Did the study include any radiometric measurements to verify the age?

We are told the paganism went on despite the bans; maybe the case is there were no bans -- that the bans are a projection of later attitudes onto the times.

The First Temple was built after Davids time by his son Solomon.

Artifacts found inside the temple suggest that despite the ban on idol worship at the time, those who visited the temple continued to engage in such practices.

It actually depends on which king was in power. Mannassah was an idol worshiper, and even Solomon himself was an idol worshiper, according to the only texts we have about them. Although under Solomon they didn't put the idols in THE temple, but he just made a different temple or altar for pretty much everything anyone worshiped. Mannasah actually put idols in THE temple and more than that as well.

this is about the time frame of Isaiah, supposedly, and yes the only texts we have claiming to be from this period claims that the land was "full of idols" and nearly everyone worshiped them. An "idol" is any false god, and especially any carving, icon, or engraving representing it, or in some cases actually believed to be the deity.

Almost nobody ever actually kept the Old Covenant law, technically nobody did.

They appear to have worshipped Bart Simpson

All evidence indicates the Israelites practiced a folk religion. The monotheists won after the Babylonian Exile, and they created an epic saga for Israel which depicted the polytheism as a backsliding from an original pure covenant of monotheism revealed at Mt. Sinai. The reality of course is that what we have here is simple religious evolution, and the idolatry of the ancestors needed an explanation that didn't reveal this basic fact. Hence the backsliding theory.

There are surviving Ethiopian communities descended from Jewish prosolytes in Africa, supposedly from before the Diaspora, who still practice most of the ceremonial law. It's even claimed that they may have possessed the Ark of the Covenant at some time (though I doubt that part,) but your claim is totally false.

Even if the books we have are corrupted, which some of them probably are, there is enough evidence to show the gist of the historical components from before Babylonian exile are probably accurate.

Thanks for your mindless regurgitation of the "total depravity" doctrine.

Total depravity does not need to be true for what I said to be true.

I've never met a person who has never told at least one lie, nor coveted at least one time. Ever.

"Artifacts found inside the temple show that the people who visited the temple had chosen to ignore the decree". This is taken from the abrahamic myths themselves. Once again archaeological results are perverted by "biblical scholars" religious interests. I hear religious historians have given up on getting to the actual history.

But some things can be ascertained. The earliest artifacts from the abrahamic religions that I know of are the Dead Sea scrolls, dated to ~ 400 BCE to ~ 200 CE. They show what even biblical scholars now accept, that the early religion wasn't yet divided into recognizable sects. It also shows how it was a melting pot based on greek pagan syncretism.

[cont] The nearest and early influential abrahamic religious center is Alexandria, which Alexander founded before 400 BCE after clearing his back of the coastal cities before going after inland Persia. It was an analogous melting pot of greek, egyptian and judean city parts, where the latter included merchants from the ransacked Tyros of "canaanite" semitic phoenicians and those related to the leveled Gaza citadel all of whom surely carried a grudge.

This find tests well that the judean cultures were non-abrahamic polytheists, and that the abrahamic religions likely arose later than ~ 750 BCE. Similar tests is that the common texts mentions an actual historical king ~ 200 BCE, but gets the king order wrong so was written a distance away. And finally christian texts, that arises earliest ~ 150 CE, mentions a judean historical king at the same time, so knew the area more intimately. This is the time when the religion spread around the hellenic coastal cities around the Mediterranean.

@ Lurker, foofighter: The myths themselves are irrelevant to anchor the historical context, in as much as they don't agree with it. Over 99 % of the myth texts is known to be outright erroneous or irrelevant for history.

Specifically the myth of the babylonian exile is not validated by any finds or historical texts what I know of. It may have happened. But the myth of the egyptian slavery archaeologists know didn't happen (no migration finds, uninterrupted local culture throughout so neither mass capture nor return). So I think there is little likelihood other "exile" myths have some historical background.

What the texts got correct were a few cities, some of the cultural change and at least two kings (but see the reversal of the king order).

