Posts Tagged ‘david sereda’

The Boyd Bushman Hoax and Appeal to Authority Fallacy

July 11, 2012 3 comments

Boyd Bushman being interviewed by the mathematician, UFO investigator, theoretical physcist and New Ager, David Sereda

An image of one of Boyd supposedly demonstrating anti-gravity

David Sereda, idiot New Ager genius

I saw this comment on YouTube, which was in reply to someone who said that a former employee, a scientific researcher and inventor, in other words a research and development worker, named Boyd Bushman, was a fraud. Whether he really was an employee of Lockheed I don’t know, but he does have at least one patent. But so, in reply to the one calling him a fraud, someone made an illogical comment and perpetuated/parroted a common logical fallacy used by Big Bangers and Evolutionists/Mainstream Science cultists/anti-fundamentalist Christians (fundamentalists are also known as Reformed Christians aka Calvinists and wrongly as conservative Christians who are usually Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodists, and Free Will (Arminian) Christians, though some Reformed Christians do call themselves conservatives, which I think is confusing):

“Don’t you love all the experts on youtube who think they are smarter than a senior scientist from lockheed martin.. Yea, all the while they are working at mcdonalds, yet when they are on the internet they suddenly become expert physicists, describing how experts from Lockheed are wrong and are frauds.. Google patents – Boyd Bushman

My reply:

Just because someone works for Lockheed or performed odd experiments doesn’t mean they know what they are talking about or won’t do deceptive things, AT ALL. A good example is mainstream scientists: they spread bad theories like the big bang and evolution, and stars-from-gas using the good base of the scientific method, why?: money and fame, and many of them have narcissism disorder (narcissists tend to be at the front of the face of everything in the world, including governments. That is because of their ill desire for large amounts of attention and praise).

Boyd even, in one video deliberately talks very vague in a childish and unhelpful way, childish in that he’s not saying anything specific but what it is common for any seasoned scientist like David Sereda who interviewed him, rather, Boyd said “watch nature”. Well what scientist DOESN’T OBSERVE NATURE?! Hello: NEWTON, EINSTEIN, GALILEO and on and on, and biologists regularly attempt to copy God’s work, looking for new industrial or medical chemicals in plants and animals.

Leedskalnin, was he a scientist? Do you know who he is? He was the “McDonalds cashier” scientist as a narcissistic scientist  might say, but despite being a “nobody” lacking college degrees still made an enormous monument using what seemed to be by a combination of antigravity and the use of a traditional weights, levers and pulley moving method. To use the McDonalds cashier insult is a bad stereotype, since genius and truth spring as much from idiots and the lowly as much as the wealthy and elite-schooled; it’s a very wrong stereotype.

Another reason it’s not wise to make fun of McDonald’s employees, is because, supposing for all you know you’re making fun of someone who only has a part time job is an employee there and yet has expertise in some field of physics or some other science field, like logic, theology, maths or physics (and does it take a great imagination to consider that many McDonald’s cashiers are college or university students in some science class, including physics?) and may even be a paid teacher of any of those, maybe even a theoretical physics teacher, which is are types people like yourself usually exalt above as superior persons. And in this so called “bad world economy” it’s very likely that many people of prestige have some second lowly job, especially being that theoretical science isn’t an easy job to profit from. If you hadn’t noticed Michio does a lot of interviews, do you think he does them all for free? Someone of prestige with many high degrees could have some second lowly job just to get rid of the last few payments they own on a loan or to get a loan, or make the final payments on whatever or to help care for a new baby or adopted son or daughter they have to live comfortably.

Back to Leedskalnin: you could reasonably think of him as a type of Boyd Bushman, because tho he was able to pull off amazing things, he didn’t say anything useful enough to be able to duplicate his feats, instead he gave a theory which was so vague (like Boyd) it amounted to vain showing off. That is the case with Boyd. Boyd, Leedskalnin, Maurice Ward (supposed inventor of Starlite) and Hutchison are, in comparison to the inventor Morgado, the inventor of the MYT Engine and Tesla useless people, and shameful even.

