| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Contribution of the "primitives" to progress
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Contribution of the "primitives" to progress

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 7>
Author
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11687
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Contribution of the "primitives" to progress
    Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 13:42
another thread bites the dust.

To the trash bin it shall go.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 13:34
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Man in his hurry
to get no place
other than a point,
any point of pointlessness,
one reached in discomfort
within the petrolated corpuscles
clogging the artery
ripped willy-nilly
through long forgotten pastures.


Indeed, you better collect poetry, because you understand nothing of math Big smile

Dr. Allways-Wrong.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 13:33
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


Of course, without realizing it you "confessed" your sins the minute you wrote "outrigged canoes" (sic outrigger canoes) and asserted the Austronesian origins, an assertion entirely based upon speculative assumptions.


For you, because you ignore things.

Look at your "Chola" empire. Look the territories were it expanded.



As you can see, it cover islands in Indonesia... A place settled by Austronesians LOL, a people that was spreading by the sea since thousand of years.
Ask yourself from where the Catamaran was copied. LOL

If instead of googling you use your brain, you would have understand it three days ago.






Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


Of course you then went on to clarify that an outrigger canoe is not a catamaran, just an "obvious descendant".


Again, your silliness is infinite. I never said Polynesians lacked catamarans! In fact, they conquered the Pacific with both kind of boats. Obviously, to pass from an outrigged canoe to a catamaran is an obvious development.

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


Chola is a dynastic term not a "peoples" and Tamil society was already organized into a body politic by the 3rd century BC at which time the initial settlement of Madagascar is given its utmost time parameter by the archeological evidence ("Austronesian" migration--200 BC to AD 500). Even "nautical" tyros know and accept the fact that the greatest development of the outrigger craft took place on Sri Lanka, where it received the greatest refinements as a cargo transport


Don't speak nonsense. Obviously you are a Tamil-phile, but the fact is that Austronesians were conquering the world a lot time before Tamils. Where else do you find Tamils but in India, and as refugees in Canada? The Austronesians were the people that spread worldwide, not Tamils!

 
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Save all of the "projection" and pompous chit-chat for your upcoming visit to the local cantina,

Here, in this thread, I have show you several times how ignorant are you. Please, don't came with the arrogancy again.

Go to study physics, or history, rather than just contributing with the fight, Dr. inflated-ballon. LOL





Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: MS, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 08:52
I would make a wild guess and suggest that I was, for maybe the first time, correct?

Thanks to you Doc!

Ronald
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 08:36
Man in his hurry
to get no place
other than a point,
any point of pointlessness,
one reached in discomfort
within the petrolated corpuscles
clogging the artery
ripped willy-nilly
through long forgotten pastures.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: MS, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 08:26
Do you mean "is it powered by gasoline/petrol, etc.?
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 02:14
Again, you are straining at the bit so as to race off into the horizon of irrelevancy and disconnect. We will not even touch your abuse of terminology as in "conquest" of the Pacific. Save that type of chatter for ESPN and the hyperbolics of "sports talk". In History, the term conquest has a very specific connotation so save those euphemistic usages for your varied moments of idle banter.
 
Of course, without realizing it you "confessed" your sins the minute you wrote "outrigged canoes" (sic outrigger canoes) and asserted the Austronesian origins, an assertion entirely based upon speculative assumptions. Of course you then went on to clarify that an outrigger canoe is not a catamaran, just an "obvious descendant". And please, do not assign your penchant for abuse (either verbal or terminological) in my direction since at no time do I or would I ever employ a term such as "invent" on objects that are the distinct product of variable developments. However, such reservations never enter into your consideration given your propensity to ignore entirely acceptable archeological time lines of specific identifications. Chola is a dynastic term not a "peoples" and Tamil society was already organized into a body politic by the 3rd century BC at which time the initial settlement of Madagascar is given its utmost time parameter by the archeological evidence ("Austronesian" migration--200 BC to AD 500). Even "nautical" tyros know and accept the fact that the greatest development of the outrigger craft took place on Sri Lanka, where it received the greatest refinements as a cargo transport.
 
