This will be jerra's draft

[TwentyOne]

Interestingly enough, truth and logic are not necessarily synonymous. For instance, based on the knowledge available to ancient man, geocentrism was a perfectly logical model...yet completely wrong.

It was never a perfectly logical model. It always fit the catholic church's "plans" and it was always a tough fight for the intellectual minds to prevail against those.

 

[5Stars]

What a coincidence. I was discussing this very issue with the sandwich cart lady the other day.

:laugh2:

 

[5Stars]

We get a free freakin trip around the sun every year.Now back to your regularly scheduled Cowboy discussions.

:laugh2: :laugh1: :laugh2: :laugh1:




:starspin

 

[ndanger]

:laugh2: :laugh1: :laugh2: :laugh1:




:starspin

That was so much easier,and look at all the money I saved on those fitty cent words.I was fixin' to log on to badmofo.com and put some cartoon knots on sumbody's melon. Maybe go to Starbucks and get a double shot viagra latte and put German helmet shaped dimples in they forehead.Somebody betta hold me back.Oh yeah,I think ol' jerra will pull off a fabulous,geocentric type draft.Gotta love that free trip around the son brotha.

 

[Seven]

What a coincidence. I was discussing this very issue with the sandwich cart lady the other day.

Dude, you ARE the limit.............
Sandwich cart lady..............

 

[Seven]

****** man turn the freakin discovery channel either on or off or log on to discovery.com.If I wanted a freakin degree in astronomy,philosophy or argumentative physics I'd go back to college.While it is an entertaining discussion, I will attempt to simplify things for you guys so you can stop your sniffing of one anothers butts like dogs...........We get a free freakin trip around the sun every year.Now back to your regularly scheduled Cowboy discussions.

 

[theogt]

Wow. Can't believe I missed this thread. I just assumed it was a bunch bickering so I never opened it.

 

[notherbob]

And the vast majority of the churches teachings were based on Aristotle via Thomas Aquinas.

It was either the pythagoreans or Democritus that looked at the shadow of the moon and the lunar eclipse and deduced the earth to be a sphere and came up with an accurate circumfurence. This was before Aristotle by a century or more.

This information was available but Aristotle rejects empiricism.

I could go on and on about Aristotle. His need to categorize EVERYTHING and discount anything that did not fit in his mold of what was acceptable basically makes him interesting but thats about it. Deduction was his gig but he was a slave to his syllogisms and refused to accept empirical evdence that went contrary to his deductions. that is a logical system but one that i wouldnt call logical.

Another misrepresentation of greek society was that they embraced Plato and Aristotle which ws just not true. The sophists had much more sway and thus the contemopt the two men had for them.

Now the Romans and then the roman church had a huge thing for Plato via that writer i cannot recall atm. Augustine's kingdom/city of god is entirely platonic. It wasnt until Auquinas came along that Aristotle got pimped like he is even to this day. And its no wonder because certain of Aristtotle's views such as geocentrism were very convenient to their dogma and doctrine.

BTW Brahe was a hack and number taker; it ws his apprentice Kepler that mathematically/logically proved the orbits of the planets around the sun and demolished geocentrism.

Well said.

To me, Tycho's main claim to fame was that he observed and made notes about the supernova in Cassiopeia in 1572. I have found one Indian pictograph (Paint Rock, Texas) and one petroglyph (SE New Mexico) that commemorate this supernova. The newest science, archeoastronomy, founded by Carl Sagan in 1970, is finally making a few discoveries now that people are getting a little better idea of what to look for.

 

[Seven]

Wow. Can't believe I missed this thread. I just assumed it was a bunch bickering so I never opened it.

Theo, were the hell you get that av. Classic.

 

[ndanger]

Only on the Zone can you mix schtick, philosophy and football as it relates to a Jerry Jones draft.

Good job, guys..

I'm not puttin' my schtick anywhere near nobodys philosophy they football and sure nuf not Jerry Jone's ol' restretched drafty butt.That there is the truth.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Well said.

To me, Tycho's main claim to fame was that he observed and made notes about the supernova in Cassiopeia in 1572. I have found one Indian pictograph (Paint Rock, Texas) and one petroglyph (SE New Mexico) that commemorate this supernova. The newest science, archeoastronomy, founded by Carl Sagan in 1970, is finally making a few discoveries now that people are getting a little better idea of what to look for.

you know i really am not at all familiar with the archeological aspect of it. I know that the mayans and there numbering systems predated the arabic world by several centuries but im not familiar with the astronomy side of things.

thats one thing that the scientific community does now is put all importance on who did what first. the nobel prize has a lot to do with that. To me two people that came to the same conclusion on there own but at different times both did great things however the guy who did it first gets all the glory and the other is wasted into obscurity and that is just unfortunate. Both should be credited as great minds.

but that is one thing that is beautiful about todays age is that if someone is a remote village in the andes discovers unified field theory then the world will get to know and we dont have to wait centuries for someone else to figure it out.

as an aside the world is a lesser place without carl sagan on it. His Cosmos is one of the best books ever written. I never got a chance to see the man sppeak and I regret that I never will get that chance.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Just to go back on topic. Since 2002 i cannot think of any really bad moves by Jones other than Eddie George and Marcellus Wiley. Those guys sucked but they were gone the next year and it didnt hurt us long term. Anyone else think of anything?

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Hey, I gave your comment the response that, in my opinion, it warranted. I'm sorry if you disagree.

And regarding my alleged "showcase of 50-cent words," I will only say this: If you don't like the schtick, don't read it.

In all seriousness though, there was only one word in that entire reply that a person could reasonably classify as 50-cent...if that!

