Palms? But Not Like Usual - Pachamama Forbid
Mexico Archdiocese encouraged the faithful, locked out of their churches by the coronavirus, to celebrate Palm Sunday “with an ecological sense.” It suggested to put a palm from the years before in …More
Mexico Archdiocese encouraged the faithful, locked out of their churches by the coronavirus, to celebrate Palm Sunday “with an ecological sense.”
It suggested to put a palm from the years before in the window or on the door. This method is called “re-use.”
A second method is using some green plant “which you can grow” and which therefore may not be cut or teared off "from nature." This method is called “reduce.”
The third method is using any plant already growing in the house. This method is called “respect.”
#newsRumzlwoqxv
It suggested to put a palm from the years before in the window or on the door. This method is called “re-use.”
A second method is using some green plant “which you can grow” and which therefore may not be cut or teared off "from nature." This method is called “reduce.”
The third method is using any plant already growing in the house. This method is called “respect.”
#newsRumzlwoqxv
Ultraviolet
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Mistake #1:
"In 1850, you genius, Méjico was the most Catholic country in the world."
Correction:
France and Italy were "more" Catholic simply by virtue of having a larger, predominantly Catholic populations. Both populations at that time were at least double the size of Mexico. They were "more Catholic" because they had more Catholics. :D
Some professor you are eticacasanova You can't even …More
Mistake #1:
"In 1850, you genius, Méjico was the most Catholic country in the world."
Correction:
France and Italy were "more" Catholic simply by virtue of having a larger, predominantly Catholic populations. Both populations at that time were at least double the size of Mexico. They were "more Catholic" because they had more Catholics. :D
Some professor you are eticacasanova You can't even discuss demographics without making simple mistakes :P
Mistake #2:
"in 1927, the Mej8canos endeavour a war ahainst their government and the government of Calvin Coolidge no one thought they could stand for 3 m9nths"
Correction: Completely irrelevant to the discussion. The personification of death existed in Latin culture, during the time of the Aztecs. That, you idiot,was thousands of years before 1927.
Santa Muerte was documented -by name- in Mexico in the 1700s, by the Catholic Inquisition no less. That, Profesor Stupido, is two hundred years before 1927.
Santa Muerte's visual iconography was established by a Mexican artist who was already drawning a female skeleton character in the late 1800s early 1900s. He died in 1913. That, Señor Incompetente, is 14 years before 1927.
This cult existed long before your irrelevant Mexican Cristero Rebellion even began.
Mistake #3:
"You cannot oppose you wikisearches to that."
Correction: Wiki is useful for fact-checking and it's a spectacular resource. But, unlike you, I know what I'm looking for and you don't.
You don't check because you're a professor and you believe you know everything, especially about a "Latin" subject. Results prove the opposite, no matter what the subject. :P
Mistake #4:
"Read La Cristiada by Jean Meyer, maybe you'd learn something, even decency..."
Correction: See my correction to Mistake #2 :D
Your book is irrelevant. A book on the Cristero Rebellion doesn't show this cult figure was created by communists or freemasons. That -was- your claim.
Mentioning books the way you did is a common European debating tactic. Mentioning a book title and author does not prove you claims or disprove mine.
What you're doing is a combination of two logical errors. First, a Fallacious Appeal to Authority (an author is not automatically correct by virtue of being published) and a Non Sequitur (it does not follow) since the subject is irrelevant to Santa Muerte.
You said Santa Muerte was, in your words "the work of the communist-freemason government".
You have shown ZERO support for your claim. It is impossible for you to prove that because, as I have already shown, Santa Muerte existed before Karl Marx was even born.
Further, you have not disproven any of my evidence. Meaning, in simple words, several things:
1.) you are wrong.
2.) you don't know how to reason,
3.) you have not supported your claims with factual information.
4.) you have not disproven my claims
5.) you have not refuted the factual information I provided in support of 4.)
6.) you're too stupid to recognize that 2) through 5.) shows 1.) is still in effect.
Mistake #5:
"Don't waste my time with your wikiseatches, please, I'm a professor. Got it, my boy?"
Correction: I'm not your boy and you're not a professor. :P
You're an imbecile who is paid to teach, nothing more. Your academic degrees aren't worth the paper they were printed on. In a competitive scholastic environment or in an academic journal, a printed discussion like this one would destroy your professional career.
Your colleagues would would photo-copy this discussion, underline your mistakes in red like correcting a student's paper and post it on the cork bulletin board outside your office all the time.
Perhaps your students must be polite to you so they can get a passing grade.
I'm not your student, so I don't need to humour you, or your stupidity. What YOU need to do, Profesor Estiércol is show factual evidence supporting your claim.
That is a basis of all intelligent debate. You made a claim Santa Muerte is (your words) "the work of the communist-freemason government "
Now prove it.
