JohnB

It is true and a bit odd. The great Pyramid Age of Egypt was circa 2,400 BC or some 600 years after the joining of the "Two Lands" under the Scorpion King (yes, there really was one. ) in about 3,000 BC. At this time the Egyptians only had a sort of proto pulley that wasn't much more than a groove in the rock. The earliest known wheels were actually potters wheels from Mesopotamia dating from 3,800 BC or so, it took a further 600 years before some bright spark thought of turning the potters wheel on its side and using an axle. Maybe his wheel fell off the bench and rolled down the hill, thus sparking the idea, we'll simply never know. But the wheel and cart appeared circa 3,200 BC. What is truly remarkable is that the Egyptians remained oblivious to the wheel and its incredible weapon of war, the Chariot for over 1,000 years. (However this could be due to a complete lack of horses in the region.) Horses and chariots were introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos invaders in about 1,800 BC, who then ruled northern Egypt as Pharoahs for 100 years or so. It was only after the descendants of the "original" Pharonic lines who held southern Egypt adopted the chariot and built them in large numbers were the kingdoms again united and the Hyksos rulers deposed. However, to directly answer your questions. About 3,200 BC and somewhere in the region of Mesopotamia.

What do Australia and Mc Donalds have in common? They're both run by red headed clowns.

I'm sorry SHA, but as we already have a number of members currently fulfilling their nefarious plots to rule the world, I will have to ask you to take a number and wait your turn. At the moment you are in the queue just behind "phi for all" and his plan for "gigantic levitating squid". However, do keep developing your plans as we don't know if iNows "Ant powered Earthquake machine" will pan out. If it fails to live up to expectations we can fit you in between the "Cattle Flatulence Volcano Maker" and the "Mutant Zombie Ladybugs". Cheers.

So Jon Stewart and the Daily Show are left wing? I just think he's hilarious. The first clip I ever saw was "Billions and Billions." Shows like this give me hope for American comedy.

"Punning 101" Check your spelling. Sorry SH3RLOCK. Thanks iNow.

Moriarty, we have a SH3LOCK here. Have you two met?

Something that may amuse you. The "Republic Debate" came up at work today. (As in should Australia become one.) I support the current Constitutional Monarchy. My reasons are simple; 1. It ain't broke, so don't fix it. 2. Oz has had 106 years of Civil peace. No Civil War, Insurrection, Troops on the streets, Reign of Terror, Military Coup or such nonsense, no Republic afaik can say the same. 3. The decision we make affects not just us, but our children and grandchildren so we have to be very sure before we mess with our system of government. The reasons given why we should change; 1. We'll feel better about ourselves. 2. The Egyptian President would meet our President at the airport rather than recieving the Prime Minister in his office. 3. It's been 100 years, time to try something new. I do so love a reasoned debate.

I'm having trouble with the above as it seems to imply that Liberalism is not Bigoted but I'm sure that wasn't what was meant. It's been my experience that all groups are bigoted somewhat against people not of their group. Certainly true but there's one question that Liberals can't seem to answer. "What logical or rational reason can be given for trying to fix something that isn't broken?". If there is one large difference I've noticed. *gets out broadest brush I can find* History shows us that societies rise and fall and all previous civilizations have fallen. Conservatives accept the fact (consciously or unconsciously) that our civilization may also fall and we should therefore be very careful about messing with it's structure. Liberals seem to have a belief that no matter how we tinker with it, our civilization won't fall. I doubt that anyone here would consider boarding an aircraft or crossing a bridge that was engineered on the "Let's tinker with it to make me feel better" principle. Social engineering is a far less precise and far more dangerous pursuit than Mechanical engineering. Dak, your post above clears things up for me. I won't delete the first part of my post in case you are currently answering it. Cheers.

To return to the OP topic. I've wondered similarly myself. I think it may be founded in the desire to prove superiority. From the extreme Right's POV, if they could actually prove the existence of God then they have a trump card, one that really can't be argued against. It would show that those opposed to them (ie the Left) are automatically wrong and therefore their opinions should be devalued. The extreme Left can't play that particular game, but if they could prove a link between Liberalism and intelligence then those opposed (ie the Right) are automatically less intelligent and therefore their opinions should be devalued. It's an attempt to demonstrate that "my" group is intrinsically superior to "your" group. Neither our arguments or our slogans are superior, but "we" are, simply because we belong to "our" group. In short, Tribalism. Different words but the same buttons get pushed. I guess it's a human thing. I wouldn't get too hung up on intelligence anyway, any con man will tell you that people of above adverage intelligence are far easier marks than John and Mary Adverage.

Sorry if this one has been used before. A cop is checking out the local "Lover's Lane" and notices a car parked all by itself so he walks up and raps on the window. The young man in the drivers seat puts down his book and rolls down the window. The cop then notices a young woman knitting in the back seat. Seeing as this seems unusual, he decides to quiz the driver. Cop; "Do you know where you are?" Man; "Lover's Lane". Cop; "What are you doing?" Man; "Reading a book." Cop; "How old are you?" Man; "20". Cop; "And the young lady, what's she doing?" Man; "As you can see, Officer, she's knitting". Cop; "And how old is she?" Man; "In 23 minutes, she'll be 18."

Hmm, someone who does hold intelligent conversations with cucumbers. Well, i guess it's an improvement. Thanks Phi, I lurked for a while before joining. I figured that any group with a "rhyming thread" that goes for 8 pages had to have a sense of humour. I was also impressed with the way that even obvious loonies were treated by the mods and members.

Hi, I"m John. *chorus* "Hello John". I found your forum by a link from a totally forgettable idiot (really I've forgotten who it was and you've since banned him anyway) on another forum and liked what I saw. I'm interested in most areas of science, so you'll probably see my stupid question all over the place. Mainly I'm interested in anomalies. I think that we learn more from them than from things that fit in perfectly. Unfortunately, the whole concept of anomalies seems to divide in most forums into two groups; Those who could conclude that aliens built Chephren's Pyramid by extrapolating the dimensions of a half eaten bun and those who are so ultra-conservative that any suggestion that orthodox theory may not be perfect brings them out with torches burning and loud cries of "Heresy". Neither of these groups could apparently have an intelligent conversation with a cucumber. Sorry if that sounds pompous, but if I'm wrong, I'd like to be told why rather than just being told I'm wrong and be expected to believe it. Don't worry, you don't have another Adam or ExtraSense on your hands. Just a curious individual.