News / Poland among the greatest enemies of Russia [112]

Why would I do that? That sounds like a silly thing to do... almost as silly as imagining a world where international relations can be based around putting aside all one's differences, ambitions, identity and desires to focus on one common ground instead. Sounds nice, sure, but let's focus on things that work... any real solution, no matter how flawed, is better than an imaginary one, no matter how perfect, imo.

News / Poland among the greatest enemies of Russia [112]


Too bad, life sucks.

Life / Where to shop in Rzeszow for a 5 month old girl? [3]

Eh... not one to give advice about shopping (at all), but as for shopping centers, there's a Macro on Ul. Armii Krajowa (can't miss it) and a Tesco... really not sure which street that's on. Don't pay much attention to those things, either.

News / How do people react when you tell them you are Polish? [71]


You do realize that it's sitting right next to two other complexes of entirely different design? My guess is that it's just older than the other two; renovating can be much cheaper than re-designing.


You do know the history of the Swastika? It far predates Nazism and Hitler and the like. Just like the Roman Salute (which the US and oh-so-many other countries, as with the swastika, used to use, until it acquired that association with Hitler).


When I was in the States, I was in the South. And when I told them my accent was Polish, the average mook asked me if I "speak Poland?" (no kidding), and the intelligent-ignorant asked if I was Jewish. Either way, I usually responded with percussive maintenence to the cranial lobe of the individual in question, and then gave the appropriate answer.

History / Russia: Poland responsible for WW II [300]



Lesser is correct. "Nation" and "state" are not synonymous.

History / A few thoughts after plowing through most "Sabaton: 40-1" comments on YouTube [59]

Anyway, back to Sabaton- just found out through the weirdest set of coincidences that they're going to be touring in Poland. Schedule:

Mon. 31st Aug. - Warsaw
Tue. 1st Sept. - Bydgoszcz
Wed. 2nd Sept. - Zielona Gora
Fri. 4th Sept. - Siemianowice Slaskie
Sat. 5th Sept. - Rzeszow
Sun. 6th Sept. - Gora Strekowa

Had to do with my being forced to walk home from a relative's one night, but for which I would never have noticed the poster (I live in Rzeszów), as I generally pay absolutely no attention to those things. Anyway, not sure that I'll attend, but the thought has crossed my mind. Anyone else thinking of going to see them live?

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Too bad you didn't actually use that word.


Won't... will not. That is speculation.


Unless the notion that it will be practiced in the future by the one specific person to which we are referring, Pope Benedict XVI, is ascertained, you're still wrong, and what you just said is irrelevant.



wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Please tell me which one exactly of the above you were referring to in this case.


I'm not sure I understand this, because if I do, then you are saying that it was a Pope that personally chose the four Gospels, wrote most of the Catholic faith, and defined every aspect of the Catholic Faith except Jesus Christ. Please be clear.


Whether or not this statement counts is irrelevant to whether you were wrong in stating that an estimate of the probability of a certain occurance requires complete and total, thorough knowledge of all factors involved is correct. It is not, I could estimate that the tree outside my window weighs five kilos without being dishonest or knowing anything at all about the average density of apple trees, it just wouldn't be as good an estimate as most other people's.

Back to Hoyle's estimate I did not say that it counted for anything, only that you were incorrect. Not to mention that, even if he were spot-on and knew everything about such, it would still be irrelevant. Probability does not work that way.


Neither did I. I simply noted the irony in your calling me dishonest.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


So, it wasn't speculation when you said that "the Pope", referring back, would 'not refrain from doing so'? What was it, then?


Except that I never claimed that it was impossible that a Pope would exercise ex cathedra ever again. Merely showed how it was exercised so rarely, and in almost all cases not exercised at all, as to eliminate the notion that it is practiced with no restraint on the Pope's part.


Your original quote said that the Pope "will not refrain" from using ex cathedra. That sounds like predicting the future to me, and pretty heavy at that. Especially how history shows it to be overwhelmingly wrong and misleading by an outright ridiculous majority of cases.


I see.
Paraphrasings are usually not put in full quotation marks, for future reference.


