Models & Illusions Etc - Specific | Models & Illusions Etc - General | Religion & Politics - Specific | Religion & Politics - General

Models & Illusions Etc

Specific Correspondence

15 July 1999 : Ralf Goertz

A psychologist from Germany who is interested in spatial perception and found my page on Oscar Reutersvärd whilst searching for impossible windows.

General E-mails

31 July 2008 : Charles Mutuah

Hi Ma'am,
been up and down your site most of afternoon today and getting pretty impressed by the depth of the content, not to mention the really hilarious stuff you got in there. I googled IPUs and yours was the second place that I got into. You pack quite a brain ma'am… thanks to?… I presume your parents, knowing your considered view on matters religion which I quite share as well. That's the story of another day though. Now, I was also intrigued by your interest in architecture… and you guessed right, I'm one… even if from a far off land… ever heard of Kenya? Have any of those projects been realised or they are pure art to you? Why I ask is because I know it takes considerable energy and time to model stuff like that… I can't imagine one doing it purely for fun when I find it so torturous.
Any way hope we can be in touch… name is Charles, from Kenya.
Will be visiting your site more often… u bet

 

02 August 2008 : Reply

Charles, glad you enjoyed your visit. The modelling is just one of my many hobbies, though I have not done much in recent years, and you're right, it takes a lot of time and effort! They are nowhere near good enough for professional use, but as a competent amateur I'm only doing them for my own enjoyment, and to realise some of the structures that are in one of my novels.

11 November 2007 : Andrea

Hello my name is Andrea. Many compliment for your website, very interesting contents. Please, which is the name of your Dark Doll? I would like to buy one, but is the first time for me in the doll's world, so I'm very confused about it. Thanks for help.

 

12 November 2007 : Reply

Andrea, Miyu is a 60cm Asian Ball-Jointed Doll (ABJD, to differentiate them from European & American ones, for though they may have a similar construction, their aesthetic is entirely different, which is why you'll find most ABJD owners are also fans of manga and animé) from a Japanese company called Volks; they have a English-language site (well, American, anyway!) at http://www.volksusa.com where the basic dolls can be purchased. Other popular and high quality companies are Korean – Dream Of Doll, Luts, and Souldoll. All of the companies sell internationally in $US, so given its currrent weakness, if you're looking to own one of these wonderful dolls, now is a good time!
Clothes are always extra unless you're getting one of the limited and more expensive editions, and tend to cost almost as much as the full-size thing (sometimes more, given the attention to detail); they can be obtained either from each doll's manufacturer, or outside companies who specialise in such things like Dollheart.
Miyu herself is a standard "Mimi" with a different wig, though I kept her lovely green eyes and got some additional hands with different poses; a few more pictures of her can be found here, but they're not very good as I'm having to slowly learn how to take photographs all over again.
A good starting-point for all things related to ABJDs are the Den Of Angels Forums, where owners also post photographs, short illustrated stories, and so on. I also know of a large French forum, so there is probably one in Italian as well; don't be afraid of being new to the hobby (or even just interested but unable to afford one), as everyone is very welcoming.

04 October 2007 : Carrie Baby

I couldn't find any personal usage notes on your website. I'm hoping that you'll allow me to use your Dawn photo on my blog. I have given you credit and posted your website under the photo. If you'd like your photo removed, I'm happy to do so.
my blog: http://rockycha.wordpress.org

 

10 October 2007 : Reply

Carrie, you're more than welcome to use the image if you have credited me. I'm glad you like it.

07 September 2006 : Steve Eaton

The pictures of your garter complete with dates was very helpful to me. Computer nerd here also :)
I have 2 garter snakes that we have had only a week. They are a bit larger than your last pic. There is a quite funny story about how we got them. I have got the one to eat chunks of nightcrawler so far. Gonna try pinkies soon.
Again Great pics :) Steve

29 June 2006 : Sean Coleman

I like one of your photos - the 'underwater sunlight'. It might be here: www.palmyria.co.uk/nature/nature.htm. How did you do that one? From where did you take the photo?

 

02 July 2006 : Reply

This, as with all the other images on the Nature page, are all CGI where I was just messing around with textures and lighting.

27 June 2006 : Tim Spencer

Hey there, I'm bemused, perplexed. I'd go so far as to say confused.
What are you… who are you… your website navigation is quite archaic… I've only been there a few minutes so maybe I can answer some of these questions myself.
What interests me immensely though is that so far I have gleaned that you don't work in retouching, but your skills at retouching are far in advance of most people's I have met who earn good money for claiming to be good retouchers.
Seriously, I am seriously impressed by your retouching skills! I thought I was pretty sharp, but, I'd hire you to make me look better!
Well done, and… ah… well done. I'm confused. Well done.
http://www.studiospooky.tv

01 March 2006 : Caroline Davies

i live in cardiff, wales.
i arrived at your site when looking up bob carlos clarke (a photographer) in google images for my art A-level unit. I noticed the photograph of Rachel Weisz as it looked similar to what clarke's work. this opened up the page with the scans of angelina jolie -whom i collect pictures of. this led me on to explore your site.
im very impressed! sadly my computer skills lack somewhat! i love the 3D designs that you have created. i am a big fan of escher's work and find your designs interesting in the same way. im glad i accidently ended up on your site! ...and thank you for the images of angelina and the one of rachel (agfa promo). all will be useful in my A-level unit.
thankyou!

24 February 2006 : Matt Jones

My name is Matt Jones. I live in Phenix City, Alabama, USA. I got to your site by searching for photos of Rachel Weisz and quickly got to your 3D pages.
I like your 3D work. I fiddle with 3D programs myself quite a bit and got started in CGI with the Amiga 500 many moons ago. I use Truespace for modeling these days.
I am curious as to how you build impossible looking structures in a modeling program. Do you build them as a perspective trick so that rotating the view at all would destroy the whole illusion?
The main reason I am writing is to say "Well Done" in dealing with the Scientology charlatans. I can't tell if you are a "proper Englishwoman" but you certainly have a proper English backbone.
Illegitimis non carborundum.

18 February 2006 : Chris S

i foudn ur site on a search engine just looking for images of a city and i found ur images of the ancient city, and i HAD TO comment that stuff was awsomeeee, im an art student myself and soemtimes we have to create landscapes using image ready or seomthng but this stuff was so awsome i def give u props for this

16 January 2006 : Lamaia

I just want to thank you for all the work you've done on this amazing site.
Thank you so much.

19 November 2005 : Ewoud Desmet

I arrived on your website by coincidence and discovered all the worlds that exist in my imagination but it's all put into your beautiful designs…
I'm fascinated.
I'm 27, live in Antwerp, Belgium and fond of Egypt, ancient history, ancient religions, cities, urbanism…
very nice website you seem to be a very interesting person.

11 June 2005 : Zagu

Dear Ms. Palmer, Kathy, Leah? Anyway, like all of your groupies, I'm in awe. What a great site and I cannot wait to work myself through every single page.
A quick question. I would like to find a Reutersvard image that is in the public domain so that I can modify it and use it on my web page. Any ideas? I'm a complete newbie to Reutersvard and graphic design but I'm a pretty quick study.
Again, your devoted fan.

 

19 June 2005 : Reply

As far as I know there are no images in what might be called 'public domain', in that I understand everything he did was of course copyrighted automatically simply because he was the creator. However, the normal tri-bar, whether solid of made from individual cubes, is such a common image and has been used everywhere for the past few decades by people who probably have no idea where it originated, that I doubt very much you'd get into trouble, and bearing in mind it's the basis for thousands of other illusions based on the same principles, no one has ever been accused of direct plagiarism; rather, they are 'homages'. Start with a simple shape and project images onto its surfaces, and build from there.

05 June 2005 : Christian Dicke

I found this image on your website and I would like to use it as a background image for a flyer containing information about a hip hop party in Frankfurt / Germany. I just wanted to ask you allow me to use this image for such a purpose.

02 June 2005 : Mark Sedgwick

Just a quick THANK YOU for placing such a wonderful resource of creative thinking and creativity all in one place. Wonderful food for the mind's eye… :) I know you're busy so I'll keep this email short.
Have yourself a creative day!

01 May 2005 : Colin MacLeod

I just stumbled upon your site through its necronomicon text while looking up H.P. Lovecraft info on google. What a surprise! I could scarcely believe the amount of fascinating and staggeringly varied content on your site. It's like no website I've ever been on before. I still haven't come close to seeing everything on it, and it seems like every time I turn around I find something else remarkable. In particular, I loved the city you've created. Such scale and detail. I wish I had the skill to create something like it. You mentioned it was from a story you wrote. Have you considered putting some of your writing on the site? I'd be very interested to read it. I do some writing myself occasionally, though not professionally, just for fun.
I also have a great interest in different religions and mythology. Your site must be one of the most comprehensive, detailed and useful references on the Internet, perhaps anywhere. However did you compile it all? It must have taken ages. Also much appreciated were your criticisms of christianity. You're absolutely right, and as obvious as the hypocrisy and delusions of the church may appear to most rational people, someone needs to come right out and say these things. It certainly takes guts on your part and I'm sure you've come under some amount of fire for it. More power to you.
The ambiguous images, quotes and UFO content were also quite nifty. I've always been a great fan of sci-fi, Dr. Who especially. All in all, I'm very impressed with the site you've created and I'm sure I'll return to it again and again. Thanks very much!

19 April 2005 : Shahin Maghsoudi

I was searching for a portrait of angelina jolie Question: You are woman, how is it that you are collecting photos of Angelina? But you have good taste, it is clear. and you have the best ones then I saw other pages. Your site has an interesting inteerface Nice but too much text
On day I'll be back to read more In case you are interested in theosophy you can take a looka t my site and talk with Nicholas (theology robot) In case that we do more correspondance then I'll read more from your pages and we can talk more if you are interested.

05 April 2005 : Ulises Sarry

Your URL is fantastic. congratulations!
I recommend to you http://WWW.3dnauta.com To see "Anamorphosis 3d multiples", the possible impossibles, a new development 3d with diverse applications: Art, architecture, decoration, jewels, publicity, etc.
My intention is a possible and future collaboration (free lance and home work, fast and cheap) for a new desing. Or developing old. Two small animations .wmv below (74 and 127 k) as a far sample of the idea. More samples .avi in URL http://WWW.3dnauta.com/anamorfosis/DALI.wmv http://WWW.3dnauta.com/anamorfosis/perna3.wmv It is a very fast URL, without baners, nor publicity, with a large graphic information science, history and art.
If you like it, a link? I would like collaborate (?) Sorry by my very limited English.

