Andrew Collins on Gobekli Tepe sister site

[Tiompan]

Totem is based on an Algonquin word ,now used world wide .
Taboo is based on a Fijian word , now used world wide .

[Simon21]

I have no idea who or what Jack Fuller is or why he should want to be buried in a pyramid - obviously a very rich man its a wonder his relatives didn't complain about the waste.

Again pointless argy-bargy. Certainly EP has some strange ideas. But instead of constantly criticsing everyone else and occasionally coming a cropper why not start you own threads on your subject of interest? Are you interested in archaeology or just arguing with people who are? If Ep wants to say there are henges in America let him, where's the harm? I think I know what he is getting at.

However as said earlier prehistoric archaeology does not greatly interest me - worthy subject though it is. To me without some textual background and context everything is too much up in the air.

I have beren told for example in the Aust Museum no less that the bunyp legends come from prehistoric animals who (going by remains) fell down sink holes in the Nullarbor. The cries of these animals amplified by the cave structures were interpreted as being those of monsters. Hence bunyips. Could be so one supposes but ultimately what does that tell us and who still cares?

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi simon -

The circular earthworks here in Ohio, where Whitehawk taught the constellations at the fall bred dance,
are certainly not "henges".
If that word is used it is only going to end up with some very confused nuts trying to construct imaginary Celtic empires here.
Now perhaps tiompan wants to construct imaginary Native American empires in Scotland,
but all of that is besides the point.

What tiompan desperately wants to demonstrate is that I do not know what I am talking about,
and that I am stupid and ignorant.
Having proved that to his satisfaction,
he thinks he can safely ignore the geological data for recent comet and asteroid impacts.

As I pointed out to you earlier,
having thoroughly worked though other historical matters before
where the truth was hard to accept,
I am used to this, as it comes with the territory.
It used to take around 15 years,
although in some cases that is now moving towards 8 to 10 years.

Your pre-historic and my proto-historical may not match up exactly.

I will note that impact events are a really useful tool for anthropological work,
and that the longer they do not exist for tiompan,
the farther behind he will become.

[Simon21]

Hi simon -

The circular earthworks here in Ohio, where Whitehawk taught the constellations at the fall bred dance,
are certainly not "henges".
If that word is used it is only going to end up with some very confused nuts trying to construct imaginary Celtic empires here.
Now perhaps tiompan wants to construct imaginary Native American empires in Scotland,
but all of that is besides the point.

What tiompan desperately wants to demonstrate is that I do not know what I am talking about,
and that I am stupid and ignorant.
Having proved that to his satisfaction,
he thinks he can safely ignore the geological data for recent comet and asteroid impacts.

As I pointed out to you earlier,
having thoroughly worked though other historical matters before
where the truth was hard to accept,
I am used to this, as it comes with the territory.
It used to take around 15 years,
although in some cases that is now moving towards 8 to 10 years.

Your pre-historic and my proto-historical may not match up exactly.

I will note that impact events are a really useful tool for anthropological work,
and that the longer they do not exist for tiompan,
the farther behind he will become.

Truth is a highly charged word and needs to be used carefully. Those ridiculous beardie weirdies who insist on putting on bedsheets and then capering about at Stonehenge in memory of their druidic ancestors (then getting dressed and going to the pub, also a druidic practice one supposes) often moan about the "truth" and demand EH acknowledges the "truth" od their connection.

I think this individual has issues. He seems to want conflict. He does make good points it has to be said, but cannot bear to contradicted and is not altogether honest. Trying to claim you have been to places when you obviously haven't is very silly, especially when engaging with someone who has been.

Despite inviting him at least five times to engage over the Lullingstone Villa site all I got was tirade over tirade.

[Tiompan]

Hi simon -

The circular earthworks here in Ohio, where Whitehawk taught the constellations at the fall bred dance,
are certainly not "henges".
If that word is used it is only going to end up with some very confused nuts trying to construct imaginary Celtic empires here.
Now perhaps tiompan wants to construct imaginary Native American empires in Scotland,
but all of that is besides the point.

