The History and Future of Man and Space, 1 of 6

[christo930]

@VioletFlame137 There are passages in the bible that STRONGLY suggest that the earth is flat, such as the ability to see all the lands of the earth when you are the top of a mountain. There are also passages that appear to assert that the earth is in the center of the universe and that the heavens rotate around the earth, although the scriptural assertions are not as clear cut as the flat earth hypothesis.

[christo930]

@VioletFlame137 Christianity teaches ignorance and teaches that believing things on little, no, or contradictory evidence is a virtue. What could be more dark than that? Christianity (and all religions) also highly encourage people to take what they are told as "gospel" for lack of a better word. What kind of organization that promotes knowledge also promotes accepting assertions without evidence?

[christo930]

@VioletFlame137 There is not a single foot print of humans in rocks (or fossils of humans) older than humanity, period. You show me one example that is valid and in the peer reviewed literature and then I will believe you. The only real way you have around this problem is to call into question the entire worldwide scientific community's credibility as if they were making it all up to protect creationism.

[Mohaha1314]

i hate disney

[4130635763]

If by "fundamentalist Christians" you mean those that take the Bible and its history as literal reality, since none of its history has yet been disproved, that would most likely be true. Though I wasn't indicating that by my post.

[apk1215]

Sigh. Another atheist puking up a video with religion or politics. One more reason,I guess,why so few atheists want to be identified as such.

He's totally wrong too. For example,according to the history book,"A Global HIstory of Man" by L.S. Stavrianos (Allyn & Bacon.1963),an entirely secular source,a Christianized Western Europe made more technological advances between 1000 & 1500 than the Greeks & the Romans made between 1000 BC & 500 AD,a period 3 times as long.

[darnact]

It would seem that Terry Pratchett's Discworld had some influence from history. Why is everybody talking about the church? This is a video about Mars! Also when I first saw Ptolemy's statue I was like "Oh HEY, it's the guy I learned about in Philosophy class.... (his eyes change) OH MY HE'S CRAZY. RUN!".

[seelkadoom9000]

thank you so much for this

[Hardyman1966]

This is retro-atomic-age HEAVEN!

[satekmary506094]

Phenomenal! 4:15 I really like the scene of the four busts that talk! I say interesting things!

[misskjdee78]

off the subject......i blame walt disney for the unrealistic expectations of men and happily ever afters!

[undogod]

Thanxs @YTMonitor1 its good nostalgia.

[PlasmaMice]

wow 0.0

[alexthekiller25]

nooooooooooooooooooo

[demonswoop]

I stopped watching after the first minute, due to the annoying website bug.

[christo930]

I wish they would have pointed out that it was Christianity that caused that 1000 plus years of darkness, stupidity and superstitions. They also failed to mention that the Greeks knew within 1% the size of the Earth (and the shape).

[kmvoss]

@christo930

I like that you're named after Christ.

[christo930]

What I am supposed to do, change my name because I rejected religious beliefs, beliefs that have no positive evidence a great deal of contradictory evidence?

[Scoinsoffaterocks]

@christo930

Issac Newton, Galileo Galilee, and many more set the foundations of science. They were Christian. Most of the basic things we know like , the modern numbers, algebra, astronomy, medicine, and architecture were founded by the Muslims. The Roman empire and their processors, the Roman Catholics, made up many excuses to do evil, religion was their favorite.

There's no need to point fingers at anyone for problems since that won't solve any.

[christo930]

@Scoinsoffaterocks They only learned the things they did because they rejected the beliefs of the church and then fought the church in public about the findings. If the church had their way, we would have the same level of knowledge as we did in 1010ad.

[Scoinsoffaterocks]

@christo930

The church is very bad, I know. But you're blaming religion which was also a victim of the dark ages of stupidity.

[christo930]

@Scoinsoffaterocks The church, especially the catholic church, was an engine of stupidity, not a victim of it.

[Scoinsoffaterocks]

@christo930

At least we're on the same page here. I was talking about RELIGION. Don't get the 2 confused.

