Freemasonry And Endowment?

[Mike Reed]

Now back to the issue at hand. In that last link I put up... There is a description that is found next to the picture. The description says :"1960, Astana in Turpan in Xinjiang in the tombs of the Tang Dynasty tombs unearthed the two thirty ancient Fuxi and Nuwa Figure: picture on the right, the right hand of the Fuxi Fuxi left, Nuwa hold live Nuwa Nuwa left hand clinging to Fuxi, the two diagonally pupil affectionate sea, and the lower part of the body are serpentine and Entwined intersect. The Fuxi left hand holding a "moment" that Sruare, the Nuwa right hand holding the "rules" that compasses, background available "rules" drawn "the sun and the moon and the constellation diagram.

You think you are quoting a translation of ancient mythology here? Sigh... this is getting ridiculous.

[mathonihah]

Sigh... you cliamed that Nowa carried the Olfa shaped compass. But you can only support such drivel from modern reproductions... which isn't really isn't suitable evidence. Not in the slightest. So you've come up with this image, but it does nothing to support your original argument. Again... not in the slightest.

Now you are claiming that you've provided a "translation" that indicates that Nuwa carried a compas. Where is the translation? I see that there is an interpretation of the art, stating that it was a compass, but no translation of mythology, as MM, Wade, CAS, and you have claimed exists. Again... provide a translation of ancient mythology, stating that Nuwa carried a compass.

Here is another source for you to look at. The text on this one is smaller, and much harder to read; but you can see the relevant paragraph with the search words highlighted, as well as in one of the side-notes. The paragraph is just readable with difficulty, although the side-note is not unfortunately. But the image is one that has an Olfa Cutter style compass in it.

The Author obviously thinks that it is authentic. If you don't think so, what can I say? I trust the overwhelming consensus of the scholarly works on the subject. If you don't, then you have that choice. I can't argue with that.

[Mike Reed]

Here is another source for you to look at. The text on this one is smaller, and much harder to read; but you can see the relevant paragraph with the search words highlighted, as well as in one of the side-notes. The paragraph is just readable with difficulty, although the side-note is not unfortunately. But the image is one that has an Olfa Cutter style compass in it. The Author obviously thinks that it is authentic. If you don't think so, what can I say? I trust the overwhelming consensus of the scholarly works on the subject. If you don't, then you have that choice. I can't argue with that.

The author provides a modern sketch, not a photo. I want evidence. I want a photo of ancient art that this is allegedly based on, showing Nuwa carring what appears to be a Olfa shaped compass. Comprende?

I also want you to quote ancient mythology stating that Nuwa carried a compass, as you, wade, cas, and MM have claimed.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Mike Reed

[CASteinman]

You think you are quoting a translation of ancient mythology here? Sigh... this is getting ridiculous.

No, I do not think so. I think what I am quoting is a more modern news source that talks about some sort of archeological find (They seem to be just fascinated to have discovered Adam and Eve apparently) and then refers to their ancient history and points to those two characters and what they are holding.

In other words, it is "normal" to see these these two mythical characters holding a "Moment Square" and an "Executive Rule".

Does that not matter to you that this is a standard interpretation?

And to be more pointed.. there is another reason I quoted that. You came up with a website that translated Two characters into "Ruler" and "Scissors". After doing my best to research it, It appears that they should have been translated as "Compass" and "Square".

But.. (and this is the point) when machine translated -- the two words of interest to us would be seen not as "Compass" and "Square" but as something like Square and Ruler or Moment Square and Executive Ruler. So, if we DO see them in some document, then we will recognize what we are seeing.

This is important I think, because the myths were recorded (From what I can tell so far) in some works put together about 900 AD. I know of one title "The Imperial Readings of the Taiping Era" -- I am not sure if it includes everything or not -- but it is a HUGE Chinese history -- 1000 volumes -- and from what I can tell so far, not translated into English.

Now you are insisting on primary sources (a ridiculous requirement -- the fact that many many researchers and historians report this should be sufficient -- but not for you. So I am trying) . The only way to get a translation of a primary source is to see if, without knowing a lick of Chinese I can google Chinese websites and find this 1000 volume work and find the text in it telling the story with those words.

So Hope you see what I mean there.

Your demands are ludicrous though.

[Mike Reed]

Now you are insisting on primary sources (a ridiculous requirement -- the fact that many many researchers and historians report this should be sufficient -- but not for you. So I am trying) .

What historians state that ancient Chinese texts of mythology says that Nuwa carried a compass? I've read their interpretations of the art in question, but have read nothing about what ancient texts of Chinese Mythology says about this detail. So again, CFR.

Your demands are ludicrous though.

