If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Duplicate of another approved link: 7478673


(NPR)   Scientists say Jesus couldn't possibly have ridden a brontosaurus, because they've conclusively proven one of them never existed. We're talking about the brontosaurus, of course   (npr.org) divider line 32
    More: Interesting, All Things Considered, dinosaurs, paleontology  
•       •       •

664 clicks; Favorite

32 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-16 03:36:08 AM  
Then what were Fred and Barney grilling?
 
2012-12-16 03:48:59 AM  
The triceratops didn't exist either. Just like Pluto, it got retconned.
 
2012-12-16 03:50:08 AM  
Just because they haven't found one yet? Doesn't sound fair.
 
2012-12-16 08:37:38 AM  
Have you ever had déjà, déjà, déjà, déjà vu?

/at least raptors are still in play
 
2012-12-16 08:41:25 AM  
Jesus rode a T-rex that could shoot lasers.
 
2012-12-16 08:52:01 AM  
Open the door, get on the floor.
Everybody kill the dinosaur.
 
2012-12-16 09:02:51 AM  
So, the mighty brontosaurus doesn't have message for us?
 
2012-12-16 09:12:40 AM  
Can anyone provide empirical evidence that Jesus existed?
 
2012-12-16 09:20:30 AM  
Come on, science! You took away Pluto as a planet, now change the damn name and give us the brontosaur.

/besides, "bronto" is a much cooler prefix than "apato"
 
2012-12-16 09:27:52 AM  
It's a good thing I'm a heavy Drinker or I wouldn't be able to Cope with this news.
 
2012-12-16 09:27:56 AM  
Next, they'll be telling us that the planet Earth isn't really a planet...
 
2012-12-16 09:29:58 AM  

Free Radical: Can anyone provide empirical evidence that Jesus existed?


That there was once a man called Jesus? Sure. As much as I can provide empirical evidence that there once was a Plato or a Pythagoras. Even the Jews and Muslims don't doubt that there was a prophet that walked around at that time and place.

Seriously, do you doubt that there was once a guy named Mohammed?

/the fact that historical people existed doesn't prove anything more than existence of any monarch proves the divine right of kings.
 
2012-12-16 09:32:03 AM  
There is still more historical evidence for brontosauri than for Jesus.
 
2012-12-16 09:33:51 AM  
"Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed... and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted"

Link

TheMoreYouKnow.jpg
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-12-16 09:36:37 AM  
It's still real to me.
 
2012-12-16 09:41:08 AM  

Olympic Trolling Judge: Have you ever had déjà, déjà, déjà, déjà vu?

/at least raptors are still in play


Yup. This is a dupe link of a story that broke 40 years ago and most of us learned about in middle school already. Good job, guys.
 
2012-12-16 09:43:02 AM  
Jesus existed, just like Jim Jones and David Koresh and Joseph Smith existed.
 
2012-12-16 09:47:27 AM  

BorgiaGinz: Jesus existed, just like Jim Jones and David Koresh and Joseph Smith existed.


And here's why this site is dying. Unmoderated trolls.
Enjoy all the short threads.
 
2012-12-16 09:49:59 AM  

weapon13: Next, they'll be telling us that the planet Earth isn't really a planet...


Well, it depends on one's viewpoint. The planets trace odd patterns in the sky, which is why they are called planets, which means wanderers. The Earth obviously does not do this unless we stand on another celestial body. Right now, for us, the Earth is not a planet. Were we to 3D print a Mars colony, then to them Earth would be a planet but Mars would not be.

That, of course, would be silly. I mean, where would you find a printer cable that long? But this is why science exists, to hash out these kinds of definitions.
 
2012-12-16 09:52:46 AM  

Choo-Choo Bear: That there was once a man called Jesus? Sure. As much as I can provide empirical evidence that there once was a Plato or a Pythagoras.