Save all of the "projection" and pompous chit-chat for your upcoming visit to the local cantina, since your attempts at historical analysis are found wanting with respect to both terminology and usage.
 
Happy sailing on your bangka! Have you had it "petrolated"?


Edited by drgonzaga - 07 Jun 2011 at 02:18
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2011 at 00:28
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

... If there is any false erudition on display in this entire thread the Penguin tracks are irrefutable when it comes to the evidentiary.


The false erudiction is, obviously, on your side, this time. It amazes me that you don't give up, no matter you have doing the clown during ten pages already.
 
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

...
You could not even distingusih anything Chola from either a chulo or a cholo, so spare me the histrionics over a nebulosity such as the Austronesian peoples.


I can very well distinguish them from a Gallego. LOL
 
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

...
Of course, you could just be rehearsing for a possible audition for a WWF Smackdown berth. Your closing bluster is quite reminiscent of the theatrics displayed there. Of one thing I am certain however your total ignorance on this subject. Why don't you begin your education on the actual literature by reading James Fox--
 
 
Perhaps then you might grasp what is meant by Comparative Studies--as well as understand what is meant by pitfalls.


What a pitfall, indeed. Yours dear paper don't show anything on the origins of the outrigged canoes and theirs obvious descendent: the catamarans.
Make me a favour, if you want to do google-research, you better look for the origins of those boats, because that's the object of this thread. And, don't give the honour of invention to a people, like the Cholas, that copied the Austronesian nautical knowledge.

How come? would you say? If you have a minimum of knowledge about the conquest of the Pacific you had known that by the times these cholos supposedly "invented" the cathamaran, Polynesians had already conquered half the Pacific, and Indonesians have already reached Madagascar Confused

So, your timing doesn't match, my erudite doc. You lose, one more time.










Edited by pinguin - 07 Jun 2011 at 00:29
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 14:05
if your "link" works click on it and see what happens! Further no matter how much you slice and splice, your purported "expert" (as well as your link) is but a general outline on the Phillipines and your "widely spread knowledge" is not as you would have it even as underscored by your own "source". If there is any false erudition on display in this entire thread the Penguin tracks are irrefutable when it comes to the evidentiary.
 
Frankly, Penguin, anyone with long experience on this Forum knows you M.O. and how you perpetuate abuse through misapplication of even the jargon dotted landscape of certain disciplines in the Social Sciences. You could not even distingusih anything Chola from either a chulo or a cholo, so spare me the histrionics over a nebulosity such as the Austronesian peoples.
 
Of course, you could just be rehearsing for a possible audition for a WWF Smackdown berth. Your closing bluster is quite reminiscent of the theatrics displayed there. Of one thing I am certain however your total ignorance on this subject. Why don't you begin your education on the actual literature by reading James Fox--
 
 
Perhaps then you might grasp what is meant by Comparative Studies--as well as understand what is meant by pitfalls.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 10:43
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Your link does not work


You are really crazy, doc. I put the content of the link right in the post Confused


Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


Were I of a "suspicious" nature I would conclude that your "playing on the links" was little more than a devious attempt to put forward a false erudition...and your nonsense over who is employing Wiki--as well as abusing it--has an air of the prima facia in support of the opening statement. Glittering generalities do not History make and preposterous assertions (as with the Polynesians reaching Hawaii by AD 500) do not further either reason or Scholarship.


Isn't this a stupid conclusion? I copied that text simply because it is easy to me to copy a source, check it and publish than write by myself in English! The contain of the text is widely spread knowledge. Anyone that has studied the origins of the Austronesian peoples, the origins of the Polynesians, and related topics, has found THE SAME things! Go to your library.

Your complains about the text, though, shows very clearly you have NO IDEA about the topic.
And, precisely, yours false erudiction is what in in play here, not mine.

Or do you believe I didn't notice you put the Chola and Tamils into play, just because you found them in wiki LOLLOL... Crazy doc, when you go, I have already go and return!


Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


Contemporary archeology can not substantiate any dating of human habitation prior to AD 900 and even this last is highly dubious.


Ignorance. Current techniques have dated places ten of thousands of years ago. Please, check your archeology LOL


Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


There are no reliable dates or population figures that substantiate a time frame earlier than that no matter what preposterous assertions you may come up with or just how many hours you might waste on abusing the Internet. So kindly control all of these mental masturbations and get a better grip on yourself. 


The only thing unreliable here is yours knowledge on the history of Asia, and the origins of the Austronesian speaking peoples.

And as you have shown during 10 pages, you are quite ignorant about "primitive" peoples.

I suggest you study, and do not comment topics you don't know. At least, without your accustumed arrogancy. Otherwise, you will be beaten.





Edited by pinguin - 06 Jun 2011 at 10:51
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 10:32
Originally posted by opuslola opuslola wrote:

I would call the above responses as a "tie!"


A tie? That's ridiculous. Doc is a bluffer.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: MS, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 08:07
I would call the above responses as a "tie!"

Both respondants were on the edge of the ridiclious!

Of course, I could even post and seem even more rediclious?

Please note my spelling?

Edited by opuslola - 06 Jun 2011 at 08:09
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 07:39
Yes, as one might quip "Men are from Mars" but Penguins most definitely escape from Irrelevancia Ulterior. Your link does not work [you have an extraneous space in it, which naturally is to be expected] but your playing the parrot to the fancies of your anonymous "author" whose hyperboles are not only ahistorical but contentiously unproven comes hardly as a surprise. But then you went far out of your way to obscure the fact that your snippet is little more than an extract from Fraser Weir's A Centennial History of the Philippines web site:
 
 
Further, this very site and your very "source" goes on to assert:
 

In the three thousand or so years that the neolithic Austronesians had spent settling and populating the Indo-Malayan archipelago, on the Asian mainland sophisticated, metal-working, literate, stratified, state civilizations had developed in China behind them and in India ahead of them. Once the east to west movement of the Austronesian cultures met the high civilization of southern India, a cultural movement of Hindic-Buddhist influences reflected back through the archipelago from west to east.

The Philippines are situated at the far northeastern end of the archipelago. They were involved in the very earliest stages of the Austronesian expansion. By the same geography, they were the last to receive the civilizational influences emanating from mainland Asia.

In the hazy transition from prehistory to recorded history, it is not absolutely clear whether it was the Austronesian seafarers who first went to India or Indian merchants who came to the Malay peninsula. In its trade with China and Rome, India imported gold. Due to Rome's economic troubles, the Emperor Vespasian (69-79 AD) decreed a ban on the export of bullion. At the same time, the Chinese Han dynasty, in its decline, was losing control of the Silk Road to marauding Huns. India needed new sources of gold and found them across the Bay of Bengal on the Malay Peninsula. Around 100 AD, Kedah was founded on the export of Malayan gold to India.

The court records from the Chinese Kingdom of Wu (222-280 AD) report that there were 100 kingdoms on the Southern Seas. These were small kingdoms in Malaya, Sumatra and Java engaged in trade with the Coramandel coast of southern India. They styled their kingdoms in conscious imitation of the Hindic-Buddhist states with whom they traded. The local sovereigns retained Brahman scholars at their courts so that their Sanskrit writings and Buddhist rites would add to the authority and prestige of their kingdoms.

 
Were I of a "suspicious" nature I would conclude that your "playing on the links" was little more than a devious attempt to put forward a false erudition...and your nonsense over who is employing Wiki--as well as abusing it--has an air of the prima facia in support of the opening statement. Glittering generalities do not History make and preposterous assertions (as with the Polynesians reaching Hawaii by AD 500) do not further either reason or Scholarship. Contemporary archeology can not substantiate any dating of human habitation prior to AD 900 and even this last is highly dubious. There are no reliable dates or population figures that substantiate a time frame earlier than that no matter what preposterous assertions you may come up with or just how many hours you might waste on abusing the Internet. So kindly control all of these mental masturbations and get a better grip on yourself. 
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 02:13
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

role played in achieving an objective: the part played by someone or something in causing a result


So?