If you can't support your statements of fact, perhaps you should retract them.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Mike Reed

[CASteinman]

If you can't support your statements of fact, perhaps you should retract them.

That logic does not follow. My abilities to search the web have nothing to do with whether something is true or not.

I don't want to let this pass though: I have not been blindly brought into this Burden of Proof reversal that you have created. Yes, you come in with outrageous claims, have yet to back them up with ANYTHING substantive and yet through it all you make other people prove you are wrong rather than come up with anything that you are right -- other than your own opinion. This is really arrogant on your part and rude.

But I am doing it because I am curious.

Edited April 7, 2013 by CASteinman

[mfbukowski]

Ancient Chinese Calipers.

http://history.cultu...H2758H7991.html

http://www.orientald...1028006125.html

Clearly these are ancient Chinese zip-guns.

Edited April 7, 2013 by mfbukowski

[mathonihah]

The author provides a modern sketch, not a photo. I want evidence. I want a photo of ancient art that this is allegedly based on, showing Nuwa carring what appears to be a Olfa shaped compass. Comprende?

I also want you to quote ancient mythology stating that Nuwa carried a compass, as you, wade, cas, and MM have claimed.

I showed you one, and you brought ridiculous excuses. And in any case, as I said, the testimony of so many scholars is sufficient for me. Here is another:

http://books.google....compass&f=false

Your question is a bit like demanding proof that Napoleon invaded Russia. But whatever reputable history book I quote, you claim that that is not authentic evidence, and demand something more.

[mfbukowski]

An interesting site especially for LDS about this

The phrase kuci chü is used by modern Chinese to signify “the way things should be, the moral standard”; it literally means the compass and the square.

It would be interesting to see if that proves true

http://www.templestudy.com/2008/09/17/nuwa-and-fuxi-in-chinese-mythology-compass-square/

[volgadon]

Why is it ludicrous and ridiculous to expect primary sources?

I find this intensely ironic, considering that some have dismissed Mike's credibility.

[volgadon]

Your question is a bit like demanding proof that Napoleon invaded Russia. But whatever reputable history book I quote, you claim that that is not authentic evidence, and demand something more.

Years ago, someone on a Sharpe discussion board posted a letter purportedly from Wellington, about some jars of raspberry jam. There was plenty about the quote that screamed apocryphal to me, and I challenged its authenticity. The person defending its authenticity was unable to provide a single primary source for the quote. http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/88q1/13785.15.html

[canard78]

For what it's worth, this conversation has been fascinating.

I'm going to contact a friend who does read/speak Chinese and is very well-versed in Chinese mythology. I'll see if he can help out with any original sources.

[CASteinman]

Why is it ludicrous and ridiculous to expect primary sources?

Duh.. they are in CHINESE. They are not translated.

I find this intensely ironic, considering that some have dismissed Mike's credibility.

He doesn't have any and his approach to this (reverse the Burden of Proof) has not improved it.

I challenged you a while back and gave you a lot of stuff to support my reasons. Why don't you go after that?

Edited April 8, 2013 by CASteinman

[volgadon]

I challenge you a while back. Why don't you go after that?

Probably because I am still trying to find a diplomatic way of saying that you backtracked when challenged on Sir Aurel Stein's credibility.

[CASteinman]

Probably because I am still trying to find a diplomatic way of saying that you backtracked when challenged on Sir Aurel Stein's credibility.

Well, you just did.

But find one instance where I ever mentioned him, brought him up, relied upon him or took ANY POSITION with respect to him that I backtracked from.

I await your report with a quote from me on that.

[Mike Reed]

I am not reversing the burden of proof. It was your side (maybe not you specifically, but those who are on your side) who claimed that we need to understand the ancient art in the context of mythology. It was asserted and maintained by others that the compass proposition was supported by mythology. I was then asked to show similar support for my proposition.... Even though I never claimed such support of mythology. But now I am asking for a cfr, to validated that ancient Chinese mythology supports your propposition after all. But it turns out that you have nothing. Just subjective interpretation of the art, as I have. So that is our common denominator. On those grounds, let's debate. I have shown you what a compass of that period and location looks like. You have similar art to show, but nothing ancient. Going off of ancient scissors vs ancient Chinese compasses, I win. You have no material culture or mythology go back your proposition up. Just a bandwagon appeal.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Mike Reed

[volgadon]

Well, you just did.

But find one instance where I ever mentioned him, brought him up, relied upon him or took ANY POSITION with respect to him that I backtracked from.

I await your report with a quote from me on that.

MM appealed to his authority as the archaeologist on the scene, and when I responded that he wasn't the last word, you posted this.

Is that a fair critique? What I mean is --- who would you say IS the Last word? No one? Then perhaps simply saying that he is not the last word is not fair.

