Glenn Beck up there with Nelson Mandela? excuse me while I go vomit blood. pis3rch

Yeah, I wondered why Mandela was on there too, damn commie.

[QUOTE="entropyecho"]

Switzerland - they have been waiting patiently for the right moment all along.

MrTorry

I've heard that Switzerland don't even have an army. Imight be wrong though :P

The Swiss population is its army. Everyone is required to own a gun.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

If World War III should start, it will be blamed on Iran or Syria or something, and the United States will be viewed as freedom fighters when they are actually the perpetrators of genocide.

danjammer69

The United States has been the perpetrators of genocide since at least the beginning of the 19th century with the countless deaths of Native Americans, the systematic elimination of countless tribes, and the theft of their lands, among many other crimes. An estimated 18 million Native Americans populated North America, and their numbers have been reduced to a mere 1.4 million spread across the entire continent. The United States is not the only country to blame, because Spanish, British, French, Dutch, and Portuguese imperialism certainly took its toll as well, but the United States has just as much blood on its hands.

If we account for the Korean, Vietnam, and the two current wars started for the sake of Liberty, Justice, and Democracy, then the United States has shown herself to have quite a history of genocide and imperialism across the globe.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] You can't really blame people for being raised in families where the bible wasn't important to them or their cultural up bringing. And most people who post religious topics have formed their opinions based on experience with the specific religion. I was raised a catholic, for example. Why would you expect somebody who wasn't raised in a specific religion setting.. to have any kind of knowledge or opinion on that specific religion. I've yet to see that occur... as often as my first example. More people with religious back grounds are more likely to post why they don't like a specific religion then somebody who has no knowledge of it. The question wasn't.. have you read the bible and post topics/opinions on it's contents. The question was simply have you read the bible.EMOEVOLUTION

I haven't blamed anyone for anything, but anyone who wishes to debate on a subject should have an adequate background on the subject, otherwise he will be shunned from the debate by those who wish to take the discussion seriously. There's no reason why a person can't pick up a Bible and start reading it before he begins to speak on it. Of course, he can do as he wishes, but if he chooses not to know the material, then I must be obliged to take anything he says with a grain of salt.

William Penn once said, "Thouwho thinketh twice, before thou speaketh once, wilt speaketh twice the better." I agree with this.

I don't think so at all, if the posts in this thread are anything to go by. Those who have read the Bible seem to be religious, while those who haven't seem to be atheist. I'm not religious, and I have stated that I've read it for enjoyment.

If World War III should start, it will be blamed on Iran or Syria or something, and the United States will be viewed as freedom fighters when they are actually the perpetrators of genocide.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="Ontain"]not aliens. it was the produce of generations of slave labor. scholars already have plausible explanations for how they things were built.Ontain

All the explanations that have been put forth are the subject of intense debate, and no-one can agree on anything, even whether slave-labour was used at all.

Of course, but I'm just adding more discussion. :P

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

I think the poll results are a bit unsurprising. More than half the people have never even read the Bible, 28 people have never heard of the Bible and about 38% have read the Bible.

Of course, someone can still form an opinion on religion without knowing or understanding that religion, but that makes their opinion uninformed and not worth my time to read or reply to. So now when another religious topic pops, I'll be inclined to take most opinions with a grain of salt, which is what I do anyway, because it's apparent to me who have read the Bible and who haven't based on their responses.

EMOEVOLUTION

I haven't blamed anyone for anything, but anyone who wishes to debate on a subject should have an adequate background on the subject, otherwise he will be shunned from the debate by those who wish to take the discussion seriously. There's no reason why a person can't pick up a Bible and start reading it before he begins to speak on it. Of course, he can do as he wishes, but if he chooses not to know the material, then I must be obliged to take anything he says with a grain of salt.

William Penn once said, "Thouwho thinketh twice, before thou speaketh once, wilt speaketh twice the better." I agree with this.

not aliens. it was the produce of generations of slave labor. scholars already have plausible explanations for how they things were built.Ontain

All the explanations that have been put forth are the subject of intense debate, and no-one can agree on anything, even whether slave-labour was used at all.

[QUOTE="TheAbbeFaria"]

[QUOTE="EMOEVOLUTION"] There is a significant amount of evidence to suggest that ancient civilizations did have a fairly knowledgeable grasp of mathematics and engineering.EMOEVOLUTION

No there's not. They had a very rudimentary knowledge of algebra and geometry, and a modern student taking geometry is learning more geometry than was known even in the days of the Pax Romana. For this reason, I do find it incredible that they were able to construct the Pyramids. I'm not saying that they were unequipped, based on their knowledge of mathematics, to create a pyramid structure, because they were able to, and anyone who knows geometry knows the basic fundamentals behind such a structure.

However, what they lacked in certain knowledge, they made up for in the tools and tricks they employed to get around the hurdles inherent in such an undertaking.

If you want to start applying mathematics to physics and such as seen over the last 200 years.. that's one thing. But engineering isn't that complicated.

Engineering is directly related to physics and mathematics, and it certainly is complicated, which is why no one knows for sure how many of the structures of the past, even with our advanced knowledge of engineering today, were created.

Early civilizations probably had fairly advanced techniques to building structures that have been lost over time.

For example 1 man Stonehenge.

jrhawk42

This is definitely true, and I subscribe to this reasoning. For as much knowledge as we've gained, there has been much knowledge lost over time. For awhile, we didn't even know how a dome could be constructed, until it was rediscovered in the late 15th century in Florence. I think there is much we still don't know that people of antiquity did know, which may explain the construction of the Pyramids as well as the Stonehenge.