 

12 April 2005 : Reply

Ulises, no need for the apology.
Wow! I downloaded them all. My favourites are Cara3 and Faraon, and Pelegrin04.
I love what you've done, and it reminds me of a far more complicated version of the front of the book "Godel Escher Bach" where the letters "G", "E", and "B" were all carved on different axes of a cube. I did the same for my own initials of CLP, but it didn't look as good. There is also a Japanese artist who makes similar sculptures, but as physical objects rather than CG models, but unfortunately I've forgotten his name. Sorry.
A collaboration sounds a nice idea, but how did you plan on doing it? Would one of us come up with the idea of the two shapes and then the other modelled it? Let me know what you think... I'm certainly willing to try. Once again, lovely work!

13 November 2004 : Peter D Schaap

Have you any information on constructing 2d illusions into real 3d. Sculptures. I saw an oscar reutersvard triangle similar to those computer rendered images on your site. Except this one was made from wood and was unremarkable until I saw it from a certain angle -- voila, a solid real world magic. Triangle. I would appreciate any info you're willing and able to share.

 

14 November 2004 : Reply

There are basically two ways with which to construct 'real' impossible objects. The first is in the manner of the one you saw, and which is the foundation of my models: a normal object is created with all the corners at right-angles, and when viewed it seems to be silly, but when seen at the magic angle, foreground elements either overlay those in the background or align with carefully-made cut-outs to create the illusion of a continuous object (textures are particularly problematical to wrap around the non-existent join).
The second way is to create a fully-connected object with all the corners joined properly, which might sound impossible but is achieved by making what at first ought to be straight beams twisted around their own axis or bent away from the observer; again, they only work from one viewpoint. Using the tri-bar as an example, the corners are all 60 degrees as you'd expect (note that the previous method requires they're at 90 degrees), but the actual bars are bent into S shapes to facilitate the joins and so only work when seen straight-on. I hope this helps to answer your query.

28 October 2004 : Durga Prasad S

great to have a visit to ur site… good amount of info reg. myths, illusions, scans,etc, esply i liked those scans and illusionary images… try to incorporate good number of scans (i.e. high resolution images or suugest me some more site in which i get them… so to have many clicks of this site… totally it is an encyclopaedia… i feel good to see ur site…
www.byrrajufoundation.org

06 October 2004 : Rustan Bowers

Excellent Content Thank you
I have enjoyed visiting your site. Despite being American, I have no disagreement with any of the topics discussed. You seem to have vast and eclectic tastes-although, most of your material is related in some degree (barring Angelina, Rachel, and Keira - I can't seem to fit them in). I have found a plethora of information of which I had some interest in, especially the enochian and angelsdemons sections. The cross referencing is wonderful.
Pictures: I love the content there too. Some of the photos seem to tell a story, all on their own. Often leading one to wonder what story was unfolding during their capture.
Illusions: Great fun, I showed them to my wife immediately. I can't believe that someone would read the PARIS thing and miss the first "the" (after reading a second time)
Scans: Unsure. The comics portion needs a bit more. I am presuming that you have read and enjoyed the Lenore and Ruby Gloom comics. I was wondering if you had, perhaps, read any of the Johnny the Homicidal Maniac comics? I find the humor to be along the same lines, though JTHM is far more dark.
Thanks again for your work.

06 September 2004 : Ed Basham

Thanks for a very interesting site!
I found it via Google, while adding to my collection of Angelina Jolie pictures. I have a screensaver slide show with folders of various themes, one of which is Angelina Jolie. On a Mac images in the 'Pictures' folder can be set as a default screen saver. With two monitors it shows different pictures on each monitor, each for ~6 sec. I have downloaded your beautiful work on Jolie to add to the pictures I had. They are great! I can appreciate all the work you did on the commercial pictures!
You might be interested in exploring Carl Jung's ideas, re: religion and mythology (and your many dreams). The London Analytic Psychology Association does public lectures, I believe. Most of my instructors and supervisors in psychoanalysis were trained at the London Institutes. There is a lot of interesting psychological work going on in town, and some of these psychological ideas may be of interest if you connect with the right people. Just a thought.
I hope you maintain your site.

18 June 2004 : Joachim Gordon

I have seen your Illusion : "I love Paris in the spring time" and don't understand it. Please give me a clue.

 

21 June 2004 : Reply

Joachim, this is an example of people seeing what they expect rather than what is actually there. A word is duplicated, but because of its location, most people don't register it.

16 June 2004 : Martin J. Steiger

I found your site via Google, when I was trying to look for pictures about gears. I'm a mechanical engineering student, and I wanted to make a webpage on gears. I was wondering if it would be ok if I used that optical illusion of that "set of gears in a globe" on my site?

15 June 2004 : Dominic Weir

I am very impressed with your impossible font and would like to use it in some graphic design work I am doing - I have downloaded the preview version. Is there a licence fee?

15 June 2004 : Dave Walton

Great Site, enjoyed the hour I spent with u.
You hear but who listens? The mind is intellect and memory but what senses? You are not what you think you are as that is only intellect and memory. You have awareness and knowing but try defining them.

15 May 2004 : Mais Attyeh

I am doing a project for my PreCal class. We are required to write about how art relates to math. In other words, we need to pick a type of art/artist and say how math is used in it. It can be any type of math. Right away, I thought of optical illusions. I have always tried to figure them out, and had fun doing so. I also know a lot, if not most, of geometry is used in optical illusions. My question to you is how exactly is math used in optical illusions. I've searched far and wide and have only found limited information such as the graphing used to make optical illusions and many, many examples of optical illusions. I would really appreciate it if you could answer this question for me, not only for the sake of my grade, but for my knowledge also.

 

16 May 2004 : Reply

I'm no expert and it's 25 years since I went to technical college, but as far as illusions are concerned, most of them rely more on geometry than anything else, and make use of isometric (all angles equal) rather than perspective viewpoints, whereby foreground elements align with those in the background and so appear to be one continuous object. In a computer modelling environment, this is usually achieved by placing the camera a long distance away and zooming in greatly to compensate, and the angle has to be equal on each axis.
Having said that, a lot of Escher's work in particular was extremely mathematical, and deliberately made use of perspective to achieve its effects, as in Three Intersecting Planes where the drawn equivalent of a wide-angle lens aligns the edges into a triangle, using very distant vanishing points. Spirals, however, is a very precise series of rotations as the segments are not only rotated in one axis around their common centre, but also extruded at right-angles around an offset axis whilst simultaneously being reduced in size, and bear in mind he did this all on paper, by hand, with often dozens of preliminary sketches and proof-of-concept line-drawings. Many other images of his use various classes of solids (dodecahedron, icosahedron, etc), which though pure geometry also have precise mathematical co-ordinates, but they are never actually defined, rather they exist simply because the shape has been drawn within a specific area.
Ambiguous images are consciously designed as such (unless serendipity reveals one in the real world that can be copied) and so is in the realm of the artist rather than the mathematician, though there is a sub-set of this where a single object can be see as different things when viewed from the front or side (or even the top), yet from an oblique angle it is a jumbled mess of angles and cut-outs.
I know this isn't very helpful to you (if at all!), but as all of my own modelling is computer-based and, no matter how complicated the model, is still like drawing on 3D graph-paper (even when making things up as I go along), although I make full use of the maths that underlie all geometry, I don't actually need to be aware of them unless it is something simple like working out areas or volumes to lock down a sense of scale.

07 May 2004 : James Barr

I stumbled across your web site in some wierd fashion, I suppose, and have found it quite amazing. What led me there was your Escher model of 'Spirals'. I actually have this tatooed on my back, because I do believe that Escher had a fascinating mind. Anyway, my purpose in contacting you is that I was wondering if you might have that model in a vector format, that you might let me use/modify for use on a personal web page. I am playing for a rock band in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, and we have allocated a small space for each of us on our page (check it out, still very young, www.buttresses.com). So anyway, with your permission I would love to incorporate this model into my section, and of course give you full credit for the file.

19 February 2004 : Blitzgal

Hello, I've just opened an Angelina Jolie fan site, and currently have sixteen of my own scans housed there; but I've been on the lookout for other hi-res images to hopefully also host on the same site. Your scans are fantastic, and I was hoping I might get your permission to show them on my website. You will get full proper credit as well as a link back to your website. At any rate, here is the site; it is an offshoot of my main wallpaper site, www.blitzgal.com.

11 February 2004 : Rosa Bellingham

Hi, Im on a computer graphics course at the moment and we have to build a model to use in a CAVE Virtual environment. I had decided to have a crack at the Relativity one, but it will take much too long and I was thinking of possibly something smaller until I saw your site.
If I give you full credit for the model and share my work with you, I was wondering if you could send me some of the 3d models for me to work on, as we are not given credit for the actual model anyway, it would be morally OK, as long as you are happy.
I appreciate that 'Relativity' is your own work in progress so I would not want to steal your thunder, but it may be possible that I could combine a few of the Escher models, and I was ambitiously hoping to have a different escer picture/model seen through all the different patio area and doors in 'Relativity' Should I achieve this, you are certainly welcome to anything I produce for you to continue on. Please let me know what you think.

13 June 2003 : Pier-Pascale Boulanger

Hello, I am hereby asking for your permission to reproduce your Sierpinski cube in an article pertaining to chaos theory and language. It will be published by Les Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg in their collection called "Les Collections de l'Université de Haute-Alsace" sometime before the end of 2003 or maybe in 2004.
While writing a chapter in my doctorate thesis on Postmodern Translation Theories, I was searching the Internet for different representations of fractals, strange attractors and other illustrations and came upon your site by typing "sierpinski cube" in Google.
I must say that your art is remarkable. Thanks in advance for your response.

 

15 June 2003 : Reply

Yes, you may use any of the images on my site; the only thing I would ask is that a small mention was made of the site, just it's base URL. I must admit to being surprised at the long lead-time, but then I've never been lucky enough to have anything published, and doing it on the web is so immediate.
By the way, as part of my re-visit to some of the older parts of my site, I have now included a full sequence of iterations from level 1 to 5, with the inverse solids, so take whatever you would like, and if you need any of them re-rendered at larger sizes for printing, please let me know and I'll be happy to oblige. The only problem might be the level 5, but I'm getting a new PC in a month or so and can do it then if needs be.