And lets focus on the task at hand: How is he in this subject vs Mike Reed? Would you venture a guess?

He is one of the experts to which MM and his defenders have appealed, so I pointed out that Stein didn't know Chinese either.

When taken in conjunction with this post insisting that if Mike isn't a Sinologist then none of his points are valid, I find your challenges ludicrous.

Look Mike you think you are on to something. Write it up. get it peer reviewed Lets see how it passes that test. Its pretty silly for you to stand around and say "Look I am so wonderful and noticed things no one else saw before -- prove me wrong everyone or be called ridiculous" -- and no one here is an expert in this subject.

Write up your idea and get it peer reviewed.

Until you do that though, seriously you have almost no credibility. Because other people who ARE experts have identified this as a Compass. It does not matter how much you wish that were not true, that is how it is. Experts are currently not in agreement with you.

So you need to get some credibility.

Or would you seriously advocate that in the interest of objective honesty people should just believe the first odd random theory that comes along from a non-expert?

[Mike Reed]

Clearly these are ancient Chinese zip-guns.

haha! I think u may be in to something.

[volgadon]

Duh.. they are in CHINESE. They are not translated.

Several are. You can even go to the wikipedia entry and check the links to the individual sources, where translations are listed. Now, they might not all be available online for free, but that is not the same as claiming that none have been translated.

[CASteinman]

MM appealed to his authority as the archaeologist on the scene, and when I responded that he wasn't the last word, you posted this.

Ok.. but I did not. You can't tar me with that.

He is one of the experts to which MM and his defenders have appealed, so I pointed out that Stein didn't know Chinese either.

OK but again.. that's not me. You keep insisting it and getting it wrong. I did not insist that Stein was ANYTHING. I have never referred to him. You are the one who did that and I merely replied to you. THAT is not me referencing him.

You insisted he was "Not the last word" When challenged on whether that's even a fair critique.. you have remained silent. Then, again, (notice I am not relying on Stein) ... I simply concede that the issue of whether your critique is fair -- is really irrelevant to the bigger point.. the real issue is. What are Mike's credentials vs Stein's on this particular matter? I was not relying on Stein. Did not care. And really, I did not know the answer the question. It was not Rhetorical. I was asking you directly..How do his credentials compare to Mikes?

That's all.

You stepped aside on that one.. did not answer the question. Again. (This seems to be a pattern with you here -- question doesn't suit you.. ignore it.). Instead you talked about Steins inability to read Chinese. OK. But is that all? What are his credentials and how do they compare with Mike? I did not ask what his credentials were NOT.. I asked what they were and how they compared.

Silence from you.

I have asked you twice now, I think, whether you as a scholar or academic would accept someone without any experience, skills or background in the area, when they produce answers that are contrary to those who are -- whether you would just trust them because they said you should.

I have asked you that twice.. and you have been silent.

You are silent again... except to accuse me of things that are not true.

When taken in conjunction with this post insisting that if Mike isn't a Sinologist then none of his points are valid, I find your challenges ludicrous.

False accusation. I never said that none of his points are valid. In fact, I early on said that one of his points was good. But what I did say was that he had no credibility on this relative to many other sources that did not see things the way he did.

And that is still true. He has no credibility. But at least he has picked up a water carrier.

Edited April 8, 2013 by CASteinman

[CASteinman]

Several are. You can even go to the wikipedia entry and check the links to the individual sources, where translations are listed. Now, they might not all be available online for free, but that is not the same as claiming that none have been translated.

Link please.

[CASteinman]

Probably because I am still trying to find a diplomatic way of saying that you backtracked when challenged on Sir Aurel Stein's credibility.

Still looking for a time that I took a position on this that I backtracked from.

Find it yet?

[Mike Reed]

Several are. You can even go to the wikipedia entry and check the links to the individual sources, where translations are listed. Now, they might not all be available online for free, but that is not the same as claiming that none have been translated.

it is about this time that I start to think that there is no sense in talking sense to the senseless. Mm said that the art matched the garments on the same sides, but then I explained that he had things backwards, and he responded that this was not the case for veils... He then called them veils, and when I asked him how silks hung on walls functioned as veils, he said that thin silks can be identified as veils, since they are so thin...Stupid, but whatever... Then it was pointed out that the compass may not be a compass afterall.... But rather scissors.... Material culture supports this, but opponents have insisted that mythology says otherwise... But when challenged over this statement of fact, they haven't been able to deliver the goods....all they have is a bandwagon appeal... But now I am called the ridiculous one... Have I suddenly entered an alternate universe? Edited April 8, 2013 by Mike Reed

[volgadon]

Link please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCwa

[CASteinman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCwa

OK. Thanks. I had seen that and forgotten it.