Talk:The Urantia Book: Difference between revisions

Archive

Seemed time for a new archive and a nice, fresh discussion page. Wazronk 04:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

It appears that it might be appropriate to change the topic heading from The Urantia book to simply "Urantia" with the Urantia book as a sub heading. I only suggest this as the book has evolved into a rather large developing movement which has in excess of 25 titles having to do with Urantia and hundreds of study groups and Internet websites which have nothing to do with the Urantia foundation as well as translations in excess of 10 languages by authors other than Urantia foundation.User:Majeston 13 May 2007

It would seem to be necessary for documentation of the 25 or so titles as offspring of The Urantia Book, and then would need to be noteworthy for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Is the suggestion for change of The Urantia Book title warranted on those criteria? Richiar 04:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Tenskwatawa eclipse of 1806

In paper 90, section 2 of the The Urantia Book, there is a statement about Tenskwatawa:

"Ever and anon, true prophets and teachers arose to denounce and expose shamanism. Even the vanishing red man had such a prophet within the past hundred years, the Shawnee Tenskwatawa, who predicted the eclipse of the sun in 1808 and denounced the vices of the white man."

This has been cited in the article as a mistake in the book under the "Criticism of science" section with this language:

"The book says that a solar eclipse was predicted in 1808 by the Native American prophet Tenskwatawa. The eclipse actually was predicted in late April of 1806 and occurred on June 16, 1806."

Every so often, a person will come by the article, and add commentary that there were in fact 3 solar eclipses in 1808, and they will cite a source such as NASA to prove it. This is true, there were 3 solar eclipses in 1808. But unfortunately, these edits are not made with a full understanding of solar eclipses, or with the well-documented historical record of this event.

Most critically, the idea that any of these three could have been potentially the Tenskwatawa eclipse is mistaken because any given solar eclipse is only visible to a very small slice of the earth's surface. The three eclipses of 1808 were extremely remote and were not visible to Tenskwatawa or his followers:

• May 25 -- Antarctica, south of Africa
• Oct 19 -- Antarctica, south of Australia
• Nov 18 -- Northern Russia

Also, the prediction by Tenskwatawa according to historic references was for a total eclipse. There are 3 different types of eclipse -- partial, annular, and total -- and only two total eclipses during the lifetime of Tenskwatawa that were viewable in North America. The first was on June 16, 1806. This is perhaps best represented visually with a graphic of the paths of occlusion for total and annular eclipses during that time period according to NASA (1801-1820). The other one was in 1834, two years prior to his death (1821-1840). The three solar eclipses that occured in 1808 were not only extremely remote, they were underwhelming partial eclipses.

All scientific evidence, all calculations, all historical records point to the Tenskwatawa prediction eclipse as the total eclipse having occured on June 16, 1806. See the book The Life of Tecumseh and of His Brother the Prophet for historical documentation of 1806 as the year (because its copyright has expired, it can be obtained for free from books.google.com). Editors will have to provide published scientific and historical evidence to support any theorized doubts about 1806 as the correct date of the eclipse that Tenskwatawa is associated with. Wazronk 05:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

NASA lists 3 eclipses during 1908 1908 Jan 03 Total 130 1.044 04m14s ne Australia, w N America, nw S America [Total: Atlantic, Costa Rica] 1908 Jun 28 Annular 135 0.965 04m00s America's, w Africa, w Europe [Annular: Mexico, U.S., Mauritania, Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso] 1908 Dec 23 Hybrid 140 1.002 00m12s S America, Antarctica, s Africa [Hybrid: Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, s Atlantic]

The June 28 annular eclipse shows a path directly over northern florida http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEplot/SEplot1901/SE1908Jun28A.GIF The quotation in the Ub does not say anything about a "total" eclipse. The material now contained in Wikipedia regarding an error in the Ubook is mis-leading at best. user:Majeston

I didn't say that TUB says the eclipse was total, and the article hasn't said it either. I said that "the prediction by Tenskwatawa according to historic references was for a total eclipse". This event was in relatively recent times (compared to the history of human civilization as a whole) and is well-documented, see here for a write up available online:

"At around noon on the appointed day, June 16th 1806, a total solar eclipse crossed the region. A long eclipse with a band of totality stretching from near the southern tip of Lake Michigan to just north of Cincinnati it encompassed most of the lands inhabited by Tenskwatawa's followers. In Greenville, where Tenskwatawa and Tecumseh waited for the event, close to a thousand had gathered to see the Prophet's sign. The Prophet waved his arms towards the eclipse at the appropriate time, and the people were truly impressed."

