Newsgroup sci.archaeology 52464

Directory

On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 13:43:49 -0600, in sci.anthropology.paleo,
rejohnsn@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu wrote:
>> In article <58pd3h$b29@news.ptd.net> edconrad@prolog.net "Ed Conrad" writes:
>> 
>> >Even worse, I've been told that a person in a killfile must be
>> >compensated $6.25 per week per news group for causing
>> >``excruciating intellectual pain by such vile and unethical behavior.''
>
>Hey, why should YOU get paid for being killfiled?  Since your being 
>killfiled would seem to suggest that you are the one causing 
>"excrutiating intellectual pain by such vile and unethical behavior," I 
>think you ought to fork over $6.25 per week to each person killfiling 
>you.  I'd killfile you for less than that.
>
>And since there would be a benefit to killfiling you, I think the many 
>lurkers who have done so should come out of the woodwork and levy their 
>claim against you.  Maybe you'd be forced to sell your computer to pay 
>them off.
Nah, he'd just sell some of his "bones". For fuel. Like any other
random chunks of coal.
>
>Cheers,
>Rebecca Lynn Johnson
>Ph.D. stud., Dept. of Anthropology, U Iowa
>
>Hatrack ratcatcher to port weapons...brickbat lingerie!!
>                                       -- Cdr. Susan Ivanova, B5
>
(Note followups, if any)
Bob C.
"No one's life, liberty or property is safe while
 the legislature is in session." - Mark Twain

Saida  wrote:
>
>So, Katherine Griffis claims that her "colleagues" (she is NOT an 
>Egyptologist) have no interest in ancient in ancient Egyptian ethnicity. 
> Yet here is something I found in my trash that she wrote some time 
>back.  You will see here that Ms Griffis is not above using words like 
>"black" and "negroid", even though she objected to my use of the word 
>"Caucasian" with regard to certain Egyptians.
>Griffith in response to Stella Nemeth :
> 
>>Many times, the choice of specific paintings and sculpture *are* 
>>*black* in features.  I don't think *anyone in Egyptology* would deny 
>>that, Stella,nor that it is possible that blacks did not exist in 
>>positions of power within the Royal House, up to and including family. 
>> It all has to do with the fact that it probably didn't matter one way 
>>or another to the *ancient Egyptians*. 
>>It certainly seems to matter *one way or the other* to the AfroC scholars. Everybody, to them, as a rule, *has to* be "black".
> 
>>However, where actual DNA/pathology and and so on indicate other traits 
>>not consistent with a negroid individual (and there are some genetic 
>>markers that can be found, BTW), then we argue in a Jesuit logic 
>>fashion (IMHO) to say, "Well, their statuary *looks* black..."
>This seems to contradict Griffis' statement that scientists have no 
>interest in race.
  No, Saida: I have been consistent: you haven't read that
corectly. But then, I am not surprised.  DNA does NOT establish race.
It determines certain traits of enzymes and the like.  NOT race, and
unless melanin studies are involved, not color.
Enough.  You haven't called my dean, as I have checked.  You called
one of my *3* coordinators for my classes.  She is new and doesn't
know all the courses I teach at UAB.  So, until you check with my dean
at Special Studies, or any other person who reads this post, I fail to
see that you gain much here except mentally stroking your ego.
Katherine Griffis (Greenberg)
Member of the American Research Center in Egypt
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
http://www.ccer.ggl.ruu.nl/ccer/PEOPLE2.HTML  

Douglas Weller (dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Did Schliemann in fact discover Homer's Troy?  I'm fairly sure I've seen
: people say that the link hasn't been proven yet.
: Thanks.
Everything I've heard on the subject is that Hissarlik is "the" Troy 
of Bronze Age and Classical Times.  The question remains, "Was there
a Trojan War as related by Homer?"  What Schliemann did not 
discover, or more precisely overlooked, was the Late Bronze Age
Levels of the site.
At a symposium on Troy and the Trojan War at Bryn Mawr in the mid-1980's
a member of Blegans team spoke about the history of digging at Troy.
He recalled Dorpfeld's visit to the site and a story Dorpfeld told 
them about excavating the walls of Troy VI.  They were massive.  He
began to wonder if these walls were more consistent with the Homeric
City and suggested it to Schliemann who had declared Troy II to be
that city.  Schliemann was "not amused" by his observation.  He
shut him self up in his tent for several times, then emerged to declare
Dorpfeld's walls to be "Homer's Walls."  I don't recall if this ever
showed up in Schlieman's writings.
C.E.S. Boulis
UPMAA

Here is a follow-up to the request on information about
Predynastic Egyptian graves found at Abydos.
There is a notable predynastic cemetary at Abydos.  It
was once under the consession of the University of 
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.  Now 
the Germans are working at this particular cemetary.  Penn 
is working everywhere else at Abydos.  I tried to find out 
if there had been a significant recent discoveries there, but 
no one really knew.  I had enough problems trying to figure out
what Penn's five or six different teams were doing at 
Abydos, let alone someone else.
Sorry I couldn't get info.
C.E.S. Boulis
UPMAA

On Wed, 18 Dec 1996, at 14:44:00, Saida cajoled electrons into this
>People work hard and make many 
>sacrifices to earn their PhDs.  Why a person like Katherine Griffis 
>feels she has the right to circumvent all this and simply pluck a degree 
>out of Cracker Jack box in order to lend herself some sort of cachet in 
>a science-oriented newsgroup, is incomprehensible to me.  
Saida
I feel it is perhaps time for you to stop making such a fool of
yourself.  
Since your contention seems to be based around your assertion that
Katherine has laid claim to a PhD in Egyptology, perhaps you would care
to furnish us all with the evidence which you consider to be so
incontrovertible.  I'm sure that you would be able to find it within
seconds if it exists.  If it does not, or you cannot, then you would
perhaps be best advised to cease this libellous petulance and offer up
the public apology whilst there are still those here who find you mildly
entertaining.
I, for one, am waiting for more than your raucous howling.  There is a
maxim in law which runs along the lines that a person is innocent until
proven guilty.  Since you have set yourself up as judge, jury and
executioner, and furthermore have decided to drag your trial into the
public domain, I should suggest that it is encumbent on you to now
furnish the evidence upon which you have based your condemnation.
Readers will doubtless draw their own conclusions as to your motivations
and reliability should you fail to do so.
There is the challenge.  Cam you meet it?
I am waiting with interest.
Regards
Marc

Marc Line wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 17 Dec 1996, at 21:31:38, Rodney Small cajoled electrons into
> this
> 
> >However, I'm still
> >trying to get a computer program that simulates the position of the stars
> >over the millenia.  Bauval and Hancock reference "Sky Chart 2000.0", but
> >that is for Macintosh computers, and I have an IBM-compatible.  Does
> >anyone know of a similar program for IBMs?
> 
> A package called "Redshift" should be all that you require, and more, in
> this regard.  It also has a very sexy voice! :)
> 
> Regards
> 
> Marc 
Thanks. Is that available for free on the Web, or through a retailer?
Regards,
Rodney

