Can we have a /his/ jokes thread?
Here's mine (I know it's famous):
Q: What is the shortest book in history?
A: The Book of Italian War Heroes.
>>968668
italian detected
Throughout the ages, how much history would an average person know? Or even the "scholars"?
Like in ancient Greece, or in Rome? Or pick any time really.
like none at all. the average person is a pleb posting on /pol/ or /int/ getting basic facts about his own and his enemy's country wrong all the time without ever being corrected by someone who knows something.
>>968119
Well I mean did a Greek know that civilizations existed before them?
>>968136
Hesiod talked about how there were ages before the current age where men were more powerful and lived longer. They also would have known about Troy since the Odyssey was very popular.
How would Islam look different today if Ali was it's prophet rather than Muhammad?
How would Christianity look different today if Peter claimed to be the Son of God rather than Jesus?
>>967949
It would [spoiler]rock.[/spoiler]
>>967901
>Ali as prophet
Ali was a weak ruler. Look how he handled Muawiyyah. He let him free, half of his follower left him in disgust.
How Muhammad handle a rival? Brand them as munafiqun, isolate them so they don't get any followers.
Now if Ali was the prophet, he would be killed by his rival just like had happened in his caliphate. Maybe we will see the shahaba & salaf like early christian with
>muh oppression
Are swords a meme weapon? It seems like their popularity really only caught on when
>they were being praised in hypothetical scenarios, eg. myths
>they were being doled out as weapons for nobility, such as cavalry
>they were being used in peacetime (duels)
While during actual wars, spear, lance, and pike formations were more effective, excepting cases where archery was key to a battle. Even axes had their moment in the sun, such as with the Varangian Guard, while the sword was only ever a sidearm at best.
swords are bad ass nerd
sword music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ1WyBGG_Vw
>>966766
>Ignores the Romans
>>966766
Dueling, sporting, and self defense weapons are commonly more iconic than war weapons.
Ask a hundred people on the street to draw the first thing that they think of when they hear the word "gun", and I bet the overwhelming majority of them will draw handguns, not rifles.
Victorian era knowledge of steam engines is given to the early imperial Romans. Would they be capable of using it optimally? How would this affect history?
They wouldn't care because they used slaves. The Romans had steam engines but it was never anything else but a curiosity.
>>966458
They'd probably have trouble applying them unless you bundled some knowledge of mechanics in there too
>>966458
they don't have everything else that was necessary to use steams engines. There is a large chance nothing happens and small chance everything changes if people with sufficient power can see its usefulness and build the infrastructure necessary
>Encouraged by this spiritual support, Fatih Sultan Mehmed, escalated the attack, and decided to add an element of surprise: the Ottoman fleet anchored in Dolmabahce would be moved to the Golden Horn gulf by land.
>In early hours of the morning, Byzantine Christians were dumbfounded and horrified when they saw Ottoman galleys moving down on the hills ol the bay. Seventy ships carried by cows and balanced by hundreds of soldiers via ropes were slid over slipways. By afternoon the ships were inside the well protected bay.
They literally carried their fucking ships across land to bypass the Byzantine blockade, they were that determined to take Constantinople. Regardless of what you think of Turks and Muslims, that is one of the most badass things in history I've read about.
>>964902
Nice thread Mehmet.
>>964902
That is one of the things i admire about medieval muslims
>>964902
The Byzantines had done that before to besiege a Crusader castle, no?
Let me tell you about it.
Summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud:
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
Shroud-like coloration of linen by nanosecond laser pulses in the vacuum ultraviolet (it explains that they replicated the shroud's qualities using laser pulsations, which so far is the only way anyone has been able the replicate the shroud's qualities):
http://www.sindone.info/DILAZZA3.pdf
Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin:
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.pdf
Nuclear imaging:
http://shroud.com/pdfs/whanger.pdf
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/accett2.pdf
3D holographic information:
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2009/847/
http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p24.pdf
Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf
Here's some secular peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on the Shroud of Turin:
http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2005/10/secular_peerrev.html
Also, here is ancient evidence for Jesus from non-Christian sources:
http://storage.cloversites.com/fcfgroups/documents/Why%20We%20Believe%207.pdf
>>969295
It's just a medieval man rapped in a shroud. Spook.
>>969295
>b-but the 1988 tests dated it back to the 13th century!
The sample was cut from a corner of the Shroud which was part of a later repair, the dating contradicts other evidence, the sample may also have been contaminated by bacteria, smoke or reactive carbon and further evidence shows that the calculations were done incorrectly. You can verify all of my statements.
The three dating labs, according to a scientific protocol agreed upon in 1985, were supposed to cut several samples of the Shroud from different locations. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Instead, the scientific adviser to the Arch Diocese of Turin, Luigi Gonnella, decided to violate the protocol and allowed only one sample to be cut from an outside corner where it had been handled hundreds of times over the centuries as it was held up for public viewing.
This flawed examination was actually discredited by Dr. Ray Rogers who published in the January, 2005 issue of Thermochimica Acta. Dr. Rogers stated, in part, ''The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud.''
New tests that have been carried out in the University of Padua's laboratories by professors from various Italian universities, led by Giulio Fanti, Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua’s engineering faculty, have dated the fibres from the cloth to a period between 300BC to 400AD.
Han Chinese are currently the largest ethnic group, at about 20% of the world pop.
What were the previous largest ethnic groups in history? What do you think the next big ethnic group will be?