That egyptians are at the root of the religious phylogeny isn't surprising, see my notes of a likely Alexandrian origin or at least early influence. The first christian personages were from there, such as the first "pope" head of church.

"Archeologists unearth King David era temple near Jerusalem"

-They should pick another name for this era because the kingdoms of solomon and david as described in the bible NEVER EXISTED.

"...at the time of the kingdoms of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was populated by only few hundred residents or less, which is insufficient for an empire stretching from the Euphrates to Eilath. According to The Bible Unearthed, archaeological evidence suggests that the kingdom of Israel at the time of Solomon was little more than a small city state..."

"the earliest independent reference to the Kingdom of Israel is about 890 BC, and for Judah about 750 BC."

"The archaeological remains that are considered to date from the time of Solomon are notable for the fact that Canaanite material culture appears to have continued unabated; there is a distinct lack of magnificent empire, or cultural development"

-Empires equal to the egyptians, hittites, babylon... WERE NEVER THERE.

Mannassah was an idol worshiper, and even Solomon himself was an idol worshiper, according to the only texts we have about them.

The only texts we have about the biblical Manassah are the bible, and for obvious reasons these dont count.

The archeological record contains no evidence whatsoever for manassah as described in the bible.
http://www.academ...Manasseh

"Some biblical scholars view this as postdiction, an eponymous metaphor providing an aetiology of the connectedness of the tribe to others in the Israelite confederation. The text of the Torah argues that the name of Manasseh is etymologically derived from the root נשה naah, which means to forget, and goes on to argue that it refers to Joseph forgetting his troubles and his father's household, on account of the actions of God"
http://en.wikiped...riticism

-In other words, fiction. Re; joseph his father;

"Modern day scholars believe the historicity of the events in the Joseph narrative cannot be demonstrated. Hermann Gunkel, Hugo Gressmann and Gerhard von Rad identified the story of Joseph as a literary composition, in the genre of romance, or the novella. As a novella, it is read as reworking legends and myths..."

-In other words, FICTION.

Don't have to dig very deep to see what lies beneath this article.

Big bold title words:
"King David"
"Jerusalem"

first paragraph:
"Mozah mentioned in the Old Testament"
"used by people in Jerusalem"

Second paragraph:
"King David era, the First Temple, in Jerusalem"

Fourth paragraph:
"that hint, they say, of a coastal Philistine influence"

The Philistine's get minimal billing with a "hint" and an "influence".

But no "hints" or "influence" for what the artifacts ***show*** about the King David era and the First Temple:

"Artifacts found inside the temple show that the people who visited the temple had chosen to ignore the decree"

That is pretty clear isn't it.

Interesting article in Spiegel this summer:
http://www.spiege...144.html
It suggests to me that Christianity started out as a Samaritan diaspora. I'm wondering if anyone else thinks this may help explain why it persevered in the early centuries.

Well, the previous comments have proven one thing my daddy always said - you can't talk politics or religion in polite company. My question is, as AC/DC asks, who made who????

A gentleman in Ontaria sneezes and a passerby immediately utters a polite "gesundheit". Another passerby, a zionist, ruminates outloud how such a sneeze could have once been heard outside the walls of The Temple In Jerusalem during the era of King David - *another* confirmation of the jews everlasting connection to The Holy Land and by extension *another* confirmation of the zionists right to the territory.

Here we have an article about artifacts and the building in which they were contained. The artifacts suggest idol worship and a Philistine connection. There isn't even a sneeze of a connection to judaism.

Noting how antithetical the size and location of the building and it's proposed purpose are to judaism only creates an opportunity to soak the air with a narrative - nay, a confirmation - about ... well, read the article:

Big bold TITLE words:
King David era temple near Jerusalem

A sneeze heard round the world.

Religious people can you answere me one simple question - why are there several religions? If God ever existed why dont we all beleive in the same? And why has he not been with us throughout our whole existance? If he ever existed and wanted us to know about him, why dont we all just know him from our birth? How come that we have to be indoctorined inorder to beleive in him?

