running from the Sun through the Earth to the Moon. That you fail to grasp this is a testament to Hooga Booga, not reality. That's from astronomy, not astrology, Rabbi Pastor Greg.

-- you can see a preview of the coming total lunar eclipse as seen from Los Angeles, and from Jerusalem. Here are snapshots of the nifty image animations at the Time and Date site. In Jerusalem the moon will appear in the west-southwest sky. In Los Angeles, the moon will appear in the east.

President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden plan to attend the 57th Presidential Inaugural Prayer Service, an official event, at the National Cathedral in Washington at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday. It is an interfaith service of prayers, readings, and music. The sermon will be delivered by the Rev. Adam Hamilton, senior pastor of the Church of the Resurrection in Leawood, Kan., the largest United Methodist church in the nation.

Others participating in the official prayer service are the Very Rev. Gary Hall, who is dean of the cathedral, seat of the Episcopal Church; the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church; the Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, and the Rev. Serene Jones, president of Union Theological Seminary in New York City.

Two prayer breakfasts planned on Monday are not official inaugural events.

At 7 a.m. at the Washington Marriott Wardman Park hotel, the Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast Committee, which includes hostess Merrie Turner and the chaplain of the House of Representatives, the Rev. Patrick J. Conroy, will begin the four-hour event. The speaker is the Rev. Jonathan Cahn, senior pastor and messianic rabbi of the Jerusalem Center/Beth Israel Messianic Congregation in Wayne, N.J., and president of Hope of the World Ministries, which calls itself “an end-time ministry for an end-time world.”

The theme of this breakfast is from Esther 4:13 in the Hebrew Bible: “Then Mordecai commanded to answer Esther, Think not with thyself that thou shalt escape in the king’s house, more than all the Jews.”

An end-time ministry for an end-time world. That's the ticket for an Objectivish audience.

For those who wonder just what the Pastor Rabbi (that is his self-chosen title) has to say about the portents, here is a review of his portentous book Harbinger. Yowza.

Finally, here is a story that concentrates all the prophetic whatnot in one place, and which includes all of the names I mentioned above, along with Cahn. It is quite clear that Greg has pieced together a bit of this and a bit of that, and has no clear concept of what he is touting. The Blood Moon Triad whoopee is certainly not a creation of the Rabbi Pastor he names.

From World New Daily ... 'Mystic' rabbi issues ominous warning on eve of blood moon

Edited May 28, 2015 by william.scherk

[moralist]

The prissy, leftist, queenly "we"? Hilarious. I am speaking to the Objectivist Living community.

Wrong again, William.

You are presuming to speak for the Objectivist Community...

... because that's what leftists do.

Greg

[william.scherk]

The prissy, leftist, queenly "we"? Hilarious. I am speaking to the Objectivist Living community.

Wrong again, William.

You are presuming to speak for the Objectivist Community...

I am not an Objectivist, Greg. The context of my remarks is, again:

Now, a magical astrological connection between the total lunar eclipse this September is predicted to engender another financial day of doom (Greg, no need to head for Israel, the spooky event will be visible from your home). We are invited, by suggestion, to believe that there was a similar total lunar eclipse on both days from 2001 and 2008.

Is it true there were total lunar eclipses on those two days? Nope. Not even close. In 2001, there were partial or penumbral lunar eclipses in July and December. The only total lunar eclipse in 2001 was on January 9-10.

On to 2008. When were the total lunar eclipses that year? Why, on February 21 (total) and August 16 (partial).

Here is what you have misunderstood: you, Greg, Moralist, Breastplate of Righteousness, Sexologist, Tinker, Zen-Christophile-Hebrew-dabbler, wrote to the Objectivist Living community, suggesting we OL community members all be aware of a scary thing predicted by Vaknin, Biltz, Hagee, and Cahn.

Your version of astrological whoopee contains a suggestion to the rest of the OL community. That suggestion concerns the dates in 2001 and 2008. That suggestion has been shown to be nonsense.

I can't speak for the Objectivist Living community, but I can address it. That is when I use the first-person plural, We.

Your homosexual sphincter clench about queenly yadda yadda is beside the point. The point is that your astrological freakshow is an awkward fit for an Objectivist/ish forum, and that lodging such portentous nonsense here is hilariously off the beam.

If I wrote 'We Reject Moonbeam Mania," or "We Think Your Religious Claptrap Degrades Discussion," then I would be attempting to speak for 'the community,' and I would be wrong. For all I know, other OLers may find the moon mania to be rational and proper and are hedging their market bets to conform to your warning.

Since you haven't addressed the other findings of fact above that contradict your whoopee, we OLers can conclude you accept those facts and subsidiary critical comments. Thanks for playing the game. Better luck next time.

Here is your favourite Rabbi Pastor Moonbeam on the warnings you have brought to Objectivist Living. "Rabbi Jonathan Cahn is in the house!" ...

-- and here is Rabbi Pastor Moonbeam's generous offerings of whoopee -- from the website promoting the book that Greg presumably takes as Gospel truth. We are I am amused.

Edited May 27, 2015 by william.scherk

[moralist]

I am not an Objectivist, Greg.

The use of the queenly "we" when you are obviously only an "I" means you are presuming to speak on the behalf of others. This is a quality shared by leftists who think collectively, and so use the groupspeak "we" as if they were more than one person. This denotes a certain weakness of character that you cannot simply speak for yourself as an individual, but need to refer to yourself as if you were an imaginary "group".