>>964457
It's probably been Han Chinese for millennia.
>>964457
How did the Han Chinese even manage to be such a large ethnic group?
There also isn't much of a difference between Italians and Spaniards, but woe on you if you say they're the same.
How the hell did the Chinese convince people from such a vast area that they're somewhat similar countrymen?
Is it possible to discuss 'ethnic groups' apart from the identity concepts associated with them? How old is the concept of Han identity?
What are the five (5, V, 1+1+1+1+1) greatest empires of all-time (any metric other than total area of control)?
>>961440
Roman Empire
British Empire
Spanish Empire
Achaememid Empire
Mongol Empire
>>961461
im assuming thats in descending order of dankness?
also, future posters plz use numbered listings
>>961440
OP again, here's my own list
5. Mongoloids (1206-1368)
4. Burtish (1603-1997)
3. Romanians (27BC-1453AD)
2. USA!USA!USA! (1776-present)
1. Secret Reptilian Empire (????-present)
![51xwPegEzlL._SX333_BO1,204,203,200_[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4WBO5yB.jpg "51xwPegEzlL. SX333 BO1,204,203,200 [2]")
>The agricultural revolution was the biggest mistake in human history
Thoughts, /his/?
if you believe that you're fucking stupid
To clarify:
The author states that before the agricultural revolution humans and animals were at peace with nature. After we got trapped into settling down we started to accumulate diseases, hernias, arthritis and we became more violent. Not to mention we domesticated tons of animals and plans, and kept them in captivity.
The title is dramatic, but late hunter gatherers were better off than early farmers.
What was the casus belli European monarchs told their subjects when declaring war on revolutionary France?
>Hey! We should invade France because it would totally suck if all of you learned how corrupt and unnecessary monarchs like me are!
Hey... you know... like some people... LIKED having a monarch.
Imagine that.
Some people like something different than you.
>>955282
>some people
Vast majority of people actually. OP is a low IQ whiggish retard.
Forget existence and morality. What religion/sect had the greatest A E S T H E T I C S? Post examples or religious buildings you just like.
Pic related, this is Wat Arun of Buddhism.
>>947369
>religious buildings you just like
Oh and you can post religous sculptures and paintings too
Orthodox is trippy
>>947369
The picture doesn't do it justice. It's a truly massive and imposing structure when seen in person.
Is class a spook?
>>969095
Spooks are a spook.
>>969099
No, no one puts spooks above themselves.
>>969105
"no" is a spook
What's this?
>>968750
Wew lad
With the news that David Simon is possibly looking into making a series based on the the foreign volunteers in the Spanish Civil War, I'm curious to know more about the conflict.
>Why does it seemingly get significantly less attention than other civil wars in in major countrise.
>Was it really the first large scale use of WWII-era fighter planes and tactics?
>Why didn't the Spanish join in to help the Axis during WWII?
>How competitive was the war as a whole? Was there ever a legitimate chance for the Nationalists to lose?
>How big of a role did the foreign volunteers play in the war as a whole and what major battles were they a part of?
>Are there any good books, films or shows that over the Spanish Civil War that you know of?
>Why does it seemingly get significantly less attention than other civil wars in in major countrise.
Because it happened immediately before the largest conflict the world has ever seen, which tends to overshadow it quite a bit
>>Was it really the first large scale use of WWII-era fighter planes and tactics?
Pretty much, yes.
>Why didn't the Spanish join in to help the Axis during WWII?
Partially because Franco was a fairly shrewd politician who didn't want to get too involved in the war unless he was 100% sure it was winnable (though he did send about a division's worth of men to fight for the Germans), and partially because Spain was just barely out of civil war in 1939, and therefore on fairly shaky footing. Getting involved in the war was basically inviting the Allies to start supporting any and all resistance groups in Spain, and a lot of Franco's resources (and some of Germany's too probably) would have been spent guarding its own borders and people.
>>966969
>>966969
This post covers it pretty well.
>Why didn't the Spanish join in to help the Axis during WWII?
To add to this they did send some volunteers to fight.
>How competitive was the war as a whole? Was there ever a legitimate chance for the Nationalists to lose?
Absolutely especially in the initial stages before the Nationalist leaders died off expect for Franco.
>How big of a role did the foreign volunteers play in the war as a whole and what major battles were they a part of?
It was mainly just a moral boost. The most important participants were the non volunteer foreigners, the Pilots and technical experts from the Soviet Union, Germany and Italy (who also helped blockade the republic and sent 50K soldiers over)
>>966922
>Why does it seemingly get significantly less attention than other civil wars in in major countrise.
As mentioned previously, it was massively overshadowed by WWII which happened right after it.
>Was it really the first large scale use of WWII-era fighter planes and tactics?
Sort of. In terms of the air war, absolutely. On the ground though it was mostly infantry, not a ton of tanks.
>Why didn't the Spanish join in to help the Axis during WWII?
Spain wasn't in any position to fight against the allies after the civil war, which is the big reason. If they did, the North African and Mediterranean campaigns would have gone very differently I imagine.
>How competitive was the war as a whole? Was there ever a legitimate chance for the Nationalists to lose?
Eh, kind of, but not really. They did in the very early stages but once the Germans airlifted the Army of Africa over to Spain from Morocco, it really tipped the scales in favour of the Nationalists. Plus they had the bulk of the officer corps intact too.
