Archaeologica.org

Archae, is that post one of the ones you really mean, or one of the ones you really don't mean?

Genesis Veracity wrote:Archae, is that post one of the ones you really mean, or one of the ones you really don't mean?

.......the dog continues to salivate ......

......the clock ticks........


j

John - this is less of a conitioned response than a contrivance it seems.

It begs the question - OAS, you seem at this point to be playing the role of enabler to GV. You've responded to every post.

Save us all some private mail discussion and let me know. Right/Wrong?

Well, he's been on about his site for a while so I'm giving him some references and pointed out some flaws - which he asks everyone to do. Archy has set up a thread just for that discussion, but if you think I'm accomplishing nothing but feeding the troll and maybe becoming one myself, let me know. I'll bow to public opinion and back off, but you know he isn't going to stop unless his theory is finally blown to bits.

You guys decide - I'm new here. Let me know.

I actually used the word contrived. Have you known GV prior to posting here?

Beagle wrote:I actually used the word contrived. Have you known GV prior to posting here?

No - never heard of him till now. Is your inference that I am his partner somehow?

i don't think you can blow his theory to bits. not because it is true but because he won't listen.

if you can limit his wandering to one or two threads then go for it, then the rest of us can discuss without fear of interuption

archaeologist wrote:i don't think you can blow his theory to bits. not because it is true but because he won't listen.

if you can limit his wandering to one or two threads then go for it, then the rest of us can discuss without fear of interuption

We disagree on some things archy - but I'm with you here. However I have no control over GV - nor am I Laurel to his Hardy.

OAS, sorry to be rude - but could you answer my question?

Beagle wrote:John - this is less of a conitioned response than a contrivance it seems.

It begs the question - OAS, you seem at this point to be playing the role of enabler to GV. You've responded to every post.

Save us all some private mail discussion and let me know. Right/Wrong?

as have we all.

thus, i'm saturating the forum with the same response to all of gv's stuff.

on purpose.

either we do answer trollshit, or we don't.

i think this answers the question of "enabling".

what about archaeology?



j

Beagle wrote:OAS, sorry to be rude - but could you answer my question?

I already did a couple of posts up. No I have not known him prior to posting here. In turn I asked - are you inferring that I am a stooge partner for GV?

I'm asking one small question. OAS, did you know GV prior to posting here? Or Marduk?

Beagle wrote:I'm asking one small question. OAS, did you know GV prior to posting here? Or Marduk?

And I'm answering for the third time.

No - I don't know GV. I don't know Marduk.

Thanks OAS - I know I've seemed rude. You've been raising eyebrows. We actually just got through the thrill of a tag team troll match.

If you want to help gv spread his warped word then that's your business.

My apologies.

Beagle - what was that all about?

Never mind - just saw your answer. Now I have a question for you. Are you accusing me of being a set up? Do you think I joined this board to be a co-ordinated foil for DV? Is that what you are trying to imply?