Slashdot Mirror


Is Atlas Holding Hipparchus' Lost Star Map?

cr0kin0le writes "The Farnese Atlas at the Naples National Archaeological Museum may be holding a celestial globe which accurately depicts the long-lost star catalog of Hipparchus, according to a physics professor at Louisiana State University."

421 comments

  1. Thanks a bunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why the hell did you link Wikipedia in the blurb, now I can't karma whore...

    1. Re:Thanks a bunch by physicsphairy · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Quite frankly, Mr. Anonymous Coward, I've read a lot of your posts and you really, really suck at karma whoring.

      Some of the things you link too. . . .

  2. I see stars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And how come nobody found this out sooner?

    1. Re:I see stars! by necromcr · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's got something to do with National Treasure movie?

      --
      No more I say.
    2. Re:I see stars! by Eric+Giguere · · Score: 1

      More fodder for Dan Brown: The Hipparchus Map, coming soon.

      Eric
      More humo(u)r: Why the Vioxx recall reduced spam
    3. Re:I see stars! by CBDSteve · · Score: 1

      Well, Dr Jackson's been a little busy recently...

  3. LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at the little peepee on atlas!!!

    LOL!!!

    1. Re:LOL!! by LarsWestergren · · Score: 5, Funny

      Look at the little peepee on atlas!!! LOL!!!

      Please, the polite way of putting it is "He's a grower, not a shower".

      Another possible retort is: "Yeah, but did you see what a great great ass he has? Divine!". Note that this can lead to awkward silences in predominantly male enviroments such as Slashdot though.

      Right guys? Guys...?
      *crickets*

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    2. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tastes change; a big dick was considered pretty ridiculous looking in ancient Greece. Besides, given the size of the body, it's probably not all that small anyway.

    3. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For slashdotters I think it's more like:
      I don't think it matters how big your star map is, it's what you do with it that counts!

    4. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that this can lead to awkward silences in predominantly male enviroments such as Slashdot

      Not in the Apple section, though.

    5. Re:LOL!! by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      Priapus did fairly well.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    6. Re:LOL!! by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      I don't normally reply to myself, but a quick look at the wikipedia entry for Priapus shows that there IS NO MENTION of his huge cock - ie his defining feature.

      American conservatism is way out of hand, this is ridiculous.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    7. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      speaking as a male reproductive specalist, "growers" typically have much larger member's when in use than any of the types that have the faulty valves that keep their "device" mostly inflated all the time.

      so ladies, if he's a grower, you will most certianly get more use and excitement out of him than any of the biological sock stuffers to call them.

    8. Re:LOL!! by aztec1430 · · Score: 1

      Well to keep it to scale - his 'peepee' is about the length of the Korean peninsular - based on the size of the globe he's lifting...

    9. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean on this page? Where there's both a picture of a statue of him, and the phrase "large, ithyphallic genitalia" in the third sentence? Or is there another Wikipedia? (And by the way, that entry hasn't been edited since October 2004, so no, it wasn't updated right after you looked.)

    10. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, true, but then could you imagine the scale of any possible mates'... er... anatomy?

    11. Re:LOL!! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      Not to mention capabilities of thoughtful attention.

      In the cycle of creation,
      the goddess had some fun:
      mother nature gave men two heads,
      but just blood enough for one.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    12. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when was that date changed?

    13. Re:LOL!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Changed? Yes, sure, somebody broke into the Wikipedia database and modified that date just to make Alan Partridge look bad. Me, I find it more plausible that he simply skimmed the page, missed the info, and decided "American conservatism" removed the penis references.

    14. Re:LOL!! by Trick · · Score: 4, Funny

      C'mon -- the guy's got the south pole on his back. That's bound to cause some shrinkage.

  4. What's up with the modified statue? by Harald74 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the NYTimes.com picture, they added a leaf... Is this some American thing? /European

    --
    A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    1. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by itsthebin · · Score: 2, Funny

      cause its just a [i]fig[/i]ment of your imagination

      --
      ...I obey the laws of physics....
    2. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably an american thing.

      Remember this is the country that ground to a virtual halt at the sight of half a breast.

    3. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to remember that if an American Family saw a picture of that statue with its genitalia exposed like that, the father would turn to drink, the mother would be out selling herself on street corners, the daughter would be into crack and be pregnant at 14, and the son would be robbing banks.

      Thank God for censorship like the NYT gives us, so we can stay pure.

    4. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by dn15 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I wouldn't put it past our wonderful American news to censor stuff like that, but I just did a quick search of Google news and every image I found had the leaf, including one from a Greek publication. Do you have any links to an image that is without it? It sure looks like it was part of the original statue to me. Or did you simply see the leaf and assume that the American media must have Photoshopped it in?

    5. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The leaf seems to be real. It's probably the doing of the (very European) Pope Pius the IX in 1857, who thought that naked statues should be covered up. In recent years they have been restored, and the NY Times probably used an old picture - whether or not that was on purpose we don't know.

    6. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Akki · · Score: 1

      Or spent $8000 to cover up the breast of Lady Justice, if you need another example...

    7. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Harald74 · · Score: 1

      Do you have any links to an image that is without it?

      Well yes, the first link in /. heading has a picture on a Danish server without a leaf....

      --
      A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    8. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      probably just another european who wants to see cock

    9. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Image linked in the story shows the statue sans figleaf.

    10. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google image search for Farnese Atlas. It turns up more than a dozen images of the Atlas.

      All sans fig leaf.

    11. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by odano · · Score: 1

      The link to the picture in the article was sans leaf.

    12. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by reynhout · · Score: 1

      Erm, no. It's a European thing.

      Prudes.

    13. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by mbyte · · Score: 3, Informative

      Uh, i just did a quick google for "Farnese Atlas statue" (as noted under the picture), and the results were without the leaf !! :)

      see here: picture (but beware, it contains nudity, oh the horror !)

    14. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

      Picture from the blurb

      This picture shows him without the leaf. Not sure where the leaf came from, but it does seem to be edited in.

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    15. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by bigiain · · Score: 1

      The first link in the post:

      http://sights.seindal.dk/img/orig/9456.jpg

      has no leaf...

      big

    16. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      maybe they'll edit leaves into biology books next?

      and add stickers that say that "blood being vital to your health is a theory".

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    17. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by flynniec6 · · Score: 1

      Uh ... the very first link above goes to a picture of the statue with said leaf not present.

    18. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by stefanvt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Today, the majority of people (in Europe) aren't shocked at the depiction of nude people in statues, paintings, ...

      But there were other times, when nude statues/paintings were altered to "protect the innocent". There are even cases of nude crucifixes being alterd with a loin cloth.

      Luckily, the morals have evolved beyond the hypocrisy of the church of old times

    19. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How do you stop your kids from seeing their own genitalia?

      I bet they sneek a peek at it when they take a piss.

    20. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by DoubleEdd · · Score: 3, Informative
      It wasn't uncommon for leaves to be added to statues in relatively modern times (ie Victorian), and perhaps more recently for them to be removed again to reveal the original statue.

      David, for example, suffered this fate.

    21. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called the human body.

      If your kid can't deal with the idea that everyone has a pee-pee down there, maybe you've got him a bit too much sheltered.

      Also, consider that you're talking about one of the last surviving records of a previous civiliation. This has to be rated as a work of art up there with Michaelangelo's David. Who is, as you'll note, also naked.

      What, are you going to keep your kid away from all culture forever?

    22. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But if the Chinese media censored a picture like that all the American Heros would be calling for an invasian to liberate the oppressed Chinamen...

    23. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by reynhout · · Score: 1


      They make and sell copies of famous statues for those who can't conquer the countries that own the originals. You can get them with or without the fig leaf.

      The NYT used a figged copy of the Farnese Atlas for their story photo.

      It's lame, but pretty much everyone everywhere does the same thing when given a chance.

      Think of all the things people could do with the energy they'd save if they just didn't bother to get offended by unimportant things...

    24. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by CrankyFool · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why do you think we're encouraging an obesity epidemic in our kids?

    25. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Probably not. They all use stock photos, even the Greek.

      Remember the saying "Never attribute to malice what can be sufficiently explained by stupidity"? Yeah, works for sloth too.

      --
      "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

      - Seneca
    26. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Harald74 · · Score: 1

      Well, I am a parent, and not in the least concerned if my daughter sees any naked statues... I would be more worried if she grows up thinking her body is something shameful...

      --
      A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    27. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by eclectro · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is this some American thing?

      Yes, and we call it "Ashcrofting".

      It's good for you.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    28. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It is, in fact, a European thing. The leaf is a real covering, as ordered by a Medieval Pope...

    29. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 1

      Erm... "Probably not" as in "They probably didn't use the fig-leafed version for any other reason than that's what they had"...

      --
      "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

      - Seneca
    30. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by madaxe42 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, this is a European thing. Many old sculptures and statues were modified by the catholic church during past centuries in the name of 'decency'. Fig leaves were typically added, made of alabaster or a similar stone to the original statue, and affixed using concrete. This is also why many statues you will now see in this part of the world lack genitalia, as when the leaves were removed by a more enlightened age of society, the genitals fairly often came with.

      The NYTimes photo is most likely an accurate picture, however is probably a lot older than the picture on the other site, and the fig leaf was removed sometime after the photo was taken.

    31. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Harald74 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, you have a word for it... That really sums it up, doesn't it?

      We have a quite a few American tourists over here, and I haven't seen anyone freak out over our park full of nude statues. Do narrow-minded and prudish Americans stay at home, while the broad-minded and friendly ones visit Europe in the summer?

      Just asking...

      --
      A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    32. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess that explains the Simpsons. What about the other 290 million?

    33. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by DingerX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Copies, eh?

      If you check the caption on the NYT photo, it's credited to Reuters/Griffith Observatory (the latter is also the source of one of the "uninvolved experts" quoted in the text).

      Now, the griffith observatory is currently closed to the public, but if you check their renovation news, you'll see that they're adding in a shiny new replica of the Farnese Atlas. Since they provided the photo, could they have just done a nice studio shot, or maybe one from the replicomat's catalog? After all, the lighting in the danish photo is pretty poor.
      Now a real story would be if these were claimed to be from the s photos that the astronomer claimed to use for determining the age of the stars.
      "Decidedly Nineteenth Century CE, or possibly 21st Century United States"

    34. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by DingerX · · Score: 1

      Bah, that's a lie. MEdieval popes had no problems with willies. It's only in the modern era that it became a problem.

      Although judging from the pictures somebody at some time did do some Hernia Repair on Atlas. The way he's lifting the globe, he's bound to have thrown things outta whack.

    35. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      Do narrow-minded and prudish Americans stay at home, while the broad-minded and friendly ones visit Europe in the summer?
      Yeah, probably.
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    36. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zakezuke · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do narrow-minded and prudish Americans stay at home, while the broad-minded and friendly ones visit Europe in the summer?

      You have the zelot-prudes who don't allow evolution to be taught in the classroom. They don't travel for the most part. The ones who do buy bulk plastic fig leaves at staple them everywhere.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    37. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Orinthe · · Score: 1

      I'm abroad right now living next to a prudish and narrow-minded American--I can assure you that they, too, study overseas. ;)

      --
      SELECT quote.text AS sig FROM quote NATURAL JOIN attribute WHERE attribute.description = 'witty';
      0 rows returned
    38. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by bobdotorg · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do narrow-minded and prudish Americans stay at home, while the broad-minded and friendly ones visit Europe in the summer?

      No, they run for President and appoint genitalphobic attourney generals and FTC chairs.

      --
      __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
    39. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Zakabog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We have a quite a few American tourists over here, and I haven't seen anyone freak out over our park full of nude statues. Do narrow-minded and prudish Americans stay at home, while the broad-minded and friendly ones visit Europe in the summer?

      Yes. The narrow-minded prudish Americans are quite happy with the narrow-minded prudish country we are and like to stay home away from disgusting, immoral Europe and their vulgar nude statue parks. The broad-minded friendly ones are very upset that we're the prudish idiots of the world so they like to leave as often as possible and visit countries that are open-minded enough to have a park full of nude statues.

    40. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by mr+i+want+to+go+home · · Score: 4, Funny
      If your kid can't deal with the idea that everyone has a pee-pee down there, maybe you've got him a bit too much sheltered.

      Whoooooh dude. I must have been brought up in a bomb shelter then, 'cause I sure can't deal with the idea that everybody has a peepee down there.

      'Cause....you know...my girlfriend is hiding hers really damn well!

    41. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by MattXVI · · Score: 1

      I sincerely doubt Pio Nono had a statue covered in Naples. You're passing along rank speculation.

      --
      When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
      -Tom Jones
    42. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by herrison · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It worries me that if (as seems likely), the NYT can publish an altered photograph without indicating that it's effectively a montage - what else might have been changed?

      --
      You know what I miss? Leeches.
    43. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by mr+i+want+to+go+home · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately this wasn't only a Catholic 'thing' - in England the Victorian's 'erased' the huge cocks from chalk figures cut into the hills in the South/South West. These figures are thousands of years old (some have their genitals back).

      This was in the reign of a Church of England Queen, who was brought up as a Lutheran and had sympathies for the Catholics.

    44. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Magickcat · · Score: 0, Troll

      Unfortunately due to excessive American religous zeal, even the classical art must now conform to the hypocritical standards of the fundamentalist Christian movement.

      Ladies and gentlemen - I give you the well placed leaf - the Christian's burka, if you will.

      --

      Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

    45. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by MattXVI · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You call current moral an 'evolution'? One man's evolution is another's rapid descent.

      Anyway, the "church of old times" sponsored an enormous quantity of art that happened to depict figures in the nude. As did religious confraternities and civic organizations.

      Now, if you want to talk about some of the more ascetic strains of the reformed churches in Northern Europe, that's another issue. They loathed what they saw as the pagan excesses of religious art. Many of them were against representational art entirely. Many statues on the outside of the C of E Cathedral of Canterbury, for example, are still half-destroyed by philistine iconoclasts of the regime of Oliver Cromwell.

      --
      When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
      -Tom Jones
    46. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike Americans who prefer the real thing, especially after a good fire and brimstone sermon.

    47. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, that may or may not be true. But it certainly begs a far more important question.

      To wit: What is your excuse for your missing genitalia?

    48. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it was started by a Victorian Era Pope! Hurray for anachronisms!

    49. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's fine. Two seconds with Google and you can expose your daughter. It's a free country. Even for perverts.

    50. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by herrison · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm going off-topic...
      I'm a parent. 39 years old, my kids are 5 and 2. Also, I helped raise an ex's son, he's 22 now. I am British, was raised in Britain. Very normal childhood. Involved studying science in science classes, religious theory in religious classes. Never involved public acts of worship, because I'm not religious. All very normal. I used to go swimming with my parents. Involved seeing other people's genitalia. As it does now, when I take my boys out. Ditto the local art museum. Ditto the beach. Ditto the kids playing in the river in the summer. Oh, also, partial tits on TV? Really, quite normal.
      This thing is: this is very normal. I can't emphasise that enough. It's not just normal in the UK, it's normal throughout the 300million people in Europe, and it's been normal for the whole of my life.
      Please, someone, tell me what they're worried about happening if a child happens to see a partial breast, an antique schlong (and, you know, I think Atlas has been bathing in very cold water...), if someone is exposed to one or more (potentially) competing theories?
      Men have penises. Women have vaginas. We all have breasts (kind of). Religious people have faith, scientists are... scientific.

      --
      You know what I miss? Leeches.
    51. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Magickcat · · Score: 1

      Even the Catholic Church has moved on from this sort of nonsence however.

      Apparently the Reformation occured well before the Victorian era - anachorisms indeed.

      --

      Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

    52. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Harald74 · · Score: 1

      I think you misunderstand. You live in the country where TV stations have to pixelate a cartoon butt not to feel the wrath of the FCC. I, on the other hand, live in a country, no; a part of the world, where naked statues are not something that raises so much as an eyebrow, much less public ire...

