I remember reading a von Däniken book when I was quite young, 9 or so, I think and being absolutely fascinated. Then after a while I realised it was pretty much all made up and what has stayed with me ever since was my blazing righteous anger that someone could make up a pile of stuff and put it in a book and claim it was true. That feeling has stayed with me far long than anything from the book itself.
Perhaps most of us can assess something like this and decide for ourselves on the available evidence as to its truth and relevance. What the author claims seems, to me at least, a minor issue. I get it that you do not agree. More generally aside from outright lies and pure stories, there are always analogical levels of interpretation. Presumably, if an unbeliever, you're irate at many of the world religions.
Well, I was 9 at the time and it was probably the first "science" book that I had read and got excited about.
And no - never been impressed by any of the major religions - although (possibly influenced by Philip Pullman) I do wonder if there was a completely normal bloke in the middle east at the relevant time who suggested it might be good to stop being complete shits to each other...
>I do wonder if there was a completely normal bloke in the middle east at the relevant time who suggested it might be good to stop being complete shits to each other...
As far as I know, what we know as established historical fact is that:
- there indeed was a bloke
- he splintered from being a follower of another more famous bloke at the time who was executed by the romans for becoming too popular with the masses
- he preached the world was about to end (as in, in their listener's lifetime)
- he also pissed off the romans enough to be executed.
"...nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change..." - Douglas Adams
Not sure it would take that long - the Younger Dryas only lasted 1,200 years and resulted in fairly significant glaciation here in Scotland - although nothing like the depth of ice of the full ice age.
Here in Scotland its pretty common for cows to be kept off of the fields during winter - a combination of protecting them from the weather and, I suspect more importantly, protecting pasture land. Having cows in a field here at the moment (and I live in the middle of a farm) would probably just result in an ocean of mud.
I can't help wondering if that's really what all of this is about - the Nordics can't really fight the US and Russia at the same time (though given their history I suspect they'd try).
But they are not fighting russia. Also putin can't really fight anywhere else but Ukraine. Special operation in Baltic state is maximum of russian ability unless there is a ceasefire in Ukraine.
Not yet no (and I seriously hope that it will never happen), but a ceasefire in Ukraine looks like it might happen tying down troops from the UK, France and others and then a threat to Greenland from the US drawing off more troops and attention perhaps leaving Russia open to attack one of the Baltic states?
Sure, the Melian order of the world is something one could consider as always there. Still, how much of Thucydides still applies when cheap drones, nuclear MAD, and environmental tragedy-of-the-commons are taken into account?
reply