Dubstepforum.com

really? lol

wait that they were extra terrestrial in origin or that they were under the ice on neptunes moon?

hackman wrote:really? lol

wait that they were extra terrestrial in origin or that they were under the ice on neptunes moon?

Neither really.

They knew the Vogons were coming to destroy the earth and tried to tell humans but we mistook all their messages for tricks, such as jumping through hoops, so they left Earth.

tbh i wouldn't be surprised if dolphins knew more than they let on, they're so intelligent
and all that stuff about them saving humans from sharks

Yeah.

Pistonsbeneath wrote:aw cmon man 'most people grow out of it??'

that's bordering on calling me childish!

Sorry, "grow out of it" was definitely an unfair turn of phrase. "Move on", perhaps. I can obviously only speak for myself, but time was a major factor with me... when I was a teenager I felt I was in the dark about an awful lot and these ideas really made things "make sense" to me... as I've done more and more general reading about human existance, history and science I've realised that most of the things I was previously in the dark about are actually quite rational, predictable and often a little bit dull.

These days I try to only 'actively' believe in things that have been proven to me. So I don't particularly make life choices based on things like String Theory, though I like the neatness of the concept or Christianity, though I like their buildings... it strikes me that there are a lot of leaps of faith involved in becoming so zealous about things that lack clinical proof that one would write off anyone that disagrees in the manner that us "scientific sheep" have been written off in this thread. Not that faith is a bad thing... like I said, I've got a lot of respect for faiths; but I *hate* being accused of wilful ignorance or stupidity just because I choose not to agree.

As an aside: I watched about 20 minutes of that interview with the dude on the couch last night... I gave up when he said something like "Err, well, I haven't decided which names to give yet" - surely if people really believed this stuff they'd be screaming from the rooftops?? Once information is out it's out... the same goes for Stargates as Sextapes... if you've got information, leak it in the most gossip causing manner possible.. don't just sit on it and make tapes showing off about information you're "going to share"!?

out to Hackman and Parsons. Cldnt believe I read this last week lol. (ps. I dont buy the Telegraph)

Mysterious Snake Appears in painting of Queen-Elizabeth I

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/ ... eth-I.html

dreamizm wrote:out to Hackman and Parsons. Cldnt believe I read this last week lol. (ps. I dont buy the Telegraph)

Mysterious Snake Appears in painting of Queen-Elizabeth I

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/ ... eth-I.html

yeah saw this was going to post it but didn't bother

fucking crazy!

If i remember right- it was to be included as a symbol of "wisdom" and then rubbed out and replaced..

There's quite a few of those sort of stories about Elizabeth. The amount of symbolism in portraits of that period (and in fact, most periods) is stunning... royal portraits are some of my favourite pieces of work for it... you could spend your whole life researching all the messages in a work like the Rainbow Portrait. Amazing.

She truly was one of the first masters of spin!

magma wrote:There's quite a few of those sort of stories about Elizabeth. The amount of symbolism in portraits of that period (and in fact, most periods) is stunning... royal portraits are some of my favourite pieces of work for it... you could spend your whole life researching all the messages in a work like the Rainbow Portrait. Amazing.

She truly was one of the first masters of spin!

yes but none involving snakes, that is unheard of in british monarchist portraits if i'm not mistaken

hackman wrote:yes but none involving snakes, that is unheard of in british monarchist portraits if i'm not mistaken

Well, I wouldn't say I was an expert on British Monarchist painting, but I imagine you're probably right about that! I was just pointing out that it's not uncommon for Bess to have asked an artist to paint something out of his work.

She was obsessed with her image and it was known for fairly whacked out metaphors to appear in her portraits (in her most famous portrait she's grasping a rainbow, which is about as ambiguous as you get)... I'd take a guess that the artist intended this snake to represent something 'good' (wisdom, secret knowledge/intelligence, cunning, her spies, power etc) , but in the end they chickened out for fear some people would see it negatively.

She had an awful lot of priceless portraits destroyed because she wasn't happy with the overall 'message' they conveyed. This is a really good paper about her attitude to art and censorship that I found last year when I was reading up on her:

http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/Eliz ... pter_7.pdf

As with the rainbow in the Rainbow portrait... I think there are probably several likely explanations - I'm not sure one can really come to a definite meaning when discussing intensely symbolic art with no documentary backing created 500 years ago.

Either way, I'm going to go and see it... I love that era of art. There's a portrait of Bess in the National where she genuinely looks HOT.

magma wrote:the artist intended this snake to represent...secret knowledge/intelligence ...her spies, power

Yeh I wld go with this as wld imagine the portraits served as a strong form of propaganda during war-time

dreamizm wrote:

magma wrote:the artist intended this snake to represent...secret knowledge/intelligence ...her spies, power

Yeh I wld go with this as wld imagine the portraits served as a strong form of propaganda during war-time

And all the time, pretty much... despite genuinely seeming to try to "bring everyone together" (CoE reforms, freedom to worship etc) she was constantly at war with certain areas of society, especially militant Catholics supporting Mary Queen of Scots. Britain was completely mental in the 16th Century!

More well known, but she also guided Shakespeare's subjects quite a bit... it's no coincidence that everything in the world goes to shit for Macbeth when he murders the rightful King, for example. It's essentially propoganda to put people off revolution.

I can't see how a snake would be used to represent secret intelligence or spies
and the artists impression doesn't even look like a snake, more of a dragon, though that is the artist impression

hackman wrote:I can't see how a snake would be used to represent secret intelligence or spies
and the artists impression doesn't even look like a snake, more of a dragon, though that is the artist impression

Snakes are surely best known for their cunning and ability to camoflage themselves, aren't they? In fact, isn't the main character in Metal Gear Solid called Solid Snake because of his ability to hide himself?

Snakes have meant all kinds of things to all kinds of people:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(symbolism)

Edit, For instance in Chinese lore:

The person born in the year of snake is the wisest and most enigmatic of all. He/she can become a philosopher, a theologian, a political lizard or a wily financier. Such person is a thinker who also likes to live well. The snake - person loves books, music, clothes, and fine food; but with all his fondness for the good things of life, his innate elegance gives him a dislike for frivolities and foolish talk.

I'd say the head and neck look more like the Loch Ness Monster!

kay wrote:I'd say the head and neck look more like the Loch Ness Monster!

Message to Mary?

snakes symbolize reptilians

Queen Elizabeth was a reptillian.

parson wrote:snakes symbolize reptilians

innART
enough coincidences already
if the snake was to represent spies/intelligence some other monarch would have used it as well
stop trying to avoid what you know deep down is realy going on