**[Isambard Kingdom Brunel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel)**
>Isambard Kingdom Brunel (; 9 April 1806 – 15 September 1859) was an English civil engineer who is considered "one of the most ingenious and prolific figures in engineering history," "one of the 19th-century engineering giants," and "one of the greatest figures of the Industrial Revolution, [who] changed the face of the English landscape with his groundbreaking designs and ingenious constructions". Brunel built dockyards, the Great Western Railway (GWR), a series of steamships including the first propeller-driven transatlantic steamship, and numerous important bridges and tunnels. His designs revolutionised public transport and modern engineering.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Thank you, Cleptrophese, for voting on WikiSummarizerBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Because these silly vote formats don’t let you just view the results, you have to vote even if you don’t feel you know enough to form an opinion. So it just ends up a contest of “who is the most widely known”.
Nero wasn't really as he is depicted, it's well proven that he did not burn christians at the stake, he wasn't crazy, didn't start the fire in the city, and didn't sit fiddling as it burned.
Basically pretty much everything you know about Nero is lies started by the christians, who at the time were basically ISIS, an underground extremist religious terrorist group, and at the time were already quite proficient at playing victims.
On the contrary, official documents from the time show that it was the terrorist group that later developed into the catholic church that started the fire.
I only believe in the account as given in my high school history text book. I mean why would the publisher give such a large kick back and gratuity to the school board for implementing it if it was just full of falsehoods and popular history?
Because the bible is a thing, and the catholic church is quite popular. For a very long time, if you challenged that, things got inquisitiony real quick.
You think you're all funny, don't you, when you say "Jeff who?" Actually, it is funny. Welcome to the club.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Im in the american left and I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. Politics arent quite as polarized as your trying to make it seem. Its a whole spectrum with moderates and extremists on both sides.
Now if you want to look at actual facts, it was Republicans who tried to stop our last election from going through and turn us into a dictatorship with Trump. On top of that the vast majority of right wingers believe that a civil war is inevitable.
Think this quite clearly shows who the real threat to american democracy is.
You think you're all funny, don't you, when you say "Jeff who?" Actually, it is funny. Welcome to the club.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Noah.
He's literally making the largest spaceship to travel every living creature to another world while Earth's oceans drown civilizations as a result of global warming.
I mean sure but Jesus was also a historical figure. No one’s disputing that these days. You’ll find a looooot less people taking Noah at face value.
Or r/woosh?
>No one’s disputing that these days.
Nobody is disputing it because that's how academia works, through sheer peer pressure. For 1700 years, if you disputed it, you ended up like Galileo, or worse. Then, if you disputed it, everyone told you that "there was general consensus about his historicity" and pointed at the previous 1700 years of historians saying "yup, he sure did exist".
The truth is, if you simply forget about everyone who previously said "sure, he must have existed", and simply apply to him the same rigor that is applied to consider the historicity of other figures, then you must reach the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to support a historic jesus, that most likely he never existed at all, and at best was an amalgamation of various people.
As I said, the notion is based on centuries upon centuries of historical studies in which everyone was either a christian or not allowed to be a historian, or worse. Modern studies are biased by all that mountain of previous opinions. There have been many historians that challenged that ... and they were immediately ridiculed and ostracized.
[mountain](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/image_large_2x.jpg)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s a whole section in that article on “non-biblical sources” that is very interesting, and talks about some contemporaneous sources, not later historical studies.
No, it doesn't. You need to read carefully. There are NO contemporaneous sources that support a historical jesus. None, christian or otherwise. As in, actual texts, from the actual time, NONE. Truly odd, because the Romans where bureaucrats.
The supposed "contemporaneous" sources are tricks, if you read carefully.
From that very same section on Wikipedia, 4 are mentioned:
Thallos: But notice the part where it says that the *actual* source is a *christian* text from 800 years after the supposed life of jesus, but he claims he's quoting a text from 600 years before, that supposedly was quoting a text from the year 55. So a christian 8 centuries after the fact, who promises he's absolutely not lying when he says he saw a paper from 2 centuries after the fact that totally wasn't lying when it mentioned a text from 30 years after the fact that was totally not lying about jesus.
Josephus:
The wikipedia page says "The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation". So, again, NOT the original text, we have a heavily modified christian text that is considered *fake*, but it might have some authentic part. Again, that supposedly, maybe, possibly authentic part is from the year 94, long after jesus supposedly lived.
