Ask The Meth anything about pre-historic lyfe thread.

[The Methematician]

Since there're some rabid dogs here behind the glory hole adn I cant stick my dick into it ... I'll do it here.

Originally Posted by SHARP

Who is "he"?

You fucking tard. Have you ever herd of the adage that histories are written by the victors ?????

Have fucking you ????

Obviously the "his" meant HE whose in charge of the power that be, whoever he is that emerge victorious from the war. History is HIS stories.

Everyone who knows their shit disagrees with you...

then they dont know shit about their shit.

Think about what you just posted.
No, just think about it for a second - you just postulated that the oldest evidence of civilization we have "doesn't tell us anything"...
Ya' know what, you're either a complete moron that shouldn't even be posting in this thread, or a troll...

No they didnt. All we "knew" about them and the prehistoric people that made them are just speculations. Every pieces of knowledge derived from these artifacts are only our assumptions and speculations ... at best their just educated guesses.

But if you think speculations and guesses are sufficient and work just as good as FACTS .... then good for you.

...Which would be accurately depicting our history, as it did actually happen!

Explain ... just how a picture of a plane slamming into WTC depicts our history ???? The story of what happened in the past ????

What story?

It depicted an event, true. A plane did slammed into WTC. But that's not history. That pict will never be able to tell us, or alien civilization who come to earth in year 336655AD about our history. Theres no history in it.

The alien, who upon seeing these picts in a cave ..... might SPECULATE that :

[1] A drinking and flying incident had taken place. Some drunk pilots had driven their plane into a building.

[2] Some 14year old hackers had hacked into the plane's fly by wire or auto system and directed it into the buildings.

[3] Acts of a deranged, suicidal and disgruntled recently divorced pilot.

And all these speculations would be all pretty reasonable and logical. But that's not OUR HISTORY .... IS IT ?????

The power that be today made it clear that it was OSAMA BIN LADEN AND HIS BUDDIES THAT WAS BEHIND IT. THE MAN IN CHARGE OF THE POWER THAT BE TODAY SAYS THAT'S THE STORY.

So that's our official history.

Get your head screwed on straight or GTFO; if you aren't capable of understanding that the "prehistoric" period relates to the time before anyone got the bright idea to consciously leave their mark, then you have no place in this thread!

Artifacts arent histories you dumbfuck.

Here's a little secret for ya' -everything those that came before us left behind, is history...

Lol ...

[1] pls go dick a dicktionary and dont come till you've found the proper meaning of the word "history".

[2] and no. Thoese piece of shits that we left behind arent histories until we .... or someone who came after us in the future put a story, a speculation or some wild or educated guesses into it.

Without that ... what we left behind are nothing but a pile of shit.

...And right now there's people smarter than you, researching it and contributing to our global knowledge bank...

And you are NONE of those aforementioned people so just STFU.

You come off more and more as a troll...

Yea ... brilliant. Use the troll card.

Originally Posted by Ebola

Pre-historic life is pr. definition BEFORE history and with emphazis on LIFE, which is why it was posted (and allowed) in this section.
Discussion about the LIFE belongs here (FF&GL) but discussion specifically on History does not! There is a dedicated forum for that.

Yes .... which we cant get into till we had clearly defined what is and is not "pre-historic". You cant discuss and make a thread to discuss pre-historic life if cant tell the distinction of when is and when its not pre-historic period since you cant tell which LIFE belongs to the pre-historic part and which LIFE belongs to post-historic period.

Vizer attempted to talk about prehistoric life. But what life belongs to which period ??? We wont be able to tell till we'd successfully define which life, from what period belong to pre-history.

Most of the questions were on topic (related to life, life-forms etc.), history is not. There is no double standard.

You want me to screencap it and circle out the posts that dwells in neither history or life ??? Do you want that ????

I have answered nothing in this thread, only asked a single question. I really don´t understand where you are comming from...

You had attempted to define what is and is not pre-historic in the first paragraph of your post, you answered my question meant for Vizer you answered.