Rather than mocking McDonald’s cashiers as being stupid and unreliable for scientific truth and as none being people with any expertise in science, it’s Mainstream Scientists, including any atheist, humanist, pagan, Armininan, New Age, Hindu, Buddhist or Muslim ones, who should be mocked, who should be called “kooks” or “crackpots”. But you shouldn’t say that to just anyone’s face, because you wouldn’t want to unnecessarily insult someone or provoke a violent person to harm you or someone else. They should be called those things if they teach their bad beliefs or endorse them by name, like saying, “Yes being a Muslim is good” or “There’s nothing wrong with being a pagan” or “Fundamentalism is bad (fundamentalism is just belief in basic teachings of the Bible necessary for being a good Christian).” I’m not saying that just because someone is a kook or crackpot or stupid that they can’t come up with anything useful or don’t do anything useful or that nothing useful can be learned from accidental discoveries they make, just that any severely bad teachings they have or believe would make them those things, as opposed to simply having some lowly job at McDonald’s and/or not having any degrees or prestigious awards or prestigious scientists agreeing with you or some popular people.

Also, to attack someone as having illegitimate critique skill or judgment merely because they work at McDonald’s, or as cashier or some other “lowly” job there is called an “Ad Hominem Fallacy”, which is when you personally insult someone for something they do that is far from directly related to what they arguing about, merely talking about or endorsing.

Related Articles:

Autodidactic Hall of Fame – Self-educated People Who’ve Made a Difference

6 Uneducated Amateurs Whose Genius Changed the WorldRead more: 6 Uneducated Amateurs Whose Genius Changed the World (

1 Cor 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1 Cor 1:26 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth.
1 Cor 1:27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;
1 Cor 1:28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,
1 Cor 1:29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. – ESV

Psalm 8:2: From out of the mouths of infants and sucklings you have established strength on account of your adversaries, to cause the silence of the enemy and vengeful foe.

Matthew 11:25: “Jesus said, ‘I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from wise and intelligent people and have revealed them to infants.'”

John 7:24: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”

UPDATE: Recently Boyd Bushman was shown in a video as having “disclosed” that aliens and their ships were here on Earth at Area 51 and “24 hours a day working on UFOs”. In one picture he showed what was to me an obviously fake alien, and used poorly made photographs to use as his evidence. The cameraman interviewing him seemed to be doing a deliberately poor job interviewing him and even keeping the camera in focus or used a deliberately poor camera. One commenter on showed an obscenely titled link to a model statuette of the same fake-looking alien Boyd had shown in one of his crappy pictures. Even though that was pointed out in the comments, the one doing so did not get any votes up as far as I could see, rather those praising Boyd and/or while criticizing his and the camera man’s method of presentation were the ones getting votes up. Why is Youtube filled with such gullible idiots? I wonder if the Internet naturally attracts narcissists and those who are gullible and wanting attention, and those who are not gullible and attention-craving abstain from wasting their time voting, in general, to their hurt in many cases. I say that because votes and comments can persuade others to be stupid and evil or wise in a morally good way.

Boyd Bushman Fake Alien (Doll) Hoax Picture Boyd Bushman Fake Alien (Doll) Hoax Picture Comparison
Obviously a doll, and in the second comparison picture it’s obvious the “teeth and smile” are jpeg noise from picture compression. Being that the keywords on the were the same obscene ones as the page of the full picture of the doll it’s obvious this is from the hoaxer, having a laugh at everyone.

By the way, if anyone does want to invest their time or money in a real anti-gravity saucer project, one you can see being made in real time, consider funding my project at, which some asshole/s on Craigslist keep flagging away. If you have any mechanical engineering skills and knowledge of physics and would like to apply for a job helping to build this craft attraction go ahead and email me.

Categories: Logic Fallacies Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Quantum Communication, Faith, and the Solution to the Hardest Bible ”Contradiction”

October 30, 2010 Leave a comment

I was watching Quantum Communication, by David Sereda, and it reminded me of a verse I think about often, which is the verse that many people try out, and abandon Christianity over, because their experiment failed, and didn’t get what they wanted. I call it the “if you have enough faith verse”:

I tell you the truth: if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you. – Matthew 17:20

A similar verse is:

If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and planted in the sea,’ and it will obey you. – Luke 17:6

I wrongly interpreted these verses (no thanks to those false Christians, Arminian Pentecostals and the inventors and preachers of the Self-Esteem and Self-Affirmation junk, who are also New Agers and Buddhists, like David Sereda and the Dali Lama), to mean that if you have enough faith that you can do something, that you can do that thing. But that’s what Jesus meant as I explain below.

