Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Amaleq13 · 02-25-2005, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WILLOWTREE

Please advise me as to specifically I did that was wrong.

I think I was pretty clear in describing what was inappropriate and irrelevant in your post and that was everything directed at Celsus, the individual, rather than the content of his post.

Quote:

I pointed out the worldview of a person.

The worldview of a person posting is irrelevant to the truth, reliability and credibility of any given post that person writes.

That you feel compelled to repeatedly assert claims about the alleged motivations and biases of posters gives the impression that you lack anything substantive to offer against the arguments presented. If you want to be taken seriously here, I suggest you change your tactics. If you are not interested in being taken seriously, I suggest you quit wasting your time and go somewhere else.

Mathetes · 02-25-2005, 07:55 PM

Is this guy for real?

Quote:

Originally Posted by WILLOWTREE

ZARAgossa, Spain

Zaragoza gets its name from the Roman camp Caesar Augusta, founded in 24 BCE, <deleted>. Here, get some culture.

And London comes from another Roman name, Londinium.

Celsus · 02-25-2005, 09:00 PM

Hey, hey, ease up on the insults! He's on to something you know. I've just had a great idea for my dissertation: the great seafarers who established InDANesia, MaDANgascar, SuDAN, SZiARA Leone, ZAnzibaRA in TanZARAnia, DAN Dong in China, MoZARAmbique, the AnDAmaN Islands, ArDANtina, built the DANama Canal, and even reached DANtarctica (and of course, I just need to incorporate those other excellent suggestions). Alfred Nobel was a Danite too--just look at his most noteworthy invention DANamite, and his establishment of the Nobel prizes to make sure "mainstream" scholarship never discovered the Danite plot to rule the world. Why do you think DANces With Wolves got so many Oscars when all the rest of Costner's stuff is crap? They also invented karate and judo (just look at the grades), which, as you should know, came from JaDAN.

Quote:

And London comes from another Roman name, Londinium.

You mean LonDANium. I can't believe Willow forgot about JorDAN though. I'll be collecting my Nobel prize next year, and since I like you BC&H lot, I can give you guys a talk at half my usual $30,000/hour rate.

Joel DANg

lpetrich · 02-25-2005, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WILLOWTREE

Attempt to stake out a position of objectivity that does not exist. ...

How so?

Quote:

How could an atheist archaeologist ever conclude for the Bible ?

An atheist archeologist would treat the Biblical God as having the same level as reality as the deities of Mt. Olympus. Which would still allow that archeologist to conclude that the Bible has some real history in it, the way that one can conclude that Greek mythology has some real history in it.

Willowtree, I'm not sure what you are getting at -- that it's impossible to be objective about some archeological research unless one also believes in the god(s) of the subject of one's research? That would mean that one cannot be objective about Greek archeology unless one also believes in Hellenic paganism, Olympians and all.

Quote:

Velikovsky was as anti-supernatural as they get and he proved that Biblical chronology was always correct and Egyptian was assumed as such just to "falsify" the O.T.

And how was he supposed to have done that? There's a lot of independent evidence that supports the Egyptian chronology of mainstream archeology.

spin · 02-25-2005, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WILLOWTREE

I am a theist.

This fact explains the insult made by atheist above.

All your posts reveal atheistic positions.

You CLAIM agnosticism in order to try and stake out a perceived state of objectivity.

This is done to validate atheist friendly conclusions as objective fact.

True agnostics question doubt and minimalism as much as they do faith and maximalism. Where are your posts confirming true agnosticism ?

The real reason opponent insults the Ceram book is because of its Schliemann content.

Minimalists hate what Schliemann accomplished.

He simply assumed a writer of ancient antiquity was reporting facts CONTRARY to all 19th century scholarship which assumed/PRESUPPOSED Homer was writing fiction/myth.

IOW, their worldview bias and ignorance was assumed true (mythical Troy).

IF Schleimann was right (and his success proves he was) THEN the hatred for the Ceram source is because it objectively reports how ancient text is true.

This becomes a basis to assume the Bible true and prove the Bible true - this is why my opponent slams the Ceram source.

We know from history that Brutus, descendant of Darda, descendant of Zarah, son of Judah who founded Troy AND New Troy/London. [source: Geoffrey of Monmouth, History of the British Kings.]

Brutus/British.

LonDAN

DANmark

scanDANavia

DANube

ZARAgossa, Spain

The Danites were expert seamen as they delivered Brutus to found London.

Two militant atheists.

Their conclusions reflect that fact.

No objective person takes them seriously.

The fact that the secular media (uneducated) promotes them proves how wrong they are.

WT

Anglo-Israelite.

<removed>, who has little grasp of the English language let alone historical processes. When I've said in the past that we should be careful of linguistically uneducated English people using linguistic arguments, what you needed to see was the result of such incompetence. Celsus gave his list, but let me add a few more, DANpassar, DANdinong, DANger Island.

<removed>This sort of utter drivel belongs elsewhere. You cannot defend allowing this sort of stuff on this forum.

He displays a total lack of awareness in the field of archaeology. He doesn't even know that modern archaeologists do not accept that what Schliemann uncovered was even Troy. Ceram, which was not the author's real name, is not an acceptible source for modern archaeological understanding.

And I'm sure the historians amongst us will appreciate the reference to Geoffrey of Monmouth's History of the British Kings, written circa 1135 CE, as a credible witness to Willow Tree's absurd historical claims regarding the founding of London.

Our knowledge of Britain circa 50 CE comes to us from the Romans as the only literate people to provide us with any information about the place. Literacy was not a big thing amongst the Britons of the era, so they didn't keep any records. It was the Romans who founded Londinium, but that wasn't available to Geoffrey of Monmouth, who I've just skimmed part of and seems good fun.

spin, who's wondering what the hell we're wading through this crap for.

Toto · 02-26-2005, 12:10 AM

Off this goes to ~Elsewhere~

WILLOWTREE · 02-26-2005, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celsus

You forgot your claim, "Therefore he casts persons with the same worldview as him to be mainstream" already? The only two I cited as "mainstream" were Mazar and Stern. Everyone else I noted were not. Both are Jews, not atheists. You don't understand my point yet?

Joel:

You are right.

I haphazzardly rummaged through your quote and made you say what you didn't say.

I know from your posts scattered on the Net that you have no equal in archaeological knowledge and when not involved in a private debate are objective.

The initial post by you that I responded to was an objective assessment.

I made a mistake.

I apologize.

sincerely,

Ray/WT

WILLOWTREE · 02-26-2005, 10:23 AM

I see there are at least a few outstanding posts that should get a reply.

But because the thread has been moved to "Elsewhere" this fact eliminates my participation.

WT

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-26-2005, 12:10 AM	#26
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Off this goes to ~Elsewhere~

02-26-2005, 10:23 AM	#28
WILLOWTREE Banned Join Date: May 2004 Location: LOS ANGELES Posts: 544	I see there are at least a few outstanding posts that should get a reply. But because the thread has been moved to "Elsewhere" this fact eliminates my participation. WT

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.