Slashdot Mirror


Lost Languages Discovered in One of the World's Oldest Continuously Run Libraries (smithsonianmag.com)

Saint Catherine's Monastery, a sacred Christian site nestled in the shadow of Mount Sinai, is home to one of the world's oldest continuously used libraries. Thousands of manuscripts and books are kept there -- some of which contain hidden treasures. An anonymous reader shares a report: Now, a team of researchers is using new technology to uncover texts that were erased and written over by the monks who lived and worked at the monastery. Many of these original texts were written in languages well known to researchers -- Latin, Greek, Arabic -- but others were inscribed in long-lost languages that are rarely seen in the historical record. Manuscripts with multiple layers of writing are known as palimpsests, and there are about 130 of them at St. Catherine's Monastery, according to the website of the Early Manuscript Electronic Library, which has been leading the initiative to uncover the original texts. With the rise of Islam in the 7th century, Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear, and Saint Catherine's found itself in relative isolation. Monks turned to reusing older parchments when supplies at the monastery ran scarce. To uncover the palimpsests' secret texts, researchers photographed thousands of pages multiple times, illuminating each page with different-colored lights. They also photographed the pages with light shining onto them from behind, or from an oblique angle, which helped "highlight tiny bumps and depressions in the surface," Gray writes. They then fed the information into a computer algorithm, which is able to distinguish the more recent texts from the originals.

164 comments

  1. So CSI was correct by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    You can lift multiple layers of writing from a piece of paper.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    1. Re:So CSI was correct by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not exactly. Palimpsets are on parchment not paper, and the method works in part because classical methods of writing used thick ink that was there for a long time which was then scraped away. Doing this with modern ink on a piece of paper is a very different story.

    2. Re:So CSI was correct by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Don't be such a spoil-sport. In part, this methodology succeeds because it also takes angled pictures of the medium and that enables it to isolate depressions and take those into account when analyzing the writing. (I did read TFA - sorry, won't happen again)

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    3. Re:So CSI was correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be such a spoil-sport.

      Don't be bitter when someone points out your ignorant, trash TV induced layman's view of science.

    4. Re:So CSI was correct by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      (I did read TFA - sorry, won't happen again)

      You're on thin ice, buddy.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
  2. Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm surprised they didn't burn it.

    1. Re:Christian by GLMDesigns · · Score: 4, Informative

      The parchment was much to expensive, much to valuable to simply burn. It was a relatively easy task to scrape off the old ink.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    2. Re:Christian by bugs2squash · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's not another language, it's just scribes writing random things over the old text a million times to obscure what was originally there.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    3. Re:Christian by JoshuaZ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because there's a difference between burning books at some points in time (which Christianity certainly did, as did many other religious and ideologies) and burning books being such a complete default that one should be "surprised" by it. In that context, just like some of the other Islam related comments in this thread, it is classic trolling, and if sincere says more about the people making the statements than it does about the groups they are making comments about.

    4. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why? Because it is? I know that you're a small minded individual unable to critically think but you might be shocked to learn that religion is not immediately anti-education or anti-science. For example, evolution has been considered "most probably fact" within the catholic church since the late 1800s. The pioneering work in evolution being done by a monk of all people. Toss in that for a very long time (we're talking centuries) if you wanted a science based education you went to the Jesuits (you'll be shocked to find out who they're associated with) and you'll start to understand what a moronic statements the OP as well as your post are making.

    5. Re:Christian by nwaack · · Score: 1

      Why is this modded troll? Why not post proof that the Christian religion did not burn books instead of putting your head in the sand?

      Why not stop being a douchebag and realize that just because Christians did, at times, burn books, that is not the de-facto standard of Christianity? Sounds like you're the one with your head in the sand and it's really a shame that tiny-brained cowards like you are allowed to post anonymously here.

    6. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You know what they did to that monk?

      They burned him.

    7. Re:Christian by guruevi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Book burnings, although they did happen, didn't happen early on. Before the printing press, books were very, very expensive and thus reserved only for the very rich and the church which, even after the printing press became ubiquitous, the church wanted to keep it that way, hence the book burnings. It's also why the mass is still held in Latin in many denominations or why Mother Teresa didn't actually help anyone, it's just a matter of keeping the poor dumb, sick and dependent on the church.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    8. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm surprised they didn't burn it.

      You're confusing Christianity with Islam.

      After 1,700 years, Buddhas fall to Taliban dynamite

      The propensity of Muslims to destroy things even has multiple Wikipedia pages.

      Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'm sure some Thalidomide-brained idiot is going to drag up the Crusades or something else that happened a thousand fucking years ago in order to justify Islamic barbarity TODAY.

    9. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Athiests, muslims, hindus, Germans, Russians, Communists, Japanese, followers of dictators, random individuals, and countless others have burned books over thousands of years for many different reasons. Don't single out Christians for something that many different people and groups have done.

    10. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... books were ....reserved only for the very rich and the church ...It's also why the mass is still held in Latin in many denominations

      Such as the world-famous Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. What? Never heard of them?
      Maybe you meant the Dark Lutherans?
      The problem is, members of those groups still using the Tridentine Mass mostly DO understand Latin.

    11. Re:Christian by Allasard · · Score: 5, Informative

      If he is referring to Gregor Mendel(d. 1884), the founder of modern genetics, no they didn't.
      They did promote him to be abbot of his abbey, where he didn't have time from science. I guess that's technically a confirmation of the Peter Principle.

    12. Re:Christian by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      It's also why the mass is still held in Latin in many denominations ...

      Mass is not held in Latin except in rare situations. A few churches have a single Latin Mass celebration out of many. And the word "denominations" inherently means "Protestant", which by definition: A. do not call it a "Mass", with the possible exception of the Anglicans and Episcopals, and B. do not use Latin at all. In fact, one of the major driving factors behind the Protestant Reformation was the desire to use the vernacular in worship.

      Book burnings, although they did happen, didn't happen early on.

      Sure they did. Ever look for the writings of Arius? Priscillian of Ávila? Nestorius? Non-Christian literature from the library of Antioch? Eutychius? Arnold of Brescia? That's just the list of Catholic writings destroyed by Catholics up through the 1100s. The burning of books believed to be heretical is a longstanding tradition in Christianity, and is more a dubious and archaic method than a modern one.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    13. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're demanding he prove a negative?
      Tip of the fedora to you, sir.

    14. Re:Christian by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The confusion is deliberate. The left hates religion in general but Christians specifically. Thus they tend to assume Christians are guilty of things when in fact they aren't. For example most people don't know that in the crusades the Muslims were the original invaders and will self righteously say how Christians did the crusades just to kill brown people.