22 May 2003 : Jornal do Brasil

Dear Ms. Palmer,
The following note, about your graphics work, was published in the column InSite, Internet Section of Jornal do Brasil, on 19/may/03, here in Rio de Janeiro - Brazil, and replicated on the newspaper site, www.jbonline.com.br. I would like thank you for the beauty of those images.
Best regards,
Humberto Tanure
JBonline

Parece, mas não é Figuras geométricas tridimensionais que parecem possíveis, mas não o são e outras que causam ilusão de ótica ou ambigüidade estão no link Optical Illusions & Geometry, do site pessoal da inglesa Catherine Leah Palmer. Quem tiver tempo e curiosidade de clicar em home e navegar no site vai descobrir que sua dona é uma senhora inteligentíssima e com interesses pra lá de variados. www.palmyria.co.uk/illusions/illusions.htm.

Translating the technical words was easy enough, but the rest was done with the help of dictionaries so leaves a lot to be desired :
Apparently, it is not three-dimensional geometrical figures that seem possible, but when they are not they are the cause of optical illusions or ambiguous (images) as in the link Optical Illusions & Geometry, at the personal site of the English woman Catherine Leah Palmer. Who will have the time and curiosity of clicar [?] at home and visit the site to discover that its owner is an intelligent woman with varied interests.

10 December 2002 : Kyle Burnett

perfectly plasuable immage in illusions
found your site while seaching google images for a picture of rodger penrose and the starcase pic caught my eye so i desided to check out your site. just figured i should point out that the image titled opus2b is not a illusion at all and reutersvard did a staircase as well which i would be shocked to find out came after penrose, that is assumeing we are talking about the same sir rodger penrose the phyisist. anyway, cool site none the less.

 

15 December 2002 : Reply

I was aware of Reutersvärd's stairways (he has created hundreds of them, and many other figures), but outside of a small circle, his works were not widely known until after the Penrose article in the 1950's. An abbreviated chronology is as follows (taken from Bruno Ernst's book The Eye Beguiled, Taschen, 1986 & 1992) :
1934 : Reutersvärd creates an impossible tri-bar as a series of cubes based around a hexagonal star.
1950 : Reutersvärd draws 14 impossible objects after hearing a radio programme about Mozart's composing practices - these include some staircases, but he isn't consciously aware they are continuous, and only some years later began to address the issue.
1954 : Penrose rediscovers the impossible tri-bar after seeing works by Escher, and with his father creates an impossible staircase (his drawing had 7,7,3,3 flights, whilst the model had 4,4,3,3). Note that at this time Penrose was unaware of Reutersvärd's work and was inspired by Escher's work, though Escher himself hadn't yet used any impossible figures.
1956 : Article by the Penroses is published.
1958 : Escher creates an impossible cube, which he later used along with the tri-bar in images for 1960 & 1961.
1958 : Reutersvärd sees Penrose's article and starts deliberately creating impossible objects (3 & 4-bars, stairs, windows, forks, etc.), making about 2500 up to 1986.
1961 : Reutersvärd first sees one of Escher's images.
So, basically it's independent discovery, which isn't unusual, and none of the artists involved have tried to claim an exclusive right to any of the main concepts, which is nice.

15 October 2002 : Gloria Weimer

friend in mexico
Cathlen: Hi, Im Gloria, 44yo from Mexico, Painter and other things…
I am enjoying so much your site! I had to congratulate you for all your work…
It is on my favorites, as i plan to visit it often…
well, be happy and enjoy life, im grateful of your work, but you might be spending too much hours on the pc…

01 September 2002 : T. Alan Russell

I entered "reuge music" in Google and your site was one listing. I was searching for a place to purchase the movements to install in wooden boxes I plan to create in my home woodworking shop. I have always been interested in "modeling" - I considered being an architect as a high school student but ended up in finance (I am a CPA). I recently attended a workshop on CAD for woodworkers covering Ashlar-Vellum's Graphite and Argon software. I already owned Graphite - to document my woodworking projects, house plans, etc. I purchased the Argon to do the modeling for these projects. Like many my time is limited so I have just started the Graphite and have been browsing thru the manual for Argon.
So I was excited to see your music box models and hope I can someday make models like yours.
Alan - the son of a Liverpudlian.

15 August 2002 : Dmitri Rakov

Dear Catherine,
A lot of interesting information. Your artwork is very nice. I send to you my graphic (topological) works.
Best regards,
http://www.rakov.de/

21 July 2002 : Daniel Seifu

Thank you for your excellent website!
I was surfing the web looking for Mobius strips and came across your website. I really liked your work on 'impossible' structures, the 3D representation of Escher's works, and also other modelling work. I spent a good half an hour, and I must thank you for for making that time very interesting for me, and for everyone on the Internet, now and in the future!
I admire your work!
Great! Thanks!

28 April 2002 : Bill Beeson

Note of Thanks
Greetings, Catherine Leah Palmer,
My name is Bill Beeson, and I am writing from the wilds of Texas, U.S.A.. Yesterday I had the very good fortune to run across your remarkable website, and I want to thank you for the delightful evening I spent getting acquainted with it. My problem is limiting the number of laudatory adjectives that it brought to mind. Fascinating. Crystal-clear. Enthusiastic. Easy to read and to navigate. (72-year-old eyes like things that are easy to read.) Wide-ranging. Literate. Sensible. Delightful. On and on . . .
How did I run across your site? It was one of the findings of a Jeeves search for "The Stranger Left No Card" .
Again, many thanks for the great site. It typifies the very best that this marvelous world-wide encyclopedia, the web, can offer. Don't let the Co$ bullies prevail. It's fortunate that others who have fought them successfully are helping you.
Best regards,

20 March 2002 : Steven Myers

Greetings,
Wow. Your artwork is very good. I have a site about the great Pyramid that could really use some of your talent. What graphic software programs do you use? Let me know. Also please review our site and you will see we need some art on our site. Let me know what you think. Warm regards,
Pharaoh's Pump Foundation

16 November 2001 : Bob Brevard

WHOA JACK!
I was trying out the images feature of GOOGLE using the word MOBIUS and - BOOM your site was in that first page list so I started looking at your 3D illusions and the rest will be history as soon as you open this email.
I once built a physical version of the steps illusion and projected film on it. It was incredible the way the images "hung" in space.
Are you familiar with the concept of 'S L O W G L A S S'? It takes light a very long time to pass through it. You could set a pane of it in a rain forest for a few years and bring it home and watch it unwind its days and nights.
Thanks for the imagery.

02 November 2001 : Drac

What a GREAT site!!! EVERYTHING about it is so very well done!!! I LOVE it!!!!!
Now, if only I could meet someone like you in the "real" world… I would be in heaven… well actually better, because it would be "real".
Thanks for some fresh air!!!

18 September 2001 : Rob Schofield

I stumbled across your site following a UFO link from Marc's site. Great fun, and I love your animations. I am also a 40-something, with similar experiences in life (your "flying dreams" are almost identical to mine, except mine stopped occuring when I was about 14). Remarkable that your attitudes and interests are so similar, and the fact that you elucidate them so clearly with the support of a well-built web site makes it more fun. Your hard work was worth it - nice site.
Any resemblence between the above views and those of my employer, my terminal, or the view out of my window are purely coincidental. Any resemblence between the above and my own views is non-deterministic. The question of the existence of views in the absence of anyone to hold them is left as an exercise for the reader. The question of the existence of the reader is left as an exercise for God. ( A discussion of non-orthogonal, non-integral polytheism is beyond the scope of this .sig ).

04 September 2001 : Tony Burlinson

My compliments and congratulations on a well laid out and interesting site!
I arrived via the hyperlink from Marc Martins ufoseries.com site, eager to see your UFO animations. With my history in Technical Graphics I was naturally interested to see which 3D software was in use.
The constructions great- although I wasnt half as impressed by the UFO flicks as I was by the M.C.Escher section! Cant wait to see an animation on the Relativity model, and the animation possibilities on some of his scenes (Im thinking of the ants on the Moebius Strips, etc) are staggering!
A great choice of source data, Ive been a big fan of Eschers work from an early age.
As a part-time website artworker, a minor criticism I might raise is the lack of artwork amongst the larger text sections as a means of visual punctuation. Compulsive novel-readers might shrug this off, but as a visually oriented webwalker Im all in favour of dropping in a themed gallery of pics here and there in the text columns.
Paul McCullough says youve inspired him to dust down his own CGI models- hmm, reckon Ive got a UFO or two I can fire up myself, amongst other things- thanks for the inspiration!!
be seeing you

27 April 2001 : Paul McCullough

Your UFO Animations!
I absolutely love them - Flyby is the BEST UFO animation I've ever seen! I think you're inspiring me to dust off my CGI models once again. I'm definitely going to have to rebuild my UFO model after seeing yours! Congrats on such a great job! :)
Whoops - I just saw your UFO Crash animation - SPECTACULAR! Add some sound fx! I love it. The missile hit is just fantastic!
Cheers.
My Webpage: 3D Animation World

31 January 2001 : Julian Carter

Catherine - I was just searching for foundries and info on cast iron lamp posts and came across your site. An excellent site - I had to stop and see it all!

28 December 2000 : Alfredo Campos

Congratulations :-)
I love your optical illusions zone in your site, it's wonderful!!!
I wanted to say that I spent a great time visiting your place, specially what i like best, optical illusions. I'll add a link to your site in mine.
See you :-)

25 July 2000 : Andreas Hkasson

Hello, I downloaded your program to make optical illusions and it's really cool. Now I have a small question concerning the tri-bar symbol. Do you know if it's protected by any copyright laws or if it's free to use? We are thinking of using it in a logo so we need to know.
Bye!

