1679 Shares

Has anyone seen Zeitgeist?

Has anyone seen Zeitgeist? Topic: News articles with thesis statements
July 16, 2019 / By Bedivere
Question: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ Im not big on conspiracy theories, but this one kinda has me convinced about the 9/11 conspiracy. If you've seen this film, do you believe what it says? Particularly the accusations that the american government completely planned 9/11, and killed 3,000 of our own people just so we would have an excuse to enter the middle east, all for oil? Why or why not?
Best Answer

Best Answers: Has anyone seen Zeitgeist?

Zoie Zoie | 6 days ago
I consider Zeitgeist 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/articles/zeitgeist/part-two/ - 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/independent-agencies.html ). 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-federal-reserve http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-income-tax http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-war 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/storage/paper997/news/2008/01/28/Opinions/Internet.Idiocy.The.Latest.Pandemic-3171363.shtml "...(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.
👍 260 | 👎 6
Did you like the answer? Has anyone seen Zeitgeist? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: News articles with thesis statements


Zoie Originally Answered: What do you think about zeitgeist?
Zeitgeist is 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/articles/zeitgeist/part-two/ - 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/independent-agencies.html ). 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-federal-reserve http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-income-tax http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/zeitgeist-war 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/storage/paper997/news/2008/01/28/Opinions/Internet.Idiocy.The.Latest.Pandemic-3171363.shtml "...(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.

Sherley Sherley
Hahaha. THat film is a joke among anyone with half a brain. I fact-checked the first 30 minutes of that movie and literally found over 53 factual errors, twisted facts, or half-truths. That movie is nothing but trash. Please, you dont have to believe me. By all means, i hope you wont believe anything anyone says unless you have researched what the person is saying. Im just going to say this. Actually do background research on the movie's claims. Spend 30 minutes researching non-biased sources Then, make up your own mind. I guarantee you will be enlightened. Edit: Oh and i HATE Bush, and im an atheist so its not like i have a biase on the issue.
👍 110 | 👎 -2

Peninna Peninna
There is no going back once you have realized, welcome to the real world. You can check the facts in Zeitgeist, about 9/11, they're matters of public record. I strongly recommend this video, it is not flashy, just a simple presentation, but it addresses the main points very well, and makes the case for 9/11 being an inside job absolute: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...
👍 105 | 👎 -10

Marje Marje
The only thing that is close to the truth in that film is the part about the federal reserve. The first part is destroyed by a multitude of sources here, http://zeitgeistchallenge.com/index.php?... while the zeitgeist film is sorely lacking in sources. The part about 911 is just ridiculous, and I have seen it debunked over and over. If you want to see something that is factual and will wake you up to some things then try these films. Money as debt: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=... Freedom to fascism: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...
👍 100 | 👎 -18

Kristine Kristine
I think everything is a conspiracy. If you can think of it, and smart enough to carry it out, why the fcuk not?? Everybody is "MORE". More greedy, more honest, more evil, more merciful, more... So when you hear of a conspiracy and it benefits a certain few, believe me, if it's logically and scientifically possible, someone somewhere is doing it. Why the hell not? Morals?? That's a concept to preserve our common wealth.
👍 95 | 👎 -26

Kristine Originally Answered: Have the big shot corporations branded The Venus Project and the Zeitgeist Movement as the NWO?
Corporations and governments (especially governments) don't want change. People who are "invested" in the current system will fight to keep things the way they are. This "fight" comes in many different forms, including misinformation (conspiracy theories and the like), name-calling, and ad hominem attacks on particular people, instead of the facts being presented. However, change is coming. It is certain that the next 20 years won't be like the last 20 years. The question is, will we embrace love or fear? Our current monetary economic model is fundamentally flawed. It requires infinite growth, which is impossible on a planet with limited resources. Infinite growth means the economy requires us to keep buying and consuming at an increasing rate. If we stop, then it all falls apart: businesses fail, unemployment rises, the unemployed don't have money to spend in their communities, and the downward spiral begins. Why is change certainly coming? There are many reasons, but here are some main ones: + Peak oil has been reached. There is not enough oil for humanity to continue on the way we have been, but there has been no urgency to find an alternative. Look around you and think about how we use oil. It is everywhere! From your plastic toothbrush to the tires on your car. We are addicted to oil, but it is a limited non-renewable resource that is running out. It may already be too late, but governments don't want people to think about that because it would lead to anarchy. + Technological unemployment is inevitable as our computers and machinery gets better and increases a corporations profits by replacing the largest cost: human labor. It's happening all around us. Farming has long been automated, manufacturing has long been automated, and now the service industry is being automated: self-check-outs, DVD vending machines, stock brokers, travel agents, newspaper classifieds, etc. Get ready for real estate agents to be replaced en masse by FSBO on-line websites. Why do you think unemployment numbers not coming down, but corporations profits are steadily climbing? Corporations have to embrace technology and limit their need on human labour, because if they don't, then their competitors will. + We're destroying the one thing that we all depend on, the Earth, and we're doing to with ever increasing efficiency in the never-ending quest for more profits: pollution of the land/air/water and unsustainable stripping of resources faster than they can possibly be replenished. We must change our ways. The future of our species depends on it. Real change is not made with elections and changing country leaders. Real change is not adding more laws, implementing more restrictions, and giving up personal rights and freedoms. Real change is not "going green" by bringing your own shopping bag to the grocery store. What is real change? First, we have to start by looking at what is important: We have one planet with limited resources that must be carefully managed in a sustainable manner to be available for all future generations. Is money important? Can you breath money or eat money or by sheltered by money? No, money just facilitates exchange so you can obtain necessities. What if we could make available all the necessities of life without money? What if we could do it for everyone on the planet in a sustainable manner? Luckily for us, we can. We have the understanding and advanced technology to do just that. We only lack the maturity as a species to go where we need to be going. The Venus Project is all about using our best knowledge and our best technologies to create a good life for everyone, and to sustainably manage the Earth's resource for all future generations. Anything less shows the immaturity of our species and allows the problems of the past to continue into the future. The leaders of the world's countries will not embrace the idea of The Venus Project. It is too radical and supporting such an idea would likely lead to losing their job. Instead, the movement to switch to a Resource Based Economy must come from the grassroots. There are more of us than there are of them. If the people want it, then it can happen. Right now, it's all about spreading the word of the possibilities we can achieve and the better world we can all live, now and for our future generations. .

If you have your own answer to the question news articles with thesis statements, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.