Right about what? I pointed out two things wrong with your posts originally: your incorrect interpretation of the word "estimate", and the use of the words "will not refrain from doing so" (the bolded, obviously) when referring to the Pope's use of ex cathedra. Never once did I say that the Pope cannot change Catholic teaching, nor that it had never been done before. Though, on that note, 98% of Popes in history never did.

You could have simply acknowledged that you were wrong about what you said of Hoyle's quote and/or amended it to replace all adjectives meaning anything like 'precisely' 'or 'exactly' with words like 'vaguely' and 'basic', and also replaced 'will not refrain' to 'will almost always refrain from, and in 98% of cases always refrain from' in the other quote, but no... this is the internet... admitting to having said something not absolutely true is a sign of weakness... let's spend three or more posts on the definiton of words like 'estimate', instead!


Yes, if I knew which quote it was.
You, on the other hand, would have done better to go five seconds out of your way to make sure you quoted appropriately (i.e. copy and paste), if you were going to go ahead and provide a link anyway. I assume that you meant to provide a real link and not one to the forums, the latter being a simple mistake. Because, and speaking of language tricks, you lose credibility by getting it wrong when you have the correct version open in the next tab right in front of you; quote doctoring is frowned upon in journalism, let alone debates that are not one-sided. In short: you accuse me of dishonesty regarding your own quote where there not only was but could be none, after I assumed simple laziness on your part where dishonesty was quite plausible, and I'm the one not attempting an honest debate?

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Whoops, appears I had it right the first time. The word was "estimates", in which case it was still wrong to say that he needed such detailed and precise knowledge to make it.


It also shows with quite reasonable certainty that he refrains from doing so quite often - in most cases, in fact, completely and altogether.


Great, now to address:
Sentence 1 of the same paragraph:


Also, your quote was doctored. It replaced "official documents" with "acts", implying anything that a Pope might say or do. Official documents, are recognized exercises of ex cathedra. Also- well, easier just to show:



Not sure where you got the quote from, but it surely wasn't vatican.va or you doctored it yourself. Which would be a silly thing to do for someone intending to provide a link, as it would rely upon the reader being too lazy to follow it and see for themselves.

So, back to your original statement: further shown: the Pope does have to invoke ex cathedra to change official Catholic dogma and beliefs, and he will overwhelmingly tend to refrain from doing so.

History / Bielski Brothers - does anyone know the story? [38]


Oh. Yes, that does seem rather apparent here. I don't agree with Harry (or, usually, much of anyone else, either) on all points.
It's true that he seems quite a positive and generally helpful person outside this particular forum.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


We were talking about what Hoyle said, which included the word "approximately". You said that he'd have to know precisely the exact details involved to be able to correctly make his statement.


I asked the number of times ex cathedra has been invoked in all of history. It is seven.


Please fix the link so that it doesn't just take me back to this page in a new tab.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Only if they tell me. In your case, you said that Hoyle would need to know "every single last bit of tiniest detail of life and the universe, the knowledge that is attributed only to that god is alleged to have.", and the same level of exact detail on Boeing 707's, to make his approximation. Which was incorrect.


You said that the Pope "won't refrain" from using ex cathedra. Since the number of times this has happened is a fraction of the number of Popes in history, 1/38 to be specific, and a Pope could choose to do this at any time he wishes, it is an obvious conclusion that the Pope will refrain from using it quite often. Almost constantly, in fact.


So what did you mean by, "as per Pius XII the Pope doesn't have to speak ex cathedra for his words to have significant impact on future teachings of the Catholic dogma"? Please be clear.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Any of which will tell you that the word 'estimate' probably does not mean what you think it does.


You'd think it would be significant, if one is to insinuate that a Pope exercises no restraint in his use of ex cathedra.


To not recognize any such reversal,


If Munificentissimus Deus is the item to which you are referring, you do know that this is, in fact, considered to be an exercise of ex cathedra?

History / Bielski Brothers - does anyone know the story? [38]


I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean; if this is meant to be some form of insult or jibe, and if so, what warrants it? If Harry's right, I'm not going to keep arguing with him. I'll just simply concede that he's right and drop it. From what I see, that's somewhat unusual here, but that's just how I do things. It helps me look far more reasonable and rational a person next time around. If you're calling me Anti-Polish... ???