[christo930]

@Scoinsoffaterocks It's just that the biggest religions (like Catholicism) have the most power and cause the most problems. But I do view religion as a problem and a detriment to the human experience. Now, a person's personal faith in whatever he believes is not a problem, as long as it is kept personal. Inevitably though, people's personal faith becomes political and that is where the problem is.

[Scoinsoffaterocks]

@christo930

It is not the religion, but the church. The evil leaders say they're religious and their actions are so, but nothing about what they did was supported by religion. And now modern Christianity is descended from the errors of the past. A reformation is needed. That is why I am not Catholic. Politics and religion don't mix. But we are entering a time of SPIRITUAL dark ages. What kind of civilization is that. To all the extreme atheist claim that we are blind while they are ignorant.

[christo930]

@Scoinsoffaterocks I don't know what you mean by "spiritual dark ages". For one, what exactly do you mean by spiritual? Religion, by it's very nature is corrupt and unreliable. There was no "golden age" for the Catholic church when everything they did was good, for example. Atheists make no claims.

[Scoinsoffaterocks]

@christo930

Exactly my point. There were no golden ages and right now religions is corrupt and unreliable. Stop confusing the church with religion. There is a difference between the fucking Vatican and the church(de facto). The Vatican is getting me pissed. They are evil but the true church members don't have the same views. We have charity work which is true and a golden heart. Catholics do not represent all religion and you can't believe that religious people are evil, that's racist.

[christo930]

@Scoinsoffaterocks I make a clear distinction between "the church" and "its followers". I don't think religious people are bad or anything, it's the institution that is bad and beyond repair. Organized religion exists for one purpose and one purpose only, that is to serve the needs of the church and it's leaders at the expense of it's followers. I have met many wonderful, warm and loving religious people, even in my family.

[Scoinsoffaterocks]

@christo930

What I mean is that both spirituality and knowledge has been neglected during the middle ages.

[Dalryk]

@christo930 You're still failing to make a distinction between religions that worship one god and those that worship many. The so-called paganistic religions are by nature more open-minded.

[friendlybees]

@christo930 Sure, true christians are fearsome warriors

[christo930]

@friendlybees I don't know what post you are referring to, maybe you could include a quote?

[Bondianwolf]

@christo930

I'm not Christian, but they also brought down the Roman Empire. Maybe you should make your own video instead of complaining about others while you collect your welfare checks religious bigot

[christo930]

@Bondianwolf Not only am I a religious bigot, but I am on welfare besides? I have nothing against religious people, I have a problem with religion itself and not just any particular religion, but all religions.

[Bondianwolf]

@christo930

The USSR banned all religions. Can you share with all of us the paradise that resulted from that achievement?

[christo930]

@Bondianwolf I would agree with you that banning religions isn't the answer. Education, rational thinking, demanding evidence to form your beliefs are the right way. Embracing atheism blindly or as a dogma or attached to a political ideology isn't going to do the world any good.

[DuBarryFilms]

@christo930 That's a LIE and The only STUPID is a person who attacks an entire religion for the acts of a few..what a loser!-not to mention the idiots that jumped on the backward bandwagon_

[christo930]

@DuBarryFilms I am not attacking the people of a religion, I am attacking religion itself. Religion has done more to hurt and retard the progress of the human race than any other ideology. The church fought every single scientific advance and used the rules of religion and their political power to keep people in ignorance. Every religion is guilty of this. The Greeks had blueprints for a steam engine! Christianity stifled learning, ruled with an iron fist was 1 of the causes of the dark ages

[vinha1006]

@christo930 You apparently cannot hear or read. Christianity had little or nothing to do with the rejection of Aristarchus' thoeries. That was well before the time of Christianity. Ptolemy and the Greeks began the long days, as Carl Sagan points out in Cosmos. If the Aristotileans had been defeated, we would be at least 500 years ahead by now, again as Carl Sagan pointed out in Cosmos.

Must you boneheaded a-holes always knee-jerk and scream that Christianlity did it? You're like these libtards.

[christo930]

@vinha1006 Did you not read what I said? Christianity was 1 of the causes of the dark ages, not THE cause. Christianity did a lot to keep us in the dark ages though.

