Talk:Nostradamus/Archive 5

message: Whichever predictions that Nostradamus got from the Arabic manuscript he stole, those are true and going to happen. The manuscript was a book written by Ali bin Abi Talib the fourth Islamic Khalifah. Ali got all the prophecies from Prophet Muhammad before the prophet died. The prophecies covering up to the era of the Dajjal (the Anti-Christ), prophet Isa (Jesus), Armageddon and many others. 9/11 also being revealed as the biggest hoax targeting the Muslims before the Anti-Christ era. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by  60.50.219.181  (talk • contribs)  08:27, 28 April 2006   (UTC)
:In that case, Mr Anonymous, you will need  to prove (a) that Nostradamus stole an Arabic manuscript, (b) that his prophecies are versions of its prophecies and (c) that they are true and going to happen. Quite a big job – and not a subject for this forum, which is concerned with discussing the article as based on the standard sources listed. Wikipedia is not for speculation, however fascinating. Try alt.prophecies.nostradamus? --PL 15:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well said PL.  That was a humourous link though -- truth seeker indeed -- I see that they are still seeking, well, stumbling around in the dark.  •Jim62sch• 19:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nostradamus's source: The Arabic manuscript 

message: I agree that Nostradamus's quatrains are so vague and loosely worded that any event could be interpreted from its sources. I write this out of all honesty because truth is stronger a goal than sophistry. Although I reiterate that Nostradamus is a HOAX in my opinion, I do have to be fair to the truth. Before 9-11, a video/documentary about Nostradamus did in fact mention that Nostradamus's quatrains revealed that New York would be a target of aggression from the Middle East with a description of the instruments used matching the airplanes used during that event. However, this video/documentary displayed the instruments as white ICBMs. Though the actual words of the quatrain came close to describing either instrument of 9-11. This is one thing I thought of after 9-11, that is I thought of Nostradamus's prediction pre- 9/11 according to this video/documentary and thought to myself, "Oh boy, now all the Nostradamus followers are going to scream we told you so !" So in all fairness not all attempts to correlate quatrains of Nostradamus with events in history came after the event which was compared. Although I agree with the author that many assertions by Nostradamus's followers occured with vague writing which could be interpreted in many different ways to events after the fact, 9/11 is not a credible premise for the author's argument as it leaves those that are familiar with Nostradamus followers' mumbo jumbo with opportunity to correct or refute that premise, thus leaving room for questioning the credibility of the rest of this article. I will write the name of this video/documentary tomorrow when I can pull it out of the collection. The rest of the article to my opinion is good though.
:Thank you, 66.32.41.9. Since the video you mention gives neither the date nor the correct means of attack for 9/11 (and is therefore not a prediction of it), and since videos and books galore have been incorrectly using Nostradamus to predict a nuclear attack on New York for years (including Orson Welles' famous The Man Who Saw Tomorrow, based on Erika Cheetham's long-discredited writings [see the reviews on my User page]), please refer to the article Nostradamus in Popular Culture (see link provided), which is the proper place for raising such issues if properly sourced. It already deals comprehensively with the point you mention, and not least the fact that the quatrains involved simply don't fit. --PL 08:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  prophecy and fact