Has anyone watched zeitgeist?

Question

i just watched it and now im not sure what to think,...im really stressed about it tho..if you have watched it, give me your complete input. if you havent watched it, then it is on youtube put in zeitgeist: the movie- full, final version. please tell me what you think, but be prepared...seriously.

Answer 1

yes i did a good one!!

Answer 2

Yes, I've seen it. Not worth getting stressed up about. Much of it is rehashing of disproven or discredit theories.

I consider it to be an intellectually dishonest documentary, not because of the filmmakers personal bias, but because of its disregard for the truth. There is so much questionable statements that can easily be refuted, or controversial points that have legitimate opposing views that should have been presented.

- Regarding part 1: Jesus

The "Mythology of Jesus" theory was an obscure and generally dismissed theory.

It has gained exposure due to author "Acharya S" and her collaboration with the Zeitgeist filmmaker. (She is also author of the films companion guide). But even the casual but astute viewer will find considerable silliness in the some of the conjectures where practically any numerical or astrological connection 'proves' mytholical derision. Son=sun? Three stars in Orions belt = three kings? Virgo = Mary because the astrological sign sort of looks like an M? Who buys this stuff?

Some other views:

" The idea of Jesus as a myth is rejected by the majority of biblical scholars and historians. In 2004, Richard Burridge and Graham Gould stated that they did not know of any "respectable" scholars that held the view today. Robert E. Van Voorst has stated that biblical scholars and historians regard the thesis as "effectively refuted"."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_...

For a point-by-point analysis, see http://www.conspiracyscience.com/article...

For more rebuttals, see http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

- Regarding Part II: 9/11

It should be noted upfront that being skeptical of the 'official version' of anything presented by the government or media, is a good thing for society. And it should also be noted that questioners of 9/11 'offical versions' range from genuine intellectual pursuits of greater truths, to bizarre interpretations specifically intended to support a unwavering point of view.

The Zeitgeist filmmaker is part of that spectrum that has bought into the theory that the government orchestrated the whole thing. Unfortunately the evidence they selected and presented was sloppy and much of it easily disproved, even by members of the Truth movement. (I've heard some speculate this may have been a red-herring to discredit the 'truth' movement).

For a point by point analysis, see http://www.conspiracyscience.com/article...



- Regarding Part III: Men behind the curtain

As a liberatarian, I found this part to have had the most potential in exposing abuses of government and men in power. Instead, it trots out tired long disproven conspiracy theories.

"Income Tax law Doesn't exist" theory - Very stale. Consistently disproven over-and-over again. No new information, just new victims going to jail that fall for these arguments. Very sad.

"Federal Reserve System is owned by international bankers" - Still a common conspiracy theory. Still wrong. The Federal Reserve System, is headed by the Board of Governors, a Government Agency (look it up - http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/ind... ). The Federal Reserve branches can definitely be considered tightly regulated corporations owned by their member banks, all of which must be American-owned by law. It is receives regular audits, and is overseen by congress.

For a point-by-point analysis, check out:

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-...

Other views:

"There is no shortage of information which refutes this viewpoint. But this type of conspiracy relies on two elements common to web surfers: First, they're only willing to check facts at the most superficial level, which usually means they'll read a message or watch a clip just once before forming an opinion and moving on. " Ref:

http://media.wildcat.arizona.edu/media/s...

"...(a) common problem in the film: presenting something in such a shallow manner without further corroboration or scholarly evidence." - Ref:

http://gauntlet.ucalgary.ca/story/12284

There are those who defend the film because they believe that agenda+motive is more important than truth. There is a certain irony here since the films overarching thesis is to be wary of those who would obfuscate the truth in an attempt to persuade others to their point of view.  

Answer 3

Yes and its a propaganda piece.  I'm atheist and still thought it was a bunch of baloney.  There are some pieces of truth but overall its a Christian smear campaign.

Answer 4

yes here is a link for those that have not seen it

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

also some other relevant links

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/911...

http://www.threeworldwars.com/nwo-timeli...

http://unveilingthem.com/SecretCovenant....

altho i ll bet 99.9% of those that even read this will not bother to  read more then a sentence or two as most are just to happy to have there heads buried in the sand i say to you take the red pill and wake up  

Answer 5

I am to atheist, I didn't enjoy or dislike Zeitgeist.  It was interesting.  Toward the end about chip implanting and one world government was a little scary.  Its worth the watch if you have the free time I suppose.