Religion is not about understanding reality, it's about: fear of death the fact that life is (for most people) shit
People don't (in general) give a shit about why things happen, only the consequences. Animals don't give a shit about why things happen either, nor do most have the concept that they will die. Animals don't have religion.
OTOH, animals DO have superstition, off which religion feeds.
I'm not sure why you're on the internet then. If you want to embrace the primitive ways, why are you using your air conditioning and your video camera and your internal combustion engine? You should put on a grass skirt and go out in the woods and start digging for grubs.
I think if you got a taste of life before modern knowledge, you'd be singing a different tune.
You stated that you don't like modern knowledge, and prefer primitive ways better, and you are being a hypocrite by saying you don't think that the things that brought you the computer are right.
Our own water is filled with chemicals that are causing problems you aren't even aware of, things 'modern knowledge' would not dare tell you. We've polluted more streams than we know what to do with and murdered the wildlife in them. What the fuck are you talking about bringing fresh water to Africa? Poor starving Africans... yeah, let's not talk about how AIDS wasn't an accident, let's not talk about how we've put them in the fucking poverty stricken slums they're in.
Ever think about how the water got contaminated? How being reliant on sewer systems only leads to not being able to find an alternative in a fresh renewed place like nomadic tribes once did?
And check this out on swine flu:
"The fact that Mexico has large areas of very high arsenic in well water -- and these include the locations where H1N1 first appeared -- intrigued the MBL and Dartmouth research team"....(continued)
According to the World Health Organization, diarrheal disease accounts for an estimated 4.1% of the total global burden of disease and is responsible for the deaths of 1.8 million people every year. It was estimated that 88% of that burden is attributable to unsafe water supply, sanitation and hygiene, and is mostly concentrated in children in developing countries.
"When a normal person or mouse is infected with the flu, they immediately develop an immune response in which immune cells rush to the lungs and produce chemicals that help fight the infection," Hamilton stated in a press release. But in the lab animals exposed to arsenic in their water, something was clearly amiss. The researchers found that the animals' immune response to H1N1 infection was initially very weak."....(continued)
More than 2 million people have been infected worldwide with the novel H1N1 influenza, and so far, more than 2100 deaths have been attributed to the disease. This has happened on every continent except Antarctica.
At least you tried. But you and I both know this wasn't about the statistical deaths or how many scientific facts I've gathered; far from it. This is outside the boundaries of the world you're fed, and hopefully it's making you think.
We are causing this catastrophe. The capitalists and christians and researchers who steal from the poor, and 'give' out of the goodness of their dear western hearts. "Oh my, how did your ignorant lesser souls get here? Let me help you!" (wink wink)
If you're talking H1N1, no, we're not. It's a VIRUS, well known for its ability to recombine in ways that evade immune system destruction (that's SCIENCE). And it's SCIENCE that developed the vaccine against it, and SCIENCE that developed the antiviral meds, and SCIENCE that tracks the disease, and SCIENCE that tells us how to recognize it, test for it, treat it, and on and on.
And you dismiss that with a wave of your ignorant hand.
Cancer is seen worldwide and is caused by genetic abnormalities. There's no EVIDENCE that cancer is caused by "modern" living, with the exception of those that have an association with smoking and/or other environmental toxins.
Heart disease has GONE DOWN since we learned what caused it.
Diabetes (type II)/obesity is related to VAST improvements in the food supply. We're evolutionarily adapted to famine. We need to adjust to that fact.
Are you immortal yet? Has the deity of science come to make you divine ruler of the earth? Are you 'progressing' your way to the final end, and purpose you so seek? Are you there, at the threshold of the answer to all you'd ever imagined? And who are you....when you are gone...and dead...and decayed...? If God of the semites is dead, and you are the infinite creator, what does that make the unknown after your 'knowledge' is underground?
LOL... water purification goes A LOT further back than 200 years, albeit it may not have been known to be purification - the simple act of boiling water to make a stew is water purification in its oldest form.
I made it quite clear that it may not have been known to be, but boiling water for a stew IS the earliest form and best form of water purification. Even today, it still is the suggested method of water purification out in the wild.
But they weren't purifying the water, were they? They were cooking dinner.
TODAY, we boil water because it kills the pathogens. THEN, nope. You're overlaying your modern knowledge against an historical accident.
I'm sure nobody saved stew water and drank it. They ate the stew and pulled water from the well to drink. Why not? The water didn't cause disease...except that it did and they didn't know it.
Again, it wasn't known to be purifying water, but it was. No matter how you slice it, water in food or water to drink, it's still purifying water...How can you not agree with that??? It's a simple equation - 1=1.... Water boiled = water purified. It doesn't matter what it was used for.
I don't need to have evidence, nor do I even need to have knowledge of it. It's a simple equation - why does it matter what the water is used for or if it was used at all?
By your logic, something cannot exist, unless you know it exists...fucking ludicrous.
Water boiled, even if unused, is water purified, for a certain period of time. Even if it is not known to be, it is what it is.
