Latest activity

stevevw · Oct 4, 2025

Stopped_lurking said:
But is this true? Are people actually arguing that the orthodox methods is defined by looking on vases with unknown provenance (because that is what is on offer)?

I don't think I ever said that or meant that in the first place. So to me you are arguing a strawman.

To the mainstream consensus the vases are made by the orthodox method which is the 'Boring bar', pounding, chiseling and rubbing. Its not the provedence thats the issue but the method claimed. Thats why the experiments are done to show that these hard stone vases can be made by the traditional method which is still in use today.

The provedence issue is itself an issue used to refute the ancient advanced tech and knowledge by saying that these are fake. That any claim or evidence of modern signatures in vases must be a modern forgery because such tech could not have been available back then. But thats a seperate issue to double standards. It is in a way a double standard in that the whole 'Fakery' narrative is exaggerated and used to refute even vases with good provedence.

Or to assume that they are fakes when its actually 'unknown' and any fair assessment would be neutral. In fact would probably lean towards authentic for arguements already given. Which is the fact that no one was worrying about such micro precision back then and therefore it would not have been necessary.

But the double standards are generally applied. As mentioned skeptics allow sub standards for support and its ok. But those proposing past advanced knowledge must jump through hoops.

Stopped_lurking said:
Olgas vases are pretty good, I don't see the need for invoking any ancient tech or lost knowledge, might there have been a potters wheel involved I don't know but that would still be interesting but not very strange.

I don't know what you mean by 'pretty good'. It sort of is implying that handmade or tradition is as good as the precision vases. A bit vague. Olga used a potters wheel and thats the point. She used modern tech to help achieve a better result in the vase. Which reallly proves the point that these precision vases needed even more modern tech to achieve there even higher precision lol.

It states in the Maximus article that the 'Scientists against Myths' for which Olga was part of aim was to show how the traditional methos could achieve the precision hard stone vases. Its in the name of their group lol. They believe they are scientists who are refuting the idea of advanced ancient tech by making Egyptian artifacts in the traditional way.

Slipping in a rotating wheel stablised with ball bearings is introducing modern tech. The very tech (lathing) that the Naqada people nor the Egyptians as per wall paintings (bore-stick method) have.

Stopped_lurking said:
I want peer review in order to say that good science have been performed.

I get what you mean but Peer Review does not guarentee good science is being done. Science as in the metrology done on vases is lab testing with equipment. Numbers don't lie. You can watch the live tests of them measuring the vase right before your eyes lol. You don't need peer review to tell you about the data. You do need it replicated though and thats whats happening. Thats good science.

Stopped_lurking said:
Just posting something to the internet is not in and of itself any guarantee that it was properly done.

Yes but if your going to make this criteria then it has to be applied even handedly. The skeptics use their own words and analysis without Peer review and just say it off their own authority as thopugh fact to refute anything linked as evidence from third parties. At least I am linking independent sources as support.

In that sense I would expect peer reviewed papers breaking down how the traditional methods can achieve such precision. Or papers refuting that there was advanced ancient tech. Same thing. But not just some objection made by someone without any support. As has been happening. Therefore the double standards. At least I am trying lol.

Stopped_lurking said:
The precise vases defined by Maximus Energy, dont seem to use the same criteria as used by the Artifact Foundation this is a problem, which would have been identitfied and been asked for a clarification if there would have been peer review. In general peer review increases the quality of the science, it's not something to be shunned.

Thats why I mentioned that this is ongoing because it may not be up to the point where repeated metrology in specific methods or all methods have been done yet. I think other testers have used the same 3D CT scanning. From memory Adam Young and Matt Beall have sent vases to places like ZEISS who have scanned some. I am pretty sure UnchartedX has 3D scans on their vase resources.

Here is the paper.
I was able to obtain high-quality 3D CAT scans of 22 stone vessels purportedly of ancient Egyptian origin from Matt Beall’s collection – Fig. 1.

https://maximus.energy/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Precision-and-Classification-of-Predynastic-Egyptian-Stone-Vessels_-A-Metrological-Study.pdf

Here are the tests from Károly Póka research team.

