Re: I smell trouble.
OldGringo38
following tidbit of information:
> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>
> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt see
> a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
<g> Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
--
OldGringo38
Just West Of Nowhere
Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
http://www.NuBoy-Industries.Com
richard
> On 6/13/2010 7:56 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote the
> following tidbit of information:
>> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
>> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>>
>> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt see
>> a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
> <g> Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
It's been an established and proven fact that Europeans were on USA soil
long before Columbus. Actually, Columbus never set on foon that soil. Ponce
De Leon laid claim to the land that became known as "Florida". With St.
Augustine holding the title of the oldest city in the USA.
It has also been established that Columbus had learned of the "new world"
to the west from sources in England and other countries. It has also been
established that he is in fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
BTW, the show has been airing for a few months now.
--
I learned my lesson well. You can't please everyone, so you got to please
yourself.
- Ricky Nelson from "Garden Party"
richard
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:12:39 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>
>> On 6/13/2010 7:56 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote the
>> following tidbit of information:
>>> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
>>> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>>>
>>> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt see
>>> a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
>> <g> Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
>
> It's been an established and proven fact that Europeans were on USA soil
> long before Columbus. Actually, Columbus never set on foon that soil. Ponce
> De Leon laid claim to the land that became known as "Florida". With St.
> Augustine holding the title of the oldest city in the USA.
>
> It has also been established that Columbus had learned of the "new world"
> to the west from sources in England and other countries. It has also been
> established that he is in fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
>
> BTW, the show has been airing for a few months now.
Oh well. so much for the typing and spelling skills.
Should have been "set foot on that soil".
OldGringo38
following tidbit of information:
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard<mem...@newsguy.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually, Columbus never set on foon that soil.
>
I was laughing so hard I couldn't answer him. <g>
OldGringo38
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:12:39 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/13/2010 7:56 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote the
>>> following tidbit of information:
>>>> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
>>>> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>>>>
>>>> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt see
>>>> a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
>>> <g> Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
>>
>> It's been an established and proven fact that Europeans were on USA soil
>> long before Columbus. Actually, Columbus never set on foon that soil. Ponce
>> De Leon laid claim to the land that became known as "Florida". With St.
>> Augustine holding the title of the oldest city in the USA.
>>
>> It has also been established that Columbus had learned of the "new world"
>> to the west from sources in England and other countries. It has also been
>> established that he is in fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
>>
>> BTW, the show has been airing for a few months now.
>
> Oh well. so much for the typing and spelling skills.
>
> Should have been "set foot on that soil".
>
richard
> On 6/13/2010 8:32 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote the
> following tidbit of information:
>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard<mem...@newsguy.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, Columbus never set on foon that soil.
>>
>> Errr what?
> I was laughing so hard I couldn't answer him. <g>
yeah me too.
OldGringo38
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:59:24 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote:
>
>> On 6/13/2010 8:32 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote the
>> following tidbit of information:
>>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard<mem...@newsguy.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually, Columbus never set on foon that soil.
>>>
>>> Errr what?
>> I was laughing so hard I couldn't answer him.<g>
>
> yeah me too.
>
>
richard
OldGringo38 wrote: On Sun, 13 Jun 2010.
> On 6/13/2010 7:56 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote
> the following tidbit of information:
>> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered
>> America" - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>>
>> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt
>> see a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
> <g Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
Actually, Columbus never set on that been foon fact that. Actually,
Columbus. With St. Title olding before of that Europeans were on USA
soil long been an est city in that Europeans were Columbus. Augustine
holding been an established and proven as "Florida". Actually,
Columbus. Actually, Columbus never set on that before of that soil
long before on the USA soil long before olding the title
oldestablished an established an established and the of that soil long
that soil long been as "Florida". With St. Actually, Columbus.
Actually, Columbus. Actually, Columbus.
Italian. It he is in England of the westablished that Columbus has
also been est from sources in fact a Spaniard, not a Spaniard, not a
Spaniard, not a Spaniard, not and of the is in fact an. That has also
been est from sources in England an Italian. It has also been
established that had learned othe west from sources in England an It
has also been established of that Columbus had learned of ther
countries.
BTW, the show has been airing for a few months now.. Now. BTW, the
joevan
>On 6/13/2010 7:56 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote the
>following tidbit of information:
>> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
>> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>>
>> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt see
>> a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
><g> Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
LOL
chuckcar
news:ecva16hhrend9rul8...@4ax.com:
> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>
ROFL. Anyone who's been to high school knows it's true - the continental
shelf alone and several Caribean islands, but still true. Amerigo Vespuchi
for the "country" (specifically what is now Florida) and the South American
continent and Johann Cabotto for the North American continent itself
(specifically the Island of Newfoundland). However that all being said,
the question is a contradiction in terms as the continents and their
continental shelves were only named *because* of Vespuchi and had no
name before that.
--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
Aardvark
> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America" -
> to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>
The Vikings? St. Brendan?
> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt see a
> full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
:-)
--
I'm Josef Fritzl, and No Windows was my idea.