You're claiming that stew water, because it was boiled and therefore more sanitary, was a water purification method.
Your logic is faulty because the water WAS NOT USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. It wasn't even USED.
To prove your contention, you need to provide EVIDENCE to that effect. That people used the water because it did not make them sick like regular "well" water.
You're going to stick with water boiled and NOT USED AS WATER = water purified is accurate?
It's your incorrect assumption that the people who made stew USED THE WATER FOR DRINKING preferentially over non-boiled water that is at issue here, not whether water purification was an artifact of making stew.
See.. now your twisting it again it to suit your argument...
I never made the claim that water used in stew was used for drinking... I only ever made the claim that water boiled purified the water... It DOES NOT MATTER what the water was used for, the equation still stands, water boiled is water purified - I honestly cannot believe you are arguing that point...
Horse shit is horse shit, I don't have to take into account its many uses to make such an equivalence. Water ingested as food, or water ingested as drink, makes no difference to the body - to it, water is water.
According to the hierarchy of disciplines. Empirical evidence is meaningless without analysis of that evidence. The mathematical and logical analysis of the evidence is what gives that evidence value... ergo, mathematics and logical analysis trump evidence.
1+1? You can't even quote me right... my equation is 1=1, a definition of what 1 is, is not required to make the equivalence. I simply cannot fathom anyone disputing that 1=1.
Aristotle proved with logic and mathematics that horses had 42 teeth. His logic and math went unquestioned for centuries until...well...someone actually counted the number of teeth that a horse had.
Aristotle was wrong.
Your assertion that math and logic trump evidence is likewise wrong.
I'm sorry your the one who is wrong...Your brain, the tool that you use to gather this "empirical evidence", has already logically analyzed it before you even know it exists as empirical evidence, so yes, logic trumps evidence - every time. Without logic processes, gathering said evidence is physically impossible - simple as that...hierarchy of disciplines...at the very top of that hierarchy, is hardwired logic process.
People often misuse the word hypocrite - by this understanding of the word, a person who goes to a job everyday that he/she does not like, but does so he/she can put food on the table, clothes on their child's backs, and a roof over their head is being hypocritical....
Or, just the opposite, a person that likes going to the bar every friday night, but choses to stay home instead is being a hypocrite...
I suggest you read the definition of the word a little more carefully.
Your translating a like/dislike of something he/she does into something he/she is telling others he/she does. The meanings do not translate. My examples clearly point that out...Else, we all be hypocrites 24/7 :)
No, I'm sorry, it doesn't translate that way. No matter how much someone likes or dislikes something they do or do not do, it doesn't make them a hypocrite.
The "dictionary" definition of hypocrite is one who affects more virtues than he has.
So, one who CLAIMS to hate civilization while living in it (and one DOES have a choice, after all - half of the planet has never made a telephone call and wipes their shitty asses with their left hands), is affecting a virtue that they do not have. Ie, hypocritical behavior.
So, by your inference, one who claims to hate something while doing that something is being a hypocrite??? So, my examples were correct then, and by you not doing the things you like, you are being hypocritical... so, your claiming we are all hypocrites 24/7, which means the word has no real meaning...
Yes. One who claims to hate something while doing that thing IS a hypocrite.
And no, we're not all hypocrites 24/7. I'm certainly not. There's nothing in my life that I do that I "hate" doing, with the exception of changing the paper in the bottom of the bird cage (and I don't even "hate" that).
to help false flagging, the youtube team should watch the video and if it is not flag worthy, the ones who did the flagging might be punished. They might get their account suspended for a week or not make them able to flag videos for a month or something.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
isn't it about time you people realised there is more to religion than your basic understanding, do you really think that millions of people bother with religion because they have primitive minds? don't you think it's silly ignorance to think that?
Please enlighten the world with your knowledge! And its not millions but billions of people, and that might be because they are indoctrinated before even know what words are. 'Silly Ignorance' you couldn't have picked a better descriptor for religion. It is silly because it's knowledge is based upon ignorance.
Please tell me what things you do in your life that you don't use logic and reasoning for. That you come to a decision about the outcome and never change your mind based on evidence.
that Columbus might have landed on the moon nonsense is so tirsome. The pace of technologicla change in the middle ages was much faster than in the Roman Empire--the spinning wheel, escapement gears, stirrups, etc.--water powered milling was far more sophisticated in 1200 than 100.
The library of Alexandria apparently contained manuscripts that had the outlines of harnessing steam as a means of powering machines so perhaps the folks back then weren't as far behind as you might imagine.
And thanks to christian fanatics, that wealth of knowledge was burned to cinders and only rediscovered more than a thousand years later
So if an industrial revolution had taken place during the millennium after Christ's death it is quite possible that Columbus would have lived in a space age
thanks to the church many books were copied by writing monks and got safely to our modern days.yes they fuck up but they are not all that evil.its interesting to see that since media and power disconnected from religion(stopped being together)everybody is noticing the evil in the church.personally i know good christians and bad christians,and there are also good and bad thing in the christianity as a whole too.