We brought a micron-accurate 3D scanner into the Petrie Museum to examine Egypt’s oldest stone vases

Ancient Technology Podcast with Karoly Poka | Ancient Technology

Join electrical engineer Karoly on the Ancient Technology Podcast as he delves into lost ancient technologies, cultures, and mysteries. Listen on YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcast.

karolypoka.com

Heres 3D scanning of Pottery rather than the precision stone vases for comparison which destinguishes the difference in signatures between handmade and ones turned on a wheel or lathe.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X21002017

But heres the thing. 3D CT scanning is just a more accurate metrology to other 3D light scanning like structured light, lazer and Xray. Its just a matter of how precise the measures go down to. But the other methods are reliable and still get down to the micron level. They are still repeating the precision found in the vases.

Even the guage metrology is repeating the precision. All methods find the same precision.

The Liturgist · Oct 4, 2025

Xeno.of.athens said:
The Law, as revealed by God and fulfilled in Christ, serves as a moral compass and pedagogical guide for the Christian faithful. It includes the Mosaic Law, especially the Decalogue, and finds its perfection in the New Law of the Gospel. “The Law has become our tutor unto Christ” (Galatians 3:24), and its enduring moral precepts are reaffirmed by the Church as binding. The Catechism teaches that “the Old Law is a preparation for the Gospel” and “remains necessary for man” as it “denounces and discloses sin” (CCC §1963–1964).

The Ten Commandments, given to Moses on Sinai (Exodus 20:1–17), are “fundamentally immutable” and “engraved by God in the human heart” (CCC §2072). They express the natural law and are reaffirmed by Christ, who deepens their meaning in the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Matthew 5–7). The Commandments are not abolished but fulfilled in charity: “If you love Me, keep My commandments” (John 14:15). They are the foundation of Christian moral life, guiding the faithful in their duties toward God and neighbour.

For the Christian in this world, the Law and Commandments are not burdens but paths to freedom and holiness. Grace enables their fulfilment, and the Spirit writes them anew on the heart (cf. Jeremiah 31:33; CCC §1965–1966). The faithful are called to interiorise the Law, living it not merely by external observance but through love: “Love is the fulfilment of the law” (Romans 13:10). Thus, the Commandments remain essential, not as relics of legalism, but as living expressions of divine wisdom and the way of life in Christ.

We also must not forget the Decalogue is entirely Christological prophecy, according to Luke ch. 24.

Additionally I am rather tired of people demanding that we observe the Law in a specific way that contradicts the practices of the early church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, the Church of the East and the traditional Protestants such as Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians et al, while at the same time attacking us for the weekly celebration of the Eucharist or our belief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist either as a physical reality in the case of Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, Assyrians and High Church Anglicans and other Protestants such as our friend @Jipsah or in the case of more low church Anglicans and other Protestants of a non-Zwinglian interpetation, a spiritual presence.

tdidymas · Oct 4, 2025

Clare73 said:
What part of "my job is to present/explain God's word to you" do you not understand?

That's what I'm trying to do for you, but you don't accept it. You keep on making assertions without any exegesis. Like I said, I'm not going to quarrel with you. If you keep on it, maybe I'll have to put you on ignore.

perplexed · Oct 4, 2025

Dan Perez · Oct 4, 2025

# 1 WE BELIEVE //. PIOSTEUO. , is. in. the PRESENT TENSE , which means RIGHY NOW. , in. the ACTIVE VOICE , means that Christ. is behind it

is. a PARTICIPE , in. the NOMINATIVE CASE , in. the Plural

# 2. THAT THOLUGH //. DIAS , is. a PREPOSITION

# 3. THE //. HO , is. a DEFINITE. ARTICLE. , in. the GENITIVE CASE , in. the SIGULAR

# 4. GRACE //. CHASRIS. , in. the GENIOTIVE CASE , in. the SIGNULAR

# 5. OF THE LORD // KYRIOS , in. the , GENITIVE CASE , in. the SINGULAR

# 6 JESUS // IERSOUS. , in. the GENIOTIVE CASE , in. the SINGULAR

# 7. WE SHALL BE SAVED //. SOZO , in. the AORIST TENSE , in. the PASSIVE VOICE

# 8. EVEN AS // TROPOS , in. the ACCUSATIVE CASE , in. the SINGULAR.

# 9. THEY. //. KAKEINOS in the PLUJRAL

And we know from Acts 15:1- and on. that circumcision. was a big issue

#. 1 They were all LAW KEEPERS

# 2 And what does Peter. . means . here and. we shall be SAVED as THEY ??

dan p

bbbbbbb · Oct 4, 2025

Living is preferable to dying.

