CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
granville1 said:
“you take on a condescending lecturer's tone when you attempt to dismiss religion, falsely insisting as unquestionable the proposition that the “real” world is matter and that the non-real world “where angels exist” is the opposite, which you erroneously term “anti-matter”. You seem unaware that anti-matter is not supernatural, and no scientist claims that it contains supernatural entities.”
Don't worry, I am very aware. The real physical world, which we can touch and see, is dominated by matter particles. The non-physical world, what you cannot see or touch, is dominated by anti-matter particles. AS YOU CAN CLEARLY READ ABOVE. DON'T INVENT FALSE CLAIMS TO TRY TO DEFEAT ME. BE A FAIR PLAYER. DON'T USE CHEAP SHOTS OR LOW BLOWS.
Matter and anti-matter belong to 2 DIFFERENT UNIVERSE, OR WORLDS IF YOU PREFER.
Scientific American magazine wrote in 2010: “A shadow cosmos in our midst may be as dynamic as the visible one, and an entire universe may be interwoven silently with our own.”.
I think you need to up-date GRANVILLE1.
granville1 said:
“For example, you take on a condescending lecturer's tone when you attempt to dismiss religion, falsely insisting as unquestionable the proposition that the “real” world is matter and that the non-real world “where angels exist” is the opposite, which you erroneously term “anti-matter”. You seem unaware that anti-matter is not supernatural, and no scientist claims that it contains supernatural entities.”
Matter: “generally is a substance (often a particle) that has rest mass and (usually) also volume. The volume is determined by the three-dimensional space it occupies, while the mass is defined by the usual ways that mass is measured. Matter is also a general term for the substance that makes up all observable physical objects.”
Anti-matter: “In particle physics, antimatter is material composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particless of ordinary matter but have opposite charge and quantum spins. Antiparticles bind with each other to form antimatter in the same way that normal particles bind to form normal matter. Furthermore, mixing matter and antimatter can lead to the annihilation of both, in the same way that mixing antiparticles and particles does, thus giving rise to high-energy photons (gamma rays) or other particle–antiparticle pairs. The end result of antimatter meeting matter is a release of energy proportional to the mass as the mass-energy equivalence equation, E=mc2 shows.“
Reference Wikipedia.
GRANVILLE1, you can say whatever you want, BUT DO NOT CALL ME A LIAR!
If you want more acurate info, watch the movie “Angels & Demons” which explains in more details this reality.
granville1 said:
“Worse, Boorman compounded his spurious “mystery” by presenting Church prelates as so blind and stupid that they are accusing Merrin of “Satanism”. Merrin, one of the Church's greatest minds; Merrin, who successfully exorcised a person in Africa twelve years earlier; Merrin, who died in one last heroic attempt at exorcism … is now a SATANIST??? This is an insult both to the Church and the saintly Merrin himself … but the severest casualty is common sense.”
See, that’s exactly why the movie bombed on the opening day…because of the high level of ignorant spectators that were present in the theater. It’s been 36 years that you saw “EXCORCIST 2†GRANVILLE1 and you still don’t understand the point.
In real life, the Catholic Church or Vatican SHOWS NO MERCY FOR A PRIEST THAT HAS DISOBEYED A DIRECT ORDER. In the first “EXCORCISTâ€, we see a messenger delivering a telegram to Father Merrin as he was taking a walk. He reads it. But us as the viewers, we have no solid clue of what was written in the letter. In real life, before a priest is chosen to perform an exorcism, HE MUST FIRST GO THROUGH A COMMITEE AND PASS A HEALTH TEST. The age has no much importance. But if a priest is found to have health problems, LIKE A WEAK HEART, he can by no means perform an exorcism.
Clearly Father Merrin disobeyed protocols. For his error of judgment, he endangered the life of 3 living persons and causing the death of 2 priests. AN UNFORGIVABLE MISTAKE, EVEN THROUGH THE EYES OF THE ALMIGHTY.
Â
granville1 said:
“Every time you are presented with eyewitness testimony to anomalies in “Robby's” case, your immediate and consistent – “knee-jerk” – response is that all these witnesses are “lying” and “liars”.”
Everyone is entitle to believe what they want. In life, there are two sides to every story, BUT ONLY ONE ABOSLUTE TRUTH. Example: What goes up, must come down. Always. To help understand why I don't believe in all the supernatural activities which alledgely occured to Robby's case, well the “Amityville” case is the best answer I can give…
What happened in the AMITYVILLE case? What drove Ronald Defeo Jr. to massacre his entire family? Was it a voice from a demon? Was he possessed from a dead entity? Was the house really haunted? Was he on drugs? Was he suffering from schizophrenia? Was the house really constructed over an ancient Indian burial ground? Or was he just insane? ANSWER: NONE OF THE ABOVE.
