You just answered your own question, dick. I have never said a single thing against Christians or Christianity on this board or elsewhere. I have said things against fake or anti-Christian hypocrites like yourself but you do not comprise "all Christians." In fact you're outnumbered. Most Christians actually try to follow the teachings of Christ rather than use the Church as an excuse for bigotry, war or general divisiveness, like you do. And yet you continually accuse me of being anti-Christian. You're damned right I'm defensive. You've been trolling this board (and me) for years now with no repercussion, calling me anti-Christian, pro-terrorist and a drunk, trying with all your might to provoke me into a banning as you've done with various other good posters. You're a blight on this board. And you have as much grounds to say I'm anti-Christian as I do to say you're an anti-Semite that believes the Holocaust never happened.
Thanks, it's always a great way to ensure laughs and a string of profanity from Batman. Sunday mornings/early afternoons are typically irritable times for him...
watching Batman Jones try to wiggle and squirm out of his "2:00am Saturday night posts" is high comedy, indeed.
Hi, liar. I wasn't drunk last night, nor am I most of the time you accuse me of it. But that's what you've got. Bogus accusations of drunkenness and cartoon pictures. How can I argue with that kind of debating skill? I surrender.
Actually the way to ensure an angry reaction from me is to constantly accuse me of heinous things like being anti-Christian or pro-terrorist. It's the definition of trolling.
Actually, trolling is what you did on the 2nd page of this thread by interrupting a discussion of Jesus' race to incite Christians by calling them bigots and hypocrites. That my friend is CLASSIC TROLLING.
I think we need to start a seperate Batman Jones-Trader Jorge thread so when one of the two decides to pick a fight with the other based on something in a thread, they can retire there to yell at each other without derailing the source thread. In fact the Genographic project has specifically adressed the specific issues you speak of and is not involving itself with pharmacutical companies and beyond it's involvement with IBM for computational power only is being sponsored by nonprofit foundations. I understand that it may not be perfect and it may never be completed, but it has addressed many of the ethics issues that surounded the human genome diversity project. I understand that some groups are protesting the project on the basis that it involves some of the members who were part of the earlier project. This strikes me as knee-jerk. The first project was flawed because geneticists, who care about genetics, made a deal with devil to get funding. It failed. They have returned with funding from a more philanthropic source. These geneticists really are only interested in discovery and publishing. National Geographic has always been a generally philanthropic group by the standards of it's time dating back to the 19th century (I have some of the issues from the early 20th century and while they may often sound provencial, by today's standards, they were always interested in knowledge for knowledge's sake. All proceeds from the sale of self-testing kits will be ploughed into a Legacy Fund to be spent on cultural preservation projects nominated by indigenous communities and the results will be freely available to everybody. Furthermore, even if the project isn't completed in an ideal way because of misguided anti-imperialistic sentiments, any reasonable amount of additional genetic data will be beneficial. The process of mapping genetic populations, as is the case for evolutionary genetics, will never be able to map all the data points with anything approaching 100% certanty because so much is gone forever. Therefore any incremental advancement of knowledge, no matter how small, is worthwhile. As an example of something that I don't think that even the best information could provide, I would look at the origin of Basque peoples in Spain. Both the widespread expansion and forced conformity of the Roman Empire and the later spread of the Germanic tribes resulted in the dissolution of much genetic data. Neither geneticists nor linguists have been able to say more than the Basque are an isolated remnant of some cultural group that existed seperately from Celts, Gauls, Romans, or Germanic tribes. Another example would be the people who were known as "Picts". Though there is a reasonable case to be made for Celtic origins, the Picts were integrated or destroyed by the numerous peoples who invaded the area so no genetic evidence will ever be forthcoming. Also, I think there is some question about the Etruscan culture that existed before Romulus and the rape of the Sabine Women. I'm sure there are lost to history numerous cultural and genetic subpopulations in places like India where there was a significant history of multiple cultures, or in the pre-Colombian Americas where civilizations like the Inca swallowed and assimilated neighbors, but that doesn't really matter. The project is interested in hashing out more of the broad strokes as opposed to the details in every line. Nobody will ever be able to make claims about the course of evolution with 100% certanty. Over the years, understandings based on incomplete information have been reversed as new information became clear. That, however, doesn't stop people from trying to aquire more information or mean that that information is worthless.
Jorge, I'm generally not a tattletale like you are. I've reported maybe two or three posts in about six years here while you're well known for serial tattling. But I'm done with your troll war on this board. I know the prescribed response to your harassment is to laugh it off and not get swept up in it, but that's easier said than done after years of constant accusations of downright heinous ideas and behavior. Yeah, you succeeded in pissing me off. It's not that hard to do, but congratulations anyway. You're a really, really good "psychological warrior," er, troll. I've reported you and the mods can do with that what they will.
For the record Otto, I was directly responding to an on-topic post in this thread when Jorge came a'trolling. It won't happen again. I'm not talking to him anymore. Sorry for the diversion.
I'm convinced we should hold a sort of Clutch BBS Survivor Competition. There are many posters that I'd like to put on an island :] that being said this thread has been
In defense of the mideval portrait painters of Jesus, most of them didn't exactly have a clear understanding of race and geographics. Beyond mythical "moors" whom they may or may not have seen first hand, everybody looked like the anglo Jesus in the painting. In most of the Russian paintings of Jesus that I have seen, for instance, he almost looks like a cross between the traditional Jesus and Rasputin. By the time that people had a better handle on this stuff, the "common image" of Jesus had already been established in the Church. Once that occured, the only reason that somebody would change the image would be to make a point or to attempt a correction or something else that would distract from the essential religious nature of most of these works.
Honestly, I don't really mind. I've had similar battles myself with other posters. I've just noticed it in the last couple of threads that I've been interested in, and when you get going at each other you are truely prodigious writers. By the time you take a break, you've typed two or three pages between the two of you. It is at any rate an impressive display of conviction. I just worry that after that much typing by the two of you the original continuity of the discussion is broken. But my remarks were only made in idle jest, so flame away. IMHO, it's more healthy to expend the accumulated vitrol rather than trying to pretend that the mutual anoyance doesn't exist.