Many atheists are former Christians, who believe that they had enough faith when they prayed for something they wanted, but didn’t get it. And many Christians will unjustly accuse other Christians or former Christians of having not had enough faith, which was why the Christians and former ones they accuse didn’t get what they wanted. I have been trying to figure out why this verse is not an error for years, trying to make sense of it even though it very strongly seemed to me to be a fatal error in the Bible, as close to a mistake, or contradiction in the Bible as I could find, besides a few others. And once again, I thought about context, how a verse will make sense from the immediate or larger context. By immediate context I mean a verse or verses before or after a certain verse and by larger context I mean a verse or verses that doesn’t come right after or before a certain verse, but can still help you to understand that certain verse.

I realized while watching that video, thanks to God opening my eyes (because I desired to know the truth in order to better please Him and that desire was also thanks to Him), that God didn’t simply mean that having faith that you can do something will allow you to do it (otherwise people who are deluded into believing they can do things that aren’t possible would be able to do them, and figuratively speaking insane people wouldn’t be insane, because their faith would make their beliefs true and give them supernatural abilities). When Jesus said “if you have [even a small amount] of faith [you can do what is usually impossible and what is miraculous]”, he meant it in the context of the other things God had taught, which was that the more you are obedient to God, the more likely he will fulfill your desires (so long as they are in keeping with God’s laws, and your will will be in tune with His), but evil intent and desires and disobedience will, at some points in time determined by God, prevent you from accomplishing what you desire, and some point, you will get almost nothing you desire, and end up in Hell for your choice to continually obey God.

Verses that prove this are:

The sacrifice of the wicked is detestable—how much more so when brought with evil intent! – Proverbs 21:27

Salvation is far from the wicked, for they do not seek out your decrees. – Psalm 119:155

Yahweh is far from the wicked but he hears the prayer of the righteous. – Proverbs 15:29

When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures. – James 4:3

And all the verses in which God goes against the desires of those who disobey Him, which are a very large amount.

And really, this is common sense, and I should have realized it: Would God really allow a person to accomplish whatever they wanted to do, like cause all the lakes in the world to become poisonous for a month, or turn the moon purple, or cause 1/3 of all the babies in the world to die, and because they convinced themselves that they could at that time, and yet had intense hatred directly for Him? Did Jesus really mean, “If you want to kill millions of people out of hatred for them not pleasing you or God, and so say to America, ‘All American citizens and those who have joined with them there, fall dead, and they will all fall dead, if you have faith the size of a grain of mustard seed”? The more logical interpretation, being that Jesus only preached obedience to God, was that he meant if you have a request that is in keeping with God’s laws, especially his stated will, that you will accomplish your desire. Moses was a good example of this, who because of his faith, and his desire to do God’s will, was able to accomplish the great miracles God set him out to do.

Of course, this will anger those who pray to have some luxury item, or to marry the most beautiful woman or man in the world, and so on, who don’t want to obey God at all, and want to live life how they want to, but that is how it is: God is far from those who hate Him, but close to those who love him.

”23 Minutes In Hell” and Liar, George Noory’s Confused ”state of mind”

July 13, 2010 3 comments

Last night, George Noory had on a guest, Bill Wiese, obviously a Christian, who gave his account of being in Hell. At first George said it was a near death experience, but he was later corrected. Odd that being that he had his own OBE (out of body experience) that he’d mess up the details, especially on a rare incident like seeing Hell. You could say it was disrespectful on George’s part. Anyways, George, who prides himself on keeping his opinion out of the stories he gets, wrecked this story by, guess, injecting his opinion to try and refute this Christian, who was obviously the fundamentalist type, but the good kind, not the “be good by obeying God and not rejecting your forgiveness to get to Heaven” type (also known as Arminians). Unfortunately, sadly, Bill was being cowardly or weak when George rudely tried to refute him: George gave his usual Universalist Christian cliche, “I know a lot of people who don’t believe in God, I have on psychics who don’t do anything wrong, they don’t murder anyone. I think Hell is just a state of mind” reply which he gives when he hears, “If you don’t believe in God you’re going to Hell.” When George, or anyone says that, he’s saying it without evidence, and playing God over right and wrong. In list form, this is what he is doing wrong when he says such a thing:

1) He’s contradicting the commandments, which Jesus also repeated as valid, as did every Christian in the Bible. No one said (as sick Christians do), “Oh that’s legalistic to try and obey God to the letter” or “perfectly”. None said, “Just believe what you want” or “your religion is personal” or “God won’t punish reasonable people” or “right and wrong is whatever George Noory or I say it is.” For George to say that a person is “good”, besides being absurd, since there are hardly even any good true Christians, is also absurd because he’s pretending, obviously pretending, to know the hearts and to have seen the lifetime of deeds of the guests he has on. Can he really know what is going on in over a thousand peoples’ lives, even enough to say they’ve never murdered anyone? So he’s been watching them every hour of their life? That’s like a 16-year-old on facebook or myspace or bebo with over 200 friends, pretending that every single one of them is a close friend, and that they know them. I don’t think so. At best you can really “know” about twenty people after having worked with them for a few years, and a typical 16-year-old American or British person would know at best about 41 people from having been around them often. The Bible clearly states that it is wrong to deny God’s existence and that people who refuse to love him will not be forever tolerated in any place other than Hell. It clearly causes a disturbance of the peace, at the very least God’s, and disgusts every Christian, as in real Christ-followers, to see rebellion. A Christian may not make it apparent right away that you’re disturbing them by acting impure, and they might even find it funny for a a while, but after, it disgusts them. God wants, in the end, the majority of rebellious people be sent away, to disturb only other rebels, and get what they deserve for their hostility.

2) George is contradicting his claim that he doesn’t give his opinion, which he says he doesn’t do because the audience doesn’t want to hear him, but what the guests have to contribute. But he is a hypocrite obviously, a false Catholic (or an example of a typical Catholic, hypocritical), because when he hears the truth about God preached, his evil heart kicks back in it’s taking offense at being called “evil” or “not good”. He’s obviously bigoted, as are all who hate Christians.

3) George is contradicting his teaching that right and wrong is just whatever you believe it to be (even going so far as to teach that Hell is just a state of mind), and might as well be teaching that reality is whatever you want it to be. It’s a contradiction, because when then isn’t what a fundamentalist Christian believes to be just as real? It also shows hypocrisy and bigotry to imply that only Christians and murderers can’t affect anything with their beliefs.

4) It’s also a contradiction for George to imply or say that murderers and Christians can’t affect anything with their beliefs, since his hostile attitude towards them clearly implies that he does believe that what they believe can affect reality. It affects reality in this way: what people believe determines their behavior, including their speech, and many people know this, and so try and change the education people get in school, what they see and hear on the “news”, in movies, what they read in books, even going so far as to make corrupt translations of the Bible to fool people into believing things like that Peter was “the rock” or making it hard to determine if Jesus was not God (something Catholics have done with many translations).

5) By itself, it makes no point to say that “Hell is a state of mind.” If George’s point was simply that Hell was a state of mind, then how does that change that people will be in extreme torment? It’s just as pointless as saying, “I think Heaven is a state of mind.”

6) There is no evidence that Hell is a state of mind.

7) It makes no sense to say that Hell is a state of mind, because Hell is described the Bible as a place, just as it describes Heaven as a place and other locations, and besides that, there is indirect evidence that it does exist from the testimony of Christians and non-Christians whose soul or spirit has left their body. It’s just as much a place as is the bottom of the deepest part of the ocean, which though is rarely seen from eyes behind plastic or glass or from a few feet away, can be seen indirectly in other ways. A person would be thought of as fool to say that the bottom of the deepest part of the ocean is a state of mind, or that the farthest place in the universe from Earth is a state of mind, or that the center of the Earth is a state of mind or that the freezing Arctic is a state of mind.