The claim that Ronald DeFeo Jr. used to defend himself, saying that spirits told him to kill his parents was rejected. Historians and Native American leaders stated that there is insufficient evidence to support that the burial ground ever existed. DeFeo Jr. killed his parents in order to collect the life insurance policies of his parents. The main motive was MONEY. Defeo was a junky and he needed money to buy his goods. Since he had a bad relationship with his father, Ronal DeFeo invented a weak and unstable story in order to legally inherit his parent’s capital. He killed his brothers and sisters in order to leave no witnesses of his sick, dirty, twisted and egocentric selfish act. DeFeo Jr. was a loser, nothing more. After that whole and unfortunate ordeal, the Luzt couple, driven by greed, found a way to capitalize on the massacre and invented a preposterous and ridiculous story about a haunted house and poltergeist activities. Which ultimately they were found guilty of inventing and manipulating a sad event, trying to turn the situation into their own advantage.
See, that wasn’t so hard after all. Like I said before, first there is fiction. Then, well sadly there is reality.
Father Halloran was brought at the last minute in Robby's exorcism. He didn't even know what the hell was going on at first. This is what he said:
“Although Father Bowdern remained convinced until his death in 1983, Halloran later gave a statement expressing his skepticism. He claimed that he was unable to either confirm or deny that the boy was actually possessed. According to Allen's book, Halloran is alleged to have said that he saw nothing beyond that capable of a boy of Roland's age: there was no demonstration of super-human strength (even though at one point Roland is alleged to have broken Halloran's nose), and Roland did not speak in tongues because Roland (or the possessing spirit) refused to converse in Latin. On the occasions that Roland did speak Latin, Halloran stresses that he only seemed to repeat words and phrases that he had heard numerous times during the rites of exorcism.”
These are facts. I am not inventing anything GRANVILLE1.
Â
 Â
granville1 said:
“As good a time as any to laugh and leave.”
For a true hardcore movie fanatic, IT’S NEVER A GOOD TIME TO LEAVE.
A true movie fanatic does exactly like Lieutenant Kinderman does. After the movie has ended, NO MATTER HOW BAD IT IS, he likes to dissect and turn the movie upside down to the point that there is nothing left. A true movie fanatic does not get up of his seat until the movie is done. Not even if the movie theater is on fire, he does not get up. Not even if he wants to take a piss, he does not get up. Not even if there is a bomb threat, he does not get up. Not even if he is about to have a heart attack, he does not get up. Not even if a gigantic meteor is about to hit the theater…guess what…HE DOES NOT GET UP!
If Manchester United is losing 4-0 against Brazil in the final World Cup round, a true hardcore and devoted fan will never get up and leave the Stadium. Worse, even after the match is done, he will go to a bar with friends and talk about the complete match all over again. Worse, even after when he goes home, he will talk about it with his wife over diner. Worse, even after diner is done, he will turn on the TV and watch the whole god damn match again. Worse, even before going to bed he will make a prayer to God and ask him to watch over the whole England team. Worse, even on his death bed, just when he is about to die, his last dying words will be…â€long live Manchester Unitedâ€. NOW THAT’S A TRUE FANATIC!
 FANATICS NEVER LEAVE THERE SEATS! PERIOD!
Â
granville1 said:
 “It's a question of whom you want to believe.”
It’s not a matter of who you want to believe…it’s a matter of WHAT you want to believe.
On many occasions in the past, the Catholic Church has been known to believe in ideas that were not true at all. Not only that, but if you didn’t share their opinion you were considered as a HERETIC and condemned to death. For instance, they firmly believed that the earth was flat and endless. Was that true? NO. They also believed that the earth was the center of our galaxy. Was that correct? NO.
What is the moral? In life it is important to believe in the right thing. To believe in what is real and tangible, and not believe in the fruit of our own imagination. Like Christopher Columbus once said: “Life Has More Imagination Than We Carry In Our Dreamsâ€.
granville1 said:
Are you by chance, BBELZEBUB, a scientific materialist?
Dude if my all time favorite horror movie is “THE EXCORCIST”, what does that tell you? I am mostly very religious. But unlike most religious persons, I am “open minded”. I like to read scientific books and magazine in order to acheive a better understanding of how the world of the demons and angels trully functions. Nothing wrong with that. What do you believe in GRANVILLE1?
Hello GRANVILLE!
First of all I don't recall you returning my greeting which is very rude and which suggest an egocentric behavior.
Second. “Denial” and “digration” suggests that you are a person that tends to run away when things get too hot. Suggesting that you don't know what to answer or you are too weak to confront your oponent.