What tiompan desperately wants to demonstrate is that I do not know what I am talking about,
and that I am stupid and ignorant.
Having proved that to his satisfaction,
he thinks he can safely ignore the geological data for recent comet and asteroid impacts.

As I pointed out to you earlier,
having thoroughly worked though other historical matters before
where the truth was hard to accept,
I am used to this, as it comes with the territory.
It used to take around 15 years,
although in some cases that is now moving towards 8 to 10 years.

Your pre-historic and my proto-historical may not match up exactly.

I will note that impact events are a really useful tool for anthropological work,
and that the longer they do not exist for tiompan,
the farther behind he will become.

Truth is a highly charged word and needs to be used carefully. Those ridiculous beardie weirdies who insist on putting on bedsheets and then capering about at Stonehenge in memory of their druidic ancestors (then getting dressed and going to the pub, also a druidic practice one supposes) often moan about the "truth" and demand EH acknowledges the "truth" od their connection.

I think this individual has issues. He seems to want conflict. He does make good points it has to be said, but cannot bear to contradicted and is not altogether honest. Trying to claim you have been to places when you obviously haven't is very silly, especially when engaging with someone who has been.

Despite inviting him at least five times to engage over the Lullingstone Villa site all I got was tirade over tirade.

Have you any idea how many people have visited Lullingstone ? It's hardly obscure .
Not that it matters a jot whether I visited or not but fwiw I did .
Again , to highlight your small mindedness , I spent 20+ yrs of my life in south London and attempted to escape it as often as possible that was often southwards the wolds etc .
Family friends lived in Isle of Sheppey , other friends in Snodland and some ancestors had lived in Milton /Sittingbourne .
I had no particular interest in visiting Lullingstone villa but Eynesford had associations with Blake iirc who I liked at the time , but no longer , and there was the castle the villa was a minor bonus .
God knows how many people would have made a similar visit and even forgotten about it . I remember it for other reasons .
The fact that you should even think I was lying about something so minor tells us more about you .
It is also a fact that I know the truth about the circumstances , you don't and can only fantasise about them .
Then there is the volume of quotes that show you make things up , that is dishonesty .

I was not interested in discussing the villa with you .
I was pointing out , politely , that your mangled comment was wrong . That was what my initial post was about and the central issue .
Although I didn't know at the time that the problem was your mangling of a perfectly reasonable comment from the lecturer .
It didn't matter what site you were talking about or whether any of us had visited it or not , to suggest " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" , for a historic site is not only wrong but laughable .

[E.P. Grondine]

Truth is a highly charged word and needs to be used carefully.

Yes. Generally artifacts and contemporary inscriptions are both hard data.
In geology, most of the data is hard data, and that includes hard impact markers,
such as platinum group elements, impactites, and mega-tsunami deposits.

Those ridiculous beardie weirdies who insist on putting on bedsheets and then capering about at Stonehenge in memory of their druidic ancestors (then getting dressed and going to the pub, also a druidic practice one supposes) often moan about the "truth" and demand EH acknowledges the "truth" of their connection.

We have them here as well, and they are vocal.
But whether its Nephilim or ancient alien hybrids, they pale in comparison to the really incompetent archaeologists one runs into.
They are the ones who leave the "mysteries" for the whack jobs to exploit.

I think this individual has issues. He seems to want conflict. He does make good points it has to be said, but cannot bear to contradicted and is not altogether honest. Trying to claim you have been to places when you obviously haven't is very silly, especially when engaging with someone who has been.
Despite inviting him at least five times to engage over the Lullingstone Villa site all I got was tirade over tirade.

What tiompan desperately wants to demonstrate is that I do not know what I am talking about,
and that I am stupid and ignorant.
Having proved that to his satisfaction,
he thinks he can safely ignore the geological data for recent comet and asteroid impacts.

Asa far as the Pelagian heretics and druids go,
it is not of interest to me now,
and by not engaging in it I can avoid controversy.
The very likely destruction of Bazas by impact is of great interest and importance.