    15. Re:Christian by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'm sure some Thalidomide-brained idiot is going to drag up the Crusades or something else that happened a thousand fucking years ago in order to justify Islamic barbarity TODAY.

      Christ on a bike, that's the most insult-dense post I've read in a while. Islamophobia, ableism and insulting people who disagree with you all rolled into one.

      Every broad group has contained some iconoclasts at some point, and you don't have to go as far back as the Crusades to see Christians destroying totems of other religions (we did it throughout the Imperial era). However, the acts of the extremists of I.S. do not represent the mainstream of Islam in any way.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    16. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that the Catholic church had to give up its monopoly on the truth when the canons of Italian nationalists threatened to bombard the Catholic capital out of existence in the late 1800s, right?

    17. Re:Christian by thomst · · Score: 1

      bugs2squash explained:

      It's not another language, it's just scribes writing random things over the old text a million times to obscure what was originally there.

      Somebody mod parent +1 Funny, please ... !

      --
      Check out my novel.
    18. Re:Christian by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Never mind, it's merely the left wing brainwashing called 'public school' which tells people that EVERYTHING about western culture is a horror, just a horror. You know, things like sanitation, the scientific method, limitations of government power, separation of church and state, etc.

    19. Re:Christian by stdarg · · Score: 1

      However, the acts of the extremists of I.S. do not represent the mainstream of Islam in any way.

      They do. Destroying pagan totems is something that goes as far back as Mohammed destroying the idols in the kaaba. You should learn something about Islam before you presume to speak for mainstream Islam.

    20. Re: Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think most people with mod points are perfectly capable of distributing those points without your guidance.

    21. Re:Christian by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Funny

      If he is referring to Gregor Mendel(d. 1884), the founder of modern genetics, no they didn't.

      They did promote him to be abbot of his abbey, where he didn't have time from science. I guess that's technically a confirmation of the Peter Principle.

      If the Peter Principle is divinely proven, does that mean it applies to God as well??

      That would explain sooo much.

    22. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not forget Georges Lemaître, one of the original pioneers of the Big Bang theory and a priest... who admonished the then-pope for using it as evidence of God creating the Universe.

    23. Re:Christian by Dorianny · · Score: 1

      Like every other War the Crusades were all about pillaging and plunder

    24. Re:Christian by terjeber · · Score: 1

      The confusion is deliberate. The left hates religion in general but Christians specifically

      Well, I would not call it "the left", considering people like Ayn Rand would be considered nowhere near "left", and Ayn Rand found religion, and Christianity in particular, to be moronic.

    25. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Atheists?? Give me a citation or two. or are you including atheist because you are one of those fxxking christians?

    26. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mendel was merely studying veges! It was mere about inheritance! Don't confuse mere inheritance with evolution! You are an example of dumb christians.

    27. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes we are all grateful to you Christians it you hadn't burned all the witches they would still be bothering us today.

    28. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You talk about islam, but only cite islam-derived extremists. But I'm sure you do the same for christians, right ?
      Maybe, just maybe, Islam is not a single religion, in every religion, people pick and choose what they want. KKK is based on christianity, but I'm sure they have a different reading of the bible than the pope. Even the different popes had different interpretation of the bible.
      You want an example of today ? How about the Lord's Army ? I heard people reply they are not really christians, wall guess what, ISIS are not really muslims either, just ask the vast majority of peaceful muslims, and the countless muslims that died at the hands of ISIS.

    29. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It goes even further than that, it goes back to christianity (and Islam is derived from it). The thing with monotheist gods, they don't like other gods very much as they are supposed to be the only one, look at the first 2 of the 10 commandments:
      1 You shall have no other gods before me.
      2 You shall not make any graven images.

    30. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, most people who you claim hate religion, don't hate religion as a whole. It's the organised aspect that is bothersome. When the religious institutions use their power to keep people misinformed, under-educated and spout hateful rhetoric they deserve to be disliked. There is no doubt that there are a lot of religious people who do good and help people, but there is also no doubt that there are also a lot of religious people who use religion and their power to control information and spread hate. It's not just christians, the left don't discriminate, that's the rights job.

    31. Re:Christian by mcswell · · Score: 1

      One of Darwin's mysteries, which he talks about in The Origin of Species, was how variability didn't just get washed out in populations, in the same way that a spoonful of sugar gets washed out in a bathtub of water. The answer was that inheritance was a discrete variable, not a continuous variable, i.e. genes. While it's true that Mendel didn't (afaik) set out to solve this mystery, nor does it make him the person who did "the pioneering work in evolution" (in the words of the poster at the top of this thread), it did have a huge influence on the study of evolution.

      (IIRC, Darwin's other big mystery was the apparently sudden appearance of fossils at the base of the Cambrian.)

    32. Re:Christian by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      Which is the Old Testament, hence it goes back to Judaism. The whole Abrahamic tradition is against idol worship (see the golden calf in Exodus), and yet even then, the Abrahamic tradition hasn't even been unusual in terms of iconoclasts -- see also the Russian revolution, the pre-Christian vikings and their sacking of monasteries etc.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    33. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The left hates religion in general but Christians specifically."

      A right-wing trope. And you are an internet troll. Pretty funny that a hater accuses others of hating...

    34. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And book burning continues to this day....to include Christians burning the wrong version of the Christian bible
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_book-burning_incidents#Non-approved_Bibles.2C_books_and_music_in_Canton.2C_North_Carolina

    35. Re:Christian by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      My friends in the Christian Left would disagree with your statement. Leftists tend to be against most organized religion, and against religion playing a role in politics. Religion itself isn't that big a deal.

      The Muslims were not the original invaders of that area. Very likely ancient Egypt wasn't the first either, but it's the earliest invader I can think of offhand. That area has seen invasion after invasion.

      The Crusaders were in general not the people kicked out by Muslims, or even their descendants. The Crusades were entirely new invasions, spurred on by the prospect of junior sons who'd inherit nothing in Germany or France. One of them sacked Constantinople instead, so it probably wasn't just brown people.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    36. Re:Christian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, things like sanitation, the scientific method, limitations of government power, separation of church and state, etc.

      Well, other than sanitation, the scientific method, limitations of government power, separation of church and state, what has Western Culture ever done for us?

  3. fed the information into a computer algorithm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Once again AI is robbing researchers of jobs. Once upon a time this would have been done by university researchers, now AI is cheaper, better, and faster.

