Re: Silver Nemesis reborn, only with cappier music


"L. Ross Raszewski" <lraszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrnfnrcf6.evv.lraszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 00:07:35 -0000, Agamemnon
<agamemnon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I have not got anything wrong. You are just totally ignorant of the
historical facts because you have not read a single ancient or medieval
historical text, but rely on the work of dissembling revisionists who
haven't read any original text either. Get a education you fool. Even
Isaac
Newton concurs with what I have said.

Maybe he has, maybe he hasn't. But *I* have. I've read Origen, and
Thomas Aquinas, and St Augustine of Hippo, and Milton, and
Shakespeare, and Luther, and Calvin. I've read Aristotle and Plato and
Virgil and Homer. I've read Froissart, and Kant, and Pascal, and
Descartes, and Goethe and Johnson and Marlowe.

And you're speaking gibberish. Your views on religion bear some
passing resembalance to what Plato presented, though his views *were
not* the views of Greeks in general, but rather and *quite explicitly*
an elitist position designed to reconsile tradition with the
"rationalistic" elements of platonic philosophy. They are also
specifically rejected by the church fathers and every christian writer
since, well, since Paul I suppose.

SYSTEMATIC LIAR!

Plato's views were the consensus of ALL Greek writers and were the views not
only accepted but promoted by the early church fathers including Eusebius,
Tatian, and Jerome. You evidently have not read Eusebius, Perpetration for
the Gospel and haven't got a clue what you are talking about. These views
were the standard model in the middle ages and the time of Shakespeare and
Newton. But you've never read Newton's natural history, Pliny's Natural
History or Lynche's, The Travels of Noe into Europe, so you know nothing.


Your views of drama bear some passing similarity to Aristotle, but
misses all the salient points. You're a bit closer to the views of
Plato, though, again, he was *rejecting* tradition. You also ignore

BULLSHIT. Plato was the tradition. His school lasted 1,000 years and was the
centre of Greek and Roman learning.

everythign since antiquity, which quite saliently counters platonic

WRONG. I have given you Middle Ages and Renascence sources including Gesta
Danorum, the Bavarian Chronical and Newton all of which agree me, Plato,
Diodorus, Philo, Porphyry, Pliny and Herodotus. NOT ONE writer proposes an
alternate view until the age of IGNORANT REVISIONISM which begins in 1800.

and aristotelian views. You're quite ignorant of Heidegger, Neitzsche,
Sartre, and Husserl.

Plato wrote the book. Heidegger was a NAZI and the pupil of Husserl, and
Neitzsche's writings provided the foundation of NAZIsm. Sartre's views on
Existentialism are only held by an elitist minority on France and German.
Plato's views were the popularist mainstream view for millennia and
accessible to everyone in simple language.


Your analyses all proceed by assuming a hypotheseis, then
cherrypicking the sources to find lines you can twist to take as
support for your theses.

BULLSHIT! EVERY ANCIENT, MIDDLE-AGES AND RENASCENCE SOURCE AGREES WITH ME!


I thought you were some brand of scientist or other. But your methods
are more similar to the fundamentalist evangelical cryptofascists who
have become so popular these days.

BULLSHIT!

My methods are exactly the same as those used by every scientism. You start
with a hypothesis and you subject it to tests. If it passes the tests you
stick with it and apply more tests, if it does not pass a test then you
modify it so that is passes the test.

Your methods are to deny anything that doesn't conform with you ignorant
revisionist preconceptions, which have no basis in science but were created
by throwing all reference to all historical sources (which would have
contradicted them from the start) and starting from nothing but personal
unproven opinions, which have still never been proven, and soliciting other
people to agree with them by the method of oration, which has nothing to do
with science, but is all about deceiving people so as to make the weaker
argument seem stronger.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Earth Deceleration theory likely a farce
    ... then became perhaps an undoable history later on. ... Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Xenophon. ... masterfully engineered ancient hoax. ... he was graduated back into time along with the Peloponnesian War. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: I wont argue with this
    ... to willfully remaining ignorant and choosing to be a Marxist wannabe... ... And the guy in the oval office is going to be out of options. ... Chamberlin and Hitler are just footnotes in history as you happily slide ... All they have to do is nuke a military ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Greek timeline fall: Critias identified as Plato!! Glaucon too old!
    ... going on during their lives all now have chronology problems. ... Plato was consulted during the PPW to solve a math problem (i.e. "The Delian ... Socrates' history was moved back in time 28 years when the ... As far as the Olympiad dating goes, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Dear Bill Maher...
    ... country. ... You're doing that ignorant thing again. ... I grace the ignorant with truth. ... holes in your PC, liberal-scrubbed revision of history. ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: Classical antiquity to the Middle Ages: Continuity or Discontinuity?
    ... Antiquity, the Early Middle Ages, or the "High Middle Ages". ... history and literature and art and culture. ... the "dark ages" were, well, frankly I've not the time, though correcting ... Of course I am ignorant, in some respects; ...
    (soc.history.ancient)