Aardvark
> Columbus had learned of the "new world" to the west from sources in
> England and other countries. It has also been established that he is in
> fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
So he wasn't a Genovese?
Aardvark
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:51:56 -0500, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>Oh well. so much for the typing and spelling skills.
>
> You lost those a long time ago.
One can lose something one never had?
Aardvark
> F***
Your keyboard's fucked.
Whiskers
<cough>
I'm sure the people living there had names for the place they lived in,
long before Europeans thought of any names for it.
As for the European naming of the new-found continents, 'America' seems to
have stuck because of one Martin Waldseemüller who wrote it on a map he
published in 1507; he also published a book that included an account by
Vespucci of one of his voyages.
As Vespucci was neither a saint nor a monarch, I think it very unlikely
that his first name would have been used as the basis for the name of any
place. A better claim to the honour can be made for a Welshman of
aristocratic lineage, Richard ap Merik; the Anglicised version of his
surname being 'Amerik' (or variations thereof). He was a prosperous
Bristol merchant, and a major investor in the official exploratory voyage
made by Giovanni Cabotto (Anglicised to John Cabot) under licence from
Henry VIII in 1497.
European knowledge of, and visits to, the Americas, date back at least
to the early 'Middle Ages' - but for sound commercial reasons, not widely
publicised.
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/tudors/americaname_01.shtml#top>
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Aardvark
Well, that told him, didn't it?
:-)
Whiskers
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:29:03 +0100, Whiskers wrote:
[...]
> Well, that told him, didn't it?
>
> :-)
Just keeping the records straight :))
NormanM
> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered America"
> - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
I am reasonably certain that the claim has been debunked years ago.
Technically, of course, the first "finders" were those Asians as became what
we now call the "Indigenous Americans".
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
nobody >
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:55:12 -0800, richard<mem...@newsguy.cum> wrote,
> by way of<Sun.13.Jun.201...@alt.sports.spouting-hoofer>, in
> 24hoursupport.helpdesk -->::
>
>> 20:12:39 -0500, OldGringo38 wrote: On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:12:39 -0500,
>> OldGringo38 wrote: On Sun, 13 Jun 2010.
>>
>>> On 6/13/2010 7:56 PM Just to please that super-ego, Evan Platt wrote
>>> the following tidbit of information:
>>>> Monday, History channel is airing a special, "Who Discovered
>>>> America" - to debunk the claim that Columbus discovered America.
>>>>
>>>> If a certain persons's teragig hard drive holds up, we'll no doubt
>>>> see a full report with their expert analysis afterwards.
>>> <g Wasn't it Minnesota Vikings?
>>
>> Actually, Columbus never set on that been foon fact that.
>
> What the F*** _are_ you "talking" about?
>
Methinks he's been imitating Bill "Wee Willie Wags" Waggoner by blosting
(posting while blasted ?)
http://www.google.com/groups/search?ie=UTF-8&q=Bill+Waggoner&sa=X&oi=spell&spell=1
http://snipurl.com/xfjqe [www_google_com]
http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&q=Bill%20Waggoner&sa=N&hl=en&tab=gw
http://snipurl.com/xfjr2 [www_google_com]
Wags has been a real hoot in news.admin.net-abuse.email lately
BUT:
Apologies to RtS.. FROGGERY HERE.
I checked the headers;
Path:
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: richard <mem...@newsguy.cum>
Newsgroups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk
Subject: Re: I smell trouble.
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:55:12 -0800
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <Sun.13.Jun.201...@alt.sports.spouting-hoofer>
References: <ecva16hhrend9rul8...@4ax.com>
<hv3vm8$271$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
<18evp70q289fx.1...@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wBpuFWpHHBDJgsVnQ/n/CA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Bytes: 2459
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com 24hoursupport.helpdesk:1717578
richard
> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard wrote:
>
>> Columbus had learned of the "new world" to the west from sources in
>> England and other countries. It has also been established that he is in
>> fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
>
> So he wasn't a Genovese?
He may have lived there. But he was not Italian by birth.
It has been proven that his wife was of royal blood and the only way, at
that time, to marry royalty, was to be royalty. Since his wife was of
Spanish royalty, how could an Italian marry her?
Then why would an Italian commoner seek support from a Spanish queen?
You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get yourself
a real education.
Aardvark
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:32:38 GMT, Aardvark wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard wrote:
>>
>>> Columbus had learned of the "new world" to the west from sources in
>>> England and other countries. It has also been established that he is
>>> in fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
>>
>> So he wasn't a Genovese?
>
> He may have lived there. But he was not Italian by birth. It has been
> proven that his wife was of royal blood and the only way, at that time,
> to marry royalty, was to be royalty. Since his wife was of Spanish
> royalty, how could an Italian marry her? Then why would an Italian
> commoner seek support from a Spanish queen?
>
So, Italy has never had Royalty? I see.
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get
> yourself a real education.
BWAHAHAHAHA. I'm fucking speechless.
Aardvark
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:29:59 -0500, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get
>>yourself a real education.
