This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc. Please use /lit/ for discussions of literature. Threads should be about specific topics, and the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere. General discussions about international culture should go on /int/./his/ is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected. History can be examined from many different conflicting viewpoints; please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character. When discussing history, please reference credible source material, and provide as much supporting information as possible in your posts.
Non-physical things don't exist. Or at least there are no good reasons to think they do exist.Prove that a soul exists. You can't.Prove that God exists. You can't.
>>16555764>Testimonies of the supernatural and miracles.Gullible retard.Testimony: My neighbor walked on water last weekWhat best explains this? Miracle? Orpeople making up stories?
You guys seriously think if miracles, magic, ghosts and supernatural stuff happened even somewhat regularly. There would be doubt about it?
>>16556865>You trust the collective testimonies of peopleCalling experiments "testimonies," thereby implying that they're mere hearsay and not reproducible, is a huge redflag of a desperate coping retard in itself. Calling a model that was critically examined by thousands of the best experts in the relevant field who work with DIVERGING INTERESTS (the exact opposite of theologians) and came to the conclusion that it's correctly supported by data "collective testimonies" is on a whole new dimension of despair and cope.>You trust the consensus which was caused by something. These causes may be by data or not.These causes are always data. There is no scientific consensus that emerged without ever testing anything empirically. That's one of the many ways to prove science is the exact opposite of religion.>Therefore, all religious testimony is bad?Yes. I care about testable claims and reproducible data, and you have yet to provide anything that qualifies.>I may remind you of the replication crisis and many showcases of maleficence in peer review.First, the replication crisis is overstated. Second, frauds in science historically are short lived because they keep getting exposed... by scientists, never by you. Third, none of this justifies believing religion. At all. No religious claim is reproducible at all, and malevolence in religion is the norm, not the exception.>They burned people alive who were known to fake miracles.Did they burn the Fatima kids alive? No? Then they're evidently not doing a good job.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>16556871>There's zero reason to think God exists.Only arguments that have nothing to do with a supposed contract with foreskins as consideration or kikes on sticks. The theists shove things like that in after they've made logical arguments only go so far as deism.
>>16556940 "Supernatural" means "beyond the natural" and is by definition scientifically inexplicable. Interestingly much of the supernatural beings (ghosts, jinn, demons, spirits etc.) are traditionally understood as being deliberately deceptive to humans.
>>16551008>God makes sure goodness is always increasing so the universe is going to get better and better, there will be more good and less bad as time goes on - and that will always be true!Ok, God is the one that makes sure goodness is always increasing. But aren't we humans the ones that actually >do< the increase in the amount of goodness? So shouldn't we thank humans for it instead of thanking God, since God only interferes minimally?
>>16554560I mean, we could thank God too, but the majority of the credit wouldn't be for God. That's because the majority of the work would be done by humans, not God. So if say you are still alive that's because people (including yourself) took care of you. If you have what to eat, that's because someone and/or you obtained it. Etc. God is there as a mere maintainer of the increase of goodness. And God would only have credit when it acted (telling prophets first, as you said).
>>16554560Also, about the Second Law of Thermodynamics, isn't it contradictory to the idea that goodness is increasing? It seems that the universe is getting more chaotic and goodness is decreasing, no?And since its invention was an act of God, what prophet did God tell about it?
>>16555369>we could thank God too, but the majority of the credit wouldn't be for GodThat seems like incredibly strange reasoning to me. Like if I got you a new Bugatti and you started thanking yourself for it since you're the one who pumps the gas into it. A human does the vast vast minority of the work for anything. If they make you something, they just arranged matter that God made (spending a few thousand calories at most in comparison to the untold billions of calories of energy present in matter). They did it using energy that ultimately comes from the sun that God gifted them and the ground God made for them. Breathing air that God designed from plants that He invented.And it goes much beyond that if we look at /his/tory. Nearly everything we have in modern society that's beyond what they had in the BC era is because God physically came and spent 30 years physically working as a man to lay the foundations for his Kingdom.Let's look at one of the best things in your life, the thing nearly everyone from a janitor to a CEO treasures: the weekend! We have weekends because God founded Christendom. Unless Christianity had come, this never would have happened. People in most cultures laboured every day of their lives (barring of course special events and occasional holidays). This included he Romans, who largely saw taking the Sabbath off as laziness to be condemned. For example, Tacitus, in his Histories, Book 5, section 4 describes such rests as arising because the Hebrews were “led by the charms of indolence”. But we see workers getting a mandatory weekend quite early in Christianity once it finally got the political power to make such laws. For example, in the 500’s, the Council of Auxerre decreed that “no man should be suffered to…do any manner of work upon the Sunday”, as you can read here: http://media.sabda.org/alkitab-8/LIBRARY/HEY_HOSB.PDFModern science and industry come from Christendom, and Christendom from Christ.
>>16555405>about the Second Law of Thermodynamics, isn't it contradictory to the idea that goodness is increasing? The second law of thermodynamics is probably inevitable in any closed system whatsoever since the only alternative seems to be something that could generate energy out of nothing, and only an omnipotent being could do that, and there can only be one of those>It seems that the universe is getting more chaotic and goodness is decreasing, no?The total amount of potential usable energy in the universe is constantly going down, but that doesn't mean that other variables (like goodness) can't be increasing as that happens.However you are absolutely correct that the universe as a whole is winding down. This is to get rid of evil. Evil is something that, if allowed to grow, would ultimately make it impossible for good to grow, like a weed choking out crops. As such, destroying evil is a necessity to ensure the growth of good. Scripture makes it clear that decay and death came into the world because evil did. Romans 5:12 for instance states that "sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin". Things cannot be destroyed in a world without destruction, so once evil came, the initial state of permanence and indestructibility in Eden would have needed to end. All things are now gradually decaying and winding down to destruction, ensuring that evil is inevitably destroyed. Given enough time, current processes ensure thorough destruction: every star in the sky will go out and every bond in every molecule will break. Scripture is well aware of this: as it says in Isaiah 51:6 that just like clothes eventually wear out, so too will the heavens and the Earth.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>16555977>That seems like incredibly strange reasoning to me. Like if I got you a new Bugatti and you started thanking yourself for it since you're the one who pumps the gas into it.>A human does the vast vast minority of the work for anything. If they make you something, they just arranged matter that God made (spending a few thousand calories at most in comparison to the untold billions of calories of energy present in matter). They did it using energy that ultimately comes from the sun that God gifted them and the ground God made for them. Breathing air that God designed from plants that He invented.I say that the universe gaven by God is not as good as a Bugatti should represent in the metaphor, and to increase its goodness we need mostly human work.I'm not talking about work to create the universe, to make it a better place, to increase the goodness in it. You said that God always does the minimum for that and humans do all the rest of the job. I agree that God has more credit for creating the universe than we do, I'm just saying this isn't the case for increasing goodness.>weekendsI'm confused now, shouldn't God face infinite regression when trying to do a good that isn't the minimum possible? Bit anyway, let's consider them. They're surely important, but what about world peace, protection from diseases, suicide, martyrdom etc? God just ignored these? Because as far as I understood, we humans are the ones responsible to solving these other problems.>>16556198>The second law of thermodynamics is probably inevitable in any closed system whatsoever since the only alternative seems to be something that could generate energy out of nothing, and only an omnipotent being could do that, and there can only be one of thoseRight, so why wouldn't God generate energy out of nothing to prevent things like cancers?(1/2)
How is it possible for people to believe in communism?
>>16556854>Be china>Be an impoverished shithole>Have communism for 40 years>Be even poorer than before>Open your economy to foreign investors and foreign consumers (free trade)>Suddenly start becoming wealthyHurrr durrrrrr communism made China rich!!!
>>16556941Wow, so the communists couldnt even control their own citizens or resources within their own borders? How is it the capitalists fault again? I guess allowing a good communist to lay eyes on a pair of blue jeans or a vinyl elvis record instantly turns them into a capitalist sleeper agent
>>16556944>marxists.org is a totally reputable and unbiased source!>heh, I noticed your source is AEI, that instantly invalidates what you're saying cause they're heckin capitalist republican propaganda?
>>16556948>Why are billionaires donating to leftiststhis doesn't happen>Why are millionaire lawyers bailing leftist agitators out of jailthis doesn't happen>Why do megacorporations instantly ban right wing ideas but allow left wing ones free movement on their platforms?are you writing a fiction book?
>>16556854>you HAVE TO kill 60 million people in order to stop being poorare you perchance a brown thirdy?
How come Eastern Baltic (Baltic States and surrounding areas) have a lot of N1c haplo ancestry (~405%), but barely any Siberian autosomal ancestry? Did N1c carriers basically slowly migrated all the way from Siberia to the Baltic and over many generations mixed the Siberian ancestry out?I'm also not quite sure which migrations were these. Anyone have good info on this topic?
>>16556076They had sex with too many EHG and WHG women.
I've read the entry for Kama culture and one theory is they're related to Dnieper-Donetsk people, which would mean not Siberian already? Just EHGs already.
>>16556876Related how? Maybe they have some of the EHG from there, but also some Siberian that carried N1c. Then Siberian got diluted to a few percent but the N1c survived.
Saars, we are having a field day in this thread talking about European genetics and breeding
>>16556852Basically this.At least across the pond in Finland mtDNA is European, there is significant I1 male population but majority is N1.They came from the East and raped their way all the way to the Baltic sea.
Why don't you Chuds think the covid vaccines were the mark of the beast?
Historical photos that go hard
>>16556452WWII is like a Greek epicBut Vietnam is pure kino
>>16556428
>>16556475Traitor
Post grandpa
What's a Vahaduo model I can use to model my ancient ancestors? t. sperm donor child
>>16555403Id say run it on Single not Distance, using the "modern population average scaled" sheet on Source. That what I did. But I still dont know how to adjust it to get consistent results. You get slightly different results every time you run it. Nothing too drastic though.Also do this as well >>16555619
>>16555578Fpbp
>>16555578>>16555619>>16555785Ancient results, not sure what any of it means.
>>16555578>>16555619>>16555785>>16556919Modern. I played with some settings but I have no idea what its telling me.
>>16556935Looks like youre British/French/German/Spanish mutt of some kind. Generic white American.
>the universe came out of nothing>we're evolved from ape like creatures and androgynous fish>talking donkies and snakes? aren't you tired listening to silly skyfairy myths?the independent freethinker ladies and gentlemen.
>>16556883Says the guy who first did it himself. Nowhere was it implied that all life shared a common ancestor in that sentence. It was mocking your faulty logic.
>>16556889>It's "why does God do anything at all?"No, it's "why does God specifically do this thing which doesn't make much sense to do?">You have to prove why it doesDo I? Because your explanation currently makes less sense, even without "proof."
>>16556906>which doesn't make much senseWhy doesn't it make sense and how would you determine that using a human's inability to comprehend the actions of an omniscient being? Animals can't make sense of what we build and the reasons for it too you know?>Do I?Yes and your opinion is completely irrelevant. Now where is the evidence?
>>16556921>Why doesn't it make senseBecause a clear motivation for such an action is absent. Why create so many species with only minor variations? Why create so many species with major variations?>YesWhy? Do you have evidence that this universe was created?
>>16556898>Nowhere was it implied that all life shared a common ancestor in that sentence. sorry, I didn't realize you were homeschooledanalogy does not necessitate homology, common origin does, imagine a v8 and an in-line 4, analogous function, no homology>inb4 hairsplitting and crying>It was mocking your faulty logic.no fault detected
historically speaking, how come Americans don't have their own culture?
>>16556626Why are you denigrating the beautiful african tradition of eating mud cookies? their culture is unique and interesting but it is sad that whenever they move to white countries they immediately adopt white culture instead
>>16556772We must retvrn
They do.
I would say that old WASP culture was very American.
>>16556216Americans aren't human
In the Germanic Holy Roman Empire, when a duke had many children, what did they inherit? The oldest yes, but did the young ones inherit anything? What about the youngest children?
>>16556250They either become warriors, educated, with possibility of political advantage. I know its not HRE, but Henry the Navigator was a secondary brother so he just invested his time and focus into navigation, maps, ships etc.
>Noooo, I expelled all the smart Jews from my country and now I'm losing the war>How could this be happening to me?
>>16555880>ALLIES WON BECAUSE TEH JOOZsaid nobody ever
>>16555936Christians really do follow their Messiah in selfless charity
>>16555948>Germany didn't lose on technologyShow me the German atom bomb project.
>>16555641People still failing to realize that occupying and colonizing the east would've been infinitely easier if you just had the massive population of people who speak bastardized German instead of trying to find the couple dozen 1/4 Germans who still speak their grandpa's language within 1000km
>>16555641It is pretty telling just how many contributors to the Manhattan Project were refugees from Nazi Europe.
>Kaffir "Why do you guys allow slavery? come on then i'm all ears">Muslim "First of all define slavery, if you mean transatlantic slavery where everyone is kidnapped based on his race, taken from their homeland, stripped of their name and religion and culture, then no Islam doesn't sanction that, if you mean indentured servitude, captives of war, then sure we can discuss further">Kaffir "why do you guys allow child brides? I mean didn't your Prophet marry a young girl?">Muslim "What's your definition of child? Are we talking in a context of 7th century society or today's definition of a child?">Kaffir "Look at the Qu'ran, kill them wherever you find them? sounds pretty clear-cut to me mate">Muslim "and what's the context? is it on the battlefield? we need to know these things before opening our mouth and speaking out of ignorance">Kaffir "stoning for adultery, eh? that's barbaric if you ask me">Muslim "What's your definition of barbaric? If God says something it's good, right? you told me you're a Christian so if the Bible says stone for adultery and says God said it, is the Bible wrong?">Kaffir "What about you guys and your treatment of women? keeping her covered, yeah? oppressing her? this is a cult mate, a male chauvinist cult!">Muslim "Ok, so then define oppression, are you using the modern kind of liberal woke definition of oppressed? I can show you your Bible and there are many rulings pertaining to women in there that would be considered oppressive by secular liberal standards, no?">Kaffir "Praying separate from women, eh? no mixing of genders? that's right is it?>Muslim "define right and wrong"You cannot bring arbitrary examples and verses out of context when it relates to a religion as finely detailed as Islam. You cannot judge Islam as you would judge a political ideology or movement, where views and laws changed over time. Everything in Islam is fixed but knowing correct context and correct application is key.
>>16556920Do you just enjoy swinging at straw men? Are you one of those atheists that don't accept eye witness testimony?
>>16556874>It's a message for all mankind.. written in a de facto extinct version of the second most difficult language you could possibly learn
>>16556928>It's revelation, because Ibn Ism said Ibn Achmad told him that he heard from Sa'ab Ibn al-Salami that Abu Ubaida ibn Al-Jarrah saw a thing once in the corner of his eye after he blinkedSign me up.
>>16556924What was the prophet's simple preferences is highlighted ("O Allah's Apostle! Is this unlawful to eat?" Allah's Apostle replied, "No, but it is not found in the land of my people, so I do not like it.") and what just the preferences of companions is easily found out using hadith methodology?
>>16556939Okay so you don't. That's all you had to say. I can assure you that you haven't run all the experiments required to determine what little knowledge you have of anything at all so you are a fraud.
It’s terrifying how many young men are lonely in the world, and it gets worse and worse, this will have consequences…
>>16556867You're talking about a specific kind of woman, not womankind as a whole. Some women will always chase the men with the most lucrative career or the best body or whatever. Most of these women have low hereditary IQ and are consequently immature (which is the real reason for their preference — immaturity).There's tens of millions of mature men and women who don't select based on materialistic preference. They select based on character and compatibility.
>>16555843>There is virtually no issue of lonelynesswho the hell are you trying to fool?
>>16556683you just proved his point with this post.I hope you find happiness
>>16555731yes
>>16556912Terrible argument. High school student quality research. At least compare the figures over time good grief. The educated boys are not asking girls out anymore because they have brainwashed themselves with pornograpgy into miserably low self esteem. Then it is a viscious cycle.
It's been a month since the end of the Liaoshen campaign. The ROC has lost all of Northeastern China and the PLA has just launched the Pingjin campaign to capture Beiping and the North China Plain.How are you, Mr. Chiang Kai Shek, going to turn the tide of the war and secure total victory for the KMT? (Hard mode: you can't kill yourself)
senor cash mai check?
>>16556037Turn on my PC and open HOI4 on the easiest difficulty.Seriously though, not possible. The loss of Manchuria was akin to stopping a car going 500 MPH without breaks. Not possible.
>>16556869This. Even with all the strategic, numerical, and logistical advantages the Nationalists had, there was no stopping the political tide from turning against them. Especially when Mao had the will to unite the entire country. The only chance Chiang would have at the KMT surviving on the mainland would be attempting to mediate a peace to the civil war with the USSR. Which is highly unlikely considering how much he relied on US support by the end.