[vinha1006]

@christo930 -Christianity was NOT a cause of the dark ages. In fact, the knowledge preserved by the "towered monks and clerics" and the Persians (of all people) was the main impetus that brought the western world out of the dark times. Ideas developed in one place were transported to other places and then brought back (such as the concept of the number "0"). It has always been this knee-jerk reaction that has infuriated scholars of all stripes, including Islamists. Get your history straight!

[4130635763]

@christo930 Actually, that isn't true. It was the monks of Christianity that kept knowledge alive. It was the demise of the Romans in Europe and the subsequent rise of the "hordes" that create the so-called "dark ages." AND, we must remember that it wasn't Biblical Christianity on display, but Catholicism.

[christo930]

@4130635763 So only if fundamentalists Christians, complete with their creationism had taken hold, we would all be much better off?

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 ?!? It was the collapse of the Roman Empire that caused a "dark ages" of only a few hundred years. Most of the Middle Ages were actually a period of great artistic and scientific advancement funded, for the most part, by the Church. The Church preserved as much Roman learning as it could, reintroduced Greek learning via Islam, started the first great European universities, laid the groundwork for science, and hired the artists of Renaissance. Look up some history guy.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven I guess if you want to cherry pick history you can support any idea. Christianity kept people ignorant for centuries and the church even refused to print the bible in languages the people could understand. Did certain individuals that were Christian help preserve knowledge and make new breakthroughs, sure. Was it the churches that caused this? HELL NO! The church fought every single inch of ground to keep people in the dark.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Of anyone that can be accused of cherry picking, it would seem to be you. You always seem to have a ready excuse. It's hard to even argue against someone who can acknowledge that the Church founded universities but apparently had an active interest in keeping people ignorant (forgetting that literacy is still a novel idea for most people, due to poverty rather than conspiracy). If you care to refute any of what I said with more than "THEY JUST KEEP PEOPLE DARK M'KAY!!" I'll listen.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Are you trying to say that the church had nothing to do with the widespread ignorance and illiteracy among the populations? Are you trying to imply that the church (for example, catholic church), encouraged unbiased investigation of the natural world? Were they open to the heliocentric model of the solar system?

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 I'm saying that the almost total collapse of civil society 1500 years ago had a lot more to do with it than the church. At a time when even the social and economic elite were barely literate, the church was practically a beacon. That is still true in spite of the Crusades and the Inquisition and what happened with Galileo, which I will explain shortly. Your problem is that you're looking to assign blame, as though humanity's natural state when society collapses is happy bunnytime.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven From what I understand, the church tried very hard to keep the masses in ignorance and wouldn't even allow their followers to own a copy of the bible in their own language. They believed in demons and witches and even burnt witches at the stake. How in the world could an "enlightened" church do those deeds and spread that venom?

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Most societies have believed in evil spirits and people who summon them to do evil deeds. You might also want to distinguish between the Inquisition, which was to deal with heresy within the church, and witchtrials, which were for the most part not carried out by any official body of the church. They were usually flashes of mob rule and not an organised "holocaust".

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 As for Bibles in the vernacular, yes there was an element of control about it, but not because they wanted to "keep people ignorant". It was more specifically to reign in what they saw as damaging and heretical interpretations of Scripture that might come out of ignorant and uneducated readers.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Think about how utterly stupid that line of reasoning is, if you assume the bible is the word of god. God isn't capable of writing clearly enough so people can come to the right conclusion of what he was trying to say?

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 The Bible isn't the Word of God. The Word of God is an active, living expression of God Himself that was most clearly incarnated in Jesus. The Bible is a collection of books written by human beings testifying to their experience with the Word of God. It's a distinction that is ordinarily lost of Fundamentalists, and you are parroting them. As for clarity, make no mistake: there is nothing written so well that some idiot won't misunderstand and misinterpret, even IKEA instructions.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Well if you think that is the case, then the bible has no more authority than any one else's musings about god and their relationship with it/him/her/they. When it comes to the bible, I admit that I see it more along the lines of the fundamentalists and not with a more nuanced view. Ether the bible is 100% correct, or it isn't and if it isn't, then it has no more weight than any other book. Also, a nuanced view provides cover for the people who take it literally.

