Klaas
-
Posts
3.116 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Klaas
-
-
Yes I can
*evil laugh*
I don't know anything about that, so just google it or go to the library.
-
We all know the phrase, told by most old people: "today's youth". We know it's not that positive.
Do you feel ok with our own generation or if you're not making part of it, do you think the old days were better?
-
A major point of discussion in most countries are immigrants and the so-called racial problems that result from it.
I think this is something really hard to discuss. In Belgium we have a quite large population of immigrated Moroccans and Turks. In some cities they cause quite some trouble, although other people say they don't. Now I live in a larger city I've noticed that if I encounter problems with some people it's usually with them. For example I was almost robbed a few days ago by two Moroccans.
There are four major oppositions here in Belgium concerning the problem:
- united young muslims saying that the police and most Belgians are racists
- white Flemish people saying that most Morrocans and Turks are criminals
- people saying that the muslims aren't doing anything wrong, except for a few of them
- people saying that a majority of the young muslims are very troublesome and that something severe needs to be done about the situation
I find it hard to choose between the last two. I think it's true that many teenagers of our muslim population are quite troublesome. But then again, I don't think it has anything to do with their race or religion; or atleast that it's not the only reason. I think it's rather a class problem. Most of them belong to the lowest class, very poor people who are not willing to get educated. But the 'white' people here belonging to that class also cause the same problems. So I conclude that race isn't really an issue here.
I do think something severe needs to be done. Belgium used to be a very nice country to live in since the end of the second world war. You could leave your money or wallet anywhere without having it stolen. But now more and more young people end up in criminality, steal, assault other people, even come on the streets in large numbers to fight the police. About three years ago a Moroccan drug dealer was shot by the police in Brussels (he was shooting them first) and a day after he died in hospital. On that day many young Moroccans came on the streets, beating up cars and fighting with the police.
Things like this make me feel really bad, actually I don't know what's going on in their head to act like that. It seems like more and more young people (of all races) rather want our whole society to turn into a complete mad house instead of actually doing something in their life.
sorry going a bit OT now
Anyway, that's a summary of the situation in my country. How is it in yours concerning racial problems and what do you think of it?
btw, I don't think anyone is a racist here, but in case you are please keep it for yourself as we want now racism in this forum.
-
Hey Shiva, nice you're paying us a visit
-
x 3/2? Although that doesn't work for 8 -> 14
-
Lol I just think it's funny people actually are so serious about profound language or being obscene. It's just words, people have been using them all the time, just a way of expression. I agree that sometimes it's childish, like those 'cool' hip hop nerds like Puff Daddy, but just have a good laugh at them if they think they're so cool instead of feeling offended. Maybe people should be a bit more easy-going, it would probably wipe out more anger in the world then founding commisions to control everything.
-
Lol yep a bit. Well his village in Armorica (Brittany, region in north-western france) was the only one still capable holding off the Romans (so he's Gaul, or rather a Celt). This is because the druid of the village, Panoramix, makes magical potions which make them extremely strong.
Although the comic will look a bit rediculous at first sight it's really interesting. No matter what mistakes the author makes (like Celts making menhirs), if you look a bit further you'll always find a good reason.
Anyway, if you try one, read it in French, it's not that hard. The French version is a lot better because it's full of puns (like the names), which are usually poorly translated.
Well in Asterix the author also gives his own explanation to what used to be a historical mystery (well not quite). The Sphinx doesn't have nose, and the archeologists can't find it. Used to be a small mystery, but obviously it the stone was either lost due to the weather conditions (wind, sandstorms) or the stone was used to build other stuff. In Asterix & Cleopatra Obelix, Asterix's best friend, wants to climb on the sphinx to have a better view. But while he's almost up his foot slips and he kicks off the nose of the sphinx. Asterix is really angry and forces Obelix to bury the nose so nobody will see what he did.
Pretty funny, around the sphinx there are all kind of gift shops selling small sphinxes. When the shopkeepers see the nose is gone they all start chopping off the nose of the little sphinxes
-
I live in a very small town so not much to show.
