Does anyone know who invented cheese?

the hanibal lektor franchise is becoming as rubbish as the star wars one.

^^^^
the first photographer. (this is the answer to hip priest's question, not to the thread question)

\

i love this movie

Anyway, the greatest genius of all time is whoever "invented" writing.

So we've narrowed it down to the Sumerians. Because, unless I'm mistaken, the epic of Gilgamesh is the oldest writing extant. Bit dubious that, obviously.

Did you know there's a pyramid in Bosnia? Everyone loves the Caucasus.

I abstain from voting for the greatest genius. There are many people I think are genuises, some of them I like, some of them I don't. Hegel, for instance, is an exceptional and paradigm-shifting person, which is what I understand by genius. Doesn't mean I agree with him though. Emotionally, I'd probably go with Bach or possibly Beethoven, but I'm not that inclined towards scientists. I think Isambard Kingdom Brunel should get a look in, by the by.

pythagoras or someone

nietsche

No, but when I was little, my mom told me a bedtime story about a poor european cheesemaker who was about to become ruined and mice nibbling holes in a piece of his cheese gave him inspiration to create the first Swiss cheese and it saved is cheese shop.

cheese and wine and beer were all accicdental proceses discovered by people living in the Sumer region more than likely, the area now called Iraq, the cradle of human civilization.

the first cheese was likely goat's milk cheese. back then all sorts of liquids were stored in goatskins and in bladders made from animal organs (including actual bladders)

milk was put in one and through constant motion and churning turned into the first butter. some other peron left the milk in the bag for awhile and it curdled and created the first cheese. beer and wine were also discovered i this method. old beer being absically barley and oat mush made into a stew and left to ferment.


without these discoveries humanity would never have succeded as it has.

wine beer and cheese and butter.

Hugh Hefner

The Dalai Lama.

All 14 times.

the guy that can truly make everyone happy, or atleast content

Kegmama- that was completely unintentional.

But there is a pretty obvious reason not many women are considered. They haven't been allowed that sort of a role in society until quite recently.

Joan of Arc would be another good candidate- she was not the greatest military leader of all time, but she was a young teenager when she helped turn the tide in the battle of Orleans.

marie curie.

Bill Watterson, creator of Calvin & Hobbes. His genius has been proven elsewhere on this board.

I agree man, heartbreaker was a classic song, and Glitter! top shelf shit right there!



:D

It is indeed a strange situation. It has been much discussed by scientists, philosophers, social historians, etc. It is an odd thing, not entirely relegated to women's roles in society. there are by numbers alone just as many women geniuses as men geniuses. However, what is the one thing that male geniuses have had in advantage over women geniuses as far as ability to dedicate themselves wholheartedly and to the exclusion of everything else in their lives? childbirth. men do not have babies. men do not nurse babies. until very recently in human history, men had very little to do with the day to day care and raising of their children, leaving them free o spend ten years figuring out thermodynamics, or writing the great novel, or describing thenext economic shift in sociopolitical circles, etc. the same goes for the arts and all sciences. the women that have made massive contributions and are certifiable geniuses are mostly women who did not have children or never got married or were lucky enough to have someone to take the children.

It may sound sexist but it is not. this is how the world has been. combine that with the societal difficulties women have had in a patriarchal society where many times they are seen as lesser creatures, as second to men (look at china where they have too many boys now and not enough girls), and then add in the very real difference in the way male and female brains work.
in our early tribal or family group days it was very likely women that created pottery, women that created clothing and textiles, women that created cooking methods, women that discovered new plants to eat, women that discovered and prepared dyes for fabric and such, women that created baskets, all items crucial to the development of humanity. As Isaac Asimov wrote, besides pottery, none of these primal and necessary inventions are meant to last and none have. It is near impossible to gauge the genius required for some primitive human to craft a basket, or to do any of these things.

plus women's distract us men;'s with their sweet round butts and their curvy bodies and their soft tittays.

It seems obvious that Einstein is a great genius, possibly the greatest of the ones you mentioned. But I'm more inclined to ask how do we measure genius? (it's obviously not historical impact (as some of those who replied seem to think), positive or negative, so what is it?)
If someone can answer me that, I may in turn be able to answer the question.

the guy who invented the wheel.

napoleon is right up there with the greatest geniuses of all time. unfortunately he was an emotional fuckup, which doomed him.

i also second archimedes. with leonardo as the best well-rounded monster, from science to art, incredible. it's easy to be an inventor these days, when there are huge teams of people working on things, and weapons money, and endless tools. but back then, it was all in the head.