The funny thing, at one point, Baal was just another Semitic god on par with Yahweh. Yahweh's followers happened to be more brutal and converted/whiped out the others.

Anyone else note the irony?

The artifacts show idol worship. Monotheist judaism *rejects* idol worship.

"We want the entire world to take note of these idols. We are proudly demonstrating our connection to the inhabitants of the ancient land around Jerusalem through our self-worshipping display of these Idols."

davidw
"The Dead Sea Scrolls are traditionally divided into three groups: "Biblical" manuscripts (copies of texts from the Hebrew Bible), which comprise roughly 40% of the identified scrolls; Other manuscripts (known documents from the Second Temple Period like Enoch, Jubilees, Tobit, Sirach, additional psalms, etc., that were not ultimately canonized in the Hebrew Bible), which comprise roughly 30% of the identified scrolls; "
thats a pretty big change, the dead sea scroll people seemed to think they were important and should be considered part of the holy doctrine. yet they are no longer taken as what should be passed on in the bible.

1 People don't follow the truth sometimes.

This is what all the religions say about yours. Newsflash - 19 Shiites blown up in Pakistan... Protestants threaten to do same to police in northern Ireland. YOUR TRUTH KILLS.

2 We are created to choose. We have choice.

No, god knew us before we were in the womb. And Jesus condemns us to eternal torture after death and our religionist neighbors persecute us while we are alive. Some choice.

3 Truth and life have been with us always.

But none of the major things in the bible ever HAPPENED. This is not truth.

4 truth is real.

But the bible is not truth.

5
If it's not the truth, it's not real. :p

-Which means that, since the bible describes people who never existed (Adam, Moses, Joshua) and events that never happened (flood, exodus, solomons kingdom), it is not the truth. Therefore the god who wrote it cannot be real. So Dave are you wiling to accept your own equation or not?

Faith is belief DESPITE evidence. A Lie.

the long-discredited khazar conspiracy theory concerning the origins of ashkenazic jewry, a theory that no academic today takes seriously

Religionists have tried to discredit this but have failed. Dr shlomo sand of tel aviv university and many others DO think this is the case.
http://www.youtub...a_player

-And dr sand is no crank. But he IS a Jew.

The truth says the most important thing in life is life.

Ah I see. You are willfully ignorant of your own book.

"25 Anyone who loves their life will lose it, while anyone who hates their life in this world will keep it for eternal life." John12

-YOUR GOD says that HE is the most important thing in life. And When required, you are to forfeit your life for him.

This is the essence of martyrdom. Presenting oneself to other religionists for killing is every bit as evil as killing for ones god. BOTH are required of adherents in any religion you choose to examine, including YOURS. Observe copts in cairo.

I realize your mind has become infected with some sort of disease Otto. You making stuff up, like how the truth says to kill needlessly

Needlessly. In contrast to what joshua did to the canaanites I suppose?

There were never 2M jews in goshen. During the time of the exodus, sinai and the levant were occupied by egyptian soldiers. Etc. How do you rationalize these things??

As for Christ crying out, 'Why have you forsaken me?' This is direct evidence of his innocence in that moment. He may have made mistakes before that, but he died an innocent man.

Again, your ignorance. This is only recorded in Mark, the first of the gospels. The author may have been trying to emphasize that jesus was a man. Later gospels tried to sell the notion of the godman hybrid, and someone added the last 11 verses to Mark to confirm that he indeed arose and walked around a bit.

So much for the unalterable word of god. SO many examples.

No other man has ever died innocent... We must look past the endless brainwashing found in religions and understand

You mean the other religions dont you? Because how can you be brainwashed with the truth? Haha.

Jesus often referred to OT stories and characters which we now know are fiction. If he were god he should have known better. Ergo, he was not. Myths are untrue by definition, correct?

Hey dave

"Tel Aviv University archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog wrote in the Haaretz newspaper:

"This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai."

