rodey_lyf
Upon your persistent request to revisit your prior comments, i diligently reviewed our previous exchanges and discovered the extent of your hypocrisy, which I did not immediately recognize.
You repeeteady denying that you make connections with Philitistines and Palestinians.
So lets go back in your comments where this issue started.
Based on your assertion above, it is evident that you have identified the Philistines as the Palestinians, who were historically recognized as adversaries of the Jewish people dating back to biblical times.
And you kept denying it because you understood it was a tremendous error on your behalf to make that connection, and you realized it was defeating your pro-Palestinian stance and demolishing the Palestinians cultural, religious, and national identities all together.
As we read further, we can see your ignorance of the history of ancient Philistines, as well as the context and background of the names Palestines and Philistia:
You identified the Philistines again with the Palestinians, by claiming it was named by greek as "Palestines" while infact they named it Philistia to be exact not Palestine.
Historical Fact on the Historical Context of the name Philistia and Palestine - para may pumasok naman sa kukote mo mo
The terms "Philistia" and "Palestine" refer to the same region, but they were used at different times in history both Palestinians today and ancient Philistines has separate distinct cultures and identity.
Philistia was a term used in ancient times. The Philistines are an ancient people who are not the Palestinian Arabs we know today. The title "Philistia" refers to their (Philistinians) presence in the region.
The term "Palestine" has been used to represent the same general geographic area, including modern-day Israel and the Palestinian territories, It was used by British mandate so technically speaking the Palestine term in this context we can consider Jews as Palestinians by nationality, and Jews by ethnicity since during the first and second Aliyah they holding Palestine passport, while the Palestinians todays are Palestinians by nationality and Arabs by ethnicity. In short they are Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs, and Palestinian Arabs has nothing to do with the ancient Philistines people beside from the name of the land.
history of ancient Philistines, you never bothered to research to find out, why? because it destroys your theories it will show that if you push your idea that Palestinians are the ancient Philistines ancient enemies of israel, it will invalidate the Palestinian people on the land since Philistinians are sea people. I was the one who spoon feeded you of the scholarly historical consensus. Since it will demolished your pro palestinian stance you just resort on the argument that History was writen by the victors, and the scholarly consensus and opinions are just mere opinions.
If it weren't for me and if I wasn't spoonfeeding you, you wouldn't know that the Scholarly consensus (which I will address in the latter section of this reply) is that Philistines are Greeks from the Aegean Sea. You refused to accept the scholarly consensus, which, in your delusory opinion, is simply that: opinions of scholars are just opinion. I know why refused it
(1) you want to save your face and your pride and (2)
Because it destroys your theories it will show that if you push your idea that Palestinians are the ancient Philistines ancient enemies of israel since biblical times, it will invalidate the Palestinians people on the land since Philistinians are sea people. Since it will demolished your pro palestinian stance you just resort on the argument that History was writen by the victors, and your tactic of reduced statement of answering True or False, i admit its a clever one, but not honorable, that is acceptable because you appear to have no shame on your body.
The Clash of your comments:
These contradictory statements demonstrates your hypocrisy, how you shifted your attitude after realizing that your notion is a suicide defeat for you and the Palestinian people. No wonders you reduced your theory and employs the tactic of True or False, because you cannot take it back, and you cannot defend it hahaha
You:
VS
You:
And You:
stellarium said:
And so? do you
accept that they are greek? hmmm
Is it not? that they are Greeks?
To be honest, your theory is an absurd argument and only a moron and phony Palestinian supporters like you will use it. hahaha
Lastly your your insistence that scholarly consensus is just an opinion:
Your delusional opinion after i presented the scholarly consensus:
I already addressed those statements which you repeateadly ignore:
Scholarly consensus are not simply opinions, they are grounded in rigorous investigation, substantiated by empirical data, and derived from specialized knowledge within a certain academic domain. Scholars, historians,researchers, and academics form their judgments and draw conclusions on a meticulous examination, critical evaluation of the existing evidence, and a comprehensive comprehension of the subject matter. It seems you are too ignorant to differentiate the two, opinion without evidence is just opinion, that what is your doing Moron,while scholary consensus and opinions are well-founded and evidence-based.
What you said is an insult on the experts, scholars around the world, and it the context of our topic an insult on the Historians and Archeologists of ancient history.
Now, since our long exchanges is about the Philistines I challenges you to demonstrate that their (scholars and scholarly consensus) evidence-based opinions are merely opinions and not facts, that they faked their data and findings, and that they are incorrect in their assertion that Philistines are not Greeks from the Aegean Sea.
“It fits with the Egyptian and other texts that we have, and it fits with the [archaeological material]."
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post.
Log in or register now.
-
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post.
Log in or register now.
Aaron J. Brody; Roy J. King (2013).
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post.
Log in or register now..
Human Biology.
85 (6): 925
---
For the last time lets demonstrate the level of your ignorance.
Your level of idiocy regarding scholarly consensus is like this:
Dr. Jose Rizal, the Philippines' national hero, was sentenced and killed by firing squad on December 30, 1896. The incident is well-documented, and a scholarly consensus exists on the reason of his death.
However,by following your level of stupidity that Scholarly consensus is merely an opinion, therefore Rizal death is fake, he may not even existed as historical person because its just a mere opinion.
Throughout our few days of interactions, I have observed your tendency to employ tactics such as twisting your own earlier comments and changing your viewpoint in order to protect your pride. Your character's combinations of ignorance, hypocrisy, and a fondness for deluded bogus theories, has become familiar to me. Kaya expected ko na mga palusot mo
View attachment 2788907