8) Illogical bias: Does George also believe that Heaven and angels are also a state of mind? If not, why? Clearly he’s biased since rarely if ever does a person say that Heaven is a state of mind, except perhaps people of a certain religion, like Buddhism maybe. For a part Christian like George to dismiss Hell, but not Heaven, makes his bias obvious. He’s effectively saying, “I like this part of the Bible, but I personally hate this part, so don’t believe it.” Why would Heaven be real but not Hell?

9) Hypocrisy: George has, with bitterness in his voice, stated that he would not forgive someone who murdered a family member. He said this after a guest caller made a silly rant about how he had been taught from some spiritual beings or being, that his murdered family member wanted to be murdered (and so everything was okay) and so he forgave the murderer when he found himself next to him. If George isn’t willing to forgive murderers, why should God? Why shouldn’t God send them to Hell forever if George doesn’t believe they shouldn’t be forgiven? Further, the world figuratively speaking, murdered Jesus, and that was God’s family member, as were, indirectly, the millions of Christians who were killed for being Christ-followers. If God were to not forgive those who murdered or who greatly contributed to those murderers, then more than the number of those who killed Jesus and millions of Christians would be permanently unforgiven, and that may be, but the point is, then why would George feel repelled by the thought of many millions of murderers being in Hell?

10) Another contradiction, in a way, is that if George meant by, “Hell is just a sate of mind and therefore just change your outlook on life” is denying that murderers should be punished, because God wouldn’t send anyone to a prison, which is basically, is what Hell is. Basically, Hell i, “a prison below ground without light and in which you are continually in pain.”

11) Encouraging crime: if George was implying the disgusting cliche which is that, “Life is what you make of it” in other words, “Just change how you view things”, he’s teaching (just as other guests on Coast to Coast have, especially, big surprise, “psychics”), that harming people can be a good thing, or neither right or wrong, if that’s how you want to view it, and that painful punishment for harming someone, can simply be viewed as peaceful and pleasurable and a reward for harming people. And that’s also a contradiction of George’s teaching or encouraging people to hate murderers then.

12) George’s attempt to make it seem like God isn’t harsh/hard/strict/wouldn’t forgive by trying to do away with sending the criminals to prison, and just making it a “state of mind” reminds me of the dumb Arminian line that God didn’t design Hell for humans, but for Satan and demons (for example a Pastor Galen (father of the wifeless Pastor Dustin Galen said that), which is bigoted, because it’s making out humans to be inherently better than angels, like saying, “God didn’t make Hell for whites, but for black people”, on top of that it’s not Biblical in that the Bible teaches that angels are greater than humans, sinless in fact, and the Bible teaches that God predestined all things, including what we choose to do (using direct and indirect acts) and nothing in the Bible says Hell was only intended for sinful angels. On top of that, God clearly is going to send billions of humans to Hell, so what difference does it make if it were designed only for demons? And concerning destiny, why would it be good for God to control the wills of demons, but not humans? George seems to be trying to make it so that God doesn’t seem so bad by believing that he wouldn’t actually send criminals to a prison forever, but would only trick them into thinking that they were in Hell. Why would God simply use a mind-trick or senses-trick? So he’s going to have billions of people scattered about screaming in agony bursting with tears writhing in pain screaming blasphemies while they are in the renewed glorified universe of peace? And where would they be? Would they be scattered here and there among the peaceful and good people who are trying to enjoy the renewed universe and Heaven, or all in a big pile right next to God’s throne? Talk about dumb. There’s no point in keeping them around and it’s not just and makes God out to be a liar, being that he promised justice and perfect eternal peace for those who love him, not eternal torment by listening and seeing or feeling up against them those in eternal torment.

13) Another contradiction is that if reality is just a state of mind, as George implied by his Hell statement and his teaching or implying that reality can be affected by intent, is that murder doesn’t have to be considered murder, but like his ranting guest caller who said that his family member wanted to be murdered, a murderer can simply be a person doing a good deed or helping out by fulfilling a request, among other things, including just being an angel in disguise giving the gift of a peaceful death, even if it was by torturing a person to death.

