Newsgroup sci.archaeology 46966

Directory

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Vladimir Vooss wrote:
> Ann McMeekin wrote:
> This (news?)group is programmed to destroy at
> the mere mention of the word - Atlantis. 
Only if you are touchy, Ann. 
It is perfectly alright to talk about controversial subjects. 
A quick check will reveal this NG talking controversy a lot, 
whilst the other group - s.a.m.m. (moderated archy), which was
created by Anti-Atlanteans to get away from the Pyramidiots - 
pines for posts. Denial, ruthless and ugly is all about you.
So remember: You are the game. You choose your rules, such as 
wanting to be objective, cool, and relaxed, in contrast to your
excited hunters.  You want to know! THEY DON'T! 
> Scripture - being Atlanteans all. Giggle. If you've got the stomach for
> violence, however, hang on. It may get very interesting.
No-one has ever trained skeptical critics into total submissiveness,
like I have with my discoveries. We are loking at the oldest horseman 
scene in the world, the ten Nasca Monkeys combination, Atlantean Math,
Seal of Atlantis, and La Marche - Nasca connection. All these subjects
are total Taboo here. Skeptics only talk to me on the 200-ton thread,
but they can't touch the ancient Science-Art. 
Jiri Mruzek 
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jiri_mruzek/

Mr. Carl Sagan has supposed in his excellent though misguided book THE
DRAGONS OF EDEN that Dragons never existed, and are merely deeply-buried
racial memories of having been Hunted by Giant Carnivorous Lizards back
in the Pre-Quaternary.  However, this fails to explain one simple fact -
why do we not have deeply-buried Racial Memories from the Precambrian
Era of being Pursued by Trilobites?  I, for one, have no deep-seated
all-pervading fear of either Woodlice or German Helmets.  However, I
have a mortal terror of Salmon.  This suggests to me that Human Beings
are evolved not from Reptiles, but from those creatures for whom Salmon
are a mortal enemy, i.e., Other Salmon.  Moreover, Manatees disturb me
greatly as they slither ominously into the water from the banks whenever
a Buffalo Calf goes to the water to drink in the Florida Everglades,
suggesting perhaps that Salmon evolved from Buffalo as changing climatic
conditions made it more necessary for Buffalo to Spawn in the Open Sea.
However, things are not so simple.  Fears differ from Nation to Nation,
reinforcing the theories of Mr. George Montandon that every Human Nation
is evolved from its own separate Ape Ancestor.  English persons, for
example, live in mortal fear of Hydrophobic French Dogs Which Swim Well,
which suggests that, firstly, Primaeval English Man resembled a Thing
even a Dog would only bite under influence of Rabies, and that secondly,
Anne Widdecombe, M.P, is the most Primitive and Vital Living Englishman
of her age.  What are French persons most afraid of?  Popular polls of
representative samples of Ninety-Year-Old French Spinsters suggest Being
Molested By Huge Bestial Naked Moroccans.  Were the Cave Painters of
Lascaux possessed of qualities that made them especially attractive to
North African Neanderthals?  Alas, we may never know, for Doe Eyes and
Soft Peachy Down on the Buttocks are qualities that do not fossilize
easily.  Belgians, of course, are Afraid Of The Germans Doing It Again,
which can only mean that Belgians are descended from a variety of Ape to
which The Germans Did It Before.  On the other hand, Argentinian Secret
Policemen feel Greatly Threatened by Nuns, implying that Sabre-Toothed
Nuns greatly resembling Sister Wendy Beckett crossed the Bering Land
Bridge Ten Thousand Years ago and Brutally Over-Intellectualized the
Saturday Night Television of the Primordial Patagonians.  
Meanwhile, American persons are frightened of seeing Leona Helmsley
naked, and Who Can Blame Them.
The diversity of our Instinctive Fears is, however, Individual rather
than simply Racial.  Many Human Beings possess quite reasonable Phobias
of Heights, Open Spaces, or having Buckets Filled With Starving Rats
Strapped to their Buttocks.  What are these but the deep-seated genetic
fears of an original Prehistoric Primate whose intestines were the Haunt
of Rodents?  The relationship between the two species would be
symbiotic; by day, the Rodents would forage for food and bring it back
to the Ape's hyper-enlarged colon; by night, the Ape's gigantic body
would protect the Tiny Creatures from Attack by all things save Giant
Boa-Constricting Tapeworm.  Why else would varieties of Gerbils have
been discovered by Medical Science subsisting inside Hollywood Film
Actors?
Yours
Reverend Colonel Ignatius Churchward Von Berlitz M.A. (Dom. Sci.) Oxon. 
(Oklahoma)

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Steve,
What you're saying makes sense. The diffusion across the N. Pacific, as
you described, is no longer a slim hypothesis. I think the diffusion in
this case is accepted by most people who bothered to look at the
evidence. There are way too many cultural connections between the peoples
of American N. Pacific coast and the peoples of East Asia, to suppose
they had no contact. 
But what I'm talking about in these threads is something quite different. 
The main hypothesis, as I see it, is that there were many South Pacific
Islanders who, while travelling between islands, were driven off course
by storms and landed in S. America. This must have been a constant and
recurring phenomenon that contributed to culture diffusion. 
Best,
Yuri.
--
             #%    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    %#
  --  a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Students achieving Oneness will move on to Twoness   ===   W. Allen

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Hey!  Thanks again to everyone for all the help.  All suggestions are
appreciated and will be considered.  I'll keep my eyes open at the new and
used bookstores.
p.s.
>In Dutch there is a terrific learning book around - but likely your
>Egyptian is better than your Dutch?? :) 
and
> with a minor problem...
Yes, unfortunately for me I probably do understand hieroglyphics better
than any language except English (and a little French).  It's ironic how
decisions made early in life (like not studying languages in school) come
back to haunt one later...  But I've learned my lesson, and when meet my
first ancient Egyptian, I'll be ready!
+-----
|  NeilUnreal
|
|  Sometimes a surrealist painting of a pipe is
|  just a surrealist painting of a pipe.
|
|       - Ce n'est pas une citation.
+-----

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <5204ld$q87@news1.io.org>, yuku@io.org says...
>
>Peter van Rossum (pmv100@psu.edu) wrote:
>: In article  (Frank Joseph Yurco) writes:
>
>: [deletions]
>: >As for the possible Polynesian contact with
>: >South America, to the doubters, I would note, how then, did the sweet
>: >potato, a distinct South American crop reach the Polynesian and 
>: >Melanesian cultures?
>
>: After doing some further research into the sweet potato, Ipomoea Batatas,
>: the case doesn't seem to be as clearcut as you make out:
>: "There are 5 major hypotheses to explain the introduction of I Batatas
>:  to the central and western Pacific, none of which can be either
>:  summarily dismissed or neatly confirmed:
I would disagree. Assume that items 3 and 4 are disproved by Yuri's
single example of a prehistoric c 900 BC find. Item 5 would still
require the plant to be recognized as edible and cultivated. Item 2
is improbable because the currents are against the first leg. Item 1
has been tested with Kon Tiki, and thus is a somewhat better candidate
than the rest. I would summarily dismiss items 2 through 4 and leave
items 1 and 5 in the category of possible but improbable. 
>:  1. prehistoric introduction by South American Indian rafts drifting
>:     downstream and downwind
>:  2. prehistoric introduction on Polynesian canoes returning from a round
>:     trip to South America
>:  3. historical introduction by the Portuguese from the Atlantic
>:  4. historical introduction by Spaniards from the Pacific
>:  and
>:  5. natural dispersal by drifting capsules"
>:     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>...snip...
>Yuri.
steve

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <51vkav$ru7@orb.direct.ca>, Ashli Gasten  wrote:
>I'm looking to find any sort of anthropology newsgroups/web sites out
>there.  I'm editing our university anth department newsletter, so I'm
>looking for interesting info to put in there.  Specifically, are there
>any sites out there that have weekely "what's new" updates?  ANy leads
>would be appreciated,
>	-Ashli
>
This information would be valuable to myself as well, and probably a number
of lurkers.  If anyone has this, please post it, and don't hoard the 
information . . . :)
Angstboy