 

31 July 2000 : Reply

Andreas, thanks for your feedback.
The solid version of the tribar as re-discovered by Roger Penrose has been used so many times that I would hazard a guess it is what might be considered 'public domain', but my very limited understanding of copyright law (at least here in the U.K.) is that as soon as something is written or drawn it is automatically copyright the author / designer - it does not have to be specifically registered (though if you are a designer then the best way to do this is to snail-mail the design to yourself and keep the sealed envelope as proof).
The version made from nine cubes drawn by Oscar Reutersvärd might originally have had some form of copyright attached to it, as with (as far as I know) all of his drawings and sketches, but copyrights do expire (though at different times for different things) and this particular arrangement has been used by so many other people (including logos and advertisements) that I doubt even a fraction of the users know where it originated. Are you going to use it 'straight' or with some form of images on the surfaces? If it's for a web-site, let me know the URL and I'll have a look.
Unlike Escher's work which is handled by Cordon Art, I've not been able to find anyone who acts on behalf of Oscar Reutersvärd, and though a couple of years ago he did have his own small web-site selling limited edition prints, that no longer exists. In all honesty, I can't see anyone being sued over the use of what is now a very common symbol, but don't quote me on that!
Sorry I've not been much help, but it's best to be honest in such matters.

09 May 2000 : Neil Allardice

Hello there, I just wanted to let you know that I love the program you made.
I use it a lot and I have used it to make the main graphic for my site.
People are always asking me how I made it so on the up and coming new version of my site I will be linking to you in my FAQ.
If you would like to check out what I have made using your program then my site is at http://www.thredz.co.uk.
Thanks again for the great program.
…::::(((( ThReDz DeSiGn ))))::::…

14 December 1999 : Christiane Gillieron

Dear Madam,
Interested in Reutersvärd, Escher and the like, I couldn't miss your site and loved it. Now, I teach methodology, and ask students to be precise when giving references. I would like to use your site as one of the referred web pages in the model bibliography they get (standards are not quite universal, however).
My principle is to gave the author's name, the date of authoring (07/03/98 ?) and the date of the visit. I can infer from Roberto your surname is Catherine. I would be pleased to get your full name…
May I add that I did appreciate your autobiography as much as the pictures you generously provide?
Looking forward to your answer, I am
Cordially yours,
Prof. Christiane Gillieron Paleologue
Faculte de Psychologie et des Sciences de l'Education, Geneve, Switzerland

15 January 1999 : Roberto Andrea Mueller

Hi, Catherine
Thank you.
I visited Oscar Reutersvärd and Others, M.C. Escher Optical Illusions & Geometry.
Thank you for the delight in the Coffe House, during the warm coffee aroma, your company turned the narrow minutes into wide time of pleasure.
Please remember that love will flow at any angle, it is not as limited as the aquaduct (aquaduct.ipg).
Would you like to join the WAOE(World Association for Online Education)?
Please see at the URL http://www.kagawa-jc.ac.jp/~steve_mc/WAOE-founding.html you can submit to the JOE "The WWW Journal of Online Education (JOE) for the World Association of Online Education", at URL http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/waoe/waoej.html
My smiling good-by.
Roberto Andrea Mueller
Universidade Federal de Vicosa, Vicosa, Brasil
http://www.ufv.br/deq/docentes/mueller.htm

28 November 1998 : Roberto Andrea Mueller

Hi, Catherine
It is a pleasure to visit you.
I arrived at you after a read Communications, Spt/98/41(9), pg53.
The figure transported my mind to a multicentered David star and ciclic life steps, ascending clockwise and descending counter-c. (or vice-versa).
All cubes are paralel, so are probably our lifes, on some moments we can be very close or we can run close without loosing time and at same velocities.
The cube face diagonals plus the cube edges equals the number of gold square edges or the number of square frame edges, so as the sum of good ittle actions equals a good existence.
The cube diagonals equals the cube edges minus the cube vertices, resembling attraction as the sum of differences.
Nine star points are defined by the external parts of the cubes so as one unique star is in the center. Perfection is unique.
If the snake is smiling, probably I am close.
Best regards. Roberto.
P.S.: Part of our work can be visited at http://www.ufv.br/deq/teleduc/crystal1.html http://www.cenapad.ufmg.br/~teleeduc/fer.html
Roberto Andrea Mueller
Departamento de Quimica, Universidade Federal de Vicosa, Vicosa, Brasil
http://www.ufv.br/deq/docentes/mueller.htm

 

The magazine to which Roberto refers is "Communications of the ACM", September 1998 (Vol 41 No 9 - Building the Data Warehouse by Stephen R. Gardner, director of advanced technology research at NCR Corp in Seattle), whose editors contacted me about 3 months ago requesting permission to use the Opus 1 image from Oscar Reutersvärd's page (the full article is available as a .pdf file from a couple of sources on the web). I said yes as long as credit was given to the original artist, and queried why someone didn't just draw the image, which would have been easier, but I think they wanted it as a 3D rendering), hence Roberto's mentioning of the 'Star of David' shape in the centre. They actually used the original version of the 'garden ornament' tribar1b, to which I later added a wooden stand & metal frame.

Religion & Politics

Specific Correspondence

11 January 2005 : Garth Stiebel

Philosophy & Semiotics.

18 April 2002 : Religious Technology Centre

Scientology's lawyers contact me about their stories, followed by my ISP. Also contains some advice from members of alt.religion.scientology.

04 May 2001 : Simon Teague

A short exchange of long emails with an orthodox Christian who arrived at his belief after careful consideration.

01 August 1998 : Dale & Christine Proulx

An interesting dialogue that began almost as a protest and suddenly stopped just as it was getting interesting.

General E-mails

27 March 2008 : Daniel McDicken

Just stumbled on your site and thought it was very thought provoking, seriously I have never had such a good laugh in ages, also heres another good one for you, if the holy bible and the quran are correct and in the beginning god created the first man (Adam) and the first woman (Eve) then it dosnt leave much to the imagination as to how they begot others... incest, is that what the church means by original sin?

I was doing a lot of research into the Liber Logath, aka: Lovecrofts Necronomicon, turns out it was based on another book translated by a scholar called Ormus Wormus back in the day, turns out Alister Crowley knew Lovecroft and shared ideas with him for his book's and it also turns out their is indeed such a text but its not called Liber Ex Mortis, it was called Sepher ha-Sha’are ha-Daath, so whats all this about, Ormus, now the bit about alchemy, the philosophers stone, well people have been searching for that one for generations and its said to be just one of the secrets hidden in this book along with how to make lightning bolts fly from your butt, a book that by all accounts drives sane normal people MAD!
So I followed it up with a quick search on google and lo and behold ORMUS is on sale!
http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/ormus/ormus.htm
Its made from wait for it, SEA-WATER!?! (I am starting to see where the madness part comes into it!)
White gold, it hasnt got a flake of gold in the stuff, now this guy is apparently giving it to his plants but people are buying this stuff and drinking it by the tea-spoonful and when something negative happens, like they become really baddly sick, they say its due to the wait for it...
"Your body going into a 'healing crisis' as your body detoxes impurities."
I have never heard such waffle in all my life.
If this is the fabled philosophers stone the author would be out there turning bars of lead into gold enjoying an early retirement along with immortality, not selling it as a cure all and wonder grow to the mindless idiots that are buying into the craze!

03 November 2007 : Bea Ming

wow! In an insomniac episode I googled Image 'spiral', since it rarely fails me, and your web site was one of the most stunning I found. I was caught right up, in realm after realm. I especially appreciated your fierce defense against religious thuggery, not that all are, but the epidemic is truly horrifying.
As furious as they make me, I find myself at some point pitying such lazy, ultimately insecure, autistic mindsets. They fear any opening, any void, any space that might allow for growth or flexibility, since it might involve some risk, patience (actual faith) and, God forbid, responsibility for one's own actions. I recall in the weeks after 9-11, the question came up, "Where was God in all of this?" My favorite answer to this came from a rabbi, (I don't recall the name) who said, "God is not in the event. God is in the response."
Whether or not you believe in a personal deity, there is no getting around the fact that spirit, be it human, or divine, is to be demonstrated, not crystalized into some rigid key, cruci-friction or plug to tidy up and smooth over whatever mystery accompanies us through Life. As far I am concerned, Jesus (and all honored visionaries) was offering an example of the visionary and healing heights one person can reach, not the Exclusive Exception to Humanity. They all promote liberation, outreach, and personal responsibility.
I could go on and on. I am just glad to have found another very clear headed and devoted visionary like you. I'm encouraged to find that there are more and more who are 'getting air time'
Heard of Bill Hicks? R.I.P. You'd love him…
When we dream alone, it's just a dream. But when we dream together, it's a Reality.
John Lennon
(Just depends which dream you want to feed… Love or Fear?)

09 August 2006 : Simon Barrow, Ekklesia

Having found Palmyria quite incidentally through a web search, I discovered that you've included some quotations from me on your superstition/quotes page. Glad that they were of interest. But above all, I wanted simply to say that it's a great site with some interesting material on it. Thank you.

14 May 2006 : Maria Mitchell

Your graphics and pictures are wonderful. However, I must congratulate you on your ability to take scripture out of context; I believe you have succeeded even Benny Hinn in this area. You talk about the "hatred" that supposedly comes from Christians (Fred Phelps is not a Christian at all, much less a fair representation of Christianity in general, and those Pentecostal web sites are representative of a few fringe groups who call themselves "Christian" but that's about the extent) yet you feel the need to rant on and on about the Bible and try to discredit it with your ridiculous, unproven claims.
While you have spent what seems to be a massive amount of time trying to show everyone how smart you are and how dumb all religions are, there are hurting people around the world being helped by missionaries and Christian organizations. There are charity hospitals here in the US that would not be here were it not for Christians. There are people being fed both here and overseas, wells being dug, homeless shelters being run, Tsunami victims being helped, aid workers in the Sudan (even before the media thought it a worthy story to tell), people caring for orphans and AIDS victims in Africa, and those of us who give our money and our time to benefit others in our own communities, etc., etc.

 

21 May 2006 : Reply

I'd certainly agree that Phelps et al are not representative of many other Christians (who almost by definition think of themselves as 'real' or 'true' and all the other sects as 'false'), but he is certainly typical of the mind-set that wouldn't have lifted a finger to help Matthew Sheperd or Brandon Teena, as are all the hundreds of thousands who rape the planet because their god told them in scripture it was theirs and care nothing for the future because, hey, guess what, Jesus is coming 'real soon now' and they're all going to be raptured away while the rest of us go to hell. It's been 2000 years and we're still waiting despite the fact that Jesus said it would happen then. And then there are the tens of millions of IDiots who think (I use the term in its loosest sense) that the Earth is younger than recorded history. No, wait, it's a test of faith. "Ridiculous, unproven claims"? Last time I checked my bible pages, all I did was quote it and add some comments. I've never said anywhere that Christians or Muslims or Odinists do not do good works, and I'm well aware that missionaries in for example South America are doing a good job in helping what's left of the indigenous people fight back against governmental and corporate oppression (there would be more of them, but they were massacred by… oops), which is why the Red Cross is one of five charities I give monthly donations to, and I do it because I know it's the right thing to do, not in hope of some future reward — not that I'm claiming you or others do it for that reason, either, but it's certainly on many people's minds.