The usual monk practice was to bleach old pagan books and use them to write their silly repetitive dogma. This is in fact how we have found one book of Archimedes, the great scientist of the ancient world. Scientists restored the old text (the stuff the monk had written were crap anyway), thankfully the bleaching was not totally successful.
Hiero's Pneumatics was not burned, in fact I've read the text in Greek. Do you know what he used his steam engine for? To make make people temple doors were opened by magic. The book was well circulated throughout the Imperial period, it never occurred to anyone to apply steam power to pumping water from mines--they didn't have that problem since they knew not to make deep mines because of the water. They were never going to have an industrial revolution.
The ancients were well on their way to industrialisation until Christianity came and screwed the world up. The only problem was slavery made it manpower cheap and the need for such inventions was limited. Society was evolving and it was about to make big steps in applying the theoretical knowledge it had accumulated when the Dark Ages ruined all.
Really? What proto-industrial processes existed under the tetrarchy that no one but you knows about? Steam driven water pumps? An accelerating rate of change in water powered milling technology? Coal mining?
The dark ages were cuase by the loss of social/political/physical infrastructure due to the Germans and Huns. What does Jesus have to do with it? Do you know some pronoucnedment from the third Chalcedonian council: "Thou shalt not convert chemical energy to mechanincal"?
I've already explained what was the problem with the Ancient world and applying its knowledge. Whether they were about to break through the barrier is anybody's guess, but to me it seem quite probable if the Empire had survived a bit more without the cancerous influence of Xianity. The loss of social/political/etc infrastructure was caused (to a degree) by the upstart religion. It was made state religion after all wasn't it? Your one liner is funny, but in a way it is quite close to the truth.
Search wikipedia for "Antikythera mechanism". The ancients were much closer to us than you think. After 324 Rome became a Xian empire and it all went downhill from there (concerning science and inventions, but also socially, remember the Inquisition?). Xianity caused the dark ages pretty much.
Try reading Peter Brown instead of summaries of Gibbon on the internet. Know what they used the antikythera mechanism for?--to cast horoscopes. The family that made it kept a dark secret so they could cast better horoscopes faster than then rival astrologers. It was never put to any practical purpose and vanished because it was a one off. It was a freak, not a precursor of science.
No one knows what it was used for exactly, you're pretty arrogant to pretend you do. You even add a sob story about families and dark secrets, talk about sensationalism. Leave that kind of stuff to the conspiracy nuts that you despise dude. It ruins your points. The reality is that it was science as were the huge structures from buildings to boats that were built by the Ancients. And the theoretical mathematics and physics. Only the idiotic Abrahamic religions managed to bury the light.
Anyone who has read the literature on the thing knows what it was used for. We know it was kept secret since a) it was a one-off, and b) there is no mention of it in any surviving source, and it would make sense to keep something like that a trade secret. It wasn't science beucase there was no scientific method in antiquity. I remind that you the pace of technological change in Medieval Europe and the Islamic world was far faster than during antiquity.
You can't know for sure it was a one-off because only one has been found so far. The "literature" on the thing is not clearly pointing to anything. It's still a mystery. The rate of technological change in Medieval Europe and the Islamic world was affected by knowledge of the Ancients resurfacing. Also you can't be serious talking about the pace of technological change in the Dark Ages. What's your benchmark? What's the value of various math discoveries in your "system" anyway?
By the way, are you in the regular habit of addressing middle-aged female classics professors as 'dude?' If so, you might want to reconsider, since I don't think you will get very far with it.
Excellent vid, as usual. My one quibble is that your "good intentions" argument is probably overly generous. I would posit that religion exists not for "comfort" to the masses, but solely for the benefit of clergy.
Another great thoughtful video. Knowledge is obviously a threat to religion. Though theists claim to be closer to an all-knowing god, it speaks volumes that when they controlled Western civilization, we got the Dark Ages. So much good has been done for humanity through science by non-believers that it must make theists wonder at times whose side their god is actually on. So much for their "divine" revelations! Their faith and hope in old beliefs often stand in the way of human happiness.
how did thy find me . next time Ann don't play the drums. hehe
themoondoor1 8 months ago
Hey man, deaf dumb and blind people can play the drums too y'know.
Now if it was Helen Keller, the girl who spent her time in Nazi occupied europe inside someone's attic, then that would be a differant story.
crazyinsane500 11 months ago
very well said
ACudmore2 1 year ago
Sorry, but I have to disagree.
Religion is not about understanding reality, it's about: fear of death the fact that life is (for most people) shit
People don't (in general) give a shit about why things happen, only the consequences. Animals don't give a shit about why things happen either, nor do most have the concept that they will die. Animals don't have religion.
OTOH, animals DO have superstition, off which religion feeds.
bdf2718 1 year ago
Knowledge is ok, but ignorance is bliss
ScorpioX19 1 year ago
I don't like power...
or what's considered modern 'knowledge',
I like primitive ways of understanding better.