His thread, yes. But my duty to keep the section clean of off topic posts. That is not Viziers call. If any of you disagree you are welcome to take it up with Fish or some other admin.

If he ... Vizer, the maker of the topic at hand didnt think its off-topic then its not off-topic and there's nothing for you to clean up other than your rampant phaggottry.

So just go suck your own dick. I'll say please.

Until then I will continue to monitor the thread and post warnings or infractions as appropriate.

Enjoy!

Now let me see how you argue without the cocoon of mod powers around you.

Come. Argue. I want to see you doing it.

[King of the world]

SHARP truly is the sperglord. I always glide over his sperg laced posts. Other than the occassional post in DIY, he has never posted anything correct, intelligent or engaging. Even then I'd rather get my advice elsewhere, without the whiny undertones as if the person writing it hates their life and knows it sucks.

[The Methematician]

Originally Posted by King of the world

SHARP truly is the sperglord. I always glide over his sperg laced posts.

The thing is that he has mod tools that made sure you cant glide thru him.

You cant glide thru another 3pts in your fract sheet.

[SHARP]

Originally Posted by The Methematician

You fucking tard. Have you ever herd of the adage that histories are written by the victors ?????

Yup, although it doesn't quite fit right here...

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Obviously the "his" meant HE whose in charge of the power that be, whoever he is that emerge victorious from the war. History is HIS stories.

If that's the way you think, you must be an extremely simple minded person, but I guess I already knew that, let me break it down for you, I'll try to keep it simple...

No, "History" in the sense in which it is used in the thread you posted in, doesn't concern any philosophical or etymological meanings but purely chronological and archaeological.

Originally Posted by The Methematician

then they dont know shit about their shit.

Yes, that's right, diss the pro's "cuz' you're so much smarter than all of them combined"...
Just face it, you're a dunce...

Originally Posted by The Methematician

No they didnt. All we "knew" about them and the prehistoric people that made them are just speculations. Every pieces of knowledge derived from these artifacts are only our assumptions and speculations ... at best their just educated guesses.

I'd advice you to try reading a book or two on the subject, I'd imagine you could perhaps find one that was meant for children, you know, one with a lot of pictures and not too many difficult multi-syllable words...

Originally Posted by The Methematician

But if you think speculations and guesses are sufficient and work just as good as FACTS .... then good for you.

You know what, I'll take the word of someone who's spent a couple of decades or more researching, over the word of some moron that happens to (unfortunately) have access to a computer with an Internet connection any day.
Try learning a bit more about the world you live in, and grow a little older as well, then you just might not come off as a blundering idiot (yes, I do know where the word "idiot" comes from)

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Explain ... just how a picture of a plane slamming into WTC depicts our history ???? The story of what happened in the past ????

You actually said it yourself, you're simply too dumb to realize it:

When you see a picture of a plane slamming into a building, the first thought that should come to that lump o' stupidity you try to pass off as "a head", should be "a plane probably slammed into that building"...

In much the same way you should be able to figure out what's going on in the following picture:



Yup, "someone got killed"...

And this one:



Yup, "two dogs fought"...

And this one:



"People fought, and some of them did it from horse back"...

If you can't even think that far, you are most likely the stupidest person I have ever had the misfortune to come across on the Net, and that says quite a deal...

Originally Posted by The Methematician

It depicted an event, true. A plane did slammed into WTC. But that's not history. That pict will never be able to tell us, or alien civilization who come to earth in year 336655AD about our history. Theres no history in it.

You're missing the point completely, our history is documented in all the marks we leave behind, if the opposite was the truth we wouldn't be able to say jack shit about our past (which isn't the case), and I'd say the murder investigators would have a hell of lot harder job solving murders, just to use an example I hope you can wrap your brain around...

Originally Posted by The Methematician

The alien, who upon seeing these picts in a cave ..... might SPECULATE that :

[1] A drinking and flying incident had taken place. Some drunk pilots had driven their plane into a building.