      And this confuses me to no end, as all the Americans I have met have been friendly, easygoing people, not at all like the theocratic government of the US would lead me to believe they should be.

      --
      A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    53. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Slur · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, the prudish Americans are a tiny minority - bordering on a myth, really.

      The media props up this mythical form of being in order to Disney-fy the airwaves and make anyone who lives a normal flawed human lifestyle feel like a depraved piece of shit. This helps to prop up those capitalist endeavors that rely on a cowed populus, such as the snack industry, the advertising industry, and the defense industry.

      The underlying aim of the media is to teach ordinary Americans that they are in constant danger of being demonized as outsiders. They are told they can escape this alienation by joining the mass-consciousness. All they need do is practice the dubious virtues of jingoism and an unquestioning submission to authority and they will be accepted, loved, and embraced by the status-quo. ...They also have a lot to say about the relative value of light-skinned blonde daughters versus black-skinned kinky-haired daughters....

      --
      -- thinkyhead software and media
    54. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by stefanvt · · Score: 2

      Yes, I do consider current moral an evolution to the better.
      Why? Simply because nudity is nothing to be ashamed of, we are all born the same way: nude.
      I'm sure that, were nudity considered natural and not obscene, there would be far fewer sex crimes.

      Yes, the (Catholic) church sponsored a lot of religuous nude art because ie in the middle ages nudity was common, most farmers and their family worked their fields naked (to spare their clothes).

      It was only when the puritan era began that the church began to perceive nudity as sinful.

      Tell me, why is a picture of or seeing a breast in the nude considered more harmfull than seeing someones brains splattered over the screen?

    55. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 1, Funny

      Chinamen is not the proper nomenclature. Asian Americans, please.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    56. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by artifex2004 · · Score: 1
      It worries me that if (as seems likely), the NYT can publish an altered photograph without indicating that it's effectively a montage - what else might have been changed?


      How is it a montage, if that's what was on the statue at the time the picture was taken?
      Just because you've also seen it without a leaf doesn't mean it was the NYT's doing.
    57. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      Yor kids read Slashdot? I hate to break it to yo8u, but if they've made it here unassisted, then they've already seen more web porn than that you could possibly imaghine - by making the human body a thing of secrecy and shame, you're contributing to an unhealthy attitude to sex - and that will get those kids into trouble later on in their lives.

      Grow the fuck up.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    58. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by superyooser · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The body is not shameful. However, it is shameful for a person to expose his/her body to those who do not have the exclusive marital privilege of seeing it. A naked statue is a model of whorish disrespect for the inherent intimacy and sexuality of the body.

    59. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      It's a lot smaller, but it's still there. Maybe you should go south this winter.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    60. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Destroy

    61. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      A naked statue is a model of whorish disrespect for the inherent intimacy and sexuality of the body.

      Why?

      Because you say so?

      Go back to the rock from whence you came, zealot.

    62. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by CaptainPotato · · Score: 1

      Sort of - the prudish ones stay home, but the prudish Americans with fetishes for naked statues (in the name of artistic characteristics, of course), are the people who travel...

      --
      I heard that your library burnt down and destroyed your only two books - and one was not even coloured in yet.
    63. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by dasunt · · Score: 1

      In the NYTimes.com picture, they added a leaf... Is this some American thing? /European

      Let me explain the difference between American and European censorship:

      In America, you can't see naked people.

      In Europe, you can't see swastikas.

      In their respective locations, both types of censorship is done to protect the public. Both are about as silly. (Oh no! Think of the children! On no! We can't have neonazis! Lets limit free speech!)

      PS: Wasn't it the English that started adding figleafs to statues? Unfortunately, America imported English prudishness and kept it alive long after the English realized just how silly it was.

    64. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup as a fellow American I can attest.

      we are dirty birdies...

      very very dirty birdies.........

      now how much for your panties!

    65. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I have two young children and I absolutely WILL NOT put up with them being shown any nudity without my permission.

      I presume you put blindfolds on them when they shower in case they should happen to look down without asking first?

      I think the outraged reaction to the Janet Jackson things was funnier. After all, the primary purpose of breasts is to be presented to young children. How is someone who spent much of the most delicate period of their post-birth brain development with a breast the size of their head shoved in their face going to be adversely affected by a glipse of nipple?

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    66. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 3, Informative
      However, it is shameful for a person to expose his/her body to those who do not have the exclusive marital privilege of seeing it.

      I hope you married a surgeon.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    67. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, yes that silly incident. I wonder if there are any women who are offended by the fact that people find the female anatomy offensive? Serious question, btw.

    68. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Bah, that's a lie. MEdieval popes had no problems with willies. It's only in
      > the modern era that it became a problem.

      It's not a lie - it IS an American thing. The US doesn't have a pope. And in the modern era outside of America what the pope thinks about modern art is only of interest to Catholics and hence such art isn't covered up (in Europe, for example).

    69. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      German/Austrian Nazism, Soviet Communism, Italian Fascism, French anti-Semitism/pro-Islamofascism, Scandinavian paganism, British witchcraft, etc.

      People who profess evil never have a problem of hypocrisy.

    70. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Blue_Nile · · Score: 2, Funny

      if dan brown is correct one of the popes (not sure which which one) decided to chip off all the penises on the statues of Men because they caused "lustful thoughts". After the removal they put plaster of paris fig leafs on. Theres supposed to be a a big box of stone wangs in the vatican basement somewhere...

      --
      Si Hoc Legere Scis Nimium Eruditionis Habes
    71. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Blue_Nile · · Score: 1

      if dan brown is correct one of the popes (not sure which which one) decided to chip off all the penises on the statues of Men because they caused "lustful thoughts". After the removal they put plaster of paris fig leafs on.
      Theres supposed to be a a big box of stone wangs in the vatican basement somewhere...

      --
      Si Hoc Legere Scis Nimium Eruditionis Habes
    72. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by DingerX · · Score: 1

      signomi I was replying to the parent and not the grandparent of my comment. I'd just rather not see medieval popes get slandered like that, since they didn't have any problem with nudes and the art they patronized clearly demonstrates this. In any case, most Americans (myself included) would rather we forget about the nineteenth century, and its legacy of colonialism, imperialism, unrestrained capitalism and generally dismal oppression coupled with prudish public morals and private excesses. The fig leaf as i point elsewhere is because the photograph is of a replica purchased by an observatory in Los Angeles and distributed with the wire story.

    73. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zpok · · Score: 1

      "In America, you can't see naked people.
      In Europe, you can't see swastikas.
      In their respective locations, both types of censorship is done to protect the public. Both are about as silly"

      Allow me to explain why you're totally wrong in this:
      - swastika's are a cultural exponent of a proven harmful ideology.
      - Breasts, vagina's, penises and armpits for that matter are an integral part of the human being. Nothing about them has been proven harmful (except maybe armpits) in se.

      If you like, you can go one further on the swastika's and say, "Yeah, but the symbol itself doesn't harm, it's just a convergence of lines."
      And in the other direction you could say that every uncovered human bodypart ultimately leads to pornography and is degrading as such.

      But I have this faint hope that people will see for themselves that nudity doesn't harm. That children don't go blind by seeing naked people, even when doing the productive thing.

      On that note, if we have to live with a certain amount of restriction, let's ban the mindless violence in media for children and give them a bit more sex to ponder.

      And no, it wasn't the English that started putting figleafs to statues. It was definitely the greek (them buggers) who started putting nudity on statues however.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    74. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chinamen is not the proper nomenclature. Asian Americans, please.

      Even when they live in China? Look, I like making fun of political correctness too, but you have to use your head at least a little when doing so.

    75. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by superyooser · · Score: 0, Troll

      I stated the rule. There are reasonable exceptions for the sake of preserving life and health. And even this is done as decently and discreetly as possible. You're not going to have testicular surgery as a public exhibit. That would be wanton disgrace.

    76. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zpok · · Score: 1

      "No, the prudish Americans are a tiny minority - bordering on a myth, really."

      Keep dreaming pall. One day they'll come knocking at your door too, confiscating your playboys and hard drive

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    77. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Medieval indeed.

    78. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by SteeldrivingJon · · Score: 1


      I'd guess the NY Times photo is of a copy, which has or had the fig leaf.

      Another possibility is that it's just an old stock photo, taken when the statue still had a fig leaf, or else the fig leaf was temporarily stuck on for the photo.

      By their nature, antiquities are just as well represented by a photo taken in the 1930s, as they are by a new photo. Actually, the older photo might be better, if the object has been damaged since the picture was taken. (By vandalism, or by environmental causes such as acid rain.)

      I don't think the *photo* was modified.

      --
      September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
    79. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by nagora · · Score: 1
      In any case, most Americans (myself included) would rather we forget about the nineteenth century, and its legacy of colonialism, imperialism, unrestrained capitalism and generally dismal oppression coupled with prudish public morals and private excesses.

      But that's exactly the 21st century America "most" Americans have just voted for!

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    80. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      Anyone notice a similarity between the Lady Justice and Janet Jackson controversies? Coincidence? I think not!

    81. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's a lot smaller, but it's still there. Maybe you should go south this winter.

      If your girlfriend has a penis you really need to determine if you're sleeping with a transexual or not. Do you enjoy games of tickling her scrotum?

    82. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by superyooser · · Score: 2, Insightful
      A friend of mine showed me an interesting essay that starts with a mention of the Jackson wardrobe malfunction, and goes into European culture, morality, the censorship of art, and other issues.

      Freedom and Decency -- Here's a sentence pulled from the middle.

      Is good art suppressed more by rules of public decency (even when applied with a heavy hand) or by the barbarism of a culture whose sensibilities have become so debauched by constant exposure to the scabrous and the vile as to have become incapable of any discrimination, or of any due appreciation of subtlety or craft?
    83. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      You see, his argument went like this.

      1. Everyone has a peepee.
      2. This is slashdot.
      3. QED

      That's not sheltered, that's a teenager.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    84. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      Who said I have a girlfriend?

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    85. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A naked statue is a model of whorish disrespect for the inherent intimacy and sexuality of the body.

      I don't think 'inherent' is the right word for it. It's very much a cultural thing. Some people have problems with showing their body to others, others don't. I have no problems going to the sauna in a fitness club where people are naked. I don't see why I should. On the other hand, I would not want to walk down some random street naked, because it seems inappropriate to me. On the other hand, there are civilizations which don't know clothes at all...

    86. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      I stated the rule. There are reasonable exceptions for the sake of preserving life and health.

      so, basicly this rule is to be obeyed until it becomes inconvinient. Got to love that religious hypocracy.

      Mind you, you have to wonder at a concept of a god who designed bodies which must be hidden by some kind of religious NDA. OK, the male equipment, especially in it's normal state, isn't exactly sleek and elegant, but some kind of flap or maintenance hatch arangement would have solved that.

      Now, most people reading this are probably just laughing their heads off, but there is a serious issue here. This kind of attitude kills. When it was more prevalent, it was a significant contribution to the high death rate from things like breast cancer, since it raises the bar on when someone suffering from it would take a minor query to their doctor, delaying diagnosis. It's still more prevalent in men (though not generally for religious reasons) so that, dispite the fact that men generally don't have to be persuaded to do the occasionaly bit of (ahem) self examination, they still often don't report anomolies to their doctor early enough.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    87. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Da+Craw · · Score: 1

      I wonder what they're being used for ...

    88. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by TRS80NT · · Score: 1

      Stanislav Jerzy Lec (IIRC): "Puritans should wear fig leaves on their eyes."

      --
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.
    89. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Well, the swastica thing is mostly a German thing. But wearing a swastica arm band in public is usually seen as very bad taste, since you effectively label yourself as a neonazi. Maybe it could be compared to going around and saying "fuck you" to everyone you meet on the street. That recent thing is silly though, since it was a costume party. The swastika itself isn't censored where I come from.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    90. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are you kidding? They're probably over at the local nudie bar hiding from their wives. Some parts of the bible belt have more interesting strip clubs than Vegas.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    91. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by eht · · Score: 1

      "swastika's are a cultural exponent of a proven harmful ideology"

      Sorry, but more people than just the Nazi's used swastikas

      Native Americans, Hindus, Jainas, and Buddhists all used it too, so 1 out of 5 and it is banned, nice going, and that's just a quick search, I could probably find more groups of people who used it long before Hitler ever did and most of them have no "proven harmful ideology"

      and people call Americans ignorant

    92. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by fbjon · · Score: 1

      But why do you say the body has "inherent" intimacy? Just because you feel so?

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    93. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by fbjon · · Score: 1

      No, you're just in a state of denial.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    94. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 1

      That's it. That sounds dangerously like double-think. Report to the Ministry of Truth ( aka Guantanamo )

      ++good.

      --

      lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
    95. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zpok · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about inverted swastika's. And indeed it's a fact of life that symbols get hi-jacked by others. More's the pity.

      And fwiw, swastika's aren't banned. It's a proposal to ban it.

      And on Americans and ignorance: I don't call Americans ignorant. I might call the majority of Americans ignorant on for instance foreign issues, or their own foreign politics or their own politics for that matter. And I might be proven right by US statistics on those issues. I might point out they're not the ultimate authority on Freedom and Democracy, and be proven right by your CIA's own documents on the last 50 years - or current events for that matter.

      Or I might just sigh and not bother. Who cares? Is your life good? Well, OK then. Seize the day.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    96. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by karakal · · Score: 1

      I hope, you are talking about Europe, aren't you? Because in the Holy Land, erh, United States they have also evolved, but back...

    97. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Betelgeuse · · Score: 1

      And this confuses me to no end, as all the Americans I have met have been friendly, easygoing people, not at all like the theocratic government of the US would lead me to believe they should be.

      Of course, there's a huge selection effect here. I would guess that you've met the Americans that have either chosen to travel outside the US, or who are in major cities. Most of those people tend to be more liberal and don't get all worked up by a little nudity.

      --
      I couldn't tell if you were experimenting with poor-man's cryogenics or looking for the orange sherbet.
    98. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Raverrn · · Score: 1

      Now, although I disagree with banning the swastika, I can see the reasoning behind it. However, some Europeans refuse to stop there. http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=22096 Not trying to say americans aren't stupid about some things, just trying to say our neighbors across the ocean can be just as stupid.

    99. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      But why do you say the body has "inherent" intimacy?

      He read it in the brochure. Comes between "not machine washable" and "contains no user servicable parts".

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    100. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by benzapp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the problem is Chinamen are oriental mongoloids. The majority of people in Asia are in fact Caucasian. Saying "Asian Americans" more likely refers to Russians, Arabs, Turkic peoples, and Indians than orientals of any type.

      Just as a Scotsman is a man from Scotland, a Chinaman is a man from China. If it is the racial category that concerns you, "Asian American" is about as inaccurate as you can possibly get.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    101. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zpok · · Score: 1

      Yessss...

      You can talk about this until you're blue in the face, it doesn't get easier. Where do the limits of society and the freedom of individuals clash. In case of the burka, I'm horribly divided. As a visual means to oppression I say ban the thing, as a custom that's not even islamitic in its nature I say who the fuck cares. When girls have to die in a fire rather than leave their burning school without their burka on (actually happened), it's easy to have an opinion. When girls get removed from school in contemporary France for that same piece of cloth it gets silly.

      However, living in France I can testify to the fact that the media is more upset than the French muslims. They happily go on wearing the thing outside school and don't make it an issue inside it - apart from 3 (three) girls who refused to take it off. Well, that proves that healthy (or unhealthy) rebellion is within us all at a certain age.

      Also, note that among muslims the opinions are equally divided. A lot of women actually think it's a good thing - regardless of their personal custom - since it further helps to emancipate their daughters and themselves. A lot of men happen to agree. A lot of girls who protest this would probably protest wearing the thing if the law wouldn't have come up in a few years. And some imams have rightly pointed out that in actual fact the quran doesn't really say anything on the subject.

