(July 10, 2015 at 4:28 am)abaris Wrote: The vid doesn't take into account that the wave retreats for about a century now. At least where Europe or China is concerned.

All the map concerns is the initial spread of these particular religions, it doesn't say anything about how many people they affect or whether there are other religions alongside. Jainism was just as big as Hinduism up til Medieval times if I'm not mistaken, but the map actually doesn't show Jainism at all. Saying the map should 'retreat' as it were, seems to be misunderstanding what the map is actually representing.

Permeation in society/cultural fabrics, not actual numbers.

Thanks for the vid Napo

(July 10, 2015 at 4:48 am)Pandæmonium Wrote: Permeation in society/cultural fabrics, not actual numbers.

Yeah, that!

(July 8, 2015 at 3:53 pm)Napoléon Wrote: This is pretty mindblowing:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/map-shows-...uffer?r=US

(it's a link to a vid, I'd just post the vid but can't seem to get it to paste straight in here)

Fascinating. It almost looks like a simulation of ideas being invented by different groups and then spreading by oral tradition rather than a single divine being sending his holy word down to earth for us so that we all recognise the one true god.

(July 10, 2015 at 6:08 am)TubbyTubby Wrote: It almost looks like a simulation of ideas being invented by different groups and then spreading by oral tradition rather than a single divine being sending his holy word down to earth for us so that we all recognise the one true god.

Funny how that is.

(July 8, 2015 at 3:53 pm)Napoléon Wrote: This is pretty mindblowing:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/map-shows-...uffer?r=US

(it's a link to a vid, I'd just post the vid but can't seem to get it to paste straight in here)

Any historian here to confirm if this video is legit in it's depiction of those religions' growths globally over time?

Meanwhile, I'll call it fake and unworthy of anyone's time.

Civil Rights Dude@
Mind explaining what the vid is about next time around?

Keeewl, spreads like a bad rash.

(July 10, 2015 at 7:17 am)excitedpenguin Wrote: Any historian here to confirm if this video is legit in it's depiction of those religions' growths globally over time?

I'm totally (not) a historian. It's legit as fuck.

Quote:Meanwhile, I'll call it fake and unworthy of anyone's time.

._.

Quote:Civil Rights Dude@
Mind explaining what the vid is about next time around?

did you read the title of this thread?
I mean, if after doing that you still can't figure out what the video is about, I can't help you

(July 10, 2015 at 7:17 am)excitedpenguin Wrote: Any historian here to confirm if this video is legit in it's depiction of those religions' growths globally over time?

Meanwhile, I'll call it fake and unworthy of anyone's time.

Call it what you like, nobody here cares for your dumbass opinion.

Quote:Civil Rights Dude@
Mind explaining what the vid is about next time around?

How cute, you're trying to be witty by invoking rules which you have no understanding of.

As for explaining the vid, can you not read the title? Also, those rules you're trying to refer to don't apply to me. I have more than 30 posts and have been here for more than 30 days. I'm not one of the many newbs who come onto this forum just to spam shit. In fact, I'd go as far to say, that as a guy who's in both the top 10 members list and has the 10th highest post count on this entire forum (not bragging, really), people probably know I don't post shit just to waste other people's time, which is what the 30/30 rule is intended to prevent in the first place.

Dumbass.

(not bragging, really)
Sure, son, whatever bullshit keeps you going.

Actually, I wasn't trying to invoke some rule, just trying to remind you, that we might not all be as brainwashed as all that : to accept some link with no explaining atached to it, just because older member, blah blah blah. Cool mindset that - not really, more like stale and silly. Meh. Try being original for once, eh? Don't make me do it for us both any longer, 'cause it's getting tiresome, you're a parody within a parody(it doesn't get any worse than that, really, Καίσαρ wannabe).

Citing your interpretations of anything at all, doesn't impress me much, I've heard it all before, more or less. So get under yourself, maybe?



But, yeah, I totally get it. Same rules don't apply 'cause older members get treated better than new ones. Except I'm enough of a gentleman not to spell it out, like you are right now. That rule should be for ambiguously done things, and we all know it. I think I've already proven that I'm not an impostor trying to advertise anything, beyond any reasonable doubt, really. But hey, gotta stick to them rules, even if we're not, really, right? Gottabe biased people, 'cause that's what us[sic] rationalists like to be like. Kewl, men, have fun pretending.

(July 10, 2015 at 8:02 am)excitedpenguin Wrote: (not bragging, really)
Sure, son, whatever bullshit keeps you going.

Actually, I wasn't trying to invoke some rule, just trying to remind you, that we might not all be as brainwashed as all that : to accept some link with no explaining atached to it, just because older member, blah blah blah. Cool mindset that - not really, more like stale and silly. Meh. Try being original for once, eh? Don't make me do it for us both any longer, 'cause it's getting tiresome, you're a parody within a parody(it doesn't get any worse than that, really, Καίσαρ wannabe).

Citing your interpretations of anything at all, doesn't impress me much, I've heard it all before, more or less. So get under yourself, maybe?



But, yeah, I totally get it. Same rules don't apply 'cause older members get treated better than new ones. Except I'm enough of a gentleman not to spell it out, like you are right now. That rule should be for ambiguously done things, and we all know it. I think I've already proven that I'm not an impostor trying to advertise anything, beyond any reasonable doubt, really. But hey, gotta stick to them rules, even if we're not, really, right? Gottabe biased people, 'cause that's what us[sic] rationalists like to be like. Kewl, men, have fun pretending.

Ah, I see you turned out to be an arsewipe. Shame, I thought you were pretty cool at first.