Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
TERMINATOR
| Reward Points: | 6781 |
| Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 90% |
| Arguments: | 4416 |
| Debates: | 782 |
The most minor of changes occurring in the "past" would radically alter the future (or rather, "now".)
Say, for instance, a horse gets killed four thousand years ago. That horse was one of the ancestors of Bucephalus. Now, Bucephalus never comes into existence and Alexander the Great's career is altered in some unfathomable way.
Or, for another example, say a person swerves to avoid hitting a dog and, instead, hits and kills a person. Had one of that dog's ancestors been 'altered' by going into the past then that person would not have been killed. If that person had not have been killed, they'd have had an effect on everybody else with whom that person would ever come into contact; thus, the future would be changed.
Perhaps it would be wisest to know what you are talking about before you attempt to critique something.
off of a 2,000 year old
It is much older than that.
book
Series of books.
The Bible is an omnibus, if you will.
written by desert people
How prejudicial!
who didn't even know the earth was round
See link.
English or Spanish, eh?
(it would seem that people are zealous in their down-voting efforts on this debate)
I wouldn't be too quick to share that bilingualism if I were you; people will think that you chose Esperanto as the 'easy way out', rather than learning a real, at-least-mildly-difficult language.
I did not state that Esperanto was a 'European' language; indeed, in the traditional sense, it does not have a 'home'. Rather, it is an amalgam of European languages.
Esperanto is based on - or rather, an amalgam - of a group of European languages.
Esperanto is only simple to speakers of European languages.
However, I'm against the idea.
In the words of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas ("The One Un-American Act." Nieman Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, Jan. 1953, p. 20):
"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."
But why? The book is simply a 'memoir' of sorts. There is nothing intrinsically evil about it.
So if Shakespeare isn't banned, no one will be interested in it?
Just how many youngsters these days are interested in Shakespeare? If Shakespeare were banned, psychology dictates that the number of people interested would go up.
Perhaps 'nobody' was too harsh a term. 'Few' would have been better.
|
||||||||||||||||