Third. I already apologized before hand that I have a tendency to be “peremptory” in my comments. Which is a sign of politeness.
Fourth. If I type your name or anyone elses name in capital letter it is only to make it easier to know to whom I am replying. Nothing more. It is nothing grave.
Fifth. I did not directly attack you and point out all of your defects like you did. That is not the way to treat a new member and especially a fan of “The Excorcist” franchise.
Sixth. It makes things much easier to follow when you make multiple posts, thus completely isolating every comment to the max. When condensing multiple comments in one post, it makes the reading long, boring, tedious and at times, confusing.
Seventh. I am not here to fight or bring someone else down. I am here to have fun and exchange views with other members in the world.
Eight. This is your thread. What is the point to start a thread if you are not going to defend it.
Finally. What do you say that we cut the crap and let two “pseudo-pedantic” individuals have fun?
 There are a lot of things out there that I don’t know. And I’m always greatfull when someone has something to teach. When you don’t know something GRANVILLE1, there is no shame in admitting it. Shame is not admitting it,
because instead of being a “sageâ€, you end up being a “clownâ€. Never forget these two wise proverbs…1- “One Should Learn Before One Teachesâ€
2- “He Who Answers Without Knowledge, He Is A Foolâ€.
Now, how about we shake hands and start all over. My name is BEELZEBUB, and you are?
ReganMacNeilfan said:
Great answers granville1. 🙂 Did I say the right thing beezlebub? Want to make sure now! Sheesh! 🙁
FANTASTIC! Very precise. That's how I like it. Formal and clear.
ReganMacNeilfan said:
“Great info, some I never knew about.”
On the next occasion, don't forget to mention who you are actually thanking. Not being a big thing I just hate it when someone tries to steal the trophy from someone else.
granville1 said:
“Thus, the story is complete in itself. It needs no embellishment or creation of false mysteries.”
Wrong. “EXORCIST†is not perfect. The story is not complete in the movie. It is very, very, very good. But it needs just a little embellishment. I will be very strict with “THE REMAKEâ€, as I have my own personal script and screenplay already done for a while now. Correcting all the invisible mistakes and answering EVERY QUESTION POSSIBLE. I also have scripts and screenplays for “remakes†of “EXORCIST 2â€, “EXORCIST 3â€, “EXORCIST: PREQUEL†and “EXORCIST 5â€. I do this as a hobby.
I also have storys for “DEMONS 3” and “DEMONS 4” for Dario Argento. Storys for “FLATLINERS 2” and much more…Â
Yes I am a very big movie fan.
Â
granville1 said:
“The filmed bombed under its own weight (EXCORCIST 2).”
The movie mainly bombed because John Boorman was a high class visionary and a very open minded director. The audience however, was very narrow minded and old fashioned at the time. Science Fiction movies were not popular at all. The studios did not want them at all. Neither did the public. Thats where John Boorman played with fire and got burned. The “synchronizer” gadget was too much for the crowd. Also the audience at the time prefered a slow paced movie with a lot of tension and easy to follow. Again, here Boorman went over the edge too fast as he chose a psychadelic/frenetic style aproach which confused everyone, and ultimately played against him.
Oh yeah, Blatty didn't help the cause either…
Â
granville1 said:
“Hardly. Probably most of the people in that particular theater did not even know that Blatty was there. Even if they did, you are taliking about a single incident in a single theater…”
Do you know what it takes to start a fire GRANVILLE1? Just a little spark. That little single incident was enough to start a very big fire.
And yes, everyone knew that Blatty was there. Thats why its on WIKIPEDIA. It was the grand premiere. Boorman was also present.
granville1 said:
“Nor was there any mystery or question as to why Regan was possessed to begin with. She was not part of a new generation of holy people Satan was attacking via possession. Rather – and quite simply – Regan was selected for possession by the demon for the explicit reason…”
Now where did you come up with that conclusion GRANVILLE1?
When I first saw the “EXORCISTâ€, I was 6 years old. Scared the living shit out of me. Thanks a lot dad.
After that, just like Blatty, I developed a tremendous passion about exorsism. Just like Blatty, I did an extensive research throughout many years. Learning everything there is to know about possession.
1- Do you know how a person gets possessed in the first place?
2- Do you know the 3 basic rules for being possessed?
3- Do you know what laws a demon must respect before entering a living person?
4- Do you know what kind of persons a demon can possess?
5- Do you know what kind of persons he cannot possess, and why he cannot possess?
6- Can a demon possess someone just for fun or out spite or out of vengeance?
If you can answer all these questions GRANVILLE1 than you are an expert and I will shut my mouth and call you “The Lord Of The Flies”.Â