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Primitive[s]: adjective   [s] noun

Come on, doc. Stop the show. From where are you, Mars?


Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


Progress: noun 
1. a movement toward a goal or to a further or higher stage: the progress of a student toward a degree.


Higher degree of destruction as well.



Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

 
Now with the "kitchen work" out of the way, let us turn to one of your statements, penned either from temerity or simple crass pomposity attempted so as to obscure realities:
Penguin squawk: I suggest you study the history of South East Asia before continuing improvising.


Yes, I suggested it because, obviously, you are an ignorant in the topic. LOL

 
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

 
That as evidence for such you chose to clip-and-paste a map "pirated" from Linguistics and totally irrelevant to the subject with respect to chronology and Historical epochs only emphasizes two possibiliites:


Another show of how badly informed are you. All the Austronesian peoples had an origin in Southern East Asia, and these peoples were pushed into the sea by the mongolians. Come on doc, don't be so ignorant! Go to get a book and get informed!

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

 
If you wish to discuss linguistics


I give a damn on legalistic definitions.

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

 
Long before any "island hopper" sailed or rowed anything into Oceania, Tamil "catamarans" were busy "colonizing" and trading the Indonesian archipelago. Whether you wish to discuss the Chola, the Chendra, or the Panya dynasties of the 3rd century BC to the 4th century AD, the fact that in the 9th and 10th centuries AD a Tamil "navy" was dominant in the Indonesian archipelago and had a widespread trading network makes mincemeat of your pretenses at "originality" with respect to Oceania and "catamarans".


LOL

Truly pathetic, doc. You ignore that the Austronesians spread before these Chola Indians even existed. And you also ignore that the owners of the tech were the Austronesians that originated in Taiwan, and not the people from India! Come on, doc, don't be lazy and study the topic.

And please, stop looking to this page from Wikipedia that's making you looking like a clown

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catamar%C3%A1n

No matter you haven't noticed that in the same page you quote so enthusiastically says:
la antigua dinastía Tamil Chola empleaba desde el siglo quinto d.c.,

Which shows clearly that those Tamils had time to copy theirs Austronesian teachers, who  reached India around 100 A.D. LOL


Ok. I will save you time of study.

http:// www.ualberta.ca/~vmitchel/rev3.html

Austronesian Expansion - Taiwan 4,000 BC

By 5,000 BC an especially potent and versatile culture combining fishing and gardening had developed on the south coast of China. As well as growing their food on land, these maritime gardeners were accomplished at fishing the waters in the Straits of Taiwan from boats with hooks and nets. Between 4,000 and 3,000 BC, these fishermen-farmers crossed the 150 km of the Straits and settled on Taiwan.

It is important to note that the fishermen-farmers who crossed the straits to Taiwan were not the Sino-Tibetan speaking Han Chinese who today make up the great majority of the Chinese population. Linguistic evidence from Taiwan suggests that they spoke an Austronesian language closely related to the Tai-Kadai language family that is the dominant language group today in Laos, Thailand and the north and east of Burma.

On Taiwan, the Austronesian speaking fishermen-farmers honed their sea-faring skills. They soon embarked on one of the most astonishing and extensive colonizations in human history known as the Austronesian expansion. By about 2,500 BC, one group, and just one group of Austronesian speakers from Taiwan had ventured to northern Luzon in the Philippines and settled there. The archaeological record from the Cagayan Valley in northern Luzon shows that they brought with them the same set of stone tools and pottery they had in Taiwan. The descendants of this group spread their language and culture through the Indo-Malayan archipelago as far west as Madagascar off the east coast of Africa and as far east as Hawaii and Easter Island in the central Pacific Ocean.

For the most part, the Austronesians encountered unoccupied coasts and islands. Where they met hunting and gathering cultures, their horticultural productivity and population growth soon overwhelmed the aboriginal occupants. All the surviving Aeta populations in the Philippines speak Austronesian languages. Where they met established agrarian cultures, such as along the coasts of Vietnam (Champa) and Indo-China, their incursions were limited.