02 May 2006 : Steve Ash

Curious website. Very entertaining and funny. Though you remind me of some of my half liberated anarchist friends, rationally enlightened but trapped by reason, rejecting the bullshit that is religion, while treating science as religion. Probably a generational thing and an intoxication within mainstream culture from someone still imbedded in it. Loved the site though and the Necronomican page in particular.

23 March 2006 : L. Aron Nelson

Your remarkable site.
I just wanted you to know I've been referred to your site many many times over the last several years, and find it to be an excellent resource. Just in case maybe you thought all that work was ignored or long forgotten.
BTW, here's a quote that was strangely absent from your list. "If I had to baptise a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over with the words 'I baptise thee in the name of Abraham.'" — Martin Luther; On The Jews And Their Lies, 1543

15 December 2005 : Robert Mcilvain

Dear Poor soul, Please ask Jesus to open the eyes of understanding in your heart, what do you have to lose? By the way your site is like nothing i have ever seen . I enjoyed the art, and the effort put into it.

30 October 2005 : Stephen Archer

What rattled your cage?
It seems that you are doing exactly what that fallen angel wants, and you being deceived…
Do you not realize that it is denial of all that is God that he wants. He doesn't care what name it takes so long as you are so full of your wisdom and probably wisdom from ascendant creatures.
The Devil is a real person, and incidentally, Jesus is the Son of God, He existed before this world was created, and He is God!
The whole mystery here is something that no one can comprehend, hence your denial and rejection!
I have to say that all of us, anyone of us have rejected Him. There is nothing good in us for our heart seek to do evil continually. I was once a homosexual, gay and condoned it.
But now, God has made me a new creature through what Jesus Christ did for me on the cross! And He resurrected for He is God.
One can only understand God, if one repents from all there vain things and thinking and trust Him.
The reason for all the sacrifices in the Old Testament was for a example and looking forward to the ultimate sacrifice which is in Christ Jesus. You have a very interesting site, but I was very interested to read your attitude toward God, and His Anointed, and particularly amazed that you have plenty to talk about angels but you are even denying the very existence of the Devil, or Satan, or the Shining One.
I see you like Geometry, and paradoxical images… Have you a concept that we don't actually live in a true reality, that we have lost something that we can't get back because of sin. I believe that the world was created in 6 days as the scriptures say, but I also believe that we have NO concept about how Adam (he existed too) lived in a lot more 'dimensions' than we can imagine! By the way, we live in about 3½ dimension. The fourth one being time, if it was a full one, we would be able to go back and forth in time, but we can only go forward and a pace, a bit like a prison really. I wonder why?
I hope you reply to me.

 

06 November 2005 : Reply

When you say I am denying or rejecting the existence of something, such an act can only be valid when the thing is known to exist, rather then being believed to. I can deny that a square has by its very definition sides of equal length, or that most crows are black, but to deny your God means I have to know he exists, which I do not; neither do I know Ra, or angels, or dragons exist. Do you deny Baal (an old name for Yahweh, as mentioned in the bible) and the resurrection of the pre-Christian Osiris?
So, by rejecting something in which I don't believe, I am by default 'evil'. What a wonderfully binary outlook, so reminiscent of Bush's "You're either with us or against us." and Bin Laden's "Believer or Infidel." Is your answer to then assert everything I say and do is a result of my being used by Satan? If so, then no discussion is possible, for I am automatically 'guilty' of not doing what you say your God wants of me. But, if as you say, 'no one can comprehend', how do you know your understanding is the right one?
Jesus is both the son of God and God himself? If God split off a part of himself to atone for the sins of humanity which he was himself responsible for creating, and being all-knowing was aware would happen, and as his other self / son could not die, where was the sacrifice? What differentiates Jesus the Christ from any other resurrected seasonal god such as Adonis or Tammuz (also mentioned in the bible, and known to Christians as St. Thomas)? Only the length of the story and the number of people who believed it at the time and so ensured the story's continuance. Symbolically and artistically, there is no difference whatsoever between Isis with Horus and the much later portraits of Mary with the infant Jesus, as even Christian scholars and historians have noted.
To repent, one must first have sinned, which I have not. I admit to having done many wrong things, but that is an entirely different thing.
Why do you say we should be able to travel as freely through time as space if it was a 'full' dimension? Time is a sequence of events in a discrete order, which occur in space. There's quite a good argument to be made that time, in the way most people understand it, doesn't actually exist. That is not to say that if we thought differently we could move backwards in time or see things played out in reverse, but I would have to ask why you are assuming any of this extra dimensionality, given that none of it is even hinted at in the bible which you seem to hold so dear.

05 March 2005 : Roger B

Except for the names and a few other changes… the story is the same one… Just came across your site, who knows how anymore…
Fascinating site and fascinating person. Thanks. I'll be looking forward to exploring your site and thoughts.

02 September 2004 : Nathan Scarborough

hey, I found your site doing a search for mesopotamian spirit guardians called shedim, and your "gods and festivals" thing came up, which was interesting. your city was lovely, I have yet to look at the rest of the site, but it seems awesome =)

23 August 2004 : Juaneyne

I stumbled on your site from going on a group on MSN. I found what you said about the "pink pony" to be very offensive. We may have no proff of God but we can feel something that is unexplainable when we pray or go to church. O another thing, I was talking to my biology teacher and you know what she told me? She told me that Science is only 99% right. 99% is a lot… But it is not 100% so what about that 1%? So science cannot explain everything and it cannot say that God doenst exsist. Why? Because you guys have no real proof that he doenst exsist.

 

30 August 2004 : Reply

As mentioned earlier to Caroline, the IPU (pbuh) was not my invention; all I have done is collect other people's newsgroup entries.
I admit to being rather puzzled, as I don't know which 'inexplicable feelings' you're referring to when you pray or go to church. I also have feelings when I enter such buildings as I appreciate the art and architecture that they represent (as well as the social and religious conditions that created them), but as for praying… it will come as no surprise to you to learn this is utterly meaningless to me except as an outward expression of group reinforcement and conformity, and though it may be desired by the church so they can consolidate their power, it actually goes against biblical teachings.
Yes, you're perfectly correct: science does not explain everything, but then it never claims to, and everything it is built on is not only testable but falsifiable. If you can produce repeatable evidence of superluminal travel or cold fusion or telepathy, scientists will go "we were wrong – we've learned something new, let's investigate" and incorporate their new knowledge into the existing paradigm. Why do you or anyone else need to be 100% right about anything at all? That means there is no opportunity for change or improvement, which is precisely why I oppose dogma of all kinds, of which most religions are a good example.
Proving negatives is extremely difficult, if not impossible, but also unnecessary as it is believers who make the claim that something invisible intangible and ultimately unknowable exists and created the entire universe just for us : what sheer arrogance to assume humans have such an exalted place in something whose size and complexity it almost beyond understanding, though the fact we have discovered and understood all that we have is in itself something remarkable.
It's true I cannot prove your God doesn't exist, but as a believer (I assume you're Christian as you mention a church rather than mosque or temple) can you then prove that any of the other gods such as Ra or Odin or Krishna do not exist? If you can't, why not believe in them as well as or instead of your own chosen one?

14 July 2004 : Barbara Loffredo

I am a Canadian woman about the same age as you who is interested in arts of all kinds. I came across your site while searching images through Google.
The speech/poem you have posted: Perfect Mind has touched me deeply. I would like to know the origin of the piece.
If you have time to email the answer I would surely appreciate it as I hope to learn more of the composer.
Thank you and kudos for producing and interesting and informative website.

 

16 July 2004 : Reply

Perfect Mind (commonly known as 'Thunder, Perfect Mind', though there's no mention of thunder), was one of the many documents discovered at Nag Hammadi at the end of WW2. More details about the actual documents can be found at www.gnosis.org, which site contains translations of all the texts. As for Perfect Mind itself, as with most of the other manuscripts they exist without much context to explain who originated them, though they were all Gnostic - that is teachings which at one time co-existed with early Christianity but were then suppressed by the literalist church as it became more powerful and deemed heretical the more spiritual Gnostic sects.

 

17 July 2004

Thank you so much for the information [anonymous commentary subsequently appended to that page] and links you provided me in response to my question regarding Perfect Mind.
For me, I interpret the inclusion of the word "Thunder" in the title, not to represent any portion of the piece, but to indicate the piece itself equivalent in power to a rolling heavy thunder. It certainly reached me with Thunderous impact. I completely connected to the piece. (and a sweet circumstance of word association… I am the native of a place called "Thunder Bay" and worked for a place called "Big Thunder") *smiles*
I have my own small website I am establishing, and have reproduced Perfect Mind there, and have included your image series "windows" as graphic accompaniment.
I have included a direct credit and link to your site at the top of the page. The site link is from http://www.ssssnakepit.com follow through to amans Fantasy Home and look for the link "I am amans libertine"
I am presenting this page to you as a mock up and if you have any objection or stipulations attached to the presentation of your artwork, please do email and let me know. I will be reading through your entire site, as it is readily apparent that what interests you enough to post is of high quality and value to the surfer.