Always in His Presence · Oct 4, 2025

rambot said:
We aren't talking about Biden now thank you. We are talking about now.

The current price situation, right now is about 70% better than before.

Eggs are exponentially less and system wide prices are up about 6 cents on the dollar.

mark46 · Oct 4, 2025

Fantine said:
Yes for "C" and they present a far greater problem in our own country.

I agree. Fundamentalism has come a long way from being the group that fought Darwin. There is nothing wrong with the 5 fundamentals. Most of us, certainly most here on this board agree with the fundamentals.
===========
Fundamentalism was at first an affirmation of orthodoxy within Christianity, an anti-Darwin movement in the 19th and early 20th century. Evangelicalism and conservativism are very, very different movements. Of course, almost all Christian consider themselves evangelical. Conservatism in the US has a long and proud political history.

In the last 50 years, the far right has co-opted the movement, the label "evangelical' and the label "conservative" and morphed the three into a very, very powerful political organization.
=============
SOME BACKGROUND (from wiki AI)

In the U.S., fundamentalism is a historically specific movement within American Protestantism that emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in reaction to theological modernism. It is characterized by its emphasis on the inerrancy of the Bible and a set of core beliefs, often referred to as the "five fundamentals".

The Five Fundamentals
The movement's name is derived from a series of pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915, titled The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth. The core tenets include:

Biblical inerrancy: The Bible is literally true, without error or contradiction, as it is divinely inspired.
The virgin birth of Jesus: Jesus was born of the virgin Mary and conceived by the Holy Spirit.
Substitutionary atonement: Jesus died on the cross as a sacrifice for the sins of humanity.
The bodily resurrection of Jesus: Jesus was physically resurrected from the dead on the third day after his crucifixion.
The authenticity of Jesus' miracles and his physical second coming: Jesus performed actual miracles as recorded in scripture and will literally return to Earth.

Historical context and development

Origins: The movement was spurred by anxiety over modern developments in biblical criticism, labor unrest, and Catholic immigration in the late 19th century.
Early 20th century: Fundamentalism gained momentum in the 1920s, fueled by opposition to teaching evolution, which was seen as a challenge to biblical literalism. This culminated in the 1925 Scopes "Monkey Trial".
Mid-20th century: Many fundamentalists separated from mainline denominations to form new churches, Bible institutes, and colleges.
Late 20th century to present:
- Some fundamentalists, often referred to as conservative evangelicals, re-entered mainstream political life after the 1960s. They have become a powerful force in conservative politics, utilizing media like television and mobilizing around issues like "family values".
- Examples of organizations that have promoted fundamentalist and conservative views include the Christian Coalition and the Family Research Council.
- The term "fundamentalist" is still embraced by some groups that maintain a separatist theology, emphasizing the literal exposition of the Bible and militantly opposing doctrinal deviation.

Distinctions

Evangelicalism: While all fundamentalists are evangelicals (sharing a commitment to evangelism and a conversion experience), not all evangelicals are fundamentalists. Following the 1920s, a new generation of more moderate evangelicals distanced themselves from the militancy of fundamentalism, though they still hold conservative theological beliefs.
Theological modernism: This was the movement that fundamentalism explicitly opposed. Theological modernists sought to revise traditional Christian beliefs to accommodate modern scientific and social developments, such as the theory of evolution.
Christian Nationalism: This is a distinct, though sometimes overlapping, movement that claims the U.S. is a Christian nation established by divine will. This ideology is political and often based on a worldview of American superiority, leading to the belief that only Christians can be "true Americans".

