EXCLUSIVE: Harold Camping to Speak Monday on Failed Prediction

International Business Times ^ | May 22, 2011

[don-o]

Harold Camping, the Oakland, California-based broadcaster who made a failed prediction about a cataclysmic doomsday said on Sunday he would make a statement on or by Monday night in a "public forum" to explain himself.

An IBTimes reporter met him at his home in Alameda, Calif., and said he would explain in the forum tomorrow.

When asked about his silence since the prediction, Camping said he needed more time seeing that his major prediction had failed, and wanted to think and recover, calling the event "a big deal."

Camping, 89, has not been heard from since Saturday.

In 1994, Camping also predicted that doomsday would come, although he admitted at the time there was a miscalculation.

[thackney]

So about 35% of their total assets is either cash or public-traded securities.

While stocks and bonds are not cash, they are pretty liquid in my opinion. They could be sold at market value within an hour.

[wideawake]

Like I said, a cash-poor operation.

$35mm in publicly traded securities is not cash-poor by any stretch of the imagination.

That's a lot of liquidity.

When the Wall Street Journal says "Apple's cash pile is now $65.8B" they are talking about $16B of cash, and almost $50B of publicly traded securities.

[Gondring]

And here I was debating with myself prior to posting that when you said he was supposed to donate what he was sitting on, you might have meant himself, not the company...and all the talk that he had taken the money and run (publicly traded securities are not identical to cash). I never guessed we had different definitions of “sitting on”.

But that’s irrelevant to the bottom line. I’m curious why you think he should donate his assets or the radio networks’.

[wideawake]

you might have meant himself, not the company

Do you really believe that he is practically - as opposed to legally - separate from the company?

I’m curious why you think he should donate his assets or the radio networks’.

Because he collected that money on false pretenses and, morally, he should give that largesse to non-fraudulent entities.

[Gondring]

Do you really believe that he is practically - as opposed to legally - separate from the company?

Not for most purposes. That's why I concluded you weren't making any relevant distinction.

Because he collected that money on false pretenses and, morally, he should give that largesse to non-fraudulent entities.

False pretenses?

He offered his interpretation of the Scriptures...Scriptures that are freely available for anyone to review. If a post of yours turns out to be wrong and I believed it, do you owe a donation to a third party?!

[wideawake]

If I solicited donations from you on the basis of the false information in my post, I would be morally obliged to return that donation to you or to donate it to a worthy cause if I could not locate you.

[728b]

"Unless he publicly apologizes and repents for his sin of presumption - and donates the $100mm he’s sitting on to actual worthy causes - then nothing he says is worth hearing."

" 20`But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.' 21. "And if you say in your heart, `How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?' 22. "when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him." Duet 18

It seems to me nothing he says is worth hearing no matter what he does.

[Gondring]

If I solicited donations from you on the basis of the false information in my post, I would be morally obliged to return that donation to you or to donate it to a worthy cause if I could not locate you.

The RNC owes a lot of people some big checks!