So, a big welcome, to you, the newest member of the Ladies Tuesday Afternoon Club to git rid of or knock any post/thread that you deem not worthy of response.

Odd, though you don't like it but yet you feel compelled to answer. But the answer said nothing about Jerra in the draft room (oops, another pet peeve of icewad) and the chilling effect it might have on fans.

Something very odd indeed.

So read it again and try to adhere. Don't like da schtick, don't read it. Don't martyr yourself by reading AND responding if you have nothing to add except some junior high response that never addresses the post/thread.

You see, as a mod put it very clearly and simply and rationally just the other day, if you don't like the thread don't respond. Very simple.

Now go skipio yourself to another thread if you don't like da schtick. :laugh2:

Or, if you really like it then schtick around.

Only try to add something meaninful. It ain't difficult, just compose something during your homeroom at that junior high.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So, a big welcome, to you, the newest member of the Ladies Tuesday Afternoon Club to git rid of or knock any post/thread that you deem not worthy of response.

Odd, though you don't like it but yet you feel compelled to answer. But the answer said nothing about Jerra in the draft room (oops, another pet peeve of icewad) and the chilling effect it might have on fans.

Something very odd indeed.

So read it again and try to adhere. Don't like da schtick, don't read it. Don't martyr yourself by reading AND responding if you have nothing to add except some junior high response that never addresses the post/thread.

You see, as a mod put it very clearly and simply and rationally just the other day, if you don't like the thread don't respond. Very simple.

Now go skipio yourself to another thread if you don't like da schtick. :laugh2:

Or, if you really like it then schtick around.

Only try to add something meaninful. It ain't difficult, just compose something during your homeroom at that junior high.

Hypocrite anyone?

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

the normal bluster of someone that does not have the ability to refute. the original statement of the 2002 drat being an excellent one stands.

thank you please drive through.

And misspellings and a disregard for commas.

Put that in your cranium and smoke it.

And before you go using the word refute, find out what it means mister fuzzy English. In this forum it is entirely possible to deny, advocate, support etc. but kinda difficult to refute philosophical musing about an owner's (Jerra's) ability to draft. It is subjective and not easily proved or disproved. So before you use words such as refute, look it up and then come back when you are ready.:laugh1:

 

[notherbob]

I'm kinda patient these days, I'll wait until the draft to get my first impressions and see how they pan out in their first, second and third years. I'm in no hurry.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I believe Jeff Ireland will be the main focus in our draft room this year

Something about the craniums that were admonished by Skipeo's ancestors (well ah blame them too for having a blow-hard, pedantic descendant!) and geocentrism (Ah think he means the middle draft rounds) and how everybody is not up on vocaberlery and stuff.

Well, I guess they is allowed to spout them important words having been educated in some girl's school in the northeast.

I for one think we can use some of their high-falutin' words and philosophies . . . oh, wait. Yeah, shut the hell up you two!!!!

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And misspellings and a disregard for commas.

Put that in your cranium and smoke it.

And before you go using the word refute, find out what it means mister fuzzy English. In this forum it is entirely possible to deny, advocate, support etc. but kinda difficult to refute philosophical musing about an owner's (Jerra's) ability to draft. It is subjective and not easily proved or disproved. So before you use words such as refute, look it up and then come back when you are ready.:laugh1:

so you want to play. you dont even know what i was referring to if you are making this comment. the askance for a refutation was on the standard of how to best define 'in the NFL' in reference to players with newly expired contracts. How that is philisophical is beyond me. Of course its subjective but saying you cannot argue subjective premises is just ignorant. If anything the most interesting discussions occur on subjects withour clear boundaries.

furthermore, a refutation does not have to be definitive. your making the assumption that a refutation is inherently true which it just is not.

as for the grammar smack thats just weak. if you have noticed i dont capitalize either except for emphasis but in the end what is your point? are you actually thinnking that you discredit me for the lack of a spellchecker or that i dont care about comma placement. heck im one of the few people here that use ; and : correctly and consistently but hey whatever makes you feeel better about yourself.

btw your schtick is lame. so put aht in your pipe and huff huff away.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Geocentrism was pimped by Aristotle however the pythagoreans and heraclitus a century before had demonstrated that the earth was round. This and euclidean geometry were the staples of greek thought in the aristocracy and as elitist as it sounds the plebs were uneducated, indentured serfs. Just because Aristotle is popular now does not mean that he was popluar then. Alexander was a macedonian and he didnt even like him.


The Romans via Cicero were very into Plato and Plato could give a frick about the sensible world as he was all about his doctrine of the good and universal supersensible world.

Aristotle and his views came at the end of classic greek civilization and as he was prone to do in many of his maxims, he would argue with conventional thought. Thats why he would constantly hammering the sophists because they were the establishment at that time.

The Romans led into the Roman church and they initially ignored Plat until Aquinas in the first parts of the last millenium.

Copernicus came before Brahe and I am not saying the work in taking notes that Brahe did was not valuable but what he did in interpretation was nothing as compared to the pure genius of Kepler. He invented the math as he went and invariably led to Newton.

Regardless I have to argue very strongly against the greeks stating that the world was flat overall.

Keep it clean, fellas, um, pedantic philosophic, esophogual peeps!!!

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Keep it clean, fellas, um, pedantic philosophic, esophogual peeps!!!

Hey if you dont care about the origins of western thought then more power to you. i personally think its very important to know why the world we live in is the way that it is. you can call it pedantic if it makes you feel better.

I have to admit that mindless banter is fun but when thats all you do its pretty lame.