Neanderthal News

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:02 pm

Man, I hope he doesn't let any of those rodents get away.

Roxanne · Post by **Roxanne** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:09 pm

You're right nothing worse than a mouthy mouse.

Worse yet consider their confusion millenia down the road trying to figure out when, if and how they diverged from common lab mice.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:18 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... ute120.xml

Dr Simon Underdown, an anthropologist at Oxford Brookes University, insists, however, that the new research will revolutionise the way people look at Neanderthals.

He said: “This research should finally blow away the last vestiges of the Neanderthal as a dull-witted cave man.”

More about the Language Gene - from Archaeologica News. You folks will NOT believe the stupid picture of Neandertal in this article.

fossiltrader · Post by **fossiltrader** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:53 pm

Does anyone here know anything about archaeological research???
For a start many here talk only in headlines stop for a minute and rethink what you are posting.
Research is not posting the latest (fact) posted on the net i cannot believe this thank god for the mythical club at least that club contains trained observers and researchers.
Several years ago i did research into cliche formations being fascinated by this study i spent several years observing cliches forming in chat rooms i see the same type of thing happening in here.
Research takes time it will not be done by reading internet posts for instance my latest paper will be on spandrals this may appear to some pointless but there is a good reason for my study its called research.

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:39 pm

Does anyone here know anything about archaeological research???

Of course someone here does knows all about archaeological research, FT. You do. You have been telling us as much for the last few months. You must be good at something other than grammar and spelling, right? Instead of bitching, please make yourself useful by locating the following scientific article, and post it here after doing so. We have been searching for it, but have only found breaking news reports instead:

Krause J. et al. Curr. Biol. 17, doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.10.008

This is a Forum for ideas and not a web-based archaeological journal. There is no need to be a "trained observer" or "researcher" to submit valuable input here and further, as many have found, crappy input gets shot down very fast anyway. If your study involves research then pony up with relevant articles or at least decent input. I'm sure you have a ton of material at your fingertips other than research on spandrals.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:52 pm

I agree with you 100% FT - and I agree with Cogs as well. This is not research, it is a discussion forum and so none our posts on this forum must withstand a review by currently active archaeologists. Neverthess, we do have a form of peer review which prevents this forum from becoming a total farce. But I for one, don't mind you reminding us to think about our posts.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:52 pm

this thank god for the mythical club at least that club contains trained observers and researchers.

You're welcome to them, FT. As Cogs correctly points out this is a forum for the discussion of ideas....not the awarding of PH. D.'s in archaeology.

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:01 pm

Everybody has a point here. They're all right. But just chill. You all know I love a good debate, but just keep it civil. {That was me announcing I'm back} MWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

john · Post by **john** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:18 pm

"Proof is an oxymoron."

Dispute me that.

Its all about the travelling.

John

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:25 am

fossiltrader wrote:Does anyone here know anything about archaeological research???
For a start many here talk only in headlines stop for a minute and rethink what you are posting.
Research is not posting the latest (fact) posted on the net i cannot believe this thank god for the mythical club at least that club contains trained observers and researchers.
Several years ago i did research into cliche formations being fascinated by this study i spent several years observing cliches forming in chat rooms i see the same type of thing happening in here.
Research takes time it will not be done by reading internet posts for instance my latest paper will be on spandrals this may appear to some pointless but there is a good reason for my study its called research.

Hello FT. So you've done actual research on worn out phrases? That's pretty interesting. You might share those research results with us sometime, even though it has nothing to do with Archaeology.

On the other hand, maybe you made a "typo" when writing (twice) and you meant to say clique. It would have to be a typo since you researched it. Right? What research methodology did you use? From what hypothesis did you begin? I would like to know.

Enough of the sarcasm. A clique is a closed, restricted, and selective group. None of that applies to this forum. I have personally invited you to drop the constant insults and the pretentiousness and just post as we all do. Share thoughts and learn from others. We don't always agree with one another but we all learn a little bit every day. And we respect each other, even when we think the other person is wrong.

I'll extend that invitation again FT. Despite the fact that you have done everything possible to alienate this forum, I think you can still drop this crap and find a degree of acceptance.

Lastly, if you just want to marginalize yourself by coming here and making provocative statements, hurling insults, and pretending to be somebody you're not, I'll personally not respond to you again. Ever.

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:07 am

This isn't a reasearch forum FT it's a get together to discuss archaeology (amongst other things)!
For all that the 'club' may have trained observers, etc, its historical record for accuracy is not very good actually, and many advances have been made of course by amateurs.
Take the Hobbits, either the majority of learned papers are by people who have not examined the original material, like us, or your trained observers seem incapable of seeing the same things, they can't even agree if this is a new species!

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:35 am

Hey, Dig.

Feeling better?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 12:27 pm

Much, thanks Min. I'm up and about, and bored rigid. Awaiting clinical results to see if I'm clear or need any further therapy but the signs are all good, so far.

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 12:28 pm

FT, it seems like an educated fellow such as yourself would have learned about punctuation. Your crap is hard to read. Research it! I hope your research papers are properly punctuated.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:28 pm

Digit wrote:Much, thanks Min. I'm up and about, and bored rigid. Awaiting clinical results to see if I'm clear or need any further therapy but the signs are all good, so far.

That's great news. Have a warm beer on me!

Archaeologica.org

Neanderthal News

neanderthal/fox2

Headlines.

Re: Headlines.