Archaeologica.org

ravenwing5910 wrote:Did I miss something? What is the "new idea"?

Clearly R/W there is no 'new' idea. Hence the question mark at the end of the subject line. I thought it interesting, however, the subject touches on many of the discussions that have permeated this board of late and especially with some of the recent discoveries of under-sea ruins. I also found it interesting the author would single out a particular board for criticism. I didn't realize that he trolled this board a little over a year ago.

As for civilizations before or during the ice-age (that is the last maximum 18kya to about 12kya) - I am of the opinion that organized groups of hunter-gathers existed in cooperative tribes prior to the ice-age but I doubt any existed above the line of permanent ice once things turned cold.

The American Museum has a decent overview:
http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permane ... y/life.php

I seem to remember Arch as both stubborn and annoying, yet not entirely without redeeming qualities. Trawling through those old GV posts though, that was another story. Wasn't he the guy who posted things like 'ha ha your going to hell and im not'?

'ha ha your going to hell and im not'?

No, that was Arch! He's still doing the same act elsewhere.

GV was "buy my book and learn the truth."


Equally annoying.

GV was "buy my book and learn the truth."

I wonder what the truth was?
I am reminded of a chap in Oz many yearrs ago who was prosecuted over the sale of the 'Sure Fire Bug Killer', delivered by return of post at a vary reasonable price.
When the mark received his parcel it contained two blocks of wood with the instructions, Catch bug, place on bloc A-,.
The rest you can work out for your self!

As a famous American showman once said "there's a sucker born every minute."



Or was that George Bush????

What's the difference Min?

What fun it was reading through these posts. Brings back so many memories of old friends who were so sefl-righteous, not to mention soooooooo sanctimonious. But as I've said before, if they are an example of what we will find in heaven, save me a seat at the bar in hell.

Just for old time's sake then, Leona, and to show that he has not lost his touch, here's a post that ARch made at Koko's.

Re: Some comments on creationism....from smart people
« Reply #17 on: September 10, 2007, 08:27:37 PM » Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
evidence is not objective but biased. if you find the ark, that is evidence but it is biased towards the biblical account. the people you are quoting are not objective in their search for they are/were searching from their bias, which is unbelief and acceptance of the evolutionary theory. they are more prejudiced thanyou claim bible thumpers are.

you need to understand there really is no such thing as objectivity as there are only 2 sides to this issue; God's or not God's. there is no third choice here.

Same shit - different wrapper.

I read that quote at least three times and I have only one thing to say.
What the hell? I still doesn't make sense, but then he never did.

Oh, I never claimed that it made sense.

He never did.

So as in the past, it's okay if I don't understand what in the hell he's trying to say. Cause he ain't saying nuttin, as always.

Minimalist wrote:

'ha ha your going to hell and im not'?

No, that was Arch! He's still doing the same act elsewhere.

It was?
uhm... looks like I need to check my records again. I'd almost swear I remember Arch disasscociating himself from the other, more openly argumentative fundies though.
Oh well.
not that it makes a lot of difference now.

Look as though I missed a lot of fun!

I'd almost swear I remember Arch disasscociating himself from the other, more openly argumentative fundies though.

Arch has been tossed from "christian boards" because he pisses them off too. It is not for being less obtuse than they but more!

Digit wrote:Look as though I missed a lot of fun!

I had a lot of fun.


I think Michelle went prematurely gray.