[christo930]

@christo930 I am hard on the bible because it has been a source of suffering since the time the first scribe set his quill in ink. While religion and the bible have given the world some great art and have inspired some men to achieve wonderful things, it has not been without i's problems, and I feel it's problems far out weigh it's good.Any good done in it's name does nothing to prove the truth of it's claims.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 I cannot be as theoretical as you about the value that religion has added to society. Up here in Canada, we got universal healthcare and votes for women because of the activity of politically involved religious people motivated by religious reasons. I wouldn't attempt to run your ideas of a flagpole around black people who have a high opinion of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. either...

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven M.L. King is a figurehead, in both the figurative and literal sense. While ordinary black folks were walking to and from work because of the bus boycott and suffering terribly, MLK was being chauffeured around with an entourage of followers(and mistresses in every city). When he spoke, thousands of people showed up. He was hardly making any real sacrifices. I have far more respect for the waitress or factory worker that participated in the boycott and walked to/from a real job.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 But those same people would have been predominately religious, which makes them bad people. Point is, figurehead or no, you are making a wholesale dismissal of the socially positive actions taken by religious people with religious motivations because you're being extraordinarily selective about what you look at and how you look at it. Quite often, critics will make any excuse for good things done by religion while trying to pin every bad thing on religion somehow.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 ... Certainly many evil things have been done using religion as an excuse, but are you seriously suggesting that the world would somehow be less violent, that people would be less rapacious, that society would be kinder and gentler, and governments less territorial if religion did not exist? Good Lord, the bloodiest wars in human history were all fought by secular nations in the 20th century. More people have died in conflict the last 100 years than through the whole "dark ages"...

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven No, I don't. If people accepted atheism as a dogma, it would be just as bad if no worse. There is no known society in history that fell because they demanded evidence for their beliefs. To paraphrase Hitchens, there is nothing positive a religious person can do because of their religion that a non believer couldn't do, but there are plenty of bad things that only a religious person could be motivated to do.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Hitchens is easily and obviously mistaken. One good thing that theists can do that atheists cannot do is pray. You may disagree that it "qualifies", but that only gets us into a debate over who decides what is "good". That is above and beyond the fact that, statistically, religious people tend to give more to charity and become more involved in justice causes than non-religious people. But as you said, that proves nothing (which makes me wonder why you brought it up).

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven You are simply wrong about this charity thing (unless you want to include religious organizations as being charities). Have you ever heard of MSF? When atheists do charitable work, it isn't done in the name of dogma. We don't go into aids ridden countries and preach the sinfulness of condoms, for example. I obviously don't accept prayer as a good act.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Look up the article "Do atheists care less?" on Macleans.ca as one example.

You don't accept prayer as a good act, but that in turn undermines Hitchens whole argument. Is he saying that there is no good deed that religious people can do that atheists cannot according to religious values or atheist ones? If it's atheist ones, then he's proving nothing. Atheists think they're overall as virtuous (in theory). Okay sure...

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Prayer has been studied on large scales and is shown to not only have no positive effects, it even shows a slight negative effect. Why don't you explain exactly how a god or gods is supposed to know what you are praying about? Can he/she/it read your mind telepathically? Is prayer the only thing he hears or does he read your entire mind? Let me know, I'm interested.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Ah more excuses that completely ignore the argument I was making. Great skills you have there.