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
CoffeesIsBack:
"I don't like power...
or what's considered modern 'knowledge',
I like primitive ways of understanding better."
I'm not sure why you're on the internet then. If you want to embrace the primitive ways, why are you using your air conditioning and your video camera and your internal combustion engine? You should put on a grass skirt and go out in the woods and start digging for grubs.
I think if you got a taste of life before modern knowledge, you'd be singing a different tune.
eequalsfb 2 years ago 11
There are innumerable possibilities of why. Don't be so absolute.
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
That had nothing to do with "why".
You stated that you don't like modern knowledge, and prefer primitive ways better, and you are being a hypocrite by saying you don't think that the things that brought you the computer are right.
Deshara218 2 years ago
@eequalsfb Or you know... typing one as the case may be. Yeah I'm just messing around with comments at this point.
hockeater 1 year ago
You don't like modern knowledge?
Yet you post videos over the internet, at least one of which was created while you were sitting next to a refrigerator...
Hmm....hypocrite much?
You, my dear, have a LOT to learn.
I suggest you join the Peace Corps and ask for assignment to sub-Saharan Africa. Work with tribes trying to bring fresh water into their villages.
THEN come back and say how much you don't like "modern knowledge."
middlekk 2 years ago
Our own water is filled with chemicals that are causing problems you aren't even aware of, things 'modern knowledge' would not dare tell you. We've polluted more streams than we know what to do with and murdered the wildlife in them. What the fuck are you talking about bringing fresh water to Africa? Poor starving Africans... yeah, let's not talk about how AIDS wasn't an accident, let's not talk about how we've put them in the fucking poverty stricken slums they're in.
Go fuck yourself.
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
Yes, I think a stint in the Peace Corps would do you wonders.
You can't even take a trip to Mexico without getting sick from the water. Water purification is one of the scientific wonders of the past 200 years.
Go fuck yourself, deary.
And AIDS is caused by a virus, HIV. Ignorance it not a virtue
middlekk 2 years ago
Ever think about how the water got contaminated? How being reliant on sewer systems only leads to not being able to find an alternative in a fresh renewed place like nomadic tribes once did?
And check this out on swine flu:
"The fact that Mexico has large areas of very high arsenic in well water -- and these include the locations where H1N1 first appeared -- intrigued the MBL and Dartmouth research team"....(continued)
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
Wow, you are one ignorant person.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
According to the World Health Organization, diarrheal disease accounts for an estimated 4.1% of the total global burden of disease and is responsible for the deaths of 1.8 million people every year. It was estimated that 88% of that burden is attributable to unsafe water supply, sanitation and hygiene, and is mostly concentrated in children in developing countries.
Your ignorance is astounding.
middlekk 2 years ago
"When a normal person or mouse is infected with the flu, they immediately develop an immune response in which immune cells rush to the lungs and produce chemicals that help fight the infection," Hamilton stated in a press release. But in the lab animals exposed to arsenic in their water, something was clearly amiss. The researchers found that the animals' immune response to H1N1 infection was initially very weak."....(continued)
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
More than 2 million people have been infected worldwide with the novel H1N1 influenza, and so far, more than 2100 deaths have been attributed to the disease. This has happened on every continent except Antarctica.
Your VAST ignorance of science is astounding.
middlekk 2 years ago
At least you tried. But you and I both know this wasn't about the statistical deaths or how many scientific facts I've gathered; far from it. This is outside the boundaries of the world you're fed, and hopefully it's making you think.
We are causing this catastrophe. The capitalists and christians and researchers who steal from the poor, and 'give' out of the goodness of their dear western hearts. "Oh my, how did your ignorant lesser souls get here? Let me help you!" (wink wink)
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
If you're talking H1N1, no, we're not. It's a VIRUS, well known for its ability to recombine in ways that evade immune system destruction (that's SCIENCE). And it's SCIENCE that developed the vaccine against it, and SCIENCE that developed the antiviral meds, and SCIENCE that tracks the disease, and SCIENCE that tells us how to recognize it, test for it, treat it, and on and on.
And you dismiss that with a wave of your ignorant hand.
You're disgusting.
middlekk 2 years ago
"But, several days later, the rodents' immune systems produced a reaction that was too strong and too late."
So clearly we cause problems that cause problems that we try to find a solution for that cause problems.
Sounds like the rational mindset of civilization to me!
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
Yes, a rational mindset of civilization didn't find a vaccine of the scourge of smallpox and of polio and of measles.
A rational mindset of civilization didn't find antibiotics and antiviral medications and anticancer medications.
A rational mindset of civilization didn't provide you a comfortable chair to mouth off ignorantly about subjects you know nothing about.
middlekk 2 years ago
And cancer?
And diabetes?
And obesity?
And heart disease?
You truly believe that you and the culture you belong to are the savior to the human race and ruler of the planet, don't you?