The speed of the Austronesian expansion was also a consequence of their maritime culture. Under the pressure of an expanding population, adventurous colonizers would prefer to settle new lands on coasts and islands before pressing inland and away from the sea. Furthermore, the Austronesian kinship system gave higher status, prestige and authority to the lineages most closely related to the society's founder. Austronesian culture put a premium on founding new colonies that gave an additional incentive to continued expansion. As it was, there were many new coasts and islands available for occupation and settlement.

Over the next thousand years to 1,500 BC, the Austronesians spread south through the Philippines to the Celebes, the Moluccas, northern Borneo and eastern Java. One branch went east from the Moluccan Island of Halmahera about 1,600 BC to colonize eastern Melanesia (1,200 BC) and Micronesia (500 BC). The migration had continued well into Polynesia by 0 AD and on to Hawaii and Easter Island by 500 AD. The Austronesians finally reached the last uninhabited land on earth, New Zealand, sometime around 1,300 AD.

Other Austronesians continued west through Borneo and Java to Sumatra and settled the coasts of the Malay peninsula and southern Vietnam by 500 BC. From Sumatra and the Malay peninsula, they learned to master the semi-annual winds of the Indian Ocean monsoons. Around 100 AD, they crossed the Bay of Bengal and made contacts with Sri Lanka and southern India. The western branch of the Austronesian expansion reached its furthest extent by 500 AD plying the monsoons to colonize Madagascar.

From Taiwan to New Zealand and Madagascar to Easter Island, the Austronesian language family is made up of more than a thousand languages and dialects. (Estimates vary from 900-1200 according to how dialects are distinguished from languages.) Measured by geographical extent, number of languages or number of speakers it is one of the world's largest language groups. In the Philippines there are some 87 Austronesian languages. The five largest, Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilocano, Hiligaynon and Bicolano account for three-quarters of the population.












Edited by pinguin - 06 Jun 2011 at 02:23
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2011 at 01:00
Given that you wish to display your awkward disconnects by constantly humming "Pretty Pictures" it is apparently time to perform an autopsy on your rotting carcass as it continues to emit putrefication.
 
Contribution: noun
  1. role played in achieving an objective: the part played by someone or something in causing a result

Synonyms: influence, input, role, involvement

Primitive[s]: adjective   [s] noun

1. a: not derived : original, primary 
    b: assumed as a basis; especially: axiomatic <primitive concepts>
2. a: of or relating to the earliest age or period : primeval <the primitive church>
    b: closely approximating an early ancestral type : little evolved <primitive mammals>  
    c: belonging to or characteristic of an early stage of development : crude, rudimentary <primitive
        technology>
3. a: elemental, natural <our primitive feelings of vengeance -- John Mackwood>   
    b: of, relating to, or produced by a people or culture that is nonindustrial and often nonliterate and
        tribal <primitive art> 
    c: naive   
    d: (1): self-taught, untutored <primitive craftsmen> 
        (2): produced by a self-taught artist <a primitive painting>   
 
Progress: noun 
1. a movement toward a goal or to a further or higher stage: the progress of a student toward a degree.
2. developmental activity in science, technology, etc., especially with reference to the commercial
    opportunities created thereby or to the promotion of the material well-being of the public through the
    goods, techniques, or facilities created.
3. advancement in general.  
 
Now with the "kitchen work" out of the way, let us turn to one of your statements, penned either from temerity or simple crass pomposity attempted so as to obscure realities:
 
Penguin squawk: I suggest you study the history of South East Asia before continuing improvising.
 
That as evidence for such you chose to clip-and-paste a map "pirated" from Linguistics and totally irrelevant to the subject with respect to chronology and Historical epochs only emphasizes two possibiliites: (1) you are the possessor of an unmitigated gall or (2) the totality of ignorance possible at the hands of a tyro attempting to read beyond a capacity for comprehension.
 