In article <5261cs$1au@news.unocal.com>,
Richard Ottolini  wrote:
>Physical anthopologists said art and seafaring are
>evidence of advanced language ability, and used to
>time that at 50-60,000 years ago.
What kind of art was it? A New York Times article a couple of
days ago said it was a multitude of circles, each about 1.2 inches
in diameter, carved into the sandstone. But the article didn't
describe them further -- what their spatial distribution was, etc.
It did say that a paper about the discovery is in a forthcoming
issue of Antiquity. I would appreciate it if somebody who
has access to that paper could post something more on this
potentially profound discovery.
-- 
==========   http://www.cais.net/whatnews/whatnews.html  =========
==========         Nine days of news at a glance         =========

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Peter van Rossum (pmv100@psu.edu) wrote:
: In article  (Frank Joseph Yurco) writes:
: [deletions]
: >As for the possible Polynesian contact with
: >South America, to the doubters, I would note, how then, did the sweet
: >potato, a distinct South American crop reach the Polynesian and Melanesian
: >cultures?
: After doing some further research into the sweet potato, Ipomoea Batatas,
: the case doesn't seem to be as clearcut as you make out:
: "There are 5 major hypotheses to explain the introduction of I Batatas
:  to the central and western Pacific, none of which can be either
:  summarily dismissed or neatly confirmed:
:  1. prehistoric introduction by South American Indian rafts drifting
:     downstream and downwind
:  2. prehistoric introduction on Polynesian canoes returning from a round
:     trip to South America
:  3. historical introduction by the Portuguese from the Atlantic
:  4. historical introduction by Spaniards from the Pacific
:  and
:  5. natural dispersal by drifting capsules"
:     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: Of course hypotheses 3&4 can be dismissed if the Hather and Kirch article
: I cited earlier is correct and they identified a 900 year old I. Batatas
: specimen on a Polynesian island.
These hypotheses are not serious contenders.
: "Purseglove (1968) suggests introduction ... by natural dispersal; the
:  seeds are viable for more than 20 years; they are hard and dormant
:  unless sacrificed; they are impervious to salt water; and they are not
:  buoyant, but the capsule is.  I doubt that the seedlings could survive
:  in the drift zone on an ocean beach, but conceivably capsules could
:  have been picked up by some Polynesian beachcomber, or seeds might
:  have germinated along the banks of a tidal estuary."
: Above quotes are from:
: Sauer, Jonathan D.
:   1993 Historical Geography of Crop Plants. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Peter, this is a MINORITY view in the field. To say that a capsule will be 
picked up by a beachcomber seems so far-fetched... How are they going to 
recognize this unknown plant? How would they know about its benefits?
If the seeds germinated this still does not mean they will propagate on 
their own. They need human assistance to survive. This is NOT a wild 
plant!
Sure a case can be made for your #5. But this will be pretty well on the 
same level as saying the Aliens were depositing those plants from their 
spaceships...
Yuri.
--
             #%    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    %#
  --  a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Students achieving Oneness will move on to Twoness   ===   W. Allen

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In-reply-to: Marc DIEBOLD's message of Fri, 20 Sep 1996 14:46:16 +0100
>>>>> "Marc" == Marc DIEBOLD  writes:
    Marc> Hi Can somebody tell me if there is a journal, review, or
    Marc> periodical specialised in Ancient Egyptian writing?  Containing
    Marc> hierogl.texts,...  Something like KMT but more specifically
    Marc> oriented on language.  Thanks!  -- /////// ( o o )
    Marc> ----oOOo-----U-----oOOo------------------------------ Marc
    Marc> DIEBOLD ULP University Louis Pasteur Po.Box 1032/F (4 rue Blaise
    Marc> Pascal) 67070 STRASBOURG CEDEX FRANCE
    Phone> (33)88.416.149 in october: (33) 3.88.416.149
    Fax> (33)88.416.060 in october: (33) 3.88.416.060
    mailto> diebold@cournot.u-strasbg.fr
    http> //cournot.u-strasbg.fr/diebold/homepage.htm
    ftp> //currif3.u-strasbg.fr/pub/diebold/
    Marc> -----------------------------------------------------
Pour des textes, il faut aller piocher dans les revues scientifiques : le
JEA (Journal of Egyptian Archaeology), la Revue  d'Egyptologie, etc...
Il y a quelques publis specialisees dans a langues, mais plutot sous forme
de livres, en particulier Lingua Aegyptiaca (qui coute bonbon). 
La plupart de ces revues sont disponible en adherant aux associations qui
les editent :
	Egypt Exploration Society
	Societe Francaise d'Egyptologie.
On recoit, en plus les bulletins desdites societes.
Pour la SFE, il faut ecrire a SFE, college de France, place Marcellin
Berthelot, 75005 Paris.
l'EES a  un site Web (peu fourni pour l'instant).
La societe Kheops propose (pour assez cher, mais ils sont serieux) des
cours par correspondance, y compris l'etude de textes. 
Ils sont a Paris, rue Albert Bayet, 13eme.
--
Serge Rosmorduc,
       	          rosmord@lifac1.ens-cachan.fr
lifac
ENS de Cachan
61, avenue du Pr\'esident Wilson
94235 Cachan Cedex
tel (16 1) 47 40 24 93
fax (16 1) 47 40 24 64
http://weblifac.ens-cachan.fr/~rosmord/AEgypt.html

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
rmp@seanet.com (Norm) wrote:
>The Theran Volcano is the mother of the
>Exodus myths.
>1.Exodus 9:8-11   The plague of the ash fall and darkness
>caused by the giant ash cloud passing over head (the pass over)
Read it again.  The plague was boils, not ash fall and darkness.  I
was in the volcanic ash fallout from Mt. St. Helens; it didn't cause
boils on anybody or anything.  Oh, btw, the "pass over" is something
wholly different.
>2.Exodus 4:9   Blood throughout the land -  Go to
>your nearest plant garden store and check out dried
>blood.  It looks like ash.  They didn't know what it
>was, so they called it like they saw it - BLOOD (dried)
Read it again.  It doesn't say it was dried.  That's an assumption on
your part that's not in the text.  Exodus 7:20-21 makes it clear that
the blood of the plague was liquid, not dried.
>3.exodus 14:24-25  The death of the egyptians in the 
>"sea of reeds".  The volcano created a tsunami that inundated
>the nile delta.  There is evidence all over the eastern med.
>shoreline for a bronze age tsunami.  
First, the reference is wrong.  You mean 27-28.  Second, before this
"tsunami" the text says that there were walls of water on either side
of the Israelites as they passed through.  I'd love to hear how a
volcanically-induced tsunami can do that.  If you're going to use a
volcanic eruption to explain the story, you're going to have to use it
to explain all of it (the notion of "later accretions," unless
accompanied by actual documentary evidence, is a cop-out and not
allowed).  Third, wouldn't it be convenient that such a tsunami "just
happened" to occur at that very moment so it caught the Egyptians and
not the crowd they were chasing?
>4.Exodus 13:21-22  The pillar of cloud.  The volcanos plume
>rose 60 miles into the sky, visible from the shoreline of
>Egypt and Canaan.
Once again the reference is wrong.  The pillar of cloud is mentioned
in 19-20 and 24.  You really should try reading the text before you
try to explain it away, it would help you avoid looking
so...unprepared.  Anyway, the pillar is said to move from in front of
the Hebrews to behind them, so this is one clever volcano!
>5.Exodus19:16-19  A description of nothing else but a volcano
Oh, right.  And Moses went up and stood on top of it.  And then came
down again.  When you can do this with an active volcano, I might
consider that your theory has some credence.  Let me know when you
schedule a demonstration.
>These are just a few of the Biblical references. The pentateuch
>is filled to the brim with the volcanoes after effects on the land
>of Egypt.  The Egyptians didn't mention it because they must have
>considered the disaster an insult to their gods, so they censored
>it.  But the stories remained to be written down many years later.
Pure assumption, nothing textual or otherwise to back it up.  Anybody
can *say* something like this, but demonstrating that it's accurate
can't be done because there is no evidence except that which exists in
the speaker's own mind.
>Here is how the Exodus myth was created.
There's only one myth here, and I'm responding to it right now.
>The catalclysm was witnessed by many.  Their memories and descriptions
>became stories told by the elders around the campfire meetings.  After
>years went by, the old stories were woven into the story of Moses by
>Canaanites who evoloved into the ancient Israelites.
There is no solid evidence that Canaanites "evoloved" [sic] into the
ancient Israelites, or that they created a "story of Moses" or that
such tales were told around campfires.  The evolutionary model for the
origin of the Israelites has been discredited many times.
>The whole myth can be traced and explained scientifically.
"Scientifically" except that there's no evidence to support the
theory.  
>Case closed.  Any challengers?
Case definitely not closed.  You don't even have your references
right, you haven't actually read what the text says, you casually
insert your own assumptions and myths without properly identifying
them as such - there's one good thing about this post: it should make
excellent fertilizer for my garden.

