Problematic Discoveries

[Tiompan]

" Topper is an unfinished story that will have a surprise ending for the ever vocal skeptics. It may behoove those folks to disagree with conditions just in case. "
That’s the usual wishful thinking , we have been getting this for over a century and it has continually been shown to be unfounded . To date ,and there is no reason to suspect that anything will change , Topper hasn’t produced the goods .
If and when any American site does produce evidence for anything like you hope for then it will be accepted , as yet they haven’t . Why not simply wait for that day rather than fantasise .


“When we are free from these constraints, if possible, more pure science can ensue. “
Pure science does not support your beliefs , maybe one day it will but it has failed to do so for a long time .


“Anthropic evidence on rocks being promoted is no less valid than outright denial of such. “ It is only valid when there is evidence for it’s presence , when there is no evidence , it is wishful thinking .

“I am able to see the subject matter and techniques I have been describing in looking at the stones and in the imagery I have produced.”
Then I suggest you look at images of genuine examples and note the difference .
The fact that you believe that you can see the “subject matter “ in the same images that we have seen confirms that it is a case of pareidolia .


“ That dates have not been established is, as I have previously mentioned, in deference to the scientific process. “ What other process is there ? Wishful thinking doesn’t count . “Bednarik uses conditional phraseology ("appear to be") as he cannot rule out the possibility of Pleistocene rock art. “
He also points out that “It follows from this review of the empirical evidence that there is currently no credible evidence of Pleistocene (or Mesozoic) rock art in North America. “

“Do we now have in hand that which has been deemed unlikely? “ Very unlikely .

“ I would like to get the opinion of another archaeologist, but where can I find someone educated in a subject that is not believed by mainstream professionals? “
Why not simply get the views of experts rather than someone with a fantastical agenda i.e. “someone educated in a subject that is not believed by mainstream professionals” . There are countless examples of Paleolithic rock art throughout the world and also rock art from the Americas that has been seen and recorded by experts without a fantastical agenda , what is wrong with getting their opinion ?

[E.P. Grondine]

I can't "see' it, spinghead.
George can't "see" it.
min can't "see" it.

Is there anyone here who does "see' it?

It looks to me like your perceptions and senses are being influenced by your hypothesis.
The technical term is "coherent delusional framework".

One problem here is your persistence and insistence:
they seem to indicate an "idea fixee", (if my french does not fail me).
Present the data, and let it speak for itself.

Topper is quite different than what you are "seeing", springhead,
not that it matters much, except to the folks working Topper,
who are likely to be irritated by your "support"
and the introduction of spurious "data".

George, what the hell does "gormless" mean in American?

[Tiompan]

George, what the hell does "gormless" mean in American?

E.P. I didn't realise that like H.erectus and neandertals , it never made it's way across the pond .
Gormless =stupid and slow to understand ( http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... h/gormless)

[E.P. Grondine]

That pretty well sums it up, Goerge.

Its unusual that no etymology is given for "gormless".
"les"usually indicates lacking,
but which language does "gorm" come from?
French (Norman) has "gourmet", but I can not see that connection.
Some obscure Latin, Celt, or German word?

As far as Neanderthal making it across, I have not found any indications of survivals, but simply erectus/sapiens.
Perhaps min would speculate on crossings via the ice sheet,
but I am not familiar with any indications of neandertal boat use.

As you can see, there's a relatively recent historical question involving real money here in Ohio,
which I will be tackling, for some gormless peoples enlightenment.

[circumspice]

I can't 'see it' either. Sorry springhead.

[Tiompan]

E.P.
Looks like it may be from Old Norse gaumr "care, heed,"

[Springhead]

Tiompan, Circumspice, E.P., Minimalist,

I have scheduled an appointment with a shrink to assess all my maladies that are apparently forcing me beyond will and reality to make conclusions and observations folks here disagree with. Not really, but one might think I need to based on the comments. By the way, absolutely no malice borne here by me, just a bit of frustration. I am off in the early AM to the mountain site to hunt morels and artifacts. Maybe I will be able to find a manipulated rock that can clearly demonstrate what I have been discussing.

Prior to starting this thread, I fully expected rejection of the assemblage to be the order of the day. I really appreciate all of your comments, although I do find myself with few allies on a few points. The issues seem pretty strait forward here, and there may be little sense in debating belief and semantics ad infinitum. I will continue on my path until I am convinced that what I see in repetitive fashion does not exist. This is not stubbornness, nor is it egoistic head butting. My claims are not outlandish, but rather unpalpable based on current understandings archaeologically.

