Discussion:
S09E05 The Girl Who Died
Add Reply
Agamemnon
2015-10-17 23:38:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
New title sequence... isn't it about time?

Spoilers

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0

The Girl Who Died

What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing pantomime.

Why Mark Gatiss was not asked to write the script I don't know. Instead
of authentic period dialogue it was written like a bad 21st century
sit-com. Compared to The Time Meddler the writing was a travesty to
Doctor Who. Not only is the Doctor addressing the "Vikings" using 21st
century comic mannerisms but they're replying back to him in exactly the
same way.

In this story you have the Doctor being turned into a bigger clown than
Sylvester McCoy ever was. Capladli has the same limited range doing
anger and authority as Sylvester McCoy did, if not worse, and sounded
more laughable than Graham Crowden in The Horn's of Nimon when he was
shouting at the "Viking" villagers claiming to be Odin. The way this set
piece was written and acted for laughs totally ruined it's philosophical
message comparing humans feeding dumb animals to gods or something along
those lines.

Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a start
the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she uses
in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived after the
strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves Norsemen after
the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by the Saxons which
meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or "Voyagers". No real
"Viking" would behave in the way any of these characters were written.

Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
unfortunately they seem to back next week.

Next you have another comedy set piece with Doctor translating a Baby
crying, as if the baby were Confucius or Lao Tzu. It was totally
ridiculous and I'm trying to think of the name of the comedy movie or
cartoon series the idea was taken from. When a baby cries it means it
wants to be fed or wants attention. It doesn't have a clue about what's
happening concerning its surroundings, only it's own self. A two year
old cat is more intelligent.

After that set piece you have the Doctor deciding to train the left over
weakling "Vikings" in how to use swords and instead of doing it properly
as Edgar Rice Burroughs had John Carter do in Skeleton Men of Jupiter
it's done as a pantomime with the Doctor giving comic names to each of
the trainees including calling one of them Lofty as if it was a 5th rate
rejected script for It Ain't 'Alf Hot Mum.

Together with the crap comedy set piece from episode 1 set in the middle
ages with the Doctor playing rock guitar on top of a tank it seems like
Moffat's main influence is Bill and Ted rather than actual science
fiction. Capaldi is being made to make a complete fool of himself, and
like who is this supposed to actually appeal to? American teenagers?
Capaldi is not Marty McFly. It might have worked with Matt Smith and
David Tennant but with Capaldi it's a complete farce. Even Dr. Emmett
Brown in Back to the Future managed to sustain an air of dignity
compared to Capaldi.

In the end comes the final battle and the Doctor decides to use a dozen
or so barrels of water full of electric eels (which the baby seems to
have guided him too) to take down the aliens in their metal casings by
electrocuting them. And like the aliens were stupid enough not to think
of insulating them. Besides which they would be acting as a Faraday cage
so any electronics would be left unharmed. And then another moronic
comedy set piece is played with the Doctor recoding everything on
Clara's mobile phone and threatening to upload it to the cosmic version
of YouTube to make the aliens into a laughing stock. More like it's made
Doctor Who into a laughing stock.

Throughout the episode time was wasted with crap comedy dialogue and
exchanges with Clara trying to shame the Doctor which made it drag on
and on. "You think these people are morons Doctor don't you." Too damn
right they are, along with the script writers who created this drivel.
There was even a reference to Capaldi's "annoying Scottish accent."

Then came the biggest piece of moronic crap of the lot with the Doctor
remembering the reason why he chose to copy the appearance of Cecilius
from The Fires of Pompeii for his regeneration. It was to remind him
that he had the power of life and death in his hands and to use it now.
What a load of bullshit. Was the reason he decided into into Colin
Baker's body from when he played a Time Lord guard in Arc of Infinity to
remind him to be nasty to everyone he met including Perry?

So finally the Doctor uses his 'super-powers' to bring Massie Williams
character back from the dead. How he manages to repair the alien medical
device without his sonic I don't know. But now Massie can no longer die.
Like we've not seen that before, and in next week's episode she's
decided to become Dick Turpin.

This whole story could have been done much better had the Doctor along
with the entire script been written in a more dignified manner.

7.5/10 for entertainment.

60/100 for script writing. What could have been a decent story was
ruined by the crap anachronistic dialogue, the crap characters and Peter
Capaldi's terrible acting and inability to do anger or authority. Also
it was ruined by the provision of a moronic plot complete with comedy
aliens and comic Vikings and Clara being turned into a comedy female
version of the Doctor.

Moffat is on his way to losing the plot entirely just like JNT did back
in the 1980s. He's turned the show into a pantomime by trying to make
the Doctor into some kind of super-hero in the manner of Bandannaman and
Baggy Pants & The Nitwits.
The Doctor
2015-10-17 23:56:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <R6udnZwPEs1-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>
>Spoilers
>
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>
>The Girl Who Died
>
>What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
>was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing pantomime.
>
>Why Mark Gatiss was not asked to write the script I don't know. Instead
>of authentic period dialogue it was written like a bad 21st century
>sit-com. Compared to The Time Meddler the writing was a travesty to
>Doctor Who. Not only is the Doctor addressing the "Vikings" using 21st
>century comic mannerisms but they're replying back to him in exactly the
>same way.
>
>In this story you have the Doctor being turned into a bigger clown than
>Sylvester McCoy ever was. Capladli has the same limited range doing
>anger and authority as Sylvester McCoy did, if not worse, and sounded
>more laughable than Graham Crowden in The Horn's of Nimon when he was
>shouting at the "Viking" villagers claiming to be Odin. The way this set
>piece was written and acted for laughs totally ruined it's philosophical
>message comparing humans feeding dumb animals to gods or something along
>those lines.
>
>Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a start
>the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she uses
>in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived after the
>strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves Norsemen after
>the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by the Saxons which
>meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or "Voyagers". No real
>"Viking" would behave in the way any of these characters were written.
>
>Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
>unfortunately they seem to back next week.
>
>Next you have another comedy set piece with Doctor translating a Baby
>crying, as if the baby were Confucius or Lao Tzu. It was totally
>ridiculous and I'm trying to think of the name of the comedy movie or
>cartoon series the idea was taken from. When a baby cries it means it
>wants to be fed or wants attention. It doesn't have a clue about what's
>happening concerning its surroundings, only it's own self. A two year
>old cat is more intelligent.
>
>After that set piece you have the Doctor deciding to train the left over
>weakling "Vikings" in how to use swords and instead of doing it properly
>as Edgar Rice Burroughs had John Carter do in Skeleton Men of Jupiter
>it's done as a pantomime with the Doctor giving comic names to each of
>the trainees including calling one of them Lofty as if it was a 5th rate
>rejected script for It Ain't 'Alf Hot Mum.
>
>Together with the crap comedy set piece from episode 1 set in the middle
>ages with the Doctor playing rock guitar on top of a tank it seems like
>Moffat's main influence is Bill and Ted rather than actual science
>fiction. Capaldi is being made to make a complete fool of himself, and
>like who is this supposed to actually appeal to? American teenagers?
>Capaldi is not Marty McFly. It might have worked with Matt Smith and
>David Tennant but with Capaldi it's a complete farce. Even Dr. Emmett
>Brown in Back to the Future managed to sustain an air of dignity
>compared to Capaldi.
>
>In the end comes the final battle and the Doctor decides to use a dozen
>or so barrels of water full of electric eels (which the baby seems to
>have guided him too) to take down the aliens in their metal casings by
>electrocuting them. And like the aliens were stupid enough not to think
>of insulating them. Besides which they would be acting as a Faraday cage
>so any electronics would be left unharmed. And then another moronic
>comedy set piece is played with the Doctor recoding everything on
>Clara's mobile phone and threatening to upload it to the cosmic version
>of YouTube to make the aliens into a laughing stock. More like it's made
>Doctor Who into a laughing stock.
>
>Throughout the episode time was wasted with crap comedy dialogue and
>exchanges with Clara trying to shame the Doctor which made it drag on
>and on. "You think these people are morons Doctor don't you." Too damn
>right they are, along with the script writers who created this drivel.
>There was even a reference to Capaldi's "annoying Scottish accent."
>
>Then came the biggest piece of moronic crap of the lot with the Doctor
>remembering the reason why he chose to copy the appearance of Cecilius
>from The Fires of Pompeii for his regeneration. It was to remind him
>that he had the power of life and death in his hands and to use it now.
>What a load of bullshit. Was the reason he decided into into Colin
>Baker's body from when he played a Time Lord guard in Arc of Infinity to
>remind him to be nasty to everyone he met including Perry?
>
>So finally the Doctor uses his 'super-powers' to bring Massie Williams
>character back from the dead. How he manages to repair the alien medical
>device without his sonic I don't know. But now Massie can no longer die.
>Like we've not seen that before, and in next week's episode she's
>decided to become Dick Turpin.
>
>This whole story could have been done much better had the Doctor along
>with the entire script been written in a more dignified manner.
>
>7.5/10 for entertainment.
>
>60/100 for script writing. What could have been a decent story was
>ruined by the crap anachronistic dialogue, the crap characters and Peter
>Capaldi's terrible acting and inability to do anger or authority. Also
>it was ruined by the provision of a moronic plot complete with comedy
>aliens and comic Vikings and Clara being turned into a comedy female
>version of the Doctor.
>
>Moffat is on his way to losing the plot entirely just like JNT did back
>in the 1980s. He's turned the show into a pantomime by trying to make
>the Doctor into some kind of super-hero in the manner of Bandannaman and
>Baggy Pants & The Nitwits.
>

Will review myself. I see you doing a change.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Time for Stephen to move on on Oct 19 2015!!
Andrew M
2015-10-18 00:07:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 2015-10-17 23:38:10 +0000, Agamemnon said:

> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>
> Spoilers
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
>
> The Girl Who Died
>
> What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
> was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing
> pantomime.
>
> Why Mark Gatiss was not asked to write the script I don't know. Instead
> of authentic period dialogue it was written like a bad 21st century
> sit-com. Compared to The Time Meddler the writing was a travesty to
> Doctor Who. Not only is the Doctor addressing the "Vikings" using 21st
> century comic mannerisms but they're replying back to him in exactly
> the same way.

You want "authentic period dialogue" from the 9th Century? Really? Good
luck with that. I have some sympathy when you speak of 2ist Century
mannerisms, but it's a 21st Century drama.

>
> In this story you have the Doctor being turned into a bigger clown than
> Sylvester McCoy ever was. Capladli has the same limited range doing
> anger and authority as Sylvester McCoy did, if not worse, and sounded
> more laughable than Graham Crowden in The Horn's of Nimon when he was
> shouting at the "Viking" villagers claiming to be Odin. The way this
> set piece was written and acted for laughs totally ruined it's
> philosophical message comparing humans feeding dumb animals to gods or
> something along those lines.

I agree that a gegreeof "clowning" was involved here. I don't accept,
though, that it "ruined" anything. The Doctor was guilty of hubris
here. He thought of the Vikings s ignorant savages who could be wowed
with a few tricks and references to their mythology. I don't think you
really understand what "philosophical message" you think was being
communicated here

>
> Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a
> start the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she
> uses in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived
> after the strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves
> Norsemen after the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by
> the Saxons which meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or
> "Voyagers". No real "Viking" would behave in the way any of these
> characters were written.

As I recall, "Viking" was, indeed, the term used by the Vikings
themselves. It derives from a Norse verb that is to do with raiding.
They NEVER called themselves "Norsemen". That woiuld imply a concept of
cultural unity across Scandinavia that simply did not exist during the
period. Would Vikings have acted as portrayed? I don't know. Nor do
you. There's every likelihood that Scandinavian culture was as rich and
varied as our own

>
> Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
> unfortunately they seem to back next week.
>
> Next you have another comedy set piece with Doctor translating a Baby crying,

You thought that was comedy? Really?

> as if the baby were Confucius or Lao Tzu. It was totally ridiculous
> and I'm trying to think of the name of the comedy movie or cartoon
> series the idea was taken from. When a baby cries it means it wants to
> be fed or wants attention. It doesn't have a clue about what's
> happening concerning its surroundings, only it's own self. A two year
> old cat is more intelligent.

A baby know when it's scared. That;'s what was communicated

>
> After that set piece you have the Doctor deciding to train the left
> over weakling "Vikings" in how to use swords and instead of doing it
> properly as Edgar Rice Burroughs had John Carter do in Skeleton Men of
> Jupiter it's done as a pantomime with the Doctor giving comic names to
> each of the trainees including calling one of them Lofty as if it was a
> 5th rate rejected script for It Ain't 'Alf Hot Mum.

Yeah. Because the way Burroughs tells it is SO realistic. That's the
way things go when farmers are faced with trained warriors. They gain
skills SO quickly that they defeat the oncoming foe because all that
really matters is the courage in your soul, right? Bollocks. The
portrayal in this episode was, perhaps, comedic, but way truer to
reality than Burroughs's view of the world

>
> Together with the crap comedy set piece from episode 1 set in the
> middle ages with the Doctor playing rock guitar on top of a tank it
> seems like Moffat's main influence is Bill and Ted rather than actual
> science fiction. Capaldi is being made to make a complete fool of
> himself, and like who is this supposed to actually appeal to? American
> teenagers? Capaldi is not Marty McFly. It might have worked with Matt
> Smith and David Tennant but with Capaldi it's a complete farce. Even
> Dr. Emmett Brown in Back to the Future managed to sustain an air of
> dignity compared to Capaldi.

I have not the slightest idea what you mean here

>
> In the end comes the final battle and the Doctor decides to use a dozen
> or so barrels of water full of electric eels (which the baby seems to
> have guided him too) to take down the aliens in their metal casings by
> electrocuting them.

It didn't electrocute them. It fried their instrumentation.

> And like the aliens were stupid enough not to think of insulating
> them. Besides which they would be acting as a Faraday cage so any
> electronics would be left unharmed.

I don't think you really understand what a Faraday cage is. A true
Faraday cage conducts an electric charge through it to the earth. That
doesn't mean that electronic systems within them woukd be unaffected by
the electric charge rippling across its surface

> And then another moronic comedy set piece is played with the Doctor
> recoding everything on Clara's mobile phone and threatening to upload
> it to the cosmic version of YouTube to make the aliens into a laughing
> stock. More like it's made Doctor Who into a laughing stock.

In what way, and why?

>
> Throughout the episode time was wasted with crap comedy dialogue and
> exchanges with Clara trying to shame the Doctor which made it drag on
> and on. "You think these people are morons Doctor don't you." Too damn
> right they are, along with the script writers who created this drivel.
> There was even a reference to Capaldi's "annoying Scottish accent."
>
> Then came the biggest piece of moronic crap of the lot with the Doctor
> remembering the reason why he chose to copy the appearance of Cecilius
> from The Fires of Pompeii for his regeneration. It was to remind him
> that he had the power of life and death in his hands and to use it now.
> What a load of bullshit. Was the reason he decided into into Colin
> Baker's body from when he played a Time Lord guard in Arc of Infinity
> to remind him to be nasty to everyone he met including Perry?

Well, that certainly seemed to work

>
> So finally the Doctor uses his 'super-powers' to bring Massie Williams
> character back from the dead. How he manages to repair the alien
> medical device without his sonic I don't know. But now Massie can no
> longer die. Like we've not seen that before, and in next week's episode
> she's decided to become Dick Turpin.

Did he "repair" the alien medical device. In don't remember him sayin that

>
> This whole story could have been done much better had the Doctor along
> with the entire script been written in a more dignified manner.
>
> 7.5/10 for entertainment.
>
> 60/100 for script writing. What could have been a decent story was
> ruined by the crap anachronistic dialogue, the crap characters and
> Peter Capaldi's terrible acting and inability to do anger or authority.
> Also it was ruined by the provision of a moronic plot complete with
> comedy aliens and comic Vikings and Clara being turned into a comedy
> female version of the Doctor.
>
> Moffat is on his way to losing the plot entirely just like JNT did back
> in the 1980s. He's turned the show into a pantomime by trying to make
> the Doctor into some kind of super-hero in the manner of Bandannaman
> and Baggy Pants & The Nitwits.
Agamemnon
2015-10-18 01:07:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 18/10/2015 01:07, Andrew M wrote:
> On 2015-10-17 23:38:10 +0000, Agamemnon said:
>
>> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>>
>> Spoilers
>>
>> 1
>> 2
>> 3
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>> 9
>> 0
>> 1
>> 2
>> 3
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>> 9
>> 0
>>
>> The Girl Who Died
>>
>> What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a
>> story was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a
>> f'ing pantomime.
>>
>> Why Mark Gatiss was not asked to write the script I don't know.
>> Instead of authentic period dialogue it was written like a bad 21st
>> century sit-com. Compared to The Time Meddler the writing was a
>> travesty to Doctor Who. Not only is the Doctor addressing the
>> "Vikings" using 21st century comic mannerisms but they're replying
>> back to him in exactly the same way.
>
> You want "authentic period dialogue" from the 9th Century? Really? Good

Take Beowulf, translate it into modern English and you will find no 21st
Century comedy mannerisms in it at all, especially ones that originate
from the US.

> luck with that. I have some sympathy when you speak of 2ist Century
> mannerisms, but it's a 21st Century drama.
>

That doesn't mean that the protagonists have to talk like they're from a
bad episode of The Office.

>>
>> In this story you have the Doctor being turned into a bigger clown
>> than Sylvester McCoy ever was. Capladli has the same limited range
>> doing anger and authority as Sylvester McCoy did, if not worse, and
>> sounded more laughable than Graham Crowden in The Horn's of Nimon when
>> he was shouting at the "Viking" villagers claiming to be Odin. The way
>> this set piece was written and acted for laughs totally ruined it's
>> philosophical message comparing humans feeding dumb animals to gods or
>> something along those lines.
>
> I agree that a gegreeof "clowning" was involved here. I don't accept,
> though, that it "ruined" anything. The Doctor was guilty of hubris here.
> He thought of the Vikings s ignorant savages who could be wowed with a
> few tricks and references to their mythology. I don't think you really
> understand what "philosophical message" you think was being communicated
> here

I don't think Moffat really understands Vikings or other historical
cultures. He's the ones who thinks of them as morons and ignorant
savages. The Doctor should know better. Taking the name of a god in vain
would have been considered blasphemy. Moffat was portraying these
Vikings as easily gullible 21st century agnostics.

The philosophical message which you fail to understand is that all gods
are the invention of man who will consider anyone or anything with a
higher power or understanding than their own to be godly. In the example
given a cow considers a farmer a god because he gives her food.
Herodotus said effectively the same thing about the Greek gods, that
they (living kings from which the Greeks/Pelasgians were descended from)
were called Theoi or Disposers because they arranged and disposed of all
things in such a beautiful order. The gods were nothing more than a
mafia who had control over peoples lives though patronage, sacrifices
effectively being the equivalent of bribes and protection money. Before
science the planets were considered gods because of their affect on the
seasons and thus the harvest and conditions for human survival.

>
>>
>> Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a
>> start the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which
>> she uses in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara
>> survived after the strongest Vikings were abducted. They called
>> themselves Norsemen after the land they came from. "Vikings" was a
>> term used by the Saxons which meant something like "pirate" or "sea
>> fairer" or "Voyagers". No real "Viking" would behave in the way any of
>> these characters were written.
>
> As I recall, "Viking" was, indeed, the term used by the Vikings
> themselves.

Not it wasn't.

"As in the Old Norse usages, the term is not employed as a name for any
people or culture in general. The word does not occur in any preserved
Middle English texts. The word Viking was introduced into Modern English
during the 18th-century Viking revival, at which point it acquired
romanticised heroic overtones of "barbarian warrior" or noble savage. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings

> It derives from a Norse verb that is to do with raiding.
> They NEVER called themselves "Norsemen". That woiuld imply a concept of
> cultural unity across Scandinavia that simply did not exist during the
> period. Would Vikings have acted as portrayed? I don't know. Nor do you.
> There's every likelihood that Scandinavian culture was as rich and
> varied as our own

Ok, correction, the Anglo-Saxons called them Danes.

"The Vikings were known as Ascomanni "ashmen" by the Germans for the ash
wood of their boats,[14] Lochlannach by the Gaels,[15] and Dene by the
Anglo-Saxons.[16]

The Slavs, the Arabs and the Byzantines knew them as the Rus' or
Rhōs,[17] probably derived from various uses of rōþs-, "related to
rowing", or derived from the area of Roslagen in east-central Sweden,
where most of the Vikings who visited the Slavic lands came from. Some
archaeologists and historians of today believe that these Scandinavian
settlements in the Slavic lands played a significant role in the
formation of the Kievan Rus' federation, and hence the names and early
states of Russia and Belarus.[18][19][20] The modern day name for Sweden
in several neighbouring countries is possibly derived from rōþs-, Ruotsi
in Finnish and Rootsi in Estonian.

The Slavs and the Byzantines also called them Varangians (Russian:
варяги, from Old Norse Væringjar, meaning "sworn men", from vàr-
"confidence, vow of fealty," related to Old English wær "agreement,
treaty, promise," Old High German wara "faithfulness"[17]). Scandinavian
bodyguards of the Byzantine emperors were known as the Varangian Guard."

Obviously Varangian is the origin of the name of the Franks by simple
consonantal shift so if the Anglo-Saxons called them anything other than
Danes or Norsemen it would have been Franks.

>
>>
>> Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
>> unfortunately they seem to back next week.
>>
>> Next you have another comedy set piece with Doctor translating a Baby
>> crying,
>
> You thought that was comedy? Really?
>

I didn't say it was good comedy of funny but it was done for laughs in
some comedy movie or other long ago and has no place in Doctor Who.

>> as if the baby were Confucius or Lao Tzu. It was totally ridiculous
>> and I'm trying to think of the name of the comedy movie or cartoon
>> series the idea was taken from. When a baby cries it means it wants to
>> be fed or wants attention. It doesn't have a clue about what's
>> happening concerning its surroundings, only it's own self. A two year
>> old cat is more intelligent.
>
> A baby know when it's scared. That;'s what was communicated
>

No. A baby does not know when it is scared. It doesn't know what to be
afraid off. A baby cat is not afraid of having a dog acting as it's
mother or a human holding it. A baby chick is not afraid of having a cat
as it's mother. In fact I have a video demonstrating it. A baby only
cries when it is hungry or is seeking attention such as when it is in
pain or discomfort. It doesn't even know how to be afraid of heights.
Look at when Michael Jackson dangled his son out of a hotel window.

>>
>> After that set piece you have the Doctor deciding to train the left
>> over weakling "Vikings" in how to use swords and instead of doing it
>> properly as Edgar Rice Burroughs had John Carter do in Skeleton Men of
>> Jupiter it's done as a pantomime with the Doctor giving comic names to
>> each of the trainees including calling one of them Lofty as if it was
>> a 5th rate rejected script for It Ain't 'Alf Hot Mum.
>
> Yeah. Because the way Burroughs tells it is SO realistic. That's the way

Yes actually it is. Burroughs served in the US cavalry and was schooled
at a military academy. His father was also a Major and fought in the US
Civil War so he was wiring from personal experience which is always the
best way to write.

> things go when farmers are faced with trained warriors. They gain skills
> SO quickly that they defeat the oncoming foe because all that really
> matters is the courage in your soul, right? Bollocks. The portrayal in
> this episode was, perhaps, comedic, but way truer to reality than
> Burroughs's view of the world

The portrayal in this episode was a farce. Every Viking was trained in
military combat from youth since it was part of their culture and
essential for their survival. The weaklings would have been killed or
left to starve by their own parents as infants or died in training. They
also too hallucinogenic substances to make the go berserk and overcome
all fear. If you are faced with an enemy driving you out of you village
that's effectively a death sentence. No other village would take you in,
so you have no choice but to fight for your life and take down as many
of the enemy as you possibly can before you fall. It's either freedom or
death.

>
>>
>> Together with the crap comedy set piece from episode 1 set in the
>> middle ages with the Doctor playing rock guitar on top of a tank it
>> seems like Moffat's main influence is Bill and Ted rather than actual
>> science fiction. Capaldi is being made to make a complete fool of
>> himself, and like who is this supposed to actually appeal to? American
>> teenagers? Capaldi is not Marty McFly. It might have worked with Matt
>> Smith and David Tennant but with Capaldi it's a complete farce. Even
>> Dr. Emmett Brown in Back to the Future managed to sustain an air of
>> dignity compared to Capaldi.
>
> I have not the slightest idea what you mean here
>

Moffat is writing the Doctor as if he's a US teenager.

>>
>> In the end comes the final battle and the Doctor decides to use a
>> dozen or so barrels of water full of electric eels (which the baby
>> seems to have guided him too) to take down the aliens in their metal
>> casings by electrocuting them.
>
> It didn't electrocute them. It fried their instrumentation.

That would have been impossible if we go by the previous story. The
instruments were house inside a Faraday cage, the metal casing of the
machines. The electricity would not have affected them just like a
lighting strike would not have affected the passengers inside an aeroplane.

>
>> And like the aliens were stupid enough not to think of insulating
>> them. Besides which they would be acting as a Faraday cage so any
>> electronics would be left unharmed.
>
> I don't think you really understand what a Faraday cage is. A true
> Faraday cage conducts an electric charge through it to the earth. That
> doesn't mean that electronic systems within them woukd be unaffected by
> the electric charge rippling across its surface

Nope. With a true Faraday Cage, for example a metal sphere, the
electrical charge is spread around the entire surface and cancels itself
out. For example an aeroplane struck by lighting behaves like a Faraday
cage and the passengers inside are unaffected by the strike. The charge
eventually dissipates from the outside but grounding to earth has
nothing to do with it. What you are describing is a lightning conductor.

"A Faraday cage operates because an external electrical field causes the
electric charges within the cage's conducting material to be distributed
such that they cancel the field's effect in the cage's interior. This
phenomenon is used to protect sensitive electronic equipment from
external radio frequency interference (RFI). Faraday cages are also used
to enclose devices that produce RFI, such as radio transmitters, to
prevent their radio waves from interfering with other nearby equipment.
They are also used to protect people and equipment against actual
electric currents such as lightning strikes and electrostatic
discharges, since the enclosing cage conducts current around the outside
of the enclosed space and none passes though the interior."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage

>
>> And then another moronic comedy set piece is played with the Doctor
>> recoding everything on Clara's mobile phone and threatening to upload
>> it to the cosmic version of YouTube to make the aliens into a laughing
>> stock. More like it's made Doctor Who into a laughing stock.
>
> In what way, and why?
>

Like these aliens or any other army would give a fuck about something
uploaded to the internet. If you threatened ISIS with that they'd take
your head off. The scene was pure farce.

>>
>> Throughout the episode time was wasted with crap comedy dialogue and
>> exchanges with Clara trying to shame the Doctor which made it drag on
>> and on. "You think these people are morons Doctor don't you." Too damn
>> right they are, along with the script writers who created this drivel.
>> There was even a reference to Capaldi's "annoying Scottish accent."
>>
>> Then came the biggest piece of moronic crap of the lot with the Doctor
>> remembering the reason why he chose to copy the appearance of Cecilius
>> from The Fires of Pompeii for his regeneration. It was to remind him
>> that he had the power of life and death in his hands and to use it
>> now. What a load of bullshit. Was the reason he decided into into
>> Colin Baker's body from when he played a Time Lord guard in Arc of
>> Infinity to remind him to be nasty to everyone he met including Perry?
>
> Well, that certainly seemed to work
>

It was pure farce.

>>
>> So finally the Doctor uses his 'super-powers' to bring Massie Williams
>> character back from the dead. How he manages to repair the alien
>> medical device without his sonic I don't know. But now Massie can no
>> longer die. Like we've not seen that before, and in next week's
>> episode she's decided to become Dick Turpin.
>
> Did he "repair" the alien medical device. In don't remember him sayin that
>

Yes. It was destroyed by the electric eels. Although it shouldn't have
been since it was housed inside a Faraday cage and formed a Faraday cage
in it's own right.

>>
>> This whole story could have been done much better had the Doctor along
>> with the entire script been written in a more dignified manner.
>>
>> 7.5/10 for entertainment.
>>
>> 60/100 for script writing. What could have been a decent story was
>> ruined by the crap anachronistic dialogue, the crap characters and
>> Peter Capaldi's terrible acting and inability to do anger or
>> authority. Also it was ruined by the provision of a moronic plot
>> complete with comedy aliens and comic Vikings and Clara being turned
>> into a comedy female version of the Doctor.
>>
>> Moffat is on his way to losing the plot entirely just like JNT did
>> back in the 1980s. He's turned the show into a pantomime by trying to
>> make the Doctor into some kind of super-hero in the manner of
>> Bandannaman and Baggy Pants & The Nitwits.
>
>
Charles E. Hardwidge
2015-10-18 05:31:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 18/10/15 02:07, Agamemnon wrote:

> That doesn't mean that the protagonists have to talk like they're from a
> bad episode of The Office.

As opposed to a windy post on usenet full of hypercriticality from one
end to the other...

I'd also row back a little on your philosophy and psychology. Animastic
religions (like Hinduism or Shintoism and Taoism in its own way) aren't
quite as dumb on the surface as they may appear. The psychology of
children under the age of two is very sketchy but there is evidence even
very young babies have a sense of awareness and fear which can,
actually, impact into childhood and adulthood. This may be more
complicated by neurology (and psycho-neurology is itself a very new
field). I'm not a defence expert but my simple understanding is that
EMP/Tempest hardening aside if someone is close enough to electrocute
you then you're likely dead already.

Science-fiction is called science fiction for a reason i.e. it's not a
textbook and includes speculation and handwaves and creativity. So does
hard science, actually, but we tend to skip this. If there's a
difference it's between what sells versus verification - the perils of
living in a linear timestream, a 40 minute show, and the need for sleep.