I do have to mail those "geological specimens" to the new museum when I return to Illinois.

[shawomet]

This thread crashed and burned on page one.

[Simon21]

Hi simon -

The circular earthworks here in Ohio, where Whitehawk taught the constellations at the fall bred dance,
are certainly not "henges".
If that word is used it is only going to end up with some very confused nuts trying to construct imaginary Celtic empires here.
Now perhaps tiompan wants to construct imaginary Native American empires in Scotland,
but all of that is besides the point.

What tiompan desperately wants to demonstrate is that I do not know what I am talking about,
and that I am stupid and ignorant.
Having proved that to his satisfaction,
he thinks he can safely ignore the geological data for recent comet and asteroid impacts.

As I pointed out to you earlier,
having thoroughly worked though other historical matters before
where the truth was hard to accept,
I am used to this, as it comes with the territory.
It used to take around 15 years,
although in some cases that is now moving towards 8 to 10 years.

Your pre-historic and my proto-historical may not match up exactly.

I will note that impact events are a really useful tool for anthropological work,
and that the longer they do not exist for tiompan,
the farther behind he will become.

Truth is a highly charged word and needs to be used carefully. Those ridiculous beardie weirdies who insist on putting on bedsheets and then capering about at Stonehenge in memory of their druidic ancestors (then getting dressed and going to the pub, also a druidic practice one supposes) often moan about the "truth" and demand EH acknowledges the "truth" od their connection.

I think this individual has issues. He seems to want conflict. He does make good points it has to be said, but cannot bear to contradicted and is not altogether honest. Trying to claim you have been to places when you obviously haven't is very silly, especially when engaging with someone who has been.

Despite inviting him at least five times to engage over the Lullingstone Villa site all I got was tirade over tirade.

Have you any idea how many people have visited Lullingstone ? It's hardly obscure .
Not that it matters a jot whether I visited or not but fwiw I did .
Again , to highlight your small mindedness , I spent 20+ yrs of my life in south London and attempted to escape it as often as possible that was often southwards the wolds etc .
Family friends lived in Isle of Sheppey , other friends in Snodland and some ancestors had lived in Milton /Sittingbourne .
I had no particular interest in visiting Lullingstone villa but Eynesford had associations with Blake iirc who I liked at the time , but no longer , and there was the castle the villa was a minor bonus .
God knows how many people would have made a similar visit and even forgotten about it . I remember it for other reasons .
The fact that you should even think I was lying about something so minor tells us more about you .
It is also a fact that I know the truth about the circumstances , you don't and can only fantasise about them .
Then there is the volume of quotes that show you make things up , that is dishonesty .

I was not interested in discussing the villa with you .
I was pointing out , politely , that your mangled comment was wrong . That was what my initial post was about and the central issue .
Although I didn't know at the time that the problem was your mangling of a perfectly reasonable comment from the lecturer .
It didn't matter what site you were talking about or whether any of us had visited it or not , to suggest " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" , for a historic site is not only wrong but laughable .

1. Have you any idea how many people have visited Lullingstone ? It's hardly obscure. I neither know nor care, the more the better. It is completely irrelevent to the interpretation of the frescoes.

2. Not that it matters a jot whether I visited or not but fwiw I did . Well we have had this out haven't we. If you went you managed not to notice a central part of the site. Is that likely? er no. And since I was discussing the site claiming to have seen it is a bit relevant yes.

3.Again , to highlight your small mindedness , I spent 20+ yrs of my life in south London and attempted to escape it as often as possible that was often southwards the wolds etc . Totally irrelevant, except it raises the interesting question of why bother living in a place for 20 years if you couldn't stand it - are we talking about prison?

4. Family friends lived in Isle of Sheppey , other friends in Snodland and some ancestors had lived in Milton /Sittingbourne . Very glad to hear you have some. Lullingstone Villa is not in the Isle of Sheppey, genius.