-So why has your god forsaken you faithers? Why does all the hard evidence indicate that your book is MADE UP?

Hey dave

"Bart D. Ehrman and Raymond E. Brown note that some of the Pauline epistles are widely regarded by scholars as pseudonymous, and it is the view of Timothy Freke, and others, that this involved a forgery in an attempt by the Church to bring in Paul's Gnostic supporters and turn the arguments in the other Epistles on their head."

-Check out more of the evidence and educate yourself.
http://en.wikiped...he_Bible

-Accepting it however would mean giving up your faith and resigning yourself to living with reality. Have you the courage to do this?

the proof is that every genetic study bears this out - ashkenazi jews are always found with middle eastern markers

So? As dr sand rightly points out, the ME is a melting pot and it is easy to infer ancestry of most any sort.

Sorry but your info and your opinion are outdated and this issue is far from settled. I suggest you bring yourself up to speed.

For instance you claim that the theory is racially-motivated but dr sand is a jew. And the politics of israel at this critical point in history is a much stronger influence on scientific opinion, than anti-semitism. The unadopted israeli constitution states that jews are the rightful inhabitants of samaria and judea. And this would be problematic if ashkenazi ancestors were from khazar.

The myth of moses and the Diaspora
http://www.consor...809.html

The truth (The Word of God) says, "The most important thing in life is life." We cannot consider this without life.

And since I showed you that the word of god says something else, I would have to conclude that you cannot distinguish truth from untruth.

Learn to listen

Learn to read.

Luke 14:25-33 ESV
"Now great crowds accompanied him, and he turned and said to them, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple."

-Your religion is only another death cult. Your life is only supposed to begin if you successfully pass the gauntlet of sin and temptation of this life with your faith intact.

Then the israelites are nothing special, and who cares if the Jews are descended from them?

The truth matters.

The fact that you keep on going and going until you discredit everything and all things jewish

Well thats not a valid extrapolation now is it?

pulls the cat out of the bag on your motives and intentions.

-And so if I (and dr sand) fail to agree with you, then our motivations are somehow anti-semitic? Grow up. As davidw says the truth shall set you free.

I wonder what the archaeologists 4,000 years from now are going to say about that odd thing I have in the corner of the room, I mean, why do they have to apply religiosity to everything they find from a few thousand years ago? Does every ancient statue of some nude voluptuous female have to be some kind of fertility symbol? Those two Figurines of a person in the first image in the article are probably a couple of travelers from France who were just visiting, and whose host had them done up in clay to show his respect. Probably.

@DavidW: From what I read and hear about God, if he were close enough to you to witness your pandering of Him then he would no doubt smite you dead for your impertinence.

and if there are artifacts related to human use of psychedelic substances like tryptamines in this pre- Jesus Christ unearthing, how many people seriously think we would be told about it, versus how many people suspect that it would be suppressed as taboo information which could topple religions and societies? I'm in the latter camp. It's lonely over here, LOL

Who cares, bulldoze it to make room for more jooish "settlers".

Who cares, bulldoze it to make room for more jooish "settlers".

-cantdrive85

They'll probably do more of that anyway...build more Jewish settlements in the West Bank and elsewhere. Probably not where this temple is...since the article says it's within walking distance of Jerusalem.
Those 2 little heads in the picture might not be idols after all. Have you ever seen a little child pull the head off of a Barbie doll? (hint hint)

Another alternative: the picture doesn't give the measurements of the heads, but if the heads are hollow like FrankHerbert/Blotto's head, they MIGHT have been "finger puppets", where you put your index finger into the hole in the head and wrap a piece of cloth around your hand. to make a finger puppet.
Blotto will now try to make a finger puppet. But first he has to pull his head out of his ass before he can put his finger in it. Either place will do.

Muahahahahahahahh

Those aren't finger puppets, those are itty bitty cockpuppets for sockpuppets.

otto: according to what you just replied to me - aren't khazars europeans? if the jews have middle eastern markers then they are middle easterners of some kind - meaning even though the ME is a melting pot with all types, they arent khazar europeans.