I'm going to guess that if you can't work out conclusions from omniscience and omnipresence being widely regarded as characteristics of the Judeo-Christian God, then there isn't much more I could say about the mechanics of prayer.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Search for "Do atheists care less" in quotes and go to the second article, the one posted by the centerforinquiry and you will find how wrong that article really is. By counting the church itself as a charitable organization, even if they do no charity work, the religious get to count non-charitable donations as charitable donations. Pathetic piece of trash, really.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Hey, I have no problem counting atheist organizations as tax exempt charitable organizations. Get on that.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 But if the debate is trying to prove to religious people that atheists can be as virtuous (in theory), then you have to factor in that prayer is a very good deed in religious circles. It`s like this: as Christians we believe in a personal deity of infinite love to whom we can communicate petitions for positive involvement in the lives of others. In fact, we are COMMANDED to pray for others as a first a primary virtuous act, including praying for our enemies. Atheists can't, or won't.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Because we don't talk to our imaginary friend in the sky.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 But we do. That's the whole point. We talk to our imaginary friend in the sky as a good deed done on behalf of others.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven If you admit that it's your imaginary friend in the sky, why are you a theist? If you are just being rhetorical, I don't accept prayer as an act that is worth anything. Large scale studies have been done on the efficacy of prayer and it is shown to be ineffective every time.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 As for the bad things only a religious person could do, I wouldn't mind seeing a list that isn't particularized down to absurdity. Atheists don't kill people because the government tells them to? Atheists don't kill people who don't believe the same things as them? Atheists are incapable of greed, deception and manipulation? Atheists are immune to irrationality and dogmatism? Nonsense.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven But atheism has no dogma and no beliefs. Nobody kills in the name of atheism. Nobody flies into buildings screaming "Dawkins is great" When an atheist hears voices, he goes to a psychiatrist. He certainly doesn't believe that a god is talking to him. Are all atheists perfect, of course not. But we do have a much lower rate of divorce, crime, poverty, abortion and all the other societal problems.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Depends on the types of atheism you're talking about. Communism is an atheist movement and the USSR and China have brutally murdered millions of people, often targeting them specifically because they were religious. Dawkins' variety of atheism is extremely dogmatic as well, filled with all sorts of pronouncements of what people should and should not think as well as toe-curling demonizations of people who disagree (including other atheists).

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven You're really pulling out all the oldies but goodies huh? Communism is not based on atheism.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Communism is explicitly atheist. Look it up.

Personally, what I find most interesting is that you're bringing up this whole line of argument anyways. You already stated - accurately - that good deeds done by religious people does not prove the existence of God, nor would bad deeds done by atheists disprove atheism. Yet apparently bad deeds done by religious people disproves God and so on. Make up your mind. Stop making convenient arguments.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven No, it doesn't disprove god, but it certainly proves that being a theist doesn't make you a good person.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 As for tho9se rates of social problems, that's just the thing... those are SOCIAL problems. If everyone in America was atheist but all else remained equal, do you seriously think those figures would go down? That would be some major wishful thinking... The only scandal here for Christians is the discovery that when people are poor and desperate and ignorant, they'll behave just as badly regardless of their supposed beliefs.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 ... Your views are incredibly naive. You can't just expell any one element and think that suddenly things are going to be better on the balance. And in the mean time, your vendetta apparently treats the Renaissance, the development of science and public education, the abolition of slavery and racial segregation, and women's suffrage as disposable. In basically whining about Fundamenatlists whose views you parrot anyways, you're willing to discard even the things you claim to value.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven I don't want to ban religion. I want people to demand good evidence for their beliefs.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 I would agree with that requirement. However, you have spent this entire time raging against "religion" when it is apparently something else that you have a problem with.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Religious people are obviously not demanding evidence for their beliefs. If they were, they would be religious no more.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 That is a fallicious assumption. As I noted before, there are extremely intelligent theists who have tested all things and derived at faith in a deity. And there are theists who have not. And there are atheists who have and arrived at faith in nothing. And there are atheists who have not and are only atheists because of knee-jerk, poorly-informed, ignorant, blind-faith reasons. You're making a self-serving assumption that to look at the evidence is to agree with you.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 The Bible is a collection of books written by 40-some people over a period of hundreds of years and across numerous different genres. The argument for literalism and bibilodolatry doesn't even make *sense* for most of it: how does one define a poem as "100% correct"? Or a mythological story? Large swaths of it are prophecies, which aren't so much portents of the future as social critiques of the present...