I also think you missed the elephant in the room. A big blue box bigger
on the inside than the outside which travels through time? Absurd.
Rubbish. Bunkum and balderdash. Whoever commissioned this must have been
insane or on drugs. Cancel this travesty immediately!

Tum, te, tum.


--
Charles E. Hardwidge
p***@gmail.com
2015-10-18 08:18:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Agamemnon wrote:

> Take Beowulf, translate it into modern English and you will find no 21st
> Century comedy mannerisms in it at all, especially ones that originate
> from the US.

Beowulf is a poem, written in a highly-stylised alliterative meter.
People didn't really talk like that in everyday speech.
Siri Cruz
2015-10-19 08:07:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
> >> Spoilers
> >>
> >> 1
> >> 2
> >> 3
> >> 4
> >> 5
> >> 6
> >> 7
> >> 8
> >> 9
> >> 0
> >> 1
> >> 2
> >> 3
> >> 4
> >> 5
> >> 6
> >> 7
> >> 8
> >> 9
> >> 0
> >>

> Take Beowulf, translate it into modern English and you will find no 21st
> Century comedy mannerisms in it at all, especially ones that originate
> from the US.

How recently was comedy invented? Does it predate talkies?

Everyday conversation was not spoken in alliterative tetrameter. And the usage
in Beowulf was already stilted and archaic when it was composed to examine
extinct English pagan traditions from the context early English christianity.

And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter Homer used.

> savages. The Doctor should know better. Taking the name of a god in vain
> would have been considered blasphemy. Moffat was portraying these

Really? Blasphemy was a big deal with Jews, enough to kill a Galilean carpenter,
but all the other religions? Descendants of these people would convert to
christianity because their old gods weren't deliverring anything. Is that
blasphemous?

> The philosophical message which you fail to understand is that all gods
> are the invention of man who will consider anyone or anything with a
> higher power or understanding than their own to be godly. In the example

In order to get Clash of Titans suckage you have to distort another religion
into a parody of christianity and then claim people could be atheists in the
living presence of their gods and that means christianity must be bogus.

> No. A baby does not know when it is scared. It doesn't know what to be
> afraid off. A baby cat is not afraid of having a dog acting as it's

Actually babies are capable of fear as experimentally demonstrated: a baby was
placed on plexiglass at a dnagerous height above the ground. It reacted in a
freeze with obvious signs of panic. Fear like anger is a primitive emotion land
veterbrates have had since at least reptiles. Some fears are instinctual and
some are learned but fear itself is wired into our brains.

Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and share in it
empathetically.

> The portrayal in this episode was a farce. Every Viking was trained in
> military combat from youth since it was part of their culture and

Farmers and fishers rarely make it into sagas. Steel weapons were expensive;
when local levies are mentionned, such as with Harald at Hastings, they are
armed with crude weapons and farm implements, and their role in battle is spear
fodder behind the trained warriors to add weight and random violence to the
shield wall.

> essential for their survival. The weaklings would have been killed or
> left to starve by their own parents as infants or died in training. They

Those were SPARTANS, not Danes. At that time societies were so close to
starvation that 90% to 99% of the population was devoted to agriculture.
Warriors were parasites on the farmers.

> of the enemy as you possibly can before you fall. It's either freedom or
> death.

Or slavery.

> That would have been impossible if we go by the previous story. The
> instruments were house inside a Faraday cage, the metal casing of the
> machines. The electricity would not have affected them just like a
> lighting strike would not have affected the passengers inside an aeroplane.

But it can fry anything not insulated from the skin. Radar cannot protected and
still be effective. Radio antennas also are unprotected, and the eletrical surge
can follow a conductor to equipment inside the plane.

> Like these aliens or any other army would give a fuck about something
> uploaded to the internet. If you threatened ISIS with that they'd take
> your head off. The scene was pure farce.

Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because they find
his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
TB
2015-10-19 17:21:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 1:07:41 AM UTC-7, Siri Cruz wrote:
> > >> Spoilers
> > >>
> > >> 1
> > >> 2
> > >> 3
> > >> 4
> > >> 5
> > >> 6
> > >> 7
> > >> 8
> > >> 9
> > >> 0
> > >> 1
> > >> 2
> > >> 3
> > >> 4
> > >> 5
> > >> 6
> > >> 7
> > >> 8
> > >> 9
> > >> 0
> > >>
>
> > Take Beowulf, translate it into modern English and you will find no 21st
> > Century comedy mannerisms in it at all, especially ones that originate
> > from the US.
>
> How recently was comedy invented? Does it predate talkies?
>
> Everyday conversation was not spoken in alliterative tetrameter. And the usage
> in Beowulf was already stilted and archaic when it was composed to examine
> extinct English pagan traditions from the context early English christianity.
>
> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter Homer used.
>
> > savages. The Doctor should know better. Taking the name of a god in vain
> > would have been considered blasphemy. Moffat was portraying these
>
> Really? Blasphemy was a big deal with Jews, enough to kill a Galilean carpenter,
> but all the other religions? Descendants of these people would convert to
> christianity because their old gods weren't deliverring anything. Is that
> blasphemous?

Muslims seem to take blasphemy seriously.
TB
2015-10-19 17:35:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

The Doctor is concerned about the impact of making a Viking girl immortal. I urge that he jump a few years into that village's future, don his invisibility watch from last season, and walk through the village to spy on that girl.
Agamemnon
2015-10-19 19:00:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 09:07, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>> Spoilers
>>>>
>>>> 1
>>>> 2
>>>> 3
>>>> 4
>>>> 5
>>>> 6
>>>> 7
>>>> 8
>>>> 9
>>>> 0
>>>> 1
>>>> 2
>>>> 3
>>>> 4
>>>> 5
>>>> 6
>>>> 7
>>>> 8
>>>> 9
>>>> 0
>>>>
>
>> Take Beowulf, translate it into modern English and you will find no 21st
>> Century comedy mannerisms in it at all, especially ones that originate
>> from the US.
>
> How recently was comedy invented? Does it predate talkies?
>

Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
being their?

> Everyday conversation was not spoken in alliterative tetrameter. And the usage
> in Beowulf was already stilted and archaic when it was composed to examine
> extinct English pagan traditions from the context early English christianity.
>
> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter Homer used.
>

Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they did
when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how
influential Homer was in ancient Greek culture and education. Everyone
quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the way
the ancient Greeks thought. Their mannerisms were those of Homer,
Euripides, Sophocles, Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Herodotus, Xeonophon, and
Diodorus. You can still see that in the way modern Greeks think and speak.

Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr it's
obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to mind
Beowulf.

"Lo! the Spear-Danes’ glory through splendid achievements
The folk-kings’ former fame we have heard of,
How princes displayed then their prowess-in-battle.
Scyld, their mighty king, in honor of whom they are often called
Scyldings. He is the great-grandfather of Hrothgar, so prominent in the
poem.
Oft Scyld the Scefing from scathers in numbers
From many a people their mead-benches tore.
Since first he found him friendless and wretched,
The earl had had terror: comfort he got for it,
Waxed ’neath the welkin, world-honor gained,
Till all his neighbors o’er sea were compelled to
Bow to his bidding and bring him their tribute:
An excellent atheling! After was borne him
A son and heir, young in his dwelling, ..."

Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?

>> savages. The Doctor should know better. Taking the name of a god in vain
>> would have been considered blasphemy. Moffat was portraying these
>
> Really? Blasphemy was a big deal with Jews, enough to kill a Galilean carpenter,
> but all the other religions? Descendants of these people would convert to
> christianity because their old gods weren't deliverring anything. Is that
> blasphemous?
>

Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in Christianity
the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
have spelled death for him.

>> The philosophical message which you fail to understand is that all gods
>> are the invention of man who will consider anyone or anything with a
>> higher power or understanding than their own to be godly. In the example
>
> In order to get Clash of Titans suckage you have to distort another religion
> into a parody of christianity and then claim people could be atheists in the
> living presence of their gods and that means christianity must be bogus.
>

So as you have just shown the actual philosophical messages that the
story was trying to communicate were distorted and hidden by all the
above nonsense. If you're going to write about a historical religion
then at least get the writers to understand it properly and not turn it
into a parody of Christianity which is already a parody of itself anyway.

>> No. A baby does not know when it is scared. It doesn't know what to be
>> afraid off. A baby cat is not afraid of having a dog acting as it's
>
> Actually babies are capable of fear as experimentally demonstrated: a baby was
> placed on plexiglass at a dnagerous height above the ground. It reacted in a
> freeze with obvious signs of panic. Fear like anger is a primitive emotion land
> veterbrates have had since at least reptiles. Some fears are instinctual and
> some are learned but fear itself is wired into our brains.
>

Those are inbuilt self preservation responses, not the kind of Freudian
poppycock the Doctor was coming up with.

> Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and share in it
> empathetically.

Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is with
them. That's what babies do.

>
>> The portrayal in this episode was a farce. Every Viking was trained in
>> military combat from youth since it was part of their culture and
>
> Farmers and fishers rarely make it into sagas. Steel weapons were expensive;
> when local levies are mentionned, such as with Harald at Hastings, they are
> armed with crude weapons and farm implements, and their role in battle is spear
> fodder behind the trained warriors to add weight and random violence to the
> shield wall.

The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the least
and would have attacked from the back. The spear fodder would have been
the idiots with swords and axes in the front line.

>
>> essential for their survival. The weaklings would have been killed or
>> left to starve by their own parents as infants or died in training. They
>
> Those were SPARTANS, not Danes. At that time societies were so close to
> starvation that 90% to 99% of the population was devoted to agriculture.
> Warriors were parasites on the farmers.
>
>> of the enemy as you possibly can before you fall. It's either freedom or
>> death.
>
> Or slavery.

The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking slaves?

>
>> That would have been impossible if we go by the previous story. The
>> instruments were house inside a Faraday cage, the metal casing of the
>> machines. The electricity would not have affected them just like a
>> lighting strike would not have affected the passengers inside an aeroplane.
>
> But it can fry anything not insulated from the skin. Radar cannot protected and
> still be effective. Radio antennas also are unprotected, and the eletrical surge
> can follow a conductor to equipment inside the plane.

Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference across
any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from the
eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been felt
inside the cage.

>
>> Like these aliens or any other army would give a fuck about something
>> uploaded to the internet. If you threatened ISIS with that they'd take
>> your head off. The scene was pure farce.
>
> Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because they find
> his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
>

I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist socially
brain dead moron Donald Trump.
Siri Cruz
2015-10-19 21:23:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that

Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies does it
sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?

> originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
> especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
> being their?

They get them from the Tardis which translated their North Germanic slang and
jokes into the slang and jokes Clara would understand.


> > And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter Homer
> > used.
>
> Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they did
> when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how

How rich in count of drachmas cost that youthful hound
in yonder window what spies my orbs perceptive light?

Aye, thirty drachmas cost that youthful hound and eight.

Can you imagine how long it buy the ingredients for the dinner's stew?

> quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
> education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the way

Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of the rest were
illiterate farmers.

> Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr it's
> obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
> Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to mind
> Beowulf.

Beowulf was an English invention, and he was a Geat not a Dane. Hrothgar was the
Dane: the openning of the poem recounts his kingdom's history up to Grendel. The
language of the poem was intentionally archaic even then. Contemporary English
did not speak that way.

The poet knew the Geats would be conquerred by Swedes, as alluded in the poem's
ending.

> "Lo! the Spear-Danes¹ glory through splendid achievements
...
> Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?

It was more along the lines of Dallas. Did you catch the Who Shot Beowulf
cliffhanger?

> Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
> religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in Christianity

Socrates was not a North German. Romans were quite happy to add gods to their
religion to bribe those gods to abandon their previous worshippers.

Post-exilic Judaism and Christianity were distinct from the polytheisms around
them in the anti-synectrism and their emphasis on religion as an instrument of
morality and justice instead of god bribery. Islam followed this, and some of
this have been incorporated into Hinduism and Buddhism.

> the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
> have spelled death for him.

Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until 300. Jews did
not execute non-Jews. The letters of Paul record some of his conflicts with
other beliefs, but they end with him leaving without killing anyone.

> Those are inbuilt self preservation responses,

So fear itself.

> > Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and share in it
> > empathetically.
>
> Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is with
> them. That's what babies do.

Uh, no. About 96% (Or is that 99.6%?) of humans are born with neural wiring that
induces in us the same emotions we see in people around us. It is not copying
behaviour, it is emotional resonance. It's why humans can live in concentrations
and cooperate in numbers impossible for the great apes.

> The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the least

Actually they used hay hooks, shovels, hammers, whatever else was at hand on the
farm with some hope of lethality. They could not afford armor and reached
between the shield bearers to whack whoever got through the shield wall. Their
weight pressing up from behind added to the shield wall inertia.

> The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking slaves?

Read Volsungasaga and pay attention to people other than the Niflungs and
Sigurth. Warrior primes would be put to death to avoid subsequent revolts, but
anyone else who could be cowed was more valuable as a slave than rotting meat.

> Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference across
> any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from the
> eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been felt
> inside the cage.

They showed no insulation between the suit interiors and outer armor. Current
surges can follow conductors into the armor. Any instrumentation on the surface
was subject to charge and current surges. How much current the cables could
carry without melting depends on their alloy. Weren't they a high quality
silver? The cables were thick enough.

The real problem is I doubt electric eels provide the kind of charge separation
and potential difference needed to power outside equipment.

> > Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because they
> > find
> > his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
> >
>
> I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist socially
> brain dead moron Donald Trump.

The Putin man-love predates the current convervative march into futility.

With either Trump or Putin it shows how easily chicken hawks can be goaded with
shame.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 03:44:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 22:23, Siri Cruz wrote:
> In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
>> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
>> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
>
> Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies does it
> sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?

It sounds close though. It's derived from late 19th early 20th century
Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville.

>
>> originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
>> especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
>> being their?
>
> They get them from the Tardis which translated their North Germanic slang and
> jokes into the slang and jokes Clara would understand.

Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are translated
into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
it doesn't exist in the original. Freudian psychology/philosophy and
Jewish vaudeville did not exist when they were written. The kind of
humour in these plays most similarly resembles that of William
Shakespeare because he copied most of his comedies (if not all) from
Italian translations of ancient Greek and Roman plays or plays written
by later Italian writers. Even the humour in Chaucer is similar to those
classic styles but bares not resemblance to Freudian
psychology/philosophy and Vaudeville which tarnishes American comedy.

Remind me where in Shakespeare he finds it funny or necessary to make
the main protagonist bully the people he's supposed to be training to
fight by giving them silly names instead of using their own? Henry V?
Julius Caesar? Hamlet? It's pure Vaudeville. It something the Marx
Brothers would be proud off. It also something that doesn't belong in a
Children's programme or anything aimed at them. Edgar Rich Burroughs
dealt with a similar situation in Skeleton Men of Jupiter but in that
case John Carter puts the bully in his place before training the people
with him to how to use weapons to fight with.

>
>
>>> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter Homer
>>> used.
>>
>> Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they did
>> when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how
>
> How rich in count of drachmas cost that youthful hound
> in yonder window what spies my orbs perceptive light?
>
> Aye, thirty drachmas cost that youthful hound and eight.
>
> Can you imagine how long it buy the ingredients for the dinner's stew?

That's not how Homer wrote. That's Shakespeare you're basing it on.

Here's Homer

Lines 795-800 from Book 13 of The Iliad

Straightforward literal translation.

"And they went in like a maelstrom of quarrelsome winds
that goes earthward beneath Father Zeus’ thunderbolt
and with an inhuman din churns with the salt sea, the many
roiling waves of the greatly-roaring ocean
cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind;
So too the Trojans were packed together, some before, others hard behind."

>
>> quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
>> education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the way
>
> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of the rest were
> illiterate farmers.

That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
gymnasia from the age of 8 to the age of 18 and then serve in the
military for 2 years. The education was free, paid for and provided by
the state for all citizens no mater how rich or poor. Everyone was
taught to read and write including the farmers. Just imagine an army or
state filled with and run by illiterates. It wouldn't get very far.
That's why they educated all citizens to prepare them to fight, follow
written orders, vote and administer the government if they were ever
elected to office. Women since they didn't have to fight always stayed
at home. The men even did the shopping. The women made cloth.

What you call salves were not Athenian citizens but the equivalent of
migrant labourers. Douloi is what they were called which literally
translates as Workers not Slaves. They were paid with bed and board or
with a set fee of 6 obols per day. It wasn't the state's duty to pay for
their education since they were not citizens, didn't fight in the army
and paid no taxes.

People need to stop trying to associate ancient Greece with 17th-19th
century slavery in America and the education standards of Middle ages
England. It was nothing of the kind.

>
>> Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr it's
>> obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
>> Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to mind
>> Beowulf.
>
> Beowulf was an English invention, and he was a Geat not a Dane. Hrothgar was the
> Dane: the openning of the poem recounts his kingdom's history up to Grendel. The
> language of the poem was intentionally archaic even then. Contemporary English
> did not speak that way.

Beowulf is the English version of Hrolfs Saga Kraka. The usual dating
for both is wrong. The kings lists place the events around 150 AD mainly
due to an absence of Frothos in the lists later than then, assuming
Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson died around 830 ADish. Hamlet dates to about
the time of Plato or Herodotus, King Leir to about the time of Homer and
Lycurgus of Sparta.

>
> The poet knew the Geats would be conquerred by Swedes, as alluded in the poem's
> ending.
>
>> "Lo! the Spear-Danes¹ glory through splendid achievements
> ...
>> Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?
>
> It was more along the lines of Dallas. Did you catch the Who Shot Beowulf
> cliffhanger?

The Iliad was along the lines of Dallas too. The best part of it is the
soap-opera among the gods.

>
>> Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
>> religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in Christianity
>
> Socrates was not a North German. Romans were quite happy to add gods to their
> religion to bribe those gods to abandon their previous worshippers.
>

That's not what they did. The Romans accepted the gods of the barbarians
and let them worship them as they wished and even allowed them to be
worshipped in Rome by the Germanic immigrants. To simplify things they
associated each foreign god with the equivalent Roman god that was
responsible for the same sphere of influence.

> Post-exilic Judaism and Christianity were distinct from the polytheisms around

What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
polytheists up until the destruction of the Temple of Elyon by Titus in
70 AD. Even their own bible makes this clear. They worshipped every god
the Phoneticians worshipped and had temples built to them all in
Jerusalem. Elyon (the Most High) was the father of Baal-Shamen (Uranus)
who was the father of El (Kronos) and Ashera (Rhea), who were parents to
Jehovah (Pontus/Yam-Nahar). Adonai (Adonis) was equivalent to Baal-Hadad
(Hades) the son of Dagon (Zeus-Arotrios) brother of El and married to
Anat (Athena) the daughter of El and his sister Baaltis (Alilat/Dione).
Other identifications were also given.

The was even a temple of Ashera (tower of Strato) on top of the temple
of Elyon and a temple of Eshmun (Asclepius) beside it long into the
first century AD.

> them in the anti-synectrism and their emphasis on religion as an
instrument of
> morality and justice instead of god bribery.

On the contrary the Jewish religion stood for absolute servitude to a
cruel schizophrenic tyrant who offered nothing in return for his
subjects services (or sacrifices) except the chance to live. The Greek
gods were like the Ewings and the Barneses feuding with each other over
who controlled the earth's resources, looking out for the good of their
children and those that bribed them the most or whose services they
needed and usually being unfaithful to their spouses and having various
affairs with anyone that took their fancy. The Jewish gods in comparison
were genocidal sadistic monsters and the entire religion was obsessed
with prostitution. Abraham and Isaac were both pimps. Lot was a rent boy
turned pimp. Christ fell in love with a prostitute.

Compare the monstrous god of Joshua who orders him to genocide every
man, woman, child and animal in Jericho except for two prostitutes who
helped his spies, to the Greek gods who were split between both warring
sides in the Trojan War. It was the Greeks who sought to destroy Tory
not the gods.

Compare how one of the Jewish gods tortures Job by killing his sons then
his wife and then then inflicting a disease on him to test his faith to
how Jason is tested by being asked to bring back the Golden Fleece and
the gods offering their help to him freely.

On the one hand the Jewish gods basically said, "if you don't follow me
and offer regular sacrifices I will slaughter you". On the other hand
the Greek gods basically said, "if you don't offer me any sacrifices
then I won't help you and might help your enemy if they pay a high
enough price, and if you don't heed my advice then you will only have
yourself to blame for the consequences."

>Islam followed this, and some of
> this have been incorporated into Hinduism and Buddhism.
>

And now you see where the bloody Jihadists and other holy warmongers
come from. The ancient Greeks never used "because it's God's will" to
justify their wars and slaughter.

>> the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
>> have spelled death for him.
>
> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until 300.

But the Jews always had it.

>Jews did
> not execute non-Jews.

Not true. Look at what they did to Stephen the first Christian martyr.
And do I need to bring up the ridiculous justification for the genocide
of Jericho again?

> The letters of Paul record some of his conflicts with
> other beliefs, but they end with him leaving without killing anyone.
>
>> Those are inbuilt self preservation responses,
>
> So fear itself.

Not necessarily. If something doesn't pose an immediate threat then how
can you feat it. The electric eels posed no threat to the baby. When I
first heard the Doctor translate "Fire Water" I thought he mean Whisky
was in the barrels and the baby's father was a distiller.

>
>>> Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and share in it
>>> empathetically.
>>
>> Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is with
>> them. That's what babies do.
>
> Uh, no. About 96% (Or is that 99.6%?) of humans are born with neural wiring that
> induces in us the same emotions we see in people around us. It is not copying
> behaviour, it is emotional resonance. It's why humans can live in concentrations
> and cooperate in numbers impossible for the great apes.
>

It's the ability to copy what they see. Parent smiles, baby smiles back.

>> The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the least
>
> Actually they used hay hooks, shovels, hammers, whatever else was at hand on the
> farm with some hope of lethality. They could not afford armor and reached
> between the shield bearers to whack whoever got through the shield wall. Their
> weight pressing up from behind added to the shield wall inertia.
>

Slingers, stone throwers and archers would have been used first to
soften up the attackers, then come the cavalry. Next comes the phalanx
and finally hand to hand combat.

>> The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking slaves?
>
> Read Volsungasaga and pay attention to people other than the Niflungs and
> Sigurth. Warrior primes would be put to death to avoid subsequent revolts, but
> anyone else who could be cowed was more valuable as a slave than rotting meat.
>

Assuming they were willing to do work.

>> Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference across
>> any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from the
>> eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been felt
>> inside the cage.
>
> They showed no insulation between the suit interiors and outer armor. Current
> surges can follow conductors into the armor.

Given that the solid steel suites would have virtually zero potential
difference across them there would be no lethal current flowing through
any conductors touching it.

>Any instrumentation on the surface
> was subject to charge and current surges. How much current the cables could
> carry without melting depends on their alloy. Weren't they a high quality
> silver? The cables were thick enough.

Looked like copper to me and where did it come from, that's the question.

>
> The real problem is I doubt electric eels provide the kind of charge separation
> and potential difference needed to power outside equipment.
>

The doctor used the tiny 10cm wires from the space suite as an
amplifier. (more nonsense)

>>> Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because they
>>> find
>>> his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
>>>
>>
>> I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist socially
>> brain dead moron Donald Trump.
>
> The Putin man-love predates the current convervative march into futility.
>
> With either Trump or Putin it shows how easily chicken hawks can be goaded with
> shame.
>
Siri Cruz
2015-10-20 05:28:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <UO-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

> On 19/10/2015 22:23, Siri Cruz wrote:
> > In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
> > Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> >
> >> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
> >> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
> >
> > Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies does
> > it
> > sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?
>
> It sounds close though. It's derived from late 19th early 20th century
> Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville.

'Asshole do vex me.'
~~ Robin Williams

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
p***@gmail.com
2015-10-20 06:50:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Agamemnon asked:

> Remind me where in Shakespeare he finds it funny or necessary to make
> the main protagonists bully the people he's supposed to be training to
> fight by giving them silly names

Oh oh, I know the answer to this one. It's what Falstaff does in Henry IV Part 2.
solar penguin
2015-10-20 10:33:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:32:18 +0000, solar penguin wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:44:53 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:

> On 19/10/2015 22:23, Siri Cruz wrote:
>> In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>
>>> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
>>> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
>>
>> Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies
>> does it sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?
>
> It sounds close though.

Can you give specific examples of Cary Grant's dialogue sounding close to
specific aspects of 21st century vernacular?

> It's derived from late 19th early 20th century
> Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville.
>

Now, can you give examples of specific Cary Grant dialogue that sounds
like 19th & 20th century
Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville _at the same time_
as sounding like 21st century vernacular?

How can something sound both 19th century and 21st century at the same
time?

>
>>> originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
>>> especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
>>> being their?
>>
>> They get them from the Tardis which translated their North Germanic
>> slang and jokes into the slang and jokes Clara would understand.
>
> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are translated
> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
> it doesn't exist in the original.

That depends on the translator. TV Tropes has a whole page about it:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CulturalTranslation

> Freudian psychology/philosophy and
> Jewish vaudeville did not exist when they were written. The kind of
> humour in these plays most similarly resembles that of William
> Shakespeare because he copied most of his comedies (if not all) from
> Italian translations of ancient Greek and Roman plays or plays written
> by later Italian writers. Even the humour in Chaucer is similar to those
> classic styles but bares not resemblance to Freudian
> psychology/philosophy and Vaudeville which tarnishes American comedy.
>
> Remind me where in Shakespeare he finds it funny or necessary to make
> the main protagonist bully the people he's supposed to be training to
> fight by giving them silly names instead of using their own? Henry V?
> Julius Caesar? Hamlet? It's pure Vaudeville.

As I pointed out elsewhere, that sounds a lot like Falstaff in Henry IV.

Moving away from Shakespeare, there's Robin Hood and Little John. Were
they influenced by American vaudeville too?

> It something the Marx
> Brothers would be proud off. It also something that doesn't belong in a
> Children's programme or anything aimed at them.

Why do you think the Marx Brothers aren't suitable for children? Are you
worried that kids will become addicted to hard-boiled eggs?

> Edgar Rich Burroughs
> dealt with a similar situation in Skeleton Men of Jupiter but in that
> case John Carter puts the bully in his place before training the people
> with him to how to use weapons to fight with.
>

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that particular book, but the books by
Edgar Rice (not Rich) Burroughs I've read have all been sexist,
testosterone-driven, macho nonsense that modern audiences wouldn't expect
from an episode of Doctor Who.

>
>>
>>>> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter
>>>> Homer used.
>>>
>>> Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they did
>>> when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how
>>
>> How rich in count of drachmas cost that youthful hound in yonder
>> window what spies my orbs perceptive light?
>>
>> Aye, thirty drachmas cost that youthful hound and eight.
>>
>> Can you imagine how long it buy the ingredients for the dinner's stew?
>
> That's not how Homer wrote. That's Shakespeare you're basing it on.
>
> Here's Homer
>
> Lines 795-800 from Book 13 of The Iliad
>
> Straightforward literal translation.
>
> "And they went in like a maelstrom of quarrelsome winds that goes
> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din
> churns with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the greatly-roaring
> ocean cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind;
> So too the Trojans were packed together, some before, others hard
> behind."
>

That's poetry. Poetry tends to be poetic. Prose tends to be prosaic.
And, despite what you may claim, people would've spoken prose in everyday
speech.

When casually chatting about the weather, they would've said, "Windy
today, isn't it?" not "A maelstrom of quarrelsome winds goes
earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din churns
with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the greatly-roaring ocean
cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind."

If you disagree, the when _do_ you think prose was invented? It was
before the 19th century, right?

>
>>> quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
>>> education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the way
>>
>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of the
>> rest were illiterate farmers.
>
> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
> gymnasia from the age of 8 to the age of 18 and then serve in the
> military for 2 years. The education was free, paid for and provided by
> the state for all citizens no mater how rich or poor. Everyone was
> taught to read and write including the farmers. Just imagine an army or
> state filled with and run by illiterates. It wouldn't get very far.
> That's why they educated all citizens to prepare them to fight, follow
> written orders, vote and administer the government if they were ever
> elected to office. Women since they didn't have to fight always stayed
> at home. The men even did the shopping. The women made cloth.
>
> What you call salves were not Athenian citizens but the equivalent of
> migrant labourers. Douloi is what they were called which literally
> translates as Workers not Slaves.

Bonded labour still counts as slavery by Amnesty International's modern-
day standards. Ancient cultures, like the Greeks, wrongly believed it
was different from slavery, but that doesn't make them right.

> They were paid with bed and board or
> with a set fee of 6 obols per day. It wasn't the state's duty to pay for
> their education since they were not citizens, didn't fight in the army
> and paid no taxes.
>
> People need to stop trying to associate ancient Greece with 17th-19th
> century slavery in America and the education standards of Middle ages
> England. It was nothing of the kind.
>
>
>>> Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr it's
>>> obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
>>> Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to
>>> mind Beowulf.
>>
>> Beowulf was an English invention, and he was a Geat not a Dane.
>> Hrothgar was the Dane: the openning of the poem recounts his kingdom's
>> history up to Grendel. The language of the poem was intentionally
>> archaic even then. Contemporary English did not speak that way.
>
> Beowulf is the English version of Hrolfs Saga Kraka. The usual dating
> for both is wrong.

Once again, only your dating is right and everyone else is wrong. What a
dull surprise.

