Originally posted by chithappens
It is not a consipracy guy. You are not even explaining what Columbus did. You are running around what I said.What did Columbus do to make history? What did he do? How is that consipracy theory? What did he do? I have no gotten answer from you?
Do you know?
His voyages to America created an awareness in Europe that resulted in the colonization of the American continent by Europeans, shaping it in the way we know it now.
Originally posted by chithappens
This is a perfect example also. This assumes that the Native Americans would have never become advanced enough with the "help" of Europeans(or hell Asians or Africans either; although again, they had already interacted). That is a "what if" history statement and that inference is invalid on multiple accounts.
Are you ****ing retarded, seriously? I didn't assume anything about Native Americans needing help, or that Europeans made the world a better place. Re-read what I said.
You're the one making claims, yet dancing with "conspiracies" when asked to support your claims
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, he found something that most people had forgotten and made it popular resulting in the colonization and in time the rise of the at the moment most powerful nation in the world.
1) Let's remember Columbus is Spanish so that is not neccesarily directly related. By "most powerful nation" I guess you mean the United States and the main colonies (at least in what became known as the United States) were of France and Britain so that is a long connect the dots game.
2) What do you mean "he found something most people had forgotten?"
Originally posted by Robtard
Are you ****ing retarded, seriously? I didn't assume anything about Native Americans needing help, or that Europeans made the world a better place. Re-read what I said.You're the one making claims, yet dancing with "conspiracies" when asked to support your claims
Originally posted by Robtard
Imagine if Columbus, Cortez or Pizarro didn't come to the "new world", its safe to logically think, that "our world" as we know it today would be very different.
Right. Left?
Originally posted by chithappensThe American continent. And yes, his voyages did create awareness. For France and England as well. I have no idea why you are trying to downplay his importance.
1) Let's remember Columbus is Spanish so that is not neccesarily directly related. By "most powerful nation" I guess you mean the United States and the main colonies (at least in what became known as the United States) were of France and Britain so that is a long connect the dots game.2) What do you mean "he found something most people had forgotten?"
Oh, and he was Italian.
Originally posted by Bardock42
His voyages to America created an awareness in Europe that resulted in the colonization of the American continent by Europeans, shaping it in the way we know it now.
Ok, cool. Now what about this:
Originally posted by chithappensWell, in the easiest and probably best known example of false canon, Christopher Columbus being celebrated as "discovering America", "teaching" the world the was round, dying poor, as well as other myths are complete bullshit.
Originally posted by chithappens
It is not a consipracy guy. You are not even explaining what Columbus did. You are running around what I said.What did Columbus do to make history? What did he do? How is that consipracy theory? What did he do? I have no gotten answer from you?
Do you know?
I have repeatedly answered. He set up trade routes, that paved the way for the colonization of the Americas. That is history. Now, you may think it is irrelevant history, it doesn't change the fact that it is history; it shaped the world you and I live in today.
Europeans, arguably the most technologically advanced people of the time became even more powerful and dominant because of exploiting the Americas, that and things like knowledge, religion, medicine, foods and agriculture spread. That is history.
Now, care to answer one question?
Originally posted by Bardock42
The American continent. And yes, his voyages did create awareness. For France and England as well. I have no idea why you are trying to downplay his importance.Oh, and he was Italian.
I'm not downplaying his importance - I'm saying his celebrity is falsified and glorified in different areas.
And I meant he went through help from the Spanish court. That was my mistake.
Originally posted by chithappens
Ok, cool. Now what about this:
I agree with that. Just saying he made history in other ways and was not just a random guy that got famous for no reason. And though I agree he gets hyped to many children, at least in Europe people that go to school get taught more accurately.
Originally posted by Robtard
I have repeatedly answered. He set up trade routes, that paved the way for the colonization of the Americas. That is history. Now, you may think it is irrelevant history, it doesn't change the fact that it is history that shaped the world you and I live in today.Europeans, arguably the most technologically advanced people of the time became even more powerful and dominant because of exploiting the Americas, that and things like knowledge, religion, medicine, foods, agriculture spread. That is history.
I don't find it irrelevant. It think it is certainly important to understanding the world as it is today. Europeans became the dominant force of the world after exploiting the Americas, I agree. We ARE NOT disagreeing that what happened was important.
The "how" is never explained is history text in schools or in mass media. The "what" is given but now how and often times it the "what" is based off one man and building him up to something he is not. My issue deals with the other myths surrounding Columbus that are certainly not true. Some textbooks omit the Vikings completely and other mention Prince Henry sailing around the tip of Africa, but never mention that Afro-Phoencians did it first - he was inspired to do so after seeing them do it blah blah blah.
The point in my original post was that Willie Lynch and Columbus have some points to them, but to falsify so much is an insult to everyone.
