On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:43:44 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 8/28/24 12:41 PM, kami wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 12:57:09 -0700, % wrote:
>>
>>> kami wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 09:02:32 -0700, % wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> kami wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 12:26:29 -0700, % wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> kami wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 24 Aug 2024 09:11:04 -0700, % wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> kami wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 23:06:22 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/23/24 10:49 PM, kami wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 20:35:36 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/23/24 9:19 AM, kami wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:06:47 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/index.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every few years they "prove" the thing is, or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not, what the faithful claim it is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are even modern reconstructions of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'face' - a fairly handsome Hebrew man.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BUT ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Prophet Isaiah 53:2-5
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In short, the Jesus guy was actually kinda UGLY. Any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "good looking" renditions would be FAKES.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even if Isaiah had a 'mis-vision', why do you just ASSUME
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Jesus guy wasn't a rather ugly git ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in those days, in that region, everyone was a strong shade of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> brown, due to the toiling all day in the sun, which by default
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> led to greater melanin production.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't particularly care about skin-tone ... everybody
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in that part of the world, except imported slaves, had
>>>>>>>>>>>>> kinda the same 'olive' look.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> My question revolves around "good looks". The reconstruction
>>>>>>>>>>>>> scan shows a GOOD LOOKING Hebrew guy - yet either by prophets
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or alleged witnesses - nobody said if the Jesus guy WAS
>>>>>>>>>>>>> good looking. MIGHT have been kind of a toad. Indeed MOST
>>>>>>>>>>>>> people aren't "good looking".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So WHY the assumptions that the guy was 'GQ' material ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If that scan WAS an accurate take on the shroud image
>>>>>>>>>>>>> then that the guy (IF that's what it is) being so good
>>>>>>>>>>>>> looking suggests it's the WRONG GUY.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh well, True Believers will never be deterred ... if
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they want their gods to look like a young Brad Pitt then
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's how they looked - period.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Beauty=Truth=Beauty" is apparently hard-wired into our
>>>>>>>>>>>>> brains ... or as Tom Petty once put it "She was born with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a face that'd let her get away".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> well yeah, our perception of the genetic health of a mate is the
>>>>>>>>>>>> result of symmetry. like retards look like retards because their
>>>>>>>>>>>> features are not symmetric.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> but the question is, why are so many dictators butt ugly ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I suspect it's BECAUSE they're ugly - or more in particular
>>>>>>>>>>> because they were treated so badly by so many in their
>>>>>>>>>>> youth and they want "ultimate revenge". They are motivated
>>>>>>>>>>> to become THE Guy, der Furher - then everybody has to
>>>>>>>>>>> suck their dick (in a few historical cases, clit ; QE-1
>>>>>>>>>>> really wasn't a great looker :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> there should be an uggos anonymous support group, they can meet
>>>>>>>>>> and discuss how extra unfair the world is, especially fat people.
>>>>>>>>>> btw is there a fats anonymous?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> there's a fat acceptance
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> really? i thought usenet is ancient and all groups were made
>>>>>>>> decades ago. i dont think there was any such thing as fat
>>>>>>>> acceptance then.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> fat people were shamed as should be the case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> there are lots of fat groups
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> please point me to those groups, i will call them fatties all day
>>>>>> long.
>>>>>>
>>>>> search where you subscribe to groups
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.harley.com/cgi-bin/usenet/usenet.pl?what=fat&x=22&y=23&state=wholewordmatch&adult=0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> they look kinda dead, except one, which has nothing to do with
>>>> fat people, let me see.
>>>>
>>> of course they're dead , usenet is dead ,
>>> i'm not going to search over 200,000 groups ,
>>> just for you to find ones you like ,
>>> you asked for some dealing with fat i gave you fat
>>
>>
>> yes thanks, i think if we find non-dead groups, we should share.
>> an oasis in a desert. i found alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, it seems
>> to be active.
>
>
> THAT one, for some reason, HAS been active for
> a very long time :-)

that's good, another one active one is alt.philosophy, i think i
will start posting in both groups.