01 April 2004 : N Prado

Madame, Though it should be no original sentiment, I thank you for constructing your site. Though this is small show of gratitude for the (I guess) hours of effort in simply typing the enormous articles I found in the superstitions alone, I offer it. I was especially glad to read the portion pertaining to Jesus the Christ. I conduct research to portray a figure based upon it in a role-playing game with my friends and found it very helpful for its objectivity. (the figure is messiah of vampires)
Enjoy your day,

19 March 2004 : John Taylor

Hails!!! My name's John and I found your site while searching for links on the types of sorcery used by Solomon --- I'd just like to say GREAT JOB!!! your site offers me bounty of knowledge I could find nowhere else…
THANX

29 November 2003 : Twisted Ferret

Please keep your website up.
A while back, I visited your site and found it wonderful. I got a new computer right after that. I had a list of favorites from the old one, but somehow Palmyra got left out. After searching on several search engines, I gave up and mostly forgot about it. Until I saw the link on Omniglot.com to the Enochian page. But after clicking it, I got a "We can't find that page" error from Demon. Nooooo! Palmyra? Gone? But intelligent ol' me thought maybe just the Enochian (is that spelled right?) page was gone, and was right. Your site was still up. That was a horrible scare. Anyway, this is a rather long winded way to say: I love your site! It is the best! Your site rocks! KEEP IT UP! DON'T LET IT GO DOWN! Thanks. ;) And I agree perfectly with your religious views.

21 July 2003 : Michael O'Malley

I googled to your site on a search for Escher-type drawings, and I often go back to it.
I like the design elements and particularly your clock. I find the clock hypnotic to watch and I have not seen another like it. Is it your own invention or based on something else?
I also like most of your opinions, which probably means we were brought up with the same prejudices. Remember the conjugation - "We have strongly held views. You are a little prejudiced. They are vicious bigots."
However, I think most religion is like kids believing in Santa Claus - it's beneficial to society for us to keep the myth going. Humanism might be better, but good religion is a reasonable approximation. It stops the majority of people from removing my wallet at knife point, even if some of them end up taking the plane to the office like on 9/11.
I think there seems to be a religious instinct. When they lose faith in organised religion, people replace it with other faiths - witchcraft, alien kidnappers, marxist paradises, crystals, Presley-is-alive, and so on.
Anyway thank you for producing such an interesting personal site.

 

26 July 2003 : Reply

The clock was one of those things that I sort-of designed myself, because when I'd finished I realised it was an unconscious copy of something else. The Mayans used a duo-decimal counting system based on 1 to 4 dots and lines for 5, but had the dots centred from the outside in rather than my inside out, and their zero was a pictogram of a shell rather then my simplified ring, but when I was designing it all I was after was something very stylised to replace the modern bar-code clock that existed before.
I'd not seen the conjugation before, and I have to say I think it's generally quite true, for as with all but the most dogmatic I like to think I have an open mind (not so open I'll accept anything that falls into it, though!), and there have been many times in the past when I've had to change my opinion or revise my outlook, but I consider such things welcome because that means I change and therefore progress, whereas I see religious fundamentalism as the precise opposite : a refusal to change or even acknowledge other systems, witness the recent self-righteous (and self-generated) furore over Jeffrey John and the remarks by African bishops. However, to criticise them is to be 'anti' them, just as lambasting a crazed mob who kills someone for dropping a so-called holy book makes me an Islamophobe, but I can live with that (as Charles Bradlaugh said, "The word heretic ought to be a term of honour").
Unless one could count Humanism as a form of religion (and I'd certainly say that as a hope it is almost a belief), I don't see what this god-shaped hole is, unless a hangover from our not-too-distant past when people ascribed unknown forces to inexplicable events, and though as I've said elsewhere I have nothing against personal religious beliefs, it's when like-minded people try and force their world-view on others that problems arise, whether creationism, the 'everything is in my book of stories so all the other books of stories are wrong' kind of attitude, a conviction that only true believers are entitled to certain parts of the world, or companies trying to impose their version of crops on people who have grown it for generations.

24 June 2003 : St Clair Martin

My name is St Clair and I found this site while browsing various chunks of information concerning angels. As a Witch (Hereditary, although the choice was mine after careful examination of my own beliefs and a lot of trying to wade through the crap to find my own personal truth), I'd like to say "Good On You!" You are one of the few atheists that has managed to not upset me.
The main reason for this email is to tell you this: If you're looking for spirituality, you're not going to find it anywhere besides your own self. If you want to believe, then believe! The main part of spirituality is finding a lost part of yourself and frankly no-one else can give that to you.
That's all that I felt moved to say so I'm going to leave you now.
By the way, your site is beautiful!

January 2003 : Humanist Society Of Santa Barbara's Website Of The Month

I found it because I had started to wonder how the creationists deal with the origin of the rainbow, which occurred some time after Genesis 1, leaving the intervening period without rain, or without the laws of optics. I found a little essay on that point, and many others : the jibes at creationists are great.
The subject matter covers a wide range, from Architecture to Jokes, with a wealth of quotes from the Bible and many other places. Format of the site is unusual but it is easy to explore, thanks to a drop-down menu on the upper left. If you go to "Superstition" and then "Bible Science" you will find some real gems.

30 November 2002 : Albert Zegiel

i bumped into your site tonight while doing a search on my name,"zegiel", it must have to do with one of the many angles in one of the many lists of the same.
what i found interesting is the definitions concerning the pleides, if right has cleared up something for me.
i am your age, born 1956, and like your description of childhood discipline mine was similar, and i too disapprove of the psycho babble on regression to find hidden abuse, bullony to me for sure, and any real discipline i got i feel i deserved.
i am eldest of 9 kids., now have 4.
i share your view on politics, your writing sounds like it could have been written on this side of the pond, some of your views of religion i can agree with, I am a Christian, was raised one, and now by choice and intensive study and, then via some events both spiritual and real proven to me to be true.
Had they happened to you would have no trouble believing that the world in spirit is more real than the world most call real.
your criticisms of the word / bible seem to come from and with a complexly literal or material understanding, you can not know the word but lead to it by the spirit, and i can tell by your writings that your path is in that direction, hard to believe i know, i have been there….
when you get there, you will see there is no contradictions in the word, you will see that the garment of the meaning (written words) is much different than the being (meanings) it covers. wildly beautiful and endlessly exciting.
be well.

07 November 2002 : Nancy

I'm sorry you think its so foolish.
1 Cor 1:18 "for the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing…"
I hope you change your mind before its too late.
Love, Nancy
Acts 4:20 "For we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard."

 

09 November 2002 : Reply

Too late for what?
Proverbs 14:16 "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going."
Be happy, and help people.
Ecclesiastes 9:8 "Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart;"
Deuteronomy 15:11 "Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land."

04 October 2002 : Madhaha

Spooky.
You speak my mind. Scary. Or perhaps reassuring that not everyone "out there" (i.e. next door) is reasonless. A beautiful site that might benifit from nicer colours (that said, it's easy on the eyes). Not a lot of things that are incredibly new to me but the refrences to the various laws and scriptures are nice.
I feel one step closer to answering the paradox of my name. Is it the world or I that is madhaha?
Oh well, now that I'm done sounding weird, congratulations on a brilliant site, keep at it.
From a 17 year old school boy somewhere in SE England.
P.S. You've probably read it, but if you haven't look into Stephen Donaldson.

22 September 2002 : Graeme Kerr

Hi. Just a quick note to say congrats on the site - impressed with the modelling (though I've only played with DesignWorkshop, so what do I know) but much more pleased with the other stuff. But maybe that's 'cos in my case you're rather preaching to the (un)converted. So to speak. Also quite nice to see some new jokes on the subject.
All the best and thanks.

15 August 2002 : Dark Avenger

Hi, I am Saint Grassmower the Second of the Erisian Church!
I have found your highly enlightening site because a friend referred me! Yes, I mean about the Invisible Pink Unicorn.
We discordians all know that the IPU and Eris our Lady of Chaos are big friends. I wanted to show you the friendly greetings of a happy Discordian, the site is great and though of course the true face of her Behooved Pinkness is not known by us I want to congratulate you on such a good information resource!
Anyhow… before order finds me behind this by Chaos Hacked mainframe computer I will say to you, You get the greetings of Eris… Goddess of Chaos!

23 May 2002 : Neda Basharat

Demon is right……
I may say that I respect you for putting your opinions out there, but I don't. I may commend you on the expansive amount of knowledge you have attained, but I won't. I may commend you for your "plugging" of your own religion (and yes, I believe you do look to atheism as a religion), but I won't.
You rebuke religions that you have studied based on the fact that they preach "hate" and impose certain views on others. I agree, some individuals try to hard, and their only goal is to convert everyone, even those who do not wish to be converted. However, you my dear Catherine, are the one who is preaching hate. Your hateful manner in addressing religion is more spiteful than the Devil's itself, and I'm sure that no one religious appreciates it. Don't you think that there is enough hate in this world without you preaching more of it? For God's sake….Oh wait. You don't believe in God.
I'm sorry if you don't believe in God, but I do. And I don't appreciate you telling me that that's wrong. How is you pressing your beliefs on me any different than religious "fanatics", as you call them, forcing theirs on you. I apologize if you have been told you are going to hell…maybe you are and maybe you aren't. Maybe I am. No one knows, and no one has the right to tell anyone else that. But you don't have the right to tell me anything either.
You have your opinion, and I respect that, but you need to respect others' opinions, as well. When you have interpreted something incorrectly, as in your case of the Qur'an, and when those who have studied it for YEARS (and have not just skimmed through it once) correct you, look at it as a learning experience. Often things can not just be read, and then understood. Like a Shakespearean play, one needs to take in account all factors, such as historical background, certain implications, and hidden meanings. Symbolism, as well. Often reading between the lines is necessary. Also, translations don't count. The Arabic language is very rich and diverse in its meanings. One that speaks English, and not Arabic would not understand this. A word in Arabic can have as many as fifty meanings, where as a word in English can have only one meaning.
Before you start preaching to the public as though you are a scholar, even though it is evident that you are not, take a moment and think about what you are saying. In my impression, you are a close-minded person who only reads and studies to reaffirm their own thoughts and ideas. This type of "learning" is acquired by only scratching the surface of subjects, and results in one not knowing anything at all. Be careful of that. Open your mind for your own sake. And calm down a little, ok? Not everyone is out to get you……

 

