Comments by "John Roberts" (@view1st) on "Knowledgia" channel.

  1. Quite a good historical account it would seem, but I do wish people wouldn't talk about the putative founder of Christianity as if he was a real historical figure. Why use him as a yardstick when someone we know to have existed for sure, someone like Rome's Julius Caesar or Greece's Alexander of Macedon, could have been used instead?
    1
  2. Why was Portugal neutral? Why should it not be?
    1
  3. I'm given to understand that the phrase has two meanings, one of which is the the one you object to and the other being the older, traditional meaning.
    1