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


And most of them know that it is the wrong thing to do, as well.


A compilation of texts commonly referred to as The Bible. They contain the Word of God.


On another otherwise-unrelated not, suppose that the chance of a Supreme Being existing is so small as to be next to zero, or 1/infinity. Also assuming that such a Supreme Being has ultimate power, therefore able to exist in all universes, we move on to the concept of having infinite universes in the multiverse - quantum foam and all that. Therefore the probability of the existence of a Supreme Being is 1. Ta-dah!

More for fun than as a serious argument.


Incorrect. Google "Define:estimate"


List, please, number of times the Pope has officially spoken ex cathedra. Otherwise, we'll all know that you have no idea what you're talking about.

History / Bielski Brothers - does anyone know the story? [38]


Touche. I stand corrected.


I see the logic.


Aren't there always?

History / Bielski Brothers - does anyone know the story? [38]


That is true. But if that's all the point you're trying to make, it would probably help you be heard more if you occasionally said some positive things about Poland and her people on these forums.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


I did not insinuate that it does. I merely showed an example of how much more convenience-oriented an atheistic lifestyle can be than a religious one.


Reading texts. Much as I am with you currently.


Yes. And after questioning, one can also agree with them. Torq's being a Catholic in a Catholic majority therefore does not have to be at all related to his ability to think for himself.


No, and as such I do not offer arguments about his first or last recorded appearance.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


I need to know what exactly "naughty" is, if I'm not going to be it. And you surely don't think I'd take it from you? What gives you the right to tell me what "naughty" is? As I see it, the only person that has the authority to tell me how to behave is God, and his representatives. All you other people, it's none of your business and I do what I please. Clear off.

Alternatively, I could make up my own version of what's naughty and not, but I don't think that you people would all like it quite so much as I would.


Who killed 25% of the Catholic Clergy in Poland. Yep. I'd call them hypocrites. And more.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


And who made their successes possible? Feudal lords? Oh! German Pagan organisations?
Now I feel that your mind is simply not able to wrap itself around the concept that science in the Middle Ages as we know it would not have been possible without the Catholic Church. And since I don't want to cause any strokes or such, let's just forget it. I give up repeating myself.


I did ask the question. Reason being that I can't think of a more popular source from which people develop notions such as Copernicus' "grave mistreatment" and that he was never able to publish his book because of the Church (since we all know that, quite to the contrary, he published his book through the Church).

I meant no offense; I personally know lots- er, multiple people who are avid fans, despite otherwise being generally very intelligent and pleasant in person. Most people just don't bother to check facts that confirm what they already thought to be true, and it's easy to see how one could get the impression that there is accuraccy in such claims.


You're trying to hold a debate to prove or disprove the existence of a God? You do know that this is literally impossible? Well, theoretically, it'd be possible to prove the existence of a God, but literally impossible to disprove.


So do religious people, given that they know full well that God gave them free will to choose whether or not to f* things up. Since the beginning, God made it clear that we would have freedom of action, and that those actions would have real consequences.


I don't see how my personal choice to kill or not kill innocent people should affect your opinion on God.


Answer it anyway: because he chose to be. That should be obvious. Because one is a free thinker doesn't actually mean that one should constantly go against whatever standards there exist. My being a free thinker, hopefully like yours, does not make me any more likely to start robbing old ladies in the street.


But of course. If one doesn't believe that there's any higher power than himself making it clear what is right and wrong, what is to stop one from taking Social Darwinism, of sorts, all the way, putting themselves first, constantly taking advantage of others? There's no God to tell us that killing children still in the womb is wrong? Good! It's easier to just kill them, anyway!


Maybe you should ask the Nazis why they killed a quarter of the Catholic Clergy in Poland?

History / A few thoughts after plowing through most "Sabaton: 40-1" comments on YouTube [59]


In exactly the same way that Poland invaded it in 1938, the Czechs were unable to defend it, and the Czechs agreed that it was Polish. Czechs invaded it prior, and the Polish were unable to defend it.


That is not correct. Take a closer look at the wording of the quote you posted.

