The opposite of a jumbo small.

My favorite is the fan mounted to the boat blowing the sail causing the boat to move. I mean there are a shitload more experiments in fun episodes that are far better and more entertaining, but this one is my favorite because it flies in the face of logic. It shouldn’t work. My brain rejects the possibility. But physics and fluid flow work otherwise and I found it pointlessly infuriating only because I’d been unassailable in my confidence that it couldn’t possibly work. Yet there it is with a perfectly logical explanation. I still find it irritating even if I accept the reality of it. (Episode 165 if anyone’s wondering)

That said, I still follow Adam on various platforms. That enthusiasm and joy of discovery is all still there, along with some maturity and some life observations. Literally the only celebrity figure I follow.

Every religion apart from Christianity dies without lies

Quoted for posterity.

There it is. Your true colors.

I guess religion and atheism are on equal footing, then.

“Me when I lie”?

Go talk to the wiki I got that from if you want to argue with someone else about whether something is true or not.

That’s not what I said.

However, like Arthurian Legend, it doesn’t mean some guy like Jesus didn’t exist, or an aggregate of characters weren’t assembled to be him on story.

That’s what I said.

I used Arthur as a fellow mythology, along with a conditional “or” he could be an aggregate character.

The moment of resurrection itself is not described in any of the gospels, but all four contain passages in which Jesus is portrayed as predicting his death and resurrection, or contain allusions that “the reader will understand”. The New Testament writings do not contain any descriptions of a resurrection but rather accounts of an empty tomb.

So therefore I stand by the premise that changes have been made, and what existed in 100 is not what we have today.

You’ll have to forgive me if I bow out. I do not share your beliefs, nor am I willing to continue to argue over religious texts that are self-referencing to constitute proof.

And they get pretty obvious in big subs like /cars and /gaming. So many posting opinions like car magazines or gaming reviews do - point out nit-picky negatives that are relatively inconsequential to the product, softball other criticism, but give an overall decent review. Heaven help you if you actually voice an opinion critical of the object, because you’re allowed to have that opinion as an individual, that doesn’t toe the line and you get instant downvotes.

See, now you’re moving the goalposts. You made a sweeping statement that Christianity is as-is compared to the first century CE. Yet here you are breaking it down and excluding things.

Let’s just face it, you don’t mean Christianity as a whole is same as 2kyr ago. It isn’t. They held on to some facets of it, got rid of others, but kept the main themes like resurrection and the like. Heck, there are even some that suggest the resurrection story was added centuries later.

Nonetheless they are different. And you skipped past the whole “little is known” part, not to mention all the parts that got tossed out along the way.

I offered my informal CV. Lemmy and the Fediverse the largest group I’ve ever offered any service to. My largest group is just over 1,800, but it’s a relatively homogeneous group needing little mod activity. The commuinity is free to comment on my history, stupidity (lol) and bias. I figure it’s fair considering he job app. I’ll offer that I respect and enjoy (even if it’s verbal sparring) the prospect of opposing reasonable views on Lemmy vs the bots, tropes, reposts, and crabs-in-a-bucket karma-whores on Reddit.

So copying everyone else’s work and rehashing it as your own is what makes a PhD level intelligence? (Sarcastic comments about post-grad work forthcoming, I’m sure)

Unless AI is able to come up with original, testable, verifiable, repeatable previously unknown associations, facts, theories, etc. of sufficient complexity it’s not PhD level…using big words doesn’t count either.

You said:

An interesting thing about what we have now in Christianity though is that it basically spawned as-is in the first century

The article says:

Little is fully known of Christianity in its first 150 years; sources are few.

So you’re making a huge, sweeping statement that Christianity as we know it today is based on something…we don’t know much about? There are 6 major Christian denominations, not to mention hundreds of smaller ones. Which one is the “as-is” one? The one that is exactly “as-is” from CE 100?

You mean besides a couple dudes running around telling us to be cool to each other?

You didn’t even read the wiki entry, did you.

I think “as-is” is a bit of a stretch.

No.

There’s lots of ambiguous information. There is no firsthand, historically agreed upon data that supports his existence in the form we know him today. In other words, there was no magical guy doing magical things.

There is no Roman record of “nailed 3 prisoners to the posts today; Bill, Roger, and Jesus the magic guy who was a pain in the ass.”

