Upload
Login or register
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#82 - JHDog
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
thumb me down, but if lived in a cave for 20+ years and then experienced the world for the first time, i'd be more impressed with the architecture of the Vatican than with the satellite
User avatar #127 to #82 - hoshasei
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
you would be more impressed by a well crafted building, then a giant ass COMPUTER, FLYING, though SPACE. your in ******* space!! the very experience would revolutionize reality as you know it. you would be scared amazed and inspired all at once , a literal orgasmic cocktail of emotions.
#134 to #82 - anon id: 4bc95bcf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Well, assuming you were uneducated on what the satellite could do.
User avatar #161 to #82 - inbardo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
It's not a Satellite, dude.

It's the ISS.
User avatar #172 to #82 - skullzero
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Can the Vatican survive in the vacuum of space? Can it block out radiation and travel at 17,000 MPH?
#255 to #172 - JHDog
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
notice the term "structure" not "function"
User avatar #344 to #255 - skullzero
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
Do you think the architects that designed either one just drew a pretty picture? Of course function is included in the structure...
#349 to #344 - JHDog
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
uhhh yes, that's what architects do: they draw then build. Also, architects don't work on functionality, you leave that to the computer engineers. My point being, structure is different than function. That being said, looking at a structural standpoint, the vatican is more impressive.
User avatar #350 to #349 - skullzero
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
The architects of the Vatican designed the huge ass dome to make sure it doesn't fall in on itself, same way the architects of the ISS designed it to withstand the millions of projectiles coming at it, and they didn't design it to be some huge thick structure to minimize that... Architects don't just design by drawing, those are the useless ones... they also make calculations for shape and such.
User avatar #315 - hauptishere
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
I think religion has inspired many great works of art. Buildings, paintings, sculptures and music were all heavily influenced by religion. Plus Leonardo da Vinci, one of the greatest minds in human history, painted the last supper, one of the most iconic Christian images in the world. So this whole religion vs. science debate is pretty foolish. Also, architecture is not only for functionality, but also for its beauty, while a space station is purely functionality. Your post is stupid and you should feel stupid.
#295 - masterboll
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
>implying that science isnt applied behind the structures of holy buildings
#309 to #295 - comanderspy
-2 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#332 to #309 - masterboll
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
if they are holy buildings then its a bit obvious that they were built for one main use

have you been living under a rock or something?
User avatar #287 - destaice
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Science was used to create those religious buildings.
User avatar #216 - pharoahemonch
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
the view that religion and science are diametrically-opposed entities that are in direct competition is such a ******* retarded one - they're not ******* sports teams where you choose to support one and unequivocally hate the other. What do you think any educated priest or rabbi says when they see someone cured of cancer against the odds? they give thanks for the brilliance that is medical science and praise the researchers who developed the cure; people like OP seem to have this idea that they fall to their knees and immediately praise Jesus for his mercy. Stupid, **** cancerous content. OP is worse than a fag; he is ignorant as ****.
User avatar #203 - zorororonoa
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
So are you implying that only religion constructed that building? That they prayed it into existence? You are truly an idiot then. Science was used to build that building too, they had to do measurements and construction. Just because a building was built for religious purposes doesn't mean there wasn't any science or math involved.
#237 to #203 - dwarfman
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
You represent your ideology rather poorly and are a disgraceful human being.
#200 - julescb
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
If you consider what we know now and the technology that is available compared to what they had back then ... the work done back then was far more impressive. There are architectural feats (espicially by Bramante) that the finest architects today are puzzled with the methods of their construction and design.


So yea .. no.
User avatar #195 - xenoquack
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
I'd say they're both pretty impressive.
User avatar #141 - mollycoddle
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Which religion was the Great Wall of China built in the name of?
User avatar #150 to #141 - nockae
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Not everything built that looks nice was built in the name of a religion.
User avatar #159 to #150 - mollycoddle
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
But the content says "Religion has made the greatest structures in the history of Man"
I.e. The greatest structures in the world were made in the name of religion.
The Great Wall of China is clearly the best.
User avatar #162 to #159 - nockae
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Well I have to disagree with you there, but I do agree that "Religion has made the greatest structures in the history of Man" is a false statement.
User avatar #164 to #162 - mollycoddle
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
I guess the Taj Mahal is pretty cool, too.
User avatar #167 to #164 - nockae
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
There are also a lot of skyscrapers I love, Venice during it's prime was pretty awesome. And the Pyramids when they were first built was a huge feet of engineering.
#139 - Rellikthebrit
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure science and engineering keep them standing.
I'm pretty sure science and engineering keep them standing.
#173 to #139 - mattymc
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
honestly what did that clown expect would happen when you ASSAULT ******* RIOT POLICE?!
#97 - twistedrider
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Religion didn't make any buldings. Humans did.
User avatar #91 - JohnTheRipper
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
eh. not sure if it is just me but I would be much more impressed walking the halls of the vatican. that's history right there. Some of the best art you will ever see, ever. Also, the architecture is amazing.
#67 - honeybiscuit
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
But religion didn't make it. Good guy science made it for religious purposes.
User avatar #63 - naeoro
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Well, to be honest, some of their Architechts are quite good. And some of their work is dare i say superb.