  4. Not completely lost languages by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Informative
    These are languages where we have some pre-existing examples and vocab. It isn't like these are languages which were until now completely unknown. From TFA:

    But perhaps the most intriguing finds are the manuscripts written in obscure languages that fell out of use many centuries ago. Two of the erased texts, for instance, were inked in Caucasian Albanian, a language spoken by Christians in what is now Azerbaijan. According to Sarah Laskow of Atlas Obscura, Caucasian Albanian only exists today in a few stone inscriptions. Michael Phelps, director of the Early Manuscripts Electronic Library, tells Gray of the Atlantic that the discovery of Caucasian Albanian writings at Saint Catherine’s library has helped scholars increase their knowledge of the language’s vocabulary, giving them words for things like “net” and “fish.”

    Other hidden texts were written in a defunct dialect known as Christian Palestinian Aramaic, a mix of Syriac and Greek, which was discontinued in the 13th century only to be rediscovered by scholars in the 18th century.

    Of course, with sea related words discovered, the obvious line of jokes is to connect this with the Deep Ones, Dagon and Cthulhu. No doubt, the true horror in the more obscure texts is being kept quiet, possibly known only to the Laundry and the Black Chamber.

    1. Re:Not completely lost languages by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      I enjoy the irony of a non-swimmer Michael Phelps discussing sea/water related vocabulary.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  5. Are you trying to tell me... by Bartles · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that Islam is a relatively new religion in the Middle East, and that both Judaism and Christianity predated it by centuries? How can that be?

    1. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2

      It's OK, eventually some fanatical Muslim group will destroy that blasphemous evidence and the next generation won't know it ever existed.

    2. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's the "same god" that created the WHOLE universe, all the stars, planets, moons, and bacteria in my crotch, but somehow, he has multiple personalities and gave us wildly different versions to different people at different times and different places?!?

      How can THAT be?

    3. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      ...that Christianity is a relatively new religion in the Middle East, and that Judaism predates it by almost a millennia? How can that be?

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    4. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      Just like Christian fanatics burned all books related to Cthulhu?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      "A millennia"? And here I thought "millennia" was the plural of "millennium"....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    6. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. So you DO recognize that Islam is also a cult and a dangerous one at that?

      I wish more people like you would speak out about the ills of modern religions especially Islam.

    7. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Sorry, i originally thought it was closer to two millennia, but i did some fact checking before hitting the submit button and failed to update the grammar to match.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    8. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      All religions are cults, some are more extreme than others.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    9. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's still about 1,400 years old, as opposed to Christianity which is about 2,000 years old. Judaism as we know it is really a merger of the ancient Hebrew monotheistic faith and Aristotlean thought, so is maybe two or three hundred years older than Christianity.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    10. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      Then "cult" has no meaning at all. Religions may start as cults, but once you have a sufficient number of followers, and the cult is no longer bound to a charismatic leader, then I'd say it has become a religion. Not that religions aren't all bunk, but that's just my own assessment, and I can still twell the difference between a cult and a religion. For instance, Joseph Smith and his band of gullible idiots in 1830 were a cult. Mormonism in 2017 is a religion. It's still all concoction, absurdity, and of course, shameless ripoffs of Masonic rites, but when you have millions of followers world wide, you can't really be a cult.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    11. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Daetrin · · Score: 5, Funny

      I believe if you're going to take down religions you have to do so in order.

      After you defeat Scientology you get to fight Mormonism. Then Protestant Christianity, then Islam, then Catholicism, then Confucianism, then Buddhism, then Judaism, then Hinduism. And then you get to the good part! You have to fight Bahamut, Gilgamesh, Ra, _and_ Tiamat. And only after you've beaten those four do you get to fight Cthulhu.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    12. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by guruevi · · Score: 2

      Depends on who you ask.

      According to the Muslims and Christians, Islam started when Abraham sent away his son Ishmael he had made with his sex slave and his son Isaac started Judaism. Judaism eventually became Christianity.

      According to scientific evidence we have (which is sparse), all the religions in that region started from the pantheon of gods of various sheep herders that eventually streamlined into the different branches we now know. They all claim the same god and ancestry and they all can be traced back to the same groups of people with similar religions, so to say one came first is dishonest. Until Alexander the Great made the decision not to enforce a state religion (unlike the Persians/Chaldeans/Egyptians before him) there really wasn't just one or two solid religious establishments and this is why you see such influence from Babylonian and Egyptian religions and a bunch of common ideologies amongst all of them.

      It's an interesting archeological research project that sadly even media like National Geographic or PBS seldom covers because they don't want to piss anyone off with reality.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    13. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      I believe if you're going to take down religions you have to do so in order. After you defeat Scientology you get to fight Mormonism. Then Protestant Christianity, then Islam, then Catholicism, then Confucianism, then Buddhism, then Judaism, then Hinduism. And then you get to the good part! You have to fight Bahamut, Gilgamesh, Ra, _and_ Tiamat. And only after you've beaten those four do you get to fight Cthulhu.

      You forgot Sikhism, but it's probably a good idea to avoid that one since you know they're armed.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    14. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by cyberchondriac · · Score: 2

      Depends on who you ask.

      According to the Muslims and Christians, Islam started when Abraham sent away his son Ishmael he had made with his sex slave and his son Isaac started Judaism. Judaism eventually became Christianity.

      According to scientific evidence we have (which is sparse), all the religions in that region started from the pantheon of gods of various sheep herders that eventually streamlined into the different branches we now know. They all claim the same god and ancestry and they all can be traced back to the same groups of people with similar religions, so to say one came first is dishonest.

      Just because that's when it's claimed it "started" doesn't mean that's when it actually did. Muhammad created Islam in the early 7th century when he claimed Gabriel spoke to him, and created the retro history of the religion in writing the Quran. There is no mention of Allah or Islam prior to this.
      Even the official religion of Christianity didn't actually begin in Jesus's time, who was a jew, (and would self-identify as such) it took several decades after Paul and the other apostles wrote their gospels. The exact point of separation of Christianity from Judaism is hard to nail down.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    15. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      Sure. But my example was selected for the region and the current risk.

    16. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      The term "cult" in theological terms relates to a specific set of beliefs and/or practices. For example, the "Marian cult" is the worship of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the belief that she was conceived without sin. This is shared by the Catholic and Orthodox Christian churches, as well as some of the Middle Eastern and north-east African groups. Most Protestant groups (particularly Calvinist sections) refuse the Marian cult as a form of pseudo-pantheism.

      The vernacular use of "cult", though, is ill-defined and meaningless.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    17. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      It's an interesting archeological research project that sadly even media like National Geographic or PBS seldom covers because they don't want to piss anyone off with reality.

