what we call science, the knowledge gained from the scientific method, is less than 700 years old. Before that it truly was philosophy, not based on experimental verification.

so ptolemy, scholemy

Bullshit. Your bias is showing. How could mankind have built the monumental architecture without experimentation? What about metallurgy?

What you just did there is called "Western Chauvinism".. The "West" did not "invent" the scientific method, there was "science" for thousands of years before there was modernish Europe. There are still so many "wonders" of the past that still can't be replicated today, that you sound silly. To this day, modern science can't replicate the Pyramids at Giza, or even the standing Obelisks of Aksum in Ethiopia. In Ethiopia there is the single largest piece of carved stone in the history of mankind, it is 140 feet long and weighs over 300 tons. To this day, we can not figure out how the fuck they moved it from the quarry which was 5 miles away.. To this day even with modern machinery we still couldn't move it 5 miles without destroying or fracturing it into several pieces ;)

lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies

lies that can be verified as lies by the simplest of googles

lies.

god of the gaps 2.0 - now with a free bong!

millions of dead slaves, erased from history by the lies of a theist. or perhaps he smoked them all up in his bong.

Theism, the last great superstition, hopefully soon to be eradicated for the betterment of every single living thing on Earth.

quoting this before he edits it anymore. this one is just too fucking good - just big massive slabs of logical fallacy, historical inaccuracy, lies and just flat out bullcrap and it can all be proved to be this with the most simplest of googles. omigod this is too good...

LET THE BACKPEDDLING COMMENCE!

Hold up, you can diss theology but you sound ignorant dissing history. Do explain how the pyramids were built without science? What about that obelisk I mentioned? I didn't make this shit up, you find this shit in the ground, it speaks for itself.



We have theories about how these were built, but nothing verifiable through SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. However, we do know for a fact that somehow they were built, because DUH, they're standing right there just outside of downtown Cairo. By the way, did you realize that the pyramids were built on the ONE small patch ground that could have supported quite literally a man-made mountain of stone? Had they been built even a mile or two away from their current location, the bedrock would not have been strong enough to carry the weight. By the way, we didn't discover this until satellite imaging technology revealed this.. How exactly did the Egyptians know it without science, something so damned advanced that even WE didn't know it until the 1990s??



As to the obelisk in Ethiopia, well shit, science STILL doesn't even have a single theory to explain how it was carved, moved 5 miles, and erected. The "sand pit by gravity" method which is believed to be how the Egyptians raised their obelisks is not able to explain the fallen one in Aksum, its simply too big. If that method had been used, the obelisk would have snapped in half as it leaned against the barrier used to raise smaller obelisks by gravity.. So.....

Nope, you sir may be an expert in nihilist philosophy, but you clearly don't understand the basic tenets of modern archaeology and historical technology ;)

why are you asking me to google the answers to these questions when its so obvious that god did it, not cranes or slaves or anything. not like we already don't understand it. or like, we don't, cos you said so. im so confused.

want me to do the obelisk as well? is it ok with jesus? ask him first please.

What does God have to do with historical technology and evidence of advanced sciences in "ancient" history? You guys are cute and all, but when you argue that "science" only existed in relatively modern, Western world, where shit, you're quite literally ignoring the scientific evidence of previous human science. Philosophy and religion didn't build massive monuments of stone, or learn to grind metal ore from rocks and smelt it into purified forms. ONLY science and a scientific method based on experimentation can do that. So, DUH, of course science isn't a modern creation, the evidence is all quite conspicuously around you.






Oh yeah here is another scientific marvel of pre-Columbian Americas.. How did the peoples in current day New Mexico build their monumental architecture in perfect alignment with astronomical events without experimentation or the scientific method? Just a really good guess? Divine revelation? Oh right like Bill Nye would say, "ITS SCIENCE!"

I think you totally missed the point caught up in your own beef with my theology. This has NOTHING to do with theology or religion. Rob argued that "science" was invented in the 1300s, meanwhile the Pyramids are clearly evidence of advanced sciences in Egypt 4500 years ago. God didn't build the pyramids. Aliens didn't build the pyramids. Humans built the pyramids, using technologies which we still don't fully understand today..

jesus fucking christ - he's now actually arguing for the arguments we originally used to argue against him with. i guess you can't beat jesus at his own game.

backtracking/sidestepping aside, i just literally provided you with a link explaining exactly how humans built the pyramids and how we do fully understand it today because it's in the link i just linked you to. you know, the link that proves that we do know the things you said we don't know and you're totally wrong and it's all there in black and white. in the link. which you asked for and said i couldn't provide. the link. which is right there. in the link. click it.

You can't.. archaeologists have been looking at this obelisk in Aksum for 75 years, they are MUCH smarter than you mean-spirited google search. They have conceded four facts about this obelisk...

(a) It is probably the single largest piece of carved stone ever made my human hands. Until archaeologists find a larger piece of single, carved granite then it holds the title.

(b) Granite is the hardest material to carve outside of diamond. In fact, we have to currently used modern machined diamond power saws to cut and carve granite. Yet, we don't fully understand how the Ethiopians carved this stone with such intricate detail.

(c) Even with modern technology, this 140 foot piece of solid stone can't be moved without breaking it, yet the Ethiopians moved it 5 miles from where it was quarried.

(d) We have a pretty good idea how smaller obelisks were raised, however, this particular method COULDN'T have possibly raised the fallen obelisk in Aksum, Ethiopia, its just too long and too heavy. If it had been leaned against a ledge and gravity allowed to lift it by removing sand underneath it, the extreme mass would have caused the obelisk to split in two.. However, we know it was raised but also fell. In fact, there are even manuscripts which tell us it fell instantly after it was raised and they have been carbon dated to be from the same period as the obelisk was carved. However these manuscripts don't tell us how it was raised, just that it was and that it fell down.

GOD DIDN'T BUILD THIS. SCIENCE DID.

I'M NOT BACKTRACKING AT ALL. ROB SAID, "SCIENCE WASN'T AROUND BEFORE 700 YEARS AGO." I'm talking about pyramids and obelisks because they are EVIDENCE OF ANCIENT SCIENCE. How is that backpedalling? What did I change exactly? PROVE IT WITH SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. Quote me ;)

this thread?