Instead of asking, why dont you just look these things up yourself?

"The Khazars (Old Turkic: IPA: [hɑ'zɑɾ]) were semi-nomadic Turkic people who established one of the largest polities of medieval Eurasia..."
http://en.wikiped.../Khazars
http://en.wikiped..._900.jpg

"The Turkic peoples are a collection of ethnic groups that live in northern, eastern, central and western Asia, northwestern China and parts of eastern Europe...It is generally agreed that the first Turkic people lived in a region extending from Central Asia to Siberia with the majority of them living in China historically."

-And those in khazaria would have been swept westward by arabs, kievan rus, and others.

Many proponents both jew and non-jew; the Jewish Zionist novelist Arthur Koestler...sephardim certainly...the Christian Identity Movement, Black Hebrews, British Israelitists and others (particularly Arabs) who claim that they, rather than Jews, are the true descendants of the Israelites.

I always thought the idea that the british aristocracy being the rightful heirs to the throne of david was interesting.
http://www.johnpr...one.html

-Especially since, as the kingdoms of solomon and david are now known to be fabrications, we can speculate that the euro dynasties were in fact the Heirs of the People who Concocted the biblical myths.

All the euro dynasties were direct descendents of charlemagne. All were related, intermarried. It was as if a single crime family ruled over an entire continent for 1000 years, moving borders, staging wars, and keeping the people subjugated in feudalism.

And thats exactly what it was. But They wrote the laws.

Another alternative: the picture doesn't give the measurements of the heads, but if the heads are hollow

So lying dimwit you have yet to answer question posed in the other thread, as to why you would think scientists would invent fish that would extinct themselves. So I thought I would ask you here.

Inventing fish that would extinct themselves would be somewhat counterproductive dont you think? Kind of like a 'zero child per family' law in china, to achieve zero growth.

Perhaps they considered that but rejected it. And the comrade who suggested it was probably shot before he had a chance to spawn more imbeciles like himself, dont you think?

And I answered your questions in the other thread, idiot.

If they are all female, how would they breed to replenish the "species"?

-is what you said. Why wouldnt scientists KNOW this?? Why would anyone ASK such a STUPID QUESTION unless -Blotto

Apparently, you missed this in the article: "The fish would be bred female and sterile, though a very small percentage might still be able to breed."
It says 'MIGHT still be able to breed'. This means that THERE IS A POSSIBILITY, but it is not definite. They will ALL be bred FEMALE. That means there will be NO MALES.
Once again…It means that out of all the FEMALE fish who are sterile, a very small percentage of the females MIGHT STILL BE ABLE TO BREED, you asshole. That means that the females who ARE able to breed, if they escape and get out, MIGHT be able to BREED with normal male salmon.
Theghostofotto1923's failure at reading comprehension of even the simplest sentences continues to prove its stupidity and insanity.

Amazing how easy it is to smoke people.

Amazing, don't you think?

Here we have an archeological find that goes against zionist dogma - Philistine "influenced" IDOLS in a large building unearthed within walking distance of where the First Temple was supposed to be.

It is hard (if not impossible) to find evidence of King David.
Why is that? 1) Because erosion and upheavals have destroyed it? Or 2) because it was never there?

But if you can find IDOLS and a large building housing then
what does that say about explanation 1) and by extension 2) ?

So what is a zionist to do when they have an archeological find that goes against zionist dogma?

Generate smoke. Just chatter about the dogma; keep your chin high; smile; generate headlines that speak of the dogma and rebury the artifact evidence in a flurry of distracting smoke.

How much smoke to you see in the TITLE for heaven's sake?
First paragraph? Second paragraph?

Well, what is a zionist to do?

Write articles like this, of course.

And I answered your questions in the other thread, idiot.

Ha yeah I know.

It says 'MIGHT still be able to breed'. This means that THERE IS A POSSIBILITY, but it is not definite. They will ALL be bred FEMALE. That means there will be NO MALES.