If they love nature I would take them to the woods and fields behind my house, lots of rare birds and small mamals.
If they love history and culture I would take them to Bruges, one of the most famous medieval towns in the world. I hate it though, lots of snobs
And for all the others I would take them first to the youth club where we would get bored because lately nobody ever comes there. So afterwards we would go to my favorite bar to drink lots of beers and talk about politics, literature, music, history and philosophy.
-
There isn't much known about the gender roles in stone age societies, I was refering to bronze and iron age societies.
But I agree with you, we shouldn't fight the way people are made. But I just think it should be a matter of choice, women shouldn't be forced to do the household or children shouldn't be raised the way that women are depicted as inferior or only good to do the household.
And it can only be a true matter of choice of both men and women have equal rights. That they both have the same wage, that they both have the same chances for a certain job. You might say women aren't capable doing physically heavy work, but some men aren't either. If they aren't capable to do it they simply won't go for such a job or give up. So no need to go telling them what they can or can't do.
But basicly we agree with eachother, but my point being that it should be a matter of choice, so I don't agree with for example forcing a political party to have 50% women on the voting list. It can be 80% women or 80% men, as long as they are chosen for their abilities, and not their gender.
-
Don't have one
-
To add some spice to the discussion:
Why is the murder rate in Europe a lot lower then in the US? Why, with our very strict gunlaws, is nobody complaining that we can't have guns?
I agree that things like Columbine aren't only because guns are legal. I saw Moore's movie, which was fairly good, but I think Moore took a very narrow minded viewpoint. I'm sure every sane person knows that it's not only about guns. If things were that easy world peace would have been accomplished already centuries ago.
There's one bad argument you (pro-gun people) keep using though. That if guns are outlawed someone who needs a gun can still get one easily. That can be partly true in the US because of the amount of guns circulating there, but that's completely wrong for Europe. It's really hard to get one here, if there are any school murders the guns are usually from parents who hunt or are policemen. In fact school murders haven't occured yet in Belgium, although it did in Germany for example.
As for criminals having guns here, they either get them abroad from Russia (Eastern European criminals) or from the military (once and a while military equipment gets stolen). Criminals here rarely use weapons, if they do it's always in the news, and that's once a month average.
Btw, about Russia. Pretty funny you use that argument as America is generally so anti-communism while you actually compare your own government to a Stalinistic regime. It's a different place in a different time, so imo has nothing really to do with it.
-
Eken, in history there were women or amazones. Look at the more matriarchal societies in ancient periods like the Celts and Germanics. You're absolutely right that the male part of their 'armies' outweighed the female, but many fought with their husband.
I agree about one thing with most of you, that women and men are completely different, as well as physically as mentally. Indeed each sex had its own purpose, but personally this isn't a reason to keep the roles as they were. I think women should have the exact same rights as men, that there is no need for a roll pattern. But that doesn't mean a roll pattern can't exist, there are many women who like to do the household and look after the children instead of earning an income.
I just think this is a matter of choice. If a women wants to do the household, ok, if she wants to make career, also ok. It's her own choice, just like a man has his own choice.
If you take a look at history you'll also see that the inferiority of women is not natural. In fact the oldest cultures had a female centered society, almost all the artifacts found from the periods when we made cave art are women; fertility objects. The inferiority of women only really started when Plato stated they are inferior, which was back then quite a revolutionary statement for other cultures.
-
He told the story (yep, an important Athen politician heard it from an Egyptian priest) to show the greatness of Athens. Atlantis was shown as the greatest empire ever, but they imprisoned the Greeks for slavery. But Athens survived and was blessed by the gods, while Atlantis went down. So sounds like a nationalistic argument to me.
You could also compare it to More's Utopia. Maybe in a few thousand years when people read about Utopia they'll think it really existed (More describes it like a distant island in our real world).
