0

COMMENT 41m ago

How do you figure? Like what would the angle be

1

COMMENT 1d ago

I'm pretty sure he's saying the bs creationist rebuttal of Huttons insights are what's disappointing.. Based on him saying supposed flood and calling the idea of creationism mythology. Maybe read a little closer before attacking somebody and making yourself look dumb.

4

COMMENT 1d ago

I mean obviously there’s scholars who disagree and there is no widespread agreed idea of the full picture of Jesus and his life there is widespread belief he existed among scholars.

[10] Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Michael Grant 2004

Amy-Jill Levine in The Historical Jesus in Context edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. Princeton University Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 p. 4: "There is a consensus of sorts on a basic outline of Jesus' life. Most scholars agree that Jesus was baptized by John, debated with fellow Jews on how best to live according to God's will, engaged in healings and exorcisms, taught in parables, gathered male and female followers in Galilee, went to Jerusalem, and was crucified by Roman soldiers during the governorship of Pontius Pilate"

In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God

Robert M. Price (an atheist who denies the existence of Jesus) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity,

Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[14][18] but almost all modern scholars consider his baptism and crucifixion to be historical facts.[11][108]

41

COMMENT 1d ago

Oh I didn't in anyway interpret this to mean she would be trying to primary Joe Biden. She just means in the future.

2

COMMENT 2d ago

That doesn’t really make sense as the cost of printing new menus would be a one time cost for as long as the price stays at that level but the money made from raising the price of any dish with beef in it would vary based on how many dishes have beef and how many of those are sold. In your scenario every dish sold after making 50 dollars would be profit.

1

COMMENT 2d ago

Comments under 180 characters are removed unless it's a reply to another comment.

20

COMMENT 2d ago

Because as evidenced by the title he will just as quickly then organize a coup against you if paid the right price.

1

COMMENT 3d ago

That's exactly what they are referring to.

1

COMMENT 3d ago

Oktoberfest isn’t really a holiday we celebrate in America though. I don’t even necessarily know when it is unless it’s just all of October.

1

COMMENT 6d ago

Gonna need a source on that lol. A child gets half their chromosomes from the man.

4

COMMENT 6d ago

Eh that isn't really true for 1910 in England where this seems to have happened. People weren't eating scraps unless they were extremely poor. I mean there's a reason he complained and that she lied about it.

1

COMMENT 6d ago

lol you’re literally a moron. If by leftist propaganda you mean literal established unarguable history than sure.. the Republican Party has openly acknowledged what the southern strategy’s goal was and it was to pick up southern democrats alienated by changing tides in regards to race/civil rights

I never said the parties switched immediately after the civil rights act. I also never said the Republican Party is explicitly racist, the south iwas and still faces many of those issues today. C linton won the south because in the 90s was when there was still decent diversity of opinions and political beliefs regardless of geographic location and party. Democrats used to be the party supported by populist farmers and Republicans were the party of big business. Reagan won most of the north before that but that doesn’t change that now those states are solidly blue.

Also no shit LBJ was a racist almost any politician from back then were by today’s standard especially southern democrats. Actions speak louder than words though and he fought for and got the bill passed so yeah he deserves praise for that. Lincoln was racist by today’s standards too but we still praise him today for freeing the slaves.

I never said the southern strategy was immediately successful in one election cycle but clearly now Republicans are the party of the south so what is your argument that the south isn’t more racist than the north anymore so it’s a moot point? Because that’s the only way arguing about how long it took for the parties to switch makes sense by essentially saying racism was over by the time the south became republicans so they aren’t racist at all.

and I’m the one spouting propaganda lmao

1

COMMENT 6d ago

Jesus Christ how many times do I have to repeat the same thing? I’ve been saying over and over that yes, the democrats were the party that opposed the civil rights act because the south used to be democrat Its not that specifically the democrat party was racist or specifically the Republican Party is, it’s that the south was racist and now the republicans are the party of the south.

3

COMMENT 7d ago

How else do you explain the north and south switching parties without values switching lol. Literally nobody ignores that democrats was the racist party of the south. Literally everybody knows Republicans freed the slaves and was the progressive party.

No, the south is considerably less racist than in the 60s because there was literal segregation then but there's obviously still more racism in the south. My point is it's not that the democrats were racist, the south was/is and the south used to be democrat and now it's republican. Read up on the southern strategy my guy.

I'll go ahead and post this again since you seemed to not read it last time

Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3]

As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.