>
> Holy shit. No wonder st00pid thinks that by watching Cops, he has
> training in law enforcement.
I'm still speechless.
Jordon
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get yourself
> a real education.
And the Discovery Channel is a good one too.
I learn a lot of shit from MythBusters!
Jordon
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:37:09 -0700, Jordon
> <jordon@REMOVE~THISmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> And the Discovery Channel is a good one too.
>>
>> I learn a lot of shit from MythBusters!
>
> about G forces than our resident physics expert st00pid?
Ah, yep.
Betcha he learned his gozinta's from tv too.
--
Jordon
NormanM
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:32:38 GMT, Aardvark wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard wrote:
>>> Columbus had learned of the "new world" to the west from sources in
>>> England and other countries. It has also been established that he is in
>>> fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
>> So he wasn't a Genovese?
> He may have lived there. But he was not Italian by birth.
> It has been proven that his wife was of royal blood and the only way, at
> that time, to marry royalty, was to be royalty. Since his wife was of
> Spanish royalty, how could an Italian marry her?
> Then why would an Italian commoner seek support from a Spanish queen?
>
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get yourself
> a real education.
Not that anything posted to any web site means anything but ...
| During his time in Portugal, Columbus married Doña Felipa Perestrello y Moniz,
| the daughter of a Portuguese nobleman around 1478. In about 1480 she bore him
| a son, Diego. Soon after Diego was born in 1480 or 81, Columbus and Felipa
| moved to the island of Madeira from Porto Santo, where they had been living
| when Diego was born. It's believed that Columbus’ wife died soon thereafter.
| He moved to Spain in 1485 ...
http://www.christopher-columbus.eu/columbus-genealogy.htm
Seems it wasn't so hard for a Genovese commoner to marry a *Portuguese* (not
Spanish) noblewoman.
Why would a Spanish queen give audience to a Genovese widower of a
Portuguese noblewoman? Probably because Portugal, like many of the other
European powers, was seeking a water route to the Far East by sailing east
(around Africa), and Colombus was proposing a westward route, which he
believed (right up to his death) he had found. I suppose the Spanish queen
was convinced that Colombus was going to get to Asia first, and hand Spain a
coup over the other powers; especially Spain's closest rival, Portugal.
chuckcar
news:1wstt9dq0wfdn$.12wukaes...@40tude.net:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:32:38 GMT, Aardvark wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard wrote:
>>
>>> Columbus had learned of the "new world" to the west from sources in
>>> England and other countries. It has also been established that he is
>>> in fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
>>
>> So he wasn't a Genovese?
>
> He may have lived there. But he was not Italian by birth.
> It has been proven that his wife was of royal blood and the only way,
> at that time, to marry royalty, was to be royalty. Since his wife was
> of Spanish royalty, how could an Italian marry her?
> Then why would an Italian commoner seek support from a Spanish queen?
>
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get
> yourself a real education.
>
Really? then how would you explain how German blood got into the British
Royal Family? Or how the Habsburg got rid of their nasty little problem?
The Old Sourdough
snip
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get yourself
> a real education.
You need to actually try reading a history book, instead of watching
cartoons and skimming through Classics Illustrated comic books...
--
The Old Sourdough
Of course a platonic relationship is possible -- but only between
husband and wife.
Aardvark
> Habsburg
WTF?????
chuckcar
news:7wwSn.44508$nz1.26416@hurricane:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:12:09 +0000, chuckcar wrote:
>
>> Habsburg
>
> WTF?????
>
A royal line in central Europe. Known for their noses and inbreeding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Habsburg
See? same exact spelling.
Aardvark
The Old Sourdough
>> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:26:25 -0500, richard wrote:
>>
>>> Columbus had learned of the "new world" to the west from sources in
>>> England and other countries. It has also been established that he is in
>>> fact a Spaniard, not an Italian.
Cite.
>>
>> So he wasn't a Genovese?
> He may have lived there. But he was not Italian by birth.
He was born in Genoa.
> It has been proven that his wife was of royal blood
Cite.
> and the only way, at
> that time, to marry royalty, was to be royalty. Since his wife was of
> Spanish royalty, how could an Italian marry her?
His wife was the daughter of a Portugese nobleman of Genoese origin.
Not Spanish, not of "royal blood". He later took a mistress in Spain,
who was a long way from being of "royal blood".
> Then why would an Italian commoner seek support from a Spanish queen?
Because he couldn't get any money from the Italians or the Portugese. He
didn't get any from the Spanish either, for quite a while.
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get yourself
> a real education.
I wasn't aware that the History Channel broadcast cartoons. You need to
try reading a real book, something besides Dick and Jane readers.
You probably think that Columbus was trying to prove the Earth was round, too.
Zeke
"richard" <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:1wstt9dq0wfdn$.12wukaestupk.dlg@40tude.net...
>
> You need to watch some of the shows on the History channel and get
> yourself
> a real education.
>
Yeah... you make that guy named Chumley on Pawn Stars look like a genius!