      In principle - when all's said and done - I think (with emphasis on think) it's a good thing, religious dividers don't belong in a classroom, in any form. But that's the principle of course. In reality things get silly pretty fast.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    102. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Torontoman · · Score: 1

      I'm just glad it's a Statue of a European and not a totally nude American ... probably wouldn't need a fig leaf to hide the private parts - McDonalds and Southern Grits have done the work for us.

    103. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by jaraxle · · Score: 1
      You're not going to have testicular surgery as a public exhibit. That would be wanton disgrace.

      Or (by all standards of what it has sunk to) really good American Reality TV...

      ~jaraxle

    104. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      The statue comes with a removable fig-leaf (and kung-fu grip). Malibu Atlas comes with even more stuff.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    105. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually that box is in my moms nightstand, I FOUND IT ONCE WHILE LOOKING FOR THE FINGERNAIL CLIPPERS ...I've never been the same since.

    106. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people have problems with showing their body to others, others don't. I have no problems going to the sauna in a fitness club where people are naked.

      And I'd add that I don't have no problems going to a mixed company sauna and neither do most of my friends (both men and women).

      A sauna simply isn't a sexual place. You go in with your friends (or strangers, depending on the situation), get steamed, go out to cool yourself, repeat it a couple of times, and finally wash yourself. No sex involved. And you don't even get aroused because it is so asexual.

    107. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by waterford0069 · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the satire.

    108. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by JavaLord · · Score: 1

      How is someone who spent much of the most delicate period of their post-birth brain development with a breast the size of their head shoved in their face going to be adversely affected by a glipse of nipple?

      I don't think it was the nipple as much as the context of it. Showing a kid a nipple because some women is breast feeding on national geographic is one thing. To have Janet Jackson go through her simulated sex show with justin timberlake which ended with him ripping off her top isn't exactly the behavior parents want children to see, since children have a tendancy to repeat whatever they see. If your daughter went to school the next day and had her top ripped off, what would you say then? Let me guess, you are a liberal UKer and only us USians would get uptight about such a thing right?

    109. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      ``Is good art suppressed more by rules of public decency (even when applied with a heavy hand) or by the barbarism of a culture whose sensibilities have become so debauched by constant exposure to the scabrous and the vile as to have become incapable of any discrimination, or of any due appreciation of subtlety or craft?''

      Obviously the former, since the latter, as described, would have no effect on the production of good art, only on it's apreciation in it's own time.

      Of course, the whole thing is based on laughable assumptions about what is `the scabrous and the vile'. If the adolescent posturing of rock bands are the worst thing he can describe, he sinks his whole case at the start.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    110. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Written by someone who likely does not have daughters. I don't want my daughters thinking it is OK to flash their nipples around. Agree or disagree with nudity, it does have sexual overtones. If you see a girl on the street flashing her goods, you think "hey, she's easy". She would be viewed as a sexual object not a person. That is not what I want for my children. It's not the nudity, it's the example these women set for younger women. It is simply not OK, or even safe, for women to behave that way.

    111. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> What, are you going to keep your kid away from all culture forever?

      No worries there. I'm sure he takes the tyke to the Monster trucks, and mebbe wrestling.

      (After all, nothing is so culturally significant or devoid of inappropriate sexual content as two big, buff, oily guys grappling with each other...)

      Buy yourself and junior a footlong while you're there ;-)

    112. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No sex involved. And you don't even get aroused because it is so asexual.

      After hitting the submit button I remembered one occasion where I almost got aroused in a mixed company sauna. It was a case when a girl (a foreign exchange student) put a bathrobe on her but didn't close it properly.

      This open bathrobe was enough to change the situation from asexual nudity into sexual temptation. Perhaps it was because using bathrobes is not common in my circles so it was a kind of novelty, or perhaps it was because clothing that hides a bit is always more erotic than complete nakedness, or perhaps for some other reason. But anyway, I had to concentrate on looking to other direction for a while to prevent any potential embarrassements.

      (If I had been single at the time I might have made a pass on that girl later in the evening but as I wasn't I didn't.)

    113. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Oddly_Drac · · Score: 1

      "To have Janet Jackson go through her simulated sex show with justin timberlake"

      Wow, are you doing it wrong. Just remember that touching isn't sex; A president proved that.

      "isn't exactly the behavior parents want children to see,"

      But bombing arabs is okay, because you can't see the nipples.

      "If your daughter went to school the next day and had her top ripped off, what would you say then?"

      As it happened, have the states been deluged with top-ripping incidents? No. Instead you gave MTV a scad of publicity over the glimpse of a nipple.

      "Let me guess, you are a liberal UKer and only us USians would get uptight about such a thing right?"

      Firstly, you can't apply your perceived value of 'liberal' to the UK. Second of all, YES, get a life and worry about other formative influences that your kids could pick up on rather than a nipple showing incident. FFS, I'm guessing that you reinforced the whole nudity thing when they hit five, so why bother about Janet Jackson.

      What makes us worry is that the US tries to apply it's twisted moral code across the world with absolutely great results. And remember, if you're six feet away, it isn't sex.

      --
      Oddly Draconis
      Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
    114. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Oblio · · Score: 1

      The next step?

      We outlaw mirrors.

      --
      Pax -- Ob
    115. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by eht · · Score: 1

      If you had even bothered to read what I had linked to you might have read "As a glance at a history book would show, the Nazi symbol was oriented in a clockwise direction. So, as often as not, was the ancient good luck/sun symbol sometimes known as the Wheel of Life." "But you can find examples of both types of swastikas being used in what are clearly benign contexts."

      no such thing as an "inverted" swastika

    116. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The media props up this mythical form of being in order to Disney-fy the airwaves and make anyone who lives a normal flawed human lifestyle feel like a depraved piece of shit. This helps to prop up those capitalist endeavors that rely on a cowed populus, such as the snack industry, the advertising industry, and the defense industry.

      don't forget the multi-billion-dollar porn industry, and the even larger sex-based advertising industry that depends on the "naughtiness" of sexual imagery for titillation and attention.

    117. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      I don't think it was the nipple as much as the context of it.

      Adipose tissue?:-)

      To have Janet Jackson go through her simulated sex show with justin timberlake which ended with him ripping off her top isn't exactly the behavior parents want children to see, since children have a tendancy to repeat whatever they see.

      You mean they might be tempted to mime badly and dance worse?

      If your daughter went to school the next day and had her top ripped off, what would you say then?

      And how many incidents of that type were actually reported?

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    118. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes. both of the depicted females have breasts.
      (btw, if you are new, most females have breasts)

    119. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chinamen is not the proper nomenclature. Asian Americans, please.

      Walter, this isn't a guy who built the railroads, here, ...

    120. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zpok · · Score: 1

      OK, how many Europeans do you think - or Americans - are going to think benign thoughts when seeing a swastika in either direction?

      Note the EU isn't trying to ban the use of swastika's outside of the EU.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    121. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want my daughters thinking it is OK to flash their nipples around. Agree or disagree with nudity, it does have sexual overtones.

      And guess why it has sexual overtones: because the girls have been taught that all nudity is dirty and something that they should be shamed about.

      So, when they hit the phase when they want to rebel and show their independence, they go around flashing their boobies.

      Meanwhile, those girls who haven't that emotional baggage don't go around flashing since they don't see a need for it. Of course, they might get naked in public for some other reason. For example, my girlfriend once changed her whole set of clothing (including underwear) on a bus stop because it was the only dry place around. (It was raining heavily and she was returning from a camping trip soaking wet and she didn't want to spend the 2 hour bus trip home in wet clothes).

    122. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      If you see a girl on the street flashing her goods, you think "hey, she's easy".

      See a shrink about your projection problems.

      I'm reminded of the TV advert where American boys are on a beach saying in an awed voice that in Europe women go topless on the beach, ``it's practically a law,'' then some Italian(?) boys are watching in horrer as a fat middle aged woman walks past topless and one says in the same dreamy, envious tone ``in America the women can't go topless on the beach... it's the law!''

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    123. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you see a girl on the street flashing her goods, you think "hey, she's easy".

      See a shrink about your projection problems.

      Actually, I would think the same. A woman who flashes her breasts on the street is doing that because she thinks that showing breasts is an inherently dirty action to do and she wants to feel sexy and kinky. I would guess that a woman like that would be more inclined to have casual sex than the average woman, especially if you managed to convince her that having sex with you would be a very wrong thing to do.

      A woman who is topless on a beach or even one who walks on a street topless is a whole different matter.

    124. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There are even cases of nude crucifixes being alterd with a loin cloth.

      This is probably a religious issue, not a nudity issue. In classical art, the adult Jesus was always depicted partly covered. This was to hide the fact that he was circumcized.

      On the other hand (hand???), they did celebrate January 1 as the "Feast of the Circumcision".

    125. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by vidarh · · Score: 1

      Then talk to them and explain that some people might get the wrong idea if they bare their bodies in places where most other people are dressed, unless they have a good reason. Treating them with respect is far more likely to work than trying to sheltering them from something they WILL face sooner or later anyway.

    126. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Opie812 · · Score: 0

      Shut the fuck up Donnie! You're out of your element?

      --
      I'm not a nerd. Nerds are smart.
    127. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Handpaper · · Score: 1
      America imported English prudishness

      Not quite.
      America imported English (and Scottish and Dutch and German etc.) prudes who wished to start a new life away from the moral deficiencies of Old Europe. On arrival, they found the populated East coast too cosmopolitan (read just as morally deficient) for them, and headed out West, where they eventually formed the famous Bible Belt. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your views), they are still there, and still fearful that somebody, somewhere is having a good time.

      Note that this is a very broad historical generalisation, not intended to insult Mid-Western slashdotters :)

      Back on topic, this discovery may help lay the myth that Atlas 'holds the World on his shoulders', when his burden is, and always has been, the Heavens.

    128. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1
      I have two young children and I absolutely WILL NOT put up with them being shown any nudity without my permission
      [cut] It's called responsible parenting. Never think of that, little 18 year old.

      No it's not. It's called an unhealthy obsession for nudity.

      IMHO responsible parenting means that you learn your children to think for themselves, be critical, open-minded, respect others and learn the difference between good and evil. Again imho, the human body is not evil.
      But how can I explain this to someone who KNOWS his view is the only correct one, who KNOWS the GP was 18 years old, has never seen him before but still gives him a lesson...

      Z (29 yrs, no kids)

    129. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      No no, doublethink is doubleplusgood. ie, if he knew all this, yet convinced himself that he didn't, he'd be a good little citizen of Oceania. Someone needs to re-read 1984. :)

    130. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, it is shameful for a person to expose his/her body to those who do not have the exclusive marital privilege of seeing it.

      Just to get the record straight, who posted this: Mullah Omar or the Ayatollah?

    131. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, with more than a little "electronic" help!

    132. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      A woman who flashes her breasts on the street is doing that because she thinks that showing breasts is an inherently dirty action to do and she wants to feel sexy and kinky. I would guess that a woman like that would be more inclined to have casual sex than the average woman

      Maybe true in the sense that almost everyone has more than the average number of legs. Any woman who doesn't occasionally want to feel sexy or kinky is probably terribly repressed and they will be pulling the average down.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    133. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just call him a chink if that's your attitude? I mean, if you're going to be damned for committing an offense (chinaman and oriental) it might as well be a good offense. Why the namby-pamby half measure? Nevermind that Chinese-American might be specific enough for your needs. You want to be offensive, go all out.

      I'm sure the rest of you spics, niggers, kikes, japs, dagos, polacks, injuns, armos, and camel jockeys see my point. (Please do not be offended if I left your ethnic group out. I'm sure it's just as dirty, dishonest, and lazy as all the others.)

    134. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Cappy+Red · · Score: 1

      You had me with the context part. At repetition, I was still fundamentally with you, but shakily. At the ad hominem, you lost me.

      I do very much agree with you that context makes a difference. But please, please, please don't attack the people you're responding to. It cheapens your good points and makes you look like an idiot.

      --
      This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
    135. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Out of curiosity, what was the "go****mit" debacle?

    136. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      And that is precisely why I fill out "Asian" on forms that ask for my ethnic locale...because I am from Israel, it is in Asia and to exclude me from "Asian" because my eye's aren't slanted is just well inaccurate

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    137. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by superyooser · · Score: 2, Funny

      To clarify, I'm talking about only the "private parts" of the body.

    138. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You either protect all speech, though reprehensible that speech may be, or no speech. Leave it up to the people to protect themselves by deciding what is bullshit and what isn't. They may make the "wrong" decision, but that's the chance you take to be free.

    139. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 1

      Whoops. You're right. I was thinking of bad-think or whatever they called it. Been a long time since I read 1984.

      --

      lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
    140. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you still didn't answer his question - which mad mullah was the source of your quote?

    141. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      That would be thoughtcrime (or the actual newspeak work, crimethink)... at least, according to the Wikipedia entry on Newspeak. Yes, I am that bored... :)

    142. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But please, please, please don't attack the people you're responding to. It cheapens your good points and makes you look like an idiot.

      WHATEVER FAGGOT. ;)

    143. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Which brings up the point that our culture in the US is increasingly dominated by a small yet very vocal minority that holds these prudish "moral" values.

      We now know that 99.8% of all FCC complaints were generated by one group: the Parents Television Council. Note that this statistic does not include nipplegate complaints, which were apparently more widespread.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    144. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Cappy+Red · · Score: 1

      Oh very cute you merry andrew. And why are you calling me a piece of firewood anyway? ;)

      --
      This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
    145. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by rjrjr · · Score: 1

      Now now now, be fair. We only know that the outgoing attorney general is afraid of breasts. We don't know anything about how he handles genitals.

    146. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to break it to you, but a woman's clitoris is basically a small penis that's grown inwards. The most significant difference is the fact that women don't urinate through it. Still, urination isn't part of sexual arousal for the majority of the public.

    147. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Actually, my favorite works dervie from people who have found creative ways to circumvent the culture police. Look throughout history and you can see Shakespeare (victorian era?), Leonardo (emerging from the dark ages of riligious control) and South Park (trying to find any boundary they can break).

      So, it is the debauched artists confronted with his uptight adversary (the person who generally has no talent but much anger is usually the uptight person), that creates great art.

      Though I don't think much of the religious record for making this a better world, I do think that religion has served the purpose of creating an impediment to which creative thought must be applied to circumvent.

      After all, you can't play tennis without the net. You have to have something in your way to present a challenge. If everything is allowed, it gets very boring to cheat.

      Republicanism seems to be a refuge for people who have no need of thought, and want everyone but themselves accountable.

      `the scabrous and the vile' Is pretty funny. It seems that everything that was too horrendous and that would destroy society only 40 years ago, is now on the "Family Channel". Heck, the Beatles with their long hair and effect on girls were seen as the bad boy rappers of their day.

      What seems to annoy me most about today's Culture Police, is that they have no sense of history. Every religious principle is spoken as though this is what everyone good has always thought--but the Pious of today would shame the Pious of yesterday, and vice versa. The only thing that family values are consistent on is that everything that is like them is "good and has always been good' and everything unlike them is bad. Conservatism is merely the status quo. Nothing more.

      For example; currently, abortion is a sin and is murder. Yet, if you look back only two hundred years (less in many cases), it was one of the purposes of the nunnery (convent). Women would have their illegitimate children, and they'd either be sent to an orphanage, or they'd be killed on the spot. The woman would then leave the convent with reputation preserved. The woman who went to term with the child, would have a "Bastard" and would have a poor reputation. I've read a few stories about thousaqnds of baby skeletons being unearthed around convents--these were babies that came to term.

      I'm not making a statement for or against--just pointing out that much of our sensibilities are very transient and that our value systems are constantly changing. If people realised this, then they might work harder at proving some public good for pronouncing something to be wrong.

