welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

an inconvenient inquiry
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dusty



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 650

PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoySetsFire wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2565436963450479963&sourceid=igoogle

speech that became An Inconvenient Truth. interesting stuff. i'm definitely interested in seeing the actual film.


i saw it. it was okay.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10794
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty wrote:
BoySetsFire wrote:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2565436963450479963&sourceid=igoogle

speech that became An Inconvenient Truth. interesting stuff. i'm definitely interested in seeing the actual film.


i saw it. it was okay.


I loved the movie. It was straight-forward, gave you tons of information (way too much to retain) and went beyond the typical "scare you and leave you hanging", it gives advice and resources for reducing your own impact on the atmosphere. Plus it addresses the myth that there is any controversy what so ever among scientists, and it suggests that if you write your senator and they don't act that you run for senate. Smile

All in all, I thought it ought to be seen by everyone.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WheelsOfConfusion



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 12251
Location: Unknown Kaddath

PostPosted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are generally very good reasons for not including various apocrypha as canon, some of them showing more obvious signs of late authorship and conflicting with the established gospels (not that the ones we do have don't share those problems to a degree). Unfortunately it was fashionable in the day to write action adventures and secret origin stories for religious figures, and so much of them are pure embellishment.
As to global warming, I really should have to tell everyone that there is a scientific consensus on the issue, yes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Major Tom



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562

PostPosted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 5:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"As [the report] went through review, there was less consensus on the science and conclusions on climate change"...

..."less" than 100%, my bet on the reference.

i'm so glad christie whitman dissappeared, she had convictions and aboLUTEly no balls. worst sellout in my recent personal recollection.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9552

PostPosted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:57 pm    Post subject: nyuck nyuck nyukc Reply with quote

Quote:
A House committee will examine accusations that political appointees in the Bush administration edited government reports on global warming to raise the level of uncertainty about research that points to a human cause.


The answer for five hundred is "Yes."

I actually love these exercises, because they involve watching a group of well-paid, corn-fed white boys in Congress dick around for

days

and

days


over an evident truth. Trying to figure out if -- oh, who knows, if it's okay to say that a cigar is a cigar?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
E-boy



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 1552
Location: Virginia (Much barfiness)

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I never said their weren't. Although biblical scholars generally accept that orthodox christians made more textual changes to the New testament than the gnostics and other groups did. Which isn't to say that the gnostics are free of sin in this department either. Pardon my terminology.

Protestant biblical scholars have turned textual study into a real science. Their analysis techniques have even been used for taxonomic analysis.




WheelsOfConfusion wrote:
There are generally very good reasons for not including various apocrypha as canon, some of them showing more obvious signs of late authorship and conflicting with the established gospels (not that the ones we do have don't share those problems to a degree). Unfortunately it was fashionable in the day to write action adventures and secret origin stories for religious figures, and so much of them are pure embellishment.
As to global warming, I really should have to tell everyone that there is a scientific consensus on the issue, yes?

_________________
"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid" ~ SGT John Stryker from "Sands of Iwo Jima".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Dusty



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 650

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

E-boy wrote:
I never said their weren't. Although biblical scholars generally accept that orthodox christians made more textual changes to the New testament than the gnostics and other groups did. Which isn't to say that the gnostics are free of sin in this department either. Pardon my terminology.

Protestant biblical scholars have turned textual study into a real science. Their analysis techniques have even been used for taxonomic analysis.




WheelsOfConfusion wrote:
There are generally very good reasons for not including various apocrypha as canon, some of them showing more obvious signs of late authorship and conflicting with the established gospels (not that the ones we do have don't share those problems to a degree). Unfortunately it was fashionable in the day to write action adventures and secret origin stories for religious figures, and so much of them are pure embellishment.
As to global warming, I really should have to tell everyone that there is a scientific consensus on the issue, yes?


so you're saying it can be seen as part of their religion to alternate what is originally known to be true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
E-boy



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 1552
Location: Virginia (Much barfiness)

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No that's not what I'm saying. Early christians weren't generally anymore literate than anyone else and initially there were few, if any professional scribes about. Early greek manuscripts were also written withoutspacesorpunctuation like that. Many accidental errors crept in, and many other "corrections" were made by well meaning scribes. The reason the orthodox christians made many changes they did (when they made them intentionally) was often to do what they thought of as clarifying passages they felt they knew the meaning of but other sects interpreted differently. For example, in the oldest texts of the new testament scholars have there are NO explicit references to Jesus being divine. Nor with the exception of one rather cryptic passage is there any discussion of the holy trinity. You can see where wording was changed in many places to support Jesus's divinity (many early sects did not believe he was divine). In passages where mary and joseph were originally referred to as his "parents" the wording has been changed. Now it's Jesus's mother and joseph.

There are so many different variations of the new testement that there are literally more of them than there are actual words in the entirety of the new testament. Biblical scholars of textual analysis do a pretty good job puzzling together a semblence of what may have been originally written.

One of the reasons these studies exist to begin with was that when all these variations were first discovered the catholic church siezed the opportunity to rub in the the protestants faces that their belief in the word of god (IE the scriptures as the inviolate word of god) was unpracticeable if no one knew what the words were and that the only way to maintain true belief was through the apostolic traditions of catholocism.

I think the protestants response to that was rather brilliant. So brilliant, that as I said earlier their techniques are even used in taxonomy.
_________________
"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid" ~ SGT John Stryker from "Sands of Iwo Jima".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Dusty



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 650

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

theres no way im retaining any of that at 5:30 in the morning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MsFrisby



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3966
Location: a quiet little corner of crazy

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dusty wrote:
theres no way im retaining any of that at 5:30 in the morning.


Then.

Don't.

Comment.

Or, hey! I have an idea! Come back and read it when you are alert! The forum medium easily allows for this!
_________________
A person's character is their destiny.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
WheelsOfConfusion



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 12251
Location: Unknown Kaddath

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

E-boy wrote:
No that's not what I'm saying. Early christians weren't generally anymore literate than anyone else and initially there were few, if any professional scribes about.

Not only that, but even scribes were sometimes taken to fabricating entire stories whole-cloth simply because there were questions about the figures that people wanted answers to. And let's not forget that "historians" of the time were more often pressured into making good stories than in making accurate histories.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
E-boy



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 1552
Location: Virginia (Much barfiness)

PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good call wheels. The story about "Let he who is free of sin cast the first stone" with Jesus and the pharisees (SP?) Isn't in any of the older new testament manuscripts. It's thought it was a remnant verbal tradition that was later included (either accientally or intentionally) by scribes. The evidence supports a possible case of it being a mistake as one of the first manuscripts the story appears in has it written as a note in the margin. A later scribe might possibly have viewed this as an error or note.

One of my favorite quotes from "Misquoting Jesus" is a note written by a scribe who'd found a passage an earlier scribe had "Corrected". I can't remember the exact wording now, but he left a note to the effect of "Thy scoundrel, thy knave! DO NOT CHANGE THE WORDS!" So not all scribes were so liberal in tinkering. This, of course, was in a much later era in which professional scribes were employed.
_________________
"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid" ~ SGT John Stryker from "Sands of Iwo Jima".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group