In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be 127.0.0.1 wrote
in message 1678620.OHQcH9YDMG@FreeBSD:
Panzerfaust wrote:
Moroccan police have cracked down on the dangerous departures, though,
causing many to head further south and leave from Mauritania, the
newspaper El Pais reported Tuesday.
Norseman/Vikings Crossed the Atlantic by 860 A.D.
"Cite your source."
No one can be this stupid as to not know this. NO ONE
I agree, even Roger should have known this.
Roger didn't realize that the idiot child was trying to pretend that
the 600 miles between Norway and Iceland was the whole of the
Atlantic.
But Roger *did* realize that the idiot child would run from the meat
of the discussion, so here it is again for zie to show us zir craven
cowardice over:
repost
In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be 127.0.0.1 wrote
in message 2892323.bbVpMMqGG0@FreeBSD:
Roger wrote:
Norseman/Vikings Crossed the Atlantic by 860 A.D.
"Cite your source."
The idiot child has none.
I didn't know that you needed one, you should know this stuff.
874 Vikings from Norway began to survey Iceland. The monks withdrew to
Ireland. The 40,000-square-mile island situated 500 miles northwest of
Scotland was first settled by Norwegians.
(NH, 6/96, p.53)(HNQ, 4/28/00)
More timelines at the url below.
http://timelines.ws/countries/ICELAND.HTML
Ah, so you think Norway to Iceland is "crossing the Atlantic."
The north Atlantic, yes.
My bad.
I assumed you actually had some knowledge of geography.
Indeed I do.
You see, the body of water between Norway and Iceland is the Norwegian
Sea. While arguably part of the North Atlantic, I have never ever
hear anyone describe its crossing to be "crossing the Atlantic."
Why must you nit pic every little thing. I call it the "North Atlantic"
But you did not say "the North Atlantic," you said "the Atlantic,"
clearly trying to suggest that this is more arduous than the crossing
being attempted by these Africans.
Yes, you're nitpicking, just as I said.
They're called "facts," idiot child.
I quite understand that you neither recognize them nor their
importance in the real world, but that's because you hatred has
blinded you.
Nor is Norway to Iceland a dramatically longer trip than the crossing
being attempted by these Africans.
The trip from Norway to Iceland would be far more harsh than anything the
Africans would experience in the Norwegian sea as you call it.
No, they are both about 600 miles or 1000 kilometers, your lies about
knowing geography (or of actually checking any of your facts before
posting) notwithstanding.
I guess weather conditions would have nothing to do with it?
You think they don't have storms in Africa, and that the Vikings went
*anywhere* during the cold season?
Yet, Blacks of today -
with advanced technology can't make a 1,000 Kilometer trip.
And your proof that these Africans had access to "advanced
technology" is ... ?
Technology is all around you and them. Even you will admit that these
people have access to technology that the Norseman didn't have.
No, I won't.
There ya have it folks. According to Roger, the Norseman were more
technologically advanced in 874 A.D. than today's blacks are in 2006.
I did not say "today's blacks" in general , idiot child
We were comparing "today's blacks" with the Norseman of 874.
No, you were comparing these specific Africans with those Norsemen,
because you have offered no evidence that blacks in general are
incapable of such a crossing.
Feel free to name the Black ship builders, explorers and navigators of the
Norseman time era.
Irrelevant to your attempt to compare apples and oranges.
Name a single Wonder of the Ancient World constructed by the Norse?
-- I was very
specifically and clearly referring to the Africans described in the
article.
So was I.
Then you lied when you claimed to have been "'today's blacks' with the
Norseman of 874."
Not a lie. Were talking about Blacks in the year of 2006 compared with the
Norseman of 874.
No, we're talking about these specific Blacks, and those specific
Norse.
Thank you for the admission.
When you cite your Black ship builders and navigators of the 874 era, be
sure to include a url.
Right after you cite your URL for that Wonder.
Now -- what proof do you offer that *they* had access to "advanced
technology?"
What proof do you offer that *they* had access to "advanced
technology?"
Its the year 2006, not 874 A.D. Dumb Joo Roger.
And of course, access to advanced technology is exactly the same the
world over and unaffected by things like the ability to pay for it?
Are you *sure* that's your final answer?
Once again, you are admitting that the Norseman of 874 had more technolgy
than black in 2006.
No, I saying that ***THESE SPECIFIC AFRICANS*** may not have access to
any more advanced tech.
I'd ask why you continue to try to distort the question, except I know
that the reason is that with out such dishonesty you cannot even
pretend to have a point.
Your proof that these Africans had access to "advanced technology" is
... ?
Tell me again how were all 'the same'
Tell me how many "Norseman/Vikings" died attempting the crossing
before one made it?
None really knows.
And how many centuries was it before any of his countrymen made it
back across?
They were explorers, not sure they wanted to go back. Many think the
Norseman made the trip to America long before Columbus. As for them
going back North, how do you think they brought 10,000 settlers from
Norway to Iceland?
I didn't say "back north" -- said back across the Atlantic.
How do you think they got from Iceland to Norway?
Across the Norwegian Sea.
And, the Norwegian sea is also the North Atlantic.
But once again, no one honest calls that crossing "crossing the
Atlantic."
Were were talking about Norway to Iceland. Did you want the longitude and
latitude written out? As always you're nitpicking.
But not the bulk of the Atlantic, your attempt to suggest such
notwithstanding.
Snip dumb joo Roger's attempt at diversion.
Why can't you admit that the original article proves today's Blacks are
less capable than the Norseman of 874?
Because it does no such thing.
Sure it does.
Not here on Earth.
And you're back to lying about your comparison.
Here, let me make it so simply even you'll see how stupid you are
being and run away from the thread like you do when your ignorance and
dishonesty is exposed in such clear terms that even you understand it:
The article does not discuss "today's Blacks," it discusses small
groups of very specific Africans who just happen to live in modern
times.
Are the not considered to be "today's Blacks?"
No.
They are considered a specific subset.
I know you really like making sweeping generalizations about entire
groups of people, but it's more true that the difference between the
average Black in America and these Africans is far greater than
between these Africans and the Norse.
And your comparison does not talk about "the Norsemen," it talks about
very specific Norsemen how had made it their life's work (along with
that of their fathers and *their* fathers and so forth) to push the
limits of ship building and navigation.
And what have the fathers of these Africans done?
We don't know.
But given the lack of a shipyard anywhere in the vicinity, we can say
with a great amount of certainty that it wasn't building and sailing
ships.
Can you really not now see how irrational it is to compare the two?
You would think today's blacks would be up with the Norseman of 874.
No, *you* would.
And you'd be wrong to make that assumption.
Or is it your contention that just *any* random group of Norwegians of
that era would be capable of such a feat?
Many of them did, the vikings were great traders and explorers.
But just *any* random group, or one that had specifically trained to
sail the ships?
And are you under the impression that those who *built* the ships were
the ones going on raids?
And why are you *still* running from your lies over in a.r?
/repost