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
However, as I recall, Mystery Hill is adjacent to the property where the
founder of Mormonism received the tablets from Moroni. Interesting
coincidence. And aren't there astronomical alignments verified at the
site?

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
pcd@bozzie.demon.co.uk        wonders...
>I would not imagine that the market for antique coins and visigothic 
>jewellery would have been sufficiently strong around the turn of the
>last century to account for Sauniere's wealth.
alan@moonrake.demon.co.uk     burbles...
>I agree entirely with you. The *only* remaining mystery here is the 
>19th century one about the source of the priest's money.
***"Antique coins" are frequently of GOLD, and that has universal value
   once melted down. Saunier went to Paris and made "influential contacts"
   (some of dubious nature) out of keeping with a poor parish priest. 
   No doubt he was converting his bullion into Francs of the day, AS WELL
   as discussing the "Tomb of God" with rosicrucians.  Et in Arcadia Ego.
   The bones of Arbel ben Joseph lie in the Languedoc, you can be sure.
   the entire Inquisition was instigated by the "heresy" of the idea,
   since if J "dead", then no (literal) "resurrection", and no more 
   income for the Pope and his scivvies.  People have trouble 
   considering renewal of the spirit as the experiencable real Meaning. 
   The "god" of catholicism was none other than the Devil in disguise,
   and in order to perpetrate "his" new religion (of creating dupes to 
   run around praising the afterlife rather than living this one), the 
   REAL gods of love (to which J was a good approximation) had to be 
   tracked down and murdered "in the name of god".
   Confusing to a non-Kamanist, but simple once you understand Packetal
   IMAGE creation in the mind, and activation by Impersonator forces.
   Merely brandishing a word like "god" does *NOT* necessarily invoke the
   real ones. but it *WILL* likely invoke the anti-gods, and they will 
   still imply that they are "god".  so you have to sort out which is 
   which  BY THEIR PERFORMANCES, not by their labels.
   Consider a can of cola next to a can of cats-piss. A devil might swap
   the labels over, and  millions of half-wits will STILL drink the 
   cats-piss, thinking that the "god" on the label "wants them to".  
   ONLY after years of suffering will they eventually conclude 
   "fuck this god of cats-piss, i dont care about mere promises anyway, 
   lets see some progress in THIS life".  And lo and behold, an 
   INDIVIDUAL is born to replace the dupes. The devils dont like that,
   so they seek to kill....  God doesnt like it either, since he spends
   all his time trying to pull Earthlings out of mortal dissipation,
   so HESHE seems "to kill" AS WELL.  
   Woe unto earthlings amidst all these god maniacs. 
         only after youve decided "fuck the lot of them", 
              and turned to the Science of Cognition
                 will you notice  THE SMILE OF THE NOT-GOD, 
   And maybe also the smile of Arbal
   He did his best to explain the Mysteries to the jews, *BUT* 
   his work was not recorded properly and easily became contamined into
   the HYPOCRITICAL EVILS of christianity in the middle ages.  
   J was a bit gullible in those days to the idea of gods "perfection", 
   and didnt teach Reincarnation nor realise how even his "father"/ 
   DELEGATES were capable of EFFECTIVE evils themselves 
   (via Overload and Mistakes).  Its a long story folks. 
   Only they who seek will find. 
   And then youll wish youd never asked....
   What makes you think "truth" has to be "nice" anyway ??
   the Higgs Boson left its traces thruout Consciousness AS WELL.
   Even the gods suffer.....
   Khufus priests knew a Great deal about these things,
             but even they had not met Goedel,
                        and even Kurt had not met....   the Aten Kaman.
   PS, Arbel has just whispered that even when a GOOD person (his father)
   makes mistakes, its still best to "love the lord thy god", since 
   there is NO ONE ELSE to call on in a universe tending towards chaos.
   In other words to reject the good gods on the  basis that they are
   not "good enough" by ones opinions, only leads towards the bad ones.
   Exactly similar to earth governments. We all know major is a half-wit
   floating two foot off the ground most of his day, but nevertheless
   hes BETTER THAN a lot of other half-wits. One only has to look at
   Russia to realise that SOME government is better than NO government.
   All of the above analysis can be applied to ATHEISTS as well via the 
   definitions of Kamanism, since even they *have* to HOPE that their 
   NEXT THOUGHT will be a "Useful" one (Materialistically), and that 
   Sequential Process is philosophically EQUIVALENT whether you ever get
   to experience the Background Reality of "the gods" - or not.
   We are dealing with a *human brain* mechanism of Cognition primarily,
   NOT only with a mere belief system open to derisions. For example
   you may chose to think Arbel never "whispered" anything if YOU like, 
   but you will NEVER be able to refute the Logics of Kamanism (i bet),
   and "logic" is after all the very basis of Science....

In article <5243nr$ivd@news.erinet.com>
          Ray Haren  wrote:
> 
> During the ice age the Med Sea was nearly completely dry because the 
> world's sea leavel dropped and the Atlantic Ocean didn't reach the 
> straights of gibralter.  The great rivers of europe and africa only 
> formed small salt lakes, solar evaporation kept the water level down.  
> Its easy to imagine cities on the edges of the deltas of the rivers.
> 
> But then around 10,000 years ago the ice melted enough that the Atlantic 
> Ocean reached the straights of gibralter.  These straights are much 
> shallower than the bulk of the Mediterranean Sea 'valley'.  The result 
> was a HUGE wall of water roaring down the valley wiping out everything, 
> including Atlantis.
Where did you get these ideas? Certainly 3 million plus years ago
the Med valley was dry, but no Straights of Gibraltar 10K years ago?
-- 
Doug Weller  Moderator,  sci.archaeology.moderated
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list:  email me for details

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
I have missed most of this conversation and therefore maybe, the whole 
point but, the actual skin is usually missing from an Egyptian mummy.
As part of the decay process, the skin peels loose from the underlying 
tissue.  Part of the embalming process was rubbing oils into the body and 
this would also add to the process of "skinning".  In some cases the skin 
was rolled into a separate package and returned to the body, buried in 
the embalmers' caches or disposed of in some way.  Sand dried bodies and 
those of the Middle Kingdom have a lighter shade of flesh than those 
prepared during the New Kingdom and later. The oils could account for 
their darker shade.  The flesh of a mummy is about the same as oil-tanned 
leather.
DNA and melanin are also very difficult to extract from a mummy.  
Remember the last mummy was made about 1700 years ago and under the best 
circumstances tissues change.  The embalming process radically changes 
the body's chemical makeup.  It isn't even possible at this time to say 
what a person's bloodtype was in life.
 Two well know mummies come to mind with regard to hair color, Yuaya 
(father of Queen Tiyi) and Rameses II both had silky white hair in life 
but, both now are blonde from the oils.
The mummy most often cited as being of a black Africian is that of 
Maihiapy found in the Valley of the Kings at the turn of the century.  He 
is shown in his book of the dead as having black skin but, this could 
indicate his divinity.  The mummy is described as having "wooley hair", 
this has turned out to be a wig glued to a shaved head. 
The Egyptians were quite capable of distinguishing races in their art and 
Nubians were shown as black. Libyans, Minoians, "sea people",the 
"Habiriu" (Hebrews) as light pink, or in the red-ocher that the 
Egyptians used to depict themselves. 
All the wigs that are now in museums, are of human hair and the color is 
always a dark brown.  Yet they are still referred to as "black wool" in 
books. 
This is my first posting and I apologise for going on so long. 

