Acme

There is a very long time between the time when Moses was supposed to live and when Jesus lived. If you can give some reference to Jewish documents around the time Jesus lived that prove that one still believed in resurrecting gods, please bring the proof. The Moses story is in the Torah so whether true or not the information/story was extant around the time of Jesus. If they didn't believe the Moses story, why would they retain it? I concede that I prefaced my argument on accepting Moses was real, but as I just laid out it is only necessary that the story was real and that Jesus had access to that story. Since there is no evidence Jesus did perform miracles my explanation for the stories of miracles is as good as the believers' explanations. The high[est] priests would keep the secrets of trickery to themselves. It's not reasonable to expect they would be bragging or otherwise making public such secrets. No, I have read your postings. Since as you say there is no evidence one way or the other, my explanation is as believable as yours. That's my proposition, yes. Myths are as myths do. Who rushed off to Egypt? It is not necessarily events that changed history, it is the myth. I've read a number of explanations over the years for the Bethlehem star, but it's just icing on the cake in regards to the main thrust of the Jesus myth. AS I say, such exactitude is anecdotal at best, i.e. icing, and does not support or decry the myth as a whole.

It's pretty hard to stay on topic when the premise is flawed. Ay, Joe was a peach. According to Campbell it is substantially different, yes. I'm not sure what sort of brain imaging or experiment might show a distinction but it's an interesting prospect. Edit: I drew up a short summary from the Wiki page on Joe. Joseph Campbell

I don't feel bad at all. As to your example, even if there were such a mention it would be of no particular historical note other than as it pertains to Christianity. The thread seems to me but a fishing expedition with the implication that ancient mentions of Jesus have a logical bearing on establishing his stature as a supernatural being. People are gullible now and were gullible then and will believe as they do regardless of facts and reasoning contrary to their belief. Joseph Campbell wrote well on the history of myth and peoples' need for it and I can only hope he was wrong that such a need is a permanent fixture of the human condition.

Thanks - I've never been called that before. Usually they call me a heretic. I didn't call you anything; I made a comparison. Again, it is a non-sequitar to discuss Jesus and pretend to not be discussing Christianity and so the thread is rather pointless insofar as any conclusion is to be expected. Seeing this thread popping to the top day after day I read it to see what is the fuss and couldn't help commenting on some sloppy reasoning herein. My bad.

Spoken like a true believer. The whole premise of the thread is flawed inasmuch as any mention of Jesus whether ancient or contemporary is of necessity Christian* in nature. Since I prefaced my hypothesis on a quote by Eise, the door was opened and the grounds laid for me to stick my foot in. Gullible, gullible, gullible. Edit:*Christain

Accepting that Moses was raised in Egypt and instructed by the high priests, then there is evidence of a tradition/teaching/influence of resurrecting gods and per se people in Judaism.* Again, the nature of the magical power of these priestly folk was stage magic and kept every bit as exclusive and secret to the few as stage magicians do today. The accounts we have of Jesus put him in close association with this 'mysticism' from an early age and one does not have to doubt Jesus' existence to accept that he handily turned this mysticism and parlor magic to his own means in the same way Moses did in Egypt, i.e. duping the rubes. Jesus one-upped the established Jewish insiders which ticked them off and they, being unable to admit their own trickery, went to the Romans to get rid of the upstart. As Jesus had plentiful resources from his sideshow, there no problem accepting that he struck a deal with the Romans to stage his own execution and quietly leave the scene. Given this context my interpretation is as likely as not and no more subject to disproof than the claimed divinity so many embrace to this day. No really! David Blaine levitated and I saw it. Gullible, gullible, gullible. *Egyptian Magic

It is hardly non-Christian. Why would you ask a question like that? ... Two reasons; it is not in [most] Bibles and this thread is supposed to be about non-Christian sources. As I may have said elsewhere I think Jesus was likely a real person who was a child prodigy and steeped in the magic & history of the temple set himself up as a fulfillment of prophesies in order to fleece the flocks. His miracles were no more or less than stage magic as we see today with Davids Blaine or Copperfield. Saw a lady in half, nail a guy to a cross. People are gullible.

What story? If you refer to the Gospel of James, are we to understand that you consider it non-Christian?

The flood story and the garden of Eden in Genesis, as well as parts of Ecclesiastes, are rewrites taken from the earlier Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh. If selective plagiarism is a mistake, then that's another few for the Bible. So too we should consider the Apocrypha mistakes whether as mistakes of inclusion or exclusion.