Lol, slashdot likes making fun of people
Seriously, all the talk about lazers, aliens, etc. in ancient periods is just made up. People come up with such rediculous theories because they don't know the truth yet. It's a bit like ghosts and such, you shouldn't believe any of it.In fact archeologists and historians do know how Stonehenge was built. They used trees to roll the stones to that spot, they even tried doing it and it worked fairly well.
Stonehenge was built by Britons, or atleast the people who lived there before the Celts. Structures like Menhirs and Dolmens were quite common during the bronze age and disappeared through the Halstatt period and iron age. These constructions have nothing to do with Celts, so for example those new age druids in stonehenge should check their history because they are 800 years or more wrong. It's just something historians thought in the 19th century or maybe because people read too many Asterix comics and think there were really people like Obelix
-
Eken132 you summed it up really well
Another argument is that the Huns and Mongolians weren't the only nomadic tribes which conquered many lands. You could also take the Germanic people, although they were forced to conquer because of the Huns. The Vikings for example were also a big thread, they conquered England, parts of northern France (Normandy), Sicily, Iceland, etc. They weren't real nomads though.
The Mongols were so successful because they had tons of horses while in middle age Europe only a rich man could have one. They were also united under Genghis Khan. They didn't stay where they conquered, they just moved one (in some places they did like China, I think they founded the Ming dynasty). So pretty natural actually.
Also watch out with astrological arguments. In fact you can easily abuse them to suit your theory, so they're quite popular. I think astrology has no real importance as a historical argument, although it might have in some areas.
Yep the Mayans are indeed still a big mystery. Huge cities totally abandoned suddenly, huge population decrease. It could have been a disease but also war. The Aztecs for example were a war-loving people. They didn't fight to conquer land (well it was not the most important motivation), they rather did it to make prisoners which were needed to sacrifice to pay their blood dept to their gods. So, maybe a people like the Aztecs could have overthrown them.
Another tipical Meso-American mystery is the god Quetzalcoatl (sp?). The god has a beard and looks a lot like a European, while the Meso-Americans had never any contact with people looking like this, beards were unknown to them.
-
Well that's what Plato wrote about it (in his Timaeus and Critias I think). It's not proven though, so you shouldn't think it's right
Nice you come up with Tolkien when talking about Atlantis. Tolkien was quite influenced by Platos writings if you read about Numenor.
Some arguments that Numenor is based on Atlantis:
- swollen by the sea
- a temple on the highest mountain
- the Numenorans pirated the villages of Middle Earth, just like the Atlanteans did according to Plato with the Greek towns
- both islands
- both a superior culture for the human race
-
I'm one because I was raised being one, my parents became nudists when I was 3 or so. I don't practise it anymore because during puberty I didn't want to expose my body just like that. But right now I'm thinking of doing it again, but my gf doesn't really want going to a nudist camping for vacation
I agree with what you say though. Taking myself as an example I would do it again because:
- I'm not ashamed of my body
- I don't follow the "physical trends", I don't feel bad because I don't look like the muscled guys in the movies, or how most people think a guy should look.
- it's some kind of self expression to say f*ck you (sorry couldn't find something more appropiate) to the commercialised media
- I want to live in harmony with nature, I feel bad in a city
- Freedom is essential to me, if I don't feel free I don't see any reason to live
So yep, you got that right, although this isn't a sexual example. But it's also reflected in my sexual life. Well an example is that I live my life quite intensely and enjoy the little things in life a lot, just like it's with sex personally.
-
Well if you can really feel it does bad to your health you have a good reason though, like your uncle's hand.
So yep, I agree 100% with you Bobby, a reason is probably the most important thing to make you quit.
CO, actuall I meant the best way is doing it "cold-turkey"
-
Looks nice, but how many Ghz and Ram will you need to play that?
-
Slavemarket was some kind of trigger trick scenario, which was the first thing I made and submitted online. Didn't get a review I think, but 7000+ downloads.