      Is good art suppressed more by rules of public decency (even when applied with a heavy hand)....
      The "heavy hand" bit worries me. Seems too many people are ready to embrace a theocracy. They want a society where people are forced to do good, by fear of the government. This is the scary undercurrent of the NeoCon philosophy. "Good art" is defined by what reinforces the society. "Good art" to a liberal is what makes a person question themselves. Obviously, one philosophy is about bullying children, while the other is about raising adults.

      I'm sure I'll be flamebate for these statements. But I know I'm right. See--faith-based works for everything! Wow, that was a lot easier than making points based on logic and examples.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    148. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Does anyone notice that this topic wasn't interesting until someone added the leaf?

      If I had more culture, I'd realize that finding that map on the globe was an important event. But the censorship created an interest in the vulgar--while in a country that might not worry about this, they would be discussing the map.

      It is censorship that creates interest in the prurient.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    149. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'd add that I don't have no problems going to a mixed company sauna

      I was also talking about mixed saunas, of course. :) And I completely agree with the rest you said.

    150. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by operagost · · Score: 1
      "What has been will be again,

      what has been done will be done again;

      there is nothing new under the sun.

      Is there anything of which one can say,

      "Look! This is something new"?

      It was here already, long ago;

      it was here before our time.

      There is no remembrance of men of old,

      and even those who are yet to come

      will not be remembered

      by those who follow.
      - Ecclesiastes 1:9
      God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind.
      - Number 23:19
      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    151. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by zpok · · Score: 1

      That's an opinion. It's a bit like the people's right to bear arms shall not be infringed... Strong principles. Germany otoh has outlawed being a member of fascist parties, spreading hate-messages or negating WWII. Can you blame them? I don't.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    152. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Andrew+Aguecheek · · Score: 1

      I'm reminded of the TV advert where American boys are on a beach saying in an awed voice that in Europe women go topless on the beach, ``it's practically a law,'' then some Italian(?) boys are watching in horrer as a fat middle aged woman walks past topless and one says in the same dreamy, envious tone ``in America the women can't go topless on the beach... it's the law!''

      Ok, since I watch too much tv, I'm going to correct this: they're talking about Spain, the second two are in Spain, the Costa del Sol, and they say "In America, they make women wear tops!" "Its the law" (although he actually says "they make women wear bikinis, the former is from the subtitles.)

      It is of course and advert for Budweiser, the final caption reading "True."

      --
      Tomorrow, I may eat another house plant
    153. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      And why are you calling me a piece of firewood anyway? ;)

      I think he's calling you a spicy meatball. Must be a term of affection.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    154. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by drwho · · Score: 1
      For example; currently, abortion is a sin and is murder. Yet, if you look back only two hundred years (less in many cases), it was one of the purposes of the nunnery (convent). Women would have their illegitimate children, and they'd either be sent to an orphanage, or they'd be killed on the spot. The woman would then leave the convent with reputation preserved. The woman who went to term with the child, would have a "Bastard" and would have a poor reputation. I've read a few stories about thousaqnds of baby skeletons being unearthed around convents--these were babies that came to term.

      Actually, abortion was pretty much legal up until the second half of the 19th century. I was surprised to find this out, but I am pretty sure I can trust the legal historians of the U.S. Supreme Court. They mention this history in Roe v. Wade.

    155. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Though I have absolutely no idea what that's supposed to mean (or who "Donnie" is), I'm quite glad to be out of whatever element you are currently in.

    156. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Cappy+Red · · Score: 1

      Nwver heard it associated with meatballs, spicy or otherwise. Maybe I'm a cigarette? I do enjoy myself at the occasional expense of those around me, and there are plenty of restaurants I'm not allowed in.

      --
      This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
    157. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by rob_squared · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, you don't need a medical degree to stick sharp things in him. You have my express permission to do so.

      --
      I don't get it.
    158. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      I thought we exported annoying Americans--you know, the ones who go to France and state loudly how everyone would be speaking German if it weren't for America? (of course, now many people are thinking; "what's the downside?")

      Well, seems we weren't exporting them, we've been breeding 'em.

      These nice American's you speak of were probably Liberals. You could make a tidy sum of money if you allowed them to join your country and escape certain persecution.

      I miss the days when streaking was a fad in the U.S.--not for any other reason but that it was funny, didn't harm anyone, and would definitely shake up the grocery store.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    159. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No--puritan Americans are not a myth. I have them all over my neighborhood. "Church lady" is not a myth. They are hard working, engaged and nice people. They scare the crap out of me--but I don't let them know that. In fact, I don't even put out signs saying; "What Mandate?" because then they'd kick me out for not having a healthy lawn and ill-pruned shrubbery. The neighborhood association is very powerful. I admire their involvement, but not their lack of insight. The head of our association is a lady who is always trying to get some naughty shop closed down or a conservative elected dog catcher--totally a family values fanatic. Ironically, they have a gay son (God is trying to tell them something).

      But I agree with you on one thing; a lot of the complaints the media gets are actually from astro-turf groups that send out the complaints posing as shocked Americans. One study was showing as many as 90% of the offended Americans were actually from one conservative group (this was on the Janet Jackson superbowl fiasco). I forget the name of the group, something like the "Council for American Integrity" or some other proud drivel.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    160. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember a bronze statue that used to sit in our Art Museum here in Atlanta. It might have been a copy of "the thinker". I remember it as brooding and naked. The parts most frequently polished by curious passers by? Finger on the left hand that stuck out. Posterior. And the un-leafed naughty bit.

      So, it could be concrete or the "grabby-ness" of the public that pulls off those certain appendages.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    161. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0

      Thank God someone got it, I was really starting to despair.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    162. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The media seems to love controversy in France as much as America it seems.

      I would compare this to my Father-In-Law's opinion. He is Peruvian and learned English after coming to America. When the issue came up about a state language in Florida, he was strongly for kids being forced to learn English. I thought that was strange at first, but he said that they'd never get a good job if they didn't. I have to agree, if his daughter and I didn't speak the same language, we would never have met. There are times to self express and other times to not. But does a Burka really help these kids in school? It seems to me that they can respect or not their own religion with or without it. But with it, they are seperated from others.

      Of course, as an expression of modesty, it may be important to them. But personally, I see it as a way that has kept women as second class citizens in their culture--I may be ignorant, but that is my impression. I just think as kids, these people need to get to know each other before they get the chance to exclude eachother. Heck, I have a hard time being comfortable around neocons. Imagine if we had real differences?

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    163. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 2, Interesting

      this discovery may help lay the myth that Atlas 'holds the World on his shoulders', when his burden is, and always has been, the Heavens.

      Wait, I thought the myth about Atlas was that he held up the earth, and that he was turned to stone my looking at Medusa's head (with Pericles help?), in order to help him endure his eternal burden.

      Are there two myths on this, or is this just a confusion that the ancient Greeks didn't see a difference from earth and the heavens?

      I think you are trying to say "allay the myth"? Allay means to "dispel", or put an end to. To "lay the myth" would be do get down and freaky with it--in a biblical sense --which would be a totally mixed metaphor. Not being picky, lord knows that I scratch out some messages on slashdot.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    164. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I wasn't getting on a treatise about abortion. The point, and I guess most of us share it, is that something that is so much the core of the NewRight is something no more than 50 years old in principle (it was only illegal for about 20 years in the entire U.S. history)--and the way they present it as that is is something that is self evident and what GOD WANTS.

      You'd think she might have mentioned it.

      I would have no problem with people arguing the ethics of the issue. I think it should be made rarer as well. But I really--and I think you'd agree--I really have an issue with their moral certitude on everything that flys out of their butt. They do not have traditional values and don't even have the understanding of what history is to know how wrong they are. The espoused enemy has been; the cultural elite, the educational elite (PHDs), the UN, the Europeans, the Liberals--in fact, just about anyone who could tell them they are full of crap. Their understanding (OK, broad brush, but I'm sick of these jerks) of values and the constitution comes off of a Swarzeneggar movie or the 700 (Propaganda) Club. They accuse others all day of being manipulated by the media. Just as they are told to do.

      [end rant]

      Just a little hyped because the coronation of the Incompetent in Chief is this Thursday. Just breathe... 1... 2... 3...

      All better.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    165. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think part of the problem is that it is not normal in America. Since it is not something we are used to we respond differently to seeing boobies. Some of us more so then others. I have a friend would would most certainly end up in a collison if he was driving a car and saw a topless woman. If he had grown up seeing such things it might not be such a distraction, but since he did not he does. I don't have a problem with nudity, but I know here in the USA there are people I really don't want to see without thier cloths, in someways that is more destracting than a nice rack.

    166. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by jafac · · Score: 1

      whether or not that was on purpose we don't know

      It was Michael Powell's doing.
      He claims he got 100 million email messages complaining about the unobscured version.
      (never mind that 99 million 999 thousand 995 of those had the same From: address.)

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    167. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by jafac · · Score: 1

      "Never attribute to malice what can be sufficiently explained by stupidity"?

      I don't see why we should be giving the maliciously stupid a free ride.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    168. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I do consider current moral an evolution to the better.

      Why? Simply because nudity is nothing to be ashamed of, we are all born the same way: nude.


      Take the broad view. Fashions come and go. Nudity is not inherently good or bad. It totally depends on cultural mores.

      Nevertheless, it's good to remember that, in most parts of the world, people will look at you a bit funny if you walk into a restaurant with your "parts" hanging out.

    169. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by linoleo · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about only the "private parts" of the body.

      Well *my* body's F/OSS, so there.

      --
      Be faithful to your obsessions. Identify them and be faithful to them, let them guide you like a sleepwalker. JG Ballard
    170. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so I think we should write to the ny times and complain about the vandalism of the statue.

    171. Re:What's up with the modified statue? by myom · · Score: 1

      You seem to think that everyone who do not think or act like you are wrong.

      I am 30+ myself, and know many parents and spend time with my relatives children, and although they are not exposed to nudity more than the normal (although you might not think so) occasions like dressing rooms, 2000 year old statues ;), beach etc, they are not sheltered from it either.

      If for some reason they are exposed to unwelcome sexual images things are explained in a mature way, and generally they do not make such a big deal out if it.

      Oversheltering young people from it makes them unprepared when it counts; birth control, handling sexual invites, menstruation. It also makes them ashamed of their own body and feelings, and can also lead to perverted desires as a reaction to normal feelings that are forbidden from them and that makes them feel ashamed of it.

      We do not the next generation to become obese Wacko Jackos, do we?

  5. Interesting stuff by dn15 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's pretty cool. The scientists/naturalists/etc. of the past may have had a more primitive understanding of the universe, but they weren't stupid. It's amazing to think that they figured out so much about the sky so long ago with so few tools, when today most people don't have a working knowledge that even comes close to matching it.

    1. Re:Interesting stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aliens helped them, obviously.

    2. Re:Interesting stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That's because most people now have better things to do than look up in the sky at night. Those people of the past didn't really have much else to entertain themselves with.

    3. Re:Interesting stuff by dn15 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      That's because most people now have better things to do than look up in the sky at night. Those people of the past didn't really have much else to entertain themselves with.
      Yes, people have much better things to do today. Why waste time learning stuff when you have an Xbox and the next episode of The Bachelorette is almost on?
    4. Re:Interesting stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Most people then didn't have a working knowledge that came close to matching it, either.

    5. Re:Interesting stuff by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      The scientists/naturalists/etc of the past may have had a more primitive understanding of the universe, but they weren't stupid.

      That also explains why the statue is anatomically correct and has his thing showing.

    6. Re:Interesting stuff by Harald74 · · Score: 1

      Fun can be had be recreating old experiments. How about how Eratosthenes calculated the diameter of Earth? Take that, Flat Earth Society!

      --
      A)bort, R)etry or S)elf-destruct?
    7. Re:Interesting stuff by Fred_A · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They could see the sky at the time. There are fewer and fewer locations where you can get a clear view of the sky nowadays between light pollution and particles.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    8. Re:Interesting stuff by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      I've just realised that it apears (at least to me it does) that the acient greeks knew that the word was round ages before someone actually sailed around it to prove it was.

      Was this mainly due to the churches influence on science or was it just an easier way to represent the world then as a flat block?

    9. Re:Interesting stuff by Kentsusai · · Score: 1

      Well said! :-)

    10. Re:Interesting stuff by ceeam · · Score: 1

      Not to mention /. is always on. Well, when it's not busy serving 503s, I mean.

    11. Re:Interesting stuff by Big_Al_B · · Score: 1

      Good point.

      It would be interesting to compare intellect "per-capita" for various points in human history.

    12. Re:Interesting stuff by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 1

      You know.... I've been thinking about that. How many people have good eyes by the age of 12? By the age of 40? Now, how long have glasses been around? I submit that many/most people of old couldn't see the sky very well due their own poor vision.

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
    13. Re:Interesting stuff by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      there are PLENTY of places to view the sky if you really want to. I could always go to Lapland. Or any other remote location not that far off. Really, it's not THAT hard! But I guess people just want to get a clear view of the sky without having to leave their homes in the city. Can't help you there buddy!

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    14. Re:Interesting stuff by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They could do it, too. Nowadays there's so much light pollution. To go to a dark place during a night with a clear sky will give you quite a sight. Everyone should be able to experience that.

    15. Re:Interesting stuff by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      I recall learning in an astronomy course that helium street lighting was encouraged in some areas, not just because it consumed less energy, but also because it only emitted spectral lines instead of a full spectrum. The spectral lines could be easily filtered by observatories, so all the ambient light reflected around the atmosphere from street lighting in highly populated areas could be cancelled out, and the stars would be highly visible.

    16. Re:Interesting stuff by tuffy · · Score: 2, Informative
      I've just realised that it apears (at least to me it does) that the acient greeks knew that the word was round ages before someone actually sailed around it to prove it was.

      Was this mainly due to the churches influence on science or was it just an easier way to represent the world then as a flat block?

      Anyone going out to sea will quickly discover the earth is round since tall buildings will be the last things to sink under the horizon. The ancient Greeks went beyond that and calculated the earth's approximate size based on the angle of sunlight in two different wells a known distance apart (with the help of some basic geometry).

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    17. Re:Interesting stuff by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      They also had the time to look at it.
      If books are rare, the best light you can get is candles, and you work during the day, most adults would have several hours of time per day (post-medieval era) in which looking at the stars is about as interesting as any alternatives.

      --
      -Styopa
    18. Re: Interesting stuff by gidds · · Score: 1

      Nothing better to do at night than look at the stars? Hmm, I bet you're expecting me to make a stereotypical slashdot-geeks-wouldn't-even-know-what-to-do-with- a-girlfriend-if-they-got-one type comment, aren't you? Well, I'm not going to. So there.

      --

      Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.

    19. Re:Interesting stuff by jnik · · Score: 2, Informative

      Low pressure sodium, not helium (well, some people might have suggested helium, but this is the first I've heard of it). Y'know, those nasty orange lights. Incredibly efficient, too.

      http://www.darksky.org/

    20. Re:Interesting stuff by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected, it was over a decade ago when I heard about it

    21. Re:Interesting stuff by SuperBigGulp · · Score: 1

      I believe these are installed/mandated on the Big Island of Hawai'i given the number of observatories loctated there. This allows the astronomers/techs to filter out a narrow band of what is basically noise, rather than the relatively broad band of white light.

      --
      Someday a Slashdot ID of 177180 will mean something.
  6. Picture sans leaf by DrInequality · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the FA: picture without leaf

    1. Re:Picture sans leaf by Threni · · Score: 1

      > I need the email of Linus Torvalds. Please email me [mailto]. :)

      I suppose you could try asking the NSA and see if their Echelon/Carnivore systems have picked any up.

      (I'd imagine if you used Google and search for his name you'd probably find his email address, if that's what you're after.)