If you wish to discuss linguistics and the controversies of classification that defy actual consensus [a point you probably missed when perusing Wiki in your efforts at bucaneering for knowledge], then do so but please do not pretend that you are either discussing History or Progress.
 
Long before any "island hopper" sailed or rowed anything into Oceania, Tamil "catamarans" were busy "colonizing" and trading the Indonesian archipelago. Whether you wish to discuss the Chola, the Chendra, or the Panya dynasties of the 3rd century BC to the 4th century AD, the fact that in the 9th and 10th centuries AD a Tamil "navy" was dominant in the Indonesian archipelago and had a widespread trading network makes mincemeat of your pretenses at "originality" with respect to Oceania and "catamarans". If you want to venture further balderdash by yammering on about Lapita pots and breadfruit, you may certainly do so but the the problematic fact there is a simple one: no one knows the characteristics of the type of vessel employed in this "island hopping". However, one assertion can be made that is irrefutable: your pretty pictures are totally irrelevant to that scenario as well.


Edited by drgonzaga - 06 Jun 2011 at 06:47
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2011 at 23:14
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Blah, blah, blah and abuse of linguistic terminology to boot!  Coflate time periods and plunder speculative relationships all you want, Penguin, but keep in mind that each time you mutter "catamaran" you are speaking Tamil!


All false accusations. You are the one that has no idea about this topic. And clearly, you don't have a clear idea of the timespan of the Austronesian expansion in the Indian and Pacific Ocean, either.




(Malgache boat, Madagascar, introduced by Indonesians 2000 years ago)

Catamaran is an object whose origins are not TAMIL (Dravidian)... but Malay. And sure, to say that Catamarans were a Tamil invention because they had a word for it, it is like to say that English domesticated the horse, because they called it "horse".... Or like to claim Guinea pigs come from Guinea, because they are called "Guinea" (actually, they are called cuy) .... Another fallacy, doc. LOL
Of course, I bet you can't distinguish Tamil from Malay, either Confused... And I bet you ignored that the Malayans went to India and not viceversa, because India's sailors were quite mediocre in comparison to Austronesian peoples. Anyways. This is the Austronesian language map. All these peoples have a common origin in South East Asia.

I suggest you study the history of South East Asia before continuing improvising.




You were wrong on boomerangs, wrong in Inuits and now wrong on Polynesians!

But you keep postings, just to show your "authority".... LOL




Edited by pinguin - 06 Jun 2011 at 00:18
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2011 at 12:53
Blah, blah, blah and abuse of linguistic terminology to boot!  Coflate time periods and plunder speculative relationships all you want, Penguin, but keep in mind that each time you mutter "catamaran" you are speaking Tamil!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2011 at 10:55
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

For one thing, this topic is not a thread but instead a typical make-do fruit crate to serve as a podium more fit for "Speaker's Corner" in Hyde Park so that you can orate your absurd juxtapositions and assert utter nonsense such as the purported mathematical acuity of the Abrogine and the cartographic finesse of the Polynesian because of their grasp on the physics of water! It's nothing more than balderdash because neither "catamarans" (the damned word is Malay and Hindi in origin) nor double-hulled craft were "invented" by Pacific Islanders and have their origins in Ptolemaic Egypt some 500 years before any "Polynesian" ventured out to sea! Save all the cant for the "recreationists" and their hobbies on backward projections that take no cognizance of knowledge acquired during intervening times. Rafts and canoes remain rafts and canoes no matter how "dolled up" you want to make them.
 
If there is any "narrowness" here it is your disconnected insistence on turning molehills into mountains... and you even have the unmitigated gall to criticize Carcharadon for undertaking disconnects such as the one you are now attempting to foist.


Ptolemaic Egypt? Give me a break. Those guys had junk ships. Remember that poor Greeks just managed to create colonies in that microscopic lake called the Mediterranean Sea.
And all the idea that helenistic Greeks had catamarans is just a wild thesis of a John Morrison. And even if the guy is right (that I doubt), they were only rowing galleys. Nothing not even close to a Polynesian high speed boat. Wink

By the way, At least Carcha has the decency of accepting when he is wrong, but with you the ridiculous goes over and over again.