Originally posted by chithappens
I don't find it irrelevant. It think it is certainly important to understanding the world as it is today. Europeans became the dominant force of the world after exploiting the Americas, I agree. We ARE NOT disagreeing that what happened was important.The "how" is never explained is history text in schools or in mass media. The "what" is given but now how and often times it the "what" is based off one man and building him up to something he is not. My issue deals with the other myths surrounding Columbus that are certainly not true. Some textbooks omit the Vikings completely and other mention Prince Henry sailing around the tip of Africa, but never mention that Afro-Phoencians did it first - he was inspired to do so after seeing them do it blah blah blah.
The point in my original post was that Willie Lynch and Columbus have some points to them, but to falsify so much is an insult to everyone.
Actually, Europeans where dominant long before the exploitation of the Americas, that is a fact, they had the technology. If you're interested in reading a great "theory" on the how/why of this, read or watch "Guns, Germs & Steel", by Jared Diamond.
Not sure where you're going with the "how" and "what"... we know "how" Columbus sailed to the Americas and we know "what" became of such exploits. Like I said, it's no secret that he was little more than a pirate/explorer. Exactly, some textbooks, not all. History is constantly being tweaked as more knowledge is discovered.
You lost me with your Prince Henry example, wasn't Bartolomeu Dias the first European to do that?
Problem with Willie Lynch, it was written as a hoax from the start, not a work of literature based off a real man's (Columbus) exploits, regardless of exaggerations and/or half-truths.
Sriously though, who sailed to the Americas first?
Originally posted by chithappens
Right. Left?
Originally posted by Robtard
Actually, Europeans where dominant long before the exploitation of the Americas, that is a fact, they had the technology. If you're interested in reading a great "theory" on the how/why of this, read or watch "Guns, Germs & Steel", by Jared Diamond.Not sure where you're going with the "how" and "what"... we know "how" Columbus sailed to the Americas and we know "what" became of such exploits. Like I said, it's no secret that he was little more than a pirate/explorer. Exactly, some textbooks, not all. History is constantly being tweaked as more knowledge is discovered.
You lost me with your Prince Henry example, wasn't Bartolomeu Dias the first European to do that?
Problem with Willie Lynch, it was written as a hoax from the start, not a work of literature based off a real man's (Columbus) exploits, regardless of exaggerations and/or half-truths.
Sriously though, who sailed to the Americas first?
What?
The Cape of Good Hope was the "tip of Africa" being sailed around. It was supposedly a big deal for the to sail around the tip of Africa as it supplies a trade route between the "East Indies" and the Europeans.
AND if you want to get technical, it wasn't Cape of Good Hope that was the southern most tip of Africa, it was the Cape Agulhas. (I was the runner-up Geography B winner...lawlz) So...if you want to say it right, you would say that Vasco de Gama was the frist to sail around the Cape of Agulhas.
It was done by Vasco de Gama in 1498. (May, I believe is the month.) However, I strongly suspect that Vasco de Gama was only the first European to sail around the Cape. (Citation needed to verify that...because I don't feel like looking it up.)
Humans are part of a unique experience. When I use the word "we" I mean "humans".
I can say that if we (humans) put our minds together, like a group-mind, we realize that it forms a life of itself, and seems to swing in ways that's not in our control. Think of it as strings that each part of our minds contribute, and we are clumsy about how that entity is going to work.
We practice controlling the images we create with our minds via what we do with "stars" in Hollywood. We practice the desire of wanting to see someone or something destroyed. But, in order to destroy something, we need to see it rise first. Then, allow the feelings of jealousy/envy, and then, allow the energy of jealousy take over our mindset and we take that star down, and do so laughing at it's destruction, savouring, as if it's a food consumption.
For those who kinda know the bible, in the book of Revelations, it talks about the beast that's underground. There's more then one, there are plenty underground and (not sure) also in the sea (no, not the lochness). These beasts or dragons or serpents were caste down underground, even if you think of them as dinosaurs, their flesh is gone, but their spirit or energy is locked underground. It has a frequency of vibration, and certain music sounds that is with the same/similar vibration conjures it up. Well, that's the boring way, b/c people in all sort of esoteric circles have been using the beast/serpent to gain wisdom or insight into things via musical frequency, vocal frequency, and along side, certain symbols to "control" that entity that is waiting to come up. The one thing the beast wants is life on earth, not below. And it wants life to destroy mankind/humans, but it needs mankind to go along with it.
When we use our group mind, we form the beast, but not completely, it's still in infancy stage as far as control. Our brains are the controls and our imagination is the abstraction layer in which it's going to re-form it's life, each part or member of it will be part of our mind's energy that is sacrificed to give it life.