History / Bielski Brothers - does anyone know the story? [38]

Like the "sensible" killings of three women, several teenagers and a ten-year-old boy? Where's the "sensible" in the Naliboki Massacre?

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]

*I'd tried to do this yesterday.


Oh, I didn't know that when you said "he had no choice", you meant "it was the only way he could get anything done".

That's because of exactly what I've been trying to tell you all this time. The Church was the only force making these things possible. There was no such thing as 'scholarships' or 'mass media' in those days, you know.

But I don't see how that's the same thing as making it impossible to succeed through any other avenue.


Because you fail? Arguments do tend to be fruitless when all you've got on your side is popular myth and unsubstantiated rhetoric, yes. Nice try, but this is why Dan Brown gets laughed at so hard by most anybody in the habit of looking past mass-media portrayals.


Yes... because you remember so clearly those times when the Church had oh-so-much power, and all of Europe, and Asia, and several colonies on Jupiter, all catered to their every whim.

And, what exactly makes your pagan beliefs more 'traditional' and 'European' than Christianity? Because they were there first? Also rejected so swiftly!

I see that you've added, in the time that I've been typing this, a compilation of "Christian Crimes", probably from the same source from which you got your Copernicus information. Tell you what: why don't you separate from that list all the crimes ordered by the Church, as opposed to simply committed by Christians and then compare them to A History Of China, or Africa if you prefer. See how truly evil this religion truly is, and what a terrible influence it's had on the world.

This "Christians did it therefore Christianity is evil" nonsense is amateurish and stupid, and I'm really quite tired of hearing it. Really it's gotten to the point where I don't even want to say anything more than "Stalin, Mao".


The same statistics also suggest that the man abducting her is Asian and right-handed. Is this supposed to prove a point? I can argue that a ball that is rolled will never stop, because statistics say that the chances of it stopping on any one point is zero.

I don't think this person has a very comprehensive understanding of statistics.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Lifelong house arrest for Galileo for having directly and publicly insulted the Pope, not for being a scientist. His celestial orbit theory wasn't even the right one. He believed in the perfect circular orbit, as opposed to Copernicus' elliptical. Further, his punishment was really extremely light given the times. Hell, they even provided him with servants.

Please do feel free to tell us all the injustices suffered by these scientists, particularly Copernicus, and under what charges and for what reasons (my net is screwing with me, so I can't kill that one directly). Because last I checked, Copernicus had his book published through his friend the Bishop, dedicated it to the Pope, and died an old man, peacefully, in his bed. Of a stroke.

From what I recall of Bruno, he was the only scientist to ever have been killed during the Inquisition, probably more because he was a Pantheist than a scientist, seeing as the Church funded and supported scientific advancements on a regular basis. Unless I'm thinking of someone else, I'm not particularly sure.

And do share with us the extreme horrors inflicted upon Charles Darwin, other than the naming of the Darwin Award.


You do know the Inquisition only had authority over proclaimed Christians, right?
The politics of the time mandated, through no extraordinary majoritarian discriminatory policy, certain privileges available for Christians that were not for other religious groups. The purpose was to determine the actual Christianity of people who proclaimed themselves Christians in order to obtain said privileges, as to declare such and continue with other practices and teachings was also common practice in those times. Still not exactly humane by modern standards, but I'm betting that's not what you thought it was either.

On the other hand, you could tell me about Jews living in Polish lands, Poles living in German lands, French living in British lands, and Italians living in Spanish lands on a regular basis being nothing unusual in Middle Ages Europe, sharing as they did a common faith and in many ways identity, whereas one still can't get various regional ethnicities in Africa to mix today.


Everybody had to... be a clergyman? Are you serious?
And everyone that wasn't a clergyman was tortured and killed?
Or even nearly everybody?
Or even a majority?
Or even a significant minority?
Let's not kid ourselves, here. You can't claim that Copernicus became a clergyman because he was afraid of being tortured and killed otherwise. Seriously. It doesn't work. And whatever that source you quoted, you should stop reading it, because the person who wrote it was apparently retarded. "Feared for their lives", indeed!

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Are you a Dan Brown reader? Astronomers burned or terrorized, really? Give me some examples.


So why complain?