29 May 2002 : Reply

Many of the points you raise have been answered elsewhere, so I'll paraphrase my responses and only expand on those not covered previously.
Atheism is not a religion any more than asymmetry is balanced. The 'a' prefix means 'without', so atheism is 'lack of belief in' and not 'belief in the lack of'. I am a-theist in the same way I am a-unicornist, as I assume you are too, and you're certainly a-Odinist. Show me a god or a unicorn and I'll believe in them the same way I believe in crows and cats.
I fail to see how I'm imposing (rather than exposing) my views. I'm not standing in a noisy and often violent crowd outside an abortion clinic or picketing the funeral of a gay man and saying everyone is going to hell. Personally, I'd just laugh at such a vacuous accusation, but I know there are people who believe in eternal torment and they suffer greatly at the hands of the protesters; neither am I approaching people in the street demanding they repent of their sins - how can someone be 'guilty' for something over which they had no control and which occurred before they were even born?
No, I do not have to respect a person's belief, only their right to hold one, which I certainly do defend. Someone is perfectly entitled to think the world is flat or only 6000 years old, but those and any other beliefs that do not hold up to scrutiny should be taken into the light of day and exposed for what they are, without the censorious accusation of blasphemy or of offending someone's religion (which is automatically deemed sacrosanct and therefore out of bounds). Despite what some people say, not all theories are equal. As for taking into account such things as historical / cultural background, I have, but if this is then used to claim (as some do) that people living two millennia ago knew more about the world and universe than we do now (because of 'divine' revelation), then that also needs to be argued against.
Oh, 'lost in translation' again. It's usually overall concepts that are translated between vastly differing languages rather than the exact words, some of which don't have precise equivalents when it comes to dealing with abstracts. I'll grant that the Arabic word for 'cave' (18:25) might also mean 'hill dwelling' or 'mountain house' or 'hole in the ground' or even 'remote place of meditation', but if you're saying it can also mean (as one of up to fifty meanings) 'bird' or 'cloud' or 'table' or 'shoes', then this only undermines the entire concept of the Qur'an (which like its biblical counterpart contains stories that were standardised by historical human scholars, thus stories they didn't agree with or which conflicted with the politics of the time were discarded as apocryphal, or they simply killed one another) and you end up with something similar to this ridiculous example (and I stress the word 'ridiculous') which provides endless time for that mainstay of many theologians - interpretation.
{My   }  {home  }  {was     }  {hot }
{Your }  {bird  }  {is      }  {cold}
{His  }--{shoe  }--{will be }--{wide}.
{Hers }  {hand  }  {might be}  {high}
{Their}  {garden}  {wasn't  }  {dull}
If having a picture of a living creature in the home prevents angels from visiting (54:4/54/448), which is presumably a bad thing, could it also be any representation such as statues? Are the hadiths and sunna even acceptable? Some factions say yes, other not, and whilst some discuss, many more kill one another over it. Interpret. If ants (27:18) don't talk (and I'll readily admit the Arabic word may be as general as 'communicate', but that hardly implies that 1300 years ago people knew ants did so by scent), and they didn't want to avoid being crushed by Solomon, then they were merely used as a plot device to say that Solomon was there with his hosts, which is perfectly acceptable in the same way that saying in the Odyssey the enchantress Circe turning men into animals could be a metaphor for them behaving like animals in her presence because of her surpassing beauty, and in the Bhagavad Gita the warrior Arjuna is caught between two armies which become symbolic of his fight for enlightenment, so I agree symbolism can plays its part, but it is overly-zealous scholars rather than I who use the ploy of saying every word in their holy books must be taken not only literally but must remain unchallenged as an undeniable truth, just like their counterparts in Christianity (and this also applies to some Vedics). No one has any problems with the Epic Of Gilgamesh (and I use this example rather than Homer's Epics deliberately because Greek is a major component of English), where the mention of 'cedar trees' and 'immortality' actually mean what they say, and the story of how the snake sheds its skin was used to describe the origins of something they knew of but couldn't explain, but for anything old in Arabic a translation somehow isn't good enough. The Bible was written in Greek and Hebrew and Coptic etc., yet none but the fussiest scholars expect readers to learn these other languages so they can appreciate or understand the stories and messages. Parables are as vague as the writings of Nostradamus - anything can always be made to fit afterwards, and as with the attempts of so-called psychics to declare what the future holds, all the failed predictions are either swept aside by the one chance hit, or reinterpreted in so vague a fashion as to apply to what actually occurred after the facts are known. Symbolism is the only area where legitimate interpretation might come into play, but that's all based in the assumption that there is something to interpret in the first place - not all images have hidden meaning, or have any meaning at all.
Lastly, I do have an open mind, only it's not so open that I accept everything that might fall into it, for as I said earlier, not all claims are equal, especially when there is no evidence to support them and the only reason I'm expected to take it as truth is personal testimony ("I was abducted and raped by aliens and they put an implant in me, but my doctor is part of the government conspiracy and took it from me when I asked him to examine me" or "I have a personal relationship with God and he talks to me, and if you open you heart and have faith then you can too"). I enjoy reading the latest descriptions and theories about our wonderful universe, and indeed any criticism of the socio-political structures we've created, but once again many believers seem to demand exemption for their religion even (and sometimes especially) when its orthodoxy is challenged from within.

18 May 2002 : Haniff Din

Hello Catherine,
Ref: Sura Like it
I wasn't aware of this event, so it's been quite interesting.
Being a "new age" muslim, I really find this shocking. Really shocking. There are lot of very good things in being a muslim, but the few seem to spoil it for the rest.
It just seems illogical to hang on every interpreted word in the Quran or any religious book, nothing should be taken that way, but the overall picture should.Which is why I totally agree with what you say, and I am still a muslim. It just seems like chinese whispers to me, dragged over centuries, it doesn't really mean anything, because we'll never know what it really meant.
All these muslim fanatics are driving me mad, they don't seem to understand the idea of freedom of speech.
This Internet is making this even more interesting, but viewpoints seem to be not to be changing, they just seem to getting more extreme! When the Internet should be breaking down these barriers I would have thought promoting free exchange of ideas.
We have all this technology and we just can't seem to get along, it's depressing. What ever happened to respect for others?
Perhaps I'm living in a Utopia in my head. I just can't see the solution.Your site like others just "attacks" the "attack" just pro-longing problems increasing divides in the long run, although clearly a valuable an important exercise, as no-one can or should attempt to censor the Internet. I feel you should put something on, (god knows what) so calm people down and promote the ideas of respecting each other beliefs.
I think we are destined to destroy our selfs and this earth with constant religious disagreements.
We'll be too busy arguing and killing each other I feel to ensure survival of the human race I feel. Not thinking about the bigger picture. Perhaps all religions need to be updated!
I have a friend who does not believe in evolution, I do. We get along, we don't argue about it. He's a Christian, I'm a muslim.
Can't others just get along?
I really feel that education is the key, we are both educated intelligent people with no weird belief systems, the common factor we have are both very interested in astronomy.
Perhaps that's the common factor in all religions. We look at the universe in awe, and know our place, how small we really are in the scope of things. Perhaps if we can get the same knowledge we have in everyone's brains we would all get along.
Now a site educating and changing every religions belief systems for the goodness of mankind would be good.
I have no idea where to start, but I'm starting to communicate to you about the idea.
In writing this e-mail I believe that's the key - astronomy, every person of any background cannot look through a telescope and look at a moon and not think the same thing. Perhaps that's were the old texts are going wrong, we now have a lot of science that should be side by side with new texts.
Proving clearly how insignificant we are, rather than live life on interpretations on interpretations.
e.g. I don't care what is says in the bible or quran, but the moral "you shouldn't kill anyone under any circumstances" Makes sense to me, no matter what religion you are from.
Why don't people follow it?
In fact with your belief system you'd be ideal to develop these axioms/morals and put them on a site.
www.haniff.co.uk
Just of interest what's your response to this:-
http://www.submission.org/challenge.html
http://www.submission.org/beyond.html
I've just been reading it, trying to get my head round it.
I was particularly impressed by this:
Quran itself: "You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them." (17:36).
Mostly because I hadn't heard of it before.
I think that should go on this website of axioms/morals for every person/religion.

 

