Here’s just a small bit of what your links says about homosexuals:
Degenerate tendencies of emotions and self-created anti-natural desires in a perverse form, as well as an individual’s own homophile egoism, are interpreted as the creation of a pseudo-homosexuality that is brought about by the person’s own thoughts and fantasies that transgress against nature’s laws and directives and consequently become a degeneration. This form of homosexuality does not show any link to the natural-anti-nature, hence naturally gene-produced, homosexuality. The degenerate homosexuality, hence pseudo-homosexuality that is self-produced through one’s own thoughts and fantasies is, as a rule, coupled with other pseudo-, self-produced sexual abnormalities and transgressions against nature, such as sodomy, masochism and sadism, to mention a few.
By definition, homosexual men cannot perform sexual acts with one another; they can only give in to mere sexual gratification, which is presented in the OM, page 69, verse 138:
Just as the male cannot give birth, neither can there be any procreative-sexual contact from one male to another male or between male to male that would be considered a transgression against Creation’s guidance and against its laws and directives and against the Order of Seven.
Homosexual men cannot perform any genuine sexual acts therefore but can only obtain mere sexual gratification. The reason for this definition is that men, among and with each other, are incapable of procreating. A genuine sexual act can only transpire, therefore, when an opportunity for procreation exists in the way that it does between two human beings of a different gender — between a man and a woman. All other sexual acts where there is no chance for procreation, such as between two men, can only be termed sexual gratification. A true sexual act is also, of course, the sex life of two partners with different genders who are infertile, together or individually. In this case, the decisive factor is their different genders. The facts are presented in the spiritual teachings in this manner.
When mention is made in the OM (page 69, verse 139) of homosexual unions between one man with another man as being punishable, it means that the culpability becomes apparent when homosexual men have intercourse in a manner that makes them capable of giving birth (such as through genetic manipulation, etc.), in an anti-natural and wanton way and having sexual relationships in order to procreate children
If he blatantly lies about talking to aliens, how can we trust him to tell the truth about all these assassination attempts?
It’s a damn petition. And it’s funny as hell. Nothing about aliens doing it.
They want to see the world population reduced to 529,000,000.
Even funnier, the ETs say in 1998, the world pop. was 6.5 million while FIGU’s chart shows 430 million.
Geezzz its amazing how anyone could so consistently get their facts wrong.
http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Population_Table_2009
http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Interpretation_of_the_Population_Table_2009
Onomatopoeia:
Oh please don’t say that newinitiation has gone away. This has got to be the most hilarious thread I have ever read and I need my daily newinitiation fix.
How most of you respond to newinitiation without having fits of explosive, convulsive laughter is beyond my ability to comprehend. The guy has answers for everything, most of them wrong, not to mention illogical, yet he keeps going. It’s amazing!
I almost blew a gasket when he tossed in the magma chamber beneath the Vatican.
I don’t believe for one second that it is possible for newinitiation to be as credulous as he pretends to be, but I’m torn between wanting him to come clean and keeping up the charade.
Its nice to know that I am valued
Absence makes the heart grow fonder?
Truman_Burbank:
He’s not credulous, his consciousness is just more **fluidinal **than yours.
My brain’s more fluid than your brain
He’s a Billy Meier weiner!
Why don’t you just admit it like a real bloke and say that I am profoundly more intelligent than the lot of you combined
he he he;)
newinitiation:
What most people don’t realise is that there exist a magma chamber some 7 kilometers right under the Vatican city and through an earthquake this city will be destroyed.
So you can include a swathe of large portion of Rome which will suffer much damage and not just the vatican city itself.
Great_Antibob:
Geophysicist here.
I suppose presumably the idea was that a scientist couldn’t easily dismiss the idea of a magma chamber several kilometers under a city.
But the funny thing is that even if there are no direct measurements (as in no drilled wells), indirect measurements are sufficient to detect plenty of things under the surface. It is, in fact, how I make my living working for a contractor that helps oil companies detect subsurface hydrocarbons at such depths. While my particular area of expertise is not volcanoes, every volcano situated near any major population center certainly has monitoring by geophysicists.