In which time period do the pyramids fit best, 2500 or 10500 BC? 
Hmmm...let's see.
In 2500 BC we know they have a state-level organization that is highly 
socially stratified. We have strong stratigraphic and seriated control 
over ceramic, architectural and epigraphic data, all of which suggest the 
pyramids date to this time. There is an architectural tradition like the 
pyramids, which clearly predate the pyramids (as the pyramid of Djoser). 
There are slabs with the names of work crews from Khufu's time in the 
pyramid. It lies in a coherently organized mortuary complex with which 
it articulates perfectly, which can be securely dated. It has been 
extensively radiocarbon dated, and while there may be scope for a few 
hundred year variation in the dates they cannot just be dismissed out of 
hand because they are inconvenient. When Egyptologists have problems with 
them, they mean the most likely intercept is off by about 150 years, or 
that the error variances are a bit large. (Lots of wiggles in the 3rd 
millenium calibration curve.) They do not mean any date in the last 10000 
years is equally likely. Etc.
In 10,500 BC we have a pretty good idea there is only an acephalous, 
dispersed, hunting and gathering population. There is a very low-level, 
non-sedentary population with no permanent architectural or other 
material culture beyond some relatively rough stone tools. No worker 
settlements, no means to support large labor crews (no agriculture-no 
domesticated plants or animals, nor even any really large scale 
wild-plant processing), no existing architectural tradition (of any 
sort), no ceramics. Nada. Not even a pot to piss in, because they had no 
pots. 
Hmmmm....tough choice.
The only argument otherwise produced is the old Argument from Personal 
Incredulity, with the familiar recitation of the astonishing technical 
achievements represented. To me all this suggests is how much you can get 
done if you are smart, well-trained, work hard, and have 20,000 slaves 
working for you for 20 years. People can surprise you; we put a man on 
the moon and bronze age Egyptians built the great pyramids. Cool.
Of course, the other problem with the Argument from Personal Incredulity, 
aside from the fact that it is content-free, is that as much as it cuts 
against a proposed date of 2500 BC, it cuts about 1000 times more 
strongly against the idea that any society we can perceive archaeologically 
that existed at 10500 BC built these things. If this argument carries 
any force at all, it applies to the earlier time a great deal more 
strongly than to the later time.
So what if another building built after the pyramids isn't as nice? Not 
everything proceeds in smooth 'upward' progression. How many churches do 
you know as neat as Chartres? 
Finally, you are quite incorrect to say that no archaeologist has come up 
with any explanation for how the pyramids might have been built. Walk 
down to your video store someday and rent "This Old Pyramid", or read 
something by Mark Lehner. It might not be "the" answer, but it is 
certainly a credible and effective solution, and completely within the 
capabilities of bronze age Egyptians. Aliens and Atlanteans need not apply.
Ben

Benjamin H. Diebold wrote:
> 
> In which time period do the pyramids fit best, 2500 or 10500 BC?
> Hmmm...let's see.
> 
> In 2500 BC we know they have a state-level organization that is highly
> socially stratified. We have strong stratigraphic and seriated control
> over ceramic, architectural and epigraphic data, all of which suggest the
> pyramids date to this time. There is an architectural tradition like the
> pyramids, which clearly predate the pyramids (as the pyramid of Djoser).
> There are slabs with the names of work crews from Khufu's time in the
> pyramid. It lies in a coherently organized mortuary complex with which
> it articulates perfectly, which can be securely dated. It has been
> extensively radiocarbon dated, and while there may be scope for a few
> hundred year variation in the dates they cannot just be dismissed out of
> hand because they are inconvenient. When Egyptologists have problems with
> them, they mean the most likely intercept is off by about 150 years, or
> that the error variances are a bit large. (Lots of wiggles in the 3rd
> millenium calibration curve.) They do not mean any date in the last 10000
> years is equally likely. Etc.
> 
> In 10,500 BC we have a pretty good idea there is only an acephalous,
> dispersed, hunting and gathering population. There is a very low-level,
> non-sedentary population with no permanent architectural or other
> material culture beyond some relatively rough stone tools. No worker
> settlements, no means to support large labor crews (no agriculture-no
> domesticated plants or animals, nor even any really large scale
> wild-plant processing), no existing architectural tradition (of any
> sort), no ceramics. Nada. Not even a pot to piss in, because they had no
> pots.
> 
> Hmmmm....tough choice.
> 
> The only argument otherwise produced is the old Argument from Personal
> Incredulity, with the familiar recitation of the astonishing technical
> achievements represented. To me all this suggests is how much you can get
> done if you are smart, well-trained, work hard, and have 20,000 slaves
> working for you for 20 years. People can surprise you; we put a man on
> the moon and bronze age Egyptians built the great pyramids. Cool.
> 
> Of course, the other problem with the Argument from Personal Incredulity,
> aside from the fact that it is content-free, is that as much as it cuts
> against a proposed date of 2500 BC, it cuts about 1000 times more
> strongly against the idea that any society we can perceive archaeologically
> that existed at 10500 BC built these things. If this argument carries
> any force at all, it applies to the earlier time a great deal more
> strongly than to the later time.
> 
> So what if another building built after the pyramids isn't as nice? Not
> everything proceeds in smooth 'upward' progression. How many churches do
> you know as neat as Chartres?
> 
> Finally, you are quite incorrect to say that no archaeologist has come up
> with any explanation for how the pyramids might have been built. Walk
> down to your video store someday and rent "This Old Pyramid", or read
> something by Mark Lehner. It might not be "the" answer, but it is
> certainly a credible and effective solution, and completely within the
> capabilities of bronze age Egyptians. Aliens and Atlanteans need not apply.
> 
> Ben
Ben, my friend, I have news for you:  I have seen "This Old Pyramid" and 
found it one of the most astonishing pieces of arrogance in the history 
of archaeology, if not mankind.  Do you seriously think that the pathetic 
pyramid that Mark and his friends built bears any vague resemblance to 
even the Third Pyramid?   The fact is that Flinders Petrie -- the Father 
of Egyptology, if not Modern Archaeology -- was amazed by the technical 
genius of the builders of the three Giza pyramids.  Why did this genius 
flourish for such a brief period of time near the dawn of civilization, 
and why did it decline so catastrophically?  Mark Lehner has no 
explanation, although he used to cite Edgar Cayce before he became a 
born-again Egyptologist.
Regards,
Rodney

malloy00@atlantis.io.com (MA Lloyd) wrote:
>S.NEMETH@IX.NETCOM.COM (Stella Nemeth) writes:
>>Claudio De Diana  wrote:
>>>S.NEMETH@IX.NETCOM.COM (Stella Nemeth) wrote:
>>>>>Bart_Torbert@piics.com (Bart Torbert) writes:
>>> 	[...]
>>>>>Now to keep it secret you:
>>>>>(1) murder your entire crew before you make landfall so they don't tell 
>>>>>    anyone where they have been.
>Let me point out here that there are two very different scenarios in this
>thread, that really need to be kept separate.
>The original post postulated a large scale trade between the Americas and 
>Europe, miraculously kept secret by the participants because it was so 
>profitable for them.  Then these highly profitable goods vanished utterly 
>after 1500.  This is obviously ridiculous.
I pretty much agree with what you are saying here except for one, very
important phrase:  "large scale trade."  No one at any time in this
thread has postulated "large scale trade" between the Americas and
Europe.  What was postulated by the original poster was an occasional
round trip which also produced occasional trade goods.  Large scale
trade has never been at issue.  There obviously wasn't any
pre-Columbian large scale trade, or raiding, or any other kind of
contact between the Old and the New Worlds.
>Stella's later reply is suggesting something more like Basque fisherman
>in the Grand Banks, maybe occassionally touching shore, but involving no
>important contact and no special effort to keep secret.  This does not 
>get widely talked about simply because it is economically marginal, and
>leaves little evidence because the contact is pretty marginal too.  This
>is not supported by evidence, but it isn't ridiculous, and I don't think 
>anyone would be really suprised if some evidence turned up.
Which is why I suggested the possibility, for which the technology
certainly existed, of occasional, intermittent contact, of the sort
you are describing as Basque fishermen in the Grand Banks.
I have nothing invested in the idea of contact between the Old and New
Worlds.  There is no evidence for such contact, except by the Norse in
Canada.  And that evidence is limited to one certain settlement and
some trade goods in the New World that could have been handed around
one piece at a time by locals.  There seems to be some indication in
Norse records in the Old World for additional, longer term contact,
but the jury seems to be out on that one.
There is plenty of evidence that ocean voyages (Pacific and Atlantic
both) were survivable with the available technology as early as the
Bronze Age, but that they might not have been survivable round trips,
or repeatable round trips.  Without survivable, repeatable round
trips, you do not have trade.
In the early 15th Century something changed.  One of the things that
changed was printing and cheap books, leaflets and handbills.
Suddenly knowledge of where people had been and what they had seen
there was being distributed.  So was lots of other kinds of knowledge,
including scientific knowledge.  
And that is where the situation stands right now with what we know
right now.
Stella Nemeth
s.nemeth@ix.netcom.com