For seaman skills, if compared to Polynesians, the Greeks were a bunch of barbarous savages that had no idea of sailing.

Now, let me teach you once again, my narrow minded friend (who think Greeks were something special in minkind, and that had the monopoly of invention .... give me a break), because you don't have idea... One more time, you are wrong in this thead.

Now, read it carefully because I won't repeat it. Ptolmaic Egypt has NOTHING TO DO with the origins of Polynesian Catamarans! Egyptians and Greeks were mediocre sailors in comparison to Austronesian peoples (Indonesians, Taiwanese, Javanese, Melanesian, Polynesians) The origins of those ships are in the Austroindonesian speaking peoples of South East Asia, which have balancing ships since at least 1000 years BC! And Polynesians ARE Austronesian peoples that migrated from South East Asia!! Ouch

Can you see the floating counterweights?



At the same time your precious Greeks had a hard time from Greece to Chipre, the Javanese sailors were doing the route Indonesia-Madagascar as a routine!

A model:




A modern lever boat in Bali



And an ancient Polynesian catamaran is not a canoe, but a complex ship mounted on top of two canoes! Those ships could carry a hundred people on top of them, with plants, farm animals, and all the stuff necesary to settle a new island thousand of miles away!






I know you have some problem to understand figures, but make the effort.

I suggest you study topics besides the Western culture, in order for you to stop making the clown, doc.







Edited by pinguin - 05 Jun 2011 at 12:27
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2011 at 06:03
For one thing, this topic is not a thread but instead a typical make-do fruit crate to serve as a podium more fit for "Speaker's Corner" in Hyde Park so that you can orate your absurd juxtapositions and assert utter nonsense such as the purported mathematical acuity of the Abrogine and the cartographic finesse of the Polynesian because of their grasp on the physics of water! It's nothing more than balderdash because neither "catamarans" (the damned word is Malay and Hindi in origin) nor double-hulled craft were "invented" by Pacific Islanders and have their origins in Ptolemaic Egypt some 500 years before any "Polynesian" ventured out to sea! Save all the cant for the "recreationists" and their hobbies on backward projections that take no cognizance of knowledge acquired during intervening times. Rafts and canoes remain rafts and canoes no matter how "dolled up" you want to make them.
 
If there is any "narrowness" here it is your disconnected insistence on turning molehills into mountains... and you even have the unmitigated gall to criticize Carcharadon for undertaking disconnects such as the one you are now attempting to foist.


Edited by drgonzaga - 05 Jun 2011 at 06:05
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2011 at 01:14
Nope SIR. The troll is yourself! You are the one that isn't able to follow an argument! That doesn't understand the math and the physics behind the marvellous inventions of "primitives"!

And here, in this thread, you sir, have contributed nothing. Only your permanent bashing and display of your narrow point of view.

Could you give us a lesson about Polynesian navigation, for example? If not, I will give it to you.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2011 at 12:55
You sir, are the TROLL...T  R  O  L  L writ large with your outrageous juxtapositions, inane analogies, and perpetual irrelevancies that always bring out the same tired repetetive nonsense that somehow always makes any thread your "specialty" with respect to mutterings that are little else but trash talk. These sophomoric tirades of yours are wearing thin and if your purpose here is solely to introduce outrageous humor masking as intelligent commentary then stay in the Tavern.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2011 at 08:07
I bet you want me to explain you the math of GPS?

Doc, stop trolling. At least Polynesians were smart enough to cross the Pacific without the need of GPS.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2011 at 07:07
More gobbledygook with which to amaze the unsophisticated...what next gps systems were the product of Polynesian island hopping!?!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 11:39
Ha Ha Ha. So, you still are a disciple of Taliban Comte... (I hope you understand now how the boomerang work; after all, it is just Holly Science) I see it clearly now.

However, why don't we go back to the "primitives"? What about studying the physics of catamarans? Just to understand how Polynesians (such primitive people) were able to conquest the Pacific, thousand of years before the overvalued "Age of Discovery"?
Amazing how smart where Polynesians, isn't?