So, no, the very concept of this undiscovered subsurface magma chamber connected to a volcano a hundred miles away is ridiculous. We have the tools and technology to detect such things and have had such for decades now.
I see that they tried to cover their asses by claiming scientists can’t actually do this. And maybe that was true 50 years ago. It’s not true now. Maybe you can claim our theoretical knowledge is false. Well, that doesn’t work, either, or else we wouldn’t have success drilling for oil/gas at depths (including wells exceeding 7km depth). Our technical expertise is certainly quite up to the task, which has been repeatedly verified by direct experiment and economic recovery of hydrocarbons. And also by experiences like detecting trapped miners, like the case of the Chilean miners a few years ago.
Great_Antibob:
Well, yes, it’s like asking what happens when the unicorns living in Buckingham Palace decide to come out to play. The problem isn’t deciding what games they play. The problem is supposing they exist in the first place. Likewise, supposing this magma chamber exists at all is quite laughable.
Besides, where is such a magma chamber? Because there certainly isn’t one under Rome, as our measurements can confirm.
I’ll note you haven’t bothered to address the actual point - the existence of a magma chamber - and have chosen to employ a distraction.
So, can you please address the fundamental point: are these supposed aliens wrong? Or is there some other seemingly rational explanation for their inexplicable decision to state unequivocally that not only does such a magma exist but also their snarky declaration that scientists are simply incapable of detecting it?
newinitiation , it is amazing to me that you aren’t embarrassed in the slightest when you are called on your BS.
First you stated that there is a magma chamber 7 kilometers below the Vatican. Great Antibob , a geophysicist, then responded in 2 separate posts that this is not correct. He then goes on to ask you, very clearly I might add, where the supposed magma chamber is of which you spoke. So, what do you do? Rather than answer his question. you first tell him he’s comparing apples to oranges (Funny how he is comparing apples to oranges when he’s responding directly to a statement you made). Then you ask him to read a news article that makes absolutely no mention of a magma chamber beneath the Vatican , but discusses the possibility that maybe, perhaps, there could be a significant eruption sometime in the future that could impact an area of up to 20 kilometers which would include Naples, not Rome.
By the way, you’ve provided a number of links as responses to posters throughout this thread that don’t actually address the poster’s query or statements, but are simply tangentially related topically, such as the one I pasted above. Why do you do this?
tomndebb:
Judging by the evidence presented in this thread, then, they are totally different from the ETs that have been cited, so far.
So what have you read so far about what the Plejaren have said so far to state such an audacious nonsense!
Geezzz a bit of a slimy backflip don’t you think
I quote “It wasn’t his turn to post” unquote.
Open your mind and let in some fresh air dude.
U.F.O DISCLOSURE PROJECT -FULL VERSIONVIDEO
Onomatopoeia:
newinitiation , it is amazing to me that you aren’t embarrassed in the slightest when you are called on your BS.
First you stated that there is a magma chamber 7 kilometers below the Vatican. Great Antibob , a geophysicist, then responded in 2 separate posts that this is not correct. He then goes on to ask you, very clearly I might add, where the supposed magma chamber is of which you spoke. So, what do you do? Rather than answer his question. you first tell him he’s comparing apples to oranges (Funny how he is comparing apples to oranges when he’s responding directly to a statement you made). Then you ask him to read a news article that makes absolutely no mention of a magma chamber beneath the Vatican , but discusses the possibility that maybe, perhaps, there could be a significant eruption sometime in the future that could impact an area of up to 20 kilometers which would include Naples, not Rome.
By the way, you’ve provided a number of links as responses to posters throughout this thread that don’t actually address the poster’s query or statements, but are simply tangentially related topically, such as the one I pasted above. Why do you do this?
I am filling in the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle for you people seeing as a direct answer to the query is rejected vehemently out of hand.