> Monica Bower wrote:
> 
> Evolution for the most part is a load of crap that requires far more
> faith than any other scientific theory.  In the hundred years we've
> studied it, we've proven biological diversity and adaptation again and
> again but NEVER EVER proven true speciation in any vertebrate (ie one
> 'breed' can't interbreed with another.)
Organic Evolution is any genetic change in organisms, or more strictly a
change in gene frequency from generation to generation.
This has pretty well been proven to happen and requires no
leap of faith.
In my studies of the theory of evolution I have yet come across any
claims that any species interbred with another to create a new species.
We all have genetic mutations (yes, even you).  This does not render
each of us as different species and prevent us from producing offspring,
which may or may not inherit our mutations.  Because a monkey and
a fruit fly can not interbreed in no way prevents us from speculating that
after millions of years adaptation and inheritance of acquired
characteristics a species can change in such a way that it appears
dramatically different then it once did.
> Mathematically that means fruit flies are higher on the evolutionary
> scale than fish or us.  Or, perhaps the fish is more advanced than the
> flies or us....
Is there such a thing as a mathematical evolutionary scale?
> The laws of thermodynamics (note: LAWS, not theory) also preclude
> evolution as a possibility....
"Each ecosystem is biologically distinct...Nutrients are withdrawn and
again released; energy captured by plants flows through the system
bringing order out of disorder in apparent defiance of the second law of
thermodynamics; organisms die and are replaced by offspring, a
renewal that threads its descent faithfully through generations of
ancestors."
	Hickman Roberts Hickman
A rebuttal

> Monica Bower wrote:
> 
> Evolution for the most part is a load of crap that requires far more
> faith than any other scientific theory.  In the hundred years we've
> studied it, we've proven biological diversity and adaptation again and
> again but NEVER EVER proven true speciation in any vertebrate (ie one
> 'breed' can't interbreed with another.)
Organic Evolution is any genetic change in organisms, or more strictly a
change in gene frequency from generation to generation.
This has pretty well been proven to happen and requires no
leap of faith.
In my studies of the theory of evolution I have yet come across any
claims that any species interbred with another to create a new species.
We all have genetic mutations (yes, even you).  This does not render
each of us as different species and prevent us from producing offspring,
which may or may not inherit our mutations.  Because a monkey and
a fruit fly can not interbreed in no way prevents us from speculating that
after millions of years adaptation and inheritance of acquired
characteristics a species can change in such a way that it appears
dramatically different then it once did.
> Mathematically that means fruit flies are higher on the evolutionary
> scale than fish or us.  Or, perhaps the fish is more advanced than the
> flies or us....
Is there such a thing as a mathematical evolutionary scale?
> The laws of thermodynamics (note: LAWS, not theory) also preclude
> evolution as a possibility....
"Each ecosystem is biologically distinct...Nutrients are withdrawn and
again released; energy captured by plants flows through the system
bringing order out of disorder in apparent defiance of the second law of
thermodynamics; organisms die and are replaced by offspring, a
renewal that threads its descent faithfully through generations of
ancestors."
	Hickman Roberts Hickman
A rebuttal

I probably shouldn't jump in to this flamewar, but...
1) Regardess of content, posting email without permission is breaking
copyright, and absolutely terrible Netiquette.
You just wrote:
> You're insane.  My father was a survivor of the Holocaust.  What right 
> would I have to be racist against any people?  Show me one racist remark 
> I have ever made!
2) Saida, you have stated that the Minoan culture was started by
Phoenicians who settled there, created a fake religion for the masses, and
left, all without leaving any definitely Phoenician evidence.  (And that
the collapse of the Mycenean society was caused by all the lovely
Phoenicians sailing off, along with everyone with an advanced skill.) My
interpretation of your statements, from our argument here earlier this
fall, was that basically you didn't feel the Cretan inhabitants were smart
enough or otherwise good enough to have created their own culture or
accomplished the things that the Minoans did on their own. 
Do I have to go back and dig out the comments you made?
Chris
--
Chris Camfield - ccamfiel@freenet.carleton.ca
"The urge to discover secrets is deeply ingrained in human nature."
(John Chadwick, _The Decipherment of Linear B_)

Also Sprach David B. Greene (daveg@halcyon.com):
> >Actually, there is a maximum age for carbon dating; there may also be a
> >minimum one; I don't know.  I do know that I read that fibers from the
> >shroud of Turin was subjected to more than one dating technique.
> What other techniques were used?
This isn't exactly a dating technique, but the fibers were examined by
someone whose name eludes me, but his experience was with examining
paintings and determining their authenticity. When he examined the "blood"
under a microscope, it turned out to be red ocher paint.
--
shanek@vnet.net | http://www.vnet.net/users/shanek
-----
"Start making sense, NOW!" --Michael Garibaldi, "Grey 17 Is Missing"

Saida  wrote:
[snip]
>The "Ma'at" of the situation!!!  Here's a tip:  Before you start 
>spouting Egytpian, learn to spell English.  I know it's the Yuletide 
>season, but I have already had enough fruitcake.  From now on, you, Marc 
>Line and the Hab go right into my kill-file.  Your names will not appear 
          *******
>on my screen again.  And stay out of my mailbox, all of you, or I'll 
                          **********************
>start reporting you to your servers as a nuisance. 
Look here beast, I have never been IN anything remotely related to 
you...including your mailbox. You need help. You are a disgrace to 
humanity. I hope you don't breed (a very low probabbilty of ever 
happening, BTW).
The Hab

Saida  wrote:
>The Hab wrote:
>> 
>> Saida  wrote:
>> [snip]
>> >Please forgive me for not being you.
>> >
>> >Xina
>> >
>> >All right, Xina, I take back every hurtful word and I hope you'll do the
>> >same.  I have posted a private e-mail from Katherine Griffis although,
>> >unlike yourself, she didn't give me permission to do so.  Well, I don't
>> >care.  Read that letter and think about what I told you.
>> 
>> Just my opinion, but I think this "Saida" beast is one wacked-out
>> individual.
>> 
>> The Hab
>
>Right back at you, Asshole.  I think you've known for some time what I 
>think of you.
Me I just loooooovvvvveeeeedddd you ever since your first post 
(that Sam erased remember?heheheh)...that is, until reality bit me. 
Stupid beast.
The Hab

Carlos:
It's very simple what are on the "hips" of those statues - they are holding
atlatls in an "at ease" position.
cheers,
Bill Belcher

In article <59binf$bgk@news.ptd.net> edconrad@prolog.net "Ed Conrad" writes:
>Guess  you're aware that clam picker in Fiji  recently found a coconut
>that had been washed ashore and was surprised to see a cork blocking a
>hole. He broke it open and discovered a note  written by Charles
>Darwin while The Beagle was homeward bound.
Are you *sure* that it was a cocoanut and not another "human calvarium"?
No, Eddy, "cocoanut" wasn't a typo.  That's how Darwin would have spelt it.
>>            Additional Paragraph for Inclusion in Chapter XV:
>>         ``Origin of Species," if I can find anyone to publish it
That book was written *decades* after the voyage of HMS Beagle.
>     Still, I think it could last a hundred years until some SOB
>seriously challenges it and eventually stuffs it down our throat.
Darwin was a lifelong Unitarian and of Unitarian parentage; no matter
how sorely he was provoked, he would not have sought to suggest that 
a person was a direct and immediate descendent of a dog...
>     Even I know there's such a big hole in my theory -- in fact, SO
>big that you can drive a tractor-trailer through (but that won't
You've just driven a combine harvester through your nonsense, Eddy. Farm 
tractors weren't used in the UK until quite some time after Darwin died. 
Not even the agricultural steam engine was in use until the lattermost part 
of the C19th.
>    The truth is -- God forbid that someone should find this coconut
                                                              ^^^^^^^
Wrong spelling; spelled like that, it belongs in the C20th.
>    See, I had to make it LOOK like my trip on The Beagle was legit.
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^
Again, wrong.  Darwin would have referred to the ship as "HMS Beagle".
>But the REAL reason I came along was to `frolic' with all those South
>Seas' lovelies 
He went at the especial request of Capt. Fitzroy, RN.
>during all our stopovers to and from my `Island of Natural Selection'."
                ^^^^^^^^^
Another C20th word.
Take my advice, Eddy.  
Don't ever try to write pastiches of C19th fiction, for you're simply inept.
-- 
< Paul >

The question of the etymology of "Atahualpa" and words in Quechua
for chicken has been addressed by real linguists - as opposed to Carter 
style linguists. 
 Hamp, E. R. 'Chicken' in Ecuadoran Quichua IJAL 30: 298-99.
 L. K. Carpenter, How did the 'Chicken' cross the Andes ? IJAL 51 361-64.
[IJAL = International Journal of American Linguistics] 
These articles do not support the preColumbian chicken hypothesis. That
hypothesis is mentioned, in order to be rejected for lack of evidence, in
Bruhns' book _Ancient South America_, 1994. ( In 1994 I was curious
 whether the idea had any foundation, read a bit, and found it did not.)
Geoffrey Mess

unlike so many of the recent battles here, its kinda difficult to
score this thing...i've got marc up by three, on subtlety of humor;
katherine up by two on dignity; xina and the hab, each up a point on
directness; but overall, saida ahead on speed and agility...
how are the rest of you scoring it??...
frank 

Sue Thing wrote:
> 
> In article <5997pk$iku@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu> glhansen@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory Loren Hansen) writes:
> >
> >In article <32B71910.4DEA@monsoon.colorado.edu>,
> >Aaron Brasket   wrote:
> 
> >>Having said that, there's considerable evidence that the present day
> >>continents of South America, Africa, Antarctica, Australia as well
> >>as present day India, were all part of a super-continent called
> >>Gondwanaland.  Antarctica was connected to the southern tips of
> 
> >Stop the injustice!  Write to your local government in support of the
> >movement to reunite Gondwanaland!  Donations accepted.
> 
> Stop plate tectonics!
> 
> Sue
> 
> >--
> >        "But you can't let the package hide the pudding; evil is just
> >plain bad.  You don't cotton to it.  You've got to hit it in the nose
> >with the rolled-up newspaper of goodness.  Bad Dog!  BAD! DOG!"
> >     - The Tick
> 
> ------------------------------------------
> Sue Thing       plburton@mail.goodnet.com
> 
> Those who do not learn from history
> are doomed to repeat it next semester.
> ------------------------------------------Sue,
The thing you and Greg must both understand is that plate tectonics are 
an important part of the dynamic world in which we live.  Tectonic 
plates come and tectonic plates go.  A wise man should not try to 
interfere with such natural processes.  
Your own desire to preserve our current purely temporary status quo 
reflects a certain fear of the future, as does Greg's desire to return 
to a distant and plainly romanticized past.  
We must free our plates to follow their own natural tectonic paths.  The 
wisest course is to recognize that today is only a moment on the surface 
of a constantly changing stream.  Neither you nor I can bathe in that 
same water twice.  
The correct response to plate tectonics is to accept their movement, to 
try to understand the whys and wherefores of this purely natural 
process, and to attempt to move with the plates, acting in harmony with 
other elements of our broader world.  
I believe that Heraclitus said it first and best, "All is fire(meaning 
change)."  I also believe that we can honestly look to our future with 
comfort, or at least some reasonable hope.  For even if if we are unable 
to accept that everything will always turn out for the good, and that 
all our lives are so many bowls of cherries; yet most of us have from 
time to time been told that we would be in a much warmer and much worse 
place before now and so far our world has disappointed those past 
doomsayers.
Catholicly yours
Joe Taylor
"No man is an Island but perhaps parrotheads are a ring of keys."

In article <32bac2c1.1493316@news.crosslink.net>, Bob Casanova wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Dec 1996 20:46:48 -0800, in sci.anthropology.paleo,
>najor@trader.com wrote:
>
>
> 
>>
>>at one time, a strong alien contact between whoever is out there and 
>>humans, why has it vanished?
Well, we come to this point when many well-intentioned people
claim that the Tunguska explsion was due to Czarist nuclear weapons.
When it's broght up why Russia forgot how to create this weapon when
it would have been rather useful in WWI and II, we're enlightened to
the fact that both Nicholas II and Stalin were such humanatarians
that they thought they'd spare the Germans such misery.
Oh shit! Ed, please don't explain Tunguska to us....
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"So tell me now, I'll dive as you say, breaking this silence
I will reach the other side of the lake
And see myself like Ophelia in flowers, drift away"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"The poet's turmoil strike again, as words once more they fail me, 
another bomb has just supplied the cross on which to nail me"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
GBH(tm)	[your secret society ad here]	KoX	ARSCC	

Get out of here!  Take this to some other newsgroup you shitheads!
Enough of this BS already...
C8

On 19 Dec 1996 16:00:37 GMT, "Michael Misenheimer"
 wrote:
>
>That's probably Katherine's home number.  Try (205) 934-8740.  Katherine 
>Griffis teaches an adult education course for persons not actually 
>enrolled at the University of Alabama.  Her class is in "Grant 
>Writing".  It has absolutely nothing to do with Egyptology.  
That's not the only class she teachers you know?
Is this Saida posting under another account?
--
Doug Weller  Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to:sci-archaeology-moderated@medieval.org
Requests To: arch-moderators@ucl.ac.uk
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details

On 19 Dec 1996 10:12:30 GMT, Claudio De Diana
>	They are not "sure" about their views, otherwise alt.archaeology
>	would not have now (Thu Dec 19 10:52:30 MET 1996) only 139 post, most of them
>	cross-posted, compared to the 1191 of sci.archaeology.
The reason for this is probably the simple fact that a LOT more people have
access to sci.archaeology than alt.archaeology. A lot of newsservers,
especially at Universities, don't carry the alt.* hierarchy. So, you'd expect
more articles in a sci.* newsgroup than the equivalent alt.* one.
--
Doug Weller  Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to:sci-archaeology-moderated@medieval.org
Requests To: arch-moderators@ucl.ac.uk
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details

On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:11:48 -0600, Saida 
wrote:
>
>To darken, obscure, to confuse, to bewilder and otherwise cover up.  AND 
>KATHERINE GRIFFIS IS STILL NOT AN EGYPTOLOGIST, Marc.  
I've not been following the orignal debate, but how do you define Egyptologist
then? She studies and teaches subjects related to ancient Egypt.  
That's what I've always understood, I've never seen her claiming anything more
than that. anyway.
What claims are you referring to that you are trying to rebut here?
--
Doug Weller  Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to:sci-archaeology-moderated@medieval.org
Requests To: arch-moderators@ucl.ac.uk
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details

Chrisso  Boulis (cboulis@mail2.sas.upenn.edu) writes:
[chop]
> At a symposium on Troy and the Trojan War at Bryn Mawr in the mid-1980's
> a member of Blegans team spoke about the history of digging at Troy.
> He recalled Dorpfeld's visit to the site and a story Dorpfeld told 
> them about excavating the walls of Troy VI.  They were massive.  He
> began to wonder if these walls were more consistent with the Homeric
> City and suggested it to Schliemann who had declared Troy II to be
> that city.  Schliemann was "not amused" by his observation.  He
> shut him self up in his tent for several times, then emerged to declare
> Dorpfeld's walls to be "Homer's Walls."  I don't recall if this ever
> showed up in Schlieman's writings.
That's very strange, because I understood it was only perhaps at the end
of his life that Schliemann had come to realize that it was Troy VI (or
VII) that was in the right time-frame.
	Chris
--
Chris Camfield - ccamfiel@freenet.carleton.ca
"The urge to discover secrets is deeply ingrained in human nature."
(John Chadwick, _The Decipherment of Linear B_)

Katherine Griffis wrote:
> 
> Saida  wrote:
> 
> >
> >So, Katherine Griffis claims that her "colleagues" (she is NOT an
> >Egyptologist) have no interest in ancient in ancient Egyptian ethnicity.
> > Yet here is something I found in my trash that she wrote some time
> >back.  You will see here that Ms Griffis is not above using words like
> >"black" and "negroid", even though she objected to my use of the word
> >"Caucasian" with regard to certain Egyptians.
> 
> >Griffith in response to Stella Nemeth :
> >
> >>Many times, the choice of specific paintings and sculpture *are*
> >>*black* in features.  I don't think *anyone in Egyptology* would deny
> >>that, Stella,nor that it is possible that blacks did not exist in
> >>positions of power within the Royal House, up to and including family.
> >> It all has to do with the fact that it probably didn't matter one way
> >>or another to the *ancient Egyptians*.
> >>It certainly seems to matter *one way or the other* to the AfroC scholars. Everybody, to them, as a rule, *has to* be "black".
> >
> >>However, where actual DNA/pathology and and so on indicate other traits
> >>not consistent with a negroid individual (and there are some genetic
> >>markers that can be found, BTW), then we argue in a Jesuit logic
> >>fashion (IMHO) to say, "Well, their statuary *looks* black..."
> 
> >This seems to contradict Griffis' statement that scientists have no
> >interest in race.
> 
>   No, Saida: I have been consistent: you haven't read that
> corectly. But then, I am not surprised.  DNA does NOT establish race.
> It determines certain traits of enzymes and the like.  NOT race, and
> unless melanin studies are involved, not color.
Keep right on sighing, lady.  You know abolutely nothing about genetics. 
For you to expound in any way on the subject is just another truckful of 
your usual BS.
> 
> Enough.  You haven't called my dean, as I have checked.  You called
> one of my *3* coordinators for my classes.  She is new and doesn't
> know all the courses I teach at UAB.  So, until you check with my dean
> at Special Studies, or any other person who reads this post, I fail to
> see that you gain much here except mentally stroking your ego.
> Katherine Griffis (Greenberg)
> Member of the American Research Center in Egypt
> 
> University of Alabama at Birmingham
> Special Studies
> 
> http://www.ccer.ggl.ruu.nl/ccer/PEOPLE2.HTML
YOU ARE NOT AN EGYPTOLOGIST AND HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE ON THE LIST ON THE 
WEB SITE YOU ARE DIRECTING PEOPLE TO.  YOU ARE A FRAUD AND A LIAR.  YOU 
ARE NOT CAPABLE OF TEACHING A CLASS IN EGYPTOLOGY BECAUSE YOU DO NOT 
EVEN HAVE THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION AT YOUR DISPOSAL.  YOU DO NOT HAVE 
THE RIGHT TO USE THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AFTER YOUR SIGNATURE.  THEY 
WOULD BE AMAZED AND DISMAYED TO BE IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE 
STATEMENTS YOU ARE MAKING IN THESE NEWSGROUPS.  
BTW, here's your old signature.  What happened to that?  Did you drop it 
after you received your correspondence course degree in Egyptology?  I 
also have you on record telling Peter Bromfield that you had a degree in 
anthropolgy.  For a person with so many "degrees", you certainly seem to 
be underemployed by teaching an adult education class in "Grant 
Writing".
-
Katherine Griffis, President and Lead Consultant
GRIFFIS CONSULTING       P.O. Box 43159
Birmingham, AL  35243-0159       U S A
Voice: 205.995.2099   FAX:  205.995.2099, *77*, SEND
E-Mail: grifcon@usa.pipeline.com//grifcon@ix.netcom.com
"The First Step to the International Culture of Business"

[Note: follow-up changed to sci.lang.]
[For newcomers to this thread: This is about the article ``Language
Paedomorphoses'' by B. H. Bichakjian in ``Geneses of Language'' edited
by W. A. Koch, (Brockmayer, 1990). The major claim made by Bichakjian
is that modern languages are `better' because they are `more evolved'.
It should be noted that modern here really means modern West European
languages.]
        The philosopher has evolved from the protozoan. This is
        sometimes called progress. But it is the philosopher who
        calls it progress, not the protozoan.
                            [My imperfect recall of a quote from
                                    Bertrand Russel]
Bichakjian wishes to argue that modern languages are `finer, more evolved,
more efficient' than ancient languages. His argument reminds me of
19th century claims that brains of Europeans were `better' than those
of pre-industrial populations.
His argument concerning phonology is countered by an article by
Michael Job in the same volume `Geneses of Language'. Bichakjian
then brings up age at acquisition by children. But, `sh' is generally
acquired by (American) children later than `s'. Is `sh' more complex
than `s'? Did PIE have `sh'? Does this mean latter languages have
developed more complicated sounds than their parent language?
Another argument made by Bichakjian is that the vowel(s) of PIE was simply
meant to make pronunciation possible, but did not carry any meaning. This
begs the question of whether words with more than one full grade vowel
were found in PIE. In infelcted words, it is not clear that words were
limited to a single full grade word. Were words such as (e)bheret or
eqwos missing in PIE? [Even in stems, it is not clear that there was at
most a single full grade vowel. What about Skt ma:tar, Gk mater etc?]
Another problem I see is with the claim that `right-branching' languages
are `better' than `left-branching' languages. Bichakjian discusses such
sentences as `I know that you believe that he has read the book' which is
supposedly difficult to express in `left-branching' languages. The
difficulty is that Bichkajian insists on avoiding the direct contruction.
In Tamil, I would just say, ``avan puththakam paTTithirukiraan enRu n^ii
n^inaippathu enakku theriyum''. [This is the ITRANS transliteration. th is
the dental stop, T is the retroflex, n^ is the dental nasal (an allophone
of the alveolar nasal n in Dravidian, but complications due to borrowings
from Sanskrit)] You can argue that the indirect construction is `better'
than the direct construction, but it is like arguing that it is better
to drive on the right side of the road than the left.
-- 
Vidhyanath Rao			It is the man, not the method, that solves
nathrao+@osu.edu		the problem. - Henri Poincare
(614)-366-9341			[as paraphrased by E. T. Bell]

Christopher John Camfield wrote:
> 
> I probably shouldn't jump in to this flamewar, but...
> 
> 1) Regardess of content, posting email without permission is breaking
> copyright, and absolutely terrible Netiquette.
> 
> You just wrote:
> > You're insane.  My father was a survivor of the Holocaust.  What right
> > would I have to be racist against any people?  Show me one racist remark
> > I have ever made!
> 
> 2) Saida, you have stated that the Minoan culture was started by
> Phoenicians who settled there, created a fake religion for the masses, and > left, all without leaving any definitely Phoenician evidence.  
(And that > the collapse of the Mycenean society was caused by all the 
lovely > Phoenicians sailing off, along with everyone with an advanced 
skill.) My > interpretation of your statements, from our argument here 
earlier this > fall, was that basically you didn't feel the Cretan 
inhabitants were smart > enough or otherwise good enough to have created 
their own culture or > accomplished the things that the Minoans did on 
their own.
> 
> Do I have to go back and dig out the comments you made?
> 
> Chris
Please do!  I have never seen your name in my life and have never 
engaged in a discussion about Minoans with you or anybody else.
> --
> Chris Camfield - ccamfiel@freenet.carleton.ca
> "The urge to discover secrets is deeply ingrained in human nature."
> (John Chadwick, _The Decipherment of Linear B_)

Marc Line wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 18 Dec 1996, at 14:44:00, Saida cajoled electrons into this
> 
> >People work hard and make many
> >sacrifices to earn their PhDs.  Why a person like Katherine Griffis
> >feels she has the right to circumvent all this and simply pluck a degree > >out of Cracker Jack box in order to lend herself some sort of 
cachet in > >a science-oriented newsgroup, is incomprehensible to me.
> 
> Saida
> 
> I feel it is perhaps time for you to stop making such a fool of
> yourself.
> 
> Since your contention seems to be based around your assertion that
> Katherine has laid claim to a PhD in Egyptology, perhaps you would care > to furnish us all with the evidence which you consider to be so
> incontrovertible.  I'm sure that you would be able to find it within
> seconds if it exists.  If it does not, or you cannot, then you would
> perhaps be best advised to cease this libellous petulance and offer up
> the public apology whilst there are still those here who find you mildly > entertaining.
Get ready to be entertained some more.  Here you go, Marc.
Xina wrote:
>She has NEVER represented herself as such to me or anyone else that I am > aware of.  Like you she has a deep interest in the subject.  Unlike
you > she has made it her business to find out as much about it as
possible > with the maximum of current sources, has never at any time
claimed to be > an acredited, Egyptologist. Tear that apart if like.  It
does not change
Is that so?  What's this then?
Email addresses of Egyptologists (Nigel Strudwick's Egypt Pages from
Cambridge University)                     4 December 1996
This file contains ethereal addresses of Egyptologists (graduate
students and professionals) known to us, in a format that can be
sorted by last name. We do not know all the people personally, and some
may not really be Egyptologists.  (many names snipped)
Allen, James P.; Metropolitan Museum, New York
73223.2243@compuserve.com
        (will also accept mail for other members of the Egyptian dept)
Altenmueller, Hartwig; Hamburg University
Arrache, Gabriela; Sociedad Mexicana de Egiptologia
                                                akunz@data.net.mx
Assmann, Jan; University of Heidelberg
ae3@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Aubourg, Eric; Paris
aubourg@hep.saclay.cea.fr
Bagnall, Roger S.; Columbia University          bagnall@columbia.edu
Bagh, Tine; Carsten Niebuhr Inst., Copenhagen   bagh@coco.ihi.ku.dk
Baines, John; University of Oxford
john.baines@orinst.ox.ac.uk
Baligh, Randa; Yale University
rabies@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Bard, Kathryn; Boston University                kbard@acs.bu.edu
Barker, M. A. R.; University of Minnesota       b
horst.beinlich@vax.rz.uni-wuerzburg.d400.de
Bell, Lanny; University of Chicago
lanny_bell@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu
Bergman, Diane; The Brooklyn Museum
bklnmus3@metgate.metro.org
Bergman, Dag; New York                          76761.322@compuserve.com
Bohleke, Briant; Yale University                b.bohleke@yale.edu
Bolshakov, Andrey O.; Hermitage Mus. St.Petersburg
imhotep@bolshakov.spb.ru
Bovot, Jean-Luc; Louvre, Paris                  bovot@louvre.fr
Brand, Peter; Toronto University                pbrand@chass.utoronto.ca
Brancaglion, Antonio Jr.; Universidade de Sao Paulo     anubis@usp.br
British Museum, London
egypt@british-museum.ac.uk
        Departmental address for Egyprian Antiquities
        Egyptologists include Carol Andrews, Morris Bierbrier, Vivian
Davies,
        Richard Parkinson, Stephen Quirke, Jeffrey Spencer, John Taylor,
        Derek Welsby
Brooklyn Museum                                 see note above
Dodson, Aidan; London
100761.3075@compuserve.com
Dorman, Peter; University of Chicago
peter_dorman@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu
Griffith Institute, University of Oxford        griffox@ashmus.ox.ac.uk
        (see also McKay, Magee, Malek, Miles) or: griffox@vax.ox.ac.uk
Griffis (Greenberg), Katherine; Univ. Alabama   grifcon@usa.pipeline.com
Guksch, Heike; Heidelberg University
b13@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
There she is, right up there with some of the foremost Egyptologist in
the world, supposedly at the University of Alabama (except her e-mail
address, as you know, has nothing to do with any university).  Then,
here she comes again--on the Centre for Computer Aided Egyptological
Research list of Egyptologist:
Hare, Tom; Stanford University
thare@leland.stanford.edu
Dr. Robert S. Bianchi, 1056 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028-0112
     Dr. Edward Bleiberg, c/o Memphis State University, Inst. of Egypt.
Art and Arch.,
     Memphis, Tennessee 38152
     Dr. Briant Bohleke, PO Box 202717, Yale Station, New Haven, CT
06520-2717,
     [e-mail: b.bohleke@yale.edu]
     Mr. Kim Bongiorno, P.O. Box 23783, Tempe, AZ 85285
     Dr. Edward J. Brovarski, 1264 Beacon Street, Brookline, MA 02146
     Dr. Betsy M. Bryan, 5410 Purlington Way, Baltimore, MD 21210
     Dr. Karl W. Butzer, c/o University of Texas, Department of
Geography, Austin, TX
     78712
     Dr. Diane Lee Carroll, c/o Calif. Academie of Sciences, Golden Gate
Park, San
     Francisco, CA 93118
     Miss Suzanne Chapman, c/o M F A, Dept. of Egyptian Art, 475
Huntington Avenue,
     Boston, MA 02115
     Prof. Virginia Condon-Viscusi, Box H, Armonk, NY 10504
     Prof.Dr. Lorelei Corcoran, Memphis State University, Memphis,
Tennessee 38152
     Dr. Carol Crown, c/o Memphis State University, Institute of
Egyptian Art, Memphis,
     Tenessee 38152
     Dr. Eugene D. Cruz-Uribe, 3175 West Brenda Loop, Flagstaff, AZ
86001
     Mr. Whitney M. Davis, c/o Dept. of Art History, 1859 Sheridan
Road,, Kresge Cent. Hall
     254, Evanston, IL 60201
     Mr. Leo Depuydt, c/o Dept. of Egyptology, P.O. Box 1899,
Providence, RI 02906
     Dr. Peter Der Manuelian, 177 Marlborough St., Apt. 1, Boston, MA
02116
     Prof. Dr. Peter F. Dorman, 5715 S. Kenwood Avenue, Apt. 3-N,
Chicago, IL 60637
(snip)
     rof. Dr. Hans Goedicke, The J.Hopkins Univ., Dept. NE Studies,
Charles and 34th
     Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218
     Prof. Dr. Ogden Goelet, 240 East 27th Street, Apt. 25F, New York,
NY 10016
     Katherine Griffis (Greenberg) University of Alabama at Birmingham
P.O. Box 43159,
     Birmingham, AL 35243-0159 [Voice: 205/995-2099; Fax: 205/995-2099
(Enter *77*,
     press SEND) or 205/991-0304; e-mail: grifcon@usa.pipeline.com OR
     grifcon@ix.netcom.com]
     Mrs. Emma Swan Hall, 1080 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028
     Ms. Joyce Haynes, 86 Wilson Road, Nahant, MA 01098
     Ms. Marsha Hill, c/o M M A, Dept. of Egyptian Art, 1000 Fifth
Avenue, New York, NY
Xina wrote:
> Wolf pack behavior?  Where do you get your delusions?
From messages like this from someone who is supposed not involved with
this--you.  P.S. with friends like you and Marc Line, Griffis doesn't 
need enemies.  You are causing her more trouble than if you had kept 
your mouths shut. 
>
> >  I am always going > > to come back with the same reply:  Katherine Griffis is NOT an > > Egyptologist and has no right to keep representing
herself as such.  Now mark this, Marc:
 I know it's the Yuletide season, but I have already had enough 
fruitcake.  From now on Xina, Marc Line and the Hab go right into my 
kill-file.  Your names will not appear on my screen again.  And stay out 
of my mailbox, all of you, or I'll start reporting you to your servers 
as a nuisance.  However, Katherine Griffis, the one who started all 
this, who began to insinuate that I am a racist just because I am 
interested in the ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians (the only people 
whose ethnicity I care anything about), she will NOT go into my 
kill-file.  In fact, her posts will undergo a much more careful scrutiny 
by me than ever before.  This "Egyptologist" had better start dotting 
her i's and crossing her t's and make sure she gets all her info right 
because I am going to bother her more than the worst boil that ever 
festered on her "Egyptological" butt.

Paul Kekai Manansala wrote:
> I wrote:
>> I notict you conveniently omit the summer temperrature for Norway (which is
>> still higher) and the winter temperature for Iceland (which is also higher).
>> Why - ignoring the facts because they don't fit your silly little
>> theories ?
> 
> Because they don't make a hell of a difference.  My point is that the temperatures
> in S. Greenland are not radically colder than those of Scandinavia. 
You can of course find some place in northern Scandinavia, or up in the
mountains there that is colder than S-Greenland.  However, if you take, say 
the average for the inhabited parts of Scandinavia, you get higher winter
and summer temperature than in S-Greenland.  Also, compare the
vegetation - does Greenland have forrests like those you can find in
Scandinavia ?  No - and by far the most significant reason for that is the
climate, which is far less hospitable in Greenland.
> And I don't have to prove anything. 
You do - if you want anybody to take you seriously.  What you have managed
to show so far is either a silly troll, or demonstration of a massive
ignorance of all the available evidence.
> The mini-ice age is pure speculation, nothing more.
Yet another of your unfounded claims.   Where is your evidence ?
I have asked before, and I ask again:
  You claim the Greenland of the Sagas and the pre-1500 documents is
  not the Greenland of today.   Where is your evidence for that claim ?
  Why should anyone bother to take this silly little "theory" of yours
  seriously, if you don't have any evidence for it.
  The Sagas say that Greenland is west from Iceland, and is a land of many
  glaciers - how does that fit "your" Greenland ?
I would guess you have not answered those questions because then you would
have to admit that your "theory" is pure fantasy, with about the same level
of evidence as Ed Conrad's "theories".
-frisk
-- 
Fridrik Skulason      Frisk Software International     phone: +354-5-617273
Author of F-PROT      E-mail: frisk@complex.is         fax:   +354-5-617274

Looks2Sky wrote:
> Anyway, I guess all of the global flood accounts from peoples from
> (literally) all over the world can be explained by one big flood limited to
> Sumer.  Yeah, makes sense to me.
Such an explanation eliminates any threat that the whole planet surface
can be destroyed, has been so before, will be again, yes now is again
at risk and will happen. That is why the Bible says they ignore that the
Flood did happen. It refers not to ignoring some local Flood, but ignoring
its scope and span of all effected. The Flood is NOT a mere local example
as was Sodom.
************
A voice crying out and going unheard,
(40 years Oct 7) Nehemiah's (9:1) 50th JUBILEE of Tishri 24 
God's 1000 years has begun Sep 14 of 1996.
The 144,000 will rule before this first year ENDS.
http://www.execpc.com/~elijah/Ezra1991CE.gif
Discover the world's true chronology thru the Bible at
          http://www.execpc.com/~elijah

Douglas Weller wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:11:48 -0600, Saida 
> wrote:
> >
> >To darken, obscure, to confuse, to bewilder and otherwise cover up.  AND
> >KATHERINE GRIFFIS IS STILL NOT AN EGYPTOLOGIST, Marc.
> 
> I've not been following the orignal debate, but how do you define Egyptologist > then? She studies and teaches subjects related to ancient 
Egypt. > That's what I've always understood, I've never seen her 
claiming anything more > than that. anyway.
> What claims are you referring to that you are trying to rebut here?
> --
> Doug Weller  Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated
> Submissions to:sci-archaeology-moderated@medieval.org
> Requests To: arch-moderators@ucl.ac.uk
> Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details
Katherine Griffis wants us to "understand" a lot of things about her 
that are not true.  I've known this for a long time, but didn't make it 
my business--until a few days ago when she insinuated that I am a racist 
because I am interested in the ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians.  I am 
interested in EVERYTHING to do with these people.  Nevertheless, Griffis 
got on her high horse, telling me I am the ONLY one with any curiosity 
about this topic because "the American and Canadian Egyptologists she 
had spent the better part of a month with" had unanymously informed her 
that the ethnic background of the various peoples who might have 
migrated into Egypt was something to which they never gave the least 
thought.  Moreover, she alledged that I had posted things advocating 
"racial hatred" (absolutely foreign to my nature), that Prof. Yurco had 
personally told her derogatory things about me and that she has had 
access to my "on-line and off-line posts" (whatever that means).  So I 
decided to call her on her "credentials" and ask her just what was her 
capacity at the University of Alabama.  She refused to say.  However, 
the University told me she teaches an adult education course in "Grant 
Writing", in my opinion a strange occupation for someone who lists 
herself with the most prominent Egyptologists in the world in two 
different sites on the web.  See below.  I wonder we don't all call 
ourselves "Egyptologists" in order to pull rank on those who might 
disagree with us.  It's that easy, it seems.  Not point in struggling 
for years to obtain one's PhD.
Email addresses of Egyptologists (Nigel Strudwick's Egypt Pages from
Cambridge University)                     4 December 1996
This file contains ethereal addresses of Egyptologists (graduate
students and professionals) known to us, in a format that can be
sorted by last name. We do not know all the people personally, and some
may not really be Egyptologists.  (many names snipped)
Allen, James P.; Metropolitan Museum, New York
73223.2243@compuserve.com
        (will also accept mail for other members of the Egyptian dept)
Altenmueller, Hartwig; Hamburg University
              z
Arrache, Gabriela; Sociedad Mexicana de Egiptologia
                                                akunz@data.net.mx
Assmann, Jan; University of Heidelberg
ae3@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Aubourg, Eric; Paris
aubourg@hep.saclay.cea.fr
Bagnall, Roger S.; Columbia University          bagnall@columbia.edu
Bagh, Tine; Carsten Niebuhr Inst., Copenhagen   bagh@coco.ihi.ku.dk
Baines, John; University of Oxford
john.baines@orinst.ox.ac.uk
Baligh, Randa; Yale University
rabies@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Bard, Kathryn; Boston University                kbard@acs.bu.edu
Barker, M. A. R.; University of Minnesota       b
horst.beinlich@vax.rz.uni-wuerzburg.d400.de
Bell, Lanny; University of Chicago
lanny_bell@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu
Bergman, Diane; The Brooklyn Museum
bklnmus3@metgate.metro.org
Bergman, Dag; New York                          76761.322@compuserve.com
Bohleke, Briant; Yale University                b.bohleke@yale.edu
Bolshakov, Andrey O.; Hermitage Mus. St.Petersburg
imhotep@bolshakov.spb.ru
Bovot, Jean-Luc; Louvre, Paris                  bovot@louvre.fr
Brand, Peter; Toronto University                pbrand@chass.utoronto.ca
Brancaglion, Antonio Jr.; Universidade de Sao Paulo     anubis@usp.br
British Museum, London
egypt@british-museum.ac.uk
        Departmental address for Egyprian Antiquities
        Egyptologists include Carol Andrews, Morris Bierbrier, Vivian
Davies,
        Richard Parkinson, Stephen Quirke, Jeffrey Spencer, John Taylor,
        Derek Welsby
Brooklyn Museum                                 see note above
Dodson, Aidan; London
100761.3075@compuserve.com
Dorman, Peter; University of Chicago
peter_dorman@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu
Griffith Institute, University of Oxford        griffox@ashmus.ox.ac.uk
        (see also McKay, Magee, Malek, Miles) or: griffox@vax.ox.ac.uk
Griffis (Greenberg), Katherine; Univ. Alabama   grifcon@usa.pipeline.com
Guksch, Heike; Heidelberg University
b13@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
There she is, right up there with some of the foremost Egyptologist in
the world, supposedly at the University of Alabama (except her e-mail
address, as you know, has nothing to do with any university).  Then,
here she comes again--on the Centre for Computer Aided Egyptological
Research list of Egyptologist:
Hare, Tom; Stanford University
thare@leland.stanford.edu
Dr. Robert S. Bianchi, 1056 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028-0112
     Dr. Edward Bleiberg, c/o Memphis State University, Inst. of Egypt.
Art and Arch.,
     Memphis, Tennessee 38152
     Dr. Briant Bohleke, PO Box 202717, Yale Station, New Haven, CT
06520-2717,
     [e-mail: b.bohleke@yale.edu]
     Mr. Kim Bongiorno, P.O. Box 23783, Tempe, AZ 85285
     Dr. Edward J. Brovarski, 1264 Beacon Street, Brookline, MA 02146
     Dr. Betsy M. Bryan, 5410 Purlington Way, Baltimore, MD 21210
     Dr. Karl W. Butzer, c/o University of Texas, Department of
Geography, Austin, TX
     78712
     Dr. Diane Lee Carroll, c/o Calif. Academie of Sciences, Golden Gate
Park, San
     Francisco, CA 93118
     Miss Suzanne Chapman, c/o M F A, Dept. of Egyptian Art, 475
Huntington Avenue,
     Boston, MA 02115
     Prof. Virginia Condon-Viscusi, Box H, Armonk, NY 10504
     Prof.Dr. Lorelei Corcoran, Memphis State University, Memphis,
Tennessee 38152
     Dr. Carol Crown, c/o Memphis State University, Institute of
Egyptian Art, Memphis,
     Tenessee 38152
     Dr. Eugene D. Cruz-Uribe, 3175 West Brenda Loop, Flagstaff, AZ
86001
     Mr. Whitney M. Davis, c/o Dept. of Art History, 1859 Sheridan
Road,, Kresge Cent. Hall
     254, Evanston, IL 60201
     Mr. Leo Depuydt, c/o Dept. of Egyptology, P.O. Box 1899,
Providence, RI 02906
     Dr. Peter Der Manuelian, 177 Marlborough St., Apt. 1, Boston, MA
02116
     Prof. Dr. Peter F. Dorman, 5715 S. Kenwood Avenue, Apt. 3-N,
Chicago, IL 60637
(snip)
     rof. Dr. Hans Goedicke, The J.Hopkins Univ., Dept. NE Studies,
Charles and 34th
     Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218
     Prof. Dr. Ogden Goelet, 240 East 27th Street, Apt. 25F, New York,
NY 10016
     Katherine Griffis (Greenberg) University of Alabama at Birmingham
P.O. Box 43159,
     Birmingham, AL 35243-0159 [Voice: 205/995-2099; Fax: 205/995-2099
(Enter *77*,
     press SEND) or 205/991-0304; e-mail: grifcon@usa.pipeline.com OR
     grifcon@ix.netcom.com]
     Mrs. Emma Swan Hall, 1080 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028
     Ms. Joyce Haynes, 86 Wilson Road, Nahant, MA 01098
     Ms. Marsha Hill, c/o M M A, Dept. of Egyptian Art, 1000 Fifth
Avenue, New York, NY

