brain sizes: Einstein's and women's
lojbab at lojban.org
Wed Aug 28 05:02:54 EST 2002
"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
>From: Willie Martin
>Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 4:02 PM
>Subject: brain sizes: Einstein's and women's
> The Jews admit that they are not the descendants of the Ancient
>Israelites in their writings.
They do not.
> Under the heading of "A brief History of the Terms for Jew" in the 1980
>Jewish Almanac is the following: "STRICTLY SPEAKING IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL
>AN ANCIENT ISRAELITE A 'JEW' OR TO CALL A CONTEMPORARY JEW AN ISRAELITE OR A
>HEBREW." (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3).
"Strictly speaking". But of course what else does that text say that
was left out, that would clarify that the two words are commonly used
in that way. You've both been found to be egregious removers of
context that contradicts the points you are trying to make.
As it is, the above text does NOT say anything about whether they are
descendants of the Ancient Israelites. It says that strictly
speaking, contemporary Jews are not Ancient Israelites. Well, duh.
Unless a contemporary Jew had been around for 3000 years, he could not
be an Ancient Israelite.
More information about the Neur-sci