However, like Arthurian Legend, it doesn’t mean some guy like Jesus didn’t exist, or an aggregate of characters weren’t assembled to be him on story. Arthur was possibly just a chieftain of a group who fought a couple of hefty battles and made a name for himself, but he ended up being an almost magical figure with wizards and witches in the story and - guess what, he will “rise again” from the dead when needed. And no, rising from the dead isn’t owned by Christian religious figures, Osiris of Egypt did it, Dionysius of the Greek Pantheon among many others. So maybe some dude, who probably wasn’t named Jesus, caused a stir and got a few people to take note. That grew over hundreds and even thousands of years to what we have now.

Want to know why King Arthur isn’t a competitor to Jesus? He a) doesn’t offer the opportunity to control people in this life for the hope of an afterlife, b) he isn’t profitable.

I’m willing to accept scientific BJs to attest where it happens.

As the owner of a foreskin, fuck science. Yes, it is erogenous.

Dial up, mostly. Cable showed up pretty quick. Slower. More open. More egalitarian. Not SEO’d. Simpler. Anyone could make a webpage and find a free place to host it or spend just a few dollars a month for a better site host. Lots of phpbb forums or similar, basically Reddit except each sub is its own independent forum with its own, independent mods. Bots weren’t a concern. Trolls weren’t really formalized, though they certainly existed. Assholes gotta be assholes. Ads were barely a thing. The gnashing of teeth as banner ads first started to make inroads was real. There were lots of search engines.

It was a bit more dangerous though. You could relatively easily download or open a virus, email spam with malware was definitely a thing and not filtered by ISPs. You could find some really dark corners and see some pretty awful things, ogrish was the precursor to live leak. Newsgroups were popular and a great place to find warez (nobody calls it warez anymore).

There were a lot of people that made free software to fill in the gaps where big software needed help. Everything from photoshop filters to windows tweak tools to things like Gimp got some of their starts early on as dedicated programmers did it because they could. Plenty of niche hobby forums, help forums, weird shit, and almost none of it was monetized. There was no real social media. We just had newsgroups, AIM, MIRC, ICQ and the like.

It was like MTV when they actually just played music and didn’t start all the tv show BS.

I do miss that internet. I think it was easier to actually connect with people, content wasn’t shoved in your face, ads weren’t shoved in your face, you weren’t constantly tracked. You weren’t monetized. You were part of the internet, not the object to have money extracted from.

Preach. A rant I’ve made before. I hate YouTube. I hate having to pause, and rewind trying to catch a view of some lousy camera angle of the thing being done.

Yeah, you can find useful stuff, but 98% of even the useful stuff is i.e. a 15 minute video, which goes like: intro, talk about sponsors, talking about everything else they have on video. Talk about themselves. Talk about what they did last week. Make sure to visibly finger point at everything in frame (fuck, I hate this. It’s the unnecessary “red circle” around the no-shit-Sherlock I know what I’m supposed to be looking at thing). Introduce buddy, point at thing they’re working on. Bullshit with buddy, talk about what buddy does. Talk about thing they’re doing today. Talk about all the different ways to do thing that aren’t relevant to the thing you clicked on the video for. Show all the parts they’re using for thing and where they got them. Now grab camera and quickly do the two or three things needed to fix thing, takes less than 5 minutes, but it would have taken less than 60 seconds had fixer not stopped to bullshit with buddy and, repeat themselves, and point at more shit. Now they step away from the job, bullshit more, sponsors more, their videos more, camera at themselves more.

The main thing I think I despise is that I’m being talked at. And I mean that it isn’t someone teaching and explaining the how-to, why, and things to watch out for, it’s someone who wants their face in frame talking at me about stuff I don’t care about because the video is about them, not the thing I clicked to find the answer about.

Ad space rules, so longer videos = more ad space, makers get paid more for longer videos with ad space, therefore they make longer videos full of garbage to get pushed to the top by the search algorithm.

Gone are the text-posts-as-a-knowledge-service. In have come the videos as a profit for the maker that necessitate forcing the viewer to watch a 15 minute video for a 2 minute fix.

Travel, something new every time, challenging.

Gone a lot, shit always goes wrong at home when you’re gone, stressful at times.