> The kings lists place the events around 150 AD mainly
> due to an absence of Frothos in the lists later than then, assuming
> Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson died around 830 ADish. Hamlet dates to about
> the time of Plato or Herodotus, King Leir to about the time of Homer and
> Lycurgus of Sparta.
>

You're getting muddled up between Amleth and Hamlet again. We've
discussed this before. Hamlet was very much a product of Shakespeare's
time, complete with contemporary cultural references that would make no
sense in the time of Plato or Herodotus.

>
>> The poet knew the Geats would be conquerred by Swedes, as alluded in
>> the poem's ending.
>>
>>> "Lo! the Spear-Danes¹ glory through splendid achievements
>> ...
>>> Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?
>>
>> It was more along the lines of Dallas. Did you catch the Who Shot
>> Beowulf cliffhanger?
>
> The Iliad was along the lines of Dallas too. The best part of it is the
> soap-opera among the gods.
>
>
>>> Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
>>> religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in
>>> Christianity
>>
>> Socrates was not a North German. Romans were quite happy to add gods to
>> their religion to bribe those gods to abandon their previous
>> worshippers.
>>
>>
> That's not what they did. The Romans accepted the gods of the barbarians
> and let them worship them as they wished and even allowed them to be
> worshipped in Rome by the Germanic immigrants. To simplify things they
> associated each foreign god with the equivalent Roman god that was
> responsible for the same sphere of influence.
>
>> Post-exilic Judaism and Christianity were distinct from the polytheisms
>> around
>
> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
> polytheists up until the destruction of the Temple of Elyon by Titus in
> 70 AD. Even their own bible makes this clear. They worshipped every god
> the Phoneticians worshipped and had temples built to them all in
> Jerusalem. Elyon (the Most High) was the father of Baal-Shamen (Uranus)
> who was the father of El (Kronos) and Ashera (Rhea), who were parents to
> Jehovah (Pontus/Yam-Nahar). Adonai (Adonis) was equivalent to Baal-Hadad
> (Hades) the son of Dagon (Zeus-Arotrios) brother of El and married to
> Anat (Athena) the daughter of El and his sister Baaltis (Alilat/Dione).
> Other identifications were also given.

You've made similar claims before. You've never given any convincing
evidence to support your theory. I bet this time won't be an exception.

>
> The was even a temple of Ashera (tower of Strato) on top of the temple
> of Elyon and a temple of Eshmun (Asclepius) beside it long into the
> first century AD.
>
> > them in the anti-synectrism and their emphasis on religion as an
> instrument of
>> morality and justice instead of god bribery.
>
> On the contrary the Jewish religion stood for absolute servitude to a
> cruel schizophrenic tyrant who offered nothing in return for his
> subjects services (or sacrifices) except the chance to live. The Greek
> gods were like the Ewings and the Barneses feuding with each other over
> who controlled the earth's resources, looking out for the good of their
> children and those that bribed them the most or whose services they
> needed and usually being unfaithful to their spouses and having various
> affairs with anyone that took their fancy. The Jewish gods in comparison
> were genocidal sadistic monsters and the entire religion was obsessed
> with prostitution. Abraham and Isaac were both pimps. Lot was a rent boy
> turned pimp. Christ fell in love with a prostitute.

But did they speak in poetry or prose?

>
> Compare the monstrous god of Joshua who orders him to genocide every
> man, woman, child and animal in Jericho except for two prostitutes who
> helped his spies, to the Greek gods who were split between both warring
> sides in the Trojan War. It was the Greeks who sought to destroy Tory
> not the gods.
>
> Compare how one of the Jewish gods tortures Job by killing his sons then
> his wife and then then inflicting a disease on him to test his faith to
> how Jason is tested by being asked to bring back the Golden Fleece and
> the gods offering their help to him freely.
>
> On the one hand the Jewish gods basically said, "if you don't follow me
> and offer regular sacrifices I will slaughter you". On the other hand
> the Greek gods basically said, "if you don't offer me any sacrifices
> then I won't help you and might help your enemy if they pay a high
> enough price, and if you don't heed my advice then you will only have
> yourself to blame for the consequences."

Did they say that in poetry or prose?

>
> >Islam followed this, and some of
>> this have been incorporated into Hinduism and Buddhism.
>>
>>
> And now you see where the bloody Jihadists and other holy warmongers
> come from. The ancient Greeks never used "because it's God's will" to
> justify their wars and slaughter.
>
>>> the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
>>> have spelled death for him.
>>
>> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until 300.
>
> But the Jews always had it.
>
> >Jews did
> > not execute non-Jews.
>
> Not true. Look at what they did to Stephen the first Christian martyr.
> And do I need to bring up the ridiculous justification for the genocide
> of Jericho again?
>
>> The letters of Paul record some of his conflicts with other beliefs,
>> but they end with him leaving without killing anyone.
>>
>>> Those are inbuilt self preservation responses,
>>
>> So fear itself.
>
> Not necessarily. If something doesn't pose an immediate threat then how
> can you feat it. The electric eels posed no threat to the baby. When I
> first heard the Doctor translate "Fire Water" I thought he mean Whisky
> was in the barrels and the baby's father was a distiller.
>

Getting the aliens drunk? Now there's an interesting idea. But probably
less suitable for children than all the Marx Brothers combined.

>
>>>> Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and share
>>>> in it empathetically.
>>>
>>> Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is
>>> with them. That's what babies do.
>>
>> Uh, no. About 96% (Or is that 99.6%?) of humans are born with neural
>> wiring that induces in us the same emotions we see in people around us.
>> It is not copying behaviour, it is emotional resonance. It's why humans
>> can live in concentrations and cooperate in numbers impossible for the
>> great apes.
>>
>>
> It's the ability to copy what they see. Parent smiles, baby smiles back.
>

Does the baby even know that it's smiling back? It can't see its own
face.

>>> The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the least
>>
>> Actually they used hay hooks, shovels, hammers, whatever else was at
>> hand on the farm with some hope of lethality. They could not afford
>> armor and reached between the shield bearers to whack whoever got
>> through the shield wall. Their weight pressing up from behind added to
>> the shield wall inertia.
>>
>>
> Slingers, stone throwers and archers would have been used first to
> soften up the attackers, then come the cavalry. Next comes the phalanx
> and finally hand to hand combat.

_If_ they were soldiers. These weren't. They were farmers.

>
>>> The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking
>>> slaves?
>>
>> Read Volsungasaga and pay attention to people other than the Niflungs
>> and Sigurth. Warrior primes would be put to death to avoid subsequent
>> revolts, but anyone else who could be cowed was more valuable as a
>> slave than rotting meat.
>>
>>
> Assuming they were willing to do work.
>
>>> Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference across
>>> any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from
>>> the eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been felt
>>> inside the cage.
>>
>> They showed no insulation between the suit interiors and outer armor.
>> Current surges can follow conductors into the armor.
>
> Given that the solid steel suites would have virtually zero potential
> difference across them there would be no lethal current flowing through
> any conductors touching it.

You're assuming the suits were made of steel. Doctor Who is full of
alien metals such as Argonite, with unusual, seemingly impossible,
properties. How do you know the suits weren't made from an alloy of them?

>
> >Any instrumentation on the surface
>> was subject to charge and current surges. How much current the cables
>> could carry without melting depends on their alloy. Weren't they a high
>> quality silver? The cables were thick enough.
>
> Looked like copper to me and where did it come from, that's the
> question.
>
>
>> The real problem is I doubt electric eels provide the kind of charge
>> separation and potential difference needed to power outside equipment.
>>
>>
> The doctor used the tiny 10cm wires from the space suite as an
> amplifier. (more nonsense)
>
>>>> Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because
>>>> they find
>>>> his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist socially
>>> brain dead moron Donald Trump.
>>
>> The Putin man-love predates the current convervative march into
>> futility.
>>
>> With either Trump or Putin it shows how easily chicken hawks can be
>> goaded with shame.
>>
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 12:15:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 20/10/2015 11:33, solar penguin wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:32:18 +0000, solar penguin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:44:53 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 19/10/2015 22:23, Siri Cruz wrote:
>
>>> In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
>
>>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
>>>
>
>>>> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
>
>>>> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
>
>>>
>
>>> Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies
>
>>> does it sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?
>
>>
>
>> It sounds close though.
>
> Can you give specific examples of Cary Grant's dialogue sounding close to
> specific aspects of 21st century vernacular?
>
>> It's derived from late 19th early 20th century
>
>> Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville.
>
>>
>
> Now, can you give examples of specific Cary Grant dialogue that sounds
> like 19th & 20th century

Considering that it was written in the 20th Century all of it.

>
> Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville _at the same time_
> as sounding like 21st century vernacular?
>
> How can something sound both 19th century and 21st century at the same
> time?
>

Get a clue. Modern American comedy is derived from Freudian
psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville. The vernacular did not
exist before Freud.

>
>>
>
>>>> originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
>
>>>> especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
>
>>>> being their?
>
>>>
>
>>> They get them from the Tardis which translated their North Germanic
>
>>> slang and jokes into the slang and jokes Clara would understand.
>
>>
>
>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are translated
>
>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
>
>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>
> That depends on the translator. TV Tropes has a whole page about it:
> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CulturalTranslation

It doesn't exist in the original Greek nor any translation into modern
Greek. I can assure you of that.

>
>> Freudian psychology/philosophy and
>
>> Jewish vaudeville did not exist when they were written. The kind of
>
>> humour in these plays most similarly resembles that of William
>
>> Shakespeare because he copied most of his comedies (if not all) from
>
>> Italian translations of ancient Greek and Roman plays or plays written
>
>> by later Italian writers. Even the humour in Chaucer is similar to those
>
>> classic styles but bares not resemblance to Freudian
>
>> psychology/philosophy and Vaudeville which tarnishes American comedy.
>
>>
>
>> Remind me where in Shakespeare he finds it funny or necessary to make
>
>> the main protagonist bully the people he's supposed to be training to
>
>> fight by giving them silly names instead of using their own? Henry V?
>
>> Julius Caesar? Hamlet? It's pure Vaudeville.
>
> As I pointed out elsewhere, that sounds a lot like Falstaff in Henry IV.


Don't think so. Cite the specific act and scene.

>
> Moving away from Shakespeare, there's Robin Hood and Little John. Were
> they influenced by American vaudeville too?
>
>> It something the Marx
>
>> Brothers would be proud off. It also something that doesn't belong in a
>
>> Children's programme or anything aimed at them.
>
> Why do you think the Marx Brothers aren't suitable for children? Are you
> worried that kids will become addicted to hard-boiled eggs?

I said nothing about the Marx Brothers not being suitable. It was the
Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy act
derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is not
suitable for children. Even if someone had put him down for doing it
still would not have been suitable for children to watch since it
encourages bulling anyone who's too tall, too short and so on.

>
>> Edgar Rich Burroughs
>
>> dealt with a similar situation in Skeleton Men of Jupiter but in that
>
>> case John Carter puts the bully in his place before training the people
>
>> with him to how to use weapons to fight with.
>
>>
>
>
> I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that particular book, but the books by
> Edgar Rice (not Rich) Burroughs I've read have all been sexist,
> testosterone-driven, macho nonsense that modern audiences wouldn't expect
> from an episode of Doctor Who.

Poppycock. Edgar Rice Burroughs is the greatest writer of romances of
all time. Tell me what is sexist about Tara Princes of Helium in The
Chessmen of Mars, Tavia in A Fighting Man of Mars or Llana of Gathol?
All of them stand up for themselves and are written as equals to the men
as is Deja Thoris and all the other female protagonists in all of his
books that I've read.

>
>>
>
>>>
>
>>>>> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic hexameter
>
>>>>> Homer used.
>
>>>>
>
>>>> Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they did
>
>>>> when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how
>
>>>
>
>>> How rich in count of drachmas cost that youthful hound in yonder
>
>>> window what spies my orbs perceptive light?
>
>>>
>
>>> Aye, thirty drachmas cost that youthful hound and eight.
>
>>>
>
>>> Can you imagine how long it buy the ingredients for the dinner's stew?
>
>>
>
>> That's not how Homer wrote. That's Shakespeare you're basing it on.
>
>>
>
>> Here's Homer
>
>>
>
>> Lines 795-800 from Book 13 of The Iliad
>
>>
>
>> Straightforward literal translation.
>
>>
>
>> "And they went in like a maelstrom of quarrelsome winds that goes
>
>> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din
>
>> churns with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the greatly-roaring
>
>> ocean cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind;
>
>> So too the Trojans were packed together, some before, others hard
>
>> behind."
>
>>
>
> That's poetry. Poetry tends to be poetic. Prose tends to be prosaic.
> And, despite what you may claim, people would've spoken prose in everyday
> speech.

Get a clue you fool. I told you to read Ion and The Republic by Plato.
Homer was quoted by everyone every day. It was the basis by which people
based their lives on.

>
> When casually chatting about the weather, they would've said, "Windy
> today, isn't it?" not "A maelstrom of quarrelsome winds goes

They would have probably quoted the relevant section of Homer.

>
> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din churns
>
> with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the greatly-roaring ocean
>
> cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind."
>
> If you disagree, the when _do_ you think prose was invented? It was
> before the 19th century, right?
>

Get a clue you imbecile. The philosophy and mannerisms in Homer have
nothing to do with prose or poetry. They are based on culture and still
permeate Greek culture to this day. Read anything by any ancient Greek
writer and you will find modern Greeks in it, and you will also find
modern Britons in Shakespeare, not the philosophy of Freud and modern
sociology which American comedy is based on.


>>>> quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
>
>>>> education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the way
>
>>>
>
>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of the
>
>>> rest were illiterate farmers.
>
>>
>
>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
>
>> gymnasia from the age of 8 to the age of 18 and then serve in the
>
>> military for 2 years. The education was free, paid for and provided by
>
>> the state for all citizens no mater how rich or poor. Everyone was
>
>> taught to read and write including the farmers. Just imagine an army or
>
>> state filled with and run by illiterates. It wouldn't get very far.
>
>> That's why they educated all citizens to prepare them to fight, follow
>
>> written orders, vote and administer the government if they were ever
>
>> elected to office. Women since they didn't have to fight always stayed
>
>> at home. The men even did the shopping. The women made cloth.
>
>>
>
>> What you call salves were not Athenian citizens but the equivalent of
>
>> migrant labourers. Douloi is what they were called which literally
>
>> translates as Workers not Slaves.
>
> Bonded labour still counts as slavery by Amnesty International's modern-
> day standards. Ancient cultures, like the Greeks, wrongly believed it
> was different from slavery, but that doesn't make them right.

Bonded labour was abolished in 593 BC by Solon. The Douloi worked
voluntarily for pay just like any worker would today or were bought and
sold in a similar manner to modern day Footballers and owned by their
employers in the same way that Footballers are owned by their teams.

>
>> They were paid with bed and board or
>
>> with a set fee of 6 obols per day. It wasn't the state's duty to pay for
>
>> their education since they were not citizens, didn't fight in the army
>
>> and paid no taxes.
>
>>
>
>> People need to stop trying to associate ancient Greece with 17th-19th
>
>> century slavery in America and the education standards of Middle ages
>
>> England. It was nothing of the kind.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>>> Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr it's
>
>>>> obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
>
>>>> Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to
>
>>>> mind Beowulf.
>
>>>
>
>>> Beowulf was an English invention, and he was a Geat not a Dane.
>
>>> Hrothgar was the Dane: the openning of the poem recounts his kingdom's
>
>>> history up to Grendel. The language of the poem was intentionally
>
>>> archaic even then. Contemporary English did not speak that way.
>
>>
>
>> Beowulf is the English version of Hrolfs Saga Kraka. The usual dating
>
>> for both is wrong.
>
> Once again, only your dating is right and everyone else is wrong. What a
> dull surprise.

Once again you show you are an ignorant fool. If you care to look at a
list of kings of Denmark and put Ragnar anywhere between 800 and 900 AD
where almost every historian thinks he live you have no choice but to
put Hrothgar before 200 AD. Have you seen the kings list fool? The
lengths of reigns are all given. There are more than 30 generations
between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.

>
>> The kings lists place the events around 150 AD mainly
>
>> due to an absence of Frothos in the lists later than then, assuming
>
>> Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson died around 830 ADish. Hamlet dates to about
>
>> the time of Plato or Herodotus, King Leir to about the time of Homer and
>
>> Lycurgus of Sparta.
>
>>
>
>
> You're getting muddled up between Amleth and Hamlet again. We've

No I'm not. Amleth is the original source for Hamlet.

> discussed this before. Hamlet was very much a product of Shakespeare's
> time, complete with contemporary cultural references that would make no
> sense in the time of Plato or Herodotus.
>
>>
>
>>> The poet knew the Geats would be conquerred by Swedes, as alluded in
>
>>> the poem's ending.
>
>>>
>
>>>> "Lo! the Spear-Danes¹ glory through splendid achievements
>
>>> ...
>
>>>> Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?
>
>>>
>
>>> It was more along the lines of Dallas. Did you catch the Who Shot
>
>>> Beowulf cliffhanger?
>
>>
>
>> The Iliad was along the lines of Dallas too. The best part of it is the
>
>> soap-opera among the gods.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>>> Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
>
>>>> religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in
>
>>>> Christianity
>
>>>
>
>>> Socrates was not a North German. Romans were quite happy to add gods to
>
>>> their religion to bribe those gods to abandon their previous
>
>>> worshippers.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>> That's not what they did. The Romans accepted the gods of the barbarians
>
>> and let them worship them as they wished and even allowed them to be
>
>> worshipped in Rome by the Germanic immigrants. To simplify things they
>
>> associated each foreign god with the equivalent Roman god that was
>
>> responsible for the same sphere of influence.
>
>>
>
>>> Post-exilic Judaism and Christianity were distinct from the polytheisms
>
>>> around
>
>>
>
>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>
>> polytheists up until the destruction of the Temple of Elyon by Titus in
>
>> 70 AD. Even their own bible makes this clear. They worshipped every god
>
>> the Phoneticians worshipped and had temples built to them all in
>
>> Jerusalem. Elyon (the Most High) was the father of Baal-Shamen (Uranus)
>
>> who was the father of El (Kronos) and Ashera (Rhea), who were parents to
>
>> Jehovah (Pontus/Yam-Nahar). Adonai (Adonis) was equivalent to Baal-Hadad
>
>> (Hades) the son of Dagon (Zeus-Arotrios) brother of El and married to
>
>> Anat (Athena) the daughter of El and his sister Baaltis (Alilat/Dione).
>
>> Other identifications were also given.
>
>
> You've made similar claims before. You've never given any convincing
> evidence to support your theory. I bet this time won't be an exception.

More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources. The Jewish
religion was clearly identified as Phonecian Polytheism by every writer
in the first and second century AD and is evident from explicit
statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of Sanchuniathon. The
bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their gods
in the Hebrew text. If you have an English translation LORD in capitals
is read as Jehovah/YHWH in the Hebrew, Lord, capital L is read as Adonai
and God is read as either El or Elohim meaning either the god El or the
Gods allied to El. Genesis in the Hebrew begins, In the beginning the
Gods created the heaven and the earth.

>
>>
>
>> The was even a temple of Ashera (tower of Strato) on top of the temple
>
>> of Elyon and a temple of Eshmun (Asclepius) beside it long into the
>
>> first century AD.
>
>>
>
>> > them in the anti-synectrism and their emphasis on religion as an
>
>> instrument of
>
>>> morality and justice instead of god bribery.
>
>>
>
>> On the contrary the Jewish religion stood for absolute servitude to a
>
>> cruel schizophrenic tyrant who offered nothing in return for his
>
>> subjects services (or sacrifices) except the chance to live. The Greek
>
>> gods were like the Ewings and the Barneses feuding with each other over
>
>> who controlled the earth's resources, looking out for the good of their
>
>> children and those that bribed them the most or whose services they
>
>> needed and usually being unfaithful to their spouses and having various
>
>> affairs with anyone that took their fancy. The Jewish gods in comparison
>
>> were genocidal sadistic monsters and the entire religion was obsessed
>
>> with prostitution. Abraham and Isaac were both pimps. Lot was a rent boy
>
>> turned pimp. Christ fell in love with a prostitute.
>
>
> But did they speak in poetry or prose?
>

Fool!

>>
>
>> Compare the monstrous god of Joshua who orders him to genocide every
>
>> man, woman, child and animal in Jericho except for two prostitutes who
>
>> helped his spies, to the Greek gods who were split between both warring
>
>> sides in the Trojan War. It was the Greeks who sought to destroy Tory
>
>> not the gods.
>
>>
>
>> Compare how one of the Jewish gods tortures Job by killing his sons then
>
>> his wife and then then inflicting a disease on him to test his faith to
>
>> how Jason is tested by being asked to bring back the Golden Fleece and
>
>> the gods offering their help to him freely.
>
>>
>
>> On the one hand the Jewish gods basically said, "if you don't follow me
>
>> and offer regular sacrifices I will slaughter you". On the other hand
>
>> the Greek gods basically said, "if you don't offer me any sacrifices
>
>> then I won't help you and might help your enemy if they pay a high
>
>> enough price, and if you don't heed my advice then you will only have
>
>> yourself to blame for the consequences."
>
> Did they say that in poetry or prose?
>

Fool!

>
>>
>
>> >Islam followed this, and some of
>
>>> this have been incorporated into Hinduism and Buddhism.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>> And now you see where the bloody Jihadists and other holy warmongers
>
>> come from. The ancient Greeks never used "because it's God's will" to
>
>> justify their wars and slaughter.
>
>>
>
>>>> the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
>
>>>> have spelled death for him.
>
>>>
>
>>> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until 300.
>
>>
>
>> But the Jews always had it.
>
>>
>
>> >Jews did
>
>> > not execute non-Jews.
>
>>
>
>> Not true. Look at what they did to Stephen the first Christian martyr.
>
>> And do I need to bring up the ridiculous justification for the genocide
>
>> of Jericho again?
>
>>
>
>>> The letters of Paul record some of his conflicts with other beliefs,
>
>>> but they end with him leaving without killing anyone.
>
>>>
>
>>>> Those are inbuilt self preservation responses,
>
>>>
>
>>> So fear itself.
>
>>
>
>> Not necessarily. If something doesn't pose an immediate threat then how
>
>> can you feat it. The electric eels posed no threat to the baby. When I
>
>> first heard the Doctor translate "Fire Water" I thought he mean Whisky
>
>> was in the barrels and the baby's father was a distiller.
>
>>
>
>
> Getting the aliens drunk? Now there's an interesting idea. But probably
> less suitable for children than all the Marx Brothers combined.
>
>>
>
>>>>> Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and share
>
>>>>> in it empathetically.
>
>>>>
>
>>>> Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is
>
>>>> with them. That's what babies do.
>
>>>
>
>>> Uh, no. About 96% (Or is that 99.6%?) of humans are born with neural
>
>>> wiring that induces in us the same emotions we see in people around us.
>
>>> It is not copying behaviour, it is emotional resonance. It's why humans
>
>>> can live in concentrations and cooperate in numbers impossible for the
>
>>> great apes.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>> It's the ability to copy what they see. Parent smiles, baby smiles back.
>
>>
>
>
> Does the baby even know that it's smiling back? It can't see its own
> face.

The baby would probably have no memory of it. It's living by instinct.

>
>>>> The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the least
>
>>>
>
>>> Actually they used hay hooks, shovels, hammers, whatever else was at
>
>>> hand on the farm with some hope of lethality. They could not afford
>
>>> armor and reached between the shield bearers to whack whoever got
>
>>> through the shield wall. Their weight pressing up from behind added to
>
>>> the shield wall inertia.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>> Slingers, stone throwers and archers would have been used first to
>
>> soften up the attackers, then come the cavalry. Next comes the phalanx
>
>> and finally hand to hand combat.
>
>
> _If_ they were soldiers. These weren't. They were farmers.
>

As far as the Vikings were concerned everyone was a solider. Military
service was compulsory.

>>
>
>>>> The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking
>
>>>> slaves?
>
>>>
>
>>> Read Volsungasaga and pay attention to people other than the Niflungs
>
>>> and Sigurth. Warrior primes would be put to death to avoid subsequent
>
>>> revolts, but anyone else who could be cowed was more valuable as a
>
>>> slave than rotting meat.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>> Assuming they were willing to do work.
>
>>
>
>>>> Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference across
>
>>>> any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from
>
>>>> the eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been felt
>
>>>> inside the cage.
>
>>>
>
>>> They showed no insulation between the suit interiors and outer armor.
>
>>> Current surges can follow conductors into the armor.
>
>>
>
>> Given that the solid steel suites would have virtually zero potential
>
>> difference across them there would be no lethal current flowing through
>
>> any conductors touching it.
>
>
> You're assuming the suits were made of steel. Doctor Who is full of
> alien metals such as Argonite, with unusual, seemingly impossible,
> properties. How do you know the suits weren't made from an alloy of them?

And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or did not.
Either way there would have been no harmful potential differences
anywhere inside the suits.

>
>>
>
>> >Any instrumentation on the surface
>
>>> was subject to charge and current surges. How much current the cables
>
>>> could carry without melting depends on their alloy. Weren't they a high
>
>>> quality silver? The cables were thick enough.
>
>>
>
>> Looked like copper to me and where did it come from, that's the
>
>> question.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>> The real problem is I doubt electric eels provide the kind of charge
>
>>> separation and potential difference needed to power outside equipment.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>> The doctor used the tiny 10cm wires from the space suite as an
>
>> amplifier. (more nonsense)
>
>>
>
>>>>> Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because
>
>>>>> they find
>
>>>>> his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
>
>>>>>
>
>>>>>
>
>>>> I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist socially
>
>>>> brain dead moron Donald Trump.
>
>>>
>
>>> The Putin man-love predates the current convervative march into
>
>>> futility.
>
>>>
>
>>> With either Trump or Putin it shows how easily chicken hawks can be
>
>>> goaded with shame.
>
>>>
>
solar penguin
2015-10-20 16:25:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 13:15:15 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:

> On 20/10/2015 11:33, solar penguin wrote:

...and not only wrote, but copied/pasted to and from a word processor to
check the grammar, which somehow added extra line feeds to it!

My apologies to everyone who struggled to read that.

Anyway, back to the attributions...

>>
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:44:53 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/10/2015 22:23, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>
>>>> In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
>>>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
>>>>> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
>>>>
>>>> Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies
>>>> does it sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?
>>>
>>> It sounds close though.
>>
>> Can you give specific examples of Cary Grant's dialogue sounding close
>> to specific aspects of 21st century vernacular?
>>

I guess not.

>>> It's derived from late 19th early 20th century
>>> Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville.
>>>
>> Now, can you give examples of specific Cary Grant dialogue that sounds
>> like 19th & 20th century
>
> Considering that it was written in the 20th Century all of it.
>
>
>> Freudian psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville _at the same
>> time_
>> as sounding like 21st century vernacular?
>>

Sorry, that was part of the line feed problem.

It should've said "Now, can you give examples of specific Cary Grant
dialogue that sounds like 19th & 20th century Freudian psychology/
philosophy and Jewish vaudeville _at the same time_ as sounding like 21st
century vernacular?"

Maybe I should go back to using King Lear to mark the ends of my
paragraphs...?

>> How can something sound both 19th century and 21st century at the same
>> time?
>>
>>
> Get a clue. Modern American comedy is derived from Freudian
> psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville. The vernacular did not
> exist before Freud.
>

The Online Etymology Dictionary traces the word "vernacular" (as a noun,
"native speech or language of a place") to 1706.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=vernacular

Why did they need a word for something that wasn't going to be invented
for over a hundred years?

>
>>
>>>
>>>>> originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
>>>>> especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
>>>>> being their?
>>>>
>>>> They get them from the Tardis which translated their North Germanic
>>>> slang and jokes into the slang and jokes Clara would understand.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
>>> translated
>>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
>>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>>
>> That depends on the translator. TV Tropes has a whole page about it:
>> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CulturalTranslation
>
> It doesn't exist in the original Greek nor any translation into modern
> Greek. I can assure you of that.
>

We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You even
said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material quoted
above.

Modern Greek translators might routinely do a shitty job, but English
translators are more thorough. (Nearly twenty years ago, I saw an
English translation of Molière's Le Misanthrope which included lines
like, "My love for you is like a Northern Line station; I'm stuck there.")

>
>>> Freudian psychology/philosophy and
>>> Jewish vaudeville did not exist when they were written. The kind of
>>> humour in these plays most similarly resembles that of William
>>> Shakespeare because he copied most of his comedies (if not all) from
>>> Italian translations of ancient Greek and Roman plays or plays written
>>> by later Italian writers. Even the humour in Chaucer is similar to
>>> those classic styles but bares not resemblance to Freudian
>>> psychology/philosophy and Vaudeville which tarnishes American comedy.
>>>
>>> Remind me where in Shakespeare he finds it funny or necessary to make
>>> the main protagonist bully the people he's supposed to be training to
>>> fight by giving them silly names instead of using their own? Henry V?
>>> Julius Caesar? Hamlet? It's pure Vaudeville.
>>
>> As I pointed out elsewhere, that sounds a lot like Falstaff in Henry
>> IV.
>
>
> Don't think so. Cite the specific act and scene.
>

Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.

>
>> Moving away from Shakespeare, there's Robin Hood and Little John. Were
>> they influenced by American vaudeville too?

Any comment?

Also, that most British, most stiff-upper-lipped of all heroes, Dick
Barton, Special Agent, called his underlings by the nicknames "Snowy" and
"Jock". Was Barton secretly a Jewish-American vaudeville comedian too?
How did he manage to balance that with the secret agent work?