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
Cancer is seen worldwide and is caused by genetic abnormalities. There's no EVIDENCE that cancer is caused by "modern" living, with the exception of those that have an association with smoking and/or other environmental toxins.
Heart disease has GONE DOWN since we learned what caused it.
Diabetes (type II)/obesity is related to VAST improvements in the food supply. We're evolutionarily adapted to famine. We need to adjust to that fact.
Ignorance isn't bliss, sweetie.
middlekk 2 years ago
Are you immortal yet? Has the deity of science come to make you divine ruler of the earth? Are you 'progressing' your way to the final end, and purpose you so seek? Are you there, at the threshold of the answer to all you'd ever imagined? And who are you....when you are gone...and dead...and decayed...? If God of the semites is dead, and you are the infinite creator, what does that make the unknown after your 'knowledge' is underground?
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
What?
Sweetie, that's a logical fallacy known as "argument from total fucking idiocy".
(It's actually a nonsequitur argument - but I like my terminology better.)
What does any of what you said have anything to do with your incredible ignorance about science and the arrogant dismissal of it?
Whoever said that science was all-knowing? If it were, there'd be no more scientists, would there?
Oh, and SCIENCE allows us to transmit knowledge over time and distance. You know, the internet, books.
middlekk 2 years ago
I wouldn't expect you to understand the paradox of your consciousness. You don't want to face death.
CoffeesIsBack 2 years ago
WHAT?!?!?! What the FUCK does that have to do with anything?
When you die, you decompose. Period. What that has to do with ANYTHING, including your ignorant arrogance, is beyond me.
middlekk 2 years ago
It's your culture, too.
I don't see you living in a mud hut growing macrobiotic vegetables with compost from your own shit.
Until you put up, you're just a little hypocrite.
middlekk 2 years ago
LOL... water purification goes A LOT further back than 200 years, albeit it may not have been known to be purification - the simple act of boiling water to make a stew is water purification in its oldest form.
krishields 2 years ago
LOL...until John Snow in 1854, disease wasn't thought to be caused by waterborne pathogens.
You might want to do just the SLIGHTEST bit of research before sticking your uneducated opinion into the fray.
And I'd say that brewing beer was the first reliable water purification method.
middlekk 2 years ago
I made it quite clear that it may not have been known to be, but boiling water for a stew IS the earliest form and best form of water purification. Even today, it still is the suggested method of water purification out in the wild.
krishields 2 years ago
But they weren't purifying the water, were they? They were cooking dinner.
TODAY, we boil water because it kills the pathogens. THEN, nope. You're overlaying your modern knowledge against an historical accident.
I'm sure nobody saved stew water and drank it. They ate the stew and pulled water from the well to drink. Why not? The water didn't cause disease...except that it did and they didn't know it.
Really, even the smallest bit of research.
middlekk 2 years ago
Again, it wasn't known to be purifying water, but it was. No matter how you slice it, water in food or water to drink, it's still purifying water...How can you not agree with that??? It's a simple equation - 1=1.... Water boiled = water purified. It doesn't matter what it was used for.
krishields 2 years ago
If they SAVED the water to drink it, you might have a point. I have evidence that this occurred.
Where's your EVIDENCE for this assertion?
Cite source in the paleontology or paleobiology literature, please.
middlekk 2 years ago
I have NO evidence this occurred.
middlekk 2 years ago
I don't need to have evidence, nor do I even need to have knowledge of it. It's a simple equation - why does it matter what the water is used for or if it was used at all?
By your logic, something cannot exist, unless you know it exists...fucking ludicrous.
Water boiled, even if unused, is water purified, for a certain period of time. Even if it is not known to be, it is what it is.
krishields 2 years ago
You're claiming that stew water, because it was boiled and therefore more sanitary, was a water purification method.
Your logic is faulty because the water WAS NOT USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. It wasn't even USED.
To prove your contention, you need to provide EVIDENCE to that effect. That people used the water because it did not make them sick like regular "well" water.
Good luck with that...
middlekk 2 years ago
Your really going to stick with that.... and claim the equation Water boiled = Water purified is faulty???
krishields 2 years ago
You're going to stick with water boiled and NOT USED AS WATER = water purified is accurate?
It's your incorrect assumption that the people who made stew USED THE WATER FOR DRINKING preferentially over non-boiled water that is at issue here, not whether water purification was an artifact of making stew.
That's known as an epiphenomenon.
middlekk 2 years ago
See.. now your twisting it again it to suit your argument...
I never made the claim that water used in stew was used for drinking... I only ever made the claim that water boiled purified the water... It DOES NOT MATTER what the water was used for, the equation still stands, water boiled is water purified - I honestly cannot believe you are arguing that point...
krishields 2 years ago
That's besides the fact that water in and of itself is generally a "stew" of ingredients, else it need not be purified!
krishields 2 years ago
REALLY!? It doesn't matter that the water wasn't used for the purpose that you attribute it to?
