(10-13-2024, 04:54 PM)Lynyrd Skynyrd Wrote: Are you mentally challenged? I linked the source, which in turn, links three supporting articles. I can help you find a text-to-speech program that will read all four sources to you.
The name of this forum is Deny Ignorance, but I notice some here that are embracing ignorance like it was their first cousin.
I think the problem is this isn't mentally challenging at all. This is drivel, and a waste of space. I'm dying for something entertaining,
my bad I shouldn't have posted anything at all. Your kind doesn't need fuel to become a machine of toxic exhaust, it's just your nature...
Edit - three lol, one link makes not three sources. I won't click an MSN link because "Microsoft".
(10-13-2024, 04:51 PM)Maxmars Wrote: Historical accounts and linguistic analyses seem to inform us that Christopher Columbus’s actual name was Cristoforo Colombo, an Italian name. This name was later anglicized to Christopher Columbus. In Spanish, his name was Cristóbal Colón, reflecting the influence of the Spanish language during his time in Spain. However, this name is also considered an adaptation or translation of his original Italian name, Cristoforo Colombo.
AI response information notes that Columbus himself referred to himself as “Colom” in some documents, which is closer to the Spanish “Colón” than the English “Columbus”. And additionally, historical records and older sources vary in their spellings of his name, including “Colombo”, “Colom”, and “Colón”.
He allegedly went to great lengths to change or modify any perception of his true roots. The reasons for this are mostly relevant to the social and cultural pressures of his world. The man was very driven to obscure much around his history, which might hint to some that he was a fame-seeking, credit hogging, and manipulative person... keen to create and maintain an air of 'daring, accomplished, and successful explorer.' Some might be offended and immediately protect a sense of illegitimacy to the claims. Others, driven by social and cultural biases, might cling to 'classic' legend accounts, rendering him into something he may never have been about...
Prejudice and bias can explain the need to make him seem 'generically' acceptable to people... as if social-acceptability changes anything... other than propaganda.
It is more and more likely that our basic understanding of this historical figure is largely a marketing construct... he may have never actually done much more than exploit political circumstances for personal gain, outright steal the results of the exploration of others, and was someone who adapted to political and cultural pressures - with great success.
Nevertheless the journeys and dangers he was willing to face to that end were impressive, and his courage was not in short order. Whether he actually 'discovered' anything will always be in question... but he did 'act', when others weren't so inclined.
Thank you so much for providing the information I find interesting in every topic. I don't know why you have the time to put this kind of thing out but I'm glad to read your entire lengthy post every time because you provide sufficient information as to seem important to the discussion where so many others just post a link and gesture at it like that's an intelligent input.
Thank you for your time. I appreciate it deeply.