>>
>>> It something the Marx
>>> Brothers would be proud off. It also something that doesn't belong in
>>> a Children's programme or anything aimed at them.
>>
>> Why do you think the Marx Brothers aren't suitable for children? Are
>> you worried that kids will become addicted to hard-boiled eggs?
>
> I said nothing about the Marx Brothers not being suitable. It was the
> Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy act
> derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is not
> suitable for children. Even if someone had put him down for doing it
> still would not have been suitable for children to watch since it
> encourages bulling anyone who's too tall, too short and so on.
>

Interesting point. If you're that worried about bullying, though, the
current worry is about cyberbullying, including kids uploading
embarrassing videos to humiliate their classmates. The Doctor openly
endorsing that is far, far worse than him using a friendly nickname.

>
>>> Edgar Rich Burroughs
>>> dealt with a similar situation in Skeleton Men of Jupiter but in that
>>> case John Carter puts the bully in his place before training the
>>> people with him to how to use weapons to fight with.
>>>
>>
>> I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that particular book, but the books by
>> Edgar Rice (not Rich) Burroughs I've read have all been sexist,
>> testosterone-driven, macho nonsense that modern audiences wouldn't
>> expect from an episode of Doctor Who.
>
> Poppycock. Edgar Rice Burroughs is the greatest writer of romances of
> all time.

And you couldn't even do him the credit of getting his name right.

> Tell me what is sexist about Tara Princes of Helium in The
> Chessmen of Mars, Tavia in A Fighting Man of Mars or Llana of Gathol?
> All of them stand up for themselves and are written as equals to the men
> as is Deja Thoris and all the other female protagonists in all of his
> books that I've read.
>

I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my impression was
that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women really
empower themselves.

>>>>
>>>>>> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic
>>>>>> hexameter Homer used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they
>>>>> did when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how
>>>>
>>>> How rich in count of drachmas cost that youthful hound in
>>>> yonder window what spies my orbs perceptive light?
>>>>
>>>> Aye, thirty drachmas cost that youthful hound and eight.
>>>>
>>>> Can you imagine how long it buy the ingredients for the dinner's
>>>> stew?
>>>
>>> That's not how Homer wrote. That's Shakespeare you're basing it on.
>>>
>>> Here's Homer
>>>
>>> Lines 795-800 from Book 13 of The Iliad
>>>
>>> Straightforward literal translation.
>>>
>>> "And they went in like a maelstrom of quarrelsome winds that goes
>>> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din
>>> churns with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the
>>> greatly-roaring
>>> ocean cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard
>>> behind;
>>> So too the Trojans were packed together, some before, others hard
>>> behind."
>>>
>> That's poetry. Poetry tends to be poetic. Prose tends to be prosaic.
>> And, despite what you may claim, people would've spoken prose in
>> everyday speech.
>
> Get a clue you fool. I told you to read Ion and The Republic by Plato.
> Homer was quoted by everyone every day. It was the basis by which people
> based their lives on.
>

All that shows is that Plato quoted Homer. Nothing more.

>
>> When casually chatting about the weather, they would've said, "Windy
>> today, isn't it?" not "A maelstrom of quarrelsome winds goes
>
> They would have probably quoted the relevant section of Homer.
>

Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up between
Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind, it's an
easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
mistake!

>
>> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din
>> churns
>> with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the greatly-roaring
>> ocean
>> cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind."
>>
>> If you disagree, the when _do_ you think prose was invented? It was
>> before the 19th century, right?
>>
>>
> Get a clue you imbecile. The philosophy and mannerisms in Homer have
> nothing to do with prose or poetry. They are based on culture and still
> permeate Greek culture to this day. Read anything by any ancient Greek
> writer and you will find modern Greeks in it, and you will also find
> modern Britons in Shakespeare, not the philosophy of Freud and modern
> sociology which American comedy is based on.
>

Talking of reading Shakespeare, you must've noticed how he has all the
commoners and rude mechanicals talk prose in the vernacular of his day,
as opposed to the high-flown verse of the noble characters.

What does that tell you?

>
>>>>> quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
>>>>> education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the
>>>>> way
>>>>
>>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of
>>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
>>>
>>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
>>> gymnasia from the age of 8 to the age of 18 and then serve in the
>>> military for 2 years. The education was free, paid for and provided by
>>> the state for all citizens no mater how rich or poor. Everyone was
>>> taught to read and write including the farmers. Just imagine an army
>>> or
>>> state filled with and run by illiterates. It wouldn't get very far.
>>
>>> That's why they educated all citizens to prepare them to fight, follow
>>> written orders, vote and administer the government if they were ever
>>> elected to office. Women since they didn't have to fight always stayed
>>> at home. The men even did the shopping. The women made cloth.
>>>
>>> What you call salves were not Athenian citizens but the equivalent of
>>> migrant labourers. Douloi is what they were called which literally
>>> translates as Workers not Slaves.
>>
>> Bonded labour still counts as slavery by Amnesty International's
>> modern- day standards. Ancient cultures, like the Greeks, wrongly
>> believed it was different from slavery, but that doesn't make them
>> right.
>
> Bonded labour was abolished in 593 BC by Solon. The Douloi worked
> voluntarily for pay just like any worker would today or were bought and
> sold in a similar manner to modern day Footballers and owned by their
> employers in the same way that Footballers are owned by their teams.
>

Can you provide a cite for this? And did they get the same pay and
lifestyle that top-class footballers get?

>
>>> They were paid with bed and board or with a set fee of 6 obols per
>>> day. It wasn't the state's duty to pay for
>>> their education since they were not citizens, didn't fight in the army
>>> and paid no taxes.
>>>
>>> People need to stop trying to associate ancient Greece with 17th-19th
>>> century slavery in America and the education standards of Middle ages
>>> England. It was nothing of the kind.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr
>>>>> it's
>>>>> obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
>>>>> Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to
>>>>> mind Beowulf.
>>

It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen discussion of
the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the story.

>>
>>>>
>>>> Beowulf was an English invention, and he was a Geat not a Dane.
>>>> Hrothgar was the Dane: the openning of the poem recounts his
>>>> kingdom's
>>>> history up to Grendel. The language of the poem was intentionally
>>>> archaic even then. Contemporary English did not speak that way.
>>>
>>> Beowulf is the English version of Hrolfs Saga Kraka. The usual dating
>>> for both is wrong.
>>
>> Once again, only your dating is right and everyone else is wrong. What
>> a dull surprise.
>
> Once again you show you are an ignorant fool. If you care to look at a
> list of kings of Denmark and put Ragnar anywhere between 800 and 900 AD
> where almost every historian thinks he live you have no choice but to
> put Hrothgar before 200 AD. Have you seen the kings list fool? The
> lengths of reigns are all given. There are more than 30 generations
> between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
> events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
>

Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
historically accurate in every detail.

>
>>> The kings lists place the events around 150 AD mainly
>>> due to an absence of Frothos in the lists later than then, assuming
>>> Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson died around 830 ADish. Hamlet dates to
>>> about
>>> the time of Plato or Herodotus, King Leir to about the time of Homer
>>> and Lycurgus of Sparta.
>>>
>>
>> You're getting muddled up between Amleth and Hamlet again. We've
>
> No I'm not. Amleth is the original source for Hamlet.

Exactly. Hamlet is a fictional character who was very loosely inspired
by Amleth. But he is not Amleth, and Hamlet's world is not Amleth's
world.

>
>> discussed this before. Hamlet was very much a product of Shakespeare's
>> time, complete with contemporary cultural references that would make no
>> sense in the time of Plato or Herodotus.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> The poet knew the Geats would be conquerred by Swedes, as alluded in
>>>> the poem's ending.
>>>>
>>>>> "Lo! the Spear-Danes' glory through splendid achievements
>>>> ...
>>>>> Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?
>>>>
>>>> It was more along the lines of Dallas. Did you catch the Who Shot
>>>> Beowulf cliffhanger?
>>>
>>> The Iliad was along the lines of Dallas too. The best part of it is
>>> the soap-opera among the gods.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
>>>>> religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in
>>>>> Christianity
>>>>
>>>> Socrates was not a North German. Romans were quite happy to add gods
>>>> to their religion to bribe those gods to abandon their previous
>>>> worshippers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> That's not what they did. The Romans accepted the gods of the
>>> barbarians
>>> and let them worship them as they wished and even allowed them to be
>>> worshipped in Rome by the Germanic immigrants. To simplify things they
>>> associated each foreign god with the equivalent Roman god that was
>>> responsible for the same sphere of influence.
>>>
>>>> Post-exilic Judaism and Christianity were distinct from the
>>>> polytheisms around
>>>
>>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>>> polytheists up until the destruction of the Temple of Elyon by Titus
>>> in 70 AD. Even their own bible makes this clear. They worshipped every
>>> god the Phoneticians worshipped and had temples built to them all in
>>> Jerusalem. Elyon (the Most High) was the father of Baal-Shamen
>>> (Uranus)
>>> who was the father of El (Kronos) and Ashera (Rhea), who were parents
>>> to Jehovah (Pontus/Yam-Nahar). Adonai (Adonis) was equivalent to
>>> Baal-Hadad
>>> (Hades) the son of Dagon (Zeus-Arotrios) brother of El and married to
>>> Anat (Athena) the daughter of El and his sister Baaltis
>>> (Alilat/Dione).
>>> Other identifications were also given.
>>
>>
>> You've made similar claims before. You've never given any convincing
>> evidence to support your theory. I bet this time won't be an
>> exception.
>
> More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.

IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.

> The Jewish
> religion was clearly identified as Phonecian Polytheism by every writer
> in the first and second century AD and is evident from explicit
> statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of Sanchuniathon. The
> bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their gods
> in the Hebrew text. If you have an English translation LORD in capitals
> is read as Jehovah/YHWH in the Hebrew, Lord, capital L is read as Adonai
> and God is read as either El or Elohim meaning either the god El or the
> Gods allied to El. Genesis in the Hebrew begins, In the beginning the
> Gods created the heaven and the earth.
>

No-one's denying that Judaism evolved out of a polytheistic religion, and
its scriptures still contain a few quaint throwbacks to those origins.

It's your specific claim that it remained polytheistic until the AD era
that people have trouble with.

>>>
>>>> them in the anti-synectrism and their emphasis on religion as an
>>>> instrument of morality and justice instead of god bribery.
>>>
>>> On the contrary the Jewish religion stood for absolute servitude to a
>>> cruel schizophrenic tyrant who offered nothing in return for his
>>> subjects services (or sacrifices) except the chance to live. The Greek
>>> gods were like the Ewings and the Barneses feuding with each other
>>> over
>>> who controlled the earth's resources, looking out for the good of
>>> their
>>> children and those that bribed them the most or whose services they
>>> needed and usually being unfaithful to their spouses and having
>>> various
>>> affairs with anyone that took their fancy. The Jewish gods in
>>> comparison
>>> were genocidal sadistic monsters and the entire religion was obsessed
>>> with prostitution. Abraham and Isaac were both pimps. Lot was a rent
>>> boy
>>> turned pimp. Christ fell in love with a prostitute.
>>
>>
>> But did they speak in poetry or prose?
>>
>>
> Fool!
>
>
>>>
>>> Compare the monstrous god of Joshua who orders him to genocide every
>>> man, woman, child and animal in Jericho except for two prostitutes who
>>> helped his spies, to the Greek gods who were split between both
>>> warring
>>> sides in the Trojan War. It was the Greeks who sought to destroy Tory
>>> not the gods.
>>>
>>> Compare how one of the Jewish gods tortures Job by killing his sons
>>> then
>>> his wife and then then inflicting a disease on him to test his faith
>>> to
>>> how Jason is tested by being asked to bring back the Golden Fleece and
>>> the gods offering their help to him freely.
>>>
>>> On the one hand the Jewish gods basically said, "if you don't follow
>>> me
>>> and offer regular sacrifices I will slaughter you". On the other hand
>>> the Greek gods basically said, "if you don't offer me any sacrifices
>>> then I won't help you and might help your enemy if they pay a high
>>> enough price, and if you don't heed my advice then you will only have
>>> yourself to blame for the consequences."
>>
>> Did they say that in poetry or prose?
>>
>>
> Fool!
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>> Islam followed this, and some of
>>>> this have been incorporated into Hinduism and Buddhism.
>>>>
>>> And now you see where the bloody Jihadists and other holy warmongers
>>> come from. The ancient Greeks never used "because it's God's will" to
>>> justify their wars and slaughter.
>>>
>>>>> the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
>>>>> have spelled death for him.
>>

Good job he _didn't_ use Christ's name then.

Seriously, are you complaining about stuff that _wasn't_ in the episode?

>>
>>>>
>>>> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until
>>>> 300.

In England they didn't gain that power until the reign of Henry IV. (Hey,
him again! He keeps popping up in this thread, doesn't he?) He gave
Archbishop Arundel the power to execute heretics and blasphemers in
exchange for recognising his dubious claim to the throne.

>>>
>>> But the Jews always had it.
>>>
>>>> Jews did not execute non-Jews.
>>>
>>> Not true. Look at what they did to Stephen the first Christian martyr.
>>> And do I need to bring up the ridiculous justification for the
>>> genocide of Jericho again?
>>>
>>>> The letters of Paul record some of his conflicts with other beliefs,
>>>> but they end with him leaving without killing anyone.
>>>>
>>>>> Those are inbuilt self preservation responses,
>>>>
>>>> So fear itself.
>>>
>>> Not necessarily. If something doesn't pose an immediate threat then
>>> how
>>> can you feat it. The electric eels posed no threat to the baby. When I
>>> first heard the Doctor translate "Fire Water" I thought he mean Whisky
>>> was in the barrels and the baby's father was a distiller.
>>>
>>
>> Getting the aliens drunk? Now there's an interesting idea. But
>> probably less suitable for children than all the Marx Brothers
>> combined.
>>
>>>
>>>>>> Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and
>>>>>> share in it empathetically.
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is
>>>>> with them. That's what babies do.
>>>>
>>>> Uh, no. About 96% (Or is that 99.6%?) of humans are born with neural
>>>> wiring that induces in us the same emotions we see in people around
>>>> us. It is not copying behaviour, it is emotional resonance. It's
>>>> why humans
>>>> can live in concentrations and cooperate in numbers impossible for
>>>> the great apes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It's the ability to copy what they see. Parent smiles, baby smiles
>>> back.
>>>
>>
>> Does the baby even know that it's smiling back? It can't see its own
>> face.
>
> The baby would probably have no memory of it. It's living by instinct.
>

Yes, the instinct is making it _feel happy_ at the sight of the smiling
parent.

>
>>>>> The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the
>>>>> least
>>>>
>>>> Actually they used hay hooks, shovels, hammers, whatever else was at
>>>> hand on the farm with some hope of lethality. They could not afford
>>>> armor and reached between the shield bearers to whack whoever got
>>>> through the shield wall. Their weight pressing up from behind added
>>>> to the shield wall inertia.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Slingers, stone throwers and archers would have been used first to
>>> soften up the attackers, then come the cavalry. Next comes the phalanx
>>> and finally hand to hand combat.
>>
>>
>> _If_ they were soldiers. These weren't. They were farmers.
>>
>>
> As far as the Vikings were concerned everyone was a solider. Military
> service was compulsory.
>

Everyone? Bear in mind that we have no reliable written records from
Vikings of that era. Also bear in mind there would've been differences
between the Rus, the Danes, etc. How can you be sure that everyone
served military service?

>
>>>
>>>>> The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking
>>>>> slaves?
>>>>
>>>> Read Volsungasaga and pay attention to people other than the Niflungs
>>>> and Sigurth. Warrior primes would be put to death to avoid subsequent
>>>> revolts, but anyone else who could be cowed was more valuable as a
>>>> slave than rotting meat.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Assuming they were willing to do work.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>> Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference
>>>>> across
>>>>> any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from
>>>>> the eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been
>>>>> felt inside the cage.
>>>>
>>>> They showed no insulation between the suit interiors and outer armor.
>>
>>>> Current surges can follow conductors into the armor.
>>>
>>> Given that the solid steel suites would have virtually zero potential
>>> difference across them there would be no lethal current flowing
>>> through any conductors touching it.
>>
>>
>> You're assuming the suits were made of steel. Doctor Who is full of
>> alien metals such as Argonite, with unusual, seemingly impossible,
>> properties. How do you know the suits weren't made from an alloy of
>> them?
>
> And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or did not.
> Either way there would have been no harmful potential differences
> anywhere inside the suits.
>

That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys. They
don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.

IIRC argonite (from "The Space Pirates") can cause strange
electromagnetic effects in copper, for example.

>
>>
>>>
>>>> Any instrumentation on the surface
>>>> was subject to charge and current surges. How much current the cables
>>>> could carry without melting depends on their alloy. Weren't they a
>>>> high quality silver? The cables were thick enough.
>>>
>>> Looked like copper to me and where did it come from, that's the
>>> question.
>>

Because copper and bronze were totally unknown to the Vikings, were
they...?

>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>> The real problem is I doubt electric eels provide the kind of charge
>>>> separation and potential difference needed to power outside
>>>> equipment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The doctor used the tiny 10cm wires from the space suite as an
>>> amplifier. (more nonsense)
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>>> Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because
>>>>>> they find
>>>>>> his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist
>>>>> socially brain dead moron Donald Trump.
>>>>
>>>> The Putin man-love predates the current convervative march into
>>>> futility.
>>>>
>>>> With either Trump or Putin it shows how easily chicken hawks can be
>>>> goaded with shame.
>>
>>
>>>>
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 18:19:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 20/10/2015 17:25, solar penguin wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 13:15:15 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>

>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 04:44:53 +0100, Agamemnon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19/10/2015 22:23, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
>>>>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Your point being? There are no 21st century comedy mannerisms in
>>>>>> Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus, especially ones that
>>>>>
>>>>> Nor in Cary Grant. When you listen to humour in old Cary Grant movies
>>>>> does it sound like the vernacular of the 21st century?
>>>>
>>>> It sounds close though.
>>>
>>> Can you give specific examples of Cary Grant's dialogue sounding close
>>> to specific aspects of 21st century vernacular?
>>>
>
> I guess not.

I answered below. All of it.

>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> originate from the US. So where do these Vikings get them from
>>>>>> especially the ones that are derived from Freud? What justifies then
>>>>>> being their?
>>>>>
>>>>> They get them from the Tardis which translated their North Germanic
>>>>> slang and jokes into the slang and jokes Clara would understand.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
>>>> translated
>>>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
>>>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>>>
>>> That depends on the translator. TV Tropes has a whole page about it:
>>> http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CulturalTranslation
>>
>> It doesn't exist in the original Greek nor any translation into modern
>> Greek. I can assure you of that.
>>
>
> We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You even
> said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material quoted
> above.
>
> Modern Greek translators might routinely do a shitty job, but English

And you would know that how? Can use understand Homeric Greek. Can you
understand modern Greek?

> translators are more thorough. (Nearly twenty years ago, I saw an
> English translation of Molière's Le Misanthrope which included lines
> like, "My love for you is like a Northern Line station; I'm stuck there.")
>

So he thought she was dirty, overcrowd and unreliable? He hated having
to use her?

What you were reading were not translations but interpretations.

No translation of Homer or Beowulf contains 20th or 21st century
American mannerisms because they do not exist in the original and did
not evolved until 100s or 1000s of years later.

>>
>>>> Freudian psychology/philosophy and
>>>> Jewish vaudeville did not exist when they were written. The kind of
>>>> humour in these plays most similarly resembles that of William
>>>> Shakespeare because he copied most of his comedies (if not all) from
>>>> Italian translations of ancient Greek and Roman plays or plays written
>>>> by later Italian writers. Even the humour in Chaucer is similar to
>>>> those classic styles but bares not resemblance to Freudian
>>>> psychology/philosophy and Vaudeville which tarnishes American comedy.
>>>>
>>>> Remind me where in Shakespeare he finds it funny or necessary to make
>>>> the main protagonist bully the people he's supposed to be training to
>>>> fight by giving them silly names instead of using their own? Henry V?
>>>> Julius Caesar? Hamlet? It's pure Vaudeville.
>>>
>>> As I pointed out elsewhere, that sounds a lot like Falstaff in Henry
>>> IV.
>>
>>
>> Don't think so. Cite the specific act and scene.
>>
>
> Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.

Falstaff isn't giving the soldiers new names so as to bully them like
the Doctor did, he's jesting with them using their own given names.

FALSTAFF. Is thy name Mouldy?
MOULDY. Yea, an't please you.
FALSTAFF. 'Tis the more time thou wert us'd.
SHALLOW. Ha, ha, ha! most excellent, i' faith! Things that are
mouldy lack use. Very singular good! In faith, well said, Sir
John; very well said.
FALSTAFF. Prick him.
MOULDY. I was prick'd well enough before, an you could have let me
alone. My old dame will be undone now for one to do her husbandry
and her drudgery. You need not to have prick'd me; there are
other men fitter to go out than I.
FALSTAFF. Go to; peace, Mouldy; you shall go. Mouldy, it is time
you were spent.
MOULDY. Spent!

>
>>
>>> Moving away from Shakespeare, there's Robin Hood and Little John. Were
>>> they influenced by American vaudeville too?
>
> Any comment?
>
> Also, that most British, most stiff-upper-lipped of all heroes, Dick
> Barton, Special Agent, called his underlings by the nicknames "Snowy" and
> "Jock". Was Barton secretly a Jewish-American vaudeville comedian too?
> How did he manage to balance that with the secret agent work?
>

What the hell are you raving on about? The subject in question is crude
American derived comedy in Doctor Who.

For example

DOCTOR: Tall one over there. What's your name Lofty?
VIKING: My name's not Lofty.
DOCTOR: Well I'm going to call you Lofty anyway. Let's see what you can
do Lofty.

That's bullying.

Then there's all the pseudo-psychological Freudian based crap with the
Baby and more crap with the Vikings being given the social values and
emotions of the 21st century middle class rather than acting like the
Vikings in the sagas.

>>>
>>>> It something the Marx
>>>> Brothers would be proud off. It also something that doesn't belong in
>>>> a Children's programme or anything aimed at them.
>>>
>>> Why do you think the Marx Brothers aren't suitable for children? Are
>>> you worried that kids will become addicted to hard-boiled eggs?
>>
>> I said nothing about the Marx Brothers not being suitable. It was the
>> Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy act
>> derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is not
>> suitable for children. Even if someone had put him down for doing it
>> still would not have been suitable for children to watch since it
>> encourages bulling anyone who's too tall, too short and so on.
>>
>
> Interesting point. If you're that worried about bullying, though, the
> current worry is about cyberbullying, including kids uploading
> embarrassing videos to humiliate their classmates. The Doctor openly
> endorsing that is far, far worse than him using a friendly nickname.
>

It wasn't a friendly nickname or his real name. After "Lofty" he goes on
to bully all the other soldiers also.

>>
>>>> Edgar Rich Burroughs
>>>> dealt with a similar situation in Skeleton Men of Jupiter but in that
>>>> case John Carter puts the bully in his place before training the
>>>> people with him to how to use weapons to fight with.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that particular book, but the books by
>>> Edgar Rice (not Rich) Burroughs I've read have all been sexist,
>>> testosterone-driven, macho nonsense that modern audiences wouldn't
>>> expect from an episode of Doctor Who.
>>
>> Poppycock. Edgar Rice Burroughs is the greatest writer of romances of
>> all time.
>
> And you couldn't even do him the credit of getting his name right.
>

Idiot. You understood full well who I was referring too.

>> Tell me what is sexist about Tara Princes of Helium in The
>> Chessmen of Mars, Tavia in A Fighting Man of Mars or Llana of Gathol?
>> All of them stand up for themselves and are written as equals to the men
>> as is Deja Thoris and all the other female protagonists in all of his
>> books that I've read.
>>
>
> I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my impression was
> that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
> empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women really
> empower themselves.

Oh yes, you mean feminists don't you? Women who think female empowerment
is equivalent to sleeping around like seedy men or sleeping your way up
the socio-political ladder.

If that's what you want the closest to it is the anti-heroin in A
Fighting Man of Mars. On the other hand you might like Xaxa from The
Master Mind of Mars (ripped off by Douglas Adams as Xanxia in The Pirate
Planet) or maybe Issus from The Gods of Mars if that's your type.

Real women who actually want a relationship with a man on an equal
footing are closer to Burroughs' main female heroic protagonists.

>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And ancient Greeks in the agora didn't speak in the heroic
>>>>>>> hexameter Homer used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually you will find that they did, or at least that's what they
>>>>>> did when they quoted Homer. Read Plato's Ion and you will see how
>>>>>
>>>>> How rich in count of drachmas cost that youthful hound in
>>>>> yonder window what spies my orbs perceptive light?
>>>>>
>>>>> Aye, thirty drachmas cost that youthful hound and eight.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you imagine how long it buy the ingredients for the dinner's
>>>>> stew?
>>>>
>>>> That's not how Homer wrote. That's Shakespeare you're basing it on.
>>>>
>>>> Here's Homer
>>>>
>>>> Lines 795-800 from Book 13 of The Iliad
>>>>
>>>> Straightforward literal translation.
>>>>
>>>> "And they went in like a maelstrom of quarrelsome winds that goes
>>>> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din
>>>> churns with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the
>>>> greatly-roaring
>>>> ocean cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard
>>>> behind;
>>>> So too the Trojans were packed together, some before, others hard
>>>> behind."
>>>>
>>> That's poetry. Poetry tends to be poetic. Prose tends to be prosaic.
>>> And, despite what you may claim, people would've spoken prose in
>>> everyday speech.
>>
>> Get a clue you fool. I told you to read Ion and The Republic by Plato.
>> Homer was quoted by everyone every day. It was the basis by which people
>> based their lives on.
>>
>
> All that shows is that Plato quoted Homer. Nothing more.

What it shows is that you've not actually read the texts I mentioned.
What it shows is that Plato gave explicit examples of ordinary people
quoting Homer on a regular basis and using his philosophy and values to
base their lives upon.

>
>>
>>> When casually chatting about the weather, they would've said, "Windy
>>> today, isn't it?" not "A maelstrom of quarrelsome winds goes
>>
>> They would have probably quoted the relevant section of Homer.
>>
>
> Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up between
> Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind, it's an
> easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
> mistake!

No. Besides which Piccard equated their mythology with that of Gilgamesh.

>
>>
>>> earthward beneath Father Zeus' thunderbolt and with an inhuman din
>>> churns
>>> with the salt sea, the many roiling waves of the greatly-roaring
>>> ocean
>>> cresting, flecked with white, some before, and others hard behind."
>>>
>>> If you disagree, the when _do_ you think prose was invented? It was
>>> before the 19th century, right?
>>>
>>>
>> Get a clue you imbecile. The philosophy and mannerisms in Homer have
>> nothing to do with prose or poetry. They are based on culture and still
>> permeate Greek culture to this day. Read anything by any ancient Greek
>> writer and you will find modern Greeks in it, and you will also find
>> modern Britons in Shakespeare, not the philosophy of Freud and modern
>> sociology which American comedy is based on.
>>
>
> Talking of reading Shakespeare, you must've noticed how he has all the
> commoners and rude mechanicals talk prose in the vernacular of his day,
> as opposed to the high-flown verse of the noble characters.
>
> What does that tell you?
>

That he was probably familiar with Aristophanes and Menander or their
Latin/Italian copyists who do exactly the same.

>>
>>>>>> quoted him. See also Plat's Republic which also indicates how the
>>>>>> education system was primarily based on Homer's works. That is the
>>>>>> way
>>>>>
>>>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of
>>>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
>>>>
>>>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
>>>> gymnasia from the age of 8 to the age of 18 and then serve in the
>>>> military for 2 years. The education was free, paid for and provided by
>>>> the state for all citizens no mater how rich or poor. Everyone was
>>>> taught to read and write including the farmers. Just imagine an army
>>>> or
>>>> state filled with and run by illiterates. It wouldn't get very far.
>>>
>>>> That's why they educated all citizens to prepare them to fight, follow
>>>> written orders, vote and administer the government if they were ever
>>>> elected to office. Women since they didn't have to fight always stayed
>>>> at home. The men even did the shopping. The women made cloth.
>>>>
>>>> What you call salves were not Athenian citizens but the equivalent of
>>>> migrant labourers. Douloi is what they were called which literally
>>>> translates as Workers not Slaves.
>>>
>>> Bonded labour still counts as slavery by Amnesty International's
>>> modern- day standards. Ancient cultures, like the Greeks, wrongly
>>> believed it was different from slavery, but that doesn't make them
>>> right.
>>
>> Bonded labour was abolished in 593 BC by Solon. The Douloi worked
>> voluntarily for pay just like any worker would today or were bought and
>> sold in a similar manner to modern day Footballers and owned by their
>> employers in the same way that Footballers are owned by their teams.
>>
>
> Can you provide a cite for this?

Herodotus, Plutarch's Life of Solon, Aristotle's, Constitution.

>And did they get the same pay and
> lifestyle that top-class footballers get?
>

The top class and highly educated ones did. Aesop for example was one.
He eventually attained his freedom and became an advisor to kings and
city-states.

>>
>>>> They were paid with bed and board or with a set fee of 6 obols per
>>>> day. It wasn't the state's duty to pay for
>>>> their education since they were not citizens, didn't fight in the army
>>>> and paid no taxes.
>>>>
>>>> People need to stop trying to associate ancient Greece with 17th-19th
>>>> century slavery in America and the education standards of Middle ages
>>>> England. It was nothing of the kind.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Since the character Maisie Williams was playing is called Ashildr
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> obviously a reference to the fact that she was a descendant of the
>>>>>> Scyldings who called themselves Danes not Vikings, which brings to
>>>>>> mind Beowulf.
>>>
>
> It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen discussion of
> the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
> meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the story.