    2. Re:Picture sans leaf by menkhaura · · Score: 1

      Looks more like a spam trap...

      --
      Stupidity is an equal opportunity striker.
      Fellow slashdotter Bill Dog
    3. Re:Picture sans leaf by aristofanes · · Score: 1

      Interesting that some of the google photos have him facing one way with the left leg bent, and other photos facing the other way with the other leg bent.
      Are the negatives reversed?

  7. Oops! Now I see it... by dn15 · · Score: 1

    Oops! I read the article but overlooked that first link. I guess I subconsciously ignored it because its placement made it look like a link to the username of the submitter. Obviously it is not, but what can I say, it's late. :D

  8. Re: Missing fig leaf! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny


    > Hmm.. Anyone else notice that the statue has a fig leaf over the groin in one photograph, but not the other? Did it fall off recently, or what?

    No, it's just the pre-Ashcroft and post-Ashcroft versions.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  9. ya the jesus freaks hate human anatomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In America the human body is something to be ashamed and disgusted at and shocked about...

    As if each person doesn't have one...

    1. Re:ya the jesus freaks hate human anatomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Given the average American's body shape most of them have never seen their own genitalia.

      **ducks**

    2. Re:ya the jesus freaks hate human anatomy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe.

      But your mom? She's seen plenty of American genitalia.

  10. Bringing Cheech & Chong up to date by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


    > Look at the little peepee on atlas!!!

    We'll never fit that on the CD cover!

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  11. Old charts interesting by Ev0lution · · Score: 5, Informative

    A sculpture probably isn't going to show enough detail, but old charts are interesting as they can show stars as being brighter or dimmer than they are today. For example, in the mid 19th century Eta Carinae was the second brightest star in the sky (after Sirius), now it's almost invisible to the naked eye (around 5th magnitude IIRC). The bright stars Castor and Pollux in Gemini were around the same magnitude, now Castor is dimmer (the brighter Pollux is still 'beta Geminorum'). I wonder what Hipparchos might have seen that we dont see now?

    1. Re:Old charts interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And what wonders can we see (Mars, Titan, Venus, etc etc, everything seen by the HST, CXB, etc etc) which they could never have imagined?

      And our children 100 generations from now, what will they know that we cannot imagine?

      Hell, I will never have children, but if I did, I know they, just ONE generation from now, would know far, far more about the universe than I can possibly imagine. I hope I live to see some of it myself.

    2. Re:Old charts interesting by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      the majesty of the night sky.

      most of the planet suffers from so much air and light pollution that many MANY people have no idea what the night sky looks like.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Old charts interesting by fuzzybunny · · Score: 1

      It's pretty amazing, all right. However, for the low low cost of 2-3 tanks of gas, many people with cars have the option of driving far enough out to see some pretty amazing stuff.

      Here in Switzerland, I think the closest are some regions of the mountains in winter when the sky's pretty clear, and it's going to be difficult in reasonably flat, built-up regions (a lot of western Europe, East coast of the US). However, with just a few hours' worth of trip, I've seen night skies to rival those I've had the fortune to view in the S. Pacific, Arizona, Mexico and North Africa.

      I think a lot of people never bother to look at a map to see what's outside of their immediate area of familiarity--even if you look at a map of a lot of the surroundings of many large cities, you'll eventually find some place where there's little light pollution. Not nearly perfect, naturally, but still a good start.

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
    4. Re:Old charts interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surprise, surpise. You mean things outside of our solar system move? Shocker.

    5. Re:Old charts interesting by Myopic · · Score: 1

      For me, a more powerful question to ask is "I wonder what I see that Hipparchos didn't?"

    6. Re:Old charts interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, numbnuts, they change brightness - sometimes unexpectedly. That's what the paretn post was getting at.

    7. Re:Old charts interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > And what wonders can we see (Mars, Titan, Venus, etc etc, everything seen by the HST, CXB, etc etc)
      > which they could never have imagined?

      I think the point that you missed was that we don't know exactly what celestial conditions were like back then, and this is something that will enhance our knowledge.

      > Hell, I will never have children

      This is slashdot. That went without saying.

  12. Re:Missing fig leaf! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Did it fall off recently, or what?
    No, it's still there. Oh wait, you mean the leaf...
  13. Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I am sure if we cut it off, noone would object anymore....

    Errr...

    1. Re:Well.. by michrech · · Score: 1

      I'm sure if we just circumcise, it'll be OK in the American eyes.

      Sometimes, I wonder why I still live here...

      --
      bork bork bork!
    2. Re:Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes, I wonder why I still live here

      Nobody's holding you here at gunpoint. If you don't like it, and don't want to work to fix what's wrong, then move. There's plenty of places you can go. And you will be making more room for those of us who want to stay.

    3. Re:Well.. by operagost · · Score: 1
      Me too. Why are you still here? Need a boot out the door?

      The photo in the article is a reproduction, obviously commissioned by someone who was a bit prudish. It's not censorship by the media.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  14. Danish porn by koi88 · · Score: 5, Funny


    In the NYTimes.com picture, they added a leaf... Is this some American thing? /European

    Of course The American Version Is The Correct Version. Don't trust Our Media?
    The danish version is just a filthy porn version from this well-known immoral little country.

    --

    I don't need a signature.
  15. the amazing chaldeans by xconfig · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Reading this story, the most amazing thing to me was to think of the Chaldeans of Babylon laboriously making observations over at least half a millenium, before Hipparchus came along. Beats the story of Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton.

    1. Re:the amazing chaldeans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had all that time to study the sky because they didn't have much else to do. Give them a boob tube and they'd be morons just like us.

      Well, anyway, the scholars may have been learned. But you can bet the vast majority of the population were uneducated idiots living day to day, much like the way most of us live right now. It is not that different.

    2. Re:the amazing chaldeans by o'reor · · Score: 1
      They had all that time to study the sky because they didn't have much else to do.

      Yup, and also because they could actually *see* the sky and the stars, much better than we can. They did not spend hundreds of kilowatts polluting the eyesight at night with a public light system.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
    3. Re:the amazing chaldeans by gilroy · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Beats the story of Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton.

      Ah, yes, yet another tale wherein the ancient peoples outdo their modern imitators. Except for the whole "found a system of the world wherein the mode of learning is a self-correcting, self-perpetuating mechanism that leads to heights, depths, and breadths of knowledge undreamt of four centuries ago, much less twenty."

      I don't know much about the Chaldeans' observations, so I'll concede that they might have outstripped Tycho. But I'm fairly certain that they did not point out that the planets move in ellipses with the Sun at one focus, or that the orbits of any planet sweeps out equal areas in equal time, or that the period of a planet's orbit is proportional to the 3/2 power of its distance from the Sun (OK, technically, its semi-major axis). So, advantage: Kepler.

      And I am absolutely certain that they did not then note that a universal attraction of each planet for the others actually pulls them off said ellipses and causes a more complex motion -- let alone actually providing a method to correct for this -- oh, and incidentally, crafting a system of mechanics that not only allows one to build skyscrapers and suspension bridges but leads to investigations and methods that eventually discover electromagnetism, relativty, and quantum mechanics.

      So I think advantage: Newton, as well.

      The ancients were not idiots. They were just as smart as we are today. But they knew less than we do about the physical universe and they didn't have a system even remotely similar to science, that allowed a steady and self-correcting accumulation of knowledge. I can honestly not understand the apparently fervent need of many to worship at the altar of mist-enshrouded nameless ancestors, who "have" to be better than the well-documented founders of the modern world.
    4. Re:the amazing chaldeans by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      Hundreds? "Bazillions" would be closer, methinks...

    5. Re:the amazing chaldeans by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
      Beats the story of Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton.

      This reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer is chasing Thomas Edison's record for inventions only to find that Edison was chasing Da Vinci.

      To be totally fair the Chaldeans were looking at a blank slate. Tycho and Kepler and Newton and Copernicus were probably finding a lot of things, only to do some research and find out the Chaldeans had gotten there first. I'm sure Kepler must have tried to figure out the distance to the sun, but because he wasn't the first, nobody cared.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    6. Re:the amazing chaldeans by SenorChuck · · Score: 1
      Lest we forget, Newton's discoveries did not come from a vacuum. It's nothing short of arrogance that leads someone to say that their heroes are much better than the heroes of the past, especially when their heroes built on those same heroes of the past.

      Also, I believe you were taking the parent post out of context. I believe it was intended to be a marvelling at what a people viewed largely as "primitive" had come up with, prior to "modern" scientific discovery.

      This says it best:

      If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.

      - Isaac Newton, Letter to Robert Hooke, February 5, 1675
      --
      A wise person makes his own decisions, a weak one obeys public opinion. -- Chinese proverb
    7. Re:the amazing chaldeans by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      So I think advantage: Newton, as well.

      I think you misspelled Liebniz. =)

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    8. Re:the amazing chaldeans by gilroy · · Score: 1
      Blockquoth the poster:

      Lest we forget, Newton's discoveries did not come from a vacuum.

      Indeed and without question. The Principia was consciously modelled on, among other things, Euclid's Elements. But science in the modern sense is a recent invention and it is something new under the sun. Most "advanced" (using the word with caution) ancient systems wrestled with the problem of the motion of the stars and planets. Newton and his contemporaries solved. I am happy to put Newton in the company of Hooke, Galileo, the Bernoullis, and Kepler. I think it ridiculous to act as if any ancient astronomy outstripped their results.
    9. Re:the amazing chaldeans by xconfig · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, that's a lot to read into one sentence of mine. Thanks so much for informing me that Isaac Newton discovered the law of gravity and enlightening me about Kepler's laws.

      I didn't say the ancients were better than Isaac Newton. I said *the story* of the Chaldeans was better. I drew a parallel between the empirical observations they made that led Hipparchus to his models and Tycho Brahe's observations that led to Kepler's and Newton's models. Imagine one man spending his life observing the skies. Now imagine generations doing the same thing for a millenium.

      *Now* imagine a world where you reflect on what others say before responding.

    10. Re:the amazing chaldeans by xconfig · · Score: 1

      Thank you for that concise defense.

  16. leaf is added by mincognito · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Here's an image of statue unaltered by US press: http://www.timelessmyths.com/classical/gallery/atl as.gif

    1. Re:leaf is added by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As unaltered by Papal decree (Or, more accurately, as restored to the condition prior to the Papal decree).

      Oh wait, this is the US media, obviously it's their fault...

  17. Knights of the Old Republic by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So there's a star map in Naples?

    Now all I need to do is find all the other Star Maps to locate the Star Forge and defeat Darth Malak.....

    May the force be with me....

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:Knights of the Old Republic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youse guys!

    2. Re:Knights of the Old Republic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude I would so mod you up right now :P

  18. Mystery of the leaf... by mikeb39 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I just ran it though several different filtering methods and plugins in photoshop that make editing/compositioning clearer, and it appears the leaf is legit. This doesn't prove it wasn't placed there just for the photograph or the current day statue has it there, but it more then likely was not photoshopped on.

    1. Re:Mystery of the leaf... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's a real leaf, that was placed on it in the Victorian era by Papal decree, and was recently removed as part of a restoration project, but most news outlets frankly don't want to spend $20 for an updated photo when their old stock still works.

    2. Re:Mystery of the leaf... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No matter on how the leaf got there, it's more than likely that the leaf originally was not there. First, the ancient Greek had a different attitude to nakedness (e.g. the Olympic games were done naked), and second, the leaf is derived from the paradise story, and since the ancient Greek were not Jewish, it's highly unlikely that they would have used a leaf even if they for some reason had desired to hide that place.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:Mystery of the leaf... by stefanvt · · Score: 1

      The, ancient, Greek predate the "paradise" story by at least 1000 years.

    4. Re:Mystery of the leaf... by ashkar · · Score: 1
      The, ancient, Greek predate the "paradise" story by at least 1000 years.


      How do you figure? The jews were telling their kids those stories at least as far back as when the Greeks left their caves. The tale of Eden is Jewish not Christian you dumbfuck.
    5. Re:Mystery of the leaf... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ancient Greeks were not Christian either you dumb fuck.

      As for the Eden story being Jewish - every culture has an Eden story, and usually a flood/catastrophe story too... the Jews weren't the first, and they won't be the last.

      Learn some classical history before criticising others.

    6. Re:Mystery of the leaf... by +apis22 · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't know when the "paradise" story took place. But I have read ("Timeus", "Crito") that when Greek philosopher Plato visited Egypt the priests told him that the Greeks had fought the people of Atlantis 10.000 years before his visit (I think you can find details in Wikipedia). If the rumours about Atlantis are correct (misuse of advanced technology, greed) then that ancient war was not fought with spears and swords... which explains many things (Hipparchus map, the computer of Antikythira, etc.)

  19. Re: Missing fig leaf! by physicsphairy · · Score: 2, Informative

    For those of you who don't catch the reference, this is the story: (or, rather, the debunking of the story)

    "The Breast was pretty quiet during the eight years of Janet Reno. As one peeved administration official puts it, "No cameraman was ever at Reno's feet, trying to get a shot of her with that thing." But Minnie Lou's outstanding feature stormed back with Ashcroft. When President Bush visited the Justice Department to rededicate the building to Robert Kennedy, his advance men insisted on a nice blue backdrop: "TV blue," infinitely preferable to the usual dingy background of the Great Hall. Everyone thought the backdrop worked nicely -- made for "good visuals," as they say. This was Deaverism, pure and simple. Ashcroft's people intended to keep using it.

    An advance woman on his team had the bright idea of buying the backdrop: It would be cheaper than renting it repeatedly. So she did -- without Ashcroft's knowledge, without his permission, without his caring, everyone in the department insists.

    But ABC put out the story that Ashcroft, the old prude, had wanted the Breast covered up, so much did it offend his churchly sensibilities. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, ever clever, wrote that Ashcroft had forced a "blue burka" on Minnie Lou. Comedians had a field day (and are still having it). The Washington Post has devoted great space to the story, letting Cher, for example, tee off on it -- as she went on to do on David Letterman's show.

    And yet the story is complete and total bunk. First, Ashcroft had nothing to do with the purchase of the backdrop. Second, the backdrop had nothing to do with Breast aversion. But the story was just "too good to check," as we say, and it will probably live forever. Generations from now, if we're reading about John Ashcroft, we will read that he was the boob who draped the Boob. The story is ineffaceable."

  20. Nice statue. by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 3, Funny

    I believe the original Greek name was "Grunting Under The Burden of Astronomy."

    --
    "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    1. Re:Nice statue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No,
      the original Greek title was "Taxpayer".

    2. Re:Nice statue. by mikeage · · Score: 1

      I believe the original Greek name was "Grunting Under The Burden of Astronomy." ... often abbreviated as GUtBoA.

      Or not.

      --
      -- Is "Sig" copyrighted by www.sig.com?
  21. Cue Indiana Jones Theme by Pseud0 · · Score: 1

    I put on my hat and my whip.

    --

    /John Sjolander, project manager Contribio
  22. What gives? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

    An article about one of the greatest scientists of antiquity, yet most comments here seem to be about Atlas' schlong.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:What gives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, this is Slashdot. Do I have to draw you a map?

  23. I Can See His WIENER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see his wiener hehehehehehe.

    I knew the french were that small but the greeks too?

  24. Hooray! by Dougie+Cool · · Score: 0

    They found it atlassed!

    See what I did there?

    --
    ~~Every few years or so I'm accidentally fashionable!
  25. *shits pants* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoa, now that's a content rich Wikipedia article. :-S

  26. star map in naples by jotux · · Score: 5, Funny

    so does it tell you where Salvatore di Giacomo, Lorenzo Bernini, Gaetano Filangieri, and Enrico De Nicola used to live?

  27. Narrow minded americans by thrill12 · · Score: 3, Funny

    don't even know where Europe lies.
    They probably think its a town in western Penssylvania or something.