Horseshit is sometimes use as fuel. Must mean that horses evolved to provide man heat.
Or, it could be horseshit.
middlekk 2 years ago
Indeed... it doesn't matter...
Horse shit is horse shit, I don't have to take into account its many uses to make such an equivalence. Water ingested as food, or water ingested as drink, makes no difference to the body - to it, water is water.
krishields 2 years ago
BTW: That's what's known as SCIENCE. Empirical evidence trumps pulling unsupported assertions out of one's ass.
middlekk 2 years ago
Yes, and mathematical and logical analysis trumps empirical evidence.
krishields 2 years ago
Heh. According to whom?
Cite source for that assertion, please.
middlekk 2 years ago
According to the hierarchy of disciplines. Empirical evidence is meaningless without analysis of that evidence. The mathematical and logical analysis of the evidence is what gives that evidence value... ergo, mathematics and logical analysis trump evidence.
krishields 2 years ago
Heh. And unsupported assertions masking as mathematical proof trump nothing.
That's what you're falling back on?
1+1?
Define 1. Why is it 1 and not something else. Where's the EVIDENCE of 1?
You used a hypothetical unsupported analogy and expect it to count as mathematical proof?
Um...no.
middlekk 2 years ago
1+1? You can't even quote me right... my equation is 1=1, a definition of what 1 is, is not required to make the equivalence. I simply cannot fathom anyone disputing that 1=1.
krishields 2 years ago
BTW: one last thing and I gotta go.
Aristotle proved with logic and mathematics that horses had 42 teeth. His logic and math went unquestioned for centuries until...well...someone actually counted the number of teeth that a horse had.
Aristotle was wrong.
Your assertion that math and logic trump evidence is likewise wrong.
middlekk 2 years ago
I'm sorry your the one who is wrong...Your brain, the tool that you use to gather this "empirical evidence", has already logically analyzed it before you even know it exists as empirical evidence, so yes, logic trumps evidence - every time. Without logic processes, gathering said evidence is physically impossible - simple as that...hierarchy of disciplines...at the very top of that hierarchy, is hardwired logic process.
krishields 2 years ago
Right. And how many teeth does a horse have?
middlekk 2 years ago
Your equation doesn't work because it is really this...
Stew meat plus vegetables plus water plus heat = a meal where you eat the meat and vegetables and discard the unused water.
That's not using a method to purify water. That's making dinner.
middlekk 2 years ago
People often misuse the word hypocrite - by this understanding of the word, a person who goes to a job everyday that he/she does not like, but does so he/she can put food on the table, clothes on their child's backs, and a roof over their head is being hypocritical....
Or, just the opposite, a person that likes going to the bar every friday night, but choses to stay home instead is being a hypocrite...
I suggest you read the definition of the word a little more carefully.
krishields 2 years ago
I think we've pretty much nailed the definition of hypocrite as someone who says one thing and does something else.
Anyone who professes to hate modern civilization while doing NOTHING but enjoy the fruits of that civilization is a hypocrite.
middlekk 2 years ago
Your translating a like/dislike of something he/she does into something he/she is telling others he/she does. The meanings do not translate. My examples clearly point that out...Else, we all be hypocrites 24/7 :)
krishields 2 years ago
There are degrees.
Someone who claims to hate modern civilization while posting of fucking YouTube is the very definition of hypocrite.
middlekk 2 years ago
No, I'm sorry, it doesn't translate that way. No matter how much someone likes or dislikes something they do or do not do, it doesn't make them a hypocrite.
Who's definition of the word are you using????
krishields 2 years ago
The "dictionary" definition of hypocrite is one who affects more virtues than he has.
So, one who CLAIMS to hate civilization while living in it (and one DOES have a choice, after all - half of the planet has never made a telephone call and wipes their shitty asses with their left hands), is affecting a virtue that they do not have. Ie, hypocritical behavior.
middlekk 2 years ago
So, by your inference, one who claims to hate something while doing that something is being a hypocrite??? So, my examples were correct then, and by you not doing the things you like, you are being hypocritical... so, your claiming we are all hypocrites 24/7, which means the word has no real meaning...
krishields 2 years ago
Yes. One who claims to hate something while doing that thing IS a hypocrite.
And no, we're not all hypocrites 24/7. I'm certainly not. There's nothing in my life that I do that I "hate" doing, with the exception of changing the paper in the bottom of the bird cage (and I don't even "hate" that).
middlekk 2 years ago
wow, that was great content, very well said.
jameshanley40 2 years ago
WOW! Your videos are always great, but this time you've really outdone yourself--and in under 3 minutes. I am humbled!
freetaught 2 years ago 2
very good video!
yamimakaiz 2 years ago
to help false flagging, the youtube team should watch the video and if it is not flag worthy, the ones who did the flagging might be punished. They might get their account suspended for a week or not make them able to flag videos for a month or something.
hobbitsarecool 2 years ago
Absolutely Brilliant!