The article is accurate and clear. What is misleading is that you suggest an annular eclipse that took place in Florida 62 years after Tenskwatawa was dead and gone has anything to do with this. You are off by a century in your list of eclipses. Wazronk 17:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Wazronk on this one. ^(H) 13:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Adding chalkboard

I've added a link to a chalkboard to display proposed revisions to the article so people can see the proposed revision and comment on it.

I think the dots under "Comparison to Christianity" are hard on the eyes, and would propose a wikitable instead. I am constructing one to show what I mean, and comments would be welcome here. Richiar 20:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Urantia Book chalkboard

Hi Richiar,

I'm not sure about the bullet points being hard on the eyes. But then, I didn't have a problem with all the links that used to be in the "Overview" section, which drew enough comments over time that made it seem better to do without. It would be good to hear multiple comments. Wazronk 19:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It was pointed out to me by another editor that the "chalkboard" was an inappropriate use of

the namespace. What seems to be more standard I've been told is a sandbox for TUB. So, that has been activated. The idea is to be able to place and arrange content so the article can be trimmed and developed without disturbing the entire ecosystem, if you know what I mean. More on that below. I'm not sure where to put the sandbox link for TUB. Richiar 21:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of link

The link for the Urantia readers international was removed recently. It seemed like an appropriate link to me, and seemed to contribute to this article. There was no explanaton of why it was removed, and if there are no comments to the contrary, I'll put it back in shortly. Richiar 14:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I see the link was just placed in a different position. Never mind. Richiar 15:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Richiar,

I'm glad you mention this link. I did move it to a lower position the other day, and have done so in the past. I've not had overly strong opinions about its legitimacy in the article, but more and more I am becoming convinced this is an inappropriate link, which is only being placed on wikipedia for advertising purposes. This is top of the list under WP:LINKS as a reason for a link to not be included on wikipedia.

The only person who has maintained the link in the article over time is 66.177.21.64. Actually the only contributions to wikipedia by this IP has been to propagate the link. I see now that 66.177.21.64 has again shifted this link up the list of "External links", and my growing impression is that this person is not just satisfied with a link from this wikipedia article, but 66.177.21.64 wants to make the organization appear more prominent than it is by manipulating its placement on the external links list.

My understanding is that the three top-tier organizations in the Urantia movement are: Urantia Foundation, The Urantia Book Fellowship, and the Urantia Association International. The first two have historical roots back to the beginning of the movement in the 1950s and the third is the fraternal organization closely backed and supported by Urantia Foundation for going on 20 years. I agree with having links to the websites of these three organizations, and to me it makes sense that they are the first three links under the "External links" section of the article.

The reason I moved the placement of the Urantia Readers-International link to a lower position the other day is that it had been placed before the Urantia Book Fellowship and Urantia Association International, but from what I can see these two organizations are more prominent and should be listed first.

I have now removed the link altogether, pending evidence that it is being placed in the article for more than advertising purposes. The person 66.177.21.64 should address this concern, and I ask that they take a moment to read WP:LINKS. It seems likely to me that there could even be a conflict-in-interest and this person is in some way associated with Urantia Readers-International. From WP:LINKS:

"Due to the rising profile of Wikipedia and the amount of extra traffic it can bring a site, there is a great temptation to use Wikipedia to advertise or promote sites. This includes both commercial and non-commercial sites. You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked. If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it."

Wazronk 19:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sandbox

The chalkboard is not appropriate, I've learned, but a sandbox is, so here's the link: Talk: The Urantia Book/sandbox. Richiar 21:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I've done a little rewriting of the Intro, Overview, and Teachings, for anyone to look at and comment on. Richiar 22:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Lol

This article treats the book as if it isn't two thousand pages of bullhockey. Wikipedia can be so funny sometimes. - ∅ (∅), 03:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)