Archaeologica.org

Charlie ... you don't have a trunk with rocks in it, do you?

Just kidding.

Marduk, it's like my site. When I find something to write home about, a professional archaeologist can come in and excavate properly. There is an abundance of tools to be found no matter how many I pick up on the surface. Charlie can do the same when he receives his initial dating should it come in where he thinks. Basically, a replicable situation, right?

Yes Sir.

Yup, I'm not worried a bit about replicating the results. The stuff is everywhere in these gravels. I have to make paths to walk, so I don't step on the stuff. And it's nicely coated with datable carbonate. Sharp (Berkeley) is also an archeologist. A double bonus. Man, I hope, if he's convinced by the dating, that he will also gather a geoarcheological team to investigate this place.

Warren's convinced their artifacts. Here's a statement by him:

Hi Charlie,


The artifacts arrived and I took a first look at them. Although much of the thicker carbonate could precede the working, there are thinner coatings on the worked surfaces as you and Jim have noted. I'll get them under a microscope soon and see if I can spot anything that looks promising to analyze.

Warren

OK...just a comment here on the comments I've read regarding agendas.

There are few people (myself, and solely due to my occupation) who do not have an "agenda". FEW people go over the edge with it.

That being said, let's all go back to school regarding anaylzing information, and critical thinking.

When read a web site such as the two I posted today, I read all the information. I am normally able to detect an agenda, I make a note.

JUST because someone has an agenda does not automatically mean that all the information that they discuss is invalid. Just because one might be mentally quick enough to notice that someone else is missing a brick from his or her wall does not mean that all of his or her ideas are invalid.

When anaylzing information I try to see first the agenda, and understand where they are coming from. I then attempt to synthasize the information. Outside of their agenga is there anything that makes sense?

Invariablely I find something that does.

Point: agendas do not invalidate ALL the information, unless you have an agenda youself!

Minimalist wrote:http://www.templemountfaithful.org/News/20051222.htm

As can be seen, his greatest find has been this seal, from the 6th century BC, which is shortly before the Babylonians 'renovated' the place.

One of the names on the seal ended with the Hebrew letters "yehu". Dr. Barkay stated that this is a direct greeting from the house of King David. He dated the seal to the 6th Century B.C.E.

Let us not forget that Herod the Great completed a monumental re-building of the temple complete with a new retaining wall and who-knows how many million tons of fill. Archaeologists cannot even find a significant amount of broken pottery from the 10th century...let alone bricks from a temple. The image which comes across is of a poverty-stricken region with minimal population existing as pastoralists while the much richer northern kingdom of Israel was a major player on the regional stage.

There's no doubt it was poverty stricken since it had been paying tribute to Assyria and then Babylon for a while and very early in the 6th century Nebuchednezzar executed a prolonged siege which allegedly resulted in nearly starving the city into submission. It was then systematically dimantled and turned into a wasteland.

From the 10th the 6th century I think you are correct. As I've stated elsewhere on this board. It was a minor kingdom surrounded by empires.

You are correct about Jerusalem but I was referring to the Mediggo site. Just ran off to look it up and its never been undeniably tied to solomon

kind of backfired on you didnt it

Gosh Clubs, an open mind. I couldn't agree more. Even if something seems weird it might still be correct, like my comment to Marduk earlier that the quickest sailing time from Europe to the Americas starts with sailing South.
Strange but true!

marduk wrote:

You are correct about Jerusalem but I was referring to the Mediggo site. Just ran off to look it up and its never been undeniably tied to solomon

kind of backfired on you didnt it

No..like I said something was there, they just can't say with certainty who built it..or who did not. it is layer upon layer.

Gosh Clubs, an open mind. I couldn't agree more. Even if something seems weird it might still be correct, like my comment to Marduk earlier that the quickest sailing time from Europe to the Americas starts with sailing South.
Strange but true!

But, on closer inspection, it makes good horse sense:



South out of Europe, riding the strong currents, and then lock into the strong west currents.