Or it could mean "shield" from Scyld also considering her role in the story.

>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Beowulf was an English invention, and he was a Geat not a Dane.
>>>>> Hrothgar was the Dane: the openning of the poem recounts his
>>>>> kingdom's
>>>>> history up to Grendel. The language of the poem was intentionally
>>>>> archaic even then. Contemporary English did not speak that way.
>>>>
>>>> Beowulf is the English version of Hrolfs Saga Kraka. The usual dating
>>>> for both is wrong.
>>>
>>> Once again, only your dating is right and everyone else is wrong. What
>>> a dull surprise.
>>
>> Once again you show you are an ignorant fool. If you care to look at a
>> list of kings of Denmark and put Ragnar anywhere between 800 and 900 AD
>> where almost every historian thinks he live you have no choice but to
>> put Hrothgar before 200 AD. Have you seen the kings list fool? The
>> lengths of reigns are all given. There are more than 30 generations
>> between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
>> events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
>>
>
> Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
> historically accurate in every detail.

Given the tradition it's from the kings have to be in the right order
and must have lived in the right period as the other kings named as
contemporaries. You wouldn't put William the Conqueror in the time of
Richard the Lion Heart.

>
>>
>>>> The kings lists place the events around 150 AD mainly
>>>> due to an absence of Frothos in the lists later than then, assuming
>>>> Ragnar "Lodbrok" Sigurdsson died around 830 ADish. Hamlet dates to
>>>> about
>>>> the time of Plato or Herodotus, King Leir to about the time of Homer
>>>> and Lycurgus of Sparta.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're getting muddled up between Amleth and Hamlet again. We've
>>
>> No I'm not. Amleth is the original source for Hamlet.
>
> Exactly. Hamlet is a fictional character who was very loosely inspired
> by Amleth. But he is not Amleth, and Hamlet's world is not Amleth's
> world.

Hamlet is as much a fictional character as Henry IV.

>
>>
>>> discussed this before. Hamlet was very much a product of Shakespeare's
>>> time, complete with contemporary cultural references that would make no
>>> sense in the time of Plato or Herodotus.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The poet knew the Geats would be conquerred by Swedes, as alluded in
>>>>> the poem's ending.
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Lo! the Spear-Danes' glory through splendid achievements
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Does any of the above remind you of a modern American sit-com?
>>>>>
>>>>> It was more along the lines of Dallas. Did you catch the Who Shot
>>>>> Beowulf cliffhanger?
>>>>
>>>> The Iliad was along the lines of Dallas too. The best part of it is
>>>> the soap-opera among the gods.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Using the name of a god in vain was blasphemy as was creating new
>>>>>> religions. Socrates was sentenced to death for it. Even in
>>>>>> Christianity
>>>>>
>>>>> Socrates was not a North German. Romans were quite happy to add gods
>>>>> to their religion to bribe those gods to abandon their previous
>>>>> worshippers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That's not what they did. The Romans accepted the gods of the
>>>> barbarians
>>>> and let them worship them as they wished and even allowed them to be
>>>> worshipped in Rome by the Germanic immigrants. To simplify things they
>>>> associated each foreign god with the equivalent Roman god that was
>>>> responsible for the same sphere of influence.
>>>>
>>>>> Post-exilic Judaism and Christianity were distinct from the
>>>>> polytheisms around
>>>>
>>>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>>>> polytheists up until the destruction of the Temple of Elyon by Titus
>>>> in 70 AD. Even their own bible makes this clear. They worshipped every
>>>> god the Phoneticians worshipped and had temples built to them all in
>>>> Jerusalem. Elyon (the Most High) was the father of Baal-Shamen
>>>> (Uranus)
>>>> who was the father of El (Kronos) and Ashera (Rhea), who were parents
>>>> to Jehovah (Pontus/Yam-Nahar). Adonai (Adonis) was equivalent to
>>>> Baal-Hadad
>>>> (Hades) the son of Dagon (Zeus-Arotrios) brother of El and married to
>>>> Anat (Athena) the daughter of El and his sister Baaltis
>>>> (Alilat/Dione).
>>>> Other identifications were also given.
>>>
>>>
>>> You've made similar claims before. You've never given any convincing
>>> evidence to support your theory. I bet this time won't be an
>>> exception.
>>
>> More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
>
> IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.
>

You will find that my sources were the standard texts of their day and
everyone found them convincing. Anyone walking though Jerusalem in the
first and second centuries AD would have witnessed that the Jews were
polytheists and worshipped the same gods as the Phoneicians.

It's time to put the historical revisionism of the Church out of your
head. The bible itself says the Jews worshipped multiple gods. The
Elephantine letters of around 400-300 BC make Ashera the wife of Jehovah
which is obviously a reference to the Baal Epic where she prostitutes
her self to Yam-Nahar (Yaw/Yah) to stop him going to war with Baal-Hadad
(Adonai or Lord since Baal is Vul meaning Lord in Babylonian and is
interchangeable with Adad in Babylonian names.)

>> The Jewish
>> religion was clearly identified as Phonecian Polytheism by every writer
>> in the first and second century AD and is evident from explicit
>> statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of Sanchuniathon. The
>> bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their gods
>> in the Hebrew text. If you have an English translation LORD in capitals
>> is read as Jehovah/YHWH in the Hebrew, Lord, capital L is read as Adonai
>> and God is read as either El or Elohim meaning either the god El or the
>> Gods allied to El. Genesis in the Hebrew begins, In the beginning the
>> Gods created the heaven and the earth.
>>
>
> No-one's denying that Judaism evolved out of a polytheistic religion, and
> its scriptures still contain a few quaint throwbacks to those origins.

Few? They're riddled with them. The Hebrew bible is explicitly polytheistic.

>
> It's your specific claim that it remained polytheistic until the AD era
> that people have trouble with.

Look at the archaeological record. There are temples to all manner of
gods scattered all over 1st and 2nd century Jerusalem.

>
>>>>
>>>>> them in the anti-synectrism and their emphasis on religion as an
>>>>> instrument of morality and justice instead of god bribery.
>>>>
>>>> On the contrary the Jewish religion stood for absolute servitude to a
>>>> cruel schizophrenic tyrant who offered nothing in return for his
>>>> subjects services (or sacrifices) except the chance to live. The Greek
>>>> gods were like the Ewings and the Barneses feuding with each other
>>>> over
>>>> who controlled the earth's resources, looking out for the good of
>>>> their
>>>> children and those that bribed them the most or whose services they
>>>> needed and usually being unfaithful to their spouses and having
>>>> various
>>>> affairs with anyone that took their fancy. The Jewish gods in
>>>> comparison
>>>> were genocidal sadistic monsters and the entire religion was obsessed
>>>> with prostitution. Abraham and Isaac were both pimps. Lot was a rent
>>>> boy
>>>> turned pimp. Christ fell in love with a prostitute.
>>>
>>>
>>> But did they speak in poetry or prose?
>>>
>>>
>> Fool!
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Compare the monstrous god of Joshua who orders him to genocide every
>>>> man, woman, child and animal in Jericho except for two prostitutes who
>>>> helped his spies, to the Greek gods who were split between both
>>>> warring
>>>> sides in the Trojan War. It was the Greeks who sought to destroy Tory
>>>> not the gods.
>>>>
>>>> Compare how one of the Jewish gods tortures Job by killing his sons
>>>> then
>>>> his wife and then then inflicting a disease on him to test his faith
>>>> to
>>>> how Jason is tested by being asked to bring back the Golden Fleece and
>>>> the gods offering their help to him freely.
>>>>
>>>> On the one hand the Jewish gods basically said, "if you don't follow
>>>> me
>>>> and offer regular sacrifices I will slaughter you". On the other hand
>>>> the Greek gods basically said, "if you don't offer me any sacrifices
>>>> then I won't help you and might help your enemy if they pay a high
>>>> enough price, and if you don't heed my advice then you will only have
>>>> yourself to blame for the consequences."
>>>
>>> Did they say that in poetry or prose?
>>>
>>>
>> Fool!
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Islam followed this, and some of
>>>>> this have been incorporated into Hinduism and Buddhism.
>>>>>
>>>> And now you see where the bloody Jihadists and other holy warmongers
>>>> come from. The ancient Greeks never used "because it's God's will" to
>>>> justify their wars and slaughter.
>>>>
>>>>>> the use of God's or Christ's name in the manner the Doctor did would
>>>>>> have spelled death for him.
>>>
>
> Good job he _didn't_ use Christ's name then.
>
> Seriously, are you complaining about stuff that _wasn't_ in the episode?
>

If you bothered to read from the stated I was referring to the Doctor
using Odin's name in vain. That was blasphemy.

>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until
>>>>> 300.
>
> In England they didn't gain that power until the reign of Henry IV. (Hey,
> him again! He keeps popping up in this thread, doesn't he?) He gave
> Archbishop Arundel the power to execute heretics and blasphemers in
> exchange for recognising his dubious claim to the throne.

The son of a Flemish butcher or something.

>
>>>>
>>>> But the Jews always had it.
>>>>
>>>>> Jews did not execute non-Jews.
>>>>
>>>> Not true. Look at what they did to Stephen the first Christian martyr.
>>>> And do I need to bring up the ridiculous justification for the
>>>> genocide of Jericho again?
>>>>
>>>>> The letters of Paul record some of his conflicts with other beliefs,
>>>>> but they end with him leaving without killing anyone.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Those are inbuilt self preservation responses,
>>>>>
>>>>> So fear itself.
>>>>
>>>> Not necessarily. If something doesn't pose an immediate threat then
>>>> how
>>>> can you feat it. The electric eels posed no threat to the baby. When I
>>>> first heard the Doctor translate "Fire Water" I thought he mean Whisky
>>>> was in the barrels and the baby's father was a distiller.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Getting the aliens drunk? Now there's an interesting idea. But
>>> probably less suitable for children than all the Marx Brothers
>>> combined.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Also at an early age babies can sense anxiety in caregivers and
>>>>>>> share in it empathetically.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Basically you are saying that they copy the behaviour of whoever is
>>>>>> with them. That's what babies do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, no. About 96% (Or is that 99.6%?) of humans are born with neural
>>>>> wiring that induces in us the same emotions we see in people around
>>>>> us. It is not copying behaviour, it is emotional resonance. It's
>>>>> why humans
>>>>> can live in concentrations and cooperate in numbers impossible for
>>>>> the great apes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It's the ability to copy what they see. Parent smiles, baby smiles
>>>> back.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does the baby even know that it's smiling back? It can't see its own
>>> face.
>>
>> The baby would probably have no memory of it. It's living by instinct.
>>
>
> Yes, the instinct is making it _feel happy_ at the sight of the smiling
> parent.
>

Therefore it has no capacity for language, no more than a 2 year old cat.

When are we gong to see the Doctor speaking Lion and Tiger? When is he
going to translate Wolf and Dolphin?


>>
>>>>>> The would have been trained as slingers or stone throwers at the
>>>>>> least
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually they used hay hooks, shovels, hammers, whatever else was at
>>>>> hand on the farm with some hope of lethality. They could not afford
>>>>> armor and reached between the shield bearers to whack whoever got
>>>>> through the shield wall. Their weight pressing up from behind added
>>>>> to the shield wall inertia.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Slingers, stone throwers and archers would have been used first to
>>>> soften up the attackers, then come the cavalry. Next comes the phalanx
>>>> and finally hand to hand combat.
>>>
>>>
>>> _If_ they were soldiers. These weren't. They were farmers.
>>>
>>>
>> As far as the Vikings were concerned everyone was a solider. Military
>> service was compulsory.
>>
>
> Everyone? Bear in mind that we have no reliable written records from
> Vikings of that era. Also bear in mind there would've been differences
> between the Rus, the Danes, etc. How can you be sure that everyone
> served military service?

The ones in England were Danes. Even in medieval times every peasant
farmer was expected to fight to defend the land of his feudal overlord.

>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The Vikings would have preferred death. Were there ever any Viking
>>>>>> slaves?
>>>>>
>>>>> Read Volsungasaga and pay attention to people other than the Niflungs
>>>>> and Sigurth. Warrior primes would be put to death to avoid subsequent
>>>>> revolts, but anyone else who could be cowed was more valuable as a
>>>>> slave than rotting meat.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Assuming they were willing to do work.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Given that the armour was solid steel the potential difference
>>>>>> across
>>>>>> any part of it would have been close to 0. The connecting wires from
>>>>>> the eel barrels would have melted before anything would have been
>>>>>> felt inside the cage.
>>>>>
>>>>> They showed no insulation between the suit interiors and outer armor.
>>>
>>>>> Current surges can follow conductors into the armor.
>>>>
>>>> Given that the solid steel suites would have virtually zero potential
>>>> difference across them there would be no lethal current flowing
>>>> through any conductors touching it.
>>>
>>>
>>> You're assuming the suits were made of steel. Doctor Who is full of
>>> alien metals such as Argonite, with unusual, seemingly impossible,
>>> properties. How do you know the suits weren't made from an alloy of
>>> them?
>>
>> And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or did not.
>> Either way there would have been no harmful potential differences
>> anywhere inside the suits.
>>
>
> That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys. They
> don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.

If is they case and it is obviously important, why isn't it mentioned
anywhere in the script?

>
> IIRC argonite (from "The Space Pirates") can cause strange
> electromagnetic effects in copper, for example.
>

Where is it mentioned in The Girl Who Died?

>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Any instrumentation on the surface
>>>>> was subject to charge and current surges. How much current the cables
>>>>> could carry without melting depends on their alloy. Weren't they a
>>>>> high quality silver? The cables were thick enough.
>>>>
>>>> Looked like copper to me and where did it come from, that's the
>>>> question.
>>>
>
> Because copper and bronze were totally unknown to the Vikings, were
> they...?

How did they make copper wire?

>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The real problem is I doubt electric eels provide the kind of charge
>>>>> separation and potential difference needed to power outside
>>>>> equipment.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The doctor used the tiny 10cm wires from the space suite as an
>>>> amplifier. (more nonsense)
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Meanwhile in the US Putin is the favourite of conservatives because
>>>>>>> they find
>>>>>>> his willingness to randomly kill people much more manly than Obama.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought it was because the only alternative was that sexist
>>>>>> socially brain dead moron Donald Trump.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Putin man-love predates the current convervative march into
>>>>> futility.
>>>>>
>>>>> With either Trump or Putin it shows how easily chicken hawks can be
>>>>> goaded with shame.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>
Mike M
2015-10-20 18:43:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

>
> When are we gong to see the Doctor speaking Lion and Tiger? When is he
> going to translate Wolf and Dolphin?
>

From "A Town Called Mercy":

DOCTOR: Can I borrow your horse, please? It's official Marshal business.
PREACHER: He's called Joshua. It's from the Bible. It means the Deliverer.
DOCTOR: No, he isn't. I speak horse. He's called Susan, and he wants you to
respect his life choices.

--
"In 900 years of time and space, I've never met anyone who wasn't
important."
Siri Cruz
2015-10-20 18:37:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
> >> Can you give specific examples of Cary Grant's dialogue sounding close
> >> to specific aspects of 21st century vernacular?
> >>
>
> I guess not.

'Jewry! Jewry! Jewry!'
~~ Cary Grant
~~ before translation to 21st century venacular.

> > Get a clue. Modern American comedy is derived from Freudian
> > psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville. The vernacular did not
> > exist before Freud.
> >
>
> The Online Etymology Dictionary traces the word "vernacular" (as a noun,
> "native speech or language of a place") to 1706.
> http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=vernacular

Language in its modern form has likely existed since at least the Mt Toba
incident, assuming that was a near extinction event and h sapiens subsequently
spread from Africa to populate the planet. On humans today have the same
language ability which is evidence that comes from a common ancestry.

That means word like 'vernacular', 'slang', 'syncope', 'formal', 'archaic' might
be of recent origins, the language elements they name are at least 70,000 years
old.

Poems are easier to memorise than prose because of they deliberately distort
normal speech patterns to make them more, well, memorable. I believe singing,
chanting, poetics are seen world wide which makes them ancient as well.

> >>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
> >>> translated
> >>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
> >>> it doesn't exist in the original.

> We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You even
> said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material quoted
> above.

Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations of one
language with the variations called registers. Greek masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m
philophers writing for the ages wrote in a formal register. Any translation into
English should be the same register.

People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of different
registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers ranging to the familar
within a family register or the very informal baby talk. Yes, even Plato
would've been googoogagaing with wee infants.

When trying the Doctor or addressing their Othin, the villagers would've used a
formal register. But once the Doctor and Clara were accepted, it would've been a
more informal register. The problem is most people are perturbed hearing ancient
languages translated into english informal even when that would make the most
sense.

> Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.

I don't know how long that particular joke has been around, but joking is
ancient. I've no doubt trainers have been adding humour to brutality to brain
wash, sorry, I mean train, recruits and conscripts since the invention of armies.

> > Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy act
> > derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is not

I think marching into a village with intent of killing everyone down to the wee
crying babe is a bit more serious than blackmailing with embarassing rout. Maybe
it's just my American upbringing, but I'm okay on preventing a village being put
to fire and sword, especially if you can do that without killing the warrior
parasites.

> I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my impression was
> that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
> empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women really
> empower themselves.

A telling clue would be whether any of the empowerred women are described as old
or ugly. Or just plain looking. See also Trump v Fiorana.

> Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up between
> Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind, it's an
> easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
> mistake!

Actually that episode was an exploration about the use of metaphor to create new
words. How many modern words of english started out as metaphors in pre-IE,
gradually reduced and generalised until the original stories were forgotten and
only a phonetic shape remained?

> >>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of
> >>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
> >>>
> >>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the

Athens was just one town in Greece, and most of the time as brutal an autocracy
as the other towns.

Slavery was fundamental to ancient Greece. It prevented the industrial
revolution that might have followed Hero's toys, and promoted slavery apologists
like Plato. If Greece had only had a few well timed plagues like England did, we
would be a few thousand years of industry and science instead of a few hundred.

> It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen discussion of
> the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
> meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the story.

It could be a-skild or as-hild with old english palatislation confusing the
orthography. as-hildr would mean holy-battler I suppose.

> > between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
> > events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
> >
>
> Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
> historically accurate in every detail.

The poet is clearly christian and the characters pre-christian. So, yes, the
poem postdates any real events. The poet was deliberately using archaic
characters and stories, perhaps to comment about christianity within a
traditional germanic society.

> >>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright

> > More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
>
> IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.

Archaelogists found far fewer household idols in that era than before. That is
evidence that post-exilic jews largely abandonned idolatry and polytheism.

Also Hebrew polytheism might not be all that polythetic. Michael Heiser for one
argues for a divine council interpretation where YHWH was the creator and master
of all, but he created lesser gods, later interpretted as angels, and delegated
some tasks to them such running other nations, but the Hebrews were always a
direct concern of YHWH.

> > statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of Sanchuniathon. The

I don't know which of those are anti-Semitic Greeks, and I'm not motivated to
find out.

> > bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their gods

Modern english also has many names for a god, which--ah ha--all refer to the
same god. Languages have these things called synonyms.

> >>>> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until
> >>>> 300.
>
> In England they didn't gain that power until the reign of Henry IV. (Hey,
> him again! He keeps popping up in this thread, doesn't he?) He gave
> Archbishop Arundel the power to execute heretics and blasphemers in
> exchange for recognising his dubious claim to the throne.

Sounds like Saud kings and their wahidists: get the priests to damn anyone who
rebels against the king, and the king lets the priests pollute the world with
their blasphemies.

> > And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or did not.
> > Either way there would have been no harmful potential differences
> > anywhere inside the suits.
> >
>
> That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys. They
> don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.

A charge surge will spread out over a conductor at about c/3. That leaves a
brief interval of charge imbalance where it can move along any conductor at a
lower potential. As a simple example lightning strikes will eventually
distribute their charge over the entire ground, but at the point of impact, the
charge is so extreme and unbalanced it can fuse sand into branching glass tubes.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 22:36:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 20/10/2015 19:37, Siri Cruz wrote:


>>>>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
>>>>> translated
>>>>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
>>>>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>
>> We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You even
>> said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material quoted
>> above.
>
> Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations of one
> language with the variations called registers. Greek masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m
> philophers writing for the ages wrote in a formal register. Any translation into
> English should be the same register.
>
> People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of different
> registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers ranging to the familar
> within a family register or the very informal baby talk. Yes, even Plato
> would've been googoogagaing with wee infants.

The would have spoken in these registers using Greek mannerisms from the
time they were speaking. There is no way they would have been using
mannerisms belonging to the 20th or 21st century which did not exist in
their time.

>
> When trying the Doctor or addressing their Othin, the villagers would've used a
> formal register. But once the Doctor and Clara were accepted, it would've been a
> more informal register. The problem is most people are perturbed hearing ancient
> languages translated into english informal even when that would make the most
> sense.

The problem is that they were using mannerisms including figures of
speech which originated in America and have nothing to do with Viking
culture.

>
>> Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.
>
> I don't know how long that particular joke has been around, but joking is
> ancient. I've no doubt trainers have been adding humour to brutality to brain
> wash, sorry, I mean train, recruits and conscripts since the invention of armies.
>
>>> Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy act
>>> derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is not
>
> I think marching into a village with intent of killing everyone down to the wee
> crying babe is a bit more serious than blackmailing with embarassing rout. Maybe

This is about bullying not blackmailing. The Doctor is there as a role
model. He should not be seen to act or condone the act of bullying. In
the light of a dramatic production aimed at children (even adults), the
perception of the main protagonist as a bully is far more serious than
anything else that transpired within the episode.

> it's just my American upbringing, but I'm okay on preventing a village being put
> to fire and sword, especially if you can do that without killing the warrior
> parasites.
>
>> I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my impression was
>> that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
>> empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women really
>> empower themselves.
>
> A telling clue would be whether any of the empowerred women are described as old
> or ugly. Or just plain looking. See also Trump v Fiorana.
>

And your point being?

>> Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up between
>> Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind, it's an
>> easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
>> mistake!
>
> Actually that episode was an exploration about the use of metaphor to create new
> words. How many modern words of english started out as metaphors in pre-IE,
> gradually reduced and generalised until the original stories were forgotten and
> only a phonetic shape remained?
>
>>>>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of
>>>>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
>
> Athens was just one town in Greece, and most of the time as brutal an autocracy
> as the other towns.
>
> Slavery was fundamental to ancient Greece. It prevented the industrial
> revolution that might have followed Hero's toys, and promoted slavery apologists
> like Plato. If Greece had only had a few well timed plagues like England did, we
> would be a few thousand years of industry and science instead of a few hundred.
>

Poppycock. Lets get it straight about how Greek society actually worked
since you seem to have the delusion that the ancient Greeks treated
their workers like the Americans treated the Negros.

Fist get the idea of Negro slavery out of your mind.

We'll start off with Sparta. The economic system was closest to
feudalism. The Spartans conquered the surrounding country and reduced it
to feudal servitude. These Helot farmers gave a percentage of what they
produced to feed the Spartan military and kept the rest themselves.

Lets now take Athens. There were 3 classes of Athenians, those who owned
land and rented it out to tenant farmers formed the highest class, the
next class were the artisans who rand family businesses the equivalent
of today's factories, in fact their houses were factories specially
constructed for the purpose of each specific kind of manufacture. The
lowest class were the tenant farmers. All of these classes had an income
which as large enough to pay taxes to the sate and all of these classes
employed workers, or Douloi as they were called, which you term as salve
in order to associate them with American Negro slaves when they were
nothing of the kind.

How do you think the factories and farms operated without workers?
People in need of money, food and board came to these factories to work
and were paid 6 obols a day for their labour. The majority of these
workers from the outlying country were not Athenian citizens but were
still free men.

Apart from the process of migration the other way that one would obtain
people to work for them is though auctions of prisoners of war. If
someone was skilled in a specific craft or skill then they fetched a
higher price and would work for their master to pay their price and
obtain their freedom or could be sold at any intervening time. The were
never kept in chains like the American Negro slaves. Where would they go
if they tried to escape? With no property to live in or run as business
from and no land to farm and virtually no money they would always have
to work for the rest of their lives. The highest skilled could
eventually earn enough to set up in business for themselves. The
unskilled went to the mines and didn't last long there.

That's how the system worked.

The industrial revolutions didn't begin because of a lack of workers. It
began because of slavery in America. American slaves were growing far
more cotton than the English cotton merchants could possibly process so
to stop it going to their competitors they built machines to process it
in vastly greater amounts.

>> It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen discussion of
>> the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
>> meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the story.
>
> It could be a-skild or as-hild with old english palatislation confusing the
> orthography. as-hildr would mean holy-battler I suppose.
>
>>> between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
>>> events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
>>>
>>
>> Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
>> historically accurate in every detail.
>
> The poet is clearly christian and the characters pre-christian. So, yes, the
> poem postdates any real events. The poet was deliberately using archaic
> characters and stories, perhaps to comment about christianity within a
> traditional germanic society.
>
>>>>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>
>>> More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
>>
>> IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.
>
> Archaelogists found far fewer household idols in that era than before. That is
> evidence that post-exilic jews largely abandonned idolatry and polytheism.
>

It's evidence that the post-exilic were reduced to poverty so couldn't
afford the household gods.

> Also Hebrew polytheism might not be all that polythetic. Michael Heiser for one
> argues for a divine council interpretation where YHWH was the creator and master
> of all, but he created lesser gods, later interpretted as angels, and delegated
> some tasks to them such running other nations, but the Hebrews were always a
> direct concern of YHWH.

That goes against everything that is known about the Hebrew gods and the
bible itself.

Genesis begins with "In the beginning the Gods created the heaven and
the earth." Gods being the direct translation of Elohim.

Jehovah was the creator of nobody. He was the son of El who was the son
of Baal Shamen who was the son of Elyon the Most High to whom the main
temple in Jerusalem was dedicated to. Why would the Jews believe that
Jehovah created the other gods when he is known to have been the great
grandson of the main god they worshipped in main their temple?

Lets have a look at the rest of the Jewish pantheon which is refereed to
in the bible and by Sanchuniathon, Philo and Porphyry.

Baal-Shamen (Uranus) was also the father of Dagon, Atlas, Astarte,
Ashera, Baaltis, and Baetylus.

Dagon we know from Samuel.

Atlas was the leader of the Titans therefore he equates with being the
leader of the Elohim who we know from Sanchniathon were the gods that
fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen from the throne. That
makes him equivalent to Tsebaoth Lord of Armies who was a god the bible
claims the Jews worshipped.

The bible tells us that Ashera and Astarte were both worshipped by the
Jews and eventually amalgamated into Asteroth. Ashera was the wife of
both El and Jehovah (sources, Sanchniathon, Baal-Epic and Elephantine
letters.)

Baaltis was the equivalent of Demeter and Dione. ("See Greek translation
(6th cent. CE) please" thread for explanation.) She is the equivalent to
the Arab goddess Alilat (Alat) and was the mother of Anat (Aphrodite
Urania, probably syncretised with her mother) who was married to
Baal-Hadad effectively the equivalent of Ares.

Baal-Hadad was the son of Dagon and from the literal meaning of his
names Baal meaning Lord and equivalent to the Babylonian Vul which was
always interchangeable with the Assyro-Babylonian god Adad, he was the
biblical Jewish god Adonai. From the Baal Epic he was a god of the
underworld and the equivalent of Tammuz as Anat was Innana. That makes
him the same as the Greek underworld god Adonis and the basis of the
underworld god Hades. It's no wonder the book of Revelation names him as
such.

Other gods the Jews worshipped include Mot of Death who is also
mentioned in Revelation being cast into Tartarus.

Virtually all the high priests of the Jews in the pre-exilic period were
called Sadoc, Zadok, Melchizeadec and other variants thereof. They
indicate the Jews worshipped the Phonetician god Sudac. Don't who Sudac
is? Let me tell you. He was equivalent to the Egyptian god Set or Sutekh
known to the Greeks as Typhon. He was Satan. He is the god who was
worshipped by the Sadducees who took their name after him.

Lets go further shall we. Lets see who the Essenes really were. They
worshipped the god Essenus, the vile one, also known as Cham. Cham was
equivalent to Kronos (source, A Historical Treatise of The Travels of
Noah into Europe/Pseudo Berosus/Thmaetes' Phrygia). Thus the Essenes
ultimately worshipped the god El. This was the god the Carthaginians
sacrificed new born babies too. The Essenes went on to invent Iesus as
their eponymous founder after the destruction of the Temple by Titus and
thus was born Christianity.

Suduc/Sadoc was the father of Eshmun or Asklepius whose temple stood
beside that of Elyon. On top of that temple stood the temple of Astarte
as the bible itself says. It was later known in Maccabbees as the Tower
of Strato and is now the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.

El also had as son called Sadidus by Ashera who was worshipped by the
Jews of the bible as Shaddai or the Almighty. El his father put him to
death as a traitor with his own sword for rebelling against him.

And you want to tell me the Jews were monotheistic? Anyone with any
familiarity of the gods of the Phoneticians, which was just about
everyone in the first and second centuries AD would have recognised them
as polytheists who worshipped exactly the same gods in exactly the same
manner.

Herodotus tells us the Arabs worshipped Orotalt and Alilat. If we assume
that Alilat was the combination of Baaltis and Anat (in the same way
Asteroth was Ashera and Astarte combined) then Orotalt described by
Herodotus as Dionysus was Elyon and El combined and that's why the
Ptolemys allowed the Jews to be initiated into the Mysteries. The Jews
worshipped El as Dionysus and turned the date of his birth into
Christmas and the date of his Greater Mysteries into Easter.

