Rameses the Great
-
Posts
742 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Rameses the Great
-
-
Kindly post your source for this.
It was written in ancient texts leading up to Caeser's showdown with Pompey. As you now the battle was in Thessaly in northern Greece around the Macedonian area. They said it once on Decisive Battles. I will try to find a source that confirms this. I'll try to find the unit price for the series of Decisive Battles, and check out the unit price for Australia. I'll give you a personal message as soon as I can get it. Just give me one if you are interested and I will try my best.
Andrew
-
Atheism is particularly prevalent among scientists, a tendency already quite marked at the beginning of the 20th century, developing into a dominant one during the course of the century. In 1914, James H. Leuba found that 58% of 1,000 randomly selected U.S. natural scientists expressed "disbelief or doubt in the existence of God". The same study, repeated in 1996, gave a similar percentage of 60.7%; this number is 93% among the members of the National Academy of Sciences. Expressions of positive disbelief rose from 52% to 72%
Yes but scientists do not believe in God, because they lean more to science. Atheism gives you the right to believe whatever you want to. I'm not saying that scientists are all Atheist but these truly are the facts. Techincal design and things like this are ways of taking "God," charactersitics.
Religion and education are different things. Studies have shown that students that go to a Catholic school usually become more successful. Doctors, as you may know are mainly Christian or some other religion. Jewish people are among some of the most successful people in the United States.
Atheism does not spell out success, and religion does not spell out failure. Scientists may think 'in the abscense of God,' but remember there maindrive is science. We compare science and religion, just some things that science can't explain we turn to religion. Scientists on the other hand do not.
Feel free to correct, nut I promise this is all facts.
I promise -
No crusade ever reached Alexandria!
I think Lara Croft did it!
They are still looking for the mausoleum and it could be under the waters of the sea, like it happened with the Pharos and with Cleopatra's palace. Some say it's under an old mosque.
Rather hard to believe that so much gold will be in place after so much time.
Yes, I heard that too. Its a mosque in Alexandria under the floor boards. The mosque was converted from a chuch actually so it may be a bit off location. Many of Alexander's followers wanted to bury him in Macedonia, but he wanted to be buried in Alexandria. Pretty neat stuff.
Great topic. -
It is a sweet and seemly thing to die for one's country.
--Homer
If you have read All Quiet On the Western Front you know this is not true and very sad to say the least.
-
I know who you are directing that too.
-
First, "Western" versus "Third World" is neither a clear nor an exhaustive distinction (e.g., there are Eastern, "first world" countries). Second, if the contrast you wish to draw is between technologically-advanced versus not-so-advanced, there is a clear metric to use: per capita GDP. When you regress Christianity against per capita GDP, I doubt you'll find a very good correlation (but I could be wrong). Have you checked for this? Also, have you checked for the opposite--free expressions of atheism versus per capita GDP? At least in the US and Europe, higher education is correlated with more income and less religion (of any kind).
Atheism are you kidding me? The last time I checked a majority atheist nation was the Czeck Republic, and the last time I checked before the Euro they were not doing so hot. You can't incorporate Christianity with poor and atheism with rich. China is an Atheist country and the are dirt poor.
-
It could work. Remember people in the ancient world could be very stubborn. Its just that how would they carry that much equipment? The Mediterranian is very hot. The Roman legion and phalanx must have been very heated. Not to mention both would be like fire.
-
Well, I'll lead off then others can chime in. Alexander the Great as a general was far greater than Caeser. He influenced more people, and bridged the gap between the east and the west. Caeser before fighting Pompey in Greece went up to Alexander's statue and said, "at the age of twenty three he conquered the world and I have yet to conquer Italy!" I think people assume that Caeser was the greatest because he was after Alexander. Julius Caeser was not able to do the achievements that Alexander was able to do. I mean he even admitted to it. Julius Caeser in my opinion was more a better polition than general. Alexander beat the unbeatable at that time Persians killing 600,000 in one battle. Julius Caeser barely yielded the already familiar Gauls and lost to the Britanians. Caeser never faced an organised army. He was not even the leader of Rome. Alexander the Great was the Greatest man of his time.
-
Varus, Varus give me back my legions!
Following the annihalation of the 3 Roman cohorts in the Teutonberg Forest.
-
as my other id say Alexandria
Greek Hellenism and Egyptian engunuity combined, great choice! It must have been a spectical of its time.
Cairo, also known as Memphis used to be a beautiful city. Guys you can look at the reference point of when the Arabs came in. Now it's a death trap, and nothing less.