[2] Some 14year old hackers had hacked into the plane's fly by wire or auto system and directed it into the buildings.

[3] Acts of a deranged, suicidal and disgruntled recently divorced pilot.

And all these speculations would be all pretty reasonable and logical. But that's not OUR HISTORY .... IS IT ?????

The power that be today made it clear that it was OSAMA BIN LADEN AND HIS BUDDIES THAT WAS BEHIND IT. THE MAN IN CHARGE OF THE POWER THAT BE TODAY SAYS THAT'S THE STORY.

So that's our official history.

Come back when you turn 15.

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Artifacts arent histories you dumbfuck.

You clearly do not understand the importance of "shit we dig out of the ground, etc."...
If you were simply uninformed but otherwise mellow I wouldn't have a problem with you, but the fact that you mouth off without having even a rudimentary understanding of what you're talking about, is worth noting short of ridicule.

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Lol ...

[1] pls go dick a dicktionary and dont come till you've found the proper meaning of the word "history".

[2] and no. Thoese piece of shits that we left behind arent histories until we .... or someone who came after us in the future put a story, a speculation or some wild or educated guesses into it.

Without that ... what we left behind are nothing but a pile of shit.

As long as you're too stubborn and/or stupid to accept that archaeological findings are paramount in determining our past, I can't help you.

Originally Posted by The Methematician

And you are NONE of those aforementioned people so just STFU.

True, but so far I'm a hell of a lot better informed than you.

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Yea ... brilliant. Use the troll card.

I will, trust me!
Nearly every time I come across such a load of shit I'll give the perpetrator an easy way out by playing the Troll Card - if he or she comes back with more of the same crap in the same thread, I have no other option than to perceive them as trolls, on the other hand they could just leave the thread and they'd drop off the radar...
Then there's the stupid ones, they go make a thread here...

[Daily]

So it seems like all SHARP has done is retort back with petty insults.

[Ebola]

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Yes .... which we cant get into till we had clearly defined what is and is not "pre-historic". You cant discuss and make a thread to discuss pre-historic life if cant tell the distinction of when is and when its not pre-historic period since you cant tell which LIFE belongs to the pre-historic part and which LIFE belongs to post-historic period.

Vizier answered your question quite simply:

Prehistory is any time before recorded history.

That you then insist on wasting time and space on a discussion about who´s recorded history doesn´t change the beginning of history or make the discussion any more valid. As I see it you are either:
1. Purposly trying to throw the thread off track.
or
2. Simply not able to understand that "any time before recorded history" means any time before recorded history... (who´s history is irrelevant as it is any time before).

Vizer attempted to talk about prehistoric life. But what life belongs to which period ??? We wont be able to tell till we'd successfully define which life, from what period belong to pre-history.

Vizier was (and is) doing fine; no attempt there. The strange thing is that you were the only one having a problem with definitions. All the previous posters seemed to understand quite easily. Might be they took the time to read what the definition was before posting (or used their brains)...

You want me to screencap it and circle out the posts that dwells in neither history or life ??? Do you want that ????

Ehh, no why would I want that?? But if you want to spend time on it, you are welcome to link the posts that did not deal with pre-history

You had attempted to define what is and is not pre-historic in the first paragraph of your post, you answered my question meant for Vizer you answered.

No, I did not Vizier did that. And I didn´t answer either; I told to take the history discussion elsewhere... Hardly an answer.

If he ... Vizer, the maker of the topic at hand didnt think its off-topic then its not off-topic and there's nothing for you to clean up other than your rampant phaggottry.

What OP thinks is off topic or not is hardly relevant. OP could in theory have started an off topic thread and that would be dealt with in the same way as you. There are no double standards here...

So just go suck your own dick. I'll say please.

That level of "argumentation" really makes me shiver... ohhhh.

Now let me see how you argue without the cocoon of mod powers around you.