>
>>> statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of Sanchuniathon. The
>
> I don't know which of those are anti-Semitic Greeks, and I'm not motivated to
> find out.

When you know you've lost the argument bring in the term "anti-Semitic"
as your weapon of last resort.

>
>>> bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their gods
>
> Modern english also has many names for a god, which--ah ha--all refer to the
> same god. Languages have these things called synonyms.

You'll find that they actually refer to different gods. The term God
itself is a corruption of the name of Odin, Wotan, Gotan, God.


>
>>> And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or did not.
>>> Either way there would have been no harmful potential differences
>>> anywhere inside the suits.
>>>
>>
>> That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys. They
>> don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.
>
> A charge surge will spread out over a conductor at about c/3. That leaves a
> brief interval of charge imbalance where it can move along any conductor at a
> lower potential. As a simple example lightning strikes will eventually
> distribute their charge over the entire ground, but at the point of impact, the
> charge is so extreme and unbalanced it can fuse sand into branching glass tubes.
>

This wasn't lightning string the metal casings. It was electricity
passing though conducting cables touching the casings. The cables would
have melted at the point of contact and no harm would have been done to
anything inside. When lightning strikes a plane does all the electronics
controlling it suddenly go off?
%
2015-10-20 22:47:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Agamemnon wrote:
> On 20/10/2015 19:37, Siri Cruz wrote:
>
>
>>>>>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
>>>>>> translated
>>>>>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>>
>>> We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You
>>> even
>>> said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material
>>> quoted
>>> above.
>>
>> Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations of
>> one language with the variations called registers. Greek
>> masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m philophers writing for the ages wrote in a
>> formal register. Any translation into English should be the same
>> register.
>>
>> People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of
>> different registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers
>> ranging to the familar within a family register or the very informal
>> baby talk. Yes, even Plato would've been googoogagaing with wee
>> infants.
>
> The would have spoken in these registers using Greek mannerisms from
> the
> time they were speaking. There is no way they would have been using
> mannerisms belonging to the 20th or 21st century which did not exist
> in
> their time.
>
>>
>> When trying the Doctor or addressing their Othin, the villagers
>> would've used a formal register. But once the Doctor and Clara were
>> accepted, it would've been a more informal register. The problem is
>> most people are perturbed hearing ancient languages translated into
>> english informal even when that would make the most sense.
>
> The problem is that they were using mannerisms including figures of
> speech which originated in America and have nothing to do with Viking
> culture.
>
>>
>>> Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.
>>
>> I don't know how long that particular joke has been around, but
>> joking is ancient. I've no doubt trainers have been adding humour to
>> brutality to brain wash, sorry, I mean train, recruits and
>> conscripts since the invention of armies.
>>
>>>> Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy
>>>> act
>>>> derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is
>>>> not
>>
>> I think marching into a village with intent of killing everyone down
>> to the wee crying babe is a bit more serious than blackmailing with
>> embarassing rout. Maybe
>
> This is about bullying not blackmailing. The Doctor is there as a role
> model. He should not be seen to act or condone the act of bullying. In
> the light of a dramatic production aimed at children (even adults),
> the perception of the main protagonist as a bully is far more serious
> than
> anything else that transpired within the episode.
>
>> it's just my American upbringing, but I'm okay on preventing a
>> village being put to fire and sword, especially if you can do that
>> without killing the warrior parasites.
>>
>>> I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my
>>> impression was
>>> that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
>>> empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women
>>> really
>>> empower themselves.
>>
>> A telling clue would be whether any of the empowerred women are
>> described as old or ugly. Or just plain looking. See also Trump v
>> Fiorana.
>>
>
> And your point being?
>
>>> Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up
>>> between
>>> Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind,
>>> it's an
>>> easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
>>> mistake!
>>
>> Actually that episode was an exploration about the use of metaphor
>> to create new words. How many modern words of english started out as
>> metaphors in pre-IE, gradually reduced and generalised until the
>> original stories were forgotten and only a phonetic shape remained?
>>
>>>>>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend
>>>>>> the
>>
>> Athens was just one town in Greece, and most of the time as brutal
>> an autocracy as the other towns.
>>
>> Slavery was fundamental to ancient Greece. It prevented the
>> industrial revolution that might have followed Hero's toys, and
>> promoted slavery apologists like Plato. If Greece had only had a few
>> well timed plagues like England did, we would be a few thousand
>> years of industry and science instead of a few hundred.
>>
>
> Poppycock. Lets get it straight about how Greek society actually
> worked
> since you seem to have the delusion that the ancient Greeks treated
> their workers like the Americans treated the Negros.
>
> Fist get the idea of Negro slavery out of your mind.
>
> We'll start off with Sparta. The economic system was closest to
> feudalism. The Spartans conquered the surrounding country and reduced
> it
> to feudal servitude. These Helot farmers gave a percentage of what
> they
> produced to feed the Spartan military and kept the rest themselves.
>
> Lets now take Athens. There were 3 classes of Athenians, those who
> owned
> land and rented it out to tenant farmers formed the highest class, the
> next class were the artisans who rand family businesses the equivalent
> of today's factories, in fact their houses were factories specially
> constructed for the purpose of each specific kind of manufacture. The
> lowest class were the tenant farmers. All of these classes had an
> income
> which as large enough to pay taxes to the sate and all of these
> classes
> employed workers, or Douloi as they were called, which you term as
> salve
> in order to associate them with American Negro slaves when they were
> nothing of the kind.
>
> How do you think the factories and farms operated without workers?
> People in need of money, food and board came to these factories to
> work
> and were paid 6 obols a day for their labour. The majority of these
> workers from the outlying country were not Athenian citizens but were
> still free men.
>
> Apart from the process of migration the other way that one would
> obtain
> people to work for them is though auctions of prisoners of war. If
> someone was skilled in a specific craft or skill then they fetched a
> higher price and would work for their master to pay their price and
> obtain their freedom or could be sold at any intervening time. The
> were
> never kept in chains like the American Negro slaves. Where would they
> go
> if they tried to escape? With no property to live in or run as
> business
> from and no land to farm and virtually no money they would always have
> to work for the rest of their lives. The highest skilled could
> eventually earn enough to set up in business for themselves. The
> unskilled went to the mines and didn't last long there.
>
> That's how the system worked.
>
> The industrial revolutions didn't begin because of a lack of workers.
> It
> began because of slavery in America. American slaves were growing far
> more cotton than the English cotton merchants could possibly process
> so
> to stop it going to their competitors they built machines to process
> it
> in vastly greater amounts.
>
>>> It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen
>>> discussion of
>>> the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
>>> meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the
>>> story.
>>
>> It could be a-skild or as-hild with old english palatislation
>> confusing the orthography. as-hildr would mean holy-battler I
>> suppose.
>>
>>>> between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
>>>> events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
>>> historically accurate in every detail.
>>
>> The poet is clearly christian and the characters pre-christian. So,
>> yes, the poem postdates any real events. The poet was deliberately
>> using archaic characters and stories, perhaps to comment about
>> christianity within a traditional germanic society.
>>
>>>>>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>>
>>>> More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
>>>
>>> IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.
>>
>> Archaelogists found far fewer household idols in that era than
>> before. That is evidence that post-exilic jews largely abandonned
>> idolatry and polytheism.
>>
>
> It's evidence that the post-exilic were reduced to poverty so couldn't
> afford the household gods.
>
>> Also Hebrew polytheism might not be all that polythetic. Michael
>> Heiser for one argues for a divine council interpretation where YHWH
>> was the creator and master of all, but he created lesser gods, later
>> interpretted as angels, and delegated some tasks to them such
>> running other nations, but the Hebrews were always a direct concern
>> of YHWH.
>
> That goes against everything that is known about the Hebrew gods and
> the
> bible itself.
>
> Genesis begins with "In the beginning the Gods created the heaven and
> the earth." Gods being the direct translation of Elohim.
>
> Jehovah was the creator of nobody. He was the son of El who was the
> son
> of Baal Shamen who was the son of Elyon the Most High to whom the main
> temple in Jerusalem was dedicated to. Why would the Jews believe that
> Jehovah created the other gods when he is known to have been the great
> grandson of the main god they worshipped in main their temple?
>
> Lets have a look at the rest of the Jewish pantheon which is refereed
> to
> in the bible and by Sanchuniathon, Philo and Porphyry.
>
> Baal-Shamen (Uranus) was also the father of Dagon, Atlas, Astarte,
> Ashera, Baaltis, and Baetylus.
>
> Dagon we know from Samuel.
>
> Atlas was the leader of the Titans therefore he equates with being the
> leader of the Elohim who we know from Sanchniathon were the gods that
> fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen from the throne. That
> makes him equivalent to Tsebaoth Lord of Armies who was a god the
> bible
> claims the Jews worshipped.
>
> The bible tells us that Ashera and Astarte were both worshipped by the
> Jews and eventually amalgamated into Asteroth. Ashera was the wife of
> both El and Jehovah (sources, Sanchniathon, Baal-Epic and Elephantine
> letters.)
>
> Baaltis was the equivalent of Demeter and Dione. ("See Greek
> translation (6th cent. CE) please" thread for explanation.) She is
> the equivalent to
> the Arab goddess Alilat (Alat) and was the mother of Anat (Aphrodite
> Urania, probably syncretised with her mother) who was married to
> Baal-Hadad effectively the equivalent of Ares.
>
> Baal-Hadad was the son of Dagon and from the literal meaning of his
> names Baal meaning Lord and equivalent to the Babylonian Vul which was
> always interchangeable with the Assyro-Babylonian god Adad, he was the
> biblical Jewish god Adonai. From the Baal Epic he was a god of the
> underworld and the equivalent of Tammuz as Anat was Innana. That makes
> him the same as the Greek underworld god Adonis and the basis of the
> underworld god Hades. It's no wonder the book of Revelation names him
> as
> such.
>
> Other gods the Jews worshipped include Mot of Death who is also
> mentioned in Revelation being cast into Tartarus.
>
> Virtually all the high priests of the Jews in the pre-exilic period
> were
> called Sadoc, Zadok, Melchizeadec and other variants thereof. They
> indicate the Jews worshipped the Phonetician god Sudac. Don't who
> Sudac
> is? Let me tell you. He was equivalent to the Egyptian god Set or
> Sutekh
> known to the Greeks as Typhon. He was Satan. He is the god who was
> worshipped by the Sadducees who took their name after him.
>
> Lets go further shall we. Lets see who the Essenes really were. They
> worshipped the god Essenus, the vile one, also known as Cham. Cham was
> equivalent to Kronos (source, A Historical Treatise of The Travels of
> Noah into Europe/Pseudo Berosus/Thmaetes' Phrygia). Thus the Essenes
> ultimately worshipped the god El. This was the god the Carthaginians
> sacrificed new born babies too. The Essenes went on to invent Iesus as
> their eponymous founder after the destruction of the Temple by Titus
> and
> thus was born Christianity.
>
> Suduc/Sadoc was the father of Eshmun or Asklepius whose temple stood
> beside that of Elyon. On top of that temple stood the temple of
> Astarte
> as the bible itself says. It was later known in Maccabbees as the
> Tower
> of Strato and is now the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.
>
> El also had as son called Sadidus by Ashera who was worshipped by the
> Jews of the bible as Shaddai or the Almighty. El his father put him to
> death as a traitor with his own sword for rebelling against him.
>
> And you want to tell me the Jews were monotheistic? Anyone with any
> familiarity of the gods of the Phoneticians, which was just about
> everyone in the first and second centuries AD would have recognised
> them
> as polytheists who worshipped exactly the same gods in exactly the
> same
> manner.
>
> Herodotus tells us the Arabs worshipped Orotalt and Alilat. If we
> assume
> that Alilat was the combination of Baaltis and Anat (in the same way
> Asteroth was Ashera and Astarte combined) then Orotalt described by
> Herodotus as Dionysus was Elyon and El combined and that's why the
> Ptolemys allowed the Jews to be initiated into the Mysteries. The Jews
> worshipped El as Dionysus and turned the date of his birth into
> Christmas and the date of his Greater Mysteries into Easter.
>
>>
>>>> statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of
>>>> Sanchuniathon. The
>>
>> I don't know which of those are anti-Semitic Greeks, and I'm not
>> motivated to find out.
>
> When you know you've lost the argument bring in the term
> "anti-Semitic"
> as your weapon of last resort.
>
>>
>>>> bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their
>>>> gods
>>
>> Modern english also has many names for a god, which--ah ha--all
>> refer to the same god. Languages have these things called synonyms.
>
> You'll find that they actually refer to different gods. The term God
> itself is a corruption of the name of Odin, Wotan, Gotan, God.
>
>
>>
>>>> And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or
>>>> did not. Either way there would have been no harmful potential
>>>> differences
>>>> anywhere inside the suits.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys.
>>> They
>>> don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.
>>
>> A charge surge will spread out over a conductor at about c/3. That
>> leaves a brief interval of charge imbalance where it can move along
>> any conductor at a lower potential. As a simple example lightning
>> strikes will eventually distribute their charge over the entire
>> ground, but at the point of impact, the charge is so extreme and
>> unbalanced it can fuse sand into branching glass tubes.
>>
>
> This wasn't lightning string the metal casings. It was electricity
> passing though conducting cables touching the casings. The cables
> would
> have melted at the point of contact and no harm would have been done
> to
> anything inside. When lightning strikes a plane does all the
> electronics controlling it suddenly go off?

yes
Checkmate, DoW #1
2015-10-20 23:01:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>, ***@gmail.com says...


>
> Agamemnon wrote:
> > On 20/10/2015 19:37, Siri Cruz wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>>>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
> >>>>>> translated
> >>>>>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out
> >>>>>> because
> >>>>>> it doesn't exist in the original.
> >>
> >>> We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You
> >>> even
> >>> said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material
> >>> quoted
> >>> above.
> >>
> >> Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations of
> >> one language with the variations called registers. Greek
> >> masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m philophers writing for the ages wrote in a
> >> formal register. Any translation into English should be the same
> >> register.
> >>
> >> People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of
> >> different registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers
> >> ranging to the familar within a family register or the very informal
> >> baby talk. Yes, even Plato would've been googoogagaing with wee
> >> infants.
> >
> > The would have spoken in these registers using Greek mannerisms from
> > the
> > time they were speaking. There is no way they would have been using
> > mannerisms belonging to the 20th or 21st century which did not exist
> > in
> > their time.
> >
> >>
> >> When trying the Doctor or addressing their Othin, the villagers
> >> would've used a formal register. But once the Doctor and Clara were
> >> accepted, it would've been a more informal register. The problem is
> >> most people are perturbed hearing ancient languages translated into
> >> english informal even when that would make the most sense.
> >
> > The problem is that they were using mannerisms including figures of
> > speech which originated in America and have nothing to do with Viking
> > culture.
> >
> >>
> >>> Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.
> >>
> >> I don't know how long that particular joke has been around, but
> >> joking is ancient. I've no doubt trainers have been adding humour to
> >> brutality to brain wash, sorry, I mean train, recruits and
> >> conscripts since the invention of armies.
> >>
> >>>> Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy
> >>>> act
> >>>> derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is
> >>>> not
> >>
> >> I think marching into a village with intent of killing everyone down
> >> to the wee crying babe is a bit more serious than blackmailing with
> >> embarassing rout. Maybe
> >
> > This is about bullying not blackmailing. The Doctor is there as a role
> > model. He should not be seen to act or condone the act of bullying. In
> > the light of a dramatic production aimed at children (even adults),
> > the perception of the main protagonist as a bully is far more serious
> > than
> > anything else that transpired within the episode.
> >
> >> it's just my American upbringing, but I'm okay on preventing a
> >> village being put to fire and sword, especially if you can do that
> >> without killing the warrior parasites.
> >>
> >>> I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my
> >>> impression was
> >>> that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
> >>> empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women
> >>> really
> >>> empower themselves.
> >>
> >> A telling clue would be whether any of the empowerred women are
> >> described as old or ugly. Or just plain looking. See also Trump v
> >> Fiorana.
> >>
> >
> > And your point being?
> >
> >>> Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up
> >>> between
> >>> Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind,
> >>> it's an
> >>> easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
> >>> mistake!
> >>
> >> Actually that episode was an exploration about the use of metaphor
> >> to create new words. How many modern words of english started out as
> >> metaphors in pre-IE, gradually reduced and generalised until the
> >> original stories were forgotten and only a phonetic shape remained?
> >>
> >>>>>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend
> >>>>>> the
> >>
> >> Athens was just one town in Greece, and most of the time as brutal
> >> an autocracy as the other towns.
> >>
> >> Slavery was fundamental to ancient Greece. It prevented the
> >> industrial revolution that might have followed Hero's toys, and
> >> promoted slavery apologists like Plato. If Greece had only had a few
> >> well timed plagues like England did, we would be a few thousand
> >> years of industry and science instead of a few hundred.
> >>
> >
> > Poppycock. Lets get it straight about how Greek society actually
> > worked
> > since you seem to have the delusion that the ancient Greeks treated
> > their workers like the Americans treated the Negros.
> >
> > Fist get the idea of Negro slavery out of your mind.
> >
> > We'll start off with Sparta. The economic system was closest to
> > feudalism. The Spartans conquered the surrounding country and reduced
> > it
> > to feudal servitude. These Helot farmers gave a percentage of what
> > they
> > produced to feed the Spartan military and kept the rest themselves.
> >
> > Lets now take Athens. There were 3 classes of Athenians, those who
> > owned
> > land and rented it out to tenant farmers formed the highest class, the
> > next class were the artisans who rand family businesses the equivalent
> > of today's factories, in fact their houses were factories specially
> > constructed for the purpose of each specific kind of manufacture. The
> > lowest class were the tenant farmers. All of these classes had an
> > income
> > which as large enough to pay taxes to the sate and all of these
> > classes
> > employed workers, or Douloi as they were called, which you term as
> > salve
> > in order to associate them with American Negro slaves when they were
> > nothing of the kind.
> >
> > How do you think the factories and farms operated without workers?
> > People in need of money, food and board came to these factories to
> > work
> > and were paid 6 obols a day for their labour. The majority of these
> > workers from the outlying country were not Athenian citizens but were
> > still free men.
> >
> > Apart from the process of migration the other way that one would
> > obtain
> > people to work for them is though auctions of prisoners of war. If
> > someone was skilled in a specific craft or skill then they fetched a
> > higher price and would work for their master to pay their price and
> > obtain their freedom or could be sold at any intervening time. The
> > were
> > never kept in chains like the American Negro slaves. Where would they
> > go
> > if they tried to escape? With no property to live in or run as
> > business
> > from and no land to farm and virtually no money they would always have
> > to work for the rest of their lives. The highest skilled could
> > eventually earn enough to set up in business for themselves. The
> > unskilled went to the mines and didn't last long there.
> >
> > That's how the system worked.
> >
> > The industrial revolutions didn't begin because of a lack of workers.
> > It
> > began because of slavery in America. American slaves were growing far
> > more cotton than the English cotton merchants could possibly process
> > so
> > to stop it going to their competitors they built machines to process
> > it
> > in vastly greater amounts.
> >
> >>> It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen
> >>> discussion of
> >>> the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
> >>> meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the
> >>> story.
> >>
> >> It could be a-skild or as-hild with old english palatislation
> >> confusing the orthography. as-hildr would mean holy-battler I
> >> suppose.
> >>
> >>>> between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
> >>>> events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
> >>> historically accurate in every detail.
> >>
> >> The poet is clearly christian and the characters pre-christian. So,
> >> yes, the poem postdates any real events. The poet was deliberately
> >> using archaic characters and stories, perhaps to comment about
> >> christianity within a traditional germanic society.
> >>
> >>>>>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
> >>
> >>>> More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
> >>>
> >>> IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.
> >>
> >> Archaelogists found far fewer household idols in that era than
> >> before. That is evidence that post-exilic jews largely abandonned
> >> idolatry and polytheism.
> >>
> >
> > It's evidence that the post-exilic were reduced to poverty so couldn't
> > afford the household gods.
> >
> >> Also Hebrew polytheism might not be all that polythetic. Michael
> >> Heiser for one argues for a divine council interpretation where YHWH
> >> was the creator and master of all, but he created lesser gods, later
> >> interpretted as angels, and delegated some tasks to them such
> >> running other nations, but the Hebrews were always a direct concern
> >> of YHWH.
> >
> > That goes against everything that is known about the Hebrew gods and
> > the
> > bible itself.
> >
> > Genesis begins with "In the beginning the Gods created the heaven and
> > the earth." Gods being the direct translation of Elohim.
> >
> > Jehovah was the creator of nobody. He was the son of El who was the
> > son
> > of Baal Shamen who was the son of Elyon the Most High to whom the main
> > temple in Jerusalem was dedicated to. Why would the Jews believe that
> > Jehovah created the other gods when he is known to have been the great
> > grandson of the main god they worshipped in main their temple?
> >
> > Lets have a look at the rest of the Jewish pantheon which is refereed
> > to
> > in the bible and by Sanchuniathon, Philo and Porphyry.
> >
> > Baal-Shamen (Uranus) was also the father of Dagon, Atlas, Astarte,
> > Ashera, Baaltis, and Baetylus.
> >
> > Dagon we know from Samuel.
> >
> > Atlas was the leader of the Titans therefore he equates with being the
> > leader of the Elohim who we know from Sanchniathon were the gods that
> > fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen from the throne. That
> > makes him equivalent to Tsebaoth Lord of Armies who was a god the
> > bible
> > claims the Jews worshipped.
> >
> > The bible tells us that Ashera and Astarte were both worshipped by the
> > Jews and eventually amalgamated into Asteroth. Ashera was the wife of
> > both El and Jehovah (sources, Sanchniathon, Baal-Epic and Elephantine
> > letters.)
> >
> > Baaltis was the equivalent of Demeter and Dione. ("See Greek
> > translation (6th cent. CE) please" thread for explanation.) She is
> > the equivalent to
> > the Arab goddess Alilat (Alat) and was the mother of Anat (Aphrodite
> > Urania, probably syncretised with her mother) who was married to
> > Baal-Hadad effectively the equivalent of Ares.
> >
> > Baal-Hadad was the son of Dagon and from the literal meaning of his
> > names Baal meaning Lord and equivalent to the Babylonian Vul which was
> > always interchangeable with the Assyro-Babylonian god Adad, he was the
> > biblical Jewish god Adonai. From the Baal Epic he was a god of the
> > underworld and the equivalent of Tammuz as Anat was Innana. That makes
> > him the same as the Greek underworld god Adonis and the basis of the
> > underworld god Hades. It's no wonder the book of Revelation names him
> > as
> > such.
> >
> > Other gods the Jews worshipped include Mot of Death who is also
> > mentioned in Revelation being cast into Tartarus.
> >
> > Virtually all the high priests of the Jews in the pre-exilic period
> > were
> > called Sadoc, Zadok, Melchizeadec and other variants thereof. They
> > indicate the Jews worshipped the Phonetician god Sudac. Don't who
> > Sudac
> > is? Let me tell you. He was equivalent to the Egyptian god Set or
> > Sutekh
> > known to the Greeks as Typhon. He was Satan. He is the god who was
> > worshipped by the Sadducees who took their name after him.
> >
> > Lets go further shall we. Lets see who the Essenes really were. They
> > worshipped the god Essenus, the vile one, also known as Cham. Cham was
> > equivalent to Kronos (source, A Historical Treatise of The Travels of
> > Noah into Europe/Pseudo Berosus/Thmaetes' Phrygia). Thus the Essenes
> > ultimately worshipped the god El. This was the god the Carthaginians
> > sacrificed new born babies too. The Essenes went on to invent Iesus as
> > their eponymous founder after the destruction of the Temple by Titus
> > and
> > thus was born Christianity.
> >
> > Suduc/Sadoc was the father of Eshmun or Asklepius whose temple stood
> > beside that of Elyon. On top of that temple stood the temple of
> > Astarte
> > as the bible itself says. It was later known in Maccabbees as the
> > Tower
> > of Strato and is now the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.
> >
> > El also had as son called Sadidus by Ashera who was worshipped by the
> > Jews of the bible as Shaddai or the Almighty. El his father put him to
> > death as a traitor with his own sword for rebelling against him.
> >
> > And you want to tell me the Jews were monotheistic? Anyone with any
> > familiarity of the gods of the Phoneticians, which was just about
> > everyone in the first and second centuries AD would have recognised
> > them
> > as polytheists who worshipped exactly the same gods in exactly the
> > same
> > manner.
> >
> > Herodotus tells us the Arabs worshipped Orotalt and Alilat. If we
> > assume
> > that Alilat was the combination of Baaltis and Anat (in the same way
> > Asteroth was Ashera and Astarte combined) then Orotalt described by
> > Herodotus as Dionysus was Elyon and El combined and that's why the
> > Ptolemys allowed the Jews to be initiated into the Mysteries. The Jews
> > worshipped El as Dionysus and turned the date of his birth into
> > Christmas and the date of his Greater Mysteries into Easter.
> >
> >>
> >>>> statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of
> >>>> Sanchuniathon. The
> >>
> >> I don't know which of those are anti-Semitic Greeks, and I'm not
> >> motivated to find out.
> >
> > When you know you've lost the argument bring in the term
> > "anti-Semitic"
> > as your weapon of last resort.
> >
> >>
> >>>> bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their
> >>>> gods
> >>
> >> Modern english also has many names for a god, which--ah ha--all
> >> refer to the same god. Languages have these things called synonyms.
> >
> > You'll find that they actually refer to different gods. The term God
> > itself is a corruption of the name of Odin, Wotan, Gotan, God.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>>> And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or
> >>>> did not. Either way there would have been no harmful potential
> >>>> differences
> >>>> anywhere inside the suits.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys.
> >>> They
> >>> don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.
> >>
> >> A charge surge will spread out over a conductor at about c/3. That
> >> leaves a brief interval of charge imbalance where it can move along
> >> any conductor at a lower potential. As a simple example lightning
> >> strikes will eventually distribute their charge over the entire
> >> ground, but at the point of impact, the charge is so extreme and
> >> unbalanced it can fuse sand into branching glass tubes.
> >>
> >
> > This wasn't lightning string the metal casings. It was electricity
> > passing though conducting cables touching the casings. The cables
> > would
> > have melted at the point of contact and no harm would have been done
> > to
> > anything inside. When lightning strikes a plane does all the
> > electronics controlling it suddenly go off?
>
> yes

No. I'm sure you're familiar with a Faraday cage, being a radio guy.