4. Truth is a highly charged word and needs to be used carefully. Not sure you are familiar with the concept.

5. I had no particular interest in visiting Lullingstone villa but Eynesford had associations with Blake iirc who I liked at the time , but no longer , and there was the castle the villa was a minor bonus . As I said earlier an inane comment and indicative of the fact you have no real interest in archeology or have been to the villa.

6. God knows how many people would have made a similar visit and even forgotten about it . So now you visited the site but er forgot all about it, but then remembered it again, but forgot the central part about it - despite this being one of chief sites (and successes) of British archaeology (not to mention its importance to the understanding of the early church). Is that what you are saying now? This is again lapsing into incoherence. You embarass yourself.

7. I was not interested in discussing the villa with you . So why comment at all on a discussion about the subject? No you were more interested in endlessly repeating yourself with inane dishonest babbling. Telling me what the "central issue" was when I was the one who set the subject wasn't I genius. The "central issue" is not your mental incapacity. This board is supposed to be about archaeology not your numerous personal chips on the shoulder.

8. I was pointing out , politely , that your mangled comment was wrong . That was what my initial post was about and the central issue . No the central issue was Lullingstone Villa's frieze. Not your dishonesty or mental incapacity to grasp a simple point. Or to be clearer the central point is not your dishonest claims, disinterest in archaeology or incoherence - but the issues associated with this frieze ie archaeology.

As for your "politeness" is it not curious that so many people do not find you polite? That is because you are aggressive in expression and tone, and are dishonest. You have a mental inability to admit you are wrong and use dishonesty to cover your ignorance. As I have found out on two occassions. The polite thing to do when one finds one cannot understand someone is to civilly ask for clarity and to accept that one might have misinterpreted a simple point - not to jump and down proclaiming someone is "wrong". In your case you might have said "I have not actually seen the lullingstone frieze, are you referring to the Chi Rho?

9. It didn't matter what site you were talking about or whether any of us had visited it or not , to suggest " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" , for a historic site is not only wrong but laughable So why lie in that case? The comment stands quite coherently. Your mysterious references to "rock art" and the Chi Rho (it's circular, who would have thought?) were more than laughable.

Just look at this latest comment. We are told about people in South London, that you have family friends (surely unlikely) living in Sheppey (marvellous, any in Tonbridge Wells) etc. Your babbling must emabarass even you. Next time do tell us about your Aunty Mary and whether you put salt in your porridge.

But stay away from archaeology - GSM to me again. How many fish can one shoot in a barrel?

[kbs2244]

"This thread crashed and burned on page one."

Come on
You don't enjoy the number of angels dancing on a pinhead arguments?

[Simon21]

"This thread crashed and burned on page one."

Come on
You don't enjoy the number of angels dancing on a pinhead arguments?

Quite but when someone lies about having a pin and then goes on about knitting - it is a little tedious

[Tiompan]

I thought that the likes of Kalopin and Skiessa had problems .
Nothing compared to what we are seeing now .

[Simon21]

I thought that the likes of Kalopin and Skiessa had problems .
Nothing compared to what we are seeing now .

Referring to oneself in the plural again. Sad.

[circumspice]

*whispers Vee-ger*...

[shawomet]

"This thread crashed and burned on page one."

Come on
You don't enjoy the number of angels dancing on a pinhead arguments?

I'm fascinated by that time honored debate to some extent, but my focus has always been on the origin of this tradition among the hierarchies of angels. Who was the first angel, or archangel perhaps, to dance upon the head of a pin? And why I wonder, when there are far broader dance floor surfaces to choose from, would the heads of pins become the default choice among our heavenly kin?

[E.P. Grondine]

Referring to oneself in the plural again. Sad.

tiompan forgets that I remember when Thom had his first major presentation in London,
and that I remember Aveni's first edition.
He intends to use his "authority" in archeo-astronomy to deny the recent small impact events occurred,
with his insults concerning the definition of "henge" are just a cover for this.

Either tiompan does not realize that geology is a science,
or he simply can not handle data.