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:Narrow minded americans by The+Datamangler · · Score: 1

      I KNEW IT!! Europe "lies"! America truths! Oh, or some word that means notlie, or America tells the truth

      --
      sig wig dig jig rig big mig fig gig higg rig pig tig zig
    2. Re:Narrow minded americans by coachvince · · Score: 0

      Actually, true narrow-minded Americans know that Europe lies everywhere (and all the time).

      --
  28. The Simpsons are bad? by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Guess that explains the Simpsons. What about the other 290 million?


    Ok, Homer turns to drink once in a while, but in which episode(s) did Bart rob a bank, Lisa become a pregnant crack addict and Marge become a whore?

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
    1. Re:The Simpsons are bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ok, Homer turns to drink once in a while, but in which episode(s) did Bart rob a bank, Lisa become a pregnant crack addict and Marge become a whore?

      That's right...it was Married With Children! =)

  29. makes sense now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My god, It's full of stars!

  30. Well-known? by pjt33 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe I'm being overly suspicious, but you look to me like a European karma whore. What true American would call Denmark "well-known"?

    1. Re:Well-known? by koi88 · · Score: 1


      What true American would call Denmark "well-known"?

      Is that you, George? Remember, Denmark is Brigitte-Nielsen-country.

      --

      I don't need a signature.
    2. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are. "Funny" moderation gives no karma.

    3. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      What true American would call Denmark "well-known"?

      Well, any self-respecting geek who ever grew up playing with, or still plays with Lego knows that it is from Denmark. Slashdot even has an icon for it. So there.

    4. Re:Well-known? by hovercraftSpareWheel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Of course Americans have heard of Denmark. It's in Wisconsin!

    5. Re:Well-known? by evalencia1 · · Score: 0

      And don't forget that pastry called the Danish! Of course that's from Denmark. :)

    6. Re:Well-known? by Spunk · · Score: 1

      Typical ignorant American. I've been to Denmark, and it's in Maine.

    7. Re:Well-known? by Adammil2000 · · Score: 1

      I played with Lego blocks for at least 12 years of my childhood and all I knew they came from Toy-R-Us. Your comment was the first I ever heard that they were from Denmark. You overestimate how many people know where Lego comes from...

    8. Re:Well-known? by hovercraftSpareWheel · · Score: 1

      Who you calling American? I'm a typically ignorant Brit and proud of it.

      I find it highly improbable that there are two Denmarks. It's much more likely that there is just one but that it migrates. Maybe it goes to Maine for the summer to be nearer the ocean.

    9. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You overestimate how many people know where Lego comes from

      Just as much you overestimate people not knowing how to read the "Made in Denmark" label on the box.

    10. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I'm being overly suspicious, but you look to me like a European karma whore. What true American would call Denmark "well-known"?

      LOL. So true. I'm from Denmark and been living in USA for over 10 years now. People still think I'm Dutch and ask me about Amsterdam (I wonder why? :))

      To the "immoral" poster: I have seen way more immoral stuff in USA than I ever did in Denmark.

    11. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It stops by Arkansas too sometimes then.

    12. Re:Well-known? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      I never knew until now. Hell going to their site, look at the bottom, says nothing of Denmark Here

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    13. Re:Well-known? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      No you buffoons, everyone knows its : 2101 S. Denmark Road, Jefferson, OH 44047

      And you call yourself knowledgable people. Frickin morons with laser beams i tell you.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    14. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      Strange. Maybe it was marketed differently around the world. All I can recall was that as a kid, I always knew there was this place called "LegoLand" in Denmark from the little pamphlets in the sets. Come to think of it, I can vaguely recall that the sets they sold in the US were different from other countries. For example, a gas station would have the "Shell" brand name, but when I got ahold of a US booklet, I saw the ones there were "Exxon".

    15. Re:Well-known? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Well, the Lego "Mind-Bots" were a creation of the MIT Media Lab. So now Legos are cool again because they can be programmed.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    16. Re:Well-known? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if you went to the company site instead of the shopping site (.com is geared towards American consumers) you might had figured out:

      http://www.lego.com/eng/info/

  31. Not to mention knocking them off. by aug24 · · Score: 1

    To quote the Guardian "...the British Museum's decision to chip off all the penises on Greek statues in its possession, to save the blushes of its Victorian visitors. (This act of egregious vandalism is remediable; the penises lie in a drawer at the museum and can be restored.)"

    J.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    1. Re:Not to mention knocking them off. by madaxe42 · · Score: 1

      Hm. They could have fun, putting them back on upside down.

  32. Not only that... by node+3 · · Score: 1

    He's also carrying the plans for our ultimate weapon. If the rebels get a hold of it, we're doomed!

    1. Re:Not only that... by Guncrazy · · Score: 1
      "There's one! Set for petrify!"

      Zap! Zap!

      "Inform Lord Vader we have something that will look great on his lawn."

  33. Congratulations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just added another such post in this thread.

  34. about astrology by dario_moreno · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This map also reminds us that astrology is complete bullshit since due to equinox precession ("wobbling" in the article) zodiac signs have changed once since the Romans and twice since the Egyptians devised occidental astrology. Makes the system of prediction wrong in principle...

    --
    Google passes Turing test : see my journal
    1. Re:about astrology by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      some ancients built equinox precession into their astrologies, like the Mayans.

    2. Re:about astrology by dario_moreno · · Score: 1

      I didn't know that ; this of course doesn't make mayans horoscopes more reliable, but maybe we could generate some by computerizing garbage, and from the equinox precession argument they could be sold to women magazines like the chinese and lunar ones which appeared a few years ago ? Or am I late also on this ? I do not push a Cartman like business plan, since there are no ???? there...

      --
      Google passes Turing test : see my journal
    3. Re:about astrology by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      heh, I only am interesting in the scientific side of what ancient civilizations did - some did great observations of outer space, but of course used these to support their baloney religions. We actually do the same thing, picking one of various scientific models to promote various social, political, religious and economic agendas.

    4. Re:about astrology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every time I hear people ranting angrily about the stupidities of astronomy, I can't help but rememember the following (with apologies to Douglas Adams, who wrote it in "Mostly Harmless")

      "Astrology isn't a science. Of course it isn't. It's just an arbitrary set of rules like chess or tennis or what's that strange thing you British play? Cricket? Self-loathing? Parliamentary democracy.

      "The rules just kind of got there. They don't make any kind of sense except in terms of themselves. But when you start to exercise those rules, all sorts of processes start to happen and you start to find out all sorts of stuff about people. In astrology the rules happen to be about stars and planets, but they could be about ducks and drakes for all the difference it would make. It's just a way of thinking about a problem which lets the shape of that problem begin to emerge. The more rules, the tinier the rules, the more arbitrary they are, the better. It's like throwing a handful of fine graphite dust on a piece of paper to see where the hidden indentations are. It lets you see the words that were written on the piece of paper above it that's now been taken away and hidden. The graphite's not important. It's just the means of revealing their indentations. So you see, astrology's nothing to do with astronomy. It's just to do with people thinking about people."

  35. Re: Missing fig leaf! by slaida1 · · Score: 1
    So this genital covering boom is going like the second term for Bush: people brought it on themselves on their own. Can't blame Asscroft for everything, masses are plenty stupid all their own.

    Fear herd mentality: fear your fear of what others might think of you.

    --
    Preserve old classics: copy your collection onto all hard drives.
  36. Actually, the Americans have the better deal by davide+marney · · Score: 1

    In America, you can have a statue without a fig leaf, and no one is going to arrest you. In Europe it is illegal to wear a Nazi symbol, and illegal to wear a Muslim head covering to school.

    Hm. I think I like the American's "prudish" free speech better than the European's "liberated" suppressed speech.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    1. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by thempstead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Urm, whilst it may be illegal to do those things in _some_ contries in Europe, (in the first case Germany and the second France (i think)), but that does not mean that its illegal to do so all over Europe.

      In the first case it may e considered in bad taste everywhere though ...

      t

    2. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by davide+marney · · Score: 1

      Granted. But, perplexing. It seems counter-intuitive that a people so self-consciously "liberated" would permit their government to make personal expression illegal. I'm sure everyone understands that if one permits head scarves to be banned today, then banning nude statues is really only one election away.

      Not wanting to get into the "Europeans are libertines/Americans are prudes" discussion here, just trying to learn something about why people are the way they are.

      --
      "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    3. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction - in France, they are preventing the use of ANY overt symbols of faith. This of course includes Muslim headscarves, large Christian crosses and Jewish yarmulkes.

      France, like the rest of Europe, has had a very large recent influx of immigrants - moreso than America has seen. They tend to be of many different faiths and ethnic groups, and unfortunately are bringing old disputes and rivalries with them to their new countries.

      This move is hoped to prevent anything that might add to the aggression these groups already show eachother.

    4. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Utter bullshit.

      The US has had to worry about the same problems. If anything, we have more cultural diversity. Of course that cultural diversity will likely be concentrated in key working class areas and diverse groups will at least initially be thrown together.

      IOW, you will have plenty of opportunity for ethnic strife. The US even has armed gang warfare along such rivalries.

      However, we dont use it as an excuse to violently rip away the culture and traditions of those that choose not to immediately and completely conform.

      You persue the unlawful activity.

      You don't act like a Louis wannabe.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      In Europe it is illegal to wear a Nazi symbol,

      Did I miss the bit where the prince was arrested and locked up? There are rules in Germany about swastikas, but I think they date from when the Allies were in charge, so Americans can hardly complain about them.

      and illegal to wear a Muslim head covering to school.

      Er, no. It's just against school rules in French state schools. School uniforms are hardly unusual.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    6. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by R.Caley · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      I'm sure everyone understands that if one permits head scarves to be banned today, then banning nude statues is really only one election away.

      The banning of religious expression from state schools arises from the same enlightenment policy of separation of church and state as is expressed in the US constitution.

      That the US has basicly thrown that idea away is to the US's shame not that of France.

      Mind you, I don't agree with this particular expression of it in France, which I think is silly, but at least they don't have their kids chanting `one nation under god'.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    7. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by pthisis · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      I'm sure everyone understands that if one permits head scarves to be banned today, then banning nude statues is really only one election away

      The banning of religious expression from state schools arises from the same enlightenment policy of separation of church and state as is expressed in the US constitution

      Really? That's odd, because it's almost completely opposite from the US policy.

      The US policy is that the state cannot endorse any religion; the school could not have a moment for prayer, or put up a cross, etc.

      But the major reason for this is to protect the individuals' right to excercise religion without state interference.

      IOW, wearing head scarves is exactly the sort of thing the US policy is designed to protect. There have been numerous instances where a school dress code that banned the scarves was challenged and the code overturned, citing seperation of church and state as the reason that students must be allowed to wear them. Indeed, the Chattanooga, TN district made such an allowance last week after consulting legal counsel.

      Of course, the right to religious freedom isn't absolute--e.g. the Muslim woman in Florida who wanted to wear her burka in a driver's license picture lost her case. The courts ruled that the state interest (public safety among other issues) in identifying drivers outweighed the religious interest in the case.
      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    8. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by vidarh · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      And the separation of church and state is exactly the argument that have been used in France for banning the head scarves. I don't agree with it, but the argument typically goes that conspicuous religious symbols does not belong in state schools because allowing them is an implicit acceptance of religious expression in a setting that is otherwise explicitly protected from it.

      To play the devils advocate: If you allow students the freedom to wear religious symbols, then what about other religious practices, such as organized prayer - as long as it is done by the students and not the teachers? What about teaching religious beliefs, as long as it is done by students?

      If one want a secular school, then as long as there are people that want religion in schools you will need to draw a line and set rules for what is and isn't an acceptable level of religious influence. This is in many ways not any different than other limitations on freedoms endured by school pupils everywhere - including in the US.

      The headscarf ban is too restrictive for my taste, though, and it does seem like it is more intended to make muslims "less visible" than it is to prevent any real religious influence in schools.

    9. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by pthisis · · Score: 1

      It's just against school rules in French state schools. School uniforms are hardly unusual.

      But in the US, most school uniform codes (at public schools) have exemptions for religious garb. Many of those that don't have been successfully challenged. The state has an obligation to provide education without abrogating your religious beliefs. As one court put it, "the student cannot be made to choose between their religion and their education." Not only is there the first ammendment to consider, but also the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.

      (Just last week the Chattanooga, TN district settled with a student rather than go to court, allowing her to wear a head scarf which they had previously said violated the school dress code.)

      And there have been numerous cases where even non-religious garb is protected as free speech--for instance, the Dearborn, Michigan case where a student (Bretton Barber) was allowed to wear an anti-war shirt depicting President Bush with an "International Terrorist" caption after the school tried to ban it. Or the Allen, TX case where Jennifer Boccia was allowed to wear a black armband to protest the schools new dress code and search policies (settled out of court with a declaration by the school that Boccia's suspension for wearing a black armband as a symbol of protest violated rights guaranteed to her under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution).

      See:
      Aaron Ganues v. McIver Elementary School
      Tinker v. DesMoines Independent School District

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    10. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by R.Caley · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      The US policy is that the state cannot endorse any religion;

      The French government's argument, of course, is that to have conspicuous religiosity in state schools would by implication be an endorsement. If you have a friend's children around to stay and allow them to take drugs, might you not be said to be endorsing drug use?

      Consider the extreme case where 99.99% of the kids are dressing in a conspicupusly, say, catholic manner. What would be the effect on the one Jewish kid?

      I think they are wrong, but it's not fundamentally different from what used to be the US principle, rather an interpretation of that principle.

      As it happens, the fact that this sudden assertion of state secularism coincides with a rise in anti-muslim politics in France makes me suspect the government was not as pure in motive as they pretended.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    11. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by pthisis · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      conspicuous religious symbols does not belong in state schools because allowing them is an implicit acceptance of religious expression in a setting that is otherwise explicitly protected from it

      Schools in the United States are not protected from religion. The school cannot promote any religion (which means, among other things, that the teachers may not express their particular religious beliefs), but the students most certainly may express their religious beliefs.

      As I said, the POINT of the first amendment religion clause is to protect the individual's right to excercise their religion--the only reason to stop the state from endorsing religion is to protect the individual practitioners of other religions. Banning religious displays by individuals would run absolutely counter to that goal.

      then what about other religious practices, such as organized prayer - as long as it is done by the students and not the teachers?

      It is allowed, so long as it is not sanctioned or endorsed by the school. For instance, a student selected to speak at graduation cannot pray during that speech, since their speech is endorsed by the school. But the school cannot prohibit students from praying during lunchtime or on the playground (singly or in groups). However, even something like allowing use of a classroom has been found to be endorsement--so the school can't allow students to run a bible session in one of their classrooms after school or similar.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    12. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      But in the US, most school uniform codes (at public schools) have exemptions for religious garb

      I was just pointing out that it's not illegal. Talking in class may be against school rules, but you don't get a visit from the police about it.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    13. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that a group is allowed to use a classroom for a prayer session, provided that any religious related group was allowed to meet. So if you had a Christian prayer group, you had to permit the pagans and the atheists to meet up as well.

      --
      Nice Marmot
    14. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      I think the reason that Europ doesn't allow the "symbol" is because it is an endorsement of a regime and a belief that tore up most of Europe and almost enslaved the world. It is shame and anger. Though I don't think that sensorship works too well, I don't know if I wouldn't feel the same way. Imagine having a klansman come to your school all dressed up... It will take a while for that wound to heal.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    15. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      I think I might side with the French on this one. I think that identifying the children's "otherness" tends to make them not a part of the other children. I know I can get over it, but I tend to feel like those in a burkah at school didn't want me around.

      I'm not much for conformity, but I also think it hampers children's development if they have some artificial thing that is going to separate them. Having the same language or a standardized dress code helps to alleviate the normal tendancy of kids to ostracize. At the workplace, I would not agree with this decision, but I do agree that in schools.

