• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Has Christianity kept us from exploring the galaxy?

shadron said:
The Greek civilization started with the ancient Greeks. They were weakened as a civilization by the explosion of Santorini and then wiped out by invasions from the northeast. The invaders took up the Greek civilization and raised it to completely unprecedented heights - all within 1200 years. Why then did Western Europe lay fallow from the death of Rome until the Renaissance? It covered a hugely larger landmass, a lot more arable land and natural resources, many times more people, had the advantages of both the Greek and Roman civilizations behind it, and it couldn't kick-start itself in spite of Charlemagne for over 800 years at least?
Click to expand...

Well, the comparison is a bit unfair IMHO, because you look at Greece right before the Bronze Age Collapse and then look at how great they were 1200 years later. If you do the same comparison for Europe, 476 AD (fall of Rome) + 1200 years = 1676, which was well after the peak of the Renaissance and anyway Europe was very much flourishing again. Quite comparable, don't you think?

Since you're talking about Greece, the Bronze Age collapse caused approximately 350 years known as the "Greek dark ages". When frankly they weren't any better off than Europe in the later European dark ages. Lack of Christianity didn't prevent those nasty centuries for Greece or anything.

And after those centuries of proper dark ages, it took about as much again to build up to the age of Pericles.

Second, I'd argue that it's precisely because Europe was much larger, that it took longer to "bootstrap" itself back up. Greece was a smaller area, quite rich, and with just about everything reachable by water. (All their colonies were around the Mediterranean and Black Sea.) It's one thing to unite something like that, and another thing to bring order to something the size of the whole Europe.

Third, it's a bit misleading to see what later happened there as a golden age of _Greece_. It was a golden age of _Athens_ at the expense of the other greek city-states. Athens was just a very successful predator there.

The Greeks were doing fairly well, but not spectacularly well, until Persia entered the equation. So a league was formed for self-defense, with Athens being merely the head of that alliance. Originally all states were supposed to provide a number of soldiers and ships to the alliance, or some money instead if they couldn't. Voluntarily, as part of a mutual-defense alliance.

But soon Athens wanted only money, not troops. With the more subtle effect that now Athens had all the army and finances to wage war, while the other states had their might diminished by having to pay that tax.

And soon they had another startling revelation: they couldn't leave that voluntary alliance any more, and Athens dealt swiftly and brutally with anyone who even tried. Basically suddenly they were owned and taxed by Athens instead of being in a mutual-defense alliance any more.

So to make this long rant shorter: when you look at the great Acropolis and all the monuments of Athens and at their citizens being free to hang around and talk philosophy... you see just the results of that scam. It's funds which were supposed to be for mutual defense, but which got mis-used to build grand marble temples and sponsored whole generations of parasites to hang around and try to sound smart.

It's easy to have a golden age like that. In Europe later, well, simply no city had such an unexpected influx of wealth. It was only in the age of colonization that something like that started happening again, and with the same results.
 
alfalfafour said:
Maybe the subject line?

"Has Christianity kept us from exploring the galaxy? "



Perhaps it was athiest blinders that "kept us from exploring the galaxy?

Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Explore the Galaxy,Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.Attack Christians.

Can we find the subject line?
Click to expand...

alfalfafour,
The OP and a few of the earliest posts had a view critical of Christianity.
The vast majority of this thread has actually been a defense of Christianity, in fact in the half dozen or so times you've shouted "Attack on Christianity" I haven't seen anything that could possibly be described as such.

Your point was very clear the first time you said it. Your repetition of your view that has become farther and farther from the truth as this thread continued is adding nothing.
 
Cavemonster said:
alfalfafour,
The OP and a few of the earliest posts had a view critical of Christianity.
The vast majority of this thread has actually been a defense of Christianity, in fact in the half dozen or so times you've shouted "Attack on Christianity" I haven't seen anything that could possibly be described as such.

Your point was very clear the first time you said it. Your repetition of your view that has become farther and farther from the truth as this thread continued is adding nothing.
Click to expand...

I personally directed the thread away from attacks, and he asked why.

Can I answer questions, or is that against the forum rules?
 
alfalfafour said:
All I did was make comments about Bigotry and putting all the members of one group into the same box. I am not Black either. If somebody wants to make bigoted comments about them to see if I wll step up, go ahead.

I am not saying that the Sagan comment was bigoted, but they tend to allude to it, and lead away from issues like Galactic exploration
Click to expand...

Who is "they"?

alfalfafour said:
how about we focus on Chritianity as it relates to Galactic Study, or maybe just focus on how bigoted comments have managed to lead us away from actual discussion of the Galactic Exporation. Gee, that sounds really close to the topic. Imagine that?
Click to expand...

I wanna know just what specific Bigoted Comments are you referring to, cause I keep hearing you talk about Bigotry in a persistent manner but I have no samples from you of any specific Bigoted comments from any specific source.

So please provide them because so far, the way you've been expressing yourself has been very confusing.
 
Ron_Tomkins said:
Who is "they"?



I wanna know just what specific Bigoted Comments are you referring to, cause I keep hearing you talk about Bigotry in a persistent manner but I have no samples from you of any specific Bigoted comments from any specific source.

So please provide them because so far, the way you've been expressing yourself has been very confusing.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should look up the definition of the word in an old dictionary and get back to me. I have one handy which precludes the new definition that tends to exclude religious and political attacks and focuses more on the color ones skin and ethnicity.

Bigot:

An intolerant, prejudiced person.

Bigoted:

Sticking to an opinion, belief, party, etc. without reason and not tolerating other views. Intolerant.