The Guy Josselyne Campaign was my first real scenario. The best accomplishment (read: worst) I got with it was causing some kind of childish flame war
Next to that it got a 3.8 rating and a 4.6 I think. And of course it was one of the things that made people join my design team back then, AoK Dragon (now DGDN).I'm quite proud of The Tale of Minothar. I never really finished it, but I won the Mapper 2000 (European map design contest) for AoK with it (I didn't have much competition though
). It was rated 4.4.The last thing I can remember is Minas Dragon, my submission to the pretty town contest. Never won a prize, but received very good comments and an average 4.2 rating I think.
-
Same here.
I've been smoking for about 4 years now, but not as much as you, probably 10 a day, sometimes less, sometimes more.
I think the first thing you need to quit is wanting to do it. Not just wanting, but really wanting! It might sounds strange if you don't smoke, but it's not that obvious. It's a bad habid, and we know how hard it is to get rid of one.
I asume you smoke filter cigarettes? The least you can do is quit that and roll your own. No, not with a machine, but roll them yourself. This helps me to not smoke more, since rolling one takes time (well now only 10 sec for me
). It's also a lot less expensive and less bad for your health. Imo filters should be forbidden, once you've tasted the difference you'll notice how really bad they are. The smoke looks thick and blue-ish, it stinks a lot more, the paper used is a lot thicker, it has all kind of chemicals and perfumes in it, etc. Things you won't find with normal tobacco.But this is not a manifest to make rolling your cigarettes look good. In fact it's still really bad, but maybe a small step closer to quitting.
The best way though is being hard with yourself (I can't, but I hope I will someday). Just quit and don't touch them anymore, that's the only sollution. You might want to consult a good doctor though.
[post previous reply edit]
My father, his father and both my brothers smoke(d). Yep, family and friends who smoke will make the step to doing it a lot easier. I guess that's how I got hooked on it (although almost none of my friends smoke now).
The less smoking system works for some people, but from experience I haven't seen anyone capable of doing it. A friend of mine did it this way, he quit for 3 months and started again. Another friend who really quit just did it and is now nearly 1 year smoke free.
-
One of the things that made me interested in history is the mystery behind it. We've gotten a lot further in what we know about the past but many things have been lost and will probably never be cleared up.
Maybe we could list and discuss some of those mysteries in this thread. If you're interested in this you have to be very cautious though. Today, and maybe it has always been like this, fantasy and history blend very easily, and especially never forget how subjective history is.
I'll give you two examples of mysterious, one I know that is wrong and one that, as far as I know, is still a mystery to most historians.
Ancient pyramids
In a documentary and some books I've seen some historians thought it strange that many ancient cultures built pyramids. Best known are the Egyptians, but also the Aztec, Maya, Greek (recently discovered), Mesoptamian and Indus cultures have built them. Some people came up with a theory that somehow the pyramid building is something one culture or civilisation discovered and spread over the world. Thor Heyerdall (sp?) for example set sail on a papyrus boat from Egypt to South America to prove that the Egyptians have had contact with the Meso-American cultures. Other historians go a little further and talk about a civilisation predating all those which are known to us (eg. Atlantis).
Interesting non the less, but if you think about it it's quite stupid to take this seriously. We know that in those days it wasn't that easy to build extremely large structures. In fact they didn't have the technology or knowledge to build for example buildings like we do. So, for large structures the easiest thing to do is starting with a huge base or foundation and make it go smaller and thinner to the top.
You should also consider buildings that have not been found. Of those ages, do we know one example of a huge building not ressembling a pyramid? In fact we don't, atleast not of the scale as all the pyramids are.
The Sphinx (Gizeh)
For ages specialists thought the Sphinx in Gizeh was built by the Egyptians. Quite natural, since it has the head of a pharaoh and sphinxes were quite popular in ancient art. Today there is a lot of doubt concerning this subject. If you watch the Sphinx carefully you'll notice the head and body aren't in proportion at all, the head is a lot smaller. Another and better proof is that the body bears marks that ressembles rain, and not a little bit, it must have rained for ages on it.
Considering the place and date it was built (if we use the Egyptian theory) it's impossible that it rained on it. So, if we go some millenia back there is a possibility, at the end of the last ice age. Around 12.000 years ago rain was very common in those regions, so this would be a good explanation.