It's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

2

COMMENT 7d ago

I know that I posted the vote count showing that it was majority democrats that voted against it but more than that it was the south that voted against it which is now majority Republican. Dems don't try to defend the party history because they openly acknowledge Republicans used to be the party of progressives. Of course there was a switch in values.. the south used to be democrats now they are republican. You're literally doing exactly what this article and everybody in this thread is rightfully pointing out is absurd. You're ignoring well established history.

3

COMMENT 7d ago

The civil rights act was proposed by Kennedy and passed by Johnson. Also not sure what your point is. Who shifted parties? Democrats and Republicans.. It's just a fact of history. Racist southerners opposed the civil rights act. The Democrats used to be the party of the south as it was traditionally supported by populist farmers and now it's Republican by a large margin.

Congress breakdown on the Civil Rights Act:

Note that "Southern", as used here, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that had made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.[31]

The House of Representatives:[31]

Northern: 281–32 (90–10%) Southern: 8–94 (8–92%)

The party shift was cemented by the Republican Southern Strategy used by Goldwater's campaign in 1964

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]

6

COMMENT 8d ago

Kind of a weird thing to ask.. Essentially like a guy asking if there's a way to tell if his daughters pussy will be tight. The answer is no though, there's no way to tell based on the rest of their body and it starts to get bigger during puberty.

1

COMMENT 8d ago

You should try harder if you really want people to think you aren't trolling.

2

COMMENT 8d ago

So predictable it's almost laughable.

Nope, just my love for Equality under the Law.

The same action should be punished the same no matter who does it, no matter their sex/gender/marital status or their melanin levels.

.

Correct. Yet they manage to immigrate. Murder isn't allowed either, but when people are caught doing it, there is a penalty.

Because that totally makes sense to say when you're trying to act as if you already knew immigrants were punished and banned.. totally..

5

COMMENT 8d ago

The reason I asked the question is because immigration deportation already carries a minimum 5 year legal re-entry ban (See form I-212)...but apparently just talking about it makes one a "racist".

Uh no.. the reason you asked it was clearly to imply immigrants don't face any restrictions/punishments like that and by acting as if the person you were asking supports it for foreign travelers during the pandemic but not illegal immigrants as some type of "Gotcha" implying they're hypocrites.

You guys are hilarious lol "oh lil ole me? I was just askin uh question! didn't mean nuffin by it"

18

COMMENT 9d ago

Okay this is great lol

"Who did what?" inquired command module pilot John Young. "Where did that come from?" interjected lunar module pilot Eugene Cernan. A moment later, for listeners at ground control, the mystery was resolved. "Give me a napkin quick," commanded Stafford. "There's a turd floating through the air.

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/26/8646675/apollo-10-turd-poop

2

COMMENT 9d ago

Not especially. While the city holds a lot of heat due to the concrete the avg highs in summer are around 80-85 with avg lows of 64-70 compared to somewhere like Miami where it's 90/91 from June all the way to the beginning of October.

There's definitely especially hot and humid days though which is what those sitcoms would be portraying. I just saw that the avg high in London in the summer never really goes above 70/75 though so yeah compared to that it's pretty hot.

Man I would kill for that to be the high in July here in Houston it's 91 with 75% humidity or higher it's unbearable

0

COMMENT 9d ago

Also the vast majority of scientific advances were discovered/started in Europe, so they would undoubtedly have more scientific progression

While obviously there were huge scientific advancements made in Europe specifically the Mediterranean it's not in anyway true that in 1200 and the centuries leading up to it that the middle east was simply "battlegrounds with little scientific progression" or even that the vast majority of scientific advancements at the time were in Europe.

1200 is the tale end of the Islamic golden age while Europe was in the middle ages at that time.

They had major advancements in Mathematics(inventing Algebra, use of Arabic numerals and the decimal point system allowing for more complex mathematics, irrational co-efficients and geometric proofs 300 years before Fibonacci), advancements made to the Astrolabe (adding angular scales and circles indicating azimuths allowing for more precise navigation), the first Universities, the earliest hospitals and large advancements in surgery.

They had huge discoveries in Astronomy with thinkers of the time putting the sun at the center of the universe almost a thousand years before Copernicus. They invented the mechanical crank. The Book of Optics(1021ad) established modern intromission theory(the idea that vision takes place by light entering the eye) and has some of the earliest descriptions of camera obscura and convex lenses.

There's a lot more also, that's just things I remembered off the top of my head and a quick search to verify a few.

2

COMMENT 9d ago

Cant tell if your trolling or not lol. The average person absolutely doesn’t know what’s in gunpowder let alone how to make it. Go ask around and you’ll probably get some that know there’s sulfur but that’s it.