> > There is no historical evidence that there existed
> > a 'Tantric goddess Chinnamasta' before the birth of
> > the Buddha...
> >
Bhairitu wrote:
> Aren't we fortunate, Vaj, to have such a world renown
> expert on tantra, Professor Willytex, to educate us all?
>
Warning: Don't trust anyth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> > But then, he's asserted that he thinks insistence
> > on honesty is "bizarre," so I guess we shouldn't
> > expect anything resembling integrity from him, any
> > more than
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
wrote:
[snip]
> When I suggested to PaliGap that he should set
> Barry straight, he responded that he had no
> disagreement with his characterization of the
> Wikipedia sentence as "a howler," and therefore
> there was nothing for him to set
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex" wrote:
>
> PaliGap wrote:
> > Richard M - Dishonest denier at your service.
> >
> So, has Judy, in posting since 1994, on this
> forum or any other, ever said that she thinks
> India is the home of all knowledge?
>
> "And about the mindset of som
> > Your obsession with this "honesty" thing is
> > bizarre.
>
Vaj wrote:
> "You're either with us, or you're with the
> terrorist Barry." - Judy the Honest Liberal.
>
You just posted a flat-out lie about Judy. She
never said any such thing, Vaj. Both you and
Barry are posting lies almost ever
PaliGap wrote:
> Richard M - Dishonest denier at your service.
>
So, has Judy, in posting since 1994, on this
forum or any other, ever said that she thinks
India is the home of all knowledge?
"And about the mindset of someone who, while
quoting WikiBS that -- as you point out -- puts
Biblical Su
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote:
>
> IMO, the Rgvedic RSis might originally have been
> Siberian shamans, or stuff. So, they gradually moved
> southward, ending up to what nowadays is Pakistan
> and India. ;D
>
According to DNA-studies, 60 percent of Finnish *men*
are
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > Just to nitpick:
> >
> > I do not think "Wikipedians are scientifically
> > illiterate". But I do think THIS article started
> > with a howler.
>
> Just to nitpick furth
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:22 PM, PaliGap wrote:
>
> > If you're referring to Barry's comment about the
> > "howler" - well as it happens his thought had
> > crossed my mind too. When push comes to shove,
> > I think I'd prefer the "cock up" theory
On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:22 PM, PaliGap wrote:
> If you're referring to Barry's comment about the
> "howler" - well as it happens his thought had
> crossed my mind too. When push comes to shove,
> I think I'd prefer the "cock up" theory though.
>
> So you see I'm hardly motivated "to explain to
> Ba
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> Let's see if PaliGap has the integrity and the cojones
> to set Barry straight. I'm betting he doesn't.
And I was right. Too bad I didn't lay some money on it.
Why most people on this forum are so frightened of
standing up to such a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > > And while you didn't make *quite* a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > And while you didn't make *quite* as a big a fool of
> > > yourself on this score as Barry and Vaj--they
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > And while you didn't make *quite* as a big a fool of
> > yourself on this score as Barry and Vaj--they set
> > quite a high standard in that regard--you've
> > sacrificed what
Let's see if PaliGap has the integrity and the cojones
to set Barry straight. I'm betting he doesn't.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > Just to nitpick:
> >
> > I do not think "Wikipedians are scientifica
WillyTex wrote:
>>> Tantric practices came much later than the Vedas,
>>> during the 'Golden Age', after King Asoka. The
>>> 'tantrics' belong to the age of the Indian
>>> alchemists, the Nath Siddhas. There is no
>>> historical evidence to indicate otherwise.
>>>
>>>
> Vaj wrote:
>
>> Th
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> Just to nitpick:
>
> I do not think "Wikipedians are scientifically
> illiterate". But I do think THIS article started
> with a howler.
Just to nitpick further :-), since I brought up the
subject in another thread, what do you think cou
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > I have faith enough in PaliGap's integrity to anticipate
> > that he'll be a bit embarrassed when he reads my response,
> > and will say so.
> >
> > The other two...not so mu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> Also, the reason that no one noticed the
> spaceship hovering over the cricket pitch
> is that it was surrounded by the Someone
> Else's Problem field. The way that works is
> that whenever anyone looks at something sur-
> rounded by this
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > > On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:13 AM, PaliGap wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfr
> > Tantric practices came much later than the Vedas,
> > during the 'Golden Age', after King Asoka. The
> > 'tantrics' belong to the age of the Indian
> > alchemists, the Nath Siddhas. There is no
> > historical evidence to indicate otherwise.
> >
Vaj wrote:
> The Naths date back to the primordial
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> P.S.: I left a post on the Talk page for this article
> pointing out that some, er, casual readers might be
> confused by that first sentence and suggesting that it
> be revised to something like, "Archeological evidence
> of habitation
> > I heard recently that some bones had been
> > discovered beneath the cricket pavilion at
> > Lord's cricket ground. I suppose we can
> > over-sell that as "The history of cricket
> > goes back 500,000 years" then? It'll be
> > good for tourism.
> >
TurquoiseB wrote:
> I think we can spice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > Stupid Sal, per
> > Apparently there's no mention of an 'ocean'
> > in the Rig Veda.
> >
Bhairitu wrote:
> This is on the order of the nonsense you post
> over on a.m.t and then whine when I kick your
> ass for it. But here we know trolls have no
> smarts.
