Talk:World History Lecture One
|!||Due to the controversial nature of this article, it has been locked by the Administrators to prevent edit wars or vandalism.
Sysops, please do not unlock it without first consulting the protecting sysop.
It was fun reading the first part of the article. But how many lies can one man bare? How much explicit nonsense remains funny? After a while it really became scary. Do you realize that innocent kids might read this? They may even believe that this is the truth.That is dangerous. Kids have a right to know the truth, this article sums up about every ill formed historcal view ever created.
You call scientists biased, have you ever thought about your own bias? Believing in something because someone else beleives it, or because you 'feel it in your heart'. In fact you call me a liar. That is bad, since I am fully sincere. If there were a god, he'd punish you for being so wrecklessly ignorant. This is one of the few moments i wish there were a god.
You abuse history, that is a very bad thing to do. That is how wars start. That is what causes the death of too many innocent people.
Europe is filled with beautiful artworks painted on the walls of caves. The dating of these artworks through geological evidence, radiocarbon dating and other evidence clearly places these artworks (and the primitive civilizations that created them) at between 20 and 30 million years old. The artworks reveal complex hunting systems, complex social hierarchies and tool-making. Popo 23:33, Mar 14, 2007 (UTC)
- Bullflop. Not even atheist scientists claim the cave paintings are 20 to 30 million years old. That would be millions of years before the apes began walking upright, according to evolutionists. So not only are you wrong about the age of the earth, you can't even get the Darwinist claims right.--Conservateur 02:06, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
- And I believe they have found writing as far back as 5500 BC in Pakistan.--Jack 01:20, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
Oops, misread the article. It is 5500 years old, but nevertheless in Pakistan, not Iraq.--Jack 01:21, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
I am who I am
You repeat the "I am who I am" thing several times, but do you know any biblical hebrew? YHVH (and no, it's not YHWH, there's no W sound in hebrew, it's a vav) is an unpronounceable word. It's a combination of the past, present, and future forms of the verb "to be", therefore indicating that God is, always has been, and always will be. The tetragrammaton does NOT mean "I am who I am" or "I am that I am", "I am that I am" is simply God's response to Moses asking about his name.
- Your entry is unsigned, and I'd like to learn more. What are you saying YHVH means, in a simple translation???--Aschlafly 01:21, 27 March 2007 (EDT)
- How dare you introduce fact? Escpecially delving into linguistics and semantics. ;) NousEpirrhytos 15:08, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
Why is every featured article locked? Now I think I know
Ah, why bother, questions are never answered either. Still awaiting proof that Scopes had an effect on the 2000 Presidential election. NousEpirrhytos 15:19, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
- Uh, "to calculus (English)"...forgot about Liebniz? NousEpirrhytos 15:23, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
- Which one do you want to edit? I can unprotect it for you, if you have a good reason. --Ed Poor 15:27, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
- Liebniz was German...just change it to "English and German". Any idea what grade level this lecture was written for?
- I'll just post the factual errors here -- you decide what to correct. Thanks. NousEpirrhytos 15:38, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
- Any source for this? "People were probably smarter than they are today." Are we talking devolution here? NousEpirrhytos 16:34, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
- Glad to see calculus was fixed. Anyway, this: "Indus (IN-dus) Valley: 2900 BC" is incorrect -- it should read 3300 BC. NousEpirrhytos 16:37, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- This, "There is no reason to think that man existed for thousands of years without ever expressing himself in written form." is as stupid as saying that there's no good reason it took until 1903 for a heavier-than-air flying machine to be built. Andy, you really might want to do some research into linguistics and the nature and genesis of writing. Also see oral traditions and economics. NousEpirrhytos 16:43, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- Uh, no... "language ... [was]] ... created in ancient history". Language was created in pre-history, writing was created in ancient history. NousEpirrhytos 16:50, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- Uh, no "There is no reliable evidence of man existing before 3500 B.C." -- fossil evidence (oh yeah, that's bad)...hmmm, let's think about the cave pictures that we know are 35K years old? Come on, Andy, why are you lying to children? NousEpirrhytos 17:06, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- Well, what about those cave paintings. Do you know how the date 35K was arrived at?--Aschlafly 01:24, 27 March 2007 (EDT)
- Yep. Unless you can prove dating methods based on the half-life of certain isotopes to be wrong, you're standing on a crumbling shore. BTW: without looking it up, can you define "half-life"? NousEpirrhytos 18:59, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- The hwut? "Indo-Aryan language" NousEpirrhytos 17:07, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- "only about 300 million people existed in the world at the time of Christ, and extrapolating backwards further yields only one family in the year 3300 B.C" Can I see the math? What were your presumptions? NousEpirrhytos 17:13, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- Hmmmm..."Old trees never predate this time either; the oldest sequoias, which never die of old age, are only 4000 years old." But the flood was 1000 years earlier. No sequoias for 1000 years? Besides, sequoias typically live for only 2000-2200 years, dying most frequently of disease or lightning strikes. NousEpirrhytos 17:26, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- "No “civilization” has been found that is older than about 3000 B.C." And yet in the chart immediately following this statement we have Mesopotamia listed at 3500 BC. Hmmm. NousEpirrhytos 17:28, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
- People lived before 3000 B.C. It's the lack of civilizations surviving that I noted.--Aschlafly 01:24, 27 March 2007 (EDT)
- And yet Mesopotamia had a full-blown civilisation. What do you mean by surviving? NousEpirrhytos 18:57, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Cite please: "The dates of these ages are controversial, and historians have a bias for giving them older dates than proven by archaeology." NousEpirrhytos 17:29, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
I noticed one mistake (at least I'm pretty sure it is one). Isn't the 5th Century BC 500-401 not 401-500? The years went backwards until they reached 0, then started counting up. Jrssr5 14:07, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
I fixed it. MountainDew 17:19, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
Maybe it's just me, but how on earth is any of information trustworthy when no sources are mentioned anywhere? All that is written here could just as well be made up, because there's no way to verify it. --Jacobsen 17:30, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Is this a logic problem for the home schooled children: spot the inconsistencies in the dates? They just don't hang together. For instance, it claims the writing was invented 400 years before there was any trace of language; the first trace of civilisation was in 3000 B.C., but there are traces of the Mesopotamian civilisation in 3500 B.C., even though there was only one family in 3300 B.C. and so on. Incidentally, how was the age of the cuneiform tablet determined? Aloysius 08:22, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
Ancient Chinese Culture
I wasn't sure how the format of this class was going to address ancient cultures not basd in Mesopotamia, but I wanted to provide a link to this site under the Metropolitan Museum in NYC, which discusses early Chinese cultures making objects like flutes circa 7000–5700 B.C.:  --DinsdaleP 18:01, 17 January 2009 (EST)