You reveal a lot about yourself and your values in your own words. And in this instance, you're a dead giveaway.

Greg

[william.scherk]

I can't speak for the Objectivist Living community, but I can address it. That is when I use the first-person plural, We.

Your homosexual sphincter clench about queenly yadda yadda is beside the point. The point is that your astrological freakshow is an awkward fit for an Objectivist/ish forum, and that lodging such portentous nonsense here is hilariously off the beam.

The use of the queenly "we" when you are obviously only an "I" means you are presuming to speak on the behalf of others.

Nope. As I explain above. Your anti-homosexual animus is one thing, your touting of the Blood Moon Tetrad nonsense is another. Avoiding discussion of the latter because of the former suggests you cannot support or defend your own contentions with reason, as predicted.

Edited May 28, 2015 by william.scherk

[Selene]

David Cohen threw a perfect game on the anniversary of Don Larson's perfect game that was caught by Yogi Berra who wore number 8.

It was the only perfect game thrown in World Series history.

Don threw the pre-game "first pitch" to Yogi who was behind the plate that day of the perfect game as well as the celebration of that game's anniversary.

There was a number 8 embossed into the grass behind home plate as David Cohen began his quest.

David threw 88 pitches that day.

I am going to start a religion based on that perfect balance.

A...

Just as valid as those common numbers?

[merjet]

David Cohen threw a perfect game on the anniversary of Don Larson's perfect game that was caught by Yogi Berra who wore number 8.

You mangled it (link). It's Cone, not Cohen, and Larsen, not Larson. Cone's perfect game was in July, Larsen's in October.

[moralist]

By odd coincidence, all of these events happened to have occurred around a blood moon tetrad

Columbus discovers America.

Israel becomes a nation.

Israeli 6 Day War.

911

The Great Recession

...and it's deja vu all over again.

Greg

[Selene]

David Cohen threw a perfect game on the anniversary of Don Larson's perfect game that was caught by Yogi Berra who wore number 8.

You mangled it (link). It's Cone, not Cohen, and Larsen, not Larson. Cone's perfect game was in July, Larsen's in October.

Lol, I knew I should have looked up Cone's name for spelling.

However, it was the "anniversary" celebrating that famous game. I should have been clearer.

Thanks...I made Cone into a member of Sandy Koufax's religion...

A...

[moralist]

I can't speak for the Objectivist Living community, but I can address it. That is when I use the first-person plural, We.

Your homosexual sphincter clench about queenly yadda yadda is beside the point. The point is that your astrological freakshow is an awkward fit for an Objectivist/ish forum, and that lodging such portentous nonsense here is hilariously off the beam.

The use of the queenly "we" when you are obviously only an "I" means you are presuming to speak on the behalf of others.

Nope.

Yep, William.

Here it is in your own words...

We are invited, by suggestion, to believe that there was a similar total lunar eclipse on both days from 2001 and 2008 .

Clearly, you presumed to speak as a representative of an imaginary group. That's what the liberal queenly "we" is.

Greg

[Mikee]

You know this Greg but I'll point it out anyway. 'We' is simply the people who read this forum, it is a perfectly accurate and correct use of the term and implies nothing of what you suggest. Williams use of language, his research efforts, his mostly congenial efforts to persuade by reason and logic are a delight always, regardless if you agree with him on some point or not. Your hardly disguised efforts to insult, embarrass, or mock him and others are offensive. As for your own arguments and point of view you have not changed one iota. You are immune to persuasion, what does not fit one of your programmed responses you simply ignore. On this forum you have failed the Turing test. I believe the following is called "psychologizing": I think your intransigence and smugness hides a very deep fear, the origins of which I have no way of guessing.

[william.scherk]

I can't speak for the Objectivist Living community, but I can address it. That is when I use the first-person plural, We.

The use of the queenly "we" when you are obviously only an "I" means you are presuming to speak on the behalf of others.

Nope.

Yep

We are invited, by suggestion, to believe that there was a similar total lunar eclipse on both days from 2001 and 2008 .

Who is the fully-fluffed Queen Hen clucking and patrolling the language? What are you, Mary Moses of lingustic correctness?

You know this Greg but I'll point it out anyway. 'We' is simply the people who read this forum, it is a perfectly accurate and correct use of the term and implies nothing of what you suggest.

What he said. Listen to your friend, please.

Roboting the issue again and again makes you look obsessed if not full kook afterburners. I do not accept the ridiculous judgments of your Word Patrol. Quit pecking at bad words, quit the clucking, and get back in the game of discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2iurDi8mrc

[moralist]

You know this Greg but I'll point it out anyway. 'We' is simply the people who read this forum, it is a perfectly accurate and correct use of the term and implies nothing of what you suggest. Williams use of language, his research efforts, his mostly congenial efforts to persuade by reason and logic are a delight always, regardless if you agree with him on some point or not. Your hardly disguised efforts to insult, embarrass, or mock him and others are offensive. As for your own arguments and point of view you have not changed one iota. You are immune to persuasion, what does not fit one of your programmed responses you simply ignore. On this forum you have failed the Turing test. I believe the following is called "psychologizing": I think your intransigence and smugness hides a very deep fear, the origins of which I have no way of guessing.

From our previous conversation we obviously had two different points of view, so in that context I understand your present comments. You also may have missed some of the derogatory things William surfaces just to post about me in his rambling third person soliloquies.

Greg