No..like I said something was there, they just can't say with certainty who built it..or who did not. it is layer upon layer

.

who can't
which chapter/verse of the bible details this ?
your original claim was that the bible has led to archaeological discoveries remember
I was saying its the other way round
that archaeological discoveries are used to support the flagging stance of Biblical veracity

anyway
stop hijacking Charlies grandstand with this biblical rubbish
he stated several times that anyone who brings biblical stuff into a conversation is a fundie

From the 10th the 6th century I think you are correct. As I've stated elsewhere on this board. It was a minor kingdom surrounded by empires.

This was where Arch lost all objectivity. The bible claims that Jerusalem was the center of a far flung empire and being a Fundi that's all he needs.
The fact that the evidence says that Jerusalem was a miniscule little shithole at the time means nothing to him.

This was where Arch lost all objectivity

he had objectivity ?

when

Minimalist wrote:

From the 10th the 6th century I think you are correct. As I've stated elsewhere on this board. It was a minor kingdom surrounded by empires.

This was where Arch lost all objectivity. The bible claims that Jerusalem was the center of a far flung empire and being a Fundi that's all he needs.
The fact that the evidence says that Jerusalem was a miniscule little shithole at the time means nothing to him.

Neither fundies nor moderates should be upset by the fact that relatively speaking Judah was just a blip on the map. I am not sure why that detracts from anyones belief. The bible never claimed they were earth shakers.

Exactly Charley, in the latter days of commercial sail the quickest route to Ausralia from Europe was South, to pick up the easterly trade winds, south down the east coast of S America to pick up the circumpolar westerlies, 'The Roaring Forties' and then north to Oz.
When the Panama Canal was originally planned it was intended as a straight cut, that turned out to be too expensive so they used locks instead, which was fortunate as the Atlantic 'sea level' is reputed to be 20ft higher than the Pacific so that the Atlantic flows down hill round Cape Horn, or the other way, I forget which.

Exactly Charley, in the latter days of commercial sail the quickest route to Ausralia from Europe was South, to pick up the easterly trade winds, south down the east coast of S America to pick up the circumpolar westerlies, 'The Roaring Forties' and then north to Oz.
When the Panama Canal was originally planned it was intended as a straight cut, that turned out to be too expensive so they used locks instead, which was fortunate as the Atlantic 'sea level' is reputed to be 20ft higher than the Pacific so that the Atlantic flows down hill round Cape Horn, or the other way, I forget which.

Yup, the shortest route is not always the fastest route. Talk to a few transcontinental airline pilots. Catch the jetsteam...even if it's a bit out of the way. And in these guys days, shorter was definitely better. You could only carry so many life-sustaining resources.

Digit wrote:Exactly Charley, in the latter days of commercial sail the quickest route to Ausralia from Europe was South, to pick up the easterly trade winds, south down the east coast of S America to pick up the circumpolar westerlies, 'The Roaring Forties' and then north to Oz.
When the Panama Canal was originally planned it was intended as a straight cut, that turned out to be too expensive so they used locks instead, which was fortunate as the Atlantic 'sea level' is reputed to be 20ft higher than the Pacific so that the Atlantic flows down hill round Cape Horn, or the other way, I forget which.

The Pacific side of Panama has a notorious 17ft tide...when on that side in the morning people were known to pull a DeNiro, thump their chest and bellow "I love the smell of Punta Patilla in the morning".

Panama does not (or did not when I lived there) have sewage treatment plants, it all runs right into the sea...even when the tide is out.

Needless to say you never found me going for a swim although I had an unfortunate encounter with a type of quick sand and a large animal which caused me to be immersed....I swear I stunk for days.

Lake Gatun is the man-made regulator for the waters of the canal. It used to be the largest man-made lake in the world not sure about now. Great fishing!!! All of the hundreds of islands that dot the lake are the tops of mountains, including Isla Coronado which is a preserve of the Smithsonian Institution.

were known to pull a DeNiro, thump their chest and bellow "I love the smell of Punta Patilla in the morning".

really
where I come from they call that Pulling a Duvall