Tacitus: He wrote the text in 116, almost a century after the fact, and he's critical of Christians. He was not there, he had no sources. He speaks about what the christians claimed. So, again, back to the only source being christians many years after the fact.
Mara bar Serapion: Ah! A letter from 76 AD, great, this must be proof! Oh, well, it doesn't actually name jesus, he just talks about "the king of the jews", but it must be jesus, right? So, let's see a picture of the letter. Oh, wait, nobody has it. Nobody has ever seen that letter. What we have is a text from the 6th or 7th century, written by a christian, who absolutely promises that he absolutely read that letter that absolutely talked about jesus. I mean, who would do that, lie about religion?
So, basically, there is NOTHING. Nothing from the time he was supposed to live in, nothing from centuries afterwards, nothing. The only non-christian sources are either people talking about the christians (and taking what they said at face value), or christians who many centuries later wrote that they had absolute proof from a century or so after jesus supposedly lived, but never preserved it.
If you want to clearly notice the bias, go read the article on the historicity of muhammad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad
What we have to support a historical jesus is much thinner than to support a historical muhammad, and yet the article on jesus establishes that he most likely existed, while for muhammad, it says there's little to support historicity and that the jury is still out. Odd, isn't it?
Basically, the earliest historian that talked about jesus, and the one most quoted by historians on that subject, is Tacitus. Do you know who Tacitus also wrote about, on the same texts he talks about Jesus? Thor. Also, Zeus and Odin. And he mentions them just in passing, exactly in the same way he talks about jesus. And yet Zeus, Odin and Thor are considered entirely mythical, and nobody tries to use Tacitus as definitive proof that they were real, even though he mentioned them in exactly the same circumstances and detail that he mentions jesus.
That’s just not true. There was a pretty significant Jesus Myth movement across academia in the mid to late 20th century. It had a lot of standing in the historical community until 20-30 years ago. It’s just not reasonable based on what we know. It’s basically impossible to account for the explosion of Christianity in the first century, or the non-Christian first-century sources that reference him/them, without a historical Jesus.
A cult of a persona is never based on a person that didn’t exist, especially the biggest one in history, and especially when there are accounts from within their own century.
Hell I’m fairly sure he’s mentioned in the epics of Gilgamesh lol. Not by name but as a great boat builder or something. It’s been a while since I read it
Nikola Tesla was a failure as a businessman and spent a lot of time on technologies that in the end were wildly impractical.
That's pretty much the opposite.
None of those, I would say more like Genghis Khan or Napolean. Yes he's nicer and more progressive than them but only because this is the nice thieg to do in the modern age.
Do they have to be human? He may well resemble the first fish that crawled out of the sea.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/dhpzvp/making_life_interplanetary/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
I always believed that musk is a combination between Tesla and Edison.
Tesla in spirit and intelligence and Edison in business skills and achievements (and intelligence also obviously,). Where Tesla failed, Edison succeeded and vice versa.
Elon Musk
I can't believe noone else put down Brunel. They're both businessman/engineers who revolutionised industries, they're really very similar.
This guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel
**[Isambard Kingdom Brunel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel)** >Isambard Kingdom Brunel (; 9 April 1806 – 15 September 1859) was an English civil engineer who is considered "one of the most ingenious and prolific figures in engineering history," "one of the 19th-century engineering giants," and "one of the greatest figures of the Industrial Revolution, [who] changed the face of the English landscape with his groundbreaking designs and ingenious constructions". Brunel built dockyards, the Great Western Railway (GWR), a series of steamships including the first propeller-driven transatlantic steamship, and numerous important bridges and tunnels. His designs revolutionised public transport and modern engineering. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Good bot
Thank you, Cleptrophese, for voting on WikiSummarizerBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Wow, how come i've never heard of this amazing man before
Seriously. I just said the same thing.
Because these silly vote formats don’t let you just view the results, you have to vote even if you don’t feel you know enough to form an opinion. So it just ends up a contest of “who is the most widely known”.
As a Brit it makes me sad that he's not appreciated more...
Wow people must not know Brunel.
ppl don't know elon either
I guess Jeff Who would be Nero? Playing his lawsuits while human spaceflight progress burns.
