Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 25, 2024, 2:57 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
An Old Science book from 1650
#1
Big Grin 
An Old Science book from 1650
I stumbled on this science book from the year 1650 called: "Historiae naturalis de quadrupetibus libri" and it is a pretty big catalog of animal species, but also you can see some Jesus driven animals that people didn't put in because they had evidence but because they felt it from god.

[Image: bO3RZOxw.jpg]

[Image: QI6ofocY.jpg]

[Image: nUCJuUWL.jpg]

[Image: 5thLrviJ.jpg]

[Image: 3areJIEp.jpg]

[Image: xZvYEBum.jpg]

[Image: tZeqsKHu.jpg]

Still you got to admit it's more accurate then most of textbooks kids use in christian homeschooling.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply
#2
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
That's cool man.
Reply
#3
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
I'd hate to be a sceptic 500 years ago!
I'd be secretly laughing at everything! (while agreeing with the authorities of course!)

The Earth was fucking woo central 500 years ago!
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
Reply
#4
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
So people just went about their day- going to work, eating dinner with their family, doing lawn maintenance- all while believing a bird with a human head existed?
I can't remember where this verse is from, I think it got removed from canon:

"I don't hang around with mostly men because I'm gay. It's because men are better than women. Better trained, better equipped...better. Just better! I'm not gay."

For context, this is the previous verse:

"Hi Jesus" -robvalue
Reply
#5
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
Old news even by 1650


[Image: Horus-standing-600x511.jpg]
Reply
#6
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
But still, a Christian apologist will readily insist that a snake can talk yet dismiss a 17th century multi-headed eel as myth.

The flaws are so blatantly obvious, but only to us heathens.
Reply
#7
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
That's what happens when you take off the Holy Blinders.
Reply
#8
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
(June 9, 2016 at 8:40 am)Exian Wrote: So people just went about their day- going to work, eating dinner with their family, doing lawn maintenance- all while believing a bird with a human head existed?

Don't forget the omnipresence of death back then. 1650 was 2 years after the 30 years war ended and between the regular outbreaks of the black death. Apart from the fact that pushing 40 was considered old age back then. People, in the largest part of the world, toiled the fields for some feudal lord.

So, no, they didn't just go about their day in our sense of the word. They were much more focussed on the next life, since it was their only hope. And science was still in it's infancy. Galen was still the ultimate authority when it came to medicine. Humoral pathology was state of the art, even if you could afford a doctor, who, most likely, would only perform some bloodletting as the ultimate therapy.

I happen to own two calendaries from 1647 and 1649. The one from 1649 holds handwritten notes by some monk where he talks about visiting the community and looking after the sick. A very different mindset, indeed. Our mindset would be more fitting for the much further removed classical age than it would fit into the world, only some 360 years in the past.
[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]
Reply
#9
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
Wow, I like those illustrations. I kind of want some of those in my pet collection! so cute Tongue

I wonder if in the future scientists can create these, I'd definitely buy them.
Quote:To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty.
- Lau Tzu

Join me on atheistforums Slack Cool Shades (pester tibs via pm if you need invite) Tongue

Reply
#10
RE: An Old Science book from 1650
(June 9, 2016 at 2:27 pm)abaris Wrote:
(June 9, 2016 at 8:40 am)Exian Wrote: So people just went about their day- going to work, eating dinner with their family, doing lawn maintenance- all while believing a bird with a human head existed?

Don't forget the omnipresence of death back then. 1650 was 2 years after the 30 years war ended and between the regular outbreaks of the black death. Apart from the fact that pushing 40 was considered old age back then. People, in the largest part of the world, toiled the fields for some feudal lord.

So, no, they didn't just go about their day in our sense of the word. They were much more focussed on the next life, since it was their only hope. And science was still in it's infancy. Galen was still the ultimate authority when it came to medicine. Humoral pathology was state of the art, even if you could afford a doctor, who, most likely, would only perform some bloodletting as the ultimate therapy.

I happen to own two calendaries from 1647 and 1649. The one from 1649 holds handwritten notes by some monk where he talks about visiting the community and looking after the sick. A very different mindset, indeed. Our mindset would be more fitting for the much further removed classical age than it would fit into the world, only some 360 years in the past.

You know what though, I sometimes like to look at history with the idea that humans haven't changed that much. Sure, the culture has as you've said, but on a basic personal level, I bet they weren't all that different. That is to say, they varied widely just as we do. For every religious text or science book from those times that would have you believe the words contained in them were the center of the world, there were probably people who just didn't give a shit. A moderate for every extreme, at least somewhere. This is all besides the point, though.
I can't remember where this verse is from, I think it got removed from canon:

"I don't hang around with mostly men because I'm gay. It's because men are better than women. Better trained, better equipped...better. Just better! I'm not gay."

For context, this is the previous verse:

"Hi Jesus" -robvalue
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Once Again - Science Does Stuff While Religitards Read Their Silly Old Books! Minimalist 6 1178 March 8, 2016 at 3:59 pm
Last Post: vorlon13
  Bug-killing book pages clean murky drinking water zebo-the-fat 6 1794 August 17, 2015 at 2:43 pm
Last Post: Kitty Galore
Thumbs Up Book Recommendations Brometheus 4 1508 April 1, 2015 at 11:45 am
Last Post: SteelCurtain
  Map proves Portuguese discovered Australia: new book pocaracas 15 5154 February 20, 2013 at 6:48 am
Last Post: The Magic Pudding
  Christian school text book teaches Loch Ness Monster real. downbeatplumb 30 10830 June 26, 2012 at 7:18 pm
Last Post: Oldandeasilyconfused
  New Hardcover Evolution Book Based Upon Junior Skeptic Gawdzilla 3 1140 October 3, 2011 at 2:19 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  The science behind why people reject science Kaptinjoo 6 2748 April 27, 2011 at 2:49 am
Last Post: Minimalist
  Critique of new creationist book on "Origins" Secularone 3 1919 November 3, 2009 at 6:20 am
Last Post: fr0d0
  Darwin Audio Book (Read by Dawkins) Kyuuketsuki 4 3239 May 14, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)