AGAIN pussytard tries to outthink scientists. Pussytard, scientists know of many ways to fertilize fish eggs. Did you consider that scientists might know something you dont? No you did not. You thought you had discovered something quite obvious that SCIENTISTS would have missed.

This gives us a finite measurement of the degree of stupid that you possess.

evidence would be buried in the old city

The kingdom of israel was said to stretch from the sinai to the euphrates. It was described as rivaling those of the phoenicians, hittites, assyrians, and even perhaps babylonians.

There is plenty of archeological evidence for those other cultures but absolutely none for israel. Solomon was said to have built large fortifications in many other cities; none have been found. Of the hittites:

"...the critical view...that, if the Hittites existed at all, "no Hittite king could have compared in power to the King of Judah...". As archaeological discoveries revealed the scale of the Hittite kingdom in the second half of the 19th Century, Archibald Henry Sayce postulated, rather than to be compared to Judah, the Anatolian civilization "[was] worthy of comparison to the divided Kingdom of Egypt..."

-AS SOON AS we began looking for the hittites we found plenty of evidence but, after 200 years, absolutely NONE for israel. None.

actually otto, the hittites mentioned in the bible were a canaanite people of the same name as the anatolian empire, but not the anatolian empire.

This has not been determined which I am sure you read if you googled my refs.

However, feel free to keep downrating all of my posts and ironically telling me to grow up at the same time.

Sorry I checked and I have downrated none of your posts. I dont typically downrate people who I am having a discussion with unless they become unreasonable. Your raters appear to be iterations of the pussytard person.

i just noticed you call people pussytard - are you 12? i'm done talking to you.

-So I won again. Yay. 'Pussytard' is someones nickname which just caught on.

Otto considers it a "win" when people get didgusted with him and don't want to converse with him? Just AMAZING!

ed: disgusted

Actually, Blotto/Theghostofotto1923 doesn't seem to comprehend fully the articles that it accuses me of not understanding.
Blotto is referring to this thread: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp
I have tried to explain to Blotto that all the salmon are female and sterile and there are no male salmon at all in the bunch...and that the genetically engineered (GE) salmon cannot reproduce, except a very few MIGHT be able to breed. BUT those few cannot breed since there are no males available UNLESS the females escape and then they only MIGHT be able to breed with the males.
Blotto talks about the sterile female salmon being inseminated somehow. But NOWHERE IN THE ARTICLE DOES IT MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT SOME FORM OF INSEMINATION.
That means that Blotto is reading something INTO THE ARTICLE WHICH ISN'T THERE.
Blotto follows me and several other commenters around to accuse us of things that he makes up in his demented mind. BLOTTO MADE THE WORD "PUSSYTARD".

What is it with dumbass obamas_cock and making himself look like an ass in articles with Jerusalem in the title?
http://phys.org/n...lem.html

the genetically engineered (GE) salmon cannot reproduce, except a very few MIGHT be able to breed. BUT those few cannot breed since there are no males available UNLESS the females escape and then they only MIGHT be able to breed with the males.
Blotto talks about the sterile female salmon being inseminated somehow. But NOWHERE IN THE ARTICLE DOES IT MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT SOME FORM OF INSEMINATION.

Hmmm... There seems to be some disconnect here in the abyss which is pussytards brain. Let's try to break the problem into increments...
1) Why would pussytard think she would discover such an obvious and fatal flaw that scientists would fail to notice?
2) Why would pussytard fail to realize that breeding involves the act of insemination?

Gosh if only I were in her Secret Other Physorg Club I could ask some real experts. Like psychiatrists and criminal pathologists. Oh well.

You are a fucking tragedy.

What is it with dumbass obamas_cock and making himself look like an ass in articles with Jerusalem in the title?
http://phys.org/n...lem.html

Ahaahaaa that was a good one eh frank? Casting metal boomerangs in wax molds. In the floor. And then all the '900 foot-tall glass-headed Martian' bullshit. I should have kept a list.