26 May 2002 : Reply

It's true that I could be seen to be "attacking the attackers", for I am certainly protesting vociferously against the homophobic and sexist rants of such people and organisations as mentioned on my Religious Reich and Religion & Gays pages, but I'm also pointing out errors and contradictions in allegedly infallible documents, though the 'lost in translation' excuse is a favourite of those historical revisionists who try to get around the fact people over 2000 years ago didn't know as much as we do today. Why is it that the Bible / Qur'an / Torah cannot be treated as historical documents in the same manner as the Epic Of Gilgamesh or the Homeric legends? How can people nowadays say in all seriousness that because something written down thousands of years ago says it's the word of God then it must be? (a perfect definition of circular reasoning), and that people then knew more about the world via revelation than all the discoveries made since?
Strange as it may seem, I actually have nothing against an individual holding a personal religious belief - it's the socio-political aspects of organised religion (cemented in dogma that demands its power remains unchallenged) that concerns me and against which I protest, as indeed I do any other form of imposed system, and to me that's all religion is: a codified system for living but with an extra supernatural dimension to act as the basis for rewards or punishment (heaven or hell). That Christianity and Islam are split internally by numerous factions who fight one another (each claiming as they do that only their way is the right one and everyone else is a heretic) only underscores their similarities, and this outlook is shown perfectly by http://www.submission.org, which is a fairly well-known fundamentalist site. As you can see from http://www.submission.org/had-sunna.html, both the Hadiths and the Sunna(h) are considered to be Satanic because they embellished tales and contradicted what was in the 'perfect' Qur'an, and the site even says Satan corrupted Judaism in the same way as people wrote their own codes of behaviour and so they didn't necessarily follow the divine revelations of holy books. (This was the beginning of civil law, although it had existed long beforehand in, for example, the Code of Hammurabi, and the later Roman Twelve Tables, which though both praised G/god(s) didn't use the deities as the origin or justification for the laws, which was a very important distinction from the allegedly God-given Commandments.) The site is also obsessed with the number 19 because of Sura 74:30 ("Over it are Nineteen"), and so like Drosnin et al searching for and finding hidden 'messages' in the Bible (in response to his challenge, the same has been applied to Moby Dick with equally amusing results), though the context probably indicates the number of angels or demons overseeing hell, which is a common topic in the Qur'an.
What bugs me is that whilst Europe was stuck in the middle of the Post-Roman Dark Ages, the entire Muslim empire was discovering things every year, partly because they had access to all the Greek and Roman literature that had been in Alexandria, and now thanks to fundamental Islam the Muslim world is stuck in the equivalent of their own Middle Ages, for unlike the Europeans they never had a Renaissance, and they seem to have considered any Enlightenment to have already occurred and, as it was holy / sacred, it could never be improved upon. Think of the phenomenal advances in astronomy that came from the Arab world at that time (most of the naked-eye stars in the Northern hemisphere were named during that period), and as for the architecture in for example Alhambra - wow, though even here they deliberately introduced flaws into their patterns because only God was capable of perfection. To me, this sense of inferiority is no different from the Christian slave mentality as exemplified by Mother Teresa. This links nicely to your quote from 17:36 which is indeed a good one, and in marked contrast to the Christian ethic (did you know that in 1 Enoch writing was considered sinful? "For men were not created for such a purpose, to give confirmation to their good faith with pen and ink." though presumably it was all right to carry on using clay tablets), but both systems are based on unquestioning acceptance of authority. That believers then went ahead despite what was in those books is demonstrated by the fact Arab astronomers ignored 36:40 which implies the sun and moon can never be in the same place in the sky, and regularly charted eclipses, and the Christian Mendel laid the foundations for modern genetics; both of these were done with personal beliefs in God, but despite rather than because of the reigning orthodoxy.
This might sound dogmatic in its own way, but as far as I'm concerned people not accepting evolution is beyond ludicrous, and despite their claims to the contrary it is a proven fact - the use of the word 'theory' is for the descriptions of the driving processes, not the changes themselves. They're deliberately not seeing what's happening in the real world as species either adapt to changing environments around them or arrive in new ones where they have to adapt to survive, but these people seem to think that because it's not in the Bible it doesn't exist. Do the penguins and kangaroos know this? :-) Now, to make matters even worse, Blair is allowing the establishment of even more religious schools which will teach creationism, although to be fair the mainstream ones accept the theory well enough and teach it as they do any other science.
I also have an keen interest in astronomy, though living in central London there's far too much light pollution to permit decent viewing except perhaps in a 60° cone from the zenith, and I collect all the releases from Hubble and the various interplanetary probes such as Mars Global Surveyor. It might sound weird, but I have what amounts to an in-built yearning to go into space, though I'm well-aware that with our limited human senses we couldn't see a fraction of the incredible images captured by time exposures which collect wavelengths far beyond those our eyes can perceive, but once again, even the sheer beauty of these phenomena wouldn't bring people together because of how their religion colours their perceptions, and there is an equal amount of beauty right here on Earth which hasn't united any of the factions. Some see nature as a sign of their god's existence and then fight as they do now over which god, others deny the possibility of extra-terrestrial life because it isn't mentioned in their holy books, and even if there were life, how can they be saved if they didn't have their own Jesus? (And yes, that's a very serious point made by some theologians, I didn't make it up!).
You say that you "don't care what it says in the Bible or Quran", which to me indicates Freethought / Humanist thinking as you follow what you think is right (within existing societal constraints), yet as a 'new Muslim' doesn't this bring you into conflict with what the Qur'an actually teaches, or do you use it as a basis for your faith rather than as a physical manifestation of it (given it's allegedly divine origins)? If so, why not create your own system of beliefs as to who / what constitutes G/god, or become a deist? As for fundamental Muslims driving you mad because they don't understand freedom of speech, for them that's the whole point - they demand a theocracy where their religion is the state, and there's no such thing as a civil society (civil as in secular rather than polite). The excesses of the Taliban are on a par with the kind of fascist theocracy some Christians want in America.
It would be nice if there could be a series of axioms for everyone to live by, but an example of it being completely impractical is the persistently arrogant unilateralism of the United States or some of the Arab states drawing up their own set of rights because they deemed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was too liberal, so if people can't even agree on what precisely constitutes freedom of thought and expression (and of equality between the sexes and races, which itself goes against many religions), what hope is there? Religion should be a personal belief system, completely separate from the State (though as an anarchist I oppose the existence of the state as well) and any politics, whereas in the U.S. and increasingly here in the U.K. Christianity is being used as part of the political process to such an extent that the two are virtually inseparable. "A vote for me is a vote for god." "God is on our side." The same argument was used by the Crusaders, and both Islam and Christendom was spread by the sword.

14 May 2002 : Trina Dennis

You have a wonderful site!! I've read most of the subjects I came by to see, and then some. Anyway I wanted to talk to you about some things you said about the Bible and the Qur'an. I don't mean to say anything negetive. But you got some of the information a little twisted. Like in the Cosmology section in the Qur'an. The last quote from it you said " 2 + 4 + 2 = 8. The simplest explanation is that some of the days overlap, but if this book is supposed to be the undeniable word of Allah, you'd think he would have made it a bit clearer. Perhaps he was got distracted by God dictating the various decalogues." I am too lazy to run and go find mine at the moment, but you can clearly see that it was asking a question at the beginning and answering it at the end. " … him who created the earth in two days? … ", " … So he completed them as seven firmaments in two days, … "
You have some more "twisted" things in your sections.
Thank you for typing out the angel list, thingy. I hate it when I have to go through the Bible and other Magick books to find Angel names, and etc.

Trina, I can see why you might think I've misinterpreted things, for my quote doesn't include all of the question. The Sura begins "Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in two Days?", which as far as I can see isn't questioning the actual number of days, but rather the existence of their God.

17 April 2002 : Richard Scarbrough

Wonderful!!!!!!
I was searching Google for information about the Coelacanth for a debate in one of my classes and I stumbled across your wonderful site! You have made my day! I think that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and you have articulated yours in stellar fashion. I share some of your beliefs, mostly those dealing with governmental function, but I am somewhat theistic, you never can be sure. I adhere to many different religious teachings and will not force them on anyone. I mostly hang with my friends, attend classes at a local university, eat out with my girlfriend, converse at times with my ex-wife, yes, we are still very good friends, and eat hotdogs W/O buns. I just wanted to send this communication to you to let you know that I think your site is stupendous and have recommended it to many of my friends!
Hail Discord!

04 January 2002 : Heather

Hi there.
I wanted to congratulate you on your page exposing the myths of Islam. I am a fundamentalist Christian, so we obviously have some differences concerning our views of Christianity, but your critique of the Qu'ran was very informative. Did you do all the research yourself, or did you summarize information from another source? I can't imagine reading the entire Qu'ran solely for the purpose of debunking it! Of course, I've never sat down with a copy of the Qu'ran, so I don't even know how long it is. Anyways, I'm exploring the rest of your site. Thanks again for the page on Islam.

I did read the Qur'an (a downloaded version of the Yusuf Ali translation), but the same criteria has been applied to both books.

14 November 2001 : Ben Fogg

Wow did a Christian burn your puppy?

Huh? Never had one, and I like my carpets the colour they are. Christians seem to like burning things, don't they? - other xians they've judged as heretics, anyone else for any other reason, oh, and let's not forget the Harry Potter books that will turn all future generations of poor vulnerable children away from the good lord.

28 October 2001 : Darwin Barrett

I love your Website. A lot of interesting information. I was particularly interested in the Quotes from the Quran. You captured a lot of the essence of the "Problem" with Mohammedism. There is more however. Some of it very scary.
All Muslims have a duty to participate in the Struggle (Jihad, Jihaad, Jehad, Jehaad) against the disbelievers (Fitnah, which is called Shirk).
All Muslims also have a duty to Protect other Muslims in the struggle against the disbelievers.
Any action, even violence and deception (Taqiyyah), against a disbeliever, committed in the struggle against fitnah, insures the Muslim a place in Heaven. (Words in parenthesis are good search words)
Although you may not believe in these concepts, they do, and there are over 1.2 billion of them worldwide. The disbelievers on the Muslims target list include Atheists, Buddists, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, and Christians. Anyone who is not Muslim. Their goal is a Muslim controlled world.
I agree the US has been naieve, maybe even stupid, in it's policies. But this struggle against the disbelievers has been going on since 632 AD. All the socio-economic and political stuff is just smoke and mirrors, to justify their cause. They use a very old revolutionary tactic. Provoke until attacked, and then blame their action on the victim. The world takes the bait, hook, line, and sinker. The US is being attacked because it is the last big obstacle the Muslims face. They Broke up the Soviet Union, liberating the Muslim dominated countries (8, I think), so Russia won't be a problem. The 100 million Muslims in India will make short work of that continent. Africa will present no challenge. The Chinese Muslim Population is estimated at 1.4% of the total, But there are enough neighboring countries with large Muslim populations to quickly overrun China. Indonesia has 160 million Muslims. If they can neutralize the US, and I believe they will with the help of the UN and the anti-war movement, then things will progress very rapidly. I don't think Europe will present the Muslims much of a problem, judging from the difference in numbers.
Have you read "A Short History of Byzantium" by John Julius Norwich? It gives a good description of the first 800 years of Muslim expansionism.
Here are some good websites
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/
http://www.geocities.com/felahi60/
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/archives/byauthor/anwarshaikh/j.html
Quotes from just after the Islamic Revolution in 1979:
"The mullahs are going to rule now. We are going to have ten thousand years of the Islamic republic. The Marxists are going to go on with their Lenin. We are going to go on in the way of Khomeini." Ayatollah Khalkhali
"What he [Stalin] did in Russia we have to do in Iran. We, too, have to do a lot of killing. A lot." Behzad, Iranian interpreter for Western journalist V.S. Naipaul
"There is no room for play in Islam… It is deadly serious about everything." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Speech at Qum, reported in Time magazine January 7, 1980
Have a nice day

19 October 2001 : Paul Nott

congrats
Just to say that your site is the most comprehensive and relevant site regarding anything.
Well done, you have set yourself far apart from any possibility of unconstructive criticism.
Samael

Neither are true in the slightest. Criticising dogma doesn't take much effort, and some of my models are so simple as to be almost laughable, but then I don't claim to be a professional designer.

14 October 2001 : Riina Makk

September 11th
Thank you for the great quotes. September 11th made me realize I was an atheist. Isn't the "pissing contest" between people's gods enough to do that to more people? Sadly, it is not. I hear a lot of: "My God toppled the twin towers". "My god saved lots of people by keeping them from going on the planes" "My god will bless the Arab world, just you wait and see". "My god blesses America".
I live in the Bible Belt of the US. I am spending a lot of time in "neighborhoods" like these because I can't stand what is going on out there. Yes, I am still "in the closet" but ready to come out.

12 October 2001 : Ayesha

Comment on your site regarding Islam
Be obedient, or be beaten. Oh, but lightly, of course. Sura 4:34 (Women) "… Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); … "
I looked up the word lightly