-
Of course its on topic. Its a counter viewpoint calling out this supposed archaeologist as a hack. Propoganda? Sure it might be, but its no more propoganda than the the notion of this pyramid in the first place.
Guys, guys, guys these are step pyramids.
To this day we now know how to make these forms of them. The pyramids of Egypt can not be duplicated to this day. They are built in a 45 degree slope. Many pyramids have been found even in West Virginia. If you go to these place you'll notice steps leading up to the main entrance. In Egypt, they are built on a 45 degree angle with no enterance. They say the pyramids then were made with precise precision. They aligned them with the stars. There was this story that they built the pyramid, but it was not aligned with the star so they did it all over again. Egypt used to make step pyramids in the beginning, and actually under ground ones! Then they made the well known pyramids of Giza. In Bosnia there may be pyramids but they are step, not the ones we are usually accustomed to. -
As you know I'm 75% Egyptian and my mom's grandmothers side is Turkish. 75% Egyptian, 25% Turkish.
-
Thanks Longbow, the new download is great! You seem to be ahead of the curve my friend.
-
Sorry, I just wanted to help.
-
Exactly. Need I remind you guy, Rome Total War was based on Decisive Battles a while back. So to sy Byzantium Total War will oust it, is hard to believe.
-
I find it remarkable that there are people who believe a man could rise from the dead, yet who are unwilling to believe that the same man could have sex with a woman. I guess they follow Tertullian--credo quia absurdum.
Simply answered he could have. If you've read my earlier post, why would he have sex if he knew he was going to be crucified short after? The Jews depicted him as beeing 100% human. So he could have had sex but why would he and cause the woman much suffering?
-
It is a sweet and seemly thing to die for one's country.
--Homer
-
Hey the dictionary don't lie.
-
Plurus visio, unus matris.
Sometimes I like to do more than argue.
-
Ok, sorry. I'll try to read words a bit mor carefully.
-
You have to find evidence that he did. Could the Bible be false, possibly. Like as they say in the forum, 'its the only account so thats what we go by.'
P.S. where is Mag Mel?
-
I would just like to add something. Saying that phalaxes could not operate on rocky terrain is somewhat skeptical. Remember Greece has rocky and hillly terrain, and they were effective in keeping out the Persians.
-
Believe me or not, but I live in Romania so I know where the name cames from
Dacians spoke a form of thracian, but during the roman conquest the latin became the most important language. Romanian it's a latin language with a thracian substratum and a slavic adstratum (and a ton of neologisms if you ask me)
Really, why didn't you just say so!?
I would have believed you the first time bud. please do that would be great. so boiling it all down is greco roman culture, in a series of developing steps, a decendant of the thracian/dacian world? the danube and balkans has taken my interests lately. i also remember reading a book saying the persians believed their ancestors migrated from the danube and modern linguists (if thats how you spell it ) have little doubt about it because iranian and germanic languages have close similarities. though i do find it hard to believe the persians have any clear similiarities with the dacian/thracians. but do they? the name of the book i read is "the enemies of rome" by philip matyszak. fun book but didnt get too detailed about this area. nor the battles between rome and dacia. but thanks for all the recent info guys. i have trouble finding reliable resources on the net. stupid revisionists and uneducated know it alls ruin everythingWho are you talking about, pick your words a bit more carefully please. Are you talking about the internet beeing a know it all, or me?
-
Quick decisions, are unsafe decisions.
--Sphocles
Greatest Leader In Ancient Times?
in Arena
Posted
Remember, Alexander did not have a good heir to the throne. As a matter of fact he did not have any because he died at a young age. This left the kingdom with a weak secular government if any. That is why they spilt up. If you want to compare the two through a political standpoint than Caeser would obviously win. The thing is the only thing Alexander liked to do was conquer. It would be interesting to see if he was more involved with politics, but of course that is hypothetical. Before he died he planned an invasion of Saudi Arabia.
If you want to stack up the military prowess of the two, then there is no comparison. Caeser's only great victory in my opinion was against Pompey, pending Caeser's troops were very loyal and veteran. Pompey's troops were a bit the opposite. It was a time when Persia planned to take over Greece, and Alexander did something nothing short of astounding by defeating them. he would face 600,000 Persians and win with 35,000 with minimal casualties. He has never lossed a battle, and Caeser has lost some to Vercengetorix.
This is very opinionated, but somewhat could be logical with some breakdown. Perhaps, Germanicus we should start a poll comparing just the two.