>>1969
>You're really trying that? Scroll through 4zom/x/ archives, read some basic histories of the area and worship thereof.
>UHHH like, just google schizo archives of basket weaving forums yourself bro and I am sure one faggot (me) will link very credible ((( christogemea.org ))) zionist website there
Burden of proofs is on you, faggot. Another christkike fail.
>How does it matter? Ah, catacombs, still irrelevant.
I accept your defeat with grace and dignity. Now that we confirm that elite christkikes do hide their own history that they accuse others of, we close the topic about muh child sacrifice permanently.
>Oh, so children were burned to death
The point we don't even know their age as they been fucking cremated retard, which is common practice amon literally every single nation in bronze age.
>You don't have contraevidence
The burden of proofs is still on you to prove such faggy jewish claims, retard. The only evidence you offer is you being an ESL shitskin who doesn't belong to USA. But fine, I will provide my condescension and will provide this link, since you most likely will just link the regurgations of oxford university anyway - https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100217114644.htm
>A new study may finally lay to rest the millennia-old conjecture that the ancient empire of Carthage regularly sacrificed its youngest citizens. An examination of the remains of Carthaginian children revealed that most infants perished prenatally or very shortly after birth and were unlikely to have lived long enough to be sacrificed.
>The findings -- based on the first published analysis of the skeletal remains found in Carthaginian burial urns -- refute claims from as early as the 3rd century BCE of systematic infant sacrifice at Carthage that remain a subject of debate among biblical scholars and archaeologists
>"Our study emphasizes that historical scientists must consider all evidence when deciphering ancient societal behavior," Schwartz said. "The idea of regular infant sacrifice in Carthage is not based on a study of the cremated remains, but on instances of human sacrifice reported by a few ancient chroniclers, inferred from ambiguous Carthaginian inscriptions, and referenced in the Old Testament.
>Schwartz and his coauthors tested the all-sacrifice claim by examining the skeletal remains from 348 urns for developmental markers that would determine the children's age at death. Schwartz and Houghton recorded skull, hip, long bone, and tooth measurements that indicated most of the children died in their first year with a sizeable number aged only two to five months, and that at least 20 percent of the sample was prenatal.
>Schwartz and Houghton then selected teeth from 50 individuals they concluded had died before or shortly after birth and sent them to Macchiarelli and Bondioli, who examined the samples for a neonatal line. This opaque band forms in human teeth between the interruption of enamel production at birth and its resumption within two weeks of life. Identification of this line is commonly used to determine an infant's age at death. Macchiarelli and Bondioli found a neonatal line in the teeth of 24 individuals, meaning that the remaining 26 individuals died prenatally or within two weeks of birth, the researchers reported.
>The contents of the urns also dispel the possibility of mass infant sacrifice, Schwartz and Houghton noted. No urn contained enough skeletal material to suggest the presence of more than two complete individuals. Although many urns contained some superfluous fragments belonging to additional children, the researchers concluded that these bones remained from previous cremations and may have inadvertently been mixed with the ashes of subsequent cremations.
>Schwartz and his colleagues conclude that the high incidence of prenate and infant mortality are consistent with modern data on stillbirths, miscarriages, and infant death. They write that if conditions in other ancient cities held in Carthage, young and unborn children could have easily succumbed to the diseases and sanitary shortcomings found in such cities as Rome and Pompeii.
and here is another link with oxford heresy also input at the end -
https://www.archaeology.wiki/blog/2014/01/24/did-carthaginians-sacrificed-their-children/
>Four years ago a group of scientists published a paper saying the cremated remains did not indicate infant sacrifice. Even now, a group of researchers that studied the same bones argue that the earlier study got the science of burnt infant bones wrong, and therefore greatly overestimated the number who died before birth rather than being murdered in infancy.
Only the ((( Paolo Xella ))) and ((( Josephine Crawley Quinn ))) from the ((( oxford university ))), judging only on incorrect interpretation of iconography alone, suggest that it was offering of the few highest elite class as an act of supreme sacrifice for the benefit of nation. I know that as kike worshipper yourself you won't phantom the concept of kikes lying to slander their millenniums old neighbours, the ones they slandered multiple times in ((( Deuteronomy ))) already, but they do lie and slander them to this day.