Show how the Communists and Freemasons created a cult-figure that was documented -by name- before they existed. Prove how "communists" invented a Mexican female skeleton figure that was already in print while the Tsars still ruled Russia..
...and before I forget. Show how Mexico was "the most Catholic country in the world" when France and Itally both had more Catholics. :D
Friendly suggestion... Before sneering at Wikisearches, you should try doing them before making an even bigger fool out of yourself.
If you can't prove your claim, don't bother replying wth more irrelevancies.
You can, of course, if you wish.;-) I am more than happy to expose you as a third-rate academic an incompetent debator and an intellectual stumbler in general.
So do you have any proof for your claims or are you done? :D
"In 1850, you genius, Méjico was the most Catholic country in the world."
Correction:
France and Italy were "more" Catholic simply by virtue of having a larger, predominantly Catholic populations. Both populations at that time were at least double the size of Mexico. They were "more Catholic" because they had more Catholics. :D
Some professor you are eticacasanova You can't even discuss demographics without making simple mistakes :P
Mistake #2:
"in 1927, the Mej8canos endeavour a war ahainst their government and the government of Calvin Coolidge no one thought they could stand for 3 m9nths"
Correction: Completely irrelevant to the discussion. The personification of death existed in Latin culture, during the time of the Aztecs. That, you idiot,was thousands of years before 1927.
Santa Muerte was documented -by name- in Mexico in the 1700s, by the Catholic Inquisition no less. That, Profesor Stupido, is two hundred years before 1927.
Santa Muerte's visual iconography was established by a Mexican artist who was already drawning a female skeleton character in the late 1800s early 1900s. He died in 1913. That, Señor Incompetente, is 14 years before 1927.
This cult existed long before your irrelevant Mexican Cristero Rebellion even began.
Mistake #3:
"You cannot oppose you wikisearches to that."
Correction: Wiki is useful for fact-checking and it's a spectacular resource. But, unlike you, I know what I'm looking for and you don't.
You don't check because you're a professor and you believe you know everything, especially about a "Latin" subject. Results prove the opposite, no matter what the subject. :P
Mistake #4:
"Read La Cristiada by Jean Meyer, maybe you'd learn something, even decency..."
Correction: See my correction to Mistake #2 :D
Your book is irrelevant. A book on the Cristero Rebellion doesn't show this cult figure was created by communists or freemasons. That -was- your claim.
Mentioning books the way you did is a common European debating tactic. Mentioning a book title and author does not prove you claims or disprove mine.
What you're doing is a combination of two logical errors. First, a Fallacious Appeal to Authority (an author is not automatically correct by virtue of being published) and a Non Sequitur (it does not follow) since the subject is irrelevant to Santa Muerte.
You said Santa Muerte was, in your words "the work of the communist-freemason government".
You have shown ZERO support for your claim. It is impossible for you to prove that because, as I have already shown, Santa Muerte existed before Karl Marx was even born.
Further, you have not disproven any of my evidence. Meaning, in simple words, several things:
1.) you are wrong.
2.) you don't know how to reason,
3.) you have not supported your claims with factual information.
4.) you have not disproven my claims
5.) you have not refuted the factual information I provided in support of 4.)
6.) you're too stupid to recognize that 2) through 5.) shows 1.) is still in effect.
Mistake #5:
"Don't waste my time with your wikiseatches, please, I'm a professor. Got it, my boy?"
Correction: I'm not your boy and you're not a professor. :P
You're an imbecile who is paid to teach, nothing more. Your academic degrees aren't worth the paper they were printed on. In a competitive scholastic environment or in an academic journal, a printed discussion like this one would destroy your professional career.
Your colleagues would would photo-copy this discussion, underline your mistakes in red like correcting a student's paper and post it on the cork bulletin board outside your office all the time.
Perhaps your students must be polite to you so they can get a passing grade.
I'm not your student, so I don't need to humour you, or your stupidity. What YOU need to do, Profesor Estiércol is show factual evidence supporting your claim.
That is a basis of all intelligent debate. You made a claim Santa Muerte is (your words) "the work of the communist-freemason government "
Now prove it.
Show how the Communists and Freemasons created a cult-figure that was documented -by name- before they existed. Prove how "communists" invented a Mexican female skeleton figure that was already in print while the Tsars still ruled Russia..
...and before I forget. Show how Mexico was "the most Catholic country in the world" when France and Itally both had more Catholics. :D
Friendly suggestion... Before sneering at Wikisearches, you should try doing them before making an even bigger fool out of yourself.
If you can't prove your claim, don't bother replying wth more irrelevancies.
You can, of course, if you wish.;-) I am more than happy to expose you as a third-rate academic an incompetent debator and an intellectual stumbler in general.
So do you have any proof for your claims or are you done? :D