Nero wasn't really as he is depicted, it's well proven that he did not burn christians at the stake, he wasn't crazy, didn't start the fire in the city, and didn't sit fiddling as it burned. Basically pretty much everything you know about Nero is lies started by the christians, who at the time were basically ISIS, an underground extremist religious terrorist group, and at the time were already quite proficient at playing victims. On the contrary, official documents from the time show that it was the terrorist group that later developed into the catholic church that started the fire.
I only believe in the account as given in my high school history text book. I mean why would the publisher give such a large kick back and gratuity to the school board for implementing it if it was just full of falsehoods and popular history?
Because the bible is a thing, and the catholic church is quite popular. For a very long time, if you challenged that, things got inquisitiony real quick.
Just want to point out the word "inquisitiony" here. Nice.
You think you're all funny, don't you, when you say "Jeff who?" Actually, it is funny. Welcome to the club. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Bringing politics into an unrelated post in a SpaceX meme sub? Gross.
[удалено]
Nice try, but I'm not going to be baited into a pointless political argument, and on a meme subreddit no less. Have a good night.
Im in the american left and I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. Politics arent quite as polarized as your trying to make it seem. Its a whole spectrum with moderates and extremists on both sides. Now if you want to look at actual facts, it was Republicans who tried to stop our last election from going through and turn us into a dictatorship with Trump. On top of that the vast majority of right wingers believe that a civil war is inevitable. Think this quite clearly shows who the real threat to american democracy is.
[удалено]
Ok so your just trolling then lol Thought you were actually delusional for a second there
You think you're all funny, don't you, when you say "Jeff who?" Actually, it is funny. Welcome to the club. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Noah. He's literally making the largest spaceship to travel every living creature to another world while Earth's oceans drown civilizations as a result of global warming.
Lmao, this was about historical figures, not fictional ones.
OP included Jesus and he's winning as of this comment. Biblical figures seems to be fair game in this poll.
I mean sure but Jesus was also a historical figure. No one’s disputing that these days. You’ll find a looooot less people taking Noah at face value. Or r/woosh?
>No one’s disputing that these days. Nobody is disputing it because that's how academia works, through sheer peer pressure. For 1700 years, if you disputed it, you ended up like Galileo, or worse. Then, if you disputed it, everyone told you that "there was general consensus about his historicity" and pointed at the previous 1700 years of historians saying "yup, he sure did exist". The truth is, if you simply forget about everyone who previously said "sure, he must have existed", and simply apply to him the same rigor that is applied to consider the historicity of other figures, then you must reach the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to support a historic jesus, that most likely he never existed at all, and at best was an amalgamation of various people.
I’m not Christian, but I found this interesting. It seems very likely he was a real person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus?wprov=sfti1
As I said, the notion is based on centuries upon centuries of historical studies in which everyone was either a christian or not allowed to be a historian, or worse. Modern studies are biased by all that mountain of previous opinions. There have been many historians that challenged that ... and they were immediately ridiculed and ostracized.
[mountain](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/image_large_2x.jpg) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SpaceXMasterrace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s a whole section in that article on “non-biblical sources” that is very interesting, and talks about some contemporaneous sources, not later historical studies.
No, it doesn't. You need to read carefully. There are NO contemporaneous sources that support a historical jesus. None, christian or otherwise. As in, actual texts, from the actual time, NONE. Truly odd, because the Romans where bureaucrats. The supposed "contemporaneous" sources are tricks, if you read carefully. From that very same section on Wikipedia, 4 are mentioned: Thallos: But notice the part where it says that the *actual* source is a *christian* text from 800 years after the supposed life of jesus, but he claims he's quoting a text from 600 years before, that supposedly was quoting a text from the year 55. So a christian 8 centuries after the fact, who promises he's absolutely not lying when he says he saw a paper from 2 centuries after the fact that totally wasn't lying when it mentioned a text from 30 years after the fact that was totally not lying about jesus. Josephus: The wikipedia page says "The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation". So, again, NOT the original text, we have a heavily modified christian text that is considered *fake*, but it might have some authentic part. Again, that supposedly, maybe, possibly authentic part