While I don't deny the possibility that SOME children MAY have been 'sacrificed' by some elite degenerates who thought they do great favour to the nation by giving away something so very valuable to them, as did many other nations during bronze age - the fact is such conduct is actually condemned by both citizens and the pristhood of the state by the time Carthage actually become an independent city, which is why I brought Tyre as it's ethnic and cultural ancestor that condemned the killing of their own family members.
Why does it all matter when YOUR kike god literally demand his follower kike Abraham to kill his son? Or when another kike Jephthah killed his own little girl daughter and yahweh didn't prevent or punish it, but ACCEPTED the offering?
This whole child sacrifice shit reeks an insecure projections of a christnigger. I am sure you will find a cunning way to move the goalpost again, shitskin kikespic faggot.
>You have no evidence contradicting the historical accounts which were extant not only in Hebrew tradition but in many different cultures.
Oh really? Please, if you're not so full of shit faggot you could provide any? Maybe you're referring to Roman propagandist who wrote utter bullshit during punic wars as anti-carthage propaganda:
>“There was in their city a bronze image of Cronus, extending its hands, palms up and sloping towards the ground, so that each of the children when placed thereon rolled down and fell into a sort of gaping pit filled with fire.”
Despite the fact that there ABSOLUTE ZERO evidence or even a HINT of remains of such statue ever was or even had plans to be constructed, or the fact that Cronus was never venerated in Carthage but instead was worshipped in Rome and Greece instead? Go ahead, don't shit your pants like you did a dozen of times already.
>>Tyre...paleo-vegans
>No evidence.
Learn2read nigger, never did I call them vegans, just that they already condemned needless sacrifices unless they were used for food.
>Nothing like what you claim
They told Alexander to fuck off when he asked them to do sacrifice at their altar, where is the contradiction? Tyre wanted a complete independence. The whole story could be a farce, and there is zero evidence that "Alexander's representatives were killed and thrown in to ocean". The Tyre hold immense strategic importance as the main porn at the east shores of Mediterranean sea which Alexander tried to conquer with great efforts and immense fleet + troops loss because he wanted to use it as main port to destroy Persia sea dominance and eventually overthrown them so the little story could be just an mythological excuse to sound justified.
This is what the results google gives regarding the whole myth
>The city of Tyre, situated on an island, refused Alexander's request to enter and sacrifice to Melqart (the Tyrian equivalent of Heracles) within their temples. They offered him the option to sacrifice on the mainland in Old Tyre, but this was a symbolic gesture that held no strategic importance for Alexander. This refusal led to a prolonged siege by Alexander.
>Tanit is Athena
Still not the same Goddess and both different roles.
Athena is the Goddess of wisdom, strategic warfare, and handicrafts.
Tanit is the Goddess fertility, motherhood, and the moon. More close to Aphrodite, Artemis and Demeter.
None of the Goddesses is Tanit either way and it was for you to prove that Tanit SYMBOL was shown in a good light on massmedia or Hollywood - which you absolutely failed, so the whole effort of you calling her an Athena is you desperate trying to use red herring for goalposts.
>quotes erodotus for red herring
>he says nothing about Athena being Tanit
>Tanit hasn't even been mentioned once
>miserable shit your pants once again
>declare victory anyway by saying "try again"
Peak brownoid christkike cunning and intelligence. Change your pants already, you stink.
>Really?
So where is the counter argument? Just saying smug one-word won't deboonks anything of what I said. No source ever depict tanit as mere crescent and moon but as lady with shrug shoulders, meanwhile crescent and moon is mere associated with her and it mostly served as emblem of heaven or divinity.
>>Why does Hollywood depict them as demons, then try to subversively redeem them to the public.
You haven't provided even a single source of popular media created by jews who does exactly what you're proposing you ginormous faggot. The burden of proof requested you to find a single media that depict a deity they call either Tanit or Baal in positive light, but you don't even showing evidence of ANY media to exist in context that you're proposing right now. You are disingenuous liar.
><Lies
><Curses
John 4:22
Another christkike lie BTFO, another BAAL victory.
You're the clown in the image you posted as I hand you permanent reddit certificate. But even such makeup won't hide the fact that you're still a shitskin disgenic jew worshipping retarded faggot. Baal Godan sees everything. Perhaps you should stayed on r/thedonald, there are plenty of cathspics.