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
William strawbridge (wstrawbr@mail.cosmosbbs.com) wrote:
: By 400 AD the Polynesians had arrived at Easter Island.
: How large was the expedition? How many people are needed
: to form a genetically viable society? Seems like the voyages
: may have been more like an armada then a couple of  canoes.
: This type of voyage doesn't seem to indicate trade, more like 
: a migration perhaps due to some tribal friction.
: We know one expedition made it, how many may have missed
: and hit S. America?
Finally some logic here for a change... Thanks, William.
The fact that Polynesians were all over the Pacific islands at rather 
early dates should indicate clearly that they were perfectly able to make 
it further East to the Americas. This should be the default hypothesis, 
really.
Yuri.
--
             #%    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    %#
  --  a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Students achieving Oneness will move on to Twoness   ===   W. Allen

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
George Black (gblack@midland.co.nz) wrote:
: In article <51gtlj$6c6@news1.io.org>, yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky) wrote:
: >George Black (gblack@midland.co.nz) wrote:
: >: There is no pottery in the Polynesian pre-European archaeology strata.
: >: Had they (the Polynesian) visited the Americas (or even the Asian mainland) 
: >: pottery would havew been present.
: >
: >This is quite an interesting claim, George. Would you like to 
: >substantiate? Or perhaps to withdraw it?
: Again. There is no evidence of pottery in the Polynesian pre-European 
: Archaeological strata.
: I have been to a number of sites here in New Zealand. There have never been 
: pottery remains.
[snip]
What about Lapita pottery?
Yuri.
--
             #%    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    %#
  --  a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Students achieving Oneness will move on to Twoness   ===   W. Allen

So Andrews & Schellenberger were advanced a lot of money for their
book. What's unusual about that?
So they called it the Priory of Sion not the Abbey....what's the big
deal?
So they didn't verify Sauniere's trip to Paris...it really makes not a
whit of difference.
So Plantard has been in jail....so was Mandela.
So de Cherissey was a libertine.....so are countless others who
nonetheless contribute.
So Plantard is a peasant and de Cherissey admits that he forged the
documents......of course libertines and peasants don't lie.......but
the documents still provided the authors with what they regarded as
the key.
It seems to me there is a fad at the moment to rubbish anything that
appears to pander to some people's open-minded inquisitiveness  in
what has cleverly been termed "pseudo-history". In fact at no stage do
either these authors or those of "The Holy Blood and The Holy
Grail"ever claim to be writing History.They build up hypotheses as
they try to solve a riddle....thats all. This Timewatch programme,
hailed by the so-called critics for its thorough demolition job, in
fact did nothing of the sort. What it did do quite cleverly was
present a shallow but learned-sounding argument designed to appeal to
the pseudo-intelligentsia who can clap themselves on the back and
applaud their rise above the ranks of the "gullible". The programme's
main points either showed themselves as trivial (such as querying
Priory or Abbey while admitting that an organisation of Sion had
existed in medieval times) or else were already dealt with in the book
it insinuated had been unaware of. Andrews and Schellenberger realise
the cipher is a modern fabrication, realise the inscriptions on the
stones may or may not have existed, realise Sauniere may not have been
to Paris, realise the "Secret Documents"must have been deposited
probably by Plantard et al, but maintain that this is neither here nor
there. Why? Because (to them) it still provides the right key to the
door of Poussin etc. In other words de Cherissey may claim to have
forged the parchments but it is more likely he modified them, or else
how could he have successfully supplied the right key? So really we
are left with one question...the validity or otherwise of the geometry
of the "coded message"and the various paintings. And here as usual you
get two "experts" disagreeing. Personally I would need to have the
geometry proved beyond doubt not to think that maybe the authors have
found merely one among many possible geometries. But its obvious they
believe it, so why scorn and accuse?  As for J.C. being buried
somewhere outside of The Holy Land (and not having risen to
Heaven)....that I feel is quite probable. No offence to the religious
intended but which scenario is more worthy of Timewatch's attempt at
scathing criticism?

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Jack:
First of all - Binford called it Middle Range Theory - mid-range theory is 
an approach that came out of sociology.
Binfordian (I love that term) Middle Range Theor really isn't a codified 
(if there is such a thing in science) body of theory - it's really an 
approach to building middle range research. This research is intended to 
be used to build MRT. His call for MR research comes out of his dispair at 
realizing the lack of a general archaeological theory.
Since the archaeological record is considered static and we are interested 
in explaining the dynamic social and cultural behavior that produced it, 
we need a link between the two - that was the proposed Middle Range 
Theory. As I see it, Binford suggested that this link was to be composed 
of an experimental approach to the creation of the archaeological record 
as well as using ethnoarchaeology. This seems to come out of his work with 
the Nunamuit to explain the Mousterian problem (which he has never really 
addressed again)
MRT is to be used to understand the development of the archaeological 
record, mostly through studying contemporary phenomena and epiphenomena - 
of course, then you get into the whole problem of using analogy - as I see 
it with any historical science, if we can't use analogy - we really can 
not nothing about what happened in the past and we will forever be 
captured in just describing the archaeological record, instead of 
explaining it.
William Belcher
Dept. of Anthropology
University of Wisconsin-Madison
mntcadst@ad.isu.edu wrote:
>does anyone out there know how to develope mid-range theory as Biford 
>explained it?  I would like to know if anyone has really used the 
>process and had results.  
>
>I ask becaus this has been the topic for my Arch. Seminar class.  We 
>talked about it for a long time and everyone came away frustrated and 
>annoyed.
>I think that it has some sound principles but we lack a data base that 
>is extensive enough.
>
>Questions, comments and cuss words are solicited
>
>Jack

Instant answers to some instant questions I got.
Yes my primary theory is some kind of Shoemaker-Levy 0 (the S-L 9 comet 
hit Jupiter in 1994 in over 20 pieces). And in addition to what I 
suggested in August, it may have had several rounds with an orbit of 
about 180 years. Thus the first visit (probably only some meteor showers) 
would have been around 2370 BC. But the scenery may have been spectacular 
and frightening. After the main hit in 2193 BC (?) there may have been a 
second, smaller one, in about 2010 BC. 
But I don't tie myself in these first rough and tentative calculations. 
I'm open to all kind of suggestions (means also non-cosmical ones) that 
could explain the event. But when we talk about the catastrophe around 
2193 BC, the needed amount of energy is several gigatons.
The second question to which I want to give an instant answer concerns 
the manuscript. It is not from 13th century BC but from 13th century AD. 
It is written in old Frisian and has been translated to at least Dutch. 
Readable if you understand Swedish and/or German. It's easy to note the 
common roots of these two languages.
BTW, Rennes-le-Chateau. Good reading about the subject is David Wood: 
Genisis (right: Gen-Isis, not Genesis), 1985. ISBN 0 85936 180 2 is the 
version in my book shelf.   
And last but not least: if there ever was an Atlantis (drowned in 
catastrophe of 2193), it was outside of the Mediterranian. Sources: 
Plato, Oera manuscript and common (Occam) sense.
Timo

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
jwbst22+@pitt.edu (John W Bornmann) wrote:
>In article <51vkav$ru7@orb.direct.ca>, Ashli Gasten  wrote:
>>I'm looking to find any sort of anthropology newsgroups/web sites out
>>there.  I'm editing our university anth department newsletter, so I'm
>>looking for interesting info to put in there.  Specifically, are there
>>any sites out there that have weekely "what's new" updates?  ANy leads
>>would be appreciated,
>>	-Ashli
>>
>				
>This information would be valuable to myself as well, and probably a number
>of lurkers.  If anyone has this, please post it, and don't hoard the 
>information . . . :)
>Angstboy
Try ArchNet, sci.anthropology, sci.anthropology.paleo, or any
university dept anthro  page.

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Interested in Amarna ? check http://www.amarna.com

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <3e333e47@ramtops.demon.co.uk>,
   Doug Weller  wrote:
>In article <51g8km$orp@news.enterprise.net>
>          solos@enterprise.net (Adrian Gilbert) wrote:
>[SNIP]
>> What nobody has so far mentioned is that in the Channel 4 programme they 
went 
>> even further than suggesting trans-Atlantic contacts to a worldwide trade 
in 
>> narcotics. They suggested that the people of Central and South America were 
>> trading across the Pacific Ocean with China and Indonesia. The evidence of 
the 
>> use of jade in funerary riites in both America and China would seem to 
support 
>> this hypothesis, as would the presence of huge, stepped pyramids near Xian.
>
>I don't follow the point about jade -- so what?  You'd expect *some*
>similarities in funeral rites between almost any 2 cultures, especially
>over time.
>
>As for your Xian pyramids, I understand they are tombs -- not temples.
>So some similiarties in shape, but not function and I suspect not
>construction.  Evidence for lack of contact, perhaps, but not for
>contact.
>I also understand (because I've seen it) that the Pyramid-Temple of 
inscriptions at Palenque in Mexico, in which the skeleton of Pacal was found 
with his jade mask, was also a tomb. At least one other pyramid in Palenque 
has been found to be a tomb and it is expected that others were as well. I 
have never disputed that Egyptian pyramids were primarily tombs, though they 
seem also to have had functions beyond merely being last resting places. In 
this context the Chinese "Stepped tumuli" clasify as pyramids in my book. They 
certainly look like stepped pyramids of the Teotihuacan type.
Adrian G. Gilbert. 

In article <526hj1$2a@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>, 
tje3@ciao.cc.columbia.edu says...
>
>dragoman@geocities.com (Robert Moldenhauer) wrote:
>>through illegal digs (which are destructive), wouldn't Archaeology 
be
>>better served by cleaning house and feeding the antiquities markets 
>>with material that is of little or no use?
>
>
>        And what exactly is of "little or no use"?
>        Anything, no matter the size or artistic or material value is 
worth
>anything archaeologically or historically speaking when it is removed 
from
>it's context without cataloging and describing it.  Any old pot, 
regardless
>of whether or not we think it is attractive, is worthless as a means 
of
>understanding the past if the context is lost -- and that includes 
not only
>geographically where it was, but the stratum it was from it, the 
artifacts
>around it, a relative and/or absolute date, the location within the 
larger
>area like a city or home.
That's just the point I was trying to make, there's an awful lot of 
"stuff" stored in various places, like the Byrsa, like ACOR, like 
AIAR, that has little or no information attached to it, the field 
records are gone or incomplete, so why bother storing it.
There are also a lot of good archaeological records out there, that 
have recorded the location and type of artifacts.  As I said in my 
message, what happens after the pottery reading?  The sherds get 
chucked into the spoil pile, no museum would want them, they've told 
their story, now it's time to move on.  The same could be said with 
generic whole pottery.  The antiquities trade in illegal goods could 
be virtually whiped out by the supply of old pots laying in dusty 
store rooms.
>        
>        And there something concerned folks can do about dealers: 
take the
>evidence like the catalog or web address to the nearest university
>archaeology or anthropology department and they will know who to 
contact --
>there are international laws against selling antiquities and stealing 
from
>sites.
>
>
>Tammy Jo Eckhart        "The power touches me
>tje3@columbia.edu       The power helps us see
>* I only look sweet *   The power holds my hand
>*    and innocent   *   The power drives me crazy" -- Amy Grant

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <843139139snz@bozzie.demon.co.uk>,
   pcd@bozzie.demon.co.uk ("Paul C. Dickie") wrote:
>In article 
>           alan@moonrake.demon.co.uk "Alan M. Dunsmuir" writes:
>
>>In article <843064026snz@bozzie.demon.co.uk>, "\"Paul C. Dickie\""
>> writes
>>>Still, at least the BBC managed to smash large chunks from one edifice they 
>>>helped to create -- the tall tales told by that arch-fake, Henry Lincoln, 
>>>regarding Rennes le Chateau, Berenger Sauniere and the Knights Templar...
>>
>>Yes - it was very enjoyable, wasn't it? Rarely have I seen a loon so
>>comprehensively hoist with his petard as these two latest "Tomb of God"
>>freaks.
>
>Like how a Victorian railway line and a cross commemorating some events in 
the 
>C19th fits their explanation of an "age-old mystery" and which allegedly 
>predated the stagecoach, let alone the railway?
>
>What they didn't care to tell us was why they chose the Masonic geometry of
>the equilateral triangle and the square, over the pentagonal geometry of the
>previous load of ca-ca.  Nor did the programme makers care to tell us what 
was 
>in de Sede's book *before* Plantard and Chamonix bamboozled him with all that 
>tripe about the "Ancien" Order of the Priory of Sion.  Nor did they care to 
>explain the presence of some of the symbolism in that church where they used 
>sculpture of grapes to explain that the "pommes blues" referred to Christ's 
>blood.
>
>The programme, though reasonably thorough in its demolition of the 
stupidities 
>that the BBC helped to start in its Chronicle programmes, seemed somewhat 
>confused.  To start with, it seemed to be going along with the drivel about 
>"la bergere" (variously a shepherdess or an armchair though, mercifully, not 
>both at the same time) and "le cheval de Dieu", the latter being not a 
railroad 
>but slang for a cricket, which was in turn slang for part of a bridge. Then 
>they told us that both the cryptogram and its solution were the work of Paul 
>Chamonix in the 1950's.  Well, *that* makes sense, for the form of the 
Viginere 
>cipher he used was the more modern variety; the original form used the 
message 
>itself as the key, and would not have been superencrypted by such a 
complicated 
>transposition cipher as the "knight's moves" puzzle.
>
>>Sean Connery was more convincing when he uncovered the code to the
>>entrance to the Venician catacombs in "Indiana Jones and the Last
>>Crusade", than they managed to be with their 'geometrical truth'.
>
>What did you expect?  
>
>Mind you, Henry Lincoln (et al) managed to fool enough folk for long enough 
to 
>make pots of money out of the tale. Perhaps *that* was the secret of how 
>Berenger Sauniere amassed so much wealth -- by telling tall tales about  his 
>village and the visigoths, he conned rich people into giving him money?
>
>Why give Henry Lincoln all the stick? He had two co-athors for "The Holy 
Blood and Holy Grail" (Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh) and they should 
share the blame as well as the profit! The real crime of "The Holy Blood" was 
that it has distracted researchers from many of the real mysteries of 
Mediaeval France and Britain. Forget Rennes le Chateau, look at Reims.
Adrian G. Gilbert.

Hmm, me thinks there are a few mistakes in that chain of argument - completely 
independent of the existance/non-existance of Atlantis (did someone say it was 
mentioned by Plato? that was quite a while after the ice age).
Ray Haren (rharen@erinet.com) wrote:
: My theory on Atlantis is that it was a city that is now buried under the 
: Mediterranean Sea.
: During the ice age the Med Sea was nearly completely dry because the 
: world's sea leavel dropped and the Atlantic Ocean didn't reach the 
: straights of gibralter.  The great rivers of europe and africa only 
: formed small salt lakes, solar evaporation kept the water level down.  
: Its easy to imagine cities on the edges of the deltas of the rivers.
Well, given that there was a warm period before the ice age, the water could 
have stayed in there even if the Straits of Gibraltar were dry. The European 
rivers were huge fearce streams, sins they were fed by a huge ice cap over the 
Alps (for central Europe and reaching down from the pole over northern 
Europe). Also at the time the Sahara was not a dessert, but a savanna, so it 
was reasonably dry, but a lot wetter than nowadays (Rock paintings in the 
Fezzan show elephants and giraffes among others). 
Anyone out there know any more details about the climate in northern Africa during the 
last ice age?
Ralf
: But then around 10,000 years ago the ice melted enough that the Atlantic 
: Ocean reached the straights of gibralter.  These straights are much 
: shallower than the bulk of the Mediterranean Sea 'valley'.  The result 
: was a HUGE wall of water roaring down the valley wiping out everything, 
: including Atlantis.
: So Atlantis didn't sink into the sea, the sea rose over it.
: Flame at will.  No, I mean flame at Will, and my name ain't Will.
--

Frank Joseph Yurco  wrote:
> Dear Steve and Yuri,
> 
> The Pacific Islanders, especially the Polynesians and Micronesians, were
> prodigious navigators. They had learned to navigate by the stars, also
> used wave patterns, and watched clouds, as well as bird formations. All
> these could give signals of undetected islands nearby. High islands are
> cloud covered at higher elevations, waves would bounce off islands, and
> certain birds were ranging far out to sea, while others stuck close to
> land. So, all these techniques were used in combination to reach and
> settle new islands. That's how Hawaii was found, Easter Island, as well
> as New Zealand, all settled by Polynesian navigators. 
What is the evidence for _continuous_ contact between New Zealand,
Easter Island and the wider Polynesia? My understanding is that there
was very little contact after the initial settlements.
> These abilities also lead me to believe
> that it is far more probable that the Polynesians touched South America,
> and there acquired the sweet potato, that in Pre-Columbian times they
> then dispersed through certain islands. The Marquesas Island Polynesians
> are the likeliest to have done this, as the sweet potato then spread in
> the larger high islands, and eventually became established in Melanesia
> and especially New Guinea. 
Weren't the Marquesas Magellen's first landfall in the western Pacific?
-- 
Bill Bedford      billb@mousa.demon.co.uk            Shetland
Brit_Rail-L list  autoshare@mousa.demon.co.uk
Looking forward to 2001 - 
When the world it due to start thinking about the future again.

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In sci.archaeology Steve Russell 
wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Sep 1996, Matt Silberstein wrote:
[snip]
>> The simple question is: Do you have flame wars with yourself? As long
>> as you can keep both sides of the conversation pleasant and on topic
>> there is no need for those men in white coats. (Unless, of course, you
>> have a thing for men in white coats.)
>> 
>> Matt Silberstein
>Hey Matt, every time I think about voting in this next presidential 
>election (that's U.S., as in tweedlbubba or tweedlstiff), I get in a 
>flame war with myself.  I would write in Crazy Horse, but if he came back 
>he would never agree to serve.
Crazy Horse would have made a damn good president. Though I would say
that Tecumsah (sp) would have been better. But I suppose that it
depends on the current political situation and what kind of president
we need.  I have always been a Eugene Debbs man myself. Though one
year I did support Howard The Duck. 
Matt Silberstein
-------------------------------
Breaking away to the other side
I wanna make sense of why we live and die
I don't get it, I don't get it
I ask my friends if they understand
They just laugh at me and watch another band
They don't worry, they don't worry
Michael Timmins 

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <521tql$rdj@shore.shore.net>,
Steve Whittet  wrote:
>In article , petrich@netcom.com says...
	[On how to create the various styles of temple column...]
	But *what* were the words used for the various parts of a column? 
In both Greek and Egyptian?
>>        The Greek names are Ionic, Doric, and Corinthian -- Greek 
>>place-names. Zero Egyptian names. 
>We don't know what the names the Greeks used were. The names we use 
>were invented by Palladio who created the Greek Orders of Architecture
>as a system so he could imitate the Greeks.
	So we can't say where the names came from, and we certainly can't 
jump to the conclusion that they all came from Egypt.
>>>Ma'at was the Goddess of Truth, and represented the essence of
>>>everything which was right and proper. The idea of the good.
>>        And *HOW* is this specifically Egyptian?
>To answer your question as simply as possible,the Egyptians celebrated 
>a very subtle and sophisticated philosophy. I think it is fair to say 
>it was an independent invention. Each of their "gods" represented a
>natural principle such as Truth, Justice, Wisdom, Literacy, Numeracy,
>Beauty, Loyalty, Craftsmanship, Time, Earth, Day, Night, Sky, Sun, 
>Stars, Life, Death, Love, Courage, Friendship, Innocence, Humour
>The Physical Body, Intelligence, Becoming and Being, (to mention
>a few of the better known and most universal symbols).
	How is that so? And Mr. Whittet, be careful in your explanations 
of how it is so, because you are likely to make all the net.egyptologists 
ROTFL, thus making it impossible for them to post a serious evaluation of 
your proposals.
>>        There you go again. English "nature" is from Latin natura, what 
>>something has built-in, from nasci, to be born, ultimately from 
>>Indo-European *gen@- "to generate, beget, ..."
>What we describe as nature was what the Egyptians celebrated as neter, 
>the natural principles which we all observe and understand as a part 
>of our own natures, taken all together it described the process by
>which our existence becomes whatever it is going to be.
	Like how???
>>        So what? Why does he have to have borrowed the idea from the 
>>Egyptians? Lots of people very far away from them have had an idea that 
>>something or other is right and proper.
>We are talking about a period before there was Law and Order in the
>world. ...
	Tell that to Hammurabi :-)
	More seriously, when a group of people follows some customary 
course of action, members of these group are likely to describe it as the 
right thing to do.
>>        And I note that Plato's Republic is not headed by some divine 
>>monarch, unlike Pharaonic Egypt, and it does not recommend that when it 
>>comes time to be judged in the Next World that you assert that you have 
>>not committed any of a *huge* catalog of sins.
>Plato is examining the state of mind which the Egyptians had created.
	Like how???
>The "negative confession" is a part of the process by which a man's
>life is put in the balance to be measured, weighed and judged by the
>goddess Ma'at (Plato's Diatoma)
	But where is the Negative Confession in Plato's Dialogues?
	And is the Republic led by a divine monarch? It wasn't, at least 
the last time I read it :-)
>>        Furthermore, its three divisions of society, guardians, soldiers, 
>>and common people, parallel Dume'zil's proposed Indo-European division of 
>>society almost exactly. No Egyptian influence there :-)
>Its three divisions are three levels of conciousness. The dialoges can
>be taken literally by common people who enjoy a story such as Atlantis
>and wish to go no farther. It can be learned as a method and practiced 
>like gymnastics or music; it can be used in combat as the weapon of the 
>soldier, and it can be a guardian which helps us avoid making the wrong
>choices in life.
	So it's literal if I like it and allegorical if I don't. Where 
have I heard this before??? :-):-):-)
>Note as just one instance, how carefully inscriptions are composed
>in a harmonious balance. ...
	These are inscriptions that are meant to last a long time; the 
more cursive Egyptian scripts that were developed from the monumental 
script (hieroglyphics), and they don't look very neat.
	And what is specifically Egyptian about careful order in 
monumental inscriptions???
>>>>More seriously, there is no discussion of rule by an allegedly divine 
>>>>monarch who is careful to keep the family lineage pure by inbreeding.
>>>No, and in fact that is not a part of the Egyptian concept of what 
>>>was right and proper either. ...
>>        What idiocy. Why go to all the trouble to be inbred if that is 
>>the case???
>One has the sense that you might answer that better than I...
	Does one go through the trouble of keeping one's family line 
inbred unless one believes that, for whatever reason, it is the right 
thing to do???
	And where does Plato mention the idea that a royal family has to 
be inbred in order to avoid contaminating its lineage with commoner 
ancestry???
	[a lot of irrelevant reassertion of WhittetLinguistics...]
-- 
Loren Petrich				Happiness is a fast Macintosh
petrich@netcom.com			And a fast train
My home page: http://www.webcom.com/petrich/home.html
Mirrored at: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/pe/petrich/home.html

In article <5231hv$1kb@news.enterprise.net>, Adrian Gilbert
 writes
>
[Posting snipped]
>Hey Ann, if you want an alternative view on the pyramids and what they might 
>have meant to the people who built them, take a look at the solos sight at 
>http://www.netlink.co.uk/users/solos. Whatever the "academics" might say or 
>whatever "consensus" opinions they might subscribe to, the fact remains that 
>nobody knowns how they were built. They are only guessing. They certainly 
>haven't explained how sixty ton blocks of granite were raised up to the King's 
>Chamber and set with an accuracy that would do justice to Christopher Wren. 
>Cheers! 
>Adrian G. Gilbert (co-author of "The Orion Mystery")
>
Hey Adrian, you're brilliant!!  You've found the answer!
The accuracy does justice to Christopher Wren because he built the
pyramids.  He was a time traveller!  It's obvious!
But who's going to tell the Atlanteans/Aliens groups?  It's going to
have to be you, I'm not brave enough.
-- 
Kathy McIntosh

solos@enterprise.net (Adrian Gilbert) wrote:
 They are only guessing. They certainly 
>haven't explained how sixty ton blocks of granite were raised up to the King's 
>Chamber and set with an accuracy that would do justice to Christopher Wren. 
>Cheers! 
>Adrian G. Gilbert (co-author of "The Orion Mystery") 
Adrian,
Obviously no one knows for sure how the blocks were raised 
to the King's Chamber.  Just for the record, aren't the 
largest ones in the 40 ton range.  There are equally large 
blocks in Khafre's pyramid and Menkura's temple.  There is 
also a 45 ton granite block in the Pit at Zawiet el Aryan. 
Mastaba 17 at Meidum has on impressively sized block - 
haven't heard a weight for it.  If I recall correctly, 
there are also some hefty blocks at Abu Roach - I will have 
to check my pictures to be certain.  The point I am trying 
to make is that the Great Pyramid does not have a corner on 
large blocks in Old Kingdom structures.  Consider that the 
granite ones probably came from 400 miles south.  Surely if 
the ancients can figure out a way to get the 45 ton granite 
block from Aswan to Zawiet and move all the other large 
blocks around, they can probably figure out how to raise 40 
tons up to the top of the Kings Chamber - a ramp would do 
nicely.  
However if you question whether the Egyptians could move 
these blocks, please offer another explanation, one that 
will account for the movement of the large blocks at a 
number of sights. 
Charlie

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Does anyone know any background info on Ahmose Hentempet, and Ahmose 
Henutimehu, whose bodies were found in the 1881 Egyptian mummy cache 
at Deir el-Bahri?
Also, does anyone have any names of the children of the following pharaohs:
Thutmose III
Thutmose IV
Ahmose I
Amenhotep I
Amenhotep II

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
[deletions]
>: "There are 5 major hypotheses to explain the introduction of I Batatas
>:  to the central and western Pacific, none of which can be either
>:  summarily dismissed or neatly confirmed:
>:  1. prehistoric introduction by South American Indian rafts drifting
>:     downstream and downwind
>:  2. prehistoric introduction on Polynesian canoes returning from a round
>:     trip to South America
>:  3. historical introduction by the Portuguese from the Atlantic
>:  4. historical introduction by Spaniards from the Pacific
>:  and
>:  5. natural dispersal by drifting capsules"
>:     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>: Sauer, Jonathan D.
>:   1993 Historical Geography of Crop Plants. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
[deletions]
>Peter, this is a MINORITY view in the field. To say that a capsule will be
>picked up by a beachcomber seems so far-fetched... How are they going to
>recognize this unknown plant? How would they know about its benefits?
>
>If the seeds germinated this still does not mean they will propagate on
>their own. They need human assistance to survive. This is NOT a wild
>plant!
>
>Sure a case can be made for your #5. But this will be pretty well on the
>same level as saying the Aliens were depositing those plants from their
>spaceships...
>
>Yuri.
Your responses are truly getting weak Yuri.  I give a full quote
from a 1993 book on plant origins and dispersals by a second generation
plant geographer and you respond with an assertion that he's wrong.
How about you demonstrate that this is a "minority view"? Or how about
you give any kind of recent research that refutes the possibility of
a natural dispersal?  Why don't you write to Dr. Sauer and explain to
him that he doesn't know what he's talking about?  I've provided you
with current research, all you seem to counter with is a basic, "I don't
want to believe it." If you won't research and support your points with
accurate data I suggest you leave archaeology to those of who will.
Peter van Rossum
PMV100@PSU.EDU

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <521hq5$hd@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, jwbst22+@pitt.edu (John W Bornmann) wrote:
>In article <51vkav$ru7@orb.direct.ca>, Ashli Gasten  wrote:
>>I'm looking to find any sort of anthropology newsgroups/web sites out
>>there.  I'm editing our university anth department newsletter, so I'm
>>looking for interesting info to put in there.  Specifically, are there
>>any sites out there that have weekely "what's new" updates?  ANy leads
>>would be appreciated,
>>       -Ashli
>>
>
>                                
>This information would be valuable to myself as well, and probably a number
>of lurkers.  If anyone has this, please post it, and don't hoard the 
>information . . . :)
>Angstboy
>
There's a *comprehensive* list available at:
http://www.nitehawk.com/alleycat/anth-faq.html
Have fun!
-------------------
Richard
rspear@primenet.com
www.primenet.com/~rspear

Does anyone have the inside scoop on the 75,000 year old rock engravings
and even older tools reported in the NYT on Saturday, Sept. 21? 
Chris Sloan
sloan7876@aol.com

In <524bsq$gr9@sun.sirius.com> Greg Reeder  writes: 
>
>solos@enterprise.net (Adrian Gilbert) wrote:
>
>>Hey Ann, if you want an alternative view on the pyramids and what
they might 
>>have meant to the people who built them, take a look at the solos
sight at 
>>http://www.netlink.co.uk/users/solos. Whatever the "academics" might
say or 
>>whatever "consensus" opinions they might subscribe to, the fact
remains that 
>>nobody knowns how they were built. They are only guessing. They
certainly 
>>haven't explained how sixty ton blocks of granite were raised up to
the King's 
>>Chamber and set with an accuracy that would do justice to Christopher
Wren. 
>>Cheers! 
>>Adrian G. Gilbert (co-author of "The Orion Mystery") 
>
>
>Dear Adrian, 
>So please tell us how were the pyramids built?
>-- 
>
>Greg Reeder
>On the WWW
>at Reeder's Egypt Page
>---------------->http://www.sirius.com/~reeder/egypt.html
>reeder@sirius.com
>
>
Didn't you know?  A transexual alien built them.  :)
Amanda