I will try in the future to post as intelligently as I can with deference to varied opinions. Whether I pass muster or not as some raving layman wanna be with mental shortcomings remains to be seen. Interestingly, I have not even introduced the most curious and controversial aspects of my finds, which perhaps now, after this united effort for coordinated control, is a good thing.

Thank you for your participation in this thread, and my apologies to Topper for tainting the water.

[circumspice]

I really appreciate all of your comments, although I do find myself with few allies on a few points.

Extraordinary, controversial claims require rock solid, incontrovertible proof. If you don't have that you have nothing except a meaningless pile of rocks... As I said before, the burden of proof lies with you. You are the one making the extraordinary claims. You can't expect your audience to embrace your hypothesis without providing proof. Anyone can claim anything.

Prove your hypothesis...

Just. Prove. It.

You been given a fair hearing here. People have examined your hypothesis from different perspectives. People have offered helpful observations & advice. You haven't advanced your theory one iota since your first post. This has become a repetitive reiteration of what you had posted previously.

In other words: Put up or shut up.

[uniface]

Extraordinary, controversial claims require rock solid, incontrovertible proof.

This claim is a transparent attempt to put the current paradigm in the judgment seat, as if it were infallible.

It is an example of the opinion-centric way True Believers look at things -- people ignorant of the scientific method. In scientific terms, it is sheer, utter rubbish whether it is stated loudly or not.

What people believe at the moment is utterly irrelevant, because understandings invariable change over time, with yesterday's orthodoxy becoming today's embarrassment. The only safe conclusion that can be drawn about it is that it is wrong.

All that is necessary to put the current view of things in the witness box for cross-examination is evidence that it cannot account for without resorting to special case exemptions or allegations of procedural error.

One single observation suffices. One experimental result. One discovery.

One.

[Tiompan]

"What people believe at the moment is utterly irrelevant, "

Yes ,what matters is the evidence , not beliefs .

"One discovery.One."
Yes ,that is all that matters ,I kept saying this to Springhead, we just haven't got one yet . One fossil that is the same age as that suggested by the true believers and everything changes .
As yet we haven't had one , just lots of wild unsubstantiated claims from the believers .

[circumspice]

Extraordinary, controversial claims require rock solid, incontrovertible proof.


This claim is a transparent attempt to put the current paradigm in the judgment seat, as if it were infallible. 

The current paradigm is in the judgment seat because it has passed muster by consensus. Until a new claim can prove the paradigm is outdated, it stands. That shouldn't be so hard for you to grasp uni... You're simply trolling by playing Devil's Advocate. But that's S.O.P. for you.

[uniface]

The current paradigm is in the judgment seat because it has passed muster by consensus.

You have a math problem.

1,000,000 X 0 = 0.

Not 1,000,000.

[circumspice]

The current paradigm is in the judgment seat because it has passed muster by consensus.

You have a math problem.

1,000,000 X 0 = 0.

Not 1,000,000.

As per usual, you answer with non sequeturs.

[uniface]

You are unable to grasp the irrelevance of consensus to truth.

"Everybody" once believed that mice and bugs were produced by spontaneous generation from dirty linen. That did not make it true.

"Everybody" once believed that malaria was caused by breathing swamp vapors in summertime. Their certainty did not make what they believed so.

"Everybody knowledgeable" once believed that manned, controlled heavier-than-air flight was ruled out by the laws of physics. Their unanimous, "expert" belief did not make them right.

It is truly scary to interact with you few. You are unable to grasp basic logic and apply it when it conflicts with your belief-realm. Which encompasses just about everything, apparently.

[circumspice]

You are unable to grasp the irrelevance of consensus to truth.

"Everybody" once believed that mice and bugs were produced by spontaneous generation from dirty linen. That did not make it true.

"Everybody" once believed that malaria was caused by breathing swamp vapors in summertime. Their certainty did not make what they believed so.

"Everybody knowledgeable" once believed that manned, controlled heavier-than-air flight was ruled out by the laws of physics. Their unanimous, "expert" belief did not make them right.

It is truly scary to interact with you few. You are unable to grasp basic logic and apply it when it conflicts with your belief-realm. Which encompasses just about everything, apparently.

All your examples were easily disproved with CONCRETE EVIDENCE... Nothing you have ever posted has shown a shred of evidence, making it hearsay BULLSHIT.

Prove it uni. Prove ANY of the bullshit that you post.