Actually, no. Plato and Pythagoras are both referenced in other, non-subject literature and documentation. Mohammed is the same, all the people whose cities he conquered and so on wrote about him, he had kids that wrote things about him, etc. Jesus, or rather Joshua bin Joseph, does not appear outside of the actual scriptures of the cult until several hundred years after contemporary.

Though, to be fair, it's less a lack of existence that makes Jesus not real and more an overabundance of existence. There were loads of 'messiahs' running around the desert at the time, chances are the "Jesus" of the bible is ten or fifteen of them duct-taped together in the same way the overarching mythology is several regional religions duct-taped together. So probably there was somebody at the root of every individual bit of biography playing savior at the time, so you could say he 'exists' in that sense.

//Interestingly, there's relatively good confirmation that John the Baptist was an actual, single guy and not a tall tale amalgamation of several other guys or a fabrication.
//The wiki page is not really reliable, sadly, like most things where there are a lot of people really emotionally invested in an interpretation it's more or less meaningless in terms of real info. Not uncommon for articles that hit hot-buttons for people.
 
2012-12-16 09:57:50 AM  
Isn't this thread supposed to be about a killed-off sauropod?

aznbadger.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-16 10:18:41 AM  
Well, technically speaking. yes.
 
2012-12-16 10:18:41 AM  

Jim_Callahan: /The wiki page is not really reliable


Really? Even though there a bunch of linked citations? I trust the scholars and historians who stake their reputations on their research, not some random Texan message board poster.

^ a b c In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (now a secular agnostic who was formerly Evangelical) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285
^ a b Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Micjhael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200
^ a b Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church's imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34
^ a b c d Robert E. Van Voorst Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"
^ a b James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemption edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"

/enjoy your fantasy of duct-taping together 15 men in loin clothes.
 
2012-12-16 10:41:15 AM  

Crunch61: Come on, science! You took away Pluto as a planet, now change the damn name and give us the brontosaur.

/besides, "bronto" is a much cooler prefix than "apato"


Or just change it to "Apathetosaurus".
 
2012-12-16 10:43:01 AM  
Four people saying that everyone believes something is not proof of everyone everyone actually believing something. It only serves as proof that those four people are willing to say that they what they are saying is true.

Proving that most scholars believe he actually existed would require an analysis of the literature, not statements of belief by four people in the field.
 
2012-12-16 10:43:50 AM  
*are willing to say that they believe what they are saying is true.
 
2012-12-16 10:46:34 AM  
Jesus existed.

And he was very are thin at one end, much, much thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end.
 
2012-12-16 10:57:25 AM  

Choo-Choo Bear: Free Radical: Can anyone provide empirical evidence that Jesus existed?

That there was once a man called Jesus? Sure. As much as I can provide empirical evidence that there once was a Plato or a Pythagoras. Even the Jews and Muslims don't doubt that there was a prophet that walked around at that time and place.

Seriously, do you doubt that there was once a guy named Mohammed?

/the fact that historical people existed doesn't prove anything more than existence of any monarch proves the divine right of kings.


I (a non-believer, completely non-religious) have made this point before here on fark, and been dogpiled by hordes of ravening furies.

Entertainment value not worth it.
 
2012-12-16 10:59:17 AM  
Holyshiatthisisawesome.jpeg
 
2012-12-16 11:01:38 AM  

fusillade762: The triceratops didn't exist either. Just like Pluto, it got retconned.


Nonsense.
 
2012-12-16 11:18:10 AM  

fusillade762: The triceratops didn't exist either. Just like Pluto, it got retconned.


I remember reading that about the triceratops. Then I saw 2 separate tv shoes with scientists showing and describing a horn and skeleton of one. If brontosaurus did not exist then where did the name and numerous skeletons come from?
 
2012-12-16 12:19:21 PM  

dittybopper: Crunch61: Come on, science! You took away Pluto as a planet, now change the damn name and give us the brontosaur.

/besides, "bronto" is a much cooler prefix than "apato"

Or just change it to "Apathetosaurus".


I wouldn't care if they did.
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report