ANDR3W1848 2 years ago
This was extremely well done - both in presentation and in articulation. I will be checking out more of your stuff.
TheBlackwaterDemon 2 years ago 2
Great vid, as usual! :-)
DefenderOfReason 2 years ago
Look up Archimedes_Palimpsest in wikipedia. Xians are responsible for a big part of the dark ages.
komninosm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
isn't it about time you people realised there is more to religion than your basic understanding, do you really think that millions of people bother with religion because they have primitive minds? don't you think it's silly ignorance to think that?
aaugoaa 2 years ago
what else would religion be?
loturos 2 years ago 2
Please enlighten the world with your knowledge! And its not millions but billions of people, and that might be because they are indoctrinated before even know what words are. 'Silly Ignorance' you couldn't have picked a better descriptor for religion. It is silly because it's knowledge is based upon ignorance.
Please tell me what things you do in your life that you don't use logic and reasoning for. That you come to a decision about the outcome and never change your mind based on evidence.
SalohcinRa 2 years ago 7
No, there isn't. Religion is a sop to the uneducated and fearful.
middlekk 2 years ago
Excellent!
discussislam 2 years ago 3
and another good vid! well done again!
1deanwdaniel 2 years ago 3
Yes.
fantasy0coach 2 years ago
awesome video
TheFartoholic 2 years ago 3
Excellent video.
Anne Frank wouldn't celebrate Christmas (Jewish, you see).
marshmarais 2 years ago 3
and dead, you see. XD
EmberflyLayouts 2 years ago
and maybe a drumset would be the most prudent gift? Hello???
Retardigion 2 years ago
Double a terrible idea because playing drums would have been the worst idea EVER for her.
ImprobableDrive 2 years ago
The narrator/author was very elegant and non-confrontational in his address of a very serious issue. Great work.
aimforcentermass 2 years ago 2
"That's right folks, the need is interfering with the fulfilment of the need."
And the blindfold analogy.
You're a fine writer, Mr E. :)
philhellenes 2 years ago 4
Praise from the master. Nothing finer. Thanks, mate.
eequalsfb 2 years ago 3
Many great points, all well delivered.
banonKING 2 years ago
that Columbus might have landed on the moon nonsense is so tirsome. The pace of technologicla change in the middle ages was much faster than in the Roman Empire--the spinning wheel, escapement gears, stirrups, etc.--water powered milling was far more sophisticated in 1200 than 100.
HConstantine 2 years ago
The library of Alexandria apparently contained manuscripts that had the outlines of harnessing steam as a means of powering machines so perhaps the folks back then weren't as far behind as you might imagine.
And thanks to christian fanatics, that wealth of knowledge was burned to cinders and only rediscovered more than a thousand years later
So if an industrial revolution had taken place during the millennium after Christ's death it is quite possible that Columbus would have lived in a space age
easuter 2 years ago 3
thanks to the church many books were copied by writing monks and got safely to our modern days.yes they fuck up but they are not all that evil.its interesting to see that since media and power disconnected from religion(stopped being together)everybody is noticing the evil in the church.personally i know good christians and bad christians,and there are also good and bad thing in the christianity as a whole too.
grassinigrassini 2 years ago
The usual monk practice was to bleach old pagan books and use them to write their silly repetitive dogma. This is in fact how we have found one book of Archimedes, the great scientist of the ancient world. Scientists restored the old text (the stuff the monk had written were crap anyway), thankfully the bleaching was not totally successful.
komninosm 2 years ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
@komninosm Why does that not surprise me?
nothingtoyouatall 1 year ago
Hiero's Pneumatics was not burned, in fact I've read the text in Greek. Do you know what he used his steam engine for? To make make people temple doors were opened by magic. The book was well circulated throughout the Imperial period, it never occurred to anyone to apply steam power to pumping water from mines--they didn't have that problem since they knew not to make deep mines because of the water. They were never going to have an industrial revolution.
HConstantine 2 years ago
The ancients were well on their way to industrialisation until Christianity came and screwed the world up. The only problem was slavery made it manpower cheap and the need for such inventions was limited. Society was evolving and it was about to make big steps in applying the theoretical knowledge it had accumulated when the Dark Ages ruined all.
komninosm 2 years ago
Really? What proto-industrial processes existed under the tetrarchy that no one but you knows about? Steam driven water pumps? An accelerating rate of change in water powered milling technology? Coal mining?
The dark ages were cuase by the loss of social/political/physical infrastructure due to the Germans and Huns. What does Jesus have to do with it? Do you know some pronoucnedment from the third Chalcedonian council: "Thou shalt not convert chemical energy to mechanincal"?