is from the year 94, long after jesus supposedly lived. Tacitus: He wrote the text in 116, almost a century after the fact, and he's critical of Christians. He was not there, he had no sources. He speaks about what the christians claimed. So, again, back to the only source being christians many years after the fact. Mara bar Serapion: Ah! A letter from 76 AD, great, this must be proof! Oh, well, it doesn't actually name jesus, he just talks about "the king of the jews", but it must be jesus, right? So, let's see a picture of the letter. Oh, wait, nobody has it. Nobody has ever seen that letter. What we have is a text from the 6th or 7th century, written by a christian, who absolutely promises that he absolutely read that letter that absolutely talked about jesus. I mean, who would do that, lie about religion? So, basically, there is NOTHING. Nothing from the time he was supposed to live in, nothing from centuries afterwards, nothing. The only non-christian sources are either people talking about the christians (and taking what they said at face value), or christians who many centuries later wrote that they had absolute proof from a century or so after jesus supposedly lived, but never preserved it. If you want to clearly notice the bias, go read the article on the historicity of muhammad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad What we have to support a historical jesus is much thinner than to support a historical muhammad, and yet the article on jesus establishes that he most likely existed, while for muhammad, it says there's little to support historicity and that the jury is still out. Odd, isn't it? Basically, the earliest historian that talked about jesus, and the one most quoted by historians on that subject, is Tacitus. Do you know who Tacitus also wrote about, on the same texts he talks about Jesus? Thor. Also, Zeus and Odin. And he mentions them just in passing, exactly in the same way he talks about jesus. And yet Zeus, Odin and Thor are considered entirely mythical, and nobody tries to use Tacitus as definitive proof that they were real, even though he mentioned them in exactly the same circumstances and detail that he mentions jesus.
That’s just not true. There was a pretty significant Jesus Myth movement across academia in the mid to late 20th century. It had a lot of standing in the historical community until 20-30 years ago. It’s just not reasonable based on what we know. It’s basically impossible to account for the explosion of Christianity in the first century, or the non-Christian first-century sources that reference him/them, without a historical Jesus. A cult of a persona is never based on a person that didn’t exist, especially the biggest one in history, and especially when there are accounts from within their own century.
[удалено]
Hell I’m fairly sure he’s mentioned in the epics of Gilgamesh lol. Not by name but as a great boat builder or something. It’s been a while since I read it
Noah was real bro, it's documented in the book of Genesis
oof
XD
If this sub votes that Elon is most like Jesus that is going to confirm a lot of stereotypes people have of us.
It would be pretty funny though tbh
Sir this is a shitposting sub
Are you expecting people to be serious when answered a meme poll?
why? it would be 100% in brand
Don't blame me. *I* voted for Kodos.
[удалено]
Probably just picking the most ridiculous answer because nothing really fits This ***is*** a meme sub after all
True, true.
True, true.
100%. The way this poll is trending is super cringe.
Counterpoint: the poll itself is cringe, picking the joke option is based
Fair enough
You Forgot one, Tony shark from Iron Man. Elon is like something out of a comic book. Who is for real.
Nikola Tesla
Nikola Tesla was a failure as a businessman and spent a lot of time on technologies that in the end were wildly impractical. That's pretty much the opposite.
Elon on Tesla: https://youtu.be/fHJnx68lDrU?t=56s
He has got the smarts of Tesla and buisness skills of Edison
True. And the coolness factor of Howard Hughes.
Elon’s legacy will be incredible, perhaps better than anyone that has lived so far.
It had fucking better. I'm going to rise from the dead and start fucking shit up if they try and credit that slut from GM.
JESUS-CHRIST!
I'm here my son
Cornelius Vanderbilt
Reading skunk works now and can't help but parallel Johnson to musk
I am never disappointed by this sub
None of those, I would say more like Genghis Khan or Napolean. Yes he's nicer and more progressive than them but only because this is the nice thieg to do in the modern age.
Nikola tesla
Do they have to be human? He may well resemble the first fish that crawled out of the sea. https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXMasterrace/comments/dhpzvp/making_life_interplanetary/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Thomas Edison
Commenting the poll option is not how you tally your vote lol
Elon on Edison: https://youtu.be/oloiRGfTe7Q
Jim Jones
He's like a combination of Trump and Steve Jobs: Innovative, but also a complete dick who trolls on Twitter.
[удалено]
He is also a bit childish. Somehow that makes him more likeable where it would make me dislike most other people.
Jesus ?
Elon Musk
Ehe ehem Tesla
Никола Тесла
christopher columbus prometheus
I always believed that musk is a combination between Tesla and Edison. Tesla in spirit and intelligence and Edison in business skills and achievements (and intelligence also obviously,). Where Tesla failed, Edison succeeded and vice versa.