Archimedes, daVinci, Newton, Kepler, and Einstein are my top 5 in no order

Quick facts about Archimedes . . . BornAbout 287 BC in Syracuse, Sicily. At the time Syracuse was an independent Greek city-state with a 500-year history. Died212 or 211 BC in Syracuse when it was being sacked by a Roman army. He was killed by a Roman soldier who did not know who he was. EducationProbably studied in Alexandria, Egypt, under the followers of Euclid. FamilyHis father was an astronomer named Phidias and he was probably related to Hieron II, the king of Syracuse. It is not known whether he was married or had any children. InventionsMany war machines used in the defense of Syracuse, compound pulley systems, planetarium, water screw (possibly), water organ (possibly), burning mirrors (very unlikely). Fields of
Science
InitiatedHydrostatics, static mechanics, pycnometry (the measurement of the volume or density of an object). He is called the "father of integral calculus" and also the "father of mathematical physics". Major
WritingsOn plane equilibriums, Quadrature of the parabola, On the sphere and cylinder, On spirals, On conoids and spheroids, On floating bodies, Measurement of a circle, The Sandreckoner, On the method of mechanical problems. Place in
HistoryGenerally regarded as the greatest mathematician and scientist of antiquity and one of the three greatest mathematicians of all time (together with Isaac Newton (English 1643-1727) and Carl Friedrich Gauss (German 1777-1855)).

funny thing about newton, he had a brilliant moment, then he became a cranky religious bastard.

can you add galileo to your list? not so much for his planetary observations, but for hiw work in physics, which dispelled many stupidities of the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

Saint Luke is in contention.

???

I'm sure you'd dislike him for pretty much the same reasons I love him.

You are right !@#$%

Galileo and Coppericus are fucking dope motherfuckers.

i suppose i do...

cool hand luke >> st. luke

actually i don't think i hate him. john of patmos & st. paul are my most hated. luke is kinda neutral, i guess? i have forgotten this, i used to read the bible as a kid.

but wouldn't his boss, jesus, be the genius here? damn i am trying not to come across as a smartass, just thinking one is the doer the other the recorder, well....

Jesus would be the only choice, but as He was the son of God, He was both human and divine. And perfect, so He had a bit of a head start. I was restricting my choice to people without that advantage.

And it's more than just recording. Luke recorded events in a different way to the other Gospel writers. He achieved something special.

i was reading something about him here. apparently, he was a protocommunist.


c'est vrai, ça?

Thurston Moore? He's smarter than one would suspect. Either that or insane.

I wouldn't say Luke was a socialist; he believed in everyone having the same opprtunity, not the same lack of opportunity!

(I'm a bit jaded when it comes to socialism)

By coincidence, I wrote this on another forum yesterday stating my favourite New Testament book: I voted for the Gospel of Luke, because it's such a nice document. Whoever first called it the 'loveliest book in the world' was right.

Luke was unique among the gospel writers in that he was a normal person - a doctor in fact - rather than a big figure in the early church. Incidentally, he was also a gentile and not a Jew (the only New TEstament author who wasn't a Jew, in fact).

The gospel was written to a man named Theophilus, who seems to have been quite an important chap, and who seems to have asked Luke to tell him about Jesus. Luke does so with an honesty and sense of love that is rarely equalled. But apart from that, the idea one gets from reading Luke is that as a doctor, ie as someone used to dealing with knowledge, Luke has gone to great length to be historically accurate - to present the facts as they shold be presented.

Luke's gospel scores for other reasons too. He demonstrates the importance of prayer by showing JEsus praying at the great moments of His life. Also, he overturns the old conventions by allowing an true acknowledgement of the role of women in the story; it is Luke who tells of the birth from MAry's point of view, Luke who who tells of Elizabeth and of Anna. It is Luke also who portrays with the greatest of skill MArtha and MAry, and also Mary Magdalene.

Luke's gospel is also the gospel of universality, by which I mean that he shows that Jesus is for all people, without barrier or distincion (Luke, for instance, is the only gospel author who relates the tale of the good Samaritan - a tale that no-one should let slip from their mind).

I think I admire Luke because he saw Jesus take away the power of the scribes and pharisees, take away division ('There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus'), but it was Luke who was the apostle who saw that and made it clear. He helped give the faith to the world rather than to those who passed innumerable tests and satisfied man-made rules.

i zee. thanks for the share. i remain staunchly agnostic, but i do appreciate your enthusiasm and will manage to rise (for once) above the level of petty argument, nitpicking, and sarcasm. must be the benign influence of the virgen the guadalupe or the fact that you're such a damn nice person it feels truly wrong to act like a bitter jackass towards you. (not that i'm a bitter jackass at heart-- it's the hardboiled mask i wear in public). but anyway. the weekend calls with its temptations of debauchery and i must answer! have a good night.

And the same to you. Take care.

Steffan Freund

I bet SAINT Luke couldn't eat 50 eggs, though....

Despite his genius, I doubt he'd be able to see the point of eating 50 eggs. It doesn't sound like a very wise thing to attempt anyway.

edit: http://www.open2.net/sciencetechnolo...lhandluke.html