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Something like 60% of US citizens believe in creationism, at least to a degree. So the evidence is against your proposition that the bible is just a bunch of stories that we are supposed to interpret. SOmething like 40% believe in the talking snake. We clearly have a problem.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 That's the USA. So what? The USA is pratically a third world nation anyways. Talk to me about your society when you get your shit together, join the civilized world and have things like universal health care. The USA is hardly any kind of normative example on anything.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Now you are just getting crazy. The US has it's fair share of problems, but it is far from a 3rd world nation.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 No? There are still parts of the US that don't even having running water. There are parts of the US full of inbred hicks living off welfare for generations. There are parts of the US that a decent person can't walk through without fear of getting shot. Your government is corrupt, your electoral system is a mess, you're imperialistic and you're a paragon of violence and inhumanity to the rest of the world.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Only we have the largest GDP in the world by a long shot. As for running water, it simply doesn't make sense to run municipal water service to a cabin in the woods. Many of these cabins have running water by their own pump, just not municipal water. Despite what you may have heard, inbreeding isn't a problem in the US, it's a vicious stereotype of Appalachia. Gov corruption happens everywhere.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Largest GDP and a horrifying gap between rich and poor that's growing. No thanks, you can keep your near-third world country and I'll be happy to stay in mine.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Our poor would be considered wealthy in the 3rd world hell holes you are comparing us to. From where do you hail?

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 ... The idea of "100% correct" can *maybe* apply to the relatively minor sections of history, but even then we're dealing with writing from a society whose idea of what counts as accurate historical writing differs from our own. It doesn't bother me that the Synoptic Gospels differ from each other by the same percentage as oral history differs with each telling. When reading the BIble and treating it as authoritative for our faith and practice, we must do so in *it's* context.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven If everyone read holy books like you do, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Yeah, but people don't. Meh.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven So then you and I aren't that far apart anyway. Instead of fighting with me, why don't you approach your fellows and get them to see that holy books aren't history books and they aren't dictation from the creator of the universe meant to be interpreted literally..

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Because you were the one making demonstrably false claims about history on a Disney video I happened to watch. I have enough time to debate people who don't know what they're talking about, regardless of the subject.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930

I am a Lutheran, so I am for the free dissemination of Scripture in the vernacular. However, I recognize that it has come at a price: every fucking idiot has an opinion, even when they don't know what they're talking about. Without that control there is nothing to stop morons from being morons.

So no, Catholic control over the Bible had more to do with the fact that the people were ignorant than it was to keep people ignorant.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 As for science, it did not exist as a class on inquiry until relatively recently and could not have developed except for the church. The church provided the education and the means for intellectual people to investigate the natural world. It also provided the philosophical framework of the detached observer (humanity as separate from nature, which the pagans didn't believe). The problem with Galileo was not that he was a courageous searcher of truth against an evil church...

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven They provided education to a certain extent, but certainly not to the masses.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 Public education is still a relatively new thing and largely limited to the industrialized world. Even then there are morons in the USA who think it should be privatised.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven Private schools have done an excellent job in the US and for a far lower cost. Privatizing the entire system is moronic.

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 ... The problem with Galileo was that he circumvented the chain of civil authority by writing his findings in the vernacular (and insulted the Pope while doing so). He was impolitic and it cost him. But he still died a devout believer and wrote elegant treatises on the reconciliation of science and religion (I'm sure you're also aware that the church was actually defending a Greek cosmology). We can complain about free expression NOW, but that was 500 years ago.

[christo930]

@CoryTheRaven So I guess you think that insulting the pope should be a crime? He was also an alchemist, so can we then say that his alchemist beliefs made him a good scientist?

[CoryTheRaven]

@christo930 I'm a Lutheran, so feel free to insult the Pope all you want.

[allenpoe17]

Its Discworld!!!

[spoon619]

Thats fuking tripy. i think this is what high people see

[JimmyWapwa3]

Turtles all the way down!

[collectorfun]

Garco = to do shit, in spanish haha!

[chaoscontrol2400]

is it an ar, ir, or er verb?

[collectorfun]

It´s a vulgar way for the nun = shit

but you can say "me garco" olso, and use it as a verb

[chaoscontrol2400]

ok thanks

[Jeorney]

The zodiac part is accurate in that it was a solar calendar to govern the activities of ancient man. Shame they didn't cover all 12 signs. Google "solar mythology".

[ozjthomas]

Wow. Amazing the amount of propaganda in this piece. Thanks for sharing!

[Jimraynor45]

What propaganda?, what message do you think there trying to brainwash us with?