HConstantine 2 years ago
I've already explained what was the problem with the Ancient world and applying its knowledge. Whether they were about to break through the barrier is anybody's guess, but to me it seem quite probable if the Empire had survived a bit more without the cancerous influence of Xianity. The loss of social/political/etc infrastructure was caused (to a degree) by the upstart religion. It was made state religion after all wasn't it? Your one liner is funny, but in a way it is quite close to the truth.
komninosm 2 years ago
hypatia and the library of alexandria. look it up.
addmoreice 2 years ago 2
Search wikipedia for "Antikythera mechanism". The ancients were much closer to us than you think. After 324 Rome became a Xian empire and it all went downhill from there (concerning science and inventions, but also socially, remember the Inquisition?). Xianity caused the dark ages pretty much.
komninosm 2 years ago 3
Try reading Peter Brown instead of summaries of Gibbon on the internet. Know what they used the antikythera mechanism for?--to cast horoscopes. The family that made it kept a dark secret so they could cast better horoscopes faster than then rival astrologers. It was never put to any practical purpose and vanished because it was a one off. It was a freak, not a precursor of science.
HConstantine 2 years ago
No one knows what it was used for exactly, you're pretty arrogant to pretend you do. You even add a sob story about families and dark secrets, talk about sensationalism. Leave that kind of stuff to the conspiracy nuts that you despise dude. It ruins your points. The reality is that it was science as were the huge structures from buildings to boats that were built by the Ancients. And the theoretical mathematics and physics. Only the idiotic Abrahamic religions managed to bury the light.
komninosm 2 years ago
Anyone who has read the literature on the thing knows what it was used for. We know it was kept secret since a) it was a one-off, and b) there is no mention of it in any surviving source, and it would make sense to keep something like that a trade secret. It wasn't science beucase there was no scientific method in antiquity. I remind that you the pace of technological change in Medieval Europe and the Islamic world was far faster than during antiquity.
HConstantine 2 years ago
You can't know for sure it was a one-off because only one has been found so far. The "literature" on the thing is not clearly pointing to anything. It's still a mystery. The rate of technological change in Medieval Europe and the Islamic world was affected by knowledge of the Ancients resurfacing. Also you can't be serious talking about the pace of technological change in the Dark Ages. What's your benchmark? What's the value of various math discoveries in your "system" anyway?
komninosm 2 years ago
By the way, are you in the regular habit of addressing middle-aged female classics professors as 'dude?' If so, you might want to reconsider, since I don't think you will get very far with it.
HConstantine 2 years ago
You're so full of yourself, it's not good. Relax, take a chill-pill. You're not making any friends this way and you're making yourself look silly.
komninosm 2 years ago
I liked your final quote so much I posted it on my favorite forum with a link.
PoopShoot1102 2 years ago
you put into words thoughts many have seen as obvious for a long time.
Thank you
jensenzo 2 years ago
Buy Anne Frank a drum-set...for Christmas.
Love it!
aiyic 2 years ago
Great. This is what I needed.
JoshuaStodart 2 years ago
I'm going to get that put on a T Shirt " if it wasn't for the dark ages Columbus could have landed on the moon" LOL
GodKillerAtheist 2 years ago 2
"Caveman" is a great movie, anybody who hasn't seen it needs to pick it up. It's hilarious. "Zug zug!"
AbbeyNormal 2 years ago
Clear, consise and to the point. 5 stars.
simonthesinner 2 years ago
This was very well done.
AlmightyAtheismo 2 years ago
5 stars and fav
mp9yq9tx 2 years ago
The analogy at the end was hilarious!
Dramphooey 2 years ago
Excellent vid, as usual. My one quibble is that your "good intentions" argument is probably overly generous. I would posit that religion exists not for "comfort" to the masses, but solely for the benefit of clergy.
Giuvannuzzeddu 2 years ago
You could be right. I have been accused of having too much faith before.
eequalsfb 2 years ago
I swear that's Ringo Starr as a caveman. What's it from?
Fordi 2 years ago
Yeah, Prophiscient knows. See his comment.
eequalsfb 2 years ago
eloquently put, bravo.
Singebuggercat 2 years ago
Another great thoughtful video. Knowledge is obviously a threat to religion. Though theists claim to be closer to an all-knowing god, it speaks volumes that when they controlled Western civilization, we got the Dark Ages. So much good has been done for humanity through science by non-believers that it must make theists wonder at times whose side their god is actually on. So much for their "divine" revelations! Their faith and hope in old beliefs often stand in the way of human happiness.
Mitchy9901 2 years ago 2
*Nod*
eequalsfb 2 years ago
"If it hadn't been for the Christian Dark Ages, Columbus might have landed on the moon."
I love that quote. Who said it?
1RadicalOne 2 years ago 3
Excellent point of view!
Koss42 2 years ago
GREAT,,,
torib5k1 2 years ago
I agree with all you said here!
mattie690 2 years ago
Very good!
ndjm00 2 years ago
Was one of those cavemen Ringo Starr?
megamanium 2 years ago
No dont be silly......
It was the Beatles!
mattie690 2 years ago
@mattie690
You son of a bitch for lying to me!
megamanium 2 years ago
Yeah, Zug Zug
RosieDesire 2 years ago
Yes, in "Caveman" (1981).
Prophiscient 2 years ago