But nothing matches the work of a Techpriest.
#61 - maxeee
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Fun Fact: Religion has not created any building...man did.
User avatar #59 - Hreidmar
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Could we just agree that they both look pretty damn good and both are very impressive structures?

This comparison is like comparing apples to Mahler's symphonies.
User avatar #55 - thedutchs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
But what about the scientists who are religious?
#57 to #55 - mattkingg **User deleted account**
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
I know right? people seem to forget that they are not exclusive traits, you can have both.
User avatar #98 to #57 - thedutchs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Someone who understands.
User avatar #34 - captainfuckitall
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
If only Science and Religion could work together, beautiful things could happen...
#44 to #34 - anon id: 3eee27e2
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
if only religion could **** off, beautiful things could happen
User avatar #77 to #44 - captainfuckitall
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
You mean religion as a whole? All 27,000 (roughly) different religions that have occupied this planet since man started worshipping the moon? Or are you just referring to a select few popular religions (christianity, judaism, islam, ect)?
User avatar #45 to #34 - iwaspromisedcake
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Yeah we could have crosses and other cool **** all over the next scientific achievement.
User avatar #76 to #45 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
You know religion was responsible for the extreme curve of early civilization, right? In ancient Mesopotamia (One of the first civilizations if not THEE first) temple building and worship is what spurred the people to make new and better things, sky-rocketing technological advancement and engineering

But you could just pay no mind to that, that's okay too
#4 - KayRed
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
*Slavery has made the greatest structures in the history of man!
#5 to #4 - KayRed
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #6 to #5 - KayRed
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
**** that, I take that back.
User avatar #14 to #4 - imakejewburgers
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Slaves didn't build the pyramids.
#30 to #14 - anon id: b36cc852
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
who thumb him down go check source outside the bible it all there
User avatar #16 to #14 - andrewjla
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Then who did?
User avatar #18 to #16 - imakejewburgers
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Workers. They weren't slaves.
User avatar #33 to #18 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Are you ******* kidding me? No, no, tell you what. You get me a source for that information and I shall find some to support my own side. If you give me more sources than I give you, I shall believe you, sound good?
User avatar #209 to #33 - zorororonoa
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
they got payed to do it, the pyramid construction projects happened during the less fertile seasons, so farmers and laborers who had nothing to do got payed to build them. also, it was considered a great honor to help the pharaoh with his projects because they thought they were doing the gods will, thus giving them a better afterlife, so, in a sense, they wanted to.
User avatar #239 to #209 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Care to give me a link to that?
User avatar #252 to #239 - imakejewburgers
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Grow the **** up. If you want to be so stupid go ahead. It's common knowledge that slaves didn't build the pyramids. If you actually want to grow past your 70 point IQ go to google and do your own ******* research.
User avatar #334 to #252 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/04/2013) [-]
Okay, because you give me no evidence (something that would take 5 seconds) I shall assume there is none and that you're butthurt because you're wrong. Nice debating with you, don't act like such a pussy the nice time you lose

In a debate, when you want to prove someone wrong, you just don't blurt out nonsense, you give them evidence as to WHY they're wrong. You want to prove something? The onus of proof is on you, simple as that
User avatar #337 to #334 - imakejewburgers
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
I'm not trying to prove anything. It's not my fault you are unaware of something considered common knowledge. I don't care if you would rather stay ignorant.
User avatar #338 to #337 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
Yes you are, otherwise you wouldn't have commented in the first place
User avatar #339 to #338 - imakejewburgers
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
No, I am in fact not. If I was trying to prove something I would have provided some source. I was simply stating a fact. So long as I provided the information I could care less whether you choose to accept it or not.
User avatar #341 to #339 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
You're still talking to me, you're OBVIOUSLY trying to prove something. And you obviously care, again, otherwise you wouldn't have gotten so upset when I asked for evidence. Seriously, you're just digging yourself into a hole
User avatar #342 to #341 - imakejewburgers
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
I don't care whether you do or do not have some basic knowledge about the construction of the pyramids. What I do care about however is when stupid people demand proof that something is true because they think it's false. You immediately began acting like an ass, challenging me to find more evidence for something than you could find against it. I care about that. I care about you being an ignorant ass that is to ******* lazy to go to google, type in a dozen words, and educate yourself. I do not care if you choose to remain ignorant, I care that you choose to remain ignorant and demand that I educate you.
User avatar #345 to #342 - captainfuckitall
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
If it's true, then you'll have absolutely no problem providing proof. Truth isn't afraid to be questioned, after-all. What do you mean "more" evidence? You didn't give me any at ALL, you just said you were right and insulted me, I'm not the one acting like an ass here. I like how you're upset at me for doing the exact same thing you're doing (not looking up evidence)
User avatar #347 to #345 - imakejewburgers
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/05/2013) [-]
I know it's hard for the mentally challenged to read, but you really have to make an effort. If you reread my comment you will see that it was a reference of your comment number 33. You challenged me to find more evidence supporting my statement than you could find disproving it. And I know it is also very difficult for special needs people to understand a linear time path, but if you concentrate real hard you'll be able to see that you initiated conversation between us in a rude manner.
User avatar #2 - mcmanybucks
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/03/2013) [-]
Building - Architecture - Calculations - Math - Science

..lol.