Urgent a 2000 Year Old Radiation Warning

Free Republic ^ | 03/14/11 | self

[Quix]

INDEED.

[dglang]

I apologize for the delay in getting back to you with the references you asked for.

Due to my back and other pains, I don't keep a set daily schedule but I am up and down at various times during both the day and the night. I feel no need to burden anyone with what I go through daily and therefore will get more directly to the response.

Rather than just simply accept without question whatever someone may say especially regarding the things and nature of God and HIS only begotten son Jesus, I try to thoroughly research various sources. One of the sites I have visited is http://www.karaite-korner.org/

To understand what that group is about, I would refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaite_Judaism

Please keep in mind that Wiki is open to posting by various anomyous sources and oftentimes presents conflicting views.

One thing we often forget is that during the second temple days, many of the scribes and priests were no longer being derived from their God mandated hereditary sources but were appointees of the ruling Roman authorities. Often times those appointed ones pushed what the Roman governors wanted them to emphasize and not what the scriptures actually stated. Scriptures were often deliberately modified to say something different than what was originally intended. The further away from Jesus’ time we get, the more the scriptures have been modified.

Therefore to avoid being influenced by what might possibly be a modified script, we should always strive to use the oldest manuscripts available and give preference to the older manuscripts when variances arise. This is especially true regarding some of the newer manuscripts which are traced back to sources outside of Jerusalem such as the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts.

The older manuscripts such as the textus Receptus are more likely to represent what was originally written than are newer manuscripts which may represent a particular sect or denominational view. This holds true for bibles with most of the newer bibles being derived from newer manuscripts which results in all of the newer translations missing several thousand verses which were present in the earlier King James versions. I refer you to: http://www.moresureword.com/KJVonlyYES.htm and http://www.moresureword.com/alcuppit.htm for further info.

Once again, I must caution you to seek the full truth and not blindly accept whatever I or anyone else may say. Research out the full truth of what Al Cuppett and Jim Searchy state.

It's taking even longer to reply since I am also reviewing these sources during my reply to you for my own benefit as well. Even though I have read them previously, I am now rereading them and following the very interesting links.

[dirtboy]

I don't accept your numbers,

Amazing. Your post cited the USGS, and when I go to their website and use their own query tool to pull the 7+ earthquakes since 1980, I get something very different. Not eight 7+ earthquakes in all of the eighties ... there were that many in 1980 alone. I even dumped the resuls on FR for all to see. I have been as open as possible, something you have not been, you didn't even provide links. Yet you don't accept my numbers. Do you always have this hard a time with hard facts?

Am I missing something dirtboy? You call me a liar and without any further ado, you snap. You're angry over exactly what?

I said the numbers your post quoted of a 1500 percent increase were wrong. Since you provided no link, I have no idea if you made the mistake or the person who wrote it did - that is what happens when you don't provide a link. I am not saying you are a liar, I am saying your source was wrong. It grossly exaggerated the change. Saying it was fifty percent instead of 1500 percent is truthful. That post was not. So what other playing with the facts is going on here?

I posted the actual numbers so folks can decide for themselves. If you call that 'snapping', well, you might want to intern with Nary Mapes, she has the same kind of cavalier attitude towards the facts and same kind of way of disparaging those who point towards such.

As to your assertion that a 50 percent increase indicates something, we'd have to look at long-term trends to see if there is any kind of similar cylicality in the past. That scientific method thingy, you know.

Now, if you simply pointed to Scripture and said you believe the recent earthquakes are indicators of the approach of end times, I would have no debate with you. But you didn't. You intermixed a specific scientific claim - and when you finally posted something to substantiate that claim, simple internet research found the specifics of that claim to be lacking.

Twice, I quote the USGS stats and you won't accept them.

FR has long prided itself to finding what the MSM is covering up or not reporting accurately. Do you think you should have some little backwater where those standards do not apply?

[aruanan]

Japanese nuclear reactors: another example of media terror-pimping, just like the Gulf oil leak that was going to devastate the planet.

The situation at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear powerplant in Japan, badly damaged during the extremely severe earthquake and tsunami there a week ago, continues to stabilise. It is becoming more probable by the day that public health consequences will be zero and radiation health effects among workers at the site will be so minor as to be hard to measure. Nuclear experts are beginning to condemn the international hysteria which has followed the incident in increasingly blunt terms.

See the following as an example of our own FR hysteria:

So, today in your sight yet another prophecy is furfilled [sic] by a soveirgn [sic] loving God and an all powerful King. We can rest with the complete knowledge that whatever disaster that's surely coming our way God is still upon the throne and great. In perfect control of events. He warns us to avoid breastfeeding and radiation. So, pass the word of warning to everyone you know.

"Normal dosage from background radiation is 2-3 millisievert annually: a chest CT scan delivers 7 millisievert. The highest radiation level detected anywhere beyond the site was a single brief reading of 0.17 millisievert at the boundary of the evacuation zone, but on average (Japanese government PDF/72KB) readings at the zone boundary are hardly above background."

"Occasional brief readings of slightly heightened radiation – occasionally reported in scaremongering fashion as "10x normal" – have been detected as far afield as the outskirts of Tokyo, but these are insignificant in a health context. Even if they persisted unbroken for a year, local dosages at such a level would be no more than powerplant workers are allowed in normal times: and nuclear powerplant workers' cancer rate is actually lower than in the general population. Measurable blips in background radiation may be detectable around the world in coming weeks, and will no doubt be heavily reported on, but they will be more insignificant still."

Whipping up hysteria to push a POV, whether religious or political, whether innocently or with malignant intent, ends up debasing the POV one is trying to promote.