--
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015
all rights reserved
%
2015-10-21 02:15:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Checkmate, DoW #1 wrote:
> In article <***@news.alt.net>, ***@gmail.com says...
>
>
>>
>> Agamemnon wrote:
>>> On 20/10/2015 19:37, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
>>>>>>>> translated
>>>>>>>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out
>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>>>>
>>>>> We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek.
>>>>> You even
>>>>> said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material
>>>>> quoted
>>>>> above.
>>>>
>>>> Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations
>>>> of one language with the variations called registers. Greek
>>>> masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m philophers writing for the ages wrote in a
>>>> formal register. Any translation into English should be the same
>>>> register.
>>>>
>>>> People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of
>>>> different registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers
>>>> ranging to the familar within a family register or the very
>>>> informal baby talk. Yes, even Plato would've been googoogagaing
>>>> with wee infants.
>>>
>>> The would have spoken in these registers using Greek mannerisms from
>>> the
>>> time they were speaking. There is no way they would have been using
>>> mannerisms belonging to the 20th or 21st century which did not exist
>>> in
>>> their time.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> When trying the Doctor or addressing their Othin, the villagers
>>>> would've used a formal register. But once the Doctor and Clara were
>>>> accepted, it would've been a more informal register. The problem is
>>>> most people are perturbed hearing ancient languages translated into
>>>> english informal even when that would make the most sense.
>>>
>>> The problem is that they were using mannerisms including figures of
>>> speech which originated in America and have nothing to do with
>>> Viking culture.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know how long that particular joke has been around, but
>>>> joking is ancient. I've no doubt trainers have been adding humour
>>>> to brutality to brain wash, sorry, I mean train, recruits and
>>>> conscripts since the invention of armies.
>>>>
>>>>>> Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy
>>>>>> act
>>>>>> derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that
>>>>>> is not
>>>>
>>>> I think marching into a village with intent of killing everyone
>>>> down to the wee crying babe is a bit more serious than
>>>> blackmailing with embarassing rout. Maybe
>>>
>>> This is about bullying not blackmailing. The Doctor is there as a
>>> role model. He should not be seen to act or condone the act of
>>> bullying. In the light of a dramatic production aimed at children
>>> (even adults), the perception of the main protagonist as a bully is
>>> far more serious than
>>> anything else that transpired within the episode.
>>>
>>>> it's just my American upbringing, but I'm okay on preventing a
>>>> village being put to fire and sword, especially if you can do that
>>>> without killing the warrior parasites.
>>>>
>>>>> I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my
>>>>> impression was
>>>>> that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
>>>>> empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women
>>>>> really
>>>>> empower themselves.
>>>>
>>>> A telling clue would be whether any of the empowerred women are
>>>> described as old or ugly. Or just plain looking. See also Trump v
>>>> Fiorana.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And your point being?
>>>
>>>>> Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up
>>>>> between
>>>>> Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind,
>>>>> it's an
>>>>> easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
>>>>> mistake!
>>>>
>>>> Actually that episode was an exploration about the use of metaphor
>>>> to create new words. How many modern words of english started out
>>>> as metaphors in pre-IE, gradually reduced and generalised until the
>>>> original stories were forgotten and only a phonetic shape remained?
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves.
>>>>>>>>> Most of
>>>>>>>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to
>>>>>>>> attend the
>>>>
>>>> Athens was just one town in Greece, and most of the time as brutal
>>>> an autocracy as the other towns.
>>>>
>>>> Slavery was fundamental to ancient Greece. It prevented the
>>>> industrial revolution that might have followed Hero's toys, and
>>>> promoted slavery apologists like Plato. If Greece had only had a
>>>> few well timed plagues like England did, we would be a few thousand
>>>> years of industry and science instead of a few hundred.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Poppycock. Lets get it straight about how Greek society actually
>>> worked
>>> since you seem to have the delusion that the ancient Greeks treated
>>> their workers like the Americans treated the Negros.
>>>
>>> Fist get the idea of Negro slavery out of your mind.
>>>
>>> We'll start off with Sparta. The economic system was closest to
>>> feudalism. The Spartans conquered the surrounding country and
>>> reduced it
>>> to feudal servitude. These Helot farmers gave a percentage of what
>>> they
>>> produced to feed the Spartan military and kept the rest themselves.
>>>
>>> Lets now take Athens. There were 3 classes of Athenians, those who
>>> owned
>>> land and rented it out to tenant farmers formed the highest class,
>>> the next class were the artisans who rand family businesses the
>>> equivalent of today's factories, in fact their houses were
>>> factories specially constructed for the purpose of each specific
>>> kind of manufacture. The lowest class were the tenant farmers. All
>>> of these classes had an income
>>> which as large enough to pay taxes to the sate and all of these
>>> classes
>>> employed workers, or Douloi as they were called, which you term as
>>> salve
>>> in order to associate them with American Negro slaves when they were
>>> nothing of the kind.
>>>
>>> How do you think the factories and farms operated without workers?
>>> People in need of money, food and board came to these factories to
>>> work
>>> and were paid 6 obols a day for their labour. The majority of these
>>> workers from the outlying country were not Athenian citizens but
>>> were still free men.
>>>
>>> Apart from the process of migration the other way that one would
>>> obtain
>>> people to work for them is though auctions of prisoners of war. If
>>> someone was skilled in a specific craft or skill then they fetched a
>>> higher price and would work for their master to pay their price and
>>> obtain their freedom or could be sold at any intervening time. The
>>> were
>>> never kept in chains like the American Negro slaves. Where would
>>> they go
>>> if they tried to escape? With no property to live in or run as
>>> business
>>> from and no land to farm and virtually no money they would always
>>> have to work for the rest of their lives. The highest skilled could
>>> eventually earn enough to set up in business for themselves. The
>>> unskilled went to the mines and didn't last long there.
>>>
>>> That's how the system worked.
>>>
>>> The industrial revolutions didn't begin because of a lack of
>>> workers. It
>>> began because of slavery in America. American slaves were growing
>>> far more cotton than the English cotton merchants could possibly
>>> process so
>>> to stop it going to their competitors they built machines to process
>>> it
>>> in vastly greater amounts.
>>>
>>>>> It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen
>>>>> discussion of
>>>>> the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
>>>>> meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in
>>>>> the story.
>>>>
>>>> It could be a-skild or as-hild with old english palatislation
>>>> confusing the orthography. as-hildr would mean holy-battler I
>>>> suppose.
>>>>
>>>>>> between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way
>>>>>> the events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
>>>>> historically accurate in every detail.
>>>>
>>>> The poet is clearly christian and the characters pre-christian. So,
>>>> yes, the poem postdates any real events. The poet was deliberately
>>>> using archaic characters and stories, perhaps to comment about
>>>> christianity within a traditional germanic society.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>>>>
>>>>>> More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
>>>>>
>>>>> IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.
>>>>
>>>> Archaelogists found far fewer household idols in that era than
>>>> before. That is evidence that post-exilic jews largely abandonned
>>>> idolatry and polytheism.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's evidence that the post-exilic were reduced to poverty so
>>> couldn't afford the household gods.
>>>
>>>> Also Hebrew polytheism might not be all that polythetic. Michael
>>>> Heiser for one argues for a divine council interpretation where
>>>> YHWH was the creator and master of all, but he created lesser
>>>> gods, later interpretted as angels, and delegated some tasks to
>>>> them such running other nations, but the Hebrews were always a
>>>> direct concern of YHWH.
>>>
>>> That goes against everything that is known about the Hebrew gods and
>>> the
>>> bible itself.
>>>
>>> Genesis begins with "In the beginning the Gods created the heaven
>>> and the earth." Gods being the direct translation of Elohim.
>>>
>>> Jehovah was the creator of nobody. He was the son of El who was the
>>> son
>>> of Baal Shamen who was the son of Elyon the Most High to whom the
>>> main temple in Jerusalem was dedicated to. Why would the Jews
>>> believe that Jehovah created the other gods when he is known to
>>> have been the great grandson of the main god they worshipped in
>>> main their temple?
>>>
>>> Lets have a look at the rest of the Jewish pantheon which is
>>> refereed to
>>> in the bible and by Sanchuniathon, Philo and Porphyry.
>>>
>>> Baal-Shamen (Uranus) was also the father of Dagon, Atlas, Astarte,
>>> Ashera, Baaltis, and Baetylus.
>>>
>>> Dagon we know from Samuel.
>>>
>>> Atlas was the leader of the Titans therefore he equates with being
>>> the leader of the Elohim who we know from Sanchniathon were the
>>> gods that fought with El to depose his father Baal-Shamen from the
>>> throne. That makes him equivalent to Tsebaoth Lord of Armies who
>>> was a god the bible
>>> claims the Jews worshipped.
>>>
>>> The bible tells us that Ashera and Astarte were both worshipped by
>>> the Jews and eventually amalgamated into Asteroth. Ashera was the
>>> wife of both El and Jehovah (sources, Sanchniathon, Baal-Epic and
>>> Elephantine letters.)
>>>
>>> Baaltis was the equivalent of Demeter and Dione. ("See Greek
>>> translation (6th cent. CE) please" thread for explanation.) She is
>>> the equivalent to
>>> the Arab goddess Alilat (Alat) and was the mother of Anat (Aphrodite
>>> Urania, probably syncretised with her mother) who was married to
>>> Baal-Hadad effectively the equivalent of Ares.
>>>
>>> Baal-Hadad was the son of Dagon and from the literal meaning of his
>>> names Baal meaning Lord and equivalent to the Babylonian Vul which
>>> was always interchangeable with the Assyro-Babylonian god Adad, he
>>> was the biblical Jewish god Adonai. From the Baal Epic he was a god
>>> of the underworld and the equivalent of Tammuz as Anat was Innana.
>>> That makes him the same as the Greek underworld god Adonis and the
>>> basis of the underworld god Hades. It's no wonder the book of
>>> Revelation names him as
>>> such.
>>>
>>> Other gods the Jews worshipped include Mot of Death who is also
>>> mentioned in Revelation being cast into Tartarus.
>>>
>>> Virtually all the high priests of the Jews in the pre-exilic period
>>> were
>>> called Sadoc, Zadok, Melchizeadec and other variants thereof. They
>>> indicate the Jews worshipped the Phonetician god Sudac. Don't who
>>> Sudac
>>> is? Let me tell you. He was equivalent to the Egyptian god Set or
>>> Sutekh
>>> known to the Greeks as Typhon. He was Satan. He is the god who was
>>> worshipped by the Sadducees who took their name after him.
>>>
>>> Lets go further shall we. Lets see who the Essenes really were. They
>>> worshipped the god Essenus, the vile one, also known as Cham. Cham
>>> was equivalent to Kronos (source, A Historical Treatise of The
>>> Travels of Noah into Europe/Pseudo Berosus/Thmaetes' Phrygia). Thus
>>> the Essenes ultimately worshipped the god El. This was the god the
>>> Carthaginians sacrificed new born babies too. The Essenes went on
>>> to invent Iesus as their eponymous founder after the destruction of
>>> the Temple by Titus and
>>> thus was born Christianity.
>>>
>>> Suduc/Sadoc was the father of Eshmun or Asklepius whose temple stood
>>> beside that of Elyon. On top of that temple stood the temple of
>>> Astarte
>>> as the bible itself says. It was later known in Maccabbees as the
>>> Tower
>>> of Strato and is now the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.
>>>
>>> El also had as son called Sadidus by Ashera who was worshipped by
>>> the Jews of the bible as Shaddai or the Almighty. El his father put
>>> him to death as a traitor with his own sword for rebelling against
>>> him.
>>>
>>> And you want to tell me the Jews were monotheistic? Anyone with any
>>> familiarity of the gods of the Phoneticians, which was just about
>>> everyone in the first and second centuries AD would have recognised
>>> them
>>> as polytheists who worshipped exactly the same gods in exactly the
>>> same
>>> manner.
>>>
>>> Herodotus tells us the Arabs worshipped Orotalt and Alilat. If we
>>> assume
>>> that Alilat was the combination of Baaltis and Anat (in the same way
>>> Asteroth was Ashera and Astarte combined) then Orotalt described by
>>> Herodotus as Dionysus was Elyon and El combined and that's why the
>>> Ptolemys allowed the Jews to be initiated into the Mysteries. The
>>> Jews worshipped El as Dionysus and turned the date of his birth into
>>> Christmas and the date of his Greater Mysteries into Easter.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of
>>>>>> Sanchuniathon. The
>>>>
>>>> I don't know which of those are anti-Semitic Greeks, and I'm not
>>>> motivated to find out.
>>>
>>> When you know you've lost the argument bring in the term
>>> "anti-Semitic"
>>> as your weapon of last resort.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their
>>>>>> gods
>>>>
>>>> Modern english also has many names for a god, which--ah ha--all
>>>> refer to the same god. Languages have these things called synonyms.
>>>
>>> You'll find that they actually refer to different gods. The term God
>>> itself is a corruption of the name of Odin, Wotan, Gotan, God.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or
>>>>>> did not. Either way there would have been no harmful potential
>>>>>> differences
>>>>>> anywhere inside the suits.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys.
>>>>> They
>>>>> don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.
>>>>
>>>> A charge surge will spread out over a conductor at about c/3. That
>>>> leaves a brief interval of charge imbalance where it can move along
>>>> any conductor at a lower potential. As a simple example lightning
>>>> strikes will eventually distribute their charge over the entire
>>>> ground, but at the point of impact, the charge is so extreme and
>>>> unbalanced it can fuse sand into branching glass tubes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This wasn't lightning string the metal casings. It was electricity
>>> passing though conducting cables touching the casings. The cables
>>> would
>>> have melted at the point of contact and no harm would have been done
>>> to
>>> anything inside. When lightning strikes a plane does all the
>>> electronics controlling it suddenly go off?
>>
>> yes
>
> No. I'm sure you're familiar with a Faraday cage, being a radio guy.

that might be the answer in your world
Checkmate, DoW #1
2015-10-21 05:34:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@news.alt.net>, ***@gmail.com says...


> > No. I'm sure you're familiar with a Faraday cage, being a radio guy.
>
> that might be the answer in your world
>

Yeah... the real world.

--
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015
all rights reserved
%
2015-10-21 05:48:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Checkmate, DoW #1 wrote:
> In article <***@news.alt.net>, ***@gmail.com says...
>
>
>>> No. I'm sure you're familiar with a Faraday cage, being a radio
>>> guy.
>>
>> that might be the answer in your world
>>
>
> Yeah... the real world.

i'm sure you'll twist it until it is
Tim Bruening
2017-07-10 03:06:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 3:36:10 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> On 20/10/2015 19:37, Siri Cruz wrote:
>

> >
> > Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations of one
> > language with the variations called registers. Greek masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m
> > philophers writing for the ages wrote in a formal register. Any translation into
> > English should be the same register.
> >
> > People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of different
> > registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers ranging to the familar
> > within a family register or the very informal baby talk. Yes, even Plato
> > would've been googoogagaing with wee infants.
>
> The would have spoken in these registers using Greek mannerisms from the
> time they were speaking. There is no way they would have been using
> mannerisms belonging to the 20th or 21st century which did not exist in
> their time.

The TARDIS translation circuits could translate the mannerisms using a perception filter.
Tim Bruening
2017-07-10 03:09:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Why the Vikings brought electric eels in fresh water barrels all the way back from South America to Britain: They liked the lights the eels were making! We know because a Viking baby rated the lights highly!
The Doctor
2017-07-10 04:39:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <4509272e-51ec-422f-ac93-***@googlegroups.com>,
Tim Bruening <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>Why the Vikings brought electric eels in fresh water barrels all the way
>back from South America to Britain: They liked the lights the eels were
>making! We know because a Viking baby rated the lights highly!

Generate eelectricity.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Talk Sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Euripides
Tim Bruening
2018-01-27 19:42:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 9:39:52 PM UTC-7, The Doctor wrote:
> In article <4509272e-51ec-422f-ac93-***@googlegroups.com>,
> Tim Bruening <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
> >Why the Vikings brought electric eels in fresh water barrels all the way
> >back from South America to Britain: They liked the lights the eels were
> >making! We know because a Viking baby rated the lights highly!
>
> Generate eelectricity.

A pun?
The Doctor
2018-01-27 19:42:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <e07db0a7-0810-49d3-9e39-***@googlegroups.com>,
Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 9:39:52 PM UTC-7, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <4509272e-51ec-422f-ac93-***@googlegroups.com>,
>> Tim Bruening <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>> >Why the Vikings brought electric eels in fresh water barrels all the way
>> >back from South America to Britain: They liked the lights the eels were
>> >making! We know because a Viking baby rated the lights highly!
>>
>> Generate eelectricity.
>
>A pun?

no.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Birthday 29 Jan 1969 BOrn Redhill,Surrey,England , UK!
Czechmate, DoW #1
2015-10-20 23:00:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <chine.bleu-***@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
***@yahoo.com says...


>
> > >> Can you give specific examples of Cary Grant's dialogue sounding close
> > >> to specific aspects of 21st century vernacular?
> > >>
> >
> > I guess not.
>
> 'Jewry! Jewry! Jewry!'
> ~~ Cary Grant
> ~~ before translation to 21st century venacular.
>
> > > Get a clue. Modern American comedy is derived from Freudian
> > > psychology/philosophy and Jewish vaudeville. The vernacular did not
> > > exist before Freud.
> > >
> >
> > The Online Etymology Dictionary traces the word "vernacular" (as a noun,
> > "native speech or language of a place") to 1706.
> > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=vernacular
>
> Language in its modern form has likely existed since at least the Mt Toba
> incident, assuming that was a near extinction event and h sapiens subsequently
> spread from Africa to populate the planet. On humans today have the same
> language ability which is evidence that comes from a common ancestry.
>
> That means word like 'vernacular', 'slang', 'syncope', 'formal', 'archaic' might
> be of recent origins, the language elements they name are at least 70,000 years
> old.
>
> Poems are easier to memorise than prose because of they deliberately distort
> normal speech patterns to make them more, well, memorable. I believe singing,
> chanting, poetics are seen world wide which makes them ancient as well.
>
> > >>> Rubbish. When Aristophanes, Menander, Terrance or Plautus are
> > >>> translated
> > >>> into English no such mannerisms, philosophy or slang comes out because
> > >>> it doesn't exist in the original.
>
> > We were discussing translations into English not modern Greek. You even
> > said "When [they] are translated into English," in the material quoted
> > above.
>
> Humans naturally speak about seven languages. Most are variations of one
> language with the variations called registers. Greek masturb\b\r\u\t\s\a\m
> philophers writing for the ages wrote in a formal register. Any translation into
> English should be the same register.
>
> People doing their daily shopping in the agora used a couple of different
> registers, the less formal language but amongst strangers ranging to the familar
> within a family register or the very informal baby talk. Yes, even Plato
> would've been googoogagaing with wee infants.
>
> When trying the Doctor or addressing their Othin, the villagers would've used a
> formal register. But once the Doctor and Clara were accepted, it would've been a
> more informal register. The problem is most people are perturbed hearing ancient
> languages translated into english informal even when that would make the most
> sense.
>
> > Henry IV Part 2, Act III, scene ii.
>
> I don't know how long that particular joke has been around, but joking is
> ancient. I've no doubt trainers have been adding humour to brutality to brain
> wash, sorry, I mean train, recruits and conscripts since the invention of armies.
>
> > > Doctor, the main role model doing a bad impersonation of a comedy act
> > > derived from them that was tantamount to explicit bullying that is not
>
> I think marching into a village with intent of killing everyone down to the wee
> crying babe is a bit more serious than blackmailing with embarassing rout. Maybe
> it's just my American upbringing, but I'm okay on preventing a village being put
> to fire and sword, especially if you can do that without killing the warrior
> parasites.
>
> > I'd have to re-read the books to answer in detail, but my impression was
> > that the characters were closer to a _man's_ ideal version of an
> > empowered woman, rather than a realistic depiction of how women really
> > empower themselves.
>
> A telling clue would be whether any of the empowerred women are described as old
> or ugly. Or just plain looking. See also Trump v Fiorana.
>
> > Ah, I see the cause of your confusion. You're getting mixed up between
> > Ancient Greeks and the Darmok aliens from Star Trek. Never mind, it's an
> > easy mistake to make... Oh, wait, it isn't! It's a totally stupid
> > mistake!
>
> Actually that episode was an exploration about the use of metaphor to create new
> words. How many modern words of english started out as metaphors in pre-IE,
> gradually reduced and generalised until the original stories were forgotten and
> only a phonetic shape remained?
>
> > >>>> Very few people went to their academies. Most were slaves. Most of
> > >>>> the rest were illiterate farmers.
> > >>>
> > >>> That's pure bullshit. All Athenian youths were obliged to attend the
>
> Athens was just one town in Greece, and most of the time as brutal an autocracy
> as the other towns.
>
> Slavery was fundamental to ancient Greece. It prevented the industrial
> revolution that might have followed Hero's toys, and promoted slavery apologists
> like Plato. If Greece had only had a few well timed plagues like England did, we
> would be a few thousand years of industry and science instead of a few hundred.
>
> > It may be obvious to you, but in another DW forum I've seen discussion of
> > the possibility that her name could come from the Old Norse hildr,
> > meaning "battle". That would fit quite nicely with her role in the story.
>
> It could be a-skild or as-hild with old english palatislation confusing the
> orthography. as-hildr would mean holy-battler I suppose.
>
> > > between the last Frotho and Ragnar. Get a clue. There's no way the
> > > events of Beowulf can be dated any later than 200 AD.
> > >
> >
> > Beowulf is a poem, and a work of fiction. It doesn't have to be
> > historically accurate in every detail.
>
> The poet is clearly christian and the characters pre-christian. So, yes, the
> poem postdates any real events. The poet was deliberately using archaic
> characters and stories, perhaps to comment about christianity within a
> traditional germanic society.
>
> > >>> What do you mean by Post-exilic Judaism? The Jews were outright
>
> > > More poppycock from you. I've already given my sources.
> >
> > IIRC nobody found your sources very convincing.
>
> Archaelogists found far fewer household idols in that era than before. That is
> evidence that post-exilic jews largely abandonned idolatry and polytheism.
>
> Also Hebrew polytheism might not be all that polythetic. Michael Heiser for one
> argues for a divine council interpretation where YHWH was the creator and master
> of all, but he created lesser gods, later interpretted as angels, and delegated
> some tasks to them such running other nations, but the Hebrews were always a
> direct concern of YHWH.
>
> > > statements by Philo and Porphyry and the contents of Sanchuniathon. The
>
> I don't know which of those are anti-Semitic Greeks, and I'm not motivated to
> find out.
>
> > > bible itself brands the Jews as Polytheists an names all of their gods
>
> Modern english also has many names for a god, which--ah ha--all refer to the
> same god. Languages have these things called synonyms.
>
> > >>>> Christians lacked the political power to execute blasphemers until
> > >>>> 300.
> >
> > In England they didn't gain that power until the reign of Henry IV. (Hey,
> > him again! He keeps popping up in this thread, doesn't he?) He gave
> > Archbishop Arundel the power to execute heretics and blasphemers in
> > exchange for recognising his dubious claim to the throne.
>
> Sounds like Saud kings and their wahidists: get the priests to damn anyone who
> rebels against the king, and the king lets the priests pollute the world with
> their blasphemies.
>
> > > And your point being what? Either they conducted electricity or did not.
> > > Either way there would have been no harmful potential differences
> > > anywhere inside the suits.
> > >
> >
> > That depends on the fictional properties of the fictional alloys. They
> > don't have to obey real-life rules for conductance and resistance.
>
> A charge surge will spread out over a conductor at about c/3. That leaves a
> brief interval of charge imbalance where it can move along any conductor at a
> lower potential. As a simple example lightning strikes will eventually
> distribute their charge over the entire ground, but at the point of impact, the
> charge is so extreme and unbalanced it can fuse sand into branching glass tubes.

You're either the most educated person in AUK, or a damned-good
bullshitter.

--
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015
all rights reserved
The Doctor
2015-10-20 20:54:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 2015-10-20, solar penguin <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Nice to see you back.

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Canada Get out and Vote Oct 19 2015!!
p***@gmail.com
2015-10-20 21:18:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Yads said:

> Nice to see you back.

I've been back for a while. Just using a different account
because I'm on a different machine.
The Doctor
2015-10-20 21:21:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <3d95a9c9-d221-4411-acc0-***@googlegroups.com>,
<***@gmail.com> wrote:
>Yads said:
>
>> Nice to see you back.
>
>I've been back for a while. Just using a different account
>because I'm on a different machine.

Still welcome back.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Canada Get out and Vote Oct 19 2015!!
Siri Cruz
2015-10-19 07:17:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
> > New title sequence... isn't it about time?
> >
> > Spoilers
> >
> > 1
> > 2
> > 3
> > 4
> > 5
> > 6
> > 7
> > 8
> > 9
> > 0
> > 1
> > 2
> > 3
> > 4
> > 5
> > 6
> > 7
> > 8
> > 9
> > 0

> You want "authentic period dialogue" from the 9th Century? Really? Good
> luck with that. I have some sympathy when you speak of 2ist Century
> mannerisms, but it's a 21st Century drama.

That's a problem with all period dialogue. That most accurate would be all the
regular words next to slang next to syncopes that people today use in everyday
conversations. But it doesn't feel authentic because like everyone knows
Elizabethans always spoke in florid iambic pentameter.

> As I recall, "Viking" was, indeed, the term used by the Vikings

The real term was in whatever North Germanic language that village was actually
speaking (probably derived from *tewta) that the Tardis translated into 'viking'
for Clara and the modern English audience.

> Yeah. Because the way Burroughs tells it is SO realistic. That's the
> way things go when farmers are faced with trained warriors. They gain
> skills SO quickly that they defeat the oncoming foe because all that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFrMLRQIT_k

The montage scene from team america world police

or

Buffy: I'm just worried this whole session's gonna turn into some training
montage from an eighties movie.
Giles: Well, if we hear any inspirational power chords, we'll just lie down
until they go away.

> I don't think you really understand what a Faraday cage is. A true
> Faraday cage conducts an electric charge through it to the earth. That

A Faraday cage intercepts a varying magnetic field to induce a current in the
cage and use up all the energy of the field. The charge distributes itself
evenly on the entire surface or drains to ground at signficant fraction of the
speed of light, nigh on instantly so no electrical field either crosses the cage.

> doesn't mean that electronic systems within them woukd be unaffected by
> the electric charge rippling across its surface

Any instruments that operate near the interceptable magnetic field frequency
cannot operate across a faraday cage: cellphones in faraday bag can't be zapped
nor communicate outside the bag. Also it wouldn't prevent a cage itself made of
iron and the like from responding to magnetic attraction.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Timothy Bruening
2015-10-19 07:25:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 12:18:21 AM UTC-7, Siri Cruz wrote:
> > > New title sequence... isn't it about time?
> > >
> > > Spoilers
> > >
> > > 1
> > > 2
> > > 3
> > > 4
> > > 5
> > > 6
> > > 7
> > > 8
> > > 9
> > > 0
> > > 1
> > > 2
> > > 3
> > > 4
> > > 5
> > > 6
> > > 7
> > > 8
> > > 9
> > > 0
>

> > Faraday cage conducts an electric charge through it to the earth. That
>
> A Faraday cage intercepts a varying magnetic field to induce a current in the
> cage and use up all the energy of the field. The charge distributes itself
> evenly on the entire surface or drains to ground at signficant fraction of the
> speed of light, nigh on instantly so no electrical field either crosses the cage.
>
> > doesn't mean that electronic systems within them woukd be unaffected by
> > the electric charge rippling across its surface
>
> Any instruments that operate near the interceptable magnetic field frequency
> cannot operate across a faraday cage: cellphones in faraday bag can't be zapped
> nor communicate outside the bag.

But shouldn't cell phones that can receive temporal signals be able to continue receiving temporal signals through the walls of a Faraday cage?
Siri Cruz
2015-10-19 09:09:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <c111e47b-014a-4a79-ba5c-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 12:18:21 AM UTC-7, Siri Cruz wrote:
> > > > New title sequence... isn't it about time?
> > > >
> > > > Spoilers
> > > >
> > > > 1
> > > > 2
> > > > 3
> > > > 4
> > > > 5
> > > > 6
> > > > 7
> > > > 8
> > > > 9
> > > > 0
> > > > 1
> > > > 2
> > > > 3
> > > > 4
> > > > 5
> > > > 6
> > > > 7
> > > > 8
> > > > 9
> > > > 0
> >
>
> > > Faraday cage conducts an electric charge through it to the earth. That
> >
> > A Faraday cage intercepts a varying magnetic field to induce a current in
> > the
> > cage and use up all the energy of the field. The charge distributes itself
> > evenly on the entire surface or drains to ground at signficant fraction of
> > the
> > speed of light, nigh on instantly so no electrical field either crosses the
> > cage.
> >
> > > doesn't mean that electronic systems within them woukd be unaffected by
> > > the electric charge rippling across its surface
> >
> > Any instruments that operate near the interceptable magnetic field
> > frequency
> > cannot operate across a faraday cage: cellphones in faraday bag can't be
> > zapped
> > nor communicate outside the bag.
>
> But shouldn't cell phones that can receive temporal signals be able to
> continue receiving temporal signals through the walls of a Faraday cage?

Depends on the concentration of phlebotium in the cage.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 03:49:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 08:25, Timothy Bruening wrote:
> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 12:18:21 AM UTC-7, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>>>>
>>>> Spoilers
>>>>
>>>> 1
>>>> 2
>>>> 3
>>>> 4
>>>> 5
>>>> 6
>>>> 7
>>>> 8
>>>> 9
>>>> 0
>>>> 1
>>>> 2
>>>> 3
>>>> 4
>>>> 5
>>>> 6
>>>> 7
>>>> 8
>>>> 9
>>>> 0
>>
>
>>> Faraday cage conducts an electric charge through it to the earth. That
>>
>> A Faraday cage intercepts a varying magnetic field to induce a current in the
>> cage and use up all the energy of the field. The charge distributes itself
>> evenly on the entire surface or drains to ground at signficant fraction of the
>> speed of light, nigh on instantly so no electrical field either crosses the cage.
>>
>>> doesn't mean that electronic systems within them woukd be unaffected by
>>> the electric charge rippling across its surface
>>
>> Any instruments that operate near the interceptable magnetic field frequency
>> cannot operate across a faraday cage: cellphones in faraday bag can't be zapped
>> nor communicate outside the bag.
>
> But shouldn't cell phones that can receive temporal signals be able to continue receiving temporal signals through the walls of a Faraday cage?
>

As far as I'm concerned yes they should. How can it receive and transmit
signals inside the TARDIS which is in another dimension. And then
there's the fact that there's 100 meters of water above them. The mobile
phone signal should not be able to pass through it. The base itself is
also a Faraday Cage.
TB
2015-10-18 09:56:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>
> Spoilers
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
>
> The Girl Who Died
>

> So finally the Doctor uses his 'super-powers' to bring Massie Williams
> character back from the dead. How he manages to repair the alien medical
> device without his sonic I don't know. But now Massie can no longer die.
> Like we've not seen that before, and in next week's episode she's
> decided to become Dick Turpin.

Next episode, I predict that Massie's character will use her spare alien medical kit to make JACK HARKNESS immortal!
TB
2015-10-18 10:01:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>
> Spoilers
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
>
> The Girl Who Died
>
> What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
> was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing pantomime.
>
> Why Mark Gatiss was not asked to write the script I don't know.

Why don't you write to Moffat to ask him?

> Then came the biggest piece of moronic crap of the lot with the Doctor
> remembering the reason why he chose to copy the appearance of Cecilius
> from The Fires of Pompeii for his regeneration. It was to remind him
> that he had the power of life and death in his hands and to use it now.

Was Cecilius played by Capaldi?
Agamemnon
2015-10-18 17:36:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 18/10/2015 11:01, TB wrote:
> On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>>
>> Spoilers
>>
>> 1
>> 2
>> 3
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>> 9
>> 0
>> 1
>> 2
>> 3
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>> 9
>> 0
>>
>> The Girl Who Died
>>
>> What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
>> was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing pantomime.
>>
>> Why Mark Gatiss was not asked to write the script I don't know.
>
> Why don't you write to Moffat to ask him?
>
>> Then came the biggest piece of moronic crap of the lot with the Doctor
>> remembering the reason why he chose to copy the appearance of Cecilius
>> from The Fires of Pompeii for his regeneration. It was to remind him
>> that he had the power of life and death in his hands and to use it now.
>
> Was Cecilius played by Capaldi?
>

You didn't notice the resemblance then? I don't think most people would
have either hence one good reason among many why it was the biggest
piece of moronic crap in the entire episode. How long have you been
watching Doctor Who? It's a well known fact.