Once it's truly alive, some humans are going to be so programmed into loving destruction, as it's already something done too often (we use to give time to allow someone or something to fall, but now, we, humans, are almost in lust to see someone fall down, it turns over almost in a weeks timing, and we practice by watching shows that we enjoy seeing someone destroyed. We've developed an appetite or taste for seeing something or someone destroyed, even on the news, it's becoming joy to see each other reduced. But it's better when we see someone that we put high above us on purpose, expressly, so that we can use that mind/system/beast to bring them down in with sportful amusement.
Once we totally get programmed to enjoy destruction of others, to the point that it's lust is a constant appetite, the beast can start to form itself and reveal itself. That's using our brain or mind. Once that happens, the ones who love destruction are going to imagine using it against people they don't like, could be family or neighbor or countries. After destruction of other lands in famine, etc. The beast needs blood and energy to live, once it has enough sacrifices, it will be a full blown entity, and it will come back and finish destruction upon the entire world. As we are going to be it's food consumption. It's time in reverse. The beasts were here first, and were removed underground for us, and was around when we were here on earth, cannibalising us, but was sent underground. And they want a time in which our stupid ass brings them back up, and they finish the job, but they need our help.
It's just my opinion. Read Revelations, but I suspect that we are living in the last few chapters in Revelations, I don't guess we are living in the first part of the book, I think that stuff already happened, but, it's all opinion, and yes, spiritual.
Every life form wants to be worshipped, not any particular personality within one, but in general. That's why you'll see the cow being worshipped in E. India or Ancient Egypt. It offers a service to humans and in turn, the thoughts and dedication of it, brings it to a new life, and starts to become a commanding force. Demi-god.
The Hindus have already done that, and they formed their own beast, which has taken form so high, that it's either in the star system Venus or Saturn, but they use each member of the beast's body as a caste system, and recarnate the souls/energy of a person back into the beast's system. They used Kali (black female), and I think that was a real human, or princesses at one point. Now sitting in a star system. They used Vishnu (white? male), and I think was a real human being, or prince at one point, sitting in one of the star systems.
Originally posted by General GStart by removing yourself.
Please read all before posting, this is my first visit, let alone post in here, this may get closed, but what do I care, I got to say it.Back on topic:
I hate people and our arrogant ways, that just because we can blow each other up with nuclear weapons and kill each other with guns, we are therefore better than any other species and have the right no totally wipe them out.
On average, about 1 species goes extinct every 18 minutes, whether that is a particular plant or bacteria, or a large mammal (most recent was a type of dolphin just a few weeks ago) which means that with all of the species on Earth, in just 300 years, there will be NO more species.
I personally think that animals lives are far above the value of a humans and that the next species to go extinct or endangered should be well...us. We are way too overpopulated too spread out, and because we are so arrogant, we think that it doesn’t matter what we do to anything else. With the amount of trees and forests we are cutting down each year (damn, each day for crying out loud) is disgusting and is a surprise that anything can still live in those areas.
I remember a bit ago a man shot a hunter dead because the hunter was about to kill a Rhino, and he got extremely ridiculed for it and was sent to jail. But I still remember what he said before he did, he said that if someone was robbing a bank and ran out with a bag of money (basically a bag of paper) and he shot that man dead, he would be praised, perhaps even rewarded, and to see that one of our endangered animals, a living, breathing animal has less value than a silly bag of paper just disgusts me.
And we are not stopping, the Amur Leopard has less than 40 left in the wild, only six of those are females, we pushed them to extinction, I guarantee within the next couple years, there will be no more. They get so little attention because they live in the same area as the Siberian (Amur) tigers which is the Amur River Valley in Russia.
The Dusky Seaside Sparrow…it took us about 118 years to drive them to extinction after we first found them. They went extinct in 1990. The person that took care of the very last Dusky Seaside Sparrow had this to say, "The last member of the rarest species known to us. He became blind in one eye, became old for a sparrow, and yet he persisted as if he knew his sole task was to sustain the bloodline as long as possible., I wondered if he felt sorrow or excruciating panic at the thought of his oneness. Orange Band, blind in one eye, old and alone, was gone.” Orange Band was the name of the Sparrow.
I personally wouldn’t mind the removal of humans from this planet, we do nothing good.
Anyways, I am done now.
I leave for a few days, and look what happens. Anyways, I do like some of these posts, and will be responding, I just have a lot to do at the moment.
Very original parenthesis, that hasn't been suggested before.
And to the hypothetical quesiton earlier, I would definately take the animals. (surprise?)
Originally posted by General G
And to the hypothetical quesiton earlier, I would definately take the animals. (surprise?)
Originally posted by Robtard
Make the stipulation, that they have to be the first human replaced. See where their convictions stand then.
does that stipulation change the answer?
(oh, and great call Robtard 🙂)