Argue?? What do you want to argue? Off topic posting or definition of history?
If you actually wanted my definition of history, or to debate it, I guess you would have followed my link in the thread. That you didn´t proves to me that you were indeed just trolling with no interest in definition of history.

Come. Argue. I want to see you doing it.

Argue for the sake of the argument? I´m really badly motivated when it comes to such things, sorry. Mayby if you throw in a cookie as a prize?

[King of the world]

Originally Posted by Daily

So it seems like all SHARP has done is retort back with petty insults.

And that is exactly why I, King of the World, have crowned him as the sperglord.

[The Methematician]

Originally Posted by SHARP

Yup, although it doesn't quite fit right here...

Really ???? I'll show you how it does.

Originally Posted by SHARP

If that's the way you think, you must be an extremely simple minded person, but I guess I already knew that, let me break it down for you, I'll try to keep it simple...

YESS .... becos the most LOGICAL thinking is often the simplest. See below.

Originally Posted by SHARP

No, "History" in the sense in which it is used in the thread you posted in, doesn't concern any philosophical or etymological meanings but purely chronological and archaeological.

True and true, which is what a single piece of artifact or a lone cave painting can not give us ....

THE CHRONOLOGICAL order of things that happened.

Originally Posted by SHARP

Yes, that's right, diss the pro's "cuz' you're so much smarter than all of them combined"...
Just face it, you're a dunce...

OOOOOO .... so just becos their called the "pros" they and everything they said instantly and automatically became credible and are facts ?????

This is why most kids get mollested by their priests and profs .... you kno ????

Originally Posted by SHARP

I'd advice you to try reading a book or two on the subject, I'd imagine you could perhaps find one that was meant for children, you know, one with a lot of pictures and not too many difficult multi-syllable words...

YESS I have had.

Originally Posted by SHARP

You know what, I'll take the word of someone who's spent a couple of decades or more researching, over the word of some moron that happens to (unfortunately) have access to a computer with an Internet connection any day.

This tells me that your :

[a] naive.

[b] lacks critical thinking and thinks that just becos their got decades involved "researches" they instantly became credible authority figure.

[c] are unable to think for yourself other than those that had been "taught" into your fregile little naive mind.

[d] not smart enough to realize thet people who had spent decades researching these things too can have internet access and appear as online as some anonymous asshole.

[e] a sheeple.

Originally Posted by SHARP

Try learning a bit more about the world you live in, and grow a little older as well, then you just might not come off as a blundering idiot (yes, I do know where the word "idiot" comes from)

Well .... the same can be said about you. And your retarded family.

Originally Posted by SHARP

You actually said it yourself, you're simply too dumb to realize it:

When you see a picture of a plane slamming into a building, the first thought that should come to that lump o' stupidity you try to pass off as "a head", should be "a plane probably slammed into that building"...

In much the same way you should be able to figure out what's going on in the following picture:



Yup, "someone got killed"...

Yess ... It seems like someone got shot at. But it also seemed like he was having a heart attack. There's no history here. As an alien Chinaman, I have no idea who he was .... and who who those people with funny hats were.

There's no history here becos I have no idea of who they're, what took place or when it took place.

So here this pict of someone got killed / someone having a heart attack certainly cant tell me shit about history and certainly isnt historical IN ITSELF.

I still need written texts to give me a brief history, a narration of some kind. And I wont even know its an execution if it wasnt for the img title ...

Originally Posted by SHARP

And this one:



Yup, "two dogs fought"...

Honestly I dont even know what it was other than two dogs biting each other ....

Originally Posted by SHARP

And this one:



"People fought, and some of them did it from horse back"...

Ohk ho ho ho ... of all your retardation this takes the cake ... its so retarded on so many level I honestly don't know where to start. So Ill start with the easiest 1st.

[1] Due to the proportion of the "horse-like" thingy and and the man .... I'd have to say it seems like someone's fought from a ponyback.

But it seems more likely its a depiction of a man whose ass had been rammed into by an ass.