What a fucking tragedy.

Anyone who uses TARD to describe or insult anyone is someone who like to bully. They are the same people who would go up to someone in school who was mentally handicaped, laugh at them and call them retards.

I don't care who you are, or what you believe, whether right wing or left wing, IF you call anyone a tard, you are a hateful bully who spits in the face of, and laugh at those who have mental handicaps.

Hello ft

I don't care who you are, or what you believe...IF you call anyone a tard, you are a hateful bully who spits in the face of, and laugh at those who have mental handicaps

-As you know it was not me who coined the term but vendicar. The 'tard' affectation is his thing not mine. He calls everyone tard, including you yes?

It is an abstraction of the 'retard' slur to be sure, but in this case it is used to acknowledge that obiewan here is indeed the pussycat_eyes person who earned the title; and to express the frustration that someone could continue to misuse this site by flooding and posting without at least researching; and to respond with yet more outrageous ignorance and invective when people rightfully take issue with this lazy and inconsiderate behavior.

I think this is selfish bullying as well dont you agree? If you are somehow mentally-challenged, please accept my apologies. Have I ever called you tard? No. I like to think I have more clever ways of insulting you.

ahhhh. . .GhostofOtto. . .kiss kiss my love. No one else on physorg is as smart as U. It is U who knows everything and nobody else knows as much as U do. They all just pretend to know just to impress U. I know that you laugh at everyone else that posts in your physorg. YES. . .this IS your physorg and nobody has the right to post their imbecillic junk without YOUR aproval. U hve been avoiding me lately, Ghost. Have U found another man to suuck on? When are we gonna get together again at our favorite motel darling. Remember all those nites we spent together in bed making love? It was pure heaven. I have missed you so much. I see that you're going after other men and looking for some pussytard. Why are you looking for pussy, darling? U KNOW you only love to suckee on me. I thought we were suppose ta get married. Those other men don't deserve you the way I do. I'll have to leave this message everywhere I find U. U have my number. . .give me a call, my precious sweetums

Anyone who uses the slur thrown at mentally challenged people, show their true nature and how bigoted they are.

You can call me any name under the book, but when anyone denigrates those that can't defend themselves (ie. mentally handicaped people) or use them as a slur, you show that you have no repect for anyone and that you don't deserve any respect.

Again, right wing or left wing, it doesn't matter. IF YOU USE retard as a slur you are denigrating those who cannot defend themselves.

Anyone who uses the slur thrown at mentally challenged people, show their true nature and how bigoted they are.

So you seem to think pussytard - oh sorry, obamasocks - is mentally challenged? What do you base your opinion on?

you are denigrating those who cannot defend themselves

Gee it seems that ritchietard is making a valiant attempt. Heh.

And I dont really see 'tard' as a slur anyway, just a stylized indication of somebodys lazy ignorance. Like noob or moron. I bet vendicar agrees with me. Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12...The word moron, along with others including, "idiotic", "imbecilic", "stupid", and "feeble-minded", was formerly considered a valid descriptor in the psychological ..." -See? People do not think these words are slurs against handicapped people any more.

Here you go;

"Tard
Any person who is not developmentally disabled, but rather has what is considered normal cognitive faculties but for whatever reason has opted out of using it. Whereas mental retardation is genetic in nature, this form of behavior is environmental usually resulting in too much daytime television, Brittany Spears piped in pop music, and other environmental factors."

-ok? Feel better now?

I don't feel better. Why? Because linking someone who is lazy to someone who is mentally disabled STILL demeans the mentally disabled.

I don't feel better. Why? Because linking someone who is lazy to someone who is mentally disabled STILL demeans the mentally disabled.

Well then you should not limit your criticism to me or vendicar, but extend it to all the people who have ever called you a moron or an idiot or a cretin or a pinhead or a simpleton or a bumblehead, all of which bear the same relationship to the mentally challenged as does the 'tard' moniker.

Take your time, you may have to spend the afternoon on this.