Here some references:
http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/marine/articles/83095.aspx

Advantages of Catamarans

Catamarans are, in general, faster than single hull boats. This is due to several factors, the most important of which is the hull shape. Displacement hulls are the most common shapes for single hull craft. A displacement hull is supported on the water entirely by buoyancy effects. This creates a hydrodynamic drag barrier, which slows the craft. Catamaran hulls can be designed as planing or displacement hulls, but they are not slowed nearly as much by the drag barrier. Catamarans reduce drag by making use of a very thin and pointed hull design.

Catamarans are also very light, which further reduces drag and displacement. Catamarans save on weight because the multihull design eliminates the need for a keel counterweight, as the same purpose (righting the ship) is served by the hull spacing. This can make them difficult to turn, however.

Catamarans are also more stable than monohull ships, enabling designers to use more sail per foot of the boat. Stability comes from the wide beam legth; beam length is the distance from one side of the boat to the other. This wide beam and stability also allows catamarans to gain more power from heavy gusts, because they do not tend to heel over like monohulls do.

Catamaran Hull Speed

More efficient single hull boats are designed to travel with a low Froude number, which reduces but does not eliminate the drag barrier. This drag limits hull speed based on a relation involving length at waterline, given by the formula V=(gL/(2pi))1/2, where g is the gravitational constant and L is the waterline length. This is the theoretical limit for single hull displacement craft. Note that ships can sometimes exceed this theoretical limit, but to do so requires a very large power source.

The calculations for a catamaran are more complicated. The formula for catamaran hull speed is 1.34*(wetted length)1/2; however, this drag formula is generally not the limiting factor for catamaran hull speed. This is because boats with waterline length to beam ratios greater than 8:1 are not limited by hydrodynamic drag factors, whereas smaller boats need to plane to do so (planing requires enormous amounts of power for displacement hulls). A more important factor to consider is the prismatic coefficient, Cp. Cp = V/(LBP*Am), where V is the volume of water displaced by the hull, LBP is the length between perpendiculars, and Am is the area at midship.

Very fast boats actually require a high prismatic coefficient, which in turn requires a less-narrow boat. However, narrower hulls can get away with a lower prismatic coefficient. The ideal range of Cp for a catamaran is between 0.61 and 0.65. There are a few ways of increasing the prismatic coefficients: sailors can use bulb bows, a wide planing aft segment, or a flat hull rocker in conjunction with a bustle aft. Though high prismatic coefficients increase drag at low speed, at high speeds they can reduce drag by as much as ten percent.












Edited by pinguin - 03 Jun 2011 at 11:40
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 09:50
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Progress is an outdate ideology invented by backwater Comte.
 
if it is "outdated" then why did you employ the term? Old Auguste is certainly far more relevant than your constant peroration on wombats and boomerangs in some cartoonish rip-off of B.C. Comics...
 
B.C.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 09:36
Progress is an outdate ideology invented by backwater Comte.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 09:22
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Gladiators...  nice analogy. I thought I have pricked Doc with my trident already...
 
A beaked bird is hardly capable of wielding a trident, and if you think that your appendage is capable of "pricking" anything other than the occasional sardine, then you are scarcely aware of the dangers your feathered counterparts face when approaching trawlers! 
 
Here is some lexicographic advice: primitives and progress are contrasting terms forging the oxymoronic.


Edited by drgonzaga - 03 Jun 2011 at 09:24
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 05:29
Gladiators...  nice analogy. I thought I have pricked Doc with my trident already...
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 05:14
These exchanges are put up with because to a certain extent they are enjoyable, like watching a gladiator with an axe fighting one with a net.
 
But, pinguin, don't become boring or the raison d'être of the toleration will vanish.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 05:11
Marvelous. You indeed can associate Bayes with probability.

So, I bet you could calculate the probability you enter a thread without trolling it? given the fact there is a probability of 80% that you troll, given you see an interesting idea in the thread?


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.