      Actually, I recently saw a fantastic PBS documentary on the birth of Judaism, which pointed out that Abraham picked up his monotheistic faith and the name of Yahweh from somewhere in Arabia, and how Yahweh worship was used as an agrarian revolution among the lower orders of the Caananites which overturned the nobility there. There was no "exodus" from Egypt, seemingly; rather, the Caananite rulers were vassal kings under the pharaoh, and the leaving of Egypt was really just getting the land out from the Egyptian empire.

      Early Israelites still hung onto trappings of pantheism, though, and when early Judaism was used to justify the rule of kings (the birth of the House of David) -- as has happened with almost every religion at some point -- there was a much stricter enforcement of genuine monotheism.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    18. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by blindseer · · Score: 1

      For a moment there I thought you were going to say after defeating the gods of earth, wind, fire, and water that Chaos himself would have to be defeated. Only then the Four Orbs will shine again, balance restored to the universe, and the time loop closed.

      Then again, perhaps I've been playing too many old video games.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    19. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How terrible of them. It just goes to prove all the worst stereotypes.

      BRB, we have some offensive historical statues that we need to destroy.

    20. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      In college, I took a "History of Religions" course which the professor started with telling us that we'd most likely be offended at some point, but he was giving us a historical perspective, not a religious one. One of the interesting things I picked up in that course was that the historical Jesus actually advocated for stricter laws. He was a rabbi (teacher) among many, many of the time and thought that sin was incurred not only if you DID an action, but if you thought about doing it. For example, there's a Jewish prohibition of eating milk and meat together. So if I eat a cheeseburger, I violate this rule. Jesus would have said I violate the rule if I even think of eating a cheeseburger. The other rabbis of the time disagreed - rightly saying that you can't hold people accountable for thoughts if they take no actions on them.

      Ironically, if this is actually true (I've never independently verified this), Jesus would be appalled at Christianity today since they've ditched most of the Jewish laws. If he magically came back to life today, he'd probably feel most at home in an ultra-orthodox Jewish temple. Definitely more-so than a church.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    21. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by burhop · · Score: 1

      I believe if you're going to take down religions you have to do so in order.
      After you defeat Scientology you get to fight Mormonism. Then Protestant Christianity, then Islam, then Catholicism, then Confucianism, then Buddhism, then Judaism, then Hinduism. And then you get to the good part! You have to fight Bahamut, Gilgamesh, Ra, _and_ Tiamat. And only after you've beaten those four do you get to fight Cthulhu.

      Mostly academic. While getting past the "Dude" might not be too hard (but that is just my opinion), no one makes it past the flying spaghetti monster and his noodly armaments.

    22. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by wyHunter · · Score: 0

      Technically, every religion is a cult. Cult: a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object. Since in this definition, 'God' is an object, every religion is a cult.

    23. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by operagost · · Score: 2

      Or maybe it's because they've covered it already, and realize it's all extrapolation and speculation.

      No, Christians do not believe Islam started with Ishmael. Christian theologians are familiar with Islam's claim on Ishmael, but realize that the religion was created by Muhammad ibn Abdullah out of tribal legends and what he learned second-hand from Jews and Gnostics.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by operagost · · Score: 1

      What you're talking about has a basis in actual scripture, but was twisted by your prof (or your memory, or both). Jesus' example was actually regarding infidelity, which is something that many of us can more readily identify with (it can make it that much harder to be faithful to your spouse if you're allowing yourself to ogle hot chicks all the time). And ironically, Jesus said that it's what comes out of one's mouth, not what goes into it, that makes one unclean, so your prof's example is all that much more unsuitable.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    25. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2

      Catholics and Orthodox do not worship Mary. Worship is due to God alone. We venerate and honor Mary much like secular society venerates people like Lincoln and Gandhi.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    26. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The different between a cult and a religion is that in a cult the founder/leader knows it is all bs. In a religion the leader/founder is dead and the true believers never got the memo it was all BS and instead hold up the founder as an enlightened human with a unique and special connect to the whatever power the founder claimed knowledge of.

    27. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alright internet, this game needs to happen. Get to work! My Steam account is waiting.

    28. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Zoroaster?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    29. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      "A millennia"? And here I thought "millennia" was the plural of "millennium"....

      No a thousand years is about right. That is what there is evidence for, the rest is religion.

    30. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your idea of conceptual equivalence and synthesis is admirably as exacting as how a car engine is exactly the same as rocks and melted butter.

      Do you even try to avoid arbitrary irrationality?

    31. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All those religions are not as old as they claim to be. Roman Catholic church has reinvented itself many times over its existence. The Roman Catholic church only came into existence about 1000 years ago after the Great Schism. Islam isn't as old as the Mohammedan empire. Mohamed was more an Aryan Christian turned warlord who was used later on as the last prophet when a group of people created Islam. Some Muslim scholars claim that their religion starts with Abraham or even Adam. So while Christians tell themselves that Christianity evolved out of Judaism, some(/many/most) Muslims claim that both Judaism and Christianity were forgeries of their Koran. The funny thing is that the current Koran was only created in the 20th century and the current version of the book ' that never changed since the beginning of time' isn't even a century old (see Said Nurs ). Islam is supposed to be adjusted by a so called mujaddid as society progresses.

      The Islam apologists claim that the golden Islamic empire was an Islamic empire, but that isn't true. It was run by a Mohammedan barbarian (as in lesser culture of foreigners) elite that restored the peace between the many different cultures and religions in the region that started fighting each other after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. My idea after having read many works of secular historians is that the three main religions (Catholic/Orthodox/Islam) started all around 1000 years ago. With the creation of Islam as the only truth as an attempt to reunite the Mohammedan Empire the opposite happened as it meant the cultural and scientific downfall of the many prosperous smaller empires. For a long time the majority of the people in that Islamic world weren't even Muslim. It is only in the 20th century for example that Turkey got its Muslim population of 98% (while in 1900 30% were Christian...), which is for me another sign of the young age of Islam.
       
      The more the totalitarian version of Islam spread, the less scientists, writers and artists were allowed to say and do. It is not coincidence that with the spread of the totalitarian Islam, the renaissance in Italy started, after many people from the Islamic world fled to Europe. The dark ages in the Western hemisphere were caused around 1000 years ago. The destruction of the past destroyed the non Christian/Islamic history of Europe, North African and the Middle East. And even today the destruction of the past or even present hasn't stopped yet as the destruction comes in waves and is not always as successful.