Wider meaning of the term
Beyond its specific historical context in American Christianity, the term "fundamentalism" is also used more broadly by scholars to describe morally absolutist religious and political movements that militantly oppose aspects of the modern world. This analytical framework has been applied to movements in Islam, Judaism, and other religions.

BPPLEE · Oct 4, 2025

Paulos23 said:
They definitely been disrespectful to the citizens.

If reports are true they are abusing their authority, but I also know how people exaggerate and lie about law enforcement actions so I am not so quick to condemn them

Kathleen30 · Oct 4, 2025

RileyG said:
Can’t we all get along despite difference in views? Hmmm….

RileyG it not be a matter of all getting along with each others politics in whatever political spectrum one be . It be a matter of common justice. Whether you be Democrat, Republican, Pro life or whatever political veiwpoint you adhere too. If you so choose to physically assault someone purely due to their political or religious perspective. Then that warrants accountability and justice: Not a get of jail free card. How can that be accepted as getting along with each other? Kathleen

Bradskii · Oct 4, 2025

zippy2006 said:
You wrote a bunch of words and managed to evade the question put to you entirely. Predictable.

Evaded it? You'll see that the last example addressed it precisely. Here's the answer again:

Having sex with a woman after plying her with booze to get her so drunk that she passes out (which is rape) is morally unacceptable.

You asked me if I thought that rape was immoral or not and I gave you a very specific answer, so how is that evading the question? Your problem seems to be that I gave it some context. You can give your own context if you like. That answer will be the same.

zippy2006 said:
Part of the incoherence of "absolute morality" construals is the arbitrariness of "context" that you are showcasing. You want to say, for example, that the act is having sex and the context is non-consent, and therefore a prohibition against rape is a contextual and therefore non-"absolute" prohibition.

The context isn't arbitrary. It's always present and always extremely specific. It's literally the facts of the matter. Which will determine the morality of the act.

I'd guess that you'd concede that many acts are relative to the context. In fact, I'm pretty certain that you'd agree with the fact that all the examples I gave were context dependent. You might not agree with my decision as to whether they were moral or not, but your decision, if it is different, would likewise be based on the context as well. But your position would render all moral questions absolute. There wouldn't be any relative morality at all.

Do you agree that killing animals for fun is immoral?
Yes.
Ah, so you're an absolutist.

Do you agree that cheating on your wife is immoral?
Yes.
Ah, so you're an absolutist.

Do you agree that getting a woman blind drunk and having sex with her is immoral?
Yes.
Ah, so you're an absolutist.

You can literally give enough specific context to any act to get a definite yes or not from someone as to the morality of the act and then declare them an absolutist. Relative morality then ceases to exist. Which, quite honestly, is plainly nonsensical.

Paulos23 · Oct 4, 2025

BPPLEE said:
ICE can't work with them because CPD are under orders from the mayor not to assist federal authorities, I haven't seen anything to suggest the federal authorities have been disrespectful to the local PD.

They definitely been disrespectful to the citizens.

BPPLEE · Oct 4, 2025

Paulos23 said:
If ICE keeps doing raids on building where they cuff everyone and then decide who they are bringing in, I don't blame the CPD for not showing up.

Treating locals this way is not a good image. If ICE wants CPD help, maybe they should work with them instead of treating them as lower than them.

ICE can't work with them because CPD are under orders from the mayor not to assist federal authorities, I haven't seen anything to suggest the federal authorities have been disrespectful to the local PD.

mark46 · Oct 4, 2025

GoldenBoy89 said:
Are they?

This is a matter of semantics.

Illegal immigrants MUST be served by the hospital if they show up at the emergency room.

Let us say that they have no money and would qualify for Medicaid if they were a citizen.

Then the hospital submits this to the feds and is reimbursed by REPUBLICANS at a rate less than when DEMOCRATS were in charge,
=========
So, yes, they are now and continue to be under either the Democratic or Republican legislation.

RocksInMyHead · Oct 4, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
You're missing out... That's what politically neutral (yet still very entertaining, but with some good life lessons) family programing should be.

We didn't need to know Danny Tanner's position on abortion, we didn't need to know Joey Gladstone's position on gay relationships, we didn't need to know Uncle Jesse's positions on gender identity.

