頭先睇影音使團D youtube片, 其中一條話: "科學家在該地區已進行了卓有成效的科研考證", 然後有一連串影住一D文章的配圖, 講到好似話佢地當年的所謂驚世發現, 其實已經喺學術期刊登出, 只係你班沐咀唔知頭唔知路.
佢有幾篇嘢唔係英文, 我冇辦法自己去睇; 有好多只係文章的片段, 唔知來歷; 只有一篇, 係有文章同作者名稱. 我立即上網搵, 係open access的, 任何人都可以睇.一睇個內容就十分失望, 根本同袁文輝嗰條舟係完全無關的, 根本就唔係一篇關於嗰舊木的文章, 作者亦唔係一個科學家. 影音使團是咪諗住冇人會check? 是咪唔記得咗有Howtindog呢個咁無聊的人?
影音使團片段: https://youtu.be/hK5FzM3PtN4?si=RZ5zE_x_9g0CmRv3&t=63
文章: https://www.atsjats.org/the-case-for-a%C4%9Fr%C4%B1-da%C4%9F%C4%B1/masis-as-biblical-mt.-ararat.pdf
而家影音使團扮晒正確嚴謹, 懶係保持理性客觀咁樣, 喺比較正式D的文宣度以"疑似係方舟的木結構"嚟稱呼嗰舊嘢, 但好明顯佢地一直都當正自己已發現到挪亞方舟, 一直都係咁樣同其他人講. 例如呢個影音使團項目及國際事工拓展執行總監Angela, 佢話最近喺台灣搭飛機返香港, 就同機上另一個女仔講: "有冇聽過挪亞方舟? 我地已經上過去嗰個地方, 其中一個人就坐喺你後面, 嗰個人就係袁文輝喇"(13:17). 其實睇晒成條片,都可以聽到佢由頭到尾都係話嗰條嘢就係挪亞方舟.
袁文輝喺影音使團官網出咗篇文章, 講挪亞精神, 佢要學效挪亞咁樣, 做方舟事工的項目負責人. 我都好想知, 挪亞當年係以乜嘢手法向人募捐, 問人攞咗幾多個他連得嚟成立「真 • 挪亞方舟國際事工」? 🙂
2010年嗰時話係4,800年前:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZyeCHhER5DQJ:https://www.media.org.hk/tme_main/index.php/action/20100425&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=firefox-b-d
2023年就話係6,000多年前:
https://youtu.be/OOyFZpEFPcM?si=tfbkSzr0qISU44rv&t=634
https://youtu.be/zm53AmqbbhU?si=wRZVQh0gNryUon8w&t=388
https://youtu.be/OOyFZpEFPcM?si=ijX44dYyyqXsG724&t=317
我一直唔明, 做乜以勒基金嗰個總幹事陳歐陽桂芬咁撐影音使團去搵方舟, 頭先睇創世電視一個節目, 見到佢講以下的嘢, 終於明白, 條友相信神已經興起中國, 令中國成為世界強國, 所以由中國人搵到方舟係合情合理的事 (對佢嚟講), 呢班中國人的不專業, 就更顯出係神的作為 sosad:
"上帝不斷興起中國人, 不斷興起華人, 中國成為世界強國, 很多華人很多中國人被興起, 今天方舟探索, 能夠被一隊華人探索隊進入, 而這隊探索隊並非一直從事探索的人, 這更加值得我們思考."
https://www.salon.com/2014/07/15/im_sorry_for_coining_the_phrase_manic_pixie_dream_girl/
People online often criticize a movie or tv series with the phrase Manic Pixie Dream Girl, thinking that they're educated critics who are capable of using a "technical" phrase in their tweet or comment. The fact is that the person who coined that phrase nearly 20 years ago openly admitted the regret of coining that phrase.
//I honestly hate the term too. I feel deeply weird, if not downright ashamed, at having created a cliché that has been trotted out again and again in an infinite Internet feedback loop. I understand how someone could read the A.V. Club list of Manic Pixie Dream Girls and be offended by the assertion that a character they deeply love and have an enduring affection for, whether it’s Diane Keaton’s Annie Hall or Katharine Hepburn in “Bringing Up Baby,” is nothing more than a representation of a sexist trope or some sad dude’s regressive fantasy.
It doesn't make sense that a character as nuanced and unforgettable as Annie Hall could exist solely to cheer up Alvy Singer. As Kazan has noted, Allen based a lot of Annie Hall on Diane Keaton, who, as far as I know, is a real person and not a ridiculous male fantasy.//