Then there's the electric eels of course. They come from the other side
of the Atlantic. Unfortunately and if I'd known I'd have pointed it out
earlier they are freshwater fish so there's no way they could have swam
to anywhere near Europe across thousands of miles of ocean. The Vikings
must have caught them in South America and brought them in barrels to
northern England. A likely story. And why?

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-10-17/was-this-a-shocking-plot-hole-in-doctor-who-the-girl-who-died
TB
2015-10-18 18:20:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
Agamemnon
2015-10-18 18:24:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 18/10/2015 19:20, TB wrote:
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
>
> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>

The Doctor said they were broken.
TB
2015-10-19 01:15:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 11:25:01 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> On 18/10/2015 19:20, TB wrote:
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> > 1
> >
> > The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
> >
>
> The Doctor said they were broken.

I was assuming that the Mire would all have taken med kit doses before going into battle as a matter of course, and that such internal kits were engineered to survive anything short of a nuclear blast!
Agamemnon
2015-10-19 01:54:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 02:15, TB wrote:
> On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 11:25:01 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> On 18/10/2015 19:20, TB wrote:
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>> 1
>>>
>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>>>
>>
>> The Doctor said they were broken.
>
> I was assuming that the Mire would all have taken med kit doses before going into battle as a matter of course, and that such internal kits were engineered to survive anything short of a nuclear blast!
>

That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
Siri Cruz
2015-10-19 06:35:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>> 1
> >>>
> >>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they
> >>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!

Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which was
recorded and used to blackmail them.

> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.

They could have different effects on different species.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Mike M
2015-10-19 06:49:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>>
>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they
>>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>
> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which was
> recorded and used to blackmail them.
>

I think four of them were fried by concentrated eel power. But you can't
apply an emergency medical kit to yourself if you're dead. So no
revivification.

>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>
> They could have different effects on different species.
>
Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?


--
"In 900 years of time and space, I've never met anyone who wasn't
important."
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 03:52:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
> Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they
>>>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>>
>> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which was
>> recorded and used to blackmail them.
>>
>
> I think four of them were fried by concentrated eel power. But you can't
> apply an emergency medical kit to yourself if you're dead. So no
> revivification.
>
>>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>>
>> They could have different effects on different species.
>>

Yer, right. So they are harmful to the Mire that made them but not to
humans that have a different biology?

> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
>
>

Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
Mike M
2015-10-20 04:36:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
>> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
>> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
>> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
>> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
>> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
>>
>
> Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
>
>
>

No idea. Since Ashildr does not age I speculated that the reason the kits
are not routinely absorbed is that they prevent significant bodily change.
The kit might prevent a child coming to term, or anything. If the kit was
nano machines and passed to an embryo, would the embryo develop? It might
be frozen in an eternal state of being no older than its development at the
point it embedded in the womb.

--
"In 900 years of time and space, I've never met anyone who wasn't
important."
TB
2015-10-20 05:41:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> > On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
> >> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
> >> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
> >> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
> >> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
> >> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
> >>
> >
> > Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
> >
> >
> >
>
> No idea. Since Ashildr does not age I speculated that the reason the kits
> are not routinely absorbed is that they prevent significant bodily change.
> The kit might prevent a child coming to term, or anything. If the kit was
> nano machines and passed to an embryo, would the embryo develop? It might
> be frozen in an eternal state of being no older than its development at the
> point it embedded in the womb.

If the med kit prevents Ashildr from aging, then she will remain a girl forever, which means that she can't be "The WOMAN Who Lived" of the title of this Saturday's episode! Another woman will have to be found to pinch hit for her!

But didn't I see her grow during the epilogue of last Saturday's episode?
Mike M
2015-10-20 05:58:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
TB <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>> On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
>>>> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
>>>> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
>>>> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
>>>> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
>>>> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No idea. Since Ashildr does not age I speculated that the reason the kits
>> are not routinely absorbed is that they prevent significant bodily change.
>> The kit might prevent a child coming to term, or anything. If the kit was
>> nano machines and passed to an embryo, would the embryo develop? It might
>> be frozen in an eternal state of being no older than its development at the
>> point it embedded in the womb.
>
> If the med kit prevents Ashildr from aging, then she will remain a girl
> forever, which means that she can't be "The WOMAN Who Lived" of the title
> of this Saturday's episode! Another woman will have to be found to pinch hit for her!
>
> But didn't I see her grow during the epilogue of last Saturday's episode?
>

She's a woman because of her chronological age, not her physiological age
or size. And the only thing that aged in the "passage of time" sequence was
the expression in her face.

--
"In 900 years of time and space, I've never met anyone who wasn't
important."
Timothy Bruening
2015-10-20 13:37:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 10:58:29 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
> TB <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
> > On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
> >> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> >>> On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
> >>>> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
> >>>> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
> >>>> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
> >>>> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
> >>>> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> No idea. Since Ashildr does not age I speculated that the reason the kits
> >> are not routinely absorbed is that they prevent significant bodily change.
> >> The kit might prevent a child coming to term, or anything. If the kit was
> >> nano machines and passed to an embryo, would the embryo develop? It might
> >> be frozen in an eternal state of being no older than its development at the
> >> point it embedded in the womb.
> >
> > If the med kit prevents Ashildr from aging, then she will remain a girl
> > forever, which means that she can't be "The WOMAN Who Lived" of the title
> > of this Saturday's episode! Another woman will have to be found to pinch hit for her!
> >
> > But didn't I see her grow during the epilogue of last Saturday's episode?
> >
>
> She's a woman because of her chronological age, not her physiological age
> or size. And the only thing that aged in the "passage of time" sequence was
> the expression in her face.

If she is still physiologically a girl, then wouldn't she still look like a girl, and therefore not be titled "The Woman Who Lived"?

Would she still be emotionally a girl? If so, might that cause problems?
Mike M
2015-10-20 13:52:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 10:58:29 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
>> TB <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>>> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
>>>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
>>>>>> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
>>>>>> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
>>>>>> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
>>>>>> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
>>>>>> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No idea. Since Ashildr does not age I speculated that the reason the kits
>>>> are not routinely absorbed is that they prevent significant bodily change.
>>>> The kit might prevent a child coming to term, or anything. If the kit was
>>>> nano machines and passed to an embryo, would the embryo develop? It might
>>>> be frozen in an eternal state of being no older than its development at the
>>>> point it embedded in the womb.
>>>
>>> If the med kit prevents Ashildr from aging, then she will remain a girl
>>> forever, which means that she can't be "The WOMAN Who Lived" of the title
>>> of this Saturday's episode! Another woman will have to be found to pinch hit for her!
>>>
>>> But didn't I see her grow during the epilogue of last Saturday's episode?
>>>
>>
>> She's a woman because of her chronological age, not her physiological age
>> or size. And the only thing that aged in the "passage of time" sequence was
>> the expression in her face.
>
> If she is still physiologically a girl, then wouldn't she still look like
> a girl, and therefore not be titled "The Woman Who Lived"?
>

You're getting locked into literalism Tim. It's more aesthetically pleasing
for one of the titles to have "girl" and one "woman". Since they are
referring to the same person, girl comes first.

> Would she still be emotionally a girl? If so, might that cause problems?
>
She will most likely still have the same hormonal balance as the teenage
girl she once was (unless the alien medical kit adjusts it to whatever it
seems normal).

However I'd imagine she has learned to control her responses to her
hormones - she will have had many hundreds of years in which to learn).

--
"In 900 years of time and space, I've never met anyone who wasn't
important."
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 16:19:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 20/10/2015 06:41, TB wrote:
> On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Mike M wrote:
>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>> On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
>>>> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
>>>> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
>>>> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
>>>> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
>>>> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No idea. Since Ashildr does not age I speculated that the reason the kits
>> are not routinely absorbed is that they prevent significant bodily change.
>> The kit might prevent a child coming to term, or anything. If the kit was
>> nano machines and passed to an embryo, would the embryo develop? It might
>> be frozen in an eternal state of being no older than its development at the
>> point it embedded in the womb.
>
> If the med kit prevents Ashildr from aging, then she will remain a girl forever, which means that she can't be "The WOMAN Who Lived" of the title of this Saturday's episode! Another woman will have to be found to pinch hit for her!
>

If the med kit prevents her from ageing or embryos from growing (though
technically they're zygotes) then wouldn't it also prevent her from
imprinting long term memories?

> But didn't I see her grow during the epilogue of last Saturday's episode?
>

Not really. What was showing was the passage of time and Maisie looking
exactly the same.
Timothy Bruening
2015-10-20 17:39:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 9:20:03 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> On 20/10/2015 06:41, TB wrote:

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


> > If the med kit prevents Ashildr from aging, then she will remain a girl forever, which means that she can't be "The WOMAN Who Lived" of the title of this Saturday's episode! Another woman will have to be found to pinch hit for her!
> >
>
> If the med kit prevents her from ageing or embryos from growing (though
> technically they're zygotes) then wouldn't it also prevent her from
> imprinting long term memories?

Holy 50 First Dates!
Siri Cruz
2015-10-20 05:17:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

> On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
> > Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>> 1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries
> >>>>>> they
> >>>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
> >>
> >> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which
> >> was
> >> recorded and used to blackmail them.
> >>
> >
> > I think four of them were fried by concentrated eel power. But you can't
> > apply an emergency medical kit to yourself if you're dead. So no
> > revivification.
> >
> >>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
> >>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
> >>
> >> They could have different effects on different species.
> >>
>
> Yer, right. So they are harmful to the Mire that made them but not to
> humans that have a different biology?
>
> > Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
> > in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
> > the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
> > routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
> > womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
> >
> >
>
> Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?

When did you become TB's sock puppet?

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
The Doctor
2015-10-20 14:38:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>On 19/10/2015 07:49, Mike M wrote:
>> Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they
>>>>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>>>
>>> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which was
>>> recorded and used to blackmail them.
>>>
>>
>> I think four of them were fried by concentrated eel power. But you can't
>> apply an emergency medical kit to yourself if you're dead. So no
>> revivification.
>>
>>>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>>>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>>>
>>> They could have different effects on different species.
>>>
>
>Yer, right. So they are harmful to the Mire that made them but not to
>humans that have a different biology?
>
>> Or: they could have severe side effects on the Mire so they're only applied
>> in real emergency. Since they are apparently antiagathic in humans, perhaps
>> the Mire are all juveniles and will never mature and breed if they
>> routinely apply the patches. Or the patches would kill off babies in the
>> womb so no one really wants one unless they really really have to?
>>
>>
>
>Wouldn't Maisie Williams children now be immortal when they're born?
>
>

Depends if those machines get inherited.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Canada Get out and Vote Oct 19 2015!!
Agamemnon
2015-10-19 06:50:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 1
>>>>>
>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they
>>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>
> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which was
> recorded and used to blackmail them.
>
>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>
> They could have different effects on different species.
>

How come they worked on humans?
Timothy Bruening
2015-10-19 07:26:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 11:50:28 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
> >>>>> 1

> >
> >> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
> >> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
> >
> > They could have different effects on different species.
> >
>
> How come they worked on humans?

Obviously, the Doctor had adjusted them to work on humans!
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 03:53:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 19/10/2015 08:26, Timothy Bruening wrote:
> On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 11:50:28 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>>>>> 1
>
>>>
>>>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>>>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>>>
>>> They could have different effects on different species.
>>>
>>
>> How come they worked on humans?
>
> Obviously, the Doctor had adjusted them to work on humans!
>

Why isn't that stated in the dialogue?
Siri Cruz
2015-10-19 09:09:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <G-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>> 1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries
> >>>>> they
> >>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
> >
> > Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which
> > was
> > recorded and used to blackmail them.
> >
> >> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
> >> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
> >
> > They could have different effects on different species.
> >
>
> How come they worked on humans?

Since humans are supposed to die, does it work?

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Pudentame
2015-10-21 03:36:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 02:09:56 -0700, Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>In article <G-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
>> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:

>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries
>> >>>>> they
>> >>>>> killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!
>> >
>> > Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat which
>> > was
>> > recorded and used to blackmail them.
>> >
>> >> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>> >> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>> >
>> > They could have different effects on different species.
>> >
>>
>> How come they worked on humans?
>
>Since humans are supposed to die, does it work?

Since it's apparently going to keep Ashildr from dying, it's going to
work at least that well on humans.

But there are drawbacks.
Your Name
2015-10-21 05:20:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, Pudentame
<***@no.where.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 02:09:56 -0700, Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >In article <G-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
> > Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> >> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire
> >> >>>>> mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to
> >> >>>>> their internal med kits!
> >> >
> >> > Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat
> >> > which was recorded and used to blackmail them.
> >> >
> >> >> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
> >> >> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
> >> >
> >> > They could have different effects on different species.
> >>
> >> How come they worked on humans?
> >
> >Since humans are supposed to die, does it work?
>
> Since it's apparently going to keep Ashildr from dying, it's going to
> work at least that well on humans.
>
> But there are drawbacks.

The Doctor said he had tweaked it to work on humans. The
almost-immortality was a side-effect.
Agamemnon
2015-10-21 20:34:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 21/10/2015 06:20, Your Name wrote:
> In article <***@4ax.com>, Pudentame
> <***@no.where.invalid> wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 02:09:56 -0700, Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> In article <G-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
>>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>>> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire
>>>>>>>>> mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to
>>>>>>>>> their internal med kits!
>>>>>
>>>>> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat
>>>>> which was recorded and used to blackmail them.
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>>>>>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>>>>>
>>>>> They could have different effects on different species.
>>>>
>>>> How come they worked on humans?
>>>
>>> Since humans are supposed to die, does it work?
>>
>> Since it's apparently going to keep Ashildr from dying, it's going to
>> work at least that well on humans.
>>
>> But there are drawbacks.
>
> The Doctor said he had tweaked it to work on humans. The
> almost-immortality was a side-effect.
>

How was he able do that when it was alien bio-technology?

Can he explain what factors meant it could work on humans as well?
Tim Bruening
2017-02-24 04:56:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 1:34:58 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> On 21/10/2015 06:20, Your Name wrote:
> > In article <***@4ax.com>, Pudentame
> > <***@no.where.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 02:09:56 -0700, Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> In article <G-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
> >>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> >>>> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire
> >>>>>>>>> mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to
> >>>>>>>>> their internal med kits!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat
> >>>>> which was recorded and used to blackmail them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
> >>>>>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> They could have different effects on different species.
> >>>>
> >>>> How come they worked on humans?
> >>>
> >>> Since humans are supposed to die, does it work?
> >>
> >> Since it's apparently going to keep Ashildr from dying, it's going to
> >> work at least that well on humans.
> >>
> >> But there are drawbacks.
> >
> > The Doctor said he had tweaked it to work on humans. The
> > almost-immortality was a side-effect.
> >
>
> How was he able do that when it was alien bio-technology?

The Mire are similar enough to humans to function in Earth's environment and safely consume human bodies, so it stands to reason that Mire medical technology could be adapted to work on humans.
The Doctor
2015-10-21 21:40:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <***@eclipse.net.uk>,
Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>On 21/10/2015 06:20, Your Name wrote:
>> In article <***@4ax.com>, Pudentame
>> <***@no.where.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 02:09:56 -0700, Siri Cruz <***@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> In article <G-***@eclipse.net.uk>,
>>>> Agamemnon <***@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/10/2015 07:35, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire
>>>>>>>>>> mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to
>>>>>>>>>> their internal med kits!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did any of them die? The point was to scare them into panic retreat
>>>>>> which was recorded and used to blackmail them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's another question. If the kits made them immortal then why hadn't
>>>>>>> they taken them already and what did they need them for if they had.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They could have different effects on different species.
>>>>>
>>>>> How come they worked on humans?
>>>>
>>>> Since humans are supposed to die, does it work?
>>>
>>> Since it's apparently going to keep Ashildr from dying, it's going to
>>> work at least that well on humans.
>>>
>>> But there are drawbacks.
>>
>> The Doctor said he had tweaked it to work on humans. The
>> almost-immortality was a side-effect.
>>
>
>How was he able do that when it was alien bio-technology?
>
>Can he explain what factors meant it could work on humans as well?
>
>

That might be explained in the next episode.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Canada Get out and Vote Oct 19 2015!!
The Doctor
2015-10-18 21:14:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <5add66e4-dde6-4e71-9f79-***@googlegroups.com>,
TB <***@dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>1
>
>The Viking villagers are in for a shock. Soon, the Mire mercenaries they killed will come back to life, thanks to their internal med kits!

IF only they had the kits with them.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
God,Queen and country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Time for Stephen to move on on Oct 19 2015!!
Tim Bruening
2017-02-24 05:06:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 10:36:26 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:

>
> Then there's the electric eels of course. They come from the other side
> of the Atlantic. Unfortunately and if I'd known I'd have pointed it out
> earlier they are freshwater fish so there's no way they could have swam
> to anywhere near Europe across thousands of miles of ocean. The Vikings
> must have caught them in South America and brought them in barrels to
> northern England. A likely story. And why?
>
> http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-10-17/was-this-a-shocking-plot-hole-in-doctor-who-the-girl-who-died

Its my understanding that Vikings got to North America. They therefore might have reached South America too.
The Doctor
2017-02-24 05:42:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <325a1bc0-3e23-44ac-8997-***@googlegroups.com>,
Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 10:36:26 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>
>>
>> Then there's the electric eels of course. They come from the other side
>> of the Atlantic. Unfortunately and if I'd known I'd have pointed it out
>> earlier they are freshwater fish so there's no way they could have swam
>> to anywhere near Europe across thousands of miles of ocean. The Vikings
>> must have caught them in South America and brought them in barrels to
>> northern England. A likely story. And why?
>>
>>
>http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-10-17/was-this-a-shocking-plot-hole-in-doctor-who-the-girl-who-died
>
>Its my understanding that Vikings got to North America. They therefore
>might have reached South America too.

Nope.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
God is dead! Yahweh lives! Jesus his only begotten Son is the Risen Saviour!!
Tim Bruening
2018-01-27 19:48:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 9:42:31 PM UTC-8, The Doctor wrote:
> In article <325a1bc0-3e23-44ac-8997-***@googlegroups.com>,
> Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 10:36:26 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Then there's the electric eels of course. They come from the other side
> >> of the Atlantic. Unfortunately and if I'd known I'd have pointed it out
> >> earlier they are freshwater fish so there's no way they could have swam
> >> to anywhere near Europe across thousands of miles of ocean. The Vikings
> >> must have caught them in South America and brought them in barrels to
> >> northern England. A likely story. And why?
> >>
> >>
> >http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-10-17/was-this-a-shocking-plot-hole-in-doctor-who-the-girl-who-died
> >
> >Its my understanding that Vikings got to North America. They therefore
> >might have reached South America too.
>
> Nope.

Can you prove they didn't?
The Doctor
2018-01-27 19:49:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <931684a2-f8e3-4337-b983-***@googlegroups.com>,
Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 9:42:31 PM UTC-8, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <325a1bc0-3e23-44ac-8997-***@googlegroups.com>,
>> Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 10:36:26 AM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Then there's the electric eels of course. They come from the other side
>> >> of the Atlantic. Unfortunately and if I'd known I'd have pointed it out
>> >> earlier they are freshwater fish so there's no way they could have swam
>> >> to anywhere near Europe across thousands of miles of ocean. The Vikings
>> >> must have caught them in South America and brought them in barrels to
>> >> northern England. A likely story. And why?
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-10-17/was-this-a-shocking-plot-hole-in-doctor-who-the-girl-who-died
>> >
>> >Its my understanding that Vikings got to North America. They therefore
>> >might have reached South America too.
>>
>> Nope.
>
>Can you prove they didn't?

No charts indicating they got that far. Only Greenland and Newfoundland.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Birthday 29 Jan 1969 BOrn Redhill,Surrey,England , UK!
Timothy Bruening
2018-03-08 13:34:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Animals: Spider in Clara's spacesuit.

Lots of chickens at village.

The Doctor mentions dinosaurs when commenting on a training accident at Viking village.
Timothy Bruening
2018-03-08 13:49:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 5:34:32 AM UTC-8, Timothy Bruening wrote:
> Animals: Spider in Clara's spacesuit.
>
> Lots of chickens at village.
>
> The Doctor mentions dinosaurs when commenting on a training accident at Viking village.

Ashildr projecting a snake at the Mire. It was actually a horse headed puppet.
The Doctor
2018-03-08 13:54:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <0a136e2a-1aa6-4d56-b346-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 5:34:32 AM UTC-8, Timothy Bruening wrote:
>> Animals: Spider in Clara's spacesuit.
>>
>> Lots of chickens at village.
>>
>> The Doctor mentions dinosaurs when commenting on a training accident
>at Viking village.
>
>Ashildr projecting a snake at the Mire. It was actually a horse headed puppet.

Stop spamtrolling rec.arts.drwho Tim!!

You are making enemies!!

You are showing yourself to be anti-social.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
To make pleasures pleasant, shorten them. -Charles Buxton
Timothy Bruening
2018-03-09 06:04:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?
The Doctor
2018-03-09 15:54:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?

Supposedly that is the idea.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
To make pleasures pleasant, shorten them. -Charles Buxton
Timothy Bruening
2018-03-30 23:50:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 7:54:29 AM UTC-8, The Doctor wrote:
> In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
> Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?
>
> Supposedly that is the idea.

Shouldn't we see Mires at the end of the universe?
The Doctor
2018-03-31 03:42:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <5eaccb15-08cb-48d6-89ca-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 7:54:29 AM UTC-8, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
>> Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?
>>
>> Supposedly that is the idea.
>
>Shouldn't we see Mires at the end of the universe?

Good point.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
You can't have everything. Where would you put it? -Steven Wright
The Doctor
2018-11-05 00:47:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?

They might!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Lest we forget - 11/11/18 !!
Daniel60
2018-11-05 10:27:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The Doctor wrote on 5/11/2018 11:47 AM:
> In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
> Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?
>
> They might!
>
If the Mire were immortal, why would they need Med Kits??

--
Daniel
Timothy Bruening
2018-12-06 21:14:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Monday, November 5, 2018 at 2:27:04 AM UTC-8, Daniel60 wrote:
> The Doctor wrote on 5/11/2018 11:47 AM:
> > In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
> > Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?
> >
> > They might!
> >
> If the Mire were immortal, why would they need Med Kits??

To make them immortal.
The Doctor
2018-12-06 22:25:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <894947c0-2a6c-4b1d-846e-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, November 5, 2018 at 2:27:04 AM UTC-8, Daniel60 wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 5/11/2018 11:47 AM:
>> > In article <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>,
>> > Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make Mire immortal?
>> >
>> > They might!
>> >
>> If the Mire were immortal, why would they need Med Kits??
>
>To make them immortal.

I see. Do you Dan?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Merry Christmas 2018 and Happy New Year 2019!!
Daniel60
2018-12-07 13:14:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Timothy Bruening wrote on 7/12/2018 8:14 AM:
> On Monday, November 5, 2018 at 2:27:04 AM UTC-8, Daniel60 wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 5/11/2018 11:47 AM:
>>> In article
>>> <6840c223-aa2b-4827-9e4b-***@googlegroups.com>, Timothy
>>> Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> A Mire med kit makes Ashildr immortal. Do the med kits make
>>>> Mire immortal?
>>>
>>> They might!
>>>
>> If the Mire were immortal, why would they need Med Kits??
>
> To make them immortal.
>
They *ARE* immortal, so no need to be made immortal!!

--
Daniel
The Doctor
2018-03-08 13:53:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <b947f2ce-1928-4b53-8067-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>Animals: Spider in Clara's spacesuit.
>
>Lots of chickens at village.
>
>The Doctor mentions dinosaurs when commenting on a training accident at
>Viking village.

Stop spamtrolling rec.arts.drwho Tim!!

You are making enemies!!

You are showing yourself to be anti-social.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
To make pleasures pleasant, shorten them. -Charles Buxton
Timothy Bruening
2015-10-20 17:42:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

After the Doctor threatens to show video of the Mire retreating from a puppet snake to the entire galaxy, the Mire leave. Why don't they blast the village with a nuclear missile to keep the Doctor silent, or even blow up Earth?
Agamemnon
2015-10-20 18:21:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 20/10/2015 18:42, Timothy Bruening wrote:
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
>
> After the Doctor threatens to show video of the Mire retreating from a puppet snake to the entire galaxy, the Mire leave. Why don't they blast the village with a nuclear missile to keep the Doctor silent, or even blow up Earth?
>

Exactly. A bullet through the Doctor's head at the time he's
regenerating should do it.
Siri Cruz
2015-10-20 18:56:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <dafedd53-117f-4bdc-b55e-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
> 1
>
> After the Doctor threatens to show video of the Mire retreating from a puppet
> snake to the entire galaxy, the Mire leave. Why don't they blast the village
> with a nuclear missile to keep the Doctor silent, or even blow up Earth?

As Clara pointed out whilst in mid-kidnap, she and Doctor were demonstrating
superior technology. The Doctor might have already transferred the video and it
would be released if the Doctor didn't prevent it. The Mire could not be sure.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
Tim Bruening
2017-02-24 05:00:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> New title sequence... isn't it about time?

>
> Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a start
> the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she uses
> in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived after the
> strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves Norsemen after
> the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by the Saxons which
> meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or "Voyagers". No real
> "Viking" would behave in the way any of these characters were written.

The TARDIS translation circuits must have translated the "Vikings" word for themselves into the English word "Vikings"!
>
> Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
> unfortunately they seem to back next week.

Think Gorilla glue.
The Doctor
2017-02-24 05:42:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <b3b2e6c6-a3f8-428c-9d9b-***@googlegroups.com>,
Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>
>>
>> Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a start
>> the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she uses
>> in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived after the
>> strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves Norsemen after
>> the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by the Saxons which
>> meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or "Voyagers". No real
>> "Viking" would behave in the way any of these characters were written.
>
>The TARDIS translation circuits must have translated the "Vikings" word
>for themselves into the English word "Vikings"!
>>
>> Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
>> unfortunately they seem to back next week.
>
>Think Gorilla glue.

That old commerical.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://www.fullyfollow.me/rootnl2k Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
God is dead! Yahweh lives! Jesus his only begotten Son is the Risen Saviour!!
Tim Bruening
2018-01-27 19:46:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 9:42:16 PM UTC-8, The Doctor wrote:
> In article <b3b2e6c6-a3f8-428c-9d9b-***@googlegroups.com>,
> Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> >> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
> >
> >>
> >> Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a start
> >> the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she uses
> >> in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived after the
> >> strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves Norsemen after
> >> the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by the Saxons which
> >> meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or "Voyagers". No real
> >> "Viking" would behave in the way any of these characters were written.
> >
> >The TARDIS translation circuits must have translated the "Vikings" word
> >for themselves into the English word "Vikings"!
> >>
> >> Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
> >> unfortunately they seem to back next week.
> >
> >Think Gorilla glue.
>
> That old commerical.

I see such ads often.
The Doctor
2018-01-27 19:48:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <cdfcb4d1-7f55-429d-ba33-***@googlegroups.com>,
Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 9:42:16 PM UTC-8, The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <b3b2e6c6-a3f8-428c-9d9b-***@googlegroups.com>,
>> Tim Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> >> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Massie Williams did not sound or act very convincing either. For a start
>> >> the so-called "Vikings" did not call themselves Vikings which she uses
>> >> in her address to the alien leader when she and Clara survived after the
>> >> strongest Vikings were abducted. They called themselves Norsemen after
>> >> the land they came from. "Vikings" was a term used by the Saxons which
>> >> meant something like "pirate" or "sea fairer" or "Voyagers". No real
>> >> "Viking" would behave in the way any of these characters were written.
>> >
>> >The TARDIS translation circuits must have translated the "Vikings" word
>> >for themselves into the English word "Vikings"!
>> >>
>> >> Meanwhile the Doctor has his comic shades snapped in half but
>> >> unfortunately they seem to back next week.
>> >
>> >Think Gorilla glue.
>>
>> That old commerical.
>
>I see such ads often.

Yeah! Yeah!!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Birthday 29 Jan 1969 BOrn Redhill,Surrey,England , UK!
Timothy Bruening
2018-07-18 07:48:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>
> Spoilers
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
>
> The Girl Who Died
>
> What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
> was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing pantomime.

How would you have done the story?
The Doctor
2018-07-18 15:55:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <4b2d019c-92fb-4ec6-8eb6-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Agamemnon wrote:
>> New title sequence... isn't it about time?
>>
>> Spoilers
>>
>> 1
>> 2
>> 3
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>> 9
>> 0
>> 1
>> 2
>> 3
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>> 9
>> 0
>>
>> The Girl Who Died
>>
>> What could have initially been considered as a good premise for a story
>> was ruined because Moffat has turned the entire show into a f'ing pantomime.
>
>How would you have done the story?

He is referring to DW in general.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Our great weariness comes from work not done. -Eric Hoffer
Timothy Bruening
2018-09-28 11:05:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The Doctor says that the Mire med kit he implanted on Ashildr will never ever stop repairing her!
He said much the same about Chula nanogenes in The Doctor Dances. Are the Mire & Chula (both warrior races) related?
The Doctor
2018-09-28 14:42:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In article <9967ed6f-064c-4181-9a12-***@googlegroups.com>,
Timothy Bruening <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>The Doctor says that the Mire med kit he implanted on Ashildr will never
>ever stop repairing her!
> He said much the same about Chula nanogenes in The Doctor Dances. Are
>the Mire & Chula (both warrior races) related?

Maybe but we do not know.

Good Observation.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism
Quebec votez contre le PQ et le QS des 1 October 2018!
Loading...