Same with Family Matters... nobody cared what Carl Winslow's or Steve Urkel's positions were on those issues...

They appealed to concepts that were universally agreed upon.

I'll take your word for it. That said, a quick jaunt on the Googles netted me this list of 10 times Full House engaged in progressive (for its time) social commentary: Login to view embedded media
Assuming that the situations in those episodes are accurately recounted, I'd tend to agree.

But anyways, it's not really clear what your point is. Should all shows be milquetoast and inoffensive to even the tenderest of sensibilities? Or are you just whining about the "good old days"?

Dan1988 · Oct 4, 2025

RamiC said:
I am sure that this is not actually the case, and I believe the Bible is quite clear that He does not always get what He wants.

Why does the Lord's Prayer include "They will be done", indeed why do we even pray, unless we must choose to connect and follow Him?

I will join you in rejecting the bible doctrine of Gods absolute sovereignty over all things, if you could find a scripture to refute it.

Isaiah 46:10 "I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please".

Daniel 4:34-35 "...all the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: What have you done?".

Acts 17:24-26 God is the one who "made the world and everything in it... and he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on the face of the whole earth, having determined appointed times and the boundaries of their dwelling place".

Psalms 16:1 "In their hearts humans plan their course, but the Lord establishes their steps".

Proverbs 19:21 "Many are the plans in a person's heart, but it is the Lord's purpose that prevails".

Romans 9:17-18"For it says to Pharaoh: 'I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.' Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden".

Lamentations 3:37-40 "Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it? Are not both good and bad come from the mouth of the Most High? ...Let us examine our ways and test them, and let us return to the Lord".

Job 42:2 "I know that you can do all things; no purpose of yours can be thwarted".

We are not called to put God on trial, ours is to trust and obey, even when His ways don't seem right in our eyes.

Gods will is not done, because we prayed for it. His will, will be done regardless of anything you or I do or say. So we shouldn't assume that He commands us to pray, in order to help Him decide what He should to do next.

Paidiske · Oct 4, 2025

There's plastic surgery and plastic surgery. Technically, I've had elective plastic surgery to remove a couple of benign moles that were annoying me. As plastic surgery goes, that's down the mild end of things, but I can see how for different people, the calculation of risk vs. reward (in terms of improved appearance etc) might play out differently.

JPPT1974 · Oct 4, 2025

JPPT1974's Tues Thoughts 10/7/2025:
Caring to share may not need to
Be over in things but in
Ideas, advice, knowledge, and
Understanding that could last a
Very long run and how it may
Help in the strengthening of relationships
Particularly over on our relationship with God
Who sent Jesus to develop relationship with God's people and
Taking twelve ordinary men to be His Disciples.

Bradskii · Oct 4, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
Your comment was, and I quote:
What makes the money is the stupidity of the people buying what's being sold.

So quick question...

Is a person who says if you're born a male, you're a man, if you're born a female, you're a woman, "stupid"?

Is a person who says no, a fetus isn't just a clump of cells, "stupid?

The person saying those things isn't necessarily stupid. But if someone wants to pay to listen to someone say those things, then they are stupid.

Paulos23 · Oct 4, 2025

If ICE keeps doing raids on building where they cuff everyone and then decide who they are bringing in, I don't blame the CPD for not showing up.

Treating locals this way is not a good image. If ICE wants CPD help, maybe they should work with them instead of treating them as lower than them.

JPPT1974 · Oct 4, 2025

JPPT1974's Mon Thoughts 10/6/2025:
Giving to others when it is
Not our names being in
Use as we need to effectively
Yet quietly remember it is not the names
But in the way of showing that it is the
Gift and a long with the thought that
Counts with being and sharing with a caring and
Sharing heart over on it.

Semper-Fi · Oct 4, 2025

those who PIERCED HIM will see Him. <
----Now how are we supposed to view that?! Rev. 1:7

“One of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear"

[One soldier] pierced His side, would be different
then [those who pierced Him], more then one.

“pierced for our transgressions” comes from the book of Isaiah.
Our transgressions caused Him to be pierced. Romans 3:23-all have
sinned/transgressed, so those alive when He returns will see Him.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page