      The modern Catholic church started in the 1960's and is even younger then the other two religions (Second Vatican Council). There is a big difference before and after this date in the Catholic world. A big difference for example is that my grand parents were not allowed to not believe, while my parents were allowed to make up their own mind which is what accelerated the secularization in Europe.

    32. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ironically, there was no such historical figure, Jesus of Christianity ever existing.

    33. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's slashdot, all these religions are just forks.

    34. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In my marriage, looking has always been OK, and it's been very solid. If a man finds it difficult to stick with his partner just from window-shopping, it wasn't that good a relationship in the first place.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    35. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      ...that Christianity is a relatively new religion in the Middle East, and that Judaism predates it by almost a millennium? How can that be?

      ...that Christianity^H^H^H^H^H^H Judaism is a relatively new religion in the Middle East, and that Judaism^H^H^H^H^H^H the Sumerian pantheon predates it by almost two millennia? How can that be?

      ...that Judaism^H^H^H^H^H^H the Sumerian pantheon is a relatively new religion in the Middle East, and that the Sumerian pantheon^H^H^H^H^H^H the GÃbekli Tepe religion predates it by almost seven millennia? How can that be?

      Lather, rinse, repeat. Pass another turtle, this one is buried under turtles.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    36. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      f this is actually true (I've never independently verified this), Jesus would be appalled at Christianity today since they've ditched most of the Jewish laws.

      I was under the impression that the disease of Christianity was invented by someone called Paul some decades after the alleged death of the alleged Jesus, to try to rationalise his psychotic imaginations. And he was very explicit that for someone following his version of mumbo-jumbo, it did not matter if they followed some of the laws of Judaism.

      Of course, he didn't address the really important question of whether you should rub woad into your belly button clockwise, or be impaled on a stake as a lesson to your heathen widdershins-rubbing friends.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    37. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by sjames · · Score: 1

      There's idly looking and then there's longing...

    38. Re:Are you trying to tell me... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Well, you've also got to remember that there were a ton of rabbis on the fringe of Judaism at that time. There were probably dozens of "Jesuses" who attracted followers, got the attention of the Romans (who were okay with Judaism being practiced as long as nobody got too noisy), and were executed only for their followers to disperse. If a historical Jesus did exist, he was like all these other rabbis except, after his death, his followers kept "following" him until this Judaism fringe group spawned its own religion entirely.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  6. Down with hateful Islamophobia by mi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With the rise of Islam in the 7th century, Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear

    A co-worker has complained to our manager, when I pointed a similar fact out during a conversation.

    The manager then reprimanded me pointing out the company's policy against "harassment" — even though no one on our team is a Muslim.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by swb · · Score: 4, Funny

      Clearly such "facts" are fake news and the byproduct of white nationalist agitation.

      By repeating such facts you inflame the sensibilities of everyone oppressed by the rise of fascist right-wing movements.

    2. Re: Down with hateful Islamophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dude, you are harassing Allah. Your coworker doesn't want to be caught in the wrath that is meant for you.

    3. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This definitely happened.

    4. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      Thanks for affirming his story.

      This is a common experience even though the left like to scoff us when we say anything.

    5. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your coworker is a virtue signalling moron. Best to avoid them since they can't handle facts like an adult. On the plus side at least you know who it is.

    6. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Tranzistors · · Score: 1

      A co-worker has complained to our manager, when I pointed a similar fact out during a conversation.

      Discussing religion in the work setting is dubious. Why would you want to do that anyway?

      The manager then reprimanded me pointing out the company's policy against "harassment"

      Whether the slap on the wrist was justified can only be judged if we had audio recording of the conversation.

      even though no one on our team is a Muslim.

      I'm not sure this makes the situation much better. If all white co-workers were discussing dem-lazy-ni**ers, management might still find it problematic.

    7. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Discussing religion in the work setting is dubious. Why would you want to do that anyway?
      We do not know who started the conversation, just that the poster was in it. If someone starts talking to you about religion, particularly if they are proselytizing, I'd say you can respond. You may disagree.

      > I'm not sure this makes the situation much better
      I'm sure it does. Harassment is not a victimless crime, where is the victim?

      > If all white co-workers were discussing dem-lazy-ni**ers, management might still find it problematic.
      They might, but that has nothing to do with anything the poster said. You are associating someone with racist views because you are a vicious sophist who cares nothing for the correctness of the argument.

      So go fuck yourself.

    8. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by operagost · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Those of us who actually value liberty need to be vigilant in not only rejecting racist thought, but in realizing that the enemy of everyone trying to resolve racial issues is the white, affluent leftist.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    9. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Tranzistors · · Score: 1

      We do not know who started the conversation

      That is kind of irrelevant. Getting yourself involved in discussions about religion ends well only if everyone agrees with each other already. I can kind of understand tabs vs spaces religious wars, since that impacts day-to-day work life. But getting drawn into discussions about 7h century events is not necessary, so why do it?

      Harassment is not a victimless crime, where is the victim?

      I'm not saying that whatever the OP said was legally harassment. I don't care about legalities because OP was not sued, not even a disciplinary action was taken. My point is that just because there is no victim doesn't mean that everything is fine. I made up the racism example to illustrate that even when there is no identifiable victim, such talk can still be problematic.

    10. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by mi · · Score: 1

      Discussing religion in the work setting is dubious. Why would you want to do that anyway?

      Dubious or not, the statement of fact is not harassment. You are blaming the victim.

      even though no one on our team is a Muslim.

      I'm not sure this makes the situation much better.

      Only a follower of a religion can claim being harassed, when the religion is portrayed negatively. Thus, there being no such followers within earshot may not make it "better", but it certainly means, no harassment has taken place.

      If all white co-workers were discussing dem-lazy-ni**ers, management might still find it problematic.

      They may find it "problematic" — a vague term. But it is not harassment, which is fairly well-defined.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    11. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Tranzistors · · Score: 1

      Dubious or not, the statement of fact is not harassment. You are blaming the victim.

      As I pointed out to AC in parallel thread, I don't care about legalities of the situation since there was no official sanction by the manager (at least that is how I read your comment). This is why I don't see you as a victim.

    12. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dubious or not, the statement of fact is not harassment.

      Actually, whether a statement is fact or not doesn't matter.

      "Nice hat/dress/hair/[other body part]" could be taken as harassment, even if the statement is true.

      It's not about facts, it's about how the other party feels

      Only a follower of a religion can claim being harassed

      Not true. See above, harassment is about feelings.

      harassment, which is fairly well-defined.