Can you tolerate a view that allows for other causes besides Christianity for the failure to explore the Galaxy? I would suggest that 300 or more years to reach the closest star at the speed of our current spacecraft, and the non-existence of even a steam engine prior to 1750 would be significant limiting factors.
 
alfalfafour said:
Maybe you should look up the definition of the word in an old dictionary and get back to me. I have one handy which precludes the new definition that tends to exclude religious and political attacks and focuses more on the color ones skin and ethnicity.

Bigot:

An intolerant, prejudiced person.

Bigoted:

Sticking to an opinion, belief, party, etc. without reason and not tolerating other views. Intolerant.


Can you tolerate a view that allows for other causes besides Christianity for the failure to explore the Galaxy? I would suggest that 300 or more years to reach the closest star at the speed of our current spacecraft, and the non-existence of even a steam engine prior to 1750 would be significant limiting factors.
Click to expand...

Yes. By now I'm convinced that you have some sort of reading comprehension problem.

I didn't ask you for the definition of the word "Bigot". Read back my post and PAY ATTENTION to what I asked you. I'm not going to repeat it.
 
Ron_Tomkins said:
Yes. By now I'm convinced that you have some sort of reading comprehension problem.

I didn't ask you for the definition of the word "Bigot". Read back my post and PAY ATTENTION to what I asked you. I'm not going to repeat it.
Click to expand...

I am soory if you thought I called you a bigot. I did not. I said that the thread was leading in that direction. Just the same, I wanted to ask if you think that a Roman Centurian's horse drawn fighting craft could get us to the moon?
 
alfalfafour said:
I am soory if you thought I called you a bigot.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm....... no? Of course I did not interpret that

alfalfafour said:
I said that the thread was leading in that direction.
Click to expand...

How exactly is the thread leading in that direction?

alfalfafour said:
Just the same, I wanted to ask if you think that a Roman Centurian's horse drawn fighting craft could get us to the moon?
Click to expand...

What is the point of that kind of question? (To which we all know the obvious answer)
 
alfalfafour said:
Maybe you should look up the definition of the word in an old dictionary and get back to me. I have one handy which precludes the new definition that tends to exclude religious and political attacks and focuses more on the color ones skin and ethnicity.

Bigot:

An intolerant, prejudiced person.

Bigoted:

Sticking to an opinion, belief, party, etc. without reason and not tolerating other views. Intolerant.


Can you tolerate a view that allows for other causes besides Christianity for the failure to explore the Galaxy? I would suggest that 300 or more years to reach the closest star at the speed of our current spacecraft, and the non-existence of even a steam engine prior to 1750 would be significant limiting factors.
Click to expand...

Troll n. : An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]
 
Ron_Tomkins said:
What is the point of that kind of question? (To which we all know the obvious answer)
Click to expand...

Why don't you give me my answer and prove your mind reading and supernatural gift?

We could even do a double blind test, and I will mail your interpretation and mine to an independant, thereby proving at least one persons mind reading abilities,.
 
Last edited:
Floyt said:
Now why do I have this image stuck in my head of everyone sitting around a table sipping good wine and having an interesting discussion while alfalfa is scampering round the edges flinging sand and gargling in incoherent fury?
Click to expand...
Because you have a prejudiced viewpoint that would rather feast on insulting insinuation than focus on the subject line. Go ahead, enjoy some more wisecracks at my expense, or the expense of Christians who aren't even here.

BTW, weren't the Romans sitting around sipping wine and laughing at someone else while they were overrun? Would you suppose that history ever repeats? Do you know what Confucius said about laughing?
 
Last edited:
Back on topic,

Seeing this graph and the discussion made me wonder something. Is there any reasonable , somewhat objective way to measure scientific progress? Even to measure how close we are to exploring the galaxy?

By definition, new innovations are unlike what came before, the most revolutionary are the ones that make the world unlike it was before. Is there really a way to compare armor and algebra and telescopes and string theory and get any meaningful comparative measurement of the "progress" in a given era?
 
Wow! Logging in today was a good idea. Thanks for sharing the knowledge HansMustermann. Of course as a skeptic I'm now forced to try and verify that what you wrote by checking other sources. To the Internet! :)
 
alfalfafour said:
I personally directed the thread away from attacks...
Click to expand...

What attacks?

Post #1: James Fox presents the graph but states that he is skeptical of its claim. He asks for discussion of other possible causes of the European "Dark Ages".

Post #2: LarianLaQuella states the opinion that Christianity can't be blamed for the "Dark Ages" saying that it probably didn't help, but it isn't to blame.

Post #3:Steelmage addresses tangential questions about technological advancement in the Americas and Asia.

Post #4:LarainLaQuell responds to Steelmage, suggesting that "Irrational Delusions" would be a better suggestion for possible blame than "Christianity".

Post #5: Safe-Keeper expresses opinion that the claim made by the poster is overly simplistic and does not point to the real cause of the European "Dark Ages".

Post #6: Arthwollipot points out that there were areas of rapid technological advancement made in Europe during the so called "Dark Ages".

Post #7: Shadron mentions the influence of Augustine, who's philosophy may have influenced European thinking during the "Dark Ages". He does not, however, place blame on Christianity.

Post #8: Paximperium mentions the state of Chinese technological stagnation during the Ming Dynasty.

Post #9: Alfalfafour accuses everyone of attacking Christianity and blaming it alone for the "Dark Ages".

Did you even read the thread prior to your first post?
 
Deleted due to actual truthfulness of an accuser. I looked back and saw that the Red Herrings had not been caught.
 
Last edited:
I imagine they will be back to paddle the dog.

No reason to get excited. He who laughs last.
 
Well, that's the first boring troll I've seen around here. Mods secretly deleting posts? What board does he think this is?

ETA: Heh, ought to add something constructive - Thanks, Hans M, great posts!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom