Oh dear! Is it the devil in me or what that urges me to write here that prayers have been answered and God willing we hope for a speedy return. Perhaps I ought opt out for a term or so. Repies only on a stamp, please.

Priscilla wrote:

Perhaps I ought opt out for a term or so. Repies only a stamp, please.

Now stop this nonsense at once, Priscilla! No more talk of anyone "opting out" here - please. We cannot have the pair of you stuck in your cat-flaps for weeks on end.

We need a God thread to settle us down again, and to get us back to our usual state of happy and amicable bickering.

I am reading a really good book at the moment - God's Funeral - by A.N. Wilson. I love Wilson because he is so confused and woolly, but honest and very funny. He converted (from the Church of England) to atheism when he was Chris Hitchen's best mate, but then he recanted. Here is a bit of blurb from the book's cover: "Wilson's fascinating and challenging account shows how the decline of religious certainty in Victorian times had its origins with the eighteenth-century sceptics - but brought a devastating sense of emotional loss which extends to our own times".

Any takers for a discussion of that (especially the eighteenth-century sceptics) - or should I stick with bleach, moggies and concerns about metabolic derangement?


EDIT: Wilson's got a new book out about Darwin. Hasn't impressed the Guardian reviewer:

Darwin the Mythmaker

The author follows Darwin from boyhood bereavement to the deck of the Beagle, thence to the study and sickrooms of Down House and the publication of On the Origin of Species, evoking the epistemological hurly-burly of the mid-Victorian age in characteristically stylish prose. These are vividly peopled pages: here is the pious depressive Robert FitzRoy, captain of the Beagle, fretfully clutching his bible; here is Emma Darwin, who preferred her husband sickly to well. Episodes are narrated with Dickensian energy: the tubercular death of Annie Darwin is highly affecting; there’s comical verve in the scene of the Oxford debate at which “Soapy Sam” Wilberforce inquired of Thomas Henry Huxley if he was descended from an ape on the paternal or maternal line (a nearby lady fainted); and there is enjoyment to be had in watching Darwin scrutinise the sexual organs of barnacles, puzzling over their relevance to his nascent theory...

...This book, with its elisions, inaccuracies, vivid set pieces and palpable dislike for its subject, has I suspect achieved its end: the air is thick with ruffled feathers. Perhaps it will be looked on most fondly by those who find proponents of the new atheism intractable and priggish: they may well take enormous pleasure in watching a scholarly gentleman in a butcher’s apron approaching a sacred cow.



PS I didn't know barnacles had sexual organs. How on earth do they mate? An uncomfortable business for all concerned, I should think.

OK - I'll stick to moggies.

Larry's messed up again.

"but brought a devastating sense of emotional loss which extends to our own times".

Well, that bit at least I understand. Just reflect upon how lost and abandoned we have felt without that stern but just voice guiding us, his followers, on the correct path, chiding us for our errors but showing (sometimes) compassion for our childish ways.

But not for the moggies.

Ferval, my typo in above quote - "out" should of course read "our". I've corrected it in my post - any chance you could edit out the reproduced error in yours? Ta.

Temperance wrote:

OK - I'll stick to moggies.

Larry's messed up again.

Of course dear Temperance I am your man.
Read and discussed a lot about Charles Darwin and read also a book about Darwin and Captain Robert Fitzroy, which I commented overhere:

Subject: Re: Great Literature - the Benefits   Fri 9 Sep 2016 - 23:04
Started today to read the novel from Harry Thompson: "This thing of darkness" and it seems very promising... http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/81961.Harry_Thompson http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/142050.This_Thing_of_Darkness I first thought it was fiction but checking the real story as about the life of Robert FitzRoy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_FitzRoy it seems to be a real account of the life of FitzRoy in all its details...and by the way what a life and in connection with the Beagle and Charles Darwin and I sse now governor of New Zealand too... Very promising indeed.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/This-Thing-Darkness-Harry-Thompson/dp/0755302818
And starting from this book I started the discussion Darwwin and Social Darwinism:
https://reshistorica.forumotion.com/t1037-darwin-and-social-darwinism

And of course my focus in the discussion will be:
"Here is a bit of blurb from the book's cover: "Wilson's fascinating and challenging account shows how the decline of religious certainty in Victorian times had its origins with the eighteenth-century sceptics - but brought a devastating sense of emotional loss which extends to our own times"." ( couldn't resist cher Temperance)

Kind regards as always from an admiring Paul. (admiring the thoughtful text  and splendid English language of course)

PS: Temperance, perhaps better to start a new thread about the subject, as here on the Nordmann thread it is out of context (or not, because it can be that Nordmann comes in the focus?)
PPS: Perhaps better, but it is your choice, to restrict the discussion to the 18th century sceptics and all, devastating sense of emotional loss, which extended to our own times...
Without too much including the Darwin story? Because a good discussion on this subject can extend over quite some messages...I suppose...

Kind regards, Paul.

This is fate. I have just been typing since before 7am and have lost the lot: the dreaded "webpage has expired" wiped out everything in one fell swoop. Should have saved it as I went -  serves me right.

Oh well, haven't the heart to start again, and the Nordmann thread is indeed not the place for my matinal ramblings. Maybe I will start a new discussion thread - or would Priscilla (who is better than I at getting things going) consider so doing? I was thinking of the history of the slow demise of God from the eighteenth century until yesterday teatime - perhaps entitled God is Dead: Long Live God or something similar .

Then again, perhaps not.

Temperance wrote:

We need a God thread to settle us down again, and to get us back to our usual state of happy and amicable bickering.

Oh god no! Anything but god or jesus or religion yet again.

I'm begging now........can't we bicker about something else?

Islanddawn wrote:

Temperance wrote:

We need a God thread to settle us down again, and to get us back to our usual state of happy and amicable bickering.

Oh god no! Anything but god or jesus or religion yet again.

I'm begging now........can't we bicker about something else?

Well, there's always the sex life of the barnacle - as observed by Darwin. It's absolutely fascinating, but not something we could really bicker about, although I suspect Nordmann and Priscilla could actually bicker about anything.

How Do Barnacles Mate When Stuck On A Rock?




Barnacles have evolved some of the longest penises, relative to body size, of any creature. Barnacle penises can stretch to up to eight times the length of their bodies....
...Length isn't everything when it comes to barnacles' penises. Longer penises can help reach more potential mates, but are also vulnerable to flopping around wildly in pounding surf.  

Temperance wrote:

Islanddawn wrote:

Temperance wrote:

We need a God thread to settle us down again, and to get us back to our usual state of happy and amicable bickering.

Oh god no! Anything but god or jesus or religion yet again.

I'm begging now........can't we bicker about something else?

Well, there's always the sex life of the barnacle - as observed by Darwin. It's absolutely fascinating, but not something we could really bicker about, although I suspect Nordmann and Priscilla could actually bicker about anything.

How Do Barnacles Mate When Stuck On A Rock?




Barnacles have evolved some of the longest penises, relative to body size, of any creature. Barnacle penises can stretch to up to eight times the length of their bodies....
...Length isn't everything when it comes to barnacles' penises. Longer penises can help reach more potential mates, but are also vulnerable to flopping around wildly in pounding surf.  

You know, Temp, there are some pictures I'd rather not have in my mind, this one is rather close to that limit.

Nielsen wrote:

 You know, Temp, there are some pictures I'd rather not have in my mind, this one is rather close to that limit.

Sorry.

But you should blame Darwin, not me - he started all the barnacle stuff - spent hours watching what they got up to, apparently.

Shame ID can't cope with anything to do with religion. Just been reading about the English Utilitarians and God. Mill and his pals were very unfair about Him, I think. They make the Almighty sound like a problem similar to inadequate drains or rotten boroughs - something that needed sorting out. But even Mill admitted that Christ was a great moral reformer and that He was, on the quiet, probably a stout Protestant liberal.

Oh an decent bicker on the merits of barnacle willy waving doesn't sound boring at all Temp. I rather enjoy the subjects of biology and natural science.

Islanddawn wrote:

 I rather enjoy the subjects of biology and natural science.

Me too. I've been down to the beach at Westward Ho! this afternoon to see if I could spot an exhibitionist barnacle, but without success. How odd this world is. Whoever created it certainly had a sense of humour.

That said, I feel very sorry for the gooseneck barnacle species - Pollicipes polymerus - who live in solitude, clinging for dear life to their lonely rocks, with no neighbours near enough to mate with. This puzzled scientists who found barnacles that were "well outside penis range" of other barnacles but still carried fertilized eggs. Even though they are hermaphrodites, these barnacles are not known to self-fertilize, and DNA tests confirmed the eggs were fertilized by other individuals.

Another of God's great mysteries, I suppose, although no doubt there is a prosaic explanation for these barnacles' triumphant fertility.

I think barnacles are probably like limpets and move about when no one is watching. Marine rocks are small worlds, ever fascinating. The patches I know very well indeed in all seasons and watched for hours on end, for many years never ceased to fascinate. Once you've got your eye in they seem as busy as airport terminals - and shady weekend hotels. Puzzled scientists need not be; things do get around. Elephants feeling an urge are - I think - said to be in  'must'. yer, so barnacles must sometimes feel the same way too and just doing what they must. Taking the DNA of pregnant barnacle seems rather intrusive into their little shadowed micro world....... anyone for a bicker?

Temperance wrote:

This is fate. I have just been typing since before 7am and have lost the lot: the dreaded "webpage has expired" wiped out everything in one fell swoop. Should have saved it as I went -  serves me right.

Oh well, haven't the heart to start again, and the Nordmann thread is indeed not the place for my matinal ramblings. Maybe I will start a new discussion thread - or would Priscilla (who is better than I at getting things going) consider so doing? I was thinking of the history of the slow demise of God from the eighteenth century until yesterday teatime - perhaps entitled God is Dead: Long Live God or something similar .

Then again, perhaps not.

Temperance,

if there are people who feel at home in for instance the "moggy" thread, so be it. But can we bicker a bit about our "mind/soul/body/God questions?...in an apart "comité"...if some don't want to read it, there is enough on the forum to read and comment...
As soon as I have some time I will start a thread...I hope some members will join, perhaps the "ressurected" (hope it is the correct ecclesiastical (what a word) term) Nordmann?...Dear Nordmann I couldn't resist...

Kind regards, Paul.

PaulRyckier wrote:

Temperance,

if there are people who feel at home in for instance the "moggy" thread, so be it. But can we bicker a bit about our "mind/soul/body/God questions?...in an apart "comité"...if some don't want to read it, there is enough on the forum to read and comment...
As soon as I have some time I will start a thread...I hope some members will join, perhaps the "ressurected" (hope it is the correct ecclesiastical (what a word) term) Nordmann?...Dear Nordmann I couldn't resist...

Maybe it is time to give it all a rest, Paul, and not start a new thread, although that, of course, is entirely up to you.

ID wrote:

Oh god no! Anything but god or jesus or religion yet again.

I'm begging now........can't we bicker about something else?

I've been thinking about ID's clearly exasperated words, and rather suspect that she - in her honest and forthright way - is speaking for a lot of people here. This sort of stuff is not what people are interested in - even though I hope that I, for one, have always tried to link the religious etc. content of my posts to history - well, most of the time. It's awful to think that one has been blithely blathering away here for years and actually boring everyone to death - perhaps literally in some cases!

To quote that other Libran whose time is  now up: "Enough is enough".

I'm on holiday for a bit in October anyway, so won't be around.

Meanwhile there are indeed lots of other excellent topics!

Temp wrote:

I'm on holiday for a bit in October anyway, so won't be around.

Have a nice holiday, Temp.

EDIT: I think I'll lock this thread - it seems silly. Some interesting historical points raised here however definitely deserve their own threads - including the woo woo stuff, which has a long historical pedigree and therefore always merits historical analysis and discussion, even when it brings the worst out in people.

Before you close this 'silly thread' perhaps it might be best to not have what you call a woo woo thread if it brings out the worst in yourself and whoever else you mean by people.

Priscilla wrote:

Before you close this 'silly thread' perhaps it might be best to not have what you call a woo woo thread if it brings out the worst in yourself and whoever else you mean by people.

I have to admit I was rather taken aback when nordmann added his edit, and of course immediately jumped to the conclusion that he was taking a swipe at me.

However, on reflection, I wonder if it could be that - ever the master of ambiguity - he simply means us all? Perhaps we have all been less than polite at times when discussing religion? The subject - especially the history of religion - I find utterly fascinating (sad, I know, but true, ID) especially the idea of God as a human construct, and I love to discuss such things. However, it is a topic that makes us all - one way or another - rather emotional. Discussion of religion presses buttons right, left and centre: it can enrage; it can upset; at best it can simply bore. That in itself is interesting, I feel.

I don't think religion - or the discussion of religion - brings out the worst in me; but the consumption of too much alcohol certainly does; and too much alcohol plus religious angst are a dangerous combination: things get said that one regrets. However, as I never intend to drink ever again, I think I can now safely discuss religion rationally, using the word rationally loosely. A Woo! Woo! thread, or perhaps a Whoa! Whoa! thread or even a Woo! Woo! Whoa! Whoa! thread, might work if we all stay fairly teetotal and count to ten regularly.

Then again, if we all start on about God again, we might drive ID to drink.

PS "The Silly Thread" would make an excellent new thread too. We all need a bit of silliness now and again to discuss barnacles and such like. I like barnacles.

It would help if Temp and Priscilla could please stop over reacting to every utterance.

Sigh. Nordmann said the thread 'seems silly' he didn't say 'this silly thread'.  And yes, the thread did get a bit silly from everyone involved, me included. There is nothing wrong with saying that.

And no Temp I don't mind if there is a thread on religion and it remains in that thread and which I can safely ignore as I did quite happily with the last religion thread. I merely object to religion being bought consistently into other threads when the topic has nothing to do with religion.

Dear whatever, peace and love doesn't last long here, does it? Most distressing to an old hippy-wanna-be like me.

I think nordmann meant that, given how I started this thread as a way of querying his extended absence and it has now outlasted its purpose (with many diversions on the way), it might as well be closed.

Now stop it you lot, talk about over sensitive, play nicely or he will bugger off again and I couldn't blame him.

Read my post more carefully, ID, and hopefully you will realise it was an attempt - no doubt a clumsy one -  at humour and diplomacy. But such attempts are clearly a waste of time and effort here.

Brusqueness at times one can forgive, but repeated discourteously blunt comments in the end just wear one down. Yes, I do react - as anyone does - to rudeness, whether yours or that of anyone else.

Let's leave it at that - you need not fear any more intrusive and tedious comments from me, here or on any other thread.

I find the discussions here often distressing too, and it doesn't happen just because this board doesn't have a lot of members.  I belong to a number of message boards with few numbers and this disagreeableness doesn't happen on the others. 

I don't quite understand the anti-religious note that surfaces on this board, supposedly dedicated to history.  How can you discuss history without also discussing religion? - it is an integral part of the human psyche and almost all peoples.  And I speak as someone with no religious beliefs.  And not much spiritual ones either.

I must admit Temp that I no longer know what is humour and what is sniping around here as much of the sniping has been cloaked in humour and it is beyond the stage where it is easy to discern one from the other. Which I find quite dishonest actually.

What you may perceive as brusque and discourteous is more often than not a complete lack of time for anything else but the bald words. Now I'm late for work already so yet another brusque and discourteous missive I'm afraid and then I'll go back to sitting on my hands.

Islanddawn wrote:

I must admit Temp that I no longer know what is humour and what is sniping around here as much of the sniping has been cloaked in humour and it is beyond the stage where it is easy to discern one from the other. Which I find quite dishonest actually.

That's really decent of you to admit, ID, but don't worry - we have all been dishonest here at times. You are no worse than others: if you have been rather brusque and aggressive, I must admit that I have indeed been passive-aggressive in the true tradition of the Church of England. Fun, isn't it? I shall do my best to be just openly aggressive in future.  Probably much healthier.

But I do very much resent your imputation (JOKE!) that I bring religion into everything I post here. I have not as yet managed to introduce Luther's theory of justification by faith alone into the Moggy Thread, although I am working on it. I'm very much tempted to post something with God in it on every thread now, but that would be too silly even for me to contemplate.


I hope nordmann hasn't "buggered off" (ferval's phrase, not mine) again. I want to ask him what he makes of something I read yesterday about poor old bonkers Nietzsche. Apparently, hours after going mad and being committed, Overman wrote: "Sing me a new song - the world is transfigured and all the heavens are full of joy!" He signed himself: "The Crucified".*

Blimey, what on earth had the doctors given him?


EDIT: * Not a joke - Friedman: The Disappearance of God , quoted Wilson, Chapter 5 God's Funeral..

Caro - thanks for PM - only just seen it and have replied.

Temperance wrote:

But I do very much resent your imputation (JOKE!) that I bring religion into everything I post here.

Sigh, here we go again with that complete over reaction Temp.

I said that I don't like religion being bought into threads where the topic isn't religion. I did not say that you bring religion into everything you post.

Continues to bang head on brick wall.

Islanddawn wrote:

Temperance wrote:

But I do very much resent your imputation (JOKE!) that I bring religion into everything I post here.

Sigh, here we go again with that complete over reaction Temp.

I said that I don't like religion being bought into threads where the topic isn't religion. I did not say that you bring religion into everything you post.

Continues to bang head on brick wall.

Dear Lord, give me patience, as I too keep bringing head into contact with the wall of brick.

ID, you complete and utter idiot, did you not see JOKE! in above?

As ever, an ill-advised attempt at cheese-making on my part.

I give up.

No Temp. As I said if you had been reading, I am beyond the stage where snipes disguised as jokes are in any way amusing.  I no longer see misrepresentation as a joke as too many misunderstandings happen and have happened because of it.


Nordmann was correct though, this thread really should be locked. Whatever the problem was he is, thankfully, OK which was the purpose of this thread and all we need to know. The rest is just sillyness.

I have just read the thread - thanks for the kind words and concern expressed earlier, very welcome indeed.

I think, especially regarding the later posts, that it's best for everyone we draw a line at this point. I had meant that it seemed silly to have a thread focused on a non-historical subject drag on beyond its initial point (which I do appreciate by the way), though now I reckon it has just become generally silly to have a thread in which nothing much is being achieved except opportunity for offence, perceived or actual, to be taken by some of those participating, with little else of value being said.

The interesting subjects which were alluded to deserve discussion in more obviously dedicated threads, I think. I'll therefore close this thread accordingly and invite those who raised those issues earlier in conversation to consider starting new threads if they wish.