      Harassment is well-defined, but not in the way you think it is. It's not about stating facts or whether you are objectively part of an identified group. You just have to FEEL threatened/offended/harassed (if it goes to court you may have to prove it more rigorous, but you're talking about reporting it to HR)

      Yes, it does mean the easily bruised professional victim snowflakes can feel and then complain about "being harassed" all the time. And that's exactly what happens. On many sides ((Quoting the POTUS here ;p)

      I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm just saying that's what happens.

    13. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by mi · · Score: 1

      since there was no official sanction by the manager

      Three such complaints, however frivolous, and the manager has to escalate the matter to HR. The HR then begins to look into means and ways to get rid of the trouble — me.

      This is why I don't see you as a victim.

      Though I'm not (yet?) a victim of undue firing, I'm already a victim of undue reprimand.

      Now, on the one hand, it is the company's right to fire anybody for any reason — or without a reason at all. On the other hand, they may be forced to do it on pain of a governmental investigation triggered by that same Illiberal complaining of "hostile work environment".

      That is, we already have laws in place, which — contrary to the First Amendment — allow the government to control, even if indirectly, what is said. This is why I chose to complain about it publicly...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    14. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If you know everyone else in the conversation, and know that they're good with such discussion, you can get away with religious discussion among people who don't agree. Workplaces are not safe places for that. You're likely not to know people's religions, and very likely not to know how they feel about someone disagreeing with theirs.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    15. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Of course there's two sides to a story. I've encountered many people who play the victim and paint a compelling picture of victim hood (many I think even believe their own narrative) until you find out the full picture.

      Basically, I think there's likely more to your story than a casual discussion about history as your story doesn't add up.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    16. Re:Down with hateful Islamophobia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and once again, he defends racism.

  7. Klingon by cerberusss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if they'll find some Klingon texts.

    "Today, I am to do battle with this book. I will mercilessly stab the book with my pen, until it dies the final death. On the way to Kahless, it will bleed the appropriate text onto its page-like corpse."

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    1. Re:Klingon by istartedi · · Score: 1

      It is a good day to dye.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    2. Re:Klingon by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Today is a good day to die. I say we release into production.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    3. Re:Klingon by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the joke that "Klingons do not "release" software. Klingon software escapes, leaving a bloody trail of design engineers and quality assurance testers in its wake."

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  8. Cobol? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pascal?

    Modula-2?

    PL/I?

    Java?

    1. Re:Cobol? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Javascript?
      PHP?
      C++?
      Python?

      What are we doing?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Cobol? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RUST. Let's PRAY it's RUST!

    3. Re:Cobol? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      Javascript? PHP? C++? Python?

      What are we doing?

      It's the modern form of a palimpsest: a CVS repository showing all the different fad languages your PHB insisted the company codebase be rewritten in over the decades.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    4. Re:Cobol? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Oh... "lost languages".

      I miss coffee.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  9. really? by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    researchers have photographed 74 palimpsests, which boast 6,8000 pages between them

    That's a lot.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    1. Re:really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It was a pretty nice microprocessor too for a while. Then we got the 6,8010, 6,8020, 6,8030, and finally the 6,8040 on the A,miga.

    2. Re:really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amiga Lives !

      https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/09/new_amiga_to_land_in_late_2017/

  10. Jokes on the researchers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Really their algorithm is AI and has become sentient writing its own languages. Once they finally decode the language they will find its full of "your floppy disk is so small, even if you could upgrade to a hard disk, you still couldn't get an OS to boot with you." Jokes.

    1. Re:Jokes on the researchers by MiniMike · · Score: 2

      I thought the AIs mostly focused on 'Yo motherboard' jokes, like 'Yo motherboard so old it's only got ISA slots!' or 'Yo motherboards form factor is double-wide!'

    2. Re: Jokes on the researchers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yo motherboard so old, she has Jesus' beeper number stored in her memory

  11. You know it's going to happen... by magusxxx · · Score: 2, Funny

    Current Text: Jesus wept...
    Recovered Text: ...and said, "Damn those hot wings are spicy!"

    --
    Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
    1. Re:You know it's going to happen... by G00F · · Score: 0

      Think of all those priests when they find out the word was suppose to be celebrate not celibate...

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
  12. I thought this was about programming langues... by jonr · · Score: 1

    ...I was sure of it.

  13. same thing happening now by Chrisq · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With the rise of Islam in the 7th century, Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear,

    The same thing is happening now in Europe

    1. Re:same thing happening now by hackertourist · · Score: 1, Informative

      No it isn't. While secularization has reduced the number of Christians in Europe, the notion of "Christian cities dissappearing" due to Muslim immigration is preposterous. Stop spreading lies.

    2. Re:same thing happening now by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 2

      With the rise of Islam in the 7th century, Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear,

      The same thing is happening now in Europe

      Except in this case it's because the Christians are becoming atheists, and there's simply no critical mass (no pun intended) to fill Christian places of worship. I doubt there's anyone under 40 going to the kirk in the village I grew up in.

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    3. Re:same thing happening now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the religion of atheism isn't fundamentally as genocidal as islam, it just deliberately has the same effect.

    4. Re:same thing happening now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mmm, delicious tears from a triggered white nationalist snowflake! The best kind!

    5. Re:same thing happening now by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Again.

  14. Areyiutrying to tell me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that Islam, a sect that claims their god and worship methodology is perfect, took at least three times to get the house rules right?

  15. Lost Languages Represent Lost Knowledge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re: Lost Languages Represent Lost Knowledge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More affiliate spam.

    2. Re: Lost Languages Represent Lost Knowledge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, no. Check the link. No affiliate parameter, direct link to Amazon, copied from address bar when not logged in.

      Fuck creimer, if this is the kind of paranoia his bullshit hi-jinks result in.

      And the CBC has an affiliate program? News to me...

      It is a good book, that is all. (Never listened to the lecture, just read the book.)

  16. algorithm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was the marketing department on holiday, there are no algorithms anymore, only machine learning and AI?

  17. Stand alone complex ad hominem by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 2

    Because there's a difference between burning books at some points in time (which Christianity certainly did, as did many other religious and ideologies) and burning books being such a complete default that one should be "surprised" by it. In that context, just like some of the other Islam related comments in this thread, it is classic trolling, and if sincere says more about the people making the statements than it does about the groups they are making comments about.

    Says more what?

    This is a nice example of "innuendo from nothing". It implies that the people in a debate are somehow inferior, while saying exactly nothing about them.

    It's a cross between an ad-hominem attack and a stand-alone complex.

    Shouldn't we focus on the debate instead of the character of the debater?