Paul Gans writes: 
>
>August Matthusen (matthuse@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: 
>: Below is the IAC(tm) FAQ:
>: 
>: The IAC(tm) is just one of the many branches of the International Science
>: Conspiracy(tm).  In all cases, "scientists" and/or "academicians" of some
>: "ilk" or another are conspiring to prevent critical information being
>: allowed to reach *those who would really know best what to do* with this
>: information (TWWRKBWTD).  These same "scientists" are also *not*
>: investigating things which would supply much needed information for
>: TWWRKBWTD.  Should any of TWWRKBWTD seek to spread the "word" regarding
>: anything being hidden, then the "scientists" make use of the dreaded "peer
>: review" to prevent the "word" from being effectively spread.  Examples of
>: things which the ISC(tm) is hiding or is not investigating are: space
>: ships being back-engineered in Area 51; space aliens being held captive in
>: Area 51; perpetual motion machines (the patent office sends out members of
>: the ISC(tm) to confiscate them);  the 1000 mile/gallon carburator;  claims
>: for the existence of Atlantis, Mu, Lemuria, et al.; amorphous silica
>: crystallizing to form sandstone strata; carbon dating of the wood from the
>: Pyramid; the Sea People(tm) dyeing salt pink; the Sphinx being carved by
>: Atlanteans; Celts, Egyptians, Basques, Polynesians, Oghams et al. invading
the new
>: world to teach the early peoples everything; collisions of the Earth with
>: Venus being responsible for hydrocarbons on Earth and everything else in
>: the Bible (while Einstein thought God does not play dice with the Universe,
>: Velikovsky was sure He plays billiards with it); the Great Flood; Marduk; 
>: psychics; Uri Geller; the Atlantean mathematics of the Nazca Monkey, 
>: Carboniferous fossil hominids and axe handles, etc., etc., etc.
>: 
>: 
>: Regards,
>: August Matthusen
>: [Recording Secretary, ISC(tm);
>: Treasurer, International Geological Conspiracy(tm)]
>
>Now we're going to have to kill you.
Over my dead body!!!
Regards,
August Matthusen

In  Jon 
writes: 
>
>In article <51qlag$3sj@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, wd&aeMiller;
> writes
>>In  Jon 
>>writes: 
>>>
>>>In article <51n7v8$deu@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>,
>>>millerwd@ix.netcom.com writes
>>>>
>>>>>>Fly on a plane that follows little red lines, of course.  Then to
>>>>make
>>>>>>it interesting...the plane won't land...we'll just parachute out
>>the
>>>>>>back and happen to land about two trees away from the main
entrance
>>>>of
>>>>>>the city.  Of course, we'll have to shoot a couple of nazi's on
the
>>>>way
>>>>>> before we can get to the door where we shout the ancient
password
>>of
>>>>>>entry :"Mellon!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hey, this could become a great screenplay.  hehe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Amanda :)
>>>>>I am afraid it won't work.  You see Atlantis is underwater.  By
the
>>>>time
>>>>>we got two tree away from the entrance by parachute, we would be
>>very
>>>>>wet, and, more upsettingly, dead.  Moreover, the only way that we
>>>>could
>>>>>shoot Nazis on the way down is if they were in a submarine! 
Tricky
>>>>this
>>>>>one.  I suggest that the way forward is to get the Nazis drunk in
a
>>>>bar
>>>>>in Cairo, then enslave them, and force them underground to dig a 
>>>>>Transatlantic tunnel.  If we happened to come across any
fossilised
>>>>>Egyptian sailors on the way, whose remains were loaded to the
gills
>>>>with
>>>>>cocaine, this would be a bonus.  But I'm not going until you agree
>>to 
>>>>>the thigh length rubber boots!
>>>>>-- 
>>>>>Jon 
>>>>
>>>>Well, well.  Ok.  As long as the thigh-high leather boots can be
>>purple
>>>>and green tye dye.  :)  As for the tunnel...good idea!  Perhaps we
>>can
>>>>use our enslaved nazi's for even longer working hours if we let
them
>>>>chop up and snort any mummies they find.
>>>>
>>>>Amanda
>>>>:)
>>>>
>>>>P.S.  For all you people out there, who haven't followed this
thread
>>>>from the beginning....It's a JOKE!!!!   DOH!!!!   Laugh!  Have
fun!!!
>>
>>>>Get bent!  
>>>You mean - gasp, you're not serious. How can I find Atlantis without
>>>you - who will wear the boots. No calm down Jon, surely she jests in
>>>case any Nazis are looking in.  No, the mummies have to be preserved
>>>to confound the Egyptologists.  Now any really expert archaeologist
>>>should regularly confound Egyptologists - it's modern form of pig
>>>sticking!
>>>
>>>-- 
>>>Jon 
>>
>>Sorry, but I had to be careful there for a day or two.  I heard the
>>Nazi regime was reading our posts.  Can't let them in on the secret,
>>now can we?  Darn, I really thought the mummy idea was good.  :)  I
>>guess we'll just have to settle for Nazi slave labor.  Of course, I
>>could always drive the heel of my boot into the back of the slow
>>workers.....(grin)
>>
>>Amanda
>It's OK, I have the whip for that - you only have to kick them for
>fun, but watch out for the ones who enjoy it!
>-- 
>Jon 
We'll just have to make them scrub the toilets.  :)
Amanda

Just a quick note to let everyone know that Knappers Anonymous, the site 
devoted to Flintknapping and Understanding Stone Tools, has found a new 
look and a new home at:
http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~t64tr/knap.html
Thanks,
Tim Rast

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
Did anyone on this board ever read the above titled-article in
Analog magazine in August 1984?  The author, Christopher P. Dunn,
states that a granite hole and core found by Flinders Petrie in
the Giza Valley Temple in 1880 bore the following
characteristics: 1) A taper on both the hole and core; 2) A
symmetrical helical groove following these tapers and cut at 0.1
inch per revolution; and 3) A spiral groove cut deeper through the
harder quartz in the granite than the softer feldspar.  Dunn
contends that this cutting rate is several hundred times faster
than can be achieved today by diamond drills, and that there
appears to be no way to explain the deeper groove cut through the
quartz than the feldspar other than ultrasonic drilling, which
employs quartz crystals and causes the quartz embedded in the
granite to vibrate sympathetically with the drill bit.  Comments?

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.
In article <5201rj$q87@news1.io.org> yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky) writes:
>William strawbridge (wstrawbr@mail.cosmosbbs.com) wrote:
>: By 400 AD the Polynesians had arrived at Easter Island.
>
>: We know one expedition made it, how many may have missed
>: and hit S. America?
>
>Finally some logic here for a change... Thanks, William.
>
>The fact that Polynesians were all over the Pacific islands at rather 
>early dates should indicate clearly that they were perfectly able to make 
>it further East to the Americas. 
Yuri, no one is arguing that they were not *able* to arrive in the 
Americas, I think everyone would stipulate that it is a possibility.  
What is being discussed is whether they *did* arrive in the Americas.
>This should be the default hypothesis, really.
>
>Yuri.
Let me see if I can explain the most basic point of the scientific 
method to you.  The most critical factor for a hypothesis to be
considered useful is that it must be falsifiable, if it is not
possible to falsify a hypothesis then it is completely useless.
That is why you are incorrect when you say that the working hypothesis
should be that contacts occurred.  Let me go through this by example
for you.
The default hypothesis of no contact occurred is easily falisifiable.
All you need to find is one authenticated Polynesian object, of pre-16th 
century date, which could not have arrived by natural means, at a 
pre-16th century New World site.  If an object satisfying these criteria 
was, or is, recovered then I (and any honest scientist) will be convinced 
that contact occurred - of course we would then need to look into the 
scale and impact of that contact.  I think that you understand how this 
works and that's why you've gotten so uppity about the recognition that 
the sweet potato could have arrived in Polynesia by non-human processes 
(a fact that even you grudgingly admitted to).
On the other hand the default hypothesis of contact did occur can never
be falsified.  Archaeologists have been doing work for 100+ years in
the New World.  I maintain that no objects satisfying the criteria
outlined above have been recovered (at least none I'm aware of).  If I
am correct does this prove that no contacts occurred?  The answer is
*no*, all it means is that so far none have been found.  What if we
worked for another 100 years and still didn't find such objects, would
this prove contacts didn't occur? *No*.  How about another 100 years? No.
Are you starting to get the idea?
This is why your "logic" regarding what is an appropriate working 
hypothesis is illogical.  
Peter van Rossum
PMV100@PSU.EDU