Ok. Srs bns :

[2] lets see what wikipedia says about The Bayeux Tapes.

Originally Posted by wikipedia

The earliest known written reference to the tapestry is a 1476 inventory of Bayeux Cathedral,[1] but its origins have been the subject of much speculation and controversy.

[READ : SPECULATION !!!!]

French legend maintained the tapestry was commissioned and created by Queen Matilda, William the Conqueror's wife, and her ladies-in-waiting. Indeed, in France it is occasionally known as "La Tapisserie de la Reine Mathilde" (Tapestry of Queen Matilda). However, scholarly analysis [2] in the 20th century concluded it probably was commissioned by William's half-brother, Bishop Odo. The reasons for the Odo commission theory include: 1) three of the bishop's followers mentioned in the Domesday Book appear on the tapestry; 2) it was found in Bayeux Cathedral, built by Odo; and 3) it may have been commissioned at the same time as the cathedral's construction in the 1070s, possibly completed by 1077 in time for display on the cathedral's dedication.

[READ : UNPROVEN ALLEGATIONS, RAMPANT SPECULATIONS ... AND HYPOTHESESES

Also ... all your Bayeux Tapes did was PROVE ME CORRECT. Like I said in my earlier posts .... histories are HIS Stories ... the stories of the man in charge of the power that be.

In the case of The Bayeux Tapes ... the man in charge was KIng Harold .... and the Bayeux tapes was CLEARLY an attempt of HIS, or parties affiliated to HIM to propagate and disseminate HIS version of story to the masses of HIS day.

THE BAYEUX TAPES WERE HIS VERSION OF STORY.

Originally Posted by SHARP

If you can't even think that far, you are most likely the stupidest person I have ever had the misfortune to come across on the Net, and that says quite a deal...

The ability to think far DOES NOT equal the ability to think logically .....

Originally Posted by SHARP

You're missing the point completely, our history is documented in all the marks we leave behind,

[1] Oh yea ???? I would like to hear your telling me the "documented" things are in a fragment of porcelain bowl and a bullet hole in a wall in East Germany.

It seems like you've confused yourself with firsthanded account and secondhanded guesses and theories and speculation.

By the way ..... the marks that we left behind can only and ONLY provide an insights to our world when those who had came after us are able to analyze them and form a logical conclusion from their analysises.

They documented nothing by themselves.

Originally Posted by SHARP

if the opposite was the truth we wouldn't be able to say jack shit about our past (which isn't the case),

Most shit we knew about our past that we know today were either written by those who lived in it OR it's just mere speculation of the people living in the present ....

Like your Bayeux Tapes.

So it all leads back to where we begin : the where's and where'nt pre-history ....

Originally Posted by SHARP

and I'd say the murder investigators would have a hell of lot harder job solving murders, just to use an example I hope you can wrap your brain around...

NO ... no just no. There's a difference between learning about a guys suicide from reading HIS SUICIDE NOTES and learning it from a bunch of forensics experts and psychologists as they speculate why and how this guy'd killed himself.

Originally Posted by SHARP

Come back when you turn 15.

I'd give anyhting to go back to being 15. ANYTHING.

Originally Posted by SHARP

You clearly do not understand the importance of "shit we dig out of the ground, etc."...
If you were simply uninformed but otherwise mellow I wouldn't have a problem with you, but the fact that you mouth off without having even a rudimentary understanding of what you're talking about, is worth noting short of ridicule.

And you clearly put too much importance in these shits that you dig out of the ground .....

Originally Posted by SHARP

As long as you're too stubborn and/or stupid to accept that archaeological findings are paramount in determining our past, I can't help you.

Whats the point of knowing thy past and yet are unable to determine your future ?????

Originally Posted by SHARP

True, but so far I'm a hell of a lot better informed than you.

I hope this thread gets achieved so that your posts would be able to provide documented evidences of your retardation to posters of the future ....

P/S : I hope your name's not Marcus cos that's a really gheyassed name ....