Anyway the links I’ve provided are all related
Its up to you to extrapolate from the content to the links I have furnished and to draw your own conclusions.
newinitiation:
Then prove he is lying.
Already been done, so why do it again?
newinitiation:
I am filling in the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle for you people seeing as a direct answer to the query is rejected vehemently out of hand.
Anyway the links I’ve provided are all related
Its up to you to extrapolate from the content to the links I have furnished and to draw your own conclusions.
We did that pages ago-He’s a bull goose loony that needs to keep his ego fed by making up poorly thought out stories to sell to the gullible.
Onomatopoeia:
newinitiation , it is amazing to me that you aren’t embarrassed in the slightest when you are called on your BS.
First you stated that there is a magma chamber 7 kilometers below the Vatican. Great Antibob , a geophysicist, then responded in 2 separate posts that this is not correct. He then goes on to ask you, very clearly I might add, where the supposed magma chamber is of which you spoke. So, what do you do? Rather than answer his question. you first tell him he’s comparing apples to oranges (Funny how he is comparing apples to oranges when he’s responding directly to a statement you made). Then you ask him to read a news article that makes absolutely no mention of a magma chamber beneath the Vatican , but discusses the possibility that maybe, perhaps, there could be a significant eruption sometime in the future that could impact an area of up to 20 kilometers which would include Naples, not Rome.
By the way, you’ve provided a number of links as responses to posters throughout this thread that don’t actually address the poster’s query or statements, but are simply tangentially related topically, such as the one I pasted above. Why do you do this?
Another piece of the jigsaw puzzle.
Caldera Lakes Near Rome
Onomatopoeia:
newinitiation , it is amazing to me that you aren’t embarrassed in the slightest when you are called on your BS.
First you stated that there is a magma chamber 7 kilometers below the Vatican. Great Antibob , a geophysicist, then responded in 2 separate posts that this is not correct. He then goes on to ask you, very clearly I might add, where the supposed magma chamber is of which you spoke. So, what do you do? Rather than answer his question. you first tell him he’s comparing apples to oranges (Funny how he is comparing apples to oranges when he’s responding directly to a statement you made). Then you ask him to read a news article that makes absolutely no mention of a magma chamber beneath the Vatican , but discusses the possibility that maybe, perhaps, there could be a significant eruption sometime in the future that could impact an area of up to 20 kilometers which would include Naples, not Rome.
By the way, you’ve provided a number of links as responses to posters throughout this thread that don’t actually address the poster’s query or statements, but are simply tangentially related topically, such as the one I pasted above. Why do you do this?
And here is more
You’ve got to remember that the magma chambers are interconnected
http://www.valutazioniambientali.it/download_manuali/The%20Colli%20Albani%20Mafic%20caldera.pdf
Sometimes literally. Don’t some of those links only advertize materiel that needs to be purchased?
Onomatopoeia:
newinitiation , it is amazing to me that you aren’t embarrassed in the slightest when you are called on your BS.
First you stated that there is a magma chamber 7 kilometers below the Vatican. Great Antibob , a geophysicist, then responded in 2 separate posts that this is not correct. He then goes on to ask you, very clearly I might add, where the supposed magma chamber is of which you spoke. So, what do you do? Rather than answer his question. you first tell him he’s comparing apples to oranges (Funny how he is comparing apples to oranges when he’s responding directly to a statement you made). Then you ask him to read a news article that makes absolutely no mention of a magma chamber beneath the Vatican , but discusses the possibility that maybe, perhaps, there could be a significant eruption sometime in the future that could impact an area of up to 20 kilometers which would include Naples, not Rome.
By the way, you’ve provided a number of links as responses to posters throughout this thread that don’t actually address the poster’s query or statements, but are simply tangentially related topically, such as the one I pasted above. Why do you do this?
Hey how about this onehttp://factsanddetails.com/world.php?itemid=2047
Not good enough!
You call that research.
Apply the scientific methodology OK and the scientific mind