>
If you have any evidence of corn in Asia before
C
> > Everyone knows that the native inhabitants of
> > the New World came to America by land routes
> > and when they arrived they found wild corn
> > growing. Your theory is not a sound one - it's
> > very far-fetched.
> >
> Actually the descendants of the ship builders of
> India can still be fou
WillyTex wrote:
>
>>> There is no historical evidence that Indians
>>> came to or traded with the inhabitants of the
>>> New World before Christopher Columbus and
>>> there is no grade school course that teaches
>>> otherwise, or no college course that I know
>>> of.
>>>
>>>
> Bhai
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > Well, well, well. "The history of India can be traced
> > as far back as 500,000 years ago".
> >
> > Not my idea of "history" or "trace" or "India".
> >
> > I heard rece
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> Well, well, well. "The history of India can be traced
> as far back as 500,000 years ago".
>
> Not my idea of "history" or "trace" or "India".
>
> I heard recently that some bones had been
> discovered beneath the cricket pavilion at L
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:13 AM, PaliGap wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memor
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > > could at least take a look at Wikipedia.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > > could at least take a look at Wikipedia. H
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:13 AM, PaliGap wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > > could at least take a look at Wikipedia. Here's
> > > a start (un
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > > could at least take a look at Wikipedia. He
On Dec 7, 2009, at 9:41 AM, WillyTex wrote:
> > There is no historical evidence that Indians
> > came to or traded with the inhabitants of the
> > New World before Christopher Columbus and
> > there is no grade school course that teaches
> > otherwise, or no college course that I know
> > of.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> [snip]
> > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > could at least take a look at Wikipedia. Here's
> > a start (unless, of course, you prefer to retain
> > your bigot
On Dec 7, 2009, at 9:50 AM, WillyTex wrote:
Vaj wrote:
> Even early evidence of pre-Vedic tantrism
> in India,
>
There is no historical evidence that the native
inhabitants of South Asia practiced 'tantrism'.
Tantric practices came much later than the Vedas,
during the 'Golden Age', after Ki
Vaj wrote:
> Even early evidence of pre-Vedic tantrism
> in India,
>
There is no historical evidence that the native
inhabitants of South Asia practiced 'tantrism'.
Tantric practices came much later than the Vedas,
during the 'Golden Age', after King Asoka. The
'tantrics' belong to the age of
> > There is no historical evidence that Indians
> > came to or traded with the inhabitants of the
> > New World before Christopher Columbus and
> > there is no grade school course that teaches
> > otherwise, or no college course that I know
> > of.
> >
Bhairitu wrote:
> Did I not say it w
On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:13 AM, PaliGap wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
[snip]
> Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> could at least take a look at Wikipedia. Here's
> a start (unless, of course, you prefer to retain
> your bigoted view of India, in whi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> [snip]
> > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > could at least take a look at Wikipedia. Here's
> > a start (unless, of course, you prefer to retain
> > your bigote
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> [snip]
> > Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> > could at least take a look at Wikipedia. Here's
> > a start (unless, of course, you prefer to retain
> > your
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
[snip]
> Stupid Sal, perhaps to refresh your memory you
> could at least take a look at Wikipedia. Here's
> a start (unless, of course, you prefer to retain
> your bigoted view of India, in which case DO NOT
> read the following):
>
> "T
WillyTex wrote:
>>> Where, exactly, does the idea of India
>>> having had "quite a navy" come from,
>>> exactly?
>>>
>>>
> There was no 'India' before 1947 when the
> land of South Asia declared independence
> from the British. There's no 'navy'
> mentioned in the Rig Veda because the A
> > Where, exactly, does the idea of India
> > having had "quite a navy" come from,
> > exactly?
> >
There was no 'India' before 1947 when the
land of South Asia declared independence
from the British. There's no 'navy'
mentioned in the Rig Veda because the Aryan
speaking immigrants came to S
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote:
>
> On Dec 6, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
>
> > There is a theory and I have a book published by an
> > Indian scholar on it that South America may have
> > been partly populated by Indian sailors whose ships
> > went off course. Th
Sal Sunshine wrote:
> On Dec 6, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
>
>
>> There is a theory and I have a book published by an Indian scholar on it
>> that South America may have been partly populated by Indian sailors
>> whose ships went off course. They could have had corn on those ships
>>
On Dec 6, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
> There is a theory and I have a book published by an Indian scholar on it
> that South America may have been partly populated by Indian sailors
> whose ships went off course. They could have had corn on those ships
> (would have kept well). I thin
There is a theory and I have a book published by an Indian scholar on it
that South America may have been partly populated by Indian sailors
whose ships went off course. They could have had corn on those ships
(would have kept well). I think he says that up until the 9th century
India had qu
-
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Maybe cardemeiester can tell us what the Sanskrit term
> > used in this verse means. I'd guess it simply means
> > "grain,"
That's what occurred to me also.
and that the translation uses the term "corn"
> > in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> Actually, sculptural portrayals of maize in ancient India
> don't tell us anything about why the translation quoted
> by do.rkflex uses the term "corn."
>
> There's a much simpler answer to Shemp's question that
> doesn't depend on m
Actually, sculptural portrayals of maize in ancient India
don't tell us anything about why the translation quoted
by do.rkflex uses the term "corn."
There's a much simpler answer to Shemp's question that
doesn't depend on maize having been cultivated in ancient
India.
The English term "corn" orig
53 matches
Mail list logo
