otzi

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:49 am

No.
What I got is just a lowlands elite yuppie who fears for his life and decides to cross the mountains to safety. Ill prepared, he steals what he needs while on his trek. Hey! It's him or them! He's trying to survive. So I wouldn't put it past him, in that desperate situation, to hit one victim over the head too many. The one he took the clothes from because he froze his balls off up there. But that geezer's bro, a mountain man, came after him, the lowlands man. Oetzi managed to stay ahead for a couple hours, by trekking ever higher. Obviously that was a fatal mistake. Oetzi was of course no match for the mountain man. Who tracked and caught up with him, avenged his kin, and went home.

Shouldn't be too expensive a production, don't you think?

clubs_stink · Post by **clubs_stink** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:03 pm

"not of a social class accustomed to manual labor"

That would be shown in the attachments of his muscles to the bone. When a person does any type of physical labor over time, there are signs in the muscles and bones that indicate that, as well as what type. There's a whole portion of forensic science devoted to the study in life and death of the particular types of muscular developments to particular types of manual labor. This is used in identification of skeletal remains. Often they can look at the bones and see which portions are more developed than others, compare those to models and at least find an occupation. Of course this only works on skeletons that had, in life, performed manual labor

but I've read some good stuff on it, and it is very useful in skeletal ID.

For instance should my bones be found in the forest ten years from now a scientist will be able to look at them and tell that I've ridden many many horses, combine that with skull injuries and they could conclude that I was, at one time either a professional or someone who spent a great deal of time aboard a horse. (hell for that matter you could look at tell now

)

I'd guess that something like that was used to assess OTZI.

Maybe he was just really good and lost (and refused to ask directions???)

Since Otzi had both muscle and bones I'd guess that is where they came up with that statement.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:12 pm

I'd guess that something like that was used to assess OTZI.

Right Clubs, they did computerized tomography, or CT scan on him. They've come to a lot of conclusions about him based on those.

Possibly he could have been the local shaman, healer, or chief. I'm sure there are other examples.

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:16 pm

It has been said the constant use of the bow produces signs on the skeleton as well, nothing said about that though.

Post by **Minimalist** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:30 pm

For instance should my bones be found in the forest ten years from now a scientist will be able to look at them and tell that

If a scientist finds my bones in the forest he'll be able to say..."this damn fool got himself lost in the forest."

clubs_stink · Post by **clubs_stink** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:14 pm

Digit wrote:It has been said the constant use of the bow produces signs on the skeleton as well, nothing said about that though.

exactly, if I recall correctly they have identified certain bodies in England as archers merely due to the abnormalities of the muscle insertion points.

So Otzi wasn't a hunter (on any regular basis) nor a warrior (on any regular basis) and he did not perform any steady rigorous physical labor.

OK, so what if he were a high born hostage taken or exchanged in a war...say a prince or a king...and he was held...but managed to escape...and they hunted him down and tried to retrieve him but ended up killing him?

(good theory clubs...insert clapping for myself.)

LOL min...mind you, I left out any personal opinions of the scientist as to my intellect...I don't think, that aside from brain size, they've found a post mortem way to measure that

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:39 pm

It’s a good thing this committee is not under pressure by the producers to have this screen play delivered by Monday!
We can’t even agree on who or what the main character is or was!

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:37 pm

Well, Oetzi dies. So he can't be the lead character!

I have the hero walking off into the sunset.

Post by **Minimalist** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:45 pm

Hamlet dies too.

Maybe we can get Leonardo Di Caprio to play the lead?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:50 am

Maybe we can get Leonardo Di Caprio to play the lead?

Errol Flyn would fit better Min.

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 6:50 am

kbs2244 wrote:
It’s a good thing this committee is not under pressure by the producers to have this screen play delivered by Monday!

I've delivered the 'treatment' already. And since I'm assuming that a rape/robbery/murder scene, a subsequent Alpine hunt, and the eventual, short, fight – all in the high mountains in terrible circumstances – didn't result in Shakespearian dialogs (it was 3,200 BC for God's sake!), I can promise you a complete scenario by Monday easily!

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:42 am

I can promise you a complete scenario by Monday easily!

To rave revues I trust!

Couldn't be worse than the some of the rubbish on TV these days.

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:22 am

Digit wrote:
I can promise you a complete scenario by Monday easily!
To rave revues I trust!
Couldn't be worse than the some of the rubbish on TV these days.

Measured against that 'standard' you can already reserve a dozen Academy awards!

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 10:05 am

It will certainly be better than "Passion of the Christ!"

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:40 pm

http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/ ... index.html

Since hikers discovered his mummified corpse in 1991 in a rocky hollow high in the Ötztal Alps on Italy's border with Austria, scientists have used ever more sophisticated tools and intellectual cunning to reconstruct the life and times of the Iceman (or "Ötzi"), the oldest intact member of the human family. We know that he was a small, sinewy, and, for his times, rather elderly man in his mid-40s. Judging from the precious, copper-bladed ax found with him, we suspect that he was a person of considerable social significance. He set off on his journey wearing three layers of garments and sturdy shoes with bearskin soles. He was well equipped with a flint-tipped dagger, a little fire-starting kit, and a birchbark container holding embers wrapped in maple leaves. Yet he also headed into a harsh wilderness curiously under-armed: The arrows in his deerskin quiver were only half finished, as if he had recently fired all his munitions and was in the process of hastily replenishing them. And he was traveling with a long, roughly shaped stalk of yew—an unfinished longbow, yet to be notched and strung. Why?

The July issue of Nat'l. Geographic has a section on the Iceman. There are a couple of things we may not have considered.