|
|
Post by Schwarzwald Magnus on Sept 1, 2018 20:17:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ellynmacg on Sept 1, 2018 22:25:46 GMT
Martin, thanks for posting that link. I found it very interesting--and surprising. Reminds me of Alistair Cooke's stories of the veterans of the Napoleonic Wars who would visit Winston Churchill's home and chuck baby Winston under the chin!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2018 22:34:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Sept 2, 2018 2:10:12 GMT
The Marquis de Lafayette supported the American revolution and was only 19 years old when he was promoted to General in the Continental Army.
|
|
|
|
Post by Schwarzwald Magnus on Sept 2, 2018 4:52:18 GMT
The Marquis de Lafayette supported the American revolution and was only 19 years old when he was promoted to General in the Continental Army. Not terribly unusual at that time since life expectancy was shorter and there was less to learn. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 7:00:47 GMT
The Marquis de Lafayette supported the American revolution and was only 19 years old when he was promoted to General in the Continental Army. Not terribly unusual at that time since life expectancy was shorter and there was less to learn. Actually there was more to learn. |
|
|
|
Post by Schwarzwald Magnus on Sept 2, 2018 7:01:35 GMT
Not terribly unusual at that time since life expectancy was shorter and there was less to learn. Actually there was more to learn. Care to back that up? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 7:06:38 GMT
Actually there was more to learn. Care to back that up? Do you really need too ? Think of what we know today, and what they knew back in those days. And then tell me that people who lived over 200 years ago did not have more to learn than we do And you can tell me how they did not have more to learn when they knew less about the world and universe than what we do. The only way they would have less to learn is if they knew more about the world and universe than we to today. And i am pretty sure that this is not the case. |
|
|
|
Post by Schwarzwald Magnus on Sept 2, 2018 7:11:20 GMT
Do you really need too ? Think of what we know today, and what they knew back in those days. And then tell me that people who lived over 200 years ago did not have more to learn than we do And you can tell me how they did not have more to learn when they knew less about the world and universe than what we do. The only way they would have less to learn is if they knew more about the world and universe than we to today. And i am pretty sure that this is not the case. Utter gibberish. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 7:14:06 GMT
Do you really need too ? Think of what we know today, and what they knew back in those days. And then tell me that people who lived over 200 years ago did not have more to learn than we do And you can tell me how they did not have more to learn when they knew less about the world and universe than what we do. The only way they would have less to learn is if they knew more about the world and universe than we to today. And i am pretty sure that this is not the case. Utter gibberish. And here we see a person with no argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Schwarzwald Magnus on Sept 2, 2018 7:17:15 GMT
And here we see a person with no argument. All you did was expound on your reasoning. There was no evidence on your part.
Did you know what you needed to do to become a doctor by the time of the Civil War? Compared to what it takes to become an MD today? On top of that, residency and such for years?
|
|