    1. Re:Stand alone complex ad hominem by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      At a certain point, some classes of comments are transparently not serious attempts to have discussion or are people who are so divorced from reality that it really isn't in general worth the time or resources to spend that much time on them. Yes, I suppose one could point out to the person who is making comments about Christianity that in fact Christianity was responsible for the preservation of many texts from other religions and cultures and that of what we have of classical Greek and Roman literature is due purely to the preservation by monks, but why bother? Anyone who didn't sleep through high school history should know that. Similarly, one could respond to the people making anti-Islamic comments by pointing out that during much of the Middle Ages it was far easier to be a Jew or Christian in an Islamic area than it was to be a Jew or Muslim in a Christian area, but none of these people are seriously interested in those discussions.

    2. Re:Stand alone complex ad hominem by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      He already pointed out what it says about them in the first part of what he wrote. Succinctly.

      There is no innuendo. It is easy to ascertain his logic and viewpoint. He showed his work before making that statement.

      What seems blatantly obvious is that you are looking for an opportunity to be argumentative with this person because you side with the AC. What I can't tell is if you had that little voice in your head telling you your post is intellectually dishonest and you did it anyways out of some misguided "the ends justify the means" rationale, or if you are just so filter blind that you really believe what you wrote.

      Either way it is irrelevant. You may want to re-read The Prince or abandon your snide sideswipe attacks and take your opponents head on instead of trying to undermine their statements with appeals to non-existent logical fallacies.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    3. Re:Stand alone complex ad hominem by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      That seems unfair to Okian Warrior. While I do disagree with their position (and I do agree that I did show my work), I don't think their response is unreasonable, and I don't think jumping to conclusions about whether Okian agrees with the AC is warranted based on their post.

    4. Re:Stand alone complex ad hominem by thomst · · Score: 1

      JoshuaZ claimed:,/p>

      I suppose one could point out to the person who is making comments about Christianity that in fact Christianity was responsible for the preservation of many texts from other religions and cultures and that of what we have of classical Greek and Roman literature is due purely to the preservation by monks, but why bother?

      Sorry, but that's absolutely incorrect.

      While Christian monasteries did, in fact, collect and preserve many ancient texts, they are FAR from our only source for such materials. Just to name three off the top of my head, there are caches such as the Dead Sea scrolls, middens such as the famous one at Oxyrhynchus, and Islamic libraries such as the House of Wisdom in Baghdad. all of which preserved Greek and Roman Latin texts, exemplars of which were absent from European Christian collections.

      You don't seem to actually know what you're talking about ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    5. Re:Stand alone complex ad hominem by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      The Dead Sea Scrolls don't contain Greek or Roman texts so I'm not sure why you are mentioning that at all. The House of Wisdom ceased to exist in the 1200s, and in general the evidence there is that the focus was on what we would call scientific rather than literary works. It is true that many of the texts that we have from Christianity came to us through Muslim lands but they did at the end of the day come from Christian sources. As for your point about Oxyrhynchus and other middens, that's certainly a correct one, and my language was definitely overbroad, although even then the major texts came to us from Christian preservation. Moreover, many of the texts at Oxyrhynchus and in similar finds are day to day documents. But in so far as there are some texts at middens that fall into that category that we don't have from other sources, in that regard your criticism does have some validity. I should have said something like "largely" rather than "purely".

    6. Re: Stand alone complex ad hominem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a fucking idiot!

    7. Re:Stand alone complex ad hominem by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Modern day muslim lands, at any rate.

  18. Does this help? by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 1

    Why? Because it is? I know that you're a small minded individual unable to critically think but you might be shocked to learn...

    Does this address the points he made, or is it an attempt to derail the issue by getting into a shouting match?

    How does something like this get modded up?

    If we allow this sort of thing on our debate floor (and yes, this forum is ours) we will never have reasoned debate.

    It'll be trivial to take any subject out of view by derailing it.

    If we let it. Please don't mod this crap up.

    1. Re:Does this help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The time where nerdery and the otherwise technologically inclined cultures being dominated by critical thinkers has long past. People smelled money in the water and there is this ever rising tide of emotional reasoners entering.

      Just take a look at any article on here involving gender or politics. Whomever appeals to pathos or destroys the opposition's ethos wins. No logos required.The opposite of what two millennia of scholars have claimed create an accurate view of reality.

      Idocracy becomes us.

    2. Re:Does this help? by yuriklastalov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Please, your myth of the "Will to Truth" being widespread among any significant population is absurd. Humans have always been emotional reasoners. They will always be emotional reasoners. Your so-called bastions of critical thought and rationality are emotional reasoners, with their precious "rationality" chiming in every now and then.

      The sooner we quit pretending that there was some halcyon era of widespread critical thinking among any population the sooner we can actually move forward. You sit here and decry Idiocracy and can't even understand that people are, and have always been, largely "stupid" and think emotionally far more than "rationally". Your persistent belief that we're somehow losing ground to irrational, emotional thinking is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to puff up your own ego.

      "Oh look at me, I'm part of the Rational Critical Thinking Elite, bravely steering Humanity through the perils of ignorant emotional reasoning! Please, tell me more how amazing my faculties for reason are! Never mind my deep seated need for such reinforcement is itself emotional reasoning, it's irrelevant!"

      Get the fuck out of here with that shit, you're pathetic.

    3. Re:Does this help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get the fuck out of here with that shit, you're pathetic.

      Actually, you're the pathetic one. Rationality and emotionality varies and to claim it's all the same is pretty childish in itself. eg. It's usually the parasites (marketers and assorted others) who like to claim this to justify their own shitty behaviour.

  19. "With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by e_pluribus_funk · · Score: 0

    "...Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear."

    That tends to happen when the inhabitants are brutally murdered and the structures burned, as was usually the case.

    1. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      "...Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear." That tends to happen when the inhabitants are brutally murdered and the structures burned, as was usually the case.

      Oh, like in the Crusades when sacking Christians armies would often wipe out every inhabitant-whether Jewish, Muslim, or Christian-of a conquered city?

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by e_pluribus_funk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >Oh, like in the Crusades when sacking Christians armies would often wipe out every inhabitant-whether Jewish, Muslim, or Christian-of a conquered city?