The "Christian Church"... ha ha, funny! Yeah, every problem ever caused by a people who believed in one God, just call it the Christian Church and blam-o! Generic villain heap.

It doesn't seem to occur to you that the Catholic Church was the stabilizing force that made scientific advancement and intellectual progress possible in the Middle Ages... you'd no doubt be happier if Europe were now in the position of Africa, because that's probably what would have been the case without the Church. Unless you believe that European genes are just better, or German pagans simply superior to African ones, in which case, yeah, sure go ahead and think that. Whatever.

I mean, you do know that science costs money, right? Who do you think paid for ways to make the lives of the common man easier and more fruitful in the times when fuedal lords were duking it out over who gets more serfs to run their profit? Lemme guess, Pagans? Hell, even Copernicus was a clergyman. He dedicated his book to Pope Innocent III! He had it published through the Church... is this lost on you?

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


Really? Okay, so, hypothetically speaking: if no part of the Ten Commandments were ever written into state law, you'd be happy with that, right?

*double errwhat. Every scientist, my ass. Where do you think science would be now if it weren't for the Catholic Church?


This is like asking the difference between a feudal monarchy's serfdom and modern Free-Market system.

News / New York Post : "Polish" Death Camps and more [278]


You say that like it's a bad thing. What should, convenience?

History / A few thoughts after plowing through most "Sabaton: 40-1" comments on YouTube [59]


You know, I do believe there are certain people in the world who are just not capable of wrapping their minds around the concept. I've brought up the Switzerland Card before, only to observe some stroke-like symptoms of confusion and babbling followed by the exclamation that this is of course logical, since one can't exactly inconspicuously conceal an assault rifle in a public place. In which case, fine, outlaw handguns and let people buy assault rifles, instead. :D

I've personally been wanting to get hold of a Mini-Beryl for the props...

History / A few thoughts after plowing through most "Sabaton: 40-1" comments on YouTube [59]


Yes, that's true, and I'm not saying that the Germans were really cowards and wimps behind their superior equipment and numbers. Morale and training are also extremely important factors. But they weren't exactly an unstoppable uber-army, either.


Good guess, but no. Probably more to do with the Swiss Militia program. The one that requires, by law, all adult male citizens to keep government-provided rifles and ammunition in their homes, and to attend mandatory shooting practices on a regular basis.

It's gotten even better nowadays: now they all get assault rifles.
On a gun-control note, rate of firearm crimes in Switzerland is relatively quite low.


Closer than with Russia, I would say.


I acknowledge that it was indeed a semi-common occurance. Do I get a prize? :)

History / A few thoughts after plowing through most "Sabaton: 40-1" comments on YouTube [59]


What, give them a giant buffer zone before attacking it? Very strategic, indeed. This of course is the functioning of the genetically-superior think-tank Hitler put together. Signing a non-aggression pact so you can later stab a country in the back is for the lowly common folk... real elites give them a bunch of land filled with people that hate and severely want to kill you between them and yourself and then declare war on their allies, first.


It's what makes a lot of people feel better. That's the image most often portrayed of the German forces these days. It makes the French and British feel better for being cowards and unwilling to fight them until the last moment. It makes the Polish, and the rest of Europe, feel better for being overrun. It makes the Russians feel like straight-up heroes for being the point where reality (economy, resources, etc.) finally caught up with them. It makes the Germans feel better about themselves, and the Italians because they can technically claim to have helped.

Fact is, they had better technology and a whole lot more of it. No matter how many time-travel type fiction novels might disagree, the Nazis never really had any hope of winning the war at all. Just look what the US - having all the advantages of Germany at the time (economic, technological, population) did to you, and they didn't even begin with a fully mobilized military. That was back when it was an isolationist country unwilling to fight any other than minor nearby Hispanic countries unless directly provoked. And fighting on two fronts, too.


The Belgians had a fort, big deal. The French had... oh, come on. Like it matters what the French had. :)
Tell me why you totally circumnavigated Switzerland.


It's what stopped the open assassinations of German officers and bombing of their buildings in Poland... wholesale massacre of the civilian population, that is. Though, to be fair, that's hardly representative of what the Germans did elsewhere... because what normal German would, at that time, want to be stationed in Poland? :)