This “reality is whatever I believe it to be and whatever everyone but fundamentalist Christians or Calvinist Christians want it to be” is clearly a hypocritical and nonsensical teaching. Not surprising to me, on the same show, George had on the narcissist (that includes elitist) scientist David Sereda, who was encouraging everyone to intend the oil spill to go away, and talked about supposed evidence from some prestigious university from some prestigious top physicist that your intentions and “karma” could, he implied, affect in a “positive” way, whatever you wanted to be fixed. He didn’t say positive, but that is what he implied. I point that out because he didn’t give any evidence that you could harm something or make water impure by intending it and doing a “good deed”. His mentioning of karma and “meditating” (on intending things to change, like for the oil spill to go away) by the way, is further of evidence of my belief that he is a Buddhist, though I’ve never heard him say or write that he was. And now that I write that, that’s just more evidence that Buddhists are also confused as to what is real or not (and big surprise since they, or many of them at least, believe that nothing exists, and is just an “illusion”). And now that I write about that, doesn’t that sound like what George was teaching: that reality is just an illusion? The illusion, for many millions, if not billions, sadly, is that George and his fellow host Ian Punnet, and their many psychopathic guests, are good teachers of the truth.

7-15-2010: Yesterday night George was asked if he was religious, or someone said, “I don’t know if you’re religious” and George gave this cliche response, “I’m spiritual”, which besides showing him to be a false Catholic, or not one at all, and just a supporter, shows his ignorance of what “spiritual” means. It simply means, “Having to do with that which is spiritual” WHICH IS TRUE FOR EVERYONE, since everyone processes and outputs information, which is a spiritual thing (you can’t see information itself, it can only be represented, though God may be able to see it directly somehow and allow others to).

7-18-2010: On the absurd Time Travelers show George Noory hosted, I think yesterday night, George lied and misquoted Wiese, asking this rambling deluded guest who never stops talking, Dr. Bruce Goldberg, if (George didn’t say his name, or rather forgot) a guest he had on who had seen Hell, was right to say that (with a sarcastic voice) “if you believe in very religious things, you’re going to Hell” which isn’t what Bill said, and shows more how childish Noory is. What is the difference between a religious and very religious thing? Weird. Was it not sufficient to say “religious things” or “trus in God” or “trust in Christ”? Apparently the names “Jesus” and “Christ” are terrible words to Noory, like rays of sunlight to a vampire. Bill Wiese basically said that Christ must be accepted as God’s (only direct) son and that you must accept him as your saviour (from your sins, as in you must ask God to forgive you for them and trust Jesus suffered the punishment you deserved for them: the shedding of his blood, hanging on a tree, and physical death, and suffering an eternity of pain for all your sins, not just some or certain ones, in a prison called “Hell”). What does that have to do with “things that very much have to do with a system of worship”? (which is what Noory said by “very religious things”). Dr. Goldberg gave a disgusting cliche response, which was something about how scare tactics like that are used when their power is threatened. WHAT POWER? Calvinists have great control over the world? I wish. And like Noory and Goldberg have no power or money interest, no customers? On top of that Goldberg is a hypnotist, taking advantage over weak-willed people and who commands people what to do without them resisting him. What hypocrite he is, taking the Bible out of context to make it appear to be a mere threat, and making an arbitrary attack like that. God’s power is not threatened by ranting morons who believe that time travelers exist and are whoever they feel them to be, and who say that they know what dogs see when they die and believe any fanciful story as long as it doesn’t threaten their beliefs. According to Dr. Bruce Goldberg then, every threat of punishment is about a fear of loss of control or power, it’s never about keeping peace or trying to give or restore peace in any way, and there should be no threat punishment to the breaking of any law nor a fear of being punished for breaking any laws, including abusing children, robbing the poor and needy, discriminating against strangers and murdering the innocent; did you expect the opposite belief from a “doctor” who believes that it’s okay to control the will of another person and to take advantage of them for fun and profit?

A few minutes later yet another caller praised George for not being confrontational to his guests. He sure is s sarcastic lying, conniving, jerk towards those who threaten the control (as in influence they have over others) and income that he and his “Psychic Hotline to Heaven” friends have. Hypocrites.

Hell is no more in the mind than Heaven. If Hell is in the mind, why not Heaven? If only painful things are in the mind, why not pleasurable? To those Satan isn’t blinding, it is obvious that there is no more reason to believe that Hell or Antarctica are “states of mind” or that “we make Hell here on Earth” anymore than Heaven is a state of mind and something we make on Earth. Those are stupid atheist and New Age cliches meant to express a denial of Biblical facts/that the Bible is God’s word, or that the Bible makes literal statements about a place called Hell and what it will be like in Hell, after God sets it on fire.