There's one downside to this theory. 12.000 years ago there weren't any real sedentary communities capable of building such a monument yet, atleast that's what historians believe now.
I have one problem with this though. I don't know if there have been found marks of rain on the head. If they have found marks of it either the rain theory is completely wrong or the egyptologists made a major mistake in dating the Egyptian culture (which is very unlikely). If not, well then it's quite a mystery to me. The head has been sculpted or resculpted by the Egyptians (smaller head, ressembles the head of a pharaoh), so it can't have rain marks.
-
Well I really agree with Cheezy about those music videos, especially in rap or r&b. Imo this is going a little too far, this is just showing women as if they are sex objects.
But that wasn't my point, as I'm not seeing this as truely sexual, but rather as way to attract men to listen to the music and acting cool.
What makes sex such an interesting subject to me is that it explains a lot about human nature and our historical background.
One of the main differences between animals and humans is that humans do it both for the fun of it and reproduction, while animals (except bonobo monkeys and some other species) do it for reproduction only. But that doesn't mean we don't have much in common in this area: for both humans and animals sex is extremely important. That's the reason why people especially now act so crazy about it, it's one of those things that influences us a lot and something we don't control.
Let me expose myself a little
I'm not sure how you call it in English, but I'm sort of a naturist (aka nudist). Not extreme, but during summer or when I go on holiday to somewhere it's hot I like going to for example a nudist camping. Let me read some of your minds a little: "man he's sick, he's obsessed, bah freak". That's what I have to hear a lot when I talk to people about that, and sometimes I'm not that happy about this reaction. It shows how ignorant and close-minded many people are, and especially, it shows how obsessed people are. Nudism in the narist sense, is nothing about sex, it's about being in close contact with nature and our true selves. In a nudist camping you don't see tons of hot naked chick walking around or people having sex everywhere. No, in fact you see people of all ages, all normal people, especially many kids and old people. You should try it once, it's a revelation, walking around naked. You don't have to care about clothes, about people who will say something about your physics, it's all about the mind, not the body. It's total freedom.
I must admit, nudist beaches for example are another case. In Belgium they recently opened one, and my parents started frequently visiting it. But what they found there were sick men watching everyone or even having sex in the dunes. Why? It's not overseen, the beach isn't part of an official nudist organisition while many good French campings are.
Something about chivalry now. In the Victorian period, which pretty much ruined our normal view on sex, sex was totally abolished, it's wasn't even appropiate to talk about kissing. But, the typical Victorian patriarch, who was such an example to society, who would never talk about sex, was also known to frequently visit @#$%s, hit his wife and do other kinds of sexist things.
And that's what brings me to my view on this. Sexual unopeness equals sexual perversity or sexism, they always co-exist in history (Victorians, Greeks, Catholics during for example the Borgia period, modern days).
And what about those brave knights during the middle ages, the troubadours who adored women so much and would never lay hands on them. In reality their hobby was raping women (I'm exaggerating), they weren't gentlemen at all, nor did they have any respect for a woman.
Another historical argument I could give are societies where women had a lot of political influence (Celts, Goths) vs societies where they didn't (Greeks). The first were very open about sex, were a lot closer to nature, while the latter thought of women as inferior (Plato).
Anyway, some random thoughts
-
When I was 4 or so I was busy drawing. I just had a new sharp pencil, and like kids like to do, I stuck it in my mouth. With the pencil in my mouth I was jumping around being proud on what I had, and suddenly BANG I crashed on my face. The pencil must have been really sharp since it penetrated my cheeck, even now I still have a scar a little bit above my chin.
Well that was pretty much it. I don't know why that's the only accident I had, I did all kinds of dangerous things like climbing trees and such, but nothing much happened. Too bad
-
Nah, just joking
Actually you look like a friend of mine, even with the little facial hair and such, almost a clone
Great Source For Info
in General Discussion
Posted
http://www.flwi.ugent.be/IAHRG/
The link site of my university's ancient history department. Tons of excellent links!