      These muslim kids will probably make more friends than they otherwise would have. And the kids that get to know them will see another side of a culture they might not have. On the other hand, this might dilute the muslim culture. I have no firm answer on this other than, I think people getting along is a better side to err on than for free expression--at least in the highschool.

      In college--party!

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    16. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That to me seems like a current "loop hole" trend. Once you get a lot of people going a certain way, everyone else kind of gets quiet.

      Personally, I'd like to post the principles of "Beezlebub" at all the court houses that have the ten commandments--just to make things fair. It seems that the evangelists are using the "not freedom from religion" as their mantra these days. That seems really reasonable until it's some religion they don't agree with.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    17. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Poster totally lost me. What is BS? That we have more or less diversity, or tolerance or what?

      We have gang wars over red or blue head bands as well--what's your point? That is not anything we institutionally support. There are a few crumbs we can still be proud of here.

      And wether culture is supported or not is sort of a provincial trend in my view. There are places where diversity is not smiled upon, and places where it is ignored.

      What unlawful activity do you mean?

      Who is Louis and why would somebody, wannabe Louis?

      Can you share whatever you're taking? Or is there an antidote?

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    18. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by farmhick · · Score: 1

      I would just say, "Hi Frank, is it Tuesday already?" ;^)

      --
      I have to stop wasting so much time reading Slashdot. It's interfering with my crystal meth addiction.
    19. Re:Actually, the Americans have the better deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have hit the nail on the head. The "not freedom from religion" is the only answer the conservatives can give. But they shouldn't be the only ones. For example, what black Democrat candidate doesn't go to local black churches to give speeches? Shouldn't he or she have the right to give a speech to a group of voters, even if it is in a religious setting? Some liberals rant over conservatives campaining in church, but never mention the liberals who do so. I don't know if it is illegal, but some churches have been threatened with revocation of their tax-exempt status over it.

      As for my own case, I am not religious. I don't have belief in a god or prophet of any creed. I still use the "not freedom from religion" phrase for myself. I think the France decision was a waste of time and thought. Why shouldn't a person be allowed to wear a religious symbol? Who needs freedom from that person's religion? Also, how many of those students are now receiving schooling at the local mosques, where there is no other viewpoint available?

      I have also used the phrase in local matters when atheist activists have sued churches to make them remove the cross in front of the church. Why waste tax-dollars, and clog the court system, on this issue. No one in the neighborhood wanted it gone, and it wasn't a safety problem, it just offended one guy who has nothing better to do. I feel I should have "freedom from his lack of religion", rather than having to subsidize his hobby of militant atheism.

      So, not just evangelists use that phrase. And I think even non-religious people should put some thought into how it affects them.

  37. Re:Just for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is a tub boy now?

  38. Re:Just for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I here its george W...

  39. Better things to do? by TapeCutter · · Score: 2, Informative

    Astronomy is not the Flinstones version of TV, it was developed by many cultures as a way to measure time. The invention of Agriculture depended on ancient astronomy and before that hunter-gathers used it to find seasonal fruits and game. Astronomy's importance to the ancients is built into thier monuments, art, religion and buildings. This has now grown into modern science that gives many people today the technology to be ignorant about thier surroundings and still survive.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  40. NSFA? by Gudlyf · · Score: 1
    Apparently the media feels the unleafed version is NSFA (Not Safe for America).

    Hm. "Unleafed". Maybe that should be the "autumn" version. :P

    --
    Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
  41. fast computing by joke_dst · · Score: 4, Funny

    He calculated, within six and a half minutes, the length of a year That's some pretty fast calculating...

  42. Length of year by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1
    From the NYT article:
    He calculated, within six and a half minutes, the length of a year.
    Wow!
    It took him less than six and a half minutes to calculate the leangth of a year?
    That's pretty impressive.
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
    1. Re:Length of year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That could be pretty good, I mean seeing as a year is not a measurement of distance (explaining length) he'd have to have realized that a year is a measure of distance when traveling at the speed of light, implying he knew about Relativity long, long before Einstein :D

    2. Re:Length of year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      leangth of a year

      "length".

  43. Slahdot is going downhill by Merdalors · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is a good example of how Slashdot is degenerating into irrelevance.

    The Farnese Atlas is an interesting example of [1] lost knowledge being rediscovered, [2] ancient wisdom forgotten during the Dark Ages, and what do we get?

    ... nattering about pee-pees.

    --
    Slashdot entertains. Windows pays the mortgage.
    1. Re:Slahdot is going downhill by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

      Haha, you got modded funny.

      I have a history degree with an emphasis in ancient history, and I thought about minoring in astronomy. So, this story was somewhat interesting to me. But now that I live in the real world, I pay attention to politics, I get most of my news (or opinion, anyway)from blogs,and I have discovered Slashdot.

      The recovery of lost knowledge is a good thing, and I'm sure the people best qualified to study it are doing so, but I'm far more interested now in what other people think. I can (and will) read a book to find out about ancient wisdom, but where else am I going to get nattering about pee-pees?

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
  44. Pius IX was mad as a fish. by aug24 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Among his other acts were the declaration (after a vote, no less) that the Pope was infallible (which, because he, the Pope, was infallible, must be right - right?) and the abduction of a jewish couple's child after the child had been secretly baptised by a servant, on the grounds that a 'christian' child must be brought up by christians. Nutter.

    Incidentally, it has been suggested that his empire-building paved the way for the powerful modern vatican, and was a direct response to the formation of the modern state of Italy, which had removed a lot of the power of the church. So possibly not such a nutter. Nah, only kidding: Nutter!

    Justin.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    1. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by freediver211 · · Score: 0

      aug24,

      You are so wrong! Stop Listening to the warped English school system. They have warped your little fragile mind.

      Infallibility only pertains to matters of Faith and Morals don't make it out to be more than it is.

      The Jewish children were NEVER abducted there were saved from the Nazis. They were baptized so they would not be discovered as jews. You are worse than the BBC.

      The so called "Powerful" Vatican city is so "Powerful" that Europe ignores it along with stealing it's rightful land.

    2. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Jewish children were NEVER abducted there were saved from the Nazis. They were baptized so they would not be discovered as jews. You are worse than the BBC.


      I know that you are trolling, but I still like to point out that Pius IX died in 1878, two years before Hitler was born.

      I'd guess there were rather few Nazis back then.

    3. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pius IX died in 1878, two years before Hitler was born.

      Graak. I remembered Hitler's birth date incorrectly. Change that to 11 years before his birth.

    4. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      I know that you are trolling, but I still like to point out that Pius IX died in 1878, two years before Hitler was born.

      Well, he showed great forsight then didn't he!

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    5. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by Hrdina · · Score: 1
      Well, he showed great forsight then didn't he!

      You can do stuff like that when you're infallible.

    6. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by CTachyon · · Score: 1

      It's been a few years since I read it, but IIRC Pius IX was one of the more memorable Popes damned in Dante's Inferno.

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
    7. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by CaptainAvatar · · Score: 1

      Seems unlikely, since Pius IX was born about half a millennium after Dante died :) OTOH, you've gone to the trouble of actually reading Inferno, and I haven't.

      --
      The real Captain Avatar is a fictional character, so I suppose he doesn't mind if I impersonate him.
    8. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by aug24 · · Score: 1

      Seeing as Pius IX was around about 150 years ago, and Dante about 900 years ago, I suspect your memory may be at fault ;-)

      J.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    9. Re:Pius IX was mad as a fish. by CTachyon · · Score: 1

      DAMN! Whoops, now that's one hell of a memory slip. Thanks to both of you for correcting me.

      As far as Inferno goes, it was required reading for AP English. We actually had to keep sort of a "reaction diary". The book itself was actually not that bad, except that (A) the Greek influence was so ridiculously thick, you had to keep checking the cover to make sure you were indeed reading a book about the Christian version of hell, and (B) some of the math and science "facts" were uproariously funny, most notably that given Dante's stats on the place, you can only presume that the mouth of hell is approx. the size of Australia (and also some pi confusion regarding circumference/diameter).

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
  45. Three hundred and sixty-five... by aug24 · · Score: 1
    ...and a bit, times twenty-four is, precisely one year!

    See, loads less than six-and-a-half minutes.

    J.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  46. I wonder by dark_fishbowl · · Score: 0

    Will it help me find my home planet?

    --
    -- juggling flaming chainsaws --
  47. Map of the stars' homes by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ancient beliefs combined stars, religion, navigation and folk heroes into a single "art" of "myth". One fascinating, though really long, essay regarding their involution, is called Hamlet's Mill. I wonder how this map could be decoded to learn more about who the Neapolitans, and their cartographic predecessor, Hipparchus, had "commerce" with.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Map of the stars' homes by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Thanks, Doc. I'm surprised I've never heard of that book, but I'm definitely going to go get a copy. (Actually, it's a pretty good excuse for me to go hit some bookstores and get some fresh air.)

      The blurbs I've read so far reminds me of The White Goddess, by Robert Graves, which I have attempted to read several times, but have never been able to finish.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:Map of the stars' homes by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      HM is certainly related to The White Goddess; TWG is mentioned in HM. Another good one is Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, though its scholarship is not nearly as airtight as the others. Though it does deal with actual copies of maps, some of which defy history: like the 1500s map of the Antarctica, unknown to Europeans until the mid-1800s, with *actual* coastlines below the ice. The controversial maps might be fake, but it's a wild read, with dizzying implications (and allegations).

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Map of the stars' homes by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, TWG's scholarship is questionable, but it's still an interesting read up to a point. I'm a pretty voracious reader, but TWG has (so far) been more than I could get all the way through.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:Map of the stars' homes by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I hear people impugn Graves' scholarship from time to time, but I've yet to see a credible backup to those accusations. He does contradict the whole paradigm of "mythology", so I expect he'll get the denial treatment. But where's some evidentiary criticism?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Map of the stars' homes by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Heresay, and it could well be just academic politics as usual, but apparently a major Celtic scholar at the time, who had studied under Graves' grandfather (who was the undisputed expert in Celtic studies) disputed the academic validity of the work.

      This was related to me some years ago by a friend who was getting a doc in medieval lit. I remember she rolled her eyes when she saw what I was reading. Still, as I'm sure you're aware, academic validity and truth/value/meaning are not necessarily isomorphic. Casteneda was debunked ages ago, but I still get a kick out of reading the Don Juan books once in a while.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  48. It's not just for wrapping fish! by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    The NYT, "All the News That's Fit to Print", is entirely devoted to fig leafs, especially for the famous people who shoulder the burdens of the world (like American politicians).

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  49. Popery by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Catholics like Rudy Giuliani, who shut down the Brooklyn Museum when it showed a painting of Jesus's mom that offended his personally unique sense of religion.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Popery by tremor_tj · · Score: 1

      That it was painted out of poop might have had something to do with it. (that is, if I remember the story right)

    2. Re:Popery by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Exactly - the painting was made from elephant "poop", a not-uncommon material in African art. That offended Giuliani, so he cancelled it. Even if the material didn't carry an offensive message from its actual context, it would still have been merely Giuliani's (Catholic) sensibilities which somehow put him in charge of what a public museum could show, contradicting the museum curators and organization. So the offense here was in the eye of the beholder, who had too much power.Giuliani's sensibilities in paintings of Jesus' mother come from the Pope - as, it seems, does his political philosophy.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Popery by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      Interesting. After his previous wife divorced him for infidelity. I suppose, piety is for those who sit in judgement. Giuliani did "one good thing", which was reassure people in NY after 9/11 and take a few photo ops with firefighters. The administration is so desperate for heros who will also be "yes-men" that Giuliani has been made a hero.

      Don't know much more about him, other than he is pious, a cheater, and supposed to be a hero that can lead the nation. It's all about product placement people.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    4. Re:Popery by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Yep - it's so much easier to defy "god" when you don't really believe - easier than being a hypocrite. Giuliani's all showbiz, backed by cold steel. You might be interested to know that that "hero" jazz enabled him to start a Giuliani "foundation", which funneled donations for survivors of the WTC planebombings here in NYC instead into his personal wealth. And that Bernie Kerik, the Newark thug Giuliani got to run "security" in Iraq to insert him in charge of "Homeland Security", was his limo driver, and another thieving punk. Kerik's mob connections and personal embezzlement of millions of dollars from Giuliani's cop budgets are now finally finding their rightful homes: millstones around Giuliani's neck. Good riddance.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Popery by beamin · · Score: 1

      I'm a practicing Catholic as well, and I don't see what Giuliani had a problem with. Then again, I never cheated on my wife, so I never had the opportunity to bring my mistress to my home.

      St. Rudy, my ass.

  50. Ant's comparing giants. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    Newton penned over a millon words on the significance of the number 666, does the fact that he was a numeroligist and alchemist negate his contribution? Also don't underestimate Guttenberg's role in the sudden knowlage explosion of Europe in the late 1500's and the compulsory education campains of the Victorian era giving humanity another "boost". The Greeks could just as rightly be called the founders of a mathematical system that has lead humanity to today's understanding of the "the physical universe".

    I think it is an advatage to humanity that we had both the ancient and the not so ancient and we should respect and learn from all of our ancestors, misty, nameless or otherwise. It's is quite possible (some would say almost certain) that humanity will enter another dark age and most of our system and it's knowlage will be lost.

    I have no idea who the Chaldeans were but they survied at least 1000yrs and by your definition "science" has only 400 under it's belt. I don't think science was invented 400 or 2000 yrs ago, it has been with us (in some form) since we climbed down from the trees.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Ant's comparing giants. by jtriangle · · Score: 1

      The strength of science is that it doesn't depend on what your opinion is, or even what the general concensus is. The system of reasoning we call the scientic method was formalized and entered public use approximately 400 years ago.

  51. Great! by adolfojp · · Score: 1

    Thanks, now I can't take the goddamn Indiana Jones theme song out of my head.

    Cheers,
    Adolfo

  52. Museo Archeologico Nazionale de Napoli & Sex by theycallmerenda · · Score: 5, Informative

    The linked photo is from the Naples Archeological Museum (Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli). The NYTimes photo is from the Griffith Observatory in LA. Hence they're not necessarily the same piece of stone, and the latter may be a copy of the original in Naples. On another porn-related note, the Naples Museum is well known across the world for its beloved "Secret Room," full of sexually explicit artifacts dug up from Pompeii and other Roman sites. That, along with the awesome mosaics, are well worth the trip to Naples. Naples has a bad rap for a being unsafe (and parts of it are) but anyone going to Italy should surely go.

  53. Free speech may help by davide+marney · · Score: 1

    Interesting. I guess the way I would come down on this topic would be that what France may need is more free speech, not less. Preventing aggression may be better achieved by letting people express themselves. Repression often breeds animosity.

    I'm not clear how allowing religious expression would "leads to" agression. A Muslim women wears a head scarf as a sign of respect. A Christians wears a cross as a sign of devotion. These are just expressions of personal piety, and pretty tame ones at that.

    What are the French worried about? That a Muslim is going to see a Christian and bash them over the head?

    In the U.S., hundreds of thousands of Muslims live, work, play, and worship in the same neighborhoods as people of other faiths. I believe something like the world's second-largest Muslim population is in America, in fact.

    So, it is possible to live together in peace.

    Perhaps having a guarantee of free speech that cannot be taken away by any law is what helps avoid conflict.

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    1. Re:Free speech may help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the U.S., hundreds of thousands of Muslims live, work, play, and worship in the same neighborhoods as people of other faiths. I believe something like the world's second-largest Muslim population is in America, in fact.

      One difference is that there are proportionally very few Muslim extremists in US compared with France, for example.

      But that was not why I hit the reply button. I replied to correct your mistaken claim that the USA (or even the whole continents of North and South America) has the second largest Muslim population.