      I know you are playing the moral equivalence game here, so it might be worthwhile for me to point out some salient facts:

      1) I am not Christian, so I do not excuse any specific or general barbarity on the part of the Crusades by Christians.
      2) Muslim conquests of the Levant and North Africa starting in the 7th Century triggered a three century long archeology dark age (also, a similar dark age throughout the Mediterranean). Populations collapsed from their Roman and post-Roman levels. The ecologies of the North Africa and Levant regions were destroyed, and to this day have yet to recover. Numerous Roman settlements were sacked and the inhabitants slaughtered, never to return. That's why you can go to Algeria or Libya or Syria and find intact Roman ruins today.
      3) Christianity didn't have the concept of Holy War until exposed to Islamic Jihad. The Crusades were basically a Christian reaction to the Muslim Jihad which had been attacking Christian lands for a solid 350 years before the first Crusade kicked off, during which millions were killed, and millions more sold into slavery. The time frame of these Christian sites "disappearing" was during the initial Muslim conquest, when Christians and Christianity had done nothing to Islam or Muslims except not converting when it was demanded by Mohammed and his acolytes. So they got murdered by him and his followers, their books and buildings burned, and their children sold into slavery.
      4) Despite all the supposed raping, plundering, and massacres at the hands of the Crusaders, they had almost no demographic impact on the region. Contrast that with the demographic impact of the initial Muslim conquests, and you come up with two different tales. Islam didn't fall into a dark age because the Crusades destroyed their cities, murdered their people, and destroyed their culture.

    3. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whataboutery

    4. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      "...Christian sites in the Sinai Desert began to disappear."

      That tends to happen when the inhabitants are brutally murdered and the structures burned, as was usually the case.

      They didn't. This is not an understatement. They started to disappear. Very slowly. Islam discriminated against Christians by making them pay taxes and making muslims tax free. That in turn meant muslims states before the crusades went out or their way to not harm Christians and Jews because they were their tax-payers. Of course over time people converted to get the priviledges of being Muslim at which point the priviledges went away and the harasment of minorities begin, but that is a lot more recent (the last couple of centuries).

    5. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if they didn't have the concept of holy war before, but God command some pretty bad stuff in the bible. If your god commands you to kill all of a people, is it a holy war or a holy genocide ?

    6. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by e_pluribus_funk · · Score: 1

      >They didn't. This is not an understatement. They started to disappear. Very slowly. Islam discriminated against Christians by making them pay taxes and making muslims tax free. It actually is an understatement.

      Islamic conquests were usually preceded by years of Islamic raiding, by which the Muslims would raid settlements with cavalry, disrupting food production and causing famine over successive years in order to weaken the state(s) under attack.

      Initial Muslim conquests usually had relatively benign treatment of the local population once conquered and once they acquiesced the Jizya. Prior to that, non-Muslims were fail game for murder and/or being captured and sold into slavery. This is what happened all across the Mediterranean once Islam reached the Med. This was the period during which coastal settlements all along the Mediterranean were burned to the ground, and you see the re-emergence of populations protected by hill forts.

      Additionally, Muslim conquerors initially weren't too bad on the local Christian population, but they tended to treat churches, priests, and nuns a *tad* bit more harshly.

      Lastly, Muslims came from somewhat nomadic, herding stock. They were completely unsuited to administer Roman and post-Roman agricultural areas, and had no problem letting their sheep and goat flocks overgraze Christian cropland, which resulted in ecological destruction of these areas over time and the inability of those areas to support the populations they had previously. Consider, Carthage used to support all of Rome and much of Italy. Today, Tunisia is a net food importer.

      Look, in a historic context, Islam of the 7th century wasn't any worse than it's contemporaries. In some modest ways, it was actually more liberal and more advanced (ironically, in the area of women's rights). But the archeological evidence is pretty clear - Europe (including Western Europe under the "barbarians") and North Africa and the Levant were flourishing right up until the breakout of Islam. After that, the end of large scale construction, burn back of settlements (so much so that there is a carbon sediment layer in many areas between 700 and 950), and the general decline in literacy and writings (exacerbated by the cutoff of papyrus from Egypt).

    7. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by epine · · Score: 1

      Hmm, hand-wavy tone, entirely unlike Wikipedia. What could possibly go wrong?

      Populations collapsed from their Roman and post-Roman levels.

      Wikipedia:

      The prolonged and escalating Byzantine–Sassanid wars of the 6th and 7th centuries and the recurring outbreaks of bubonic plague (Plague of Justinian) left both empires exhausted and vulnerable in the face of the sudden emergence and expansion of the Arabs.

      Now the stool has three legs of decline, and two of them are inside jobs.

    8. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by e_pluribus_funk · · Score: 1

      >Now the stool has three legs of decline, and two of them are inside jobs.

      Except the population decline was universal across the former Roman Empire - not just the ERE under control of Constantinople, and only started in earnest after the Arab conquests. Sure, Italy was devastated by the Gothic wars and the later Langobard invasion, but Spain under the Goths? Carthage under the Vandals? Egypt under the ERE? Gaul under the Franks? They were all prospering after the end of the barbarian invasions and the re-stabilization of Mediterranean trade.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      "Some historians such as Josiah C. Russell (1958) have suggested a total European population loss of 50 to 60 per cent between 541 and 700"

      Some of those deaths were from recurring plagues, but a lot of them were also due to the disruption by Arab invasion of the areas that formerly fed much of Roman Europe (i.e., Carthage, Egypt), and the follow-on raiding from Muslim pirates that destroyed undefended or poorly defended settlements along the Mediterranean coasts. Are you really contesting the ecological health of, say Tunisia in 800 vs. Carthage in 570 and the impact of the cessation of Mediterranean food trade on European populations?

    9. Re:"With the rise of Islam in the 7th century..." by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      Christianity didn't have the concept of Holy War until exposed to Islamic Jihad.

      Strange...I have distinct memories of reading of wars the Jews were commanded by God to wage, sometimes without mercy. At least some of these were described in the collection of books that became the Christian Bible.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  20. Re:No-Go Zones by hackertourist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No, they're not. I live in the middle of one of those purported no-go zones. I'm no unsafer than anywhere in the country.

  21. Hsns dahnns sjsjnshsiiitr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HA d dd duwinm ika sdi sk askk a ssiisks qwjw ala sknnf alsjk sjdnaklk

  22. Most like the lst arcane language of RAVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Often found in the fields of Britain.

  23. Another damned apostate by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Melted butter?!?!?

    Heretic! The butter is to be solid, fresh from the churn, lightly salted, then lovingly applied to the pasta by the worshiper. The only exception to this allowed by the canon is when The Sauce is to be applied, and yea, verily, it is still holy to use the butter with the sauce. Cheese also is holy, very holy. And I'm not talking about the Swiss; for that, we have to go back to the vat again.

    Ramen

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  24. Lost language by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it English?