Appeal to authority? Where is your integrity? How many respected academics propounded phrenology? Edinburgh Phrenological Society

They consider them so when the holy books make claims about articles of science. Presuming that only people of faith die comforted is a non sequitar.

I cant see how you can decide that I have no vision. One (not I) may argue that the concepts I presented here are brimming with vision, but that is irrelevant. Again, changing font and type-size adds nothing to your communication and in fact detracts from it. You said "I can't see...", ergo you suffer a lack of vision. See? No, I'd say that in my examples of written communication the global brain is like that of a youth. Going further back to before writing a global brain would be akin to a toddler's brain. But in any case there is no evidence of a global brain; it is nothing more than a speculative metaphor and a poor one at that.

I can't see the validity of this comparison. Writing and printing are static forms of communication and cannot at all be compared to the fluid, fast, global and immediate communication by digital means. ... Your lack of vision does not discredit my comparison. Labeling writing and printing as 'static forms' is a less than rigorous dodge that misrepresents the dynamics that letters and literature exhibit. Speed of flow does not change the character of fluidity, i.e. either a 'thing' flows or it does not. If such a thing as a 'global brain' exists, how would it not be affected/influenced by Luther's letters or his Bible? Would you seriously deny that Luther's Bible had any affect on people worldwide?

The issue of the existence of a meaningful global brain is not my own proposition, it is a well-accepted and studied area (https://sites.google.com/site/gbialternative1/) ... Once again thank you for raising some relevant points. Marios Kyriazis An operational note regarding internet communication: Your formatting of quoted material and use of fonts & type styles is an unnecessary and confusing mash. While you are not alone in trying to apply old-school techniques to this venue it would aid your communication to use the quote function and use the default style. I have edited your post to reflect this. Back on topic, if what you & those at your link propose as a 'well accepted' global brain, wouldn't there exist an evolutionary analog for writing in general and printing in specific? Can you point to any research or evidence for such an evolutionary effect or artifact in humans?

ESA has a Flickr page with an Album dedicated to the Rosetta mission. >> ESA: Rosetta @ Flickr

Pipette Since the chemistry of tears varies by what causes them -in humans at least, as I have heard-, you may want to tell the mice sad stories and jokes as well as subject them to irritants. (Not to presume sad stories and jokes won't irritate the mice of course. )

This high school group has been doing such launches for at least the last year and publishing their results and pics @ SpaceWeather.com. I'm sure they would be happy to share their expertise. >> Earth to Sky Calculus Spaceweather.com

There is another possibility to chocking the hole, and that is precipitating a massive eruption due to the sudden release of pressure. I have been looking for a YouTube video on this effect since you first made the hole point to Airbrush but I can't seem to find it. Anyway, the video is of a lab experiment wherein a tall closed flask with some tree resin & acetone in the bottom is heated. While the flask remains closed the resin bubbles & boils, but then when the top is opened to a vacuum the resin flashes to vapor and uncontrollably erupts out the top. IIRC the experiment was particularly related to illustrating super-volcanoes if not Yellowstone itself. Duck & cover! In any case, I agree drilling into a volcano is not going to have the result that Airbrush expects. Edit: Found the video.

Here's a page on tables in Latex: (please affix correct postage. )>> Tables

Odd. Copying and pasting your post gives me: n/(n-1) - 22.0 51.25 101.11111 1001.01010 10001.00100 Perhaps you need to flick the toggle switch upper-left of the edit box before you paste?

It wasn't obvious from your opening post where you give a rather blanket prescription. Getting killed is a very specific term[ination] & hardly trivial to the victim.

I didn't include the table titles 'Number in sample,' and 'Bessel’s Correction' inside the BB code tags.

I haven't tried figuring out the Table Heading code, but here is what I get substituting your data. [ta=left][tr][td]n/(n-1)[/td][td]-[/td] [/tr] [tr][td]2[/td][td]2.0[/td][/tr] [tr][td]5[/td][td]1.25[/td][/tr] [tr][td]10[/td][td]1.11111[/td][/tr] [tr][td]100[/td][td]1.01010[/td][/tr] [tr][td]1000[/td][td]1.00100[/td][/tr][/ta] n/(n-1) - 22.0 51.25 101.11111 1001.01010 10001.00100

For someone in a witness protection program or hiding from a violent spouse, significant other, or acquaintances, going public could very well result in their demise in short order. Anonymity is not a one-size fits all proposition. MYOB.

I get a scrambled page when I open it. ?? Try copying the last code I gave and replace the 'Hi' & 'There' in each column and row with your data.