Ian Punnet Seeks To Have a Bigger MIND

Tonight Ian Punnet just a little while ago said, "wasn’t that great, David Sereda talking about how our natural electric field fluctuates around us" (or something almost exactly like that) and then, "…how big our minds actually get. …we could be having thoughts, right now, that are basically bouncing off of Mars… and [David Sereda] had the math to prove it." What a stupid moron. The night before Ian, once again displaying what a false hypocritical teacher of the Bible he is again, mocked a Christian tarot card reader for saying that a homosexual man who consulted her would go to Hell, and said that the Bible no where says that homosexuals are going to Hell, and then tonight, before the above comments I quoted, seemed to try to weasel his way out of what he said by saying that he had said last night that "straight people aren’t going to Hell anymore than homosexuals." He has no excuse for this attempt to weasel his way out as I had warned him during his show yesterday night, that he had lied, saying to him:

"The Bible doesn’t mention that homosexuality is a sin anywhere" you said, talk about super ignorant:

"’Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.’" – Leviticus 18:22

"’If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.’" – Leviticus 20:13

From Romans 1:

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plainto them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles".

Once again you’ve been shown to be a false teacher. Stop pretending to be an expert on the Bible when you aren’t. You thought the King James was a paraphrase, and taught that on Coast to Coast AM and by that showed you were an ignorant fool. Even the Wikipedia admins know that’s false and those admins are often atheists and hard core liberal Christians.

No doubt your next move will be to find contrived explanations to get rid of these verses and come up with "alternative" interpretations which have no historical support, but which are clearly meant to suit the feelings of evil men like yourself. That you didn’t know these verses were in the Bible, or that you are so evil that you wouldn’t even mention their use, shows what a stupid evil ignorant and hypocrite you are.

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Didn’t you know that Ian Punnet the false Christian?

"The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him." – Proverbs 18:17

The Bible is not your personal play toy, it is not for your private interpretation, it is not for you to twist, it is God’s word, repent and treat it as such or stay condemned.

Jesus gave this parable, can you understand it Ian?:

"Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher. – Luke 6:39-40

You’re not above God, you’re not above his only begotten son Jesus, you’re not above the prophets or the apostles, and you’re not above me.

No big surprise to me Ian uses a blog that blocks the word "homo" blocking me from using that word. So, it’s okay for him to use the word, but not me or anyone else? What gross stupidity.

Then, before babbling about the holy grail, Ian let a called called J.C. on, yet another false Christian, who ranted at Ian and Ian mocked him for his stupidity. What a hypocrite.

"For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye." – Matthew 7:2-5

Concerning David Sereda’s nonsense about the power of human conciousness (David is so blind and confused and ignorant about spiritual matters, despite claiming to love all the religions of the world – which is a contradiction if he includes Hyper-Calvinism – that he to no end kept misusing the word "conciousness" in place of the word "will" while talking about it on Coast to Coast AM yesterday. Ian, no surprise to me, was giddy over Sereda’s babbleand Sereda’s calling on the world to wish solar flares away with their combined "conciousness".

On Coast to Coast A.m. David said he believed that [the elitists?] in the U.S. government have conspired keep secret what human conciousness is capable of, and that animals were in direct contact with God because they were pure of heart (does that include snakes, scorpions, sharks, lions, tigers, and harmful parasites like ticks and fluke worms, and other animals that would like to eat you (unless trained not to do so of course)?

Here’s a test for you human consciousness worshipers who believe that wishful thinking can cause what you want to happen to happen, especially if others are wishing the same thing with you: see if you millions of "just have faith" people can lift a grain of sand one micron into the air with your combined faith. When you accomplish that, maybe then you can give free abortions with your thoughts for the mothers you care oh so much for. You would murder babies for free with your mental powers wouldn’t you? Oh and, when you have the chance, try wishing for the end of injustice, starvation, stupidity, and wishing for peace. I wonder why David and Ian didn’t suggest wishing for that instead of no harmful solar flares? Typical pagans: their priorities are mess, a maddening jumble.