      The largest is in Indonesia: roughly 150 millions. The second is Pakistan, with about 90 millions. Next come Bangladesh and Nigeria, both having around 80 millions. Even Iran has over 50 millions. The USA has perhaps 6 millions or so.

    2. Re:Free speech may help by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      The USA has perhaps 6 millions or so [muslims]

      To put that into context for the discussion, that is roghly the same number (not proportion, absolute number) as France.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
  54. Check in a dictionary.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... the word "context".

    It will be an enlightening experience, you trying to appear "cultivated" but ignore the context in which swastikas exist.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  55. Huh? by davide+marney · · Score: 1

    However, we dont use it as an excuse to violently rip away the culture and traditions of those that choose not to immediately and completely conform.

    What in the world are you talking about? Can you give an example of what you mean?

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
  56. Don't be ridiculous. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Not everybody is a few minutes drive from a place where they can have a reasonable view of the sky unimpeded by artificial light.

    If the Lapland is the best you can come off with then it is just one samll confirmation of how difficult it is to watch a clean sky.

    I was not able to experience a clean sky until I had a chance to go to the Namib desert, pretty much in the middle of nowhere....

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Don't be ridiculous. by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed. Truly dark sky sites are very hard to come by these days. The real problem, IMHO, is that, because they're so hard to come by, very few people no what a truly dark sky looks like! Thus, like the grandparent, they think a field an hour from a major metropolitan area constitutes a dark sky site.

      The secondary effect of this is that astronomers have a hell of a time convincing people that light pollution is a problem, because a) they don't understand *why* it's a problem, and b) they don't understand the sheer magnitude of the issue. The only bright side (no pun intended) is that the astronomers have economic forces in their corner (you can save money if you stop radiating half of your artificial light out into space).

    2. Re:Don't be ridiculous. by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      You can't have it both ways. Want to have the convenience of living in a city? then you have to live in a city. Do you expect them to shut down all streetlights so you could watch the skies?

      However, if you REALLY want to watch the skies with no light-pollution, is there something stopping you from living in such a place where it's possible? Or is it just that you want it all, with zero effort from your part?

      If the Lapland is the best you can come off with then it is just one samll confirmation of how difficult it is to watch a clean sky.

      Well, I live in suburbs of Helsinki, so there's quite a bit of lights in here. And I do not expect them to reduce illumination just to satisfy my whims. But for example back home in the countryside I had to drive just 2 kilometers to be surrounded by total darkness. And yet, my home was not actually in the middle of nowhere. And even here I can experience total darkness just by driving few kilometers.

      If you want clear skies, you CAN arrange it. But if you expect to watch the skies in downtown Manhattan or something, think again.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    3. Re:Don't be ridiculous. by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      You can't have it both ways.

      Yes, you can. There are a number of things metropolitan areas can do to significantly reduce light pollution (just changing street lights to use hoods which prevent light from reflecting back into space would make a *huge* difference). And, in the end, while it would require an upfront investment, they'd make their money back due improved efficiency.

      Don't kid yourself. Urban need not equate to light polluted. Which is good, because light pollution doesn't just affect the skies. It also affects your health, and the health of those around you, both human and animal.

  57. Oh my god... Its full of stars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no text.

  58. Obsessed with wieners by SamSeaborn · · Score: 1
    I'm not offended by the nude sculpture or anything. But what's the deal with all those naked statues? I mean, why were these guys so obsessed with sculpting wieners?

    Sam

    1. Re:Obsessed with wieners by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      I mean, why were these guys so obsessed with sculpting wieners?

      If you sculpt a naked man and don't put one in how many people will be able to look at your masterpiece without laughing? They did tend to make the genitals as small as reasonably possible.

      If you think of it, the weird obsession is the modern one which creates supposedly macho soldier dolls for kids to play with, with guns and grenades and so on but no equipment of a more important kind. Are they supposed to be over-compensating for a tragic childhood accident?

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    2. Re:Obsessed with wieners by lxs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I mean, why were these guys so obsessed with sculpting wieners?

      They hadn't invented dick jokes yet? But seriously, when you're depicting the human body, why not make it anatomically correct? The hands are sculpted realistically, so why not the rest of the body. Don't forget that in the classical world, before thousends of years of christian puritanism, nudity was no big deal. Why were they obsessed with long hair? Why were they obsessed with feet?

      In this case I'm afraid you're the one obsessed with "wieners", they tend to (excuse the phrase) jump out at us, simply because we don't often see them depicted in everyday life.

    3. Re:Obsessed with wieners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They did tend to make the genitals as small as reasonably possible.


      Making protrusions like the genitals small also lowers the chance of them breaking off.

  59. The moral high ground by microbox · · Score: 1

    I have two young children and I absolutely WILL NOT put up with them being shown any nudity without my permission

    Kid's do what they see, not what they are told to do. You are teaching them to be ashamed of nudity.

    As their father it is up to me to decide what they see and what they don't

    A parent doesn't OWN their children. A parent is the GUARDIAN of their children. But children are independent living beings that are slowly coming into the world of adults. You can't imprison their minds.

    They have acted in good faith and given me the choice

    Perhaps they lied about the reality of the statue... isn't that bad faith?

    It's called responsible parenting. Never think of that, little 18 year old.

    It sounds to me like you'll have a few 18 year olds in your house one day. Better prepare yourself for the worst.

    Life and parenting isn't as simple as jumping on the moral high ground.

    --

    Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    1. Re:The moral high ground by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      You can't imprison their minds.

      Why the hell not? It apparently worked in the case of the GP.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  60. That wasn't the original David: by caveat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From TFA: "The cast of Michelangelo's David, taken from the original marble figure now in the Accademia di Belle Arti in Florence, was an early and unexpected acquisition for the fledgling Museum at South Kensington."

    The Victorians were notoriously prudish, making even current America look downright debaucherous..."A letter sent to the Museum in 1903 by a Mr Dobson complained about the statuary displayed: 'One can hardly designate these figures as "art"; if it is, it is a very objectionable form of art.'" Course, some philistine woman in Florida had this to say about David: "'I didn't even know it was art,' said Jeanne Johnson, owner of a nearby barber shop, who complained about the 5ft concrete statue. 'To me, it's just a naked man standing on the side of the road. Once the girls saw it, I found myself in a position where I had to explain what a penis is.'" Talk about a sex-o-phobe...

    --

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    1. Re:That wasn't the original David: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She was just trying to prevent penis-envy... you can't envy what you don't know exists...

  61. So much for astronomy by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Browsing at +1, the topic contains 181 comments in 3 threads. The majority (like, 175 comments) are in "What's up with the modified statue", discussing a frigging fig leaf.
    # of comments saying "Cool that we found this ancient star map", or otherwise even remotely related to astronomy: zero.
    (yeah, I know, "this is /., what else did you expect")
    So I'll say it: Cool that we found this ancient star map. Pity we don't have Hipparchus' complete works, though.

    1. Re:So much for astronomy by esonik · · Score: 1

      word!
      To add some content, here is the home page of Bradley E. Schaefer (the guy who made the discovery). There you can find hi-res photos of the globe, a powerpoint presentation which has more details than the NYT article, some quicktime movies (didn't work on my machine) showing the precession of earth's rotation axis and a preprint of the research article.

  62. Round Earth - The Ancients Knew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the ancient Romans carved a statue of Atlas holding a globe then they must have known the Earth is a sphere. What took the rest of us so long to figure it out?

  63. One must speak precisely by davide+marney · · Score: 1

    Sorry, what I meant to say was I have heard that the U.S. has the second-largest expatriate Muslim population (Muslims not living in a Muslim-majority country.) I didn't mean to imply that more Muslims live in the U.S. than in Indonesia!

    --
    "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
    1. Re:One must speak precisely by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Sorry, what I meant to say was I have heard that the U.S. has the second-largest expatriate Muslim population (Muslims not living in a Muslim-majority country.)

      China has over 100 million, India has several hundred million. I'm sure, due to geography, that Russia must have way more than the US.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    2. Re:One must speak precisely by R.Caley · · Score: 1

      Another source I just found has those numbers proportionally smaller. However, all still way beyond the US number.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    3. Re:One must speak precisely by davide+marney · · Score: 1

      Hrm. Well, I can't find my source that I thought I was quoting, so you can dust off the spot where my position used to stand.

      I guess I can only (rather lamely) restate my larger point as that there seem to be "some number" of Muslims who can live peacably in very close proximity with non-Muslims. They are able to do this without having to supress any religious practices that are not physically causing harm or voiding the rights of others.

      And that's a good thing, I think everyone could agree.

      --
      "We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
  64. Offtopic: Nudity by Sique · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The rule is that I grew up in a land where nude bathing was considered the norm and wearing clothes was for the tourists. So I remember being at the beach at age 12 with lots of other people around, completely naked, independent of age and gender. Yes, there were complete families there, from little child up to the grand parents sitting together naked and going for a swim.

    The most arousing moment for me was when I noticed that a girl didn't take off her pants. I was for at least 20mins wondering how she might have looked underneath. It never occured to me that I should have been aroused by people being naked.

    Then there was a lake not far away from my parents home. When I went there the first time, it was uses half of the beach by nude swimmers, the other half by people prefering textiles around them. A year later it was a nude beach only. And this without any regularies around. It just happened.

    And then I was partaking at a triathlon competition. The swimming part took place at another lake not far from my parents home. There were ropes around the changing zone and the place at the beach where the athletes entered the lake and left it after the swimming distance. The places behind the ropes were crowded by nude spectators watching intensely the neoprene-clad people fighting for a good starting position at the competition.

    Lets put it like this: In it's true sence of word, all about nudity depends on how you look at it ;)

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  65. Since all I can think about now is BOOBIES... by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 1

    ...I might as well go to lunch (like I wasn't having ENOUGH trouble keeping my mind on my work...and to think I actually believed Slashdot might take my mind OFF of boobies for a few minutes...)

    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  66. Sight Problems by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    Actually, as I understand it, the amount of people with bad vision isn't that high. Most people get along fine without glasses or contacts. Now, on the other hand, in technical areas, bad vision seems to be the norm. Supposedly long hours of television or monitor viewing at an early age can do something to defocus your eyes. *shrug* The results of that study keep ping-ponging back and forth depending on what result the tester wants. Personally, I think eyeglasses are just such "geek chic" that they're more noticeable.

    On the other hand, you might have a point in that diet plays a role in vision. (Oh, and to answer your question, glasses were likely invented around 1280, at least according to Wikipedia, grains of salt implied.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
  67. Ha! by Spunk · · Score: 1

    Atlas. Divine. Was that pun intentional? :)

    1. Re:Ha! by LarsWestergren · · Score: 1

      Yep. ;)

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

  68. Hooke was just short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.

    - Isaac Newton, Letter to Robert Hooke, February 5, 1675

    It has been suggested that Newton here was taking a subtle jab at his rival Hooke, who was of short stature (5'0") and self-conscious of it.
  69. Obligatory Atlas quote by Stormwatch · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Mr. Rearden," said Francisco, his voice solemnly calm, "if you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders - what would you tell him to do?"

    "I... don't know. What... could he do? What would you tell him?"

    "To shrug."

    1. Re:Obligatory Atlas quote by rleibman · · Score: 1

      I was waiting for someone to bring it up, thanks.

  70. Prudish Americans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think prudish American are a tiny minority? Methinks you come from the flakey pinko liberal infidel traitorous blue-state minority coastlands--not the stable, patriotic heartlands that form the flesh and blood of this great country. May you all slide into the ocean, you demonic evildoers!

    Whoops, am I overstating something?

    Cheers :-)

  71. Re:Just for you by AviLazar · · Score: 1

    curiousity is killing this cat. ....must...hold....lunch...down...

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
  72. Nudity is not porn by CustomDesigned · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Porn is a difficult thing to define objectively. On the subject of defining pornography, an American Supreme Court justice said in frustration, "I know it when I see it, but I can't define it."

    The basis of Christian (Catholic and Protestant) ethics concerning sexual behaviour is the concept of "defrauding". In this context, to defraud someone is to arouse desires that cannot be righteously (or practically, for you libertines) fulfilled. Pornography is the ultimate in sexual defrauding, hence it condemned. Solomon puts it more positively, "I adjour you, awake not my love till it pleases." In other words, don't arouse me until the time is right and we can enjoy it to the utmost. (We don't need to be reminded of how Solomon did not exactly set a good example of sexual restraint. He regretted it afterward.)

    However, the precise stimuli which result in inappropriate arousal is very culturally relative. A Christian family I know was visited by a Christian family from Russia. They met them at the airport, and the American wife gave all of their visitors a big hug. Later, they discovered that this made the Russians very uncomfortable. (This may reflect a particular subculture in Russia, and not Russians in general.)

    My sister spent some years in the jungle in Papua New Gunea. The Christian women there were very few clothes, often going topless due to the climate. This did not seem to provoke the wrong response in the men. (Although I've heard that it does for American boys reading National Geographic.) Strangely, the Papua women were shocked by magazine photos of American women in bikinis. Objectively, the bikinis represented more cloth than what the Papua women wore, but there was something about the facial expression and body language that said "come hither", and thus became pornography.

    One more thing, Eros is exclusive and jealous by nature. Promiscuous behaviour does not contradict this. When that special someone says to us, "I love you!", we are thrilled. When we discover that they are saying the same thing to 10 other people, we are not so thrilled. Some people have expressed the idea that pornography might be appropriate within marriage (or whatever you libertines want to use as a substitute). However, because an image rather than the beloved becomes the source of arousal, it diminishes Eros and cheats both partners.

  73. What's this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (.)


    Me, showing you my hairy arse. And I'm not ashamed. I'd love to show you it IRL. Seriously. The shame is entirely yours (cf Jebus, if he existed, died for his own sins, not mine. I'd show him my arse too)

  74. This is rediculous by clem9796 · · Score: 1

    A whole first page of comments and hardly a one is actually about the star map. You want to discuss plaster penises go here:

    http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaints.html
    or
    http ://www.selfregulation.info/iapcoda/0405-press- report-dl.html (in europe anyway, couldn't find a US one.)

    --
    IANALOOA
  75. don't click the link at work by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

    Dude, your girlfriend isn't even alive. And I think the pee-pee option is built into the "xtreem watersportz edition".

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  76. Starry Night by FlunkedFlank · · Score: 1

    Cool, this coincides perfectly with my purchase of Starry Night a few days ago. I never knew much about astronomy, but I've learned tons in the last few days of playing with it, and I totally understand, technically, what this guy did re: Hipparchus, whereas I'm sure I wouldn't have really understood it just last week. (i.e., how the ecliptic precesses relative to the celestial equator.)

    Starry Night is definitely the coolest program I've purchased in a long time. (I swear I'm not a shill!) Great for planning photo shoots, too.

  77. Frankly I think it's another Rimbaldi artifact. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    No doubt Sidney Bristow will shortly show up, any moment now, in something skin tight and cut to there, then will see if Atlas is REALLY made of stone or not.

    No doubt pushing the correct combination of constellations will reveal Rimbaldi artifact #4,236,319 which will lead to yet further plot confusion.

    And more skimpy outfits and multicolored wigs!

  78. Re:Mystery the leaf Or "What happened to Atlantis" by +apis22 · · Score: 1

    Well it is very difficult for me to think of any connection between Greeks and caves... BTW it seems that you have not the slightest knowledge of Plato's books. I would recommend you to read "Timeus" and "Crito". It will enhance your ability to discuss and it will improve your manners. But most important it will help you put the "tale of Eden" in its correct perspective.

  79. Ethnic locale vs ethnicity by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1

    I guess the question would be whether they were really asking for your ethnicity or for your location of birth. I'm caucasian no matter where I was born (and boy am I white...). I think part of the problem is that it's become politically correct to not refer to an ethnicity by a term like Mongoloid or Negroid. Therefore, we get terms like "Asian" or "African American" that refer to locations rather than ethnicity.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.