Douglas Weller wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:11:48 -0600, Saida 
> wrote:
> >
> >To darken, obscure, to confuse, to bewilder and otherwise cover up.  AND
> >KATHERINE GRIFFIS IS STILL NOT AN EGYPTOLOGIST, Marc.
> 
> I've not been following the orignal debate, but how do you define Egyptologist > then? She studies and teaches subjects related to ancient 
Egypt. > That's what I've always understood, I've never seen her 
claiming anything more > than that. anyway.
> What claims are you referring to that you are trying to rebut here?
> --
> Doug Weller  Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated
> Submissions to:sci-archaeology-moderated@medieval.org
> Requests To: arch-moderators@ucl.ac.uk
> Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details
Katherine Griffis wants us to "understand" a lot of things about her 
that are not true.  I've known this for a long time, but didn't make it 
my business--until a few days ago when she insinuated that I am a racist 
because I am interested in the ethnicity of the ancient Egyptians.  I am 
interested in EVERYTHING to do with these people.  Nevertheless, Griffis 
got on her high horse, telling me I am the ONLY one with any curiosity 
about this topic because "the American and Canadian Egyptologists she 
had spent the better part of a month with" had unanymously informed her 
that the ethnic background of the various peoples who might have 
migrated into Egypt was something to which they never gave the least 
thought.  Moreover, she alledged that I had posted things advocating 
"racial hatred" (absolutely foreign to my nature), that Prof. Yurco had 
personally told her derogatory things about me and that she has had 
access to my "on-line and off-line posts" (whatever that means).  So I 
decided to call her on her "credentials" and ask her just what was her 
capacity at the University of Alabama.  She refused to say.  However, 
the University told me she teaches an adult education course in "Grant 
Writing", in my opinion a strange occupation for someone who lists 
herself with the most prominent Egyptologists in the world in two 
different sites on the web.  See below.  I wonder we don't all call 
ourselves "Egyptologists" in order to pull rank on those who might 
disagree with us.  It's that easy, it seems.  Not point in struggling 
for years to obtain one's PhD.
Email addresses of Egyptologists (Nigel Strudwick's Egypt Pages from
Cambridge University)                     4 December 1996
This file contains ethereal addresses of Egyptologists (graduate
students and professionals) known to us, in a format that can be
sorted by last name. We do not know all the people personally, and some
may not really be Egyptologists.  (many names snipped)
Allen, James P.; Metropolitan Museum, New York
73223.2243@compuserve.com
        (will also accept mail for other members of the Egyptian dept)
Altenmueller, Hartwig; Hamburg University
              z
Arrache, Gabriela; Sociedad Mexicana de Egiptologia
                                                akunz@data.net.mx
Assmann, Jan; University of Heidelberg
ae3@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Aubourg, Eric; Paris
aubourg@hep.saclay.cea.fr
Bagnall, Roger S.; Columbia University          bagnall@columbia.edu
Bagh, Tine; Carsten Niebuhr Inst., Copenhagen   bagh@coco.ihi.ku.dk
Baines, John; University of Oxford
john.baines@orinst.ox.ac.uk
Baligh, Randa; Yale University
rabies@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Bard, Kathryn; Boston University                kbard@acs.bu.edu
Barker, M. A. R.; University of Minnesota       b
horst.beinlich@vax.rz.uni-wuerzburg.d400.de
Bell, Lanny; University of Chicago
lanny_bell@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu
Bergman, Diane; The Brooklyn Museum
bklnmus3@metgate.metro.org
Bergman, Dag; New York                          76761.322@compuserve.com
Bohleke, Briant; Yale University                b.bohleke@yale.edu
Bolshakov, Andrey O.; Hermitage Mus. St.Petersburg
imhotep@bolshakov.spb.ru
Bovot, Jean-Luc; Louvre, Paris                  bovot@louvre.fr
Brand, Peter; Toronto University                pbrand@chass.utoronto.ca
Brancaglion, Antonio Jr.; Universidade de Sao Paulo     anubis@usp.br
British Museum, London
egypt@british-museum.ac.uk
        Departmental address for Egyprian Antiquities
        Egyptologists include Carol Andrews, Morris Bierbrier, Vivian
Davies,
        Richard Parkinson, Stephen Quirke, Jeffrey Spencer, John Taylor,
        Derek Welsby
Brooklyn Museum                                 see note above
Dodson, Aidan; London
100761.3075@compuserve.com
Dorman, Peter; University of Chicago
peter_dorman@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu
Griffith Institute, University of Oxford        griffox@ashmus.ox.ac.uk
        (see also McKay, Magee, Malek, Miles) or: griffox@vax.ox.ac.uk
Griffis (Greenberg), Katherine; Univ. Alabama   grifcon@usa.pipeline.com
Guksch, Heike; Heidelberg University
b13@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
There she is, right up there with some of the foremost Egyptologist in
the world, supposedly at the University of Alabama (except her e-mail
address, as you know, has nothing to do with any university).  Then,
here she comes again--on the Centre for Computer Aided Egyptological
Research list of Egyptologist:
Hare, Tom; Stanford University
thare@leland.stanford.edu
Dr. Robert S. Bianchi, 1056 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028-0112
     Dr. Edward Bleiberg, c/o Memphis State University, Inst. of Egypt.
Art and Arch.,
     Memphis, Tennessee 38152
     Dr. Briant Bohleke, PO Box 202717, Yale Station, New Haven, CT
06520-2717,
     [e-mail: b.bohleke@yale.edu]
     Mr. Kim Bongiorno, P.O. Box 23783, Tempe, AZ 85285
     Dr. Edward J. Brovarski, 1264 Beacon Street, Brookline, MA 02146
     Dr. Betsy M. Bryan, 5410 Purlington Way, Baltimore, MD 21210
     Dr. Karl W. Butzer, c/o University of Texas, Department of
Geography, Austin, TX
     78712
     Dr. Diane Lee Carroll, c/o Calif. Academie of Sciences, Golden Gate
Park, San
     Francisco, CA 93118
     Miss Suzanne Chapman, c/o M F A, Dept. of Egyptian Art, 475
Huntington Avenue,
     Boston, MA 02115
     Prof. Virginia Condon-Viscusi, Box H, Armonk, NY 10504
     Prof.Dr. Lorelei Corcoran, Memphis State University, Memphis,
Tennessee 38152
     Dr. Carol Crown, c/o Memphis State University, Institute of
Egyptian Art, Memphis,
     Tenessee 38152
     Dr. Eugene D. Cruz-Uribe, 3175 West Brenda Loop, Flagstaff, AZ
86001
     Mr. Whitney M. Davis, c/o Dept. of Art History, 1859 Sheridan
Road,, Kresge Cent. Hall
     254, Evanston, IL 60201
     Mr. Leo Depuydt, c/o Dept. of Egyptology, P.O. Box 1899,
Providence, RI 02906
     Dr. Peter Der Manuelian, 177 Marlborough St., Apt. 1, Boston, MA
02116
     Prof. Dr. Peter F. Dorman, 5715 S. Kenwood Avenue, Apt. 3-N,
Chicago, IL 60637
(snip)
     rof. Dr. Hans Goedicke, The J.Hopkins Univ., Dept. NE Studies,
Charles and 34th
     Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218
     Prof. Dr. Ogden Goelet, 240 East 27th Street, Apt. 25F, New York,
NY 10016
     Katherine Griffis (Greenberg) University of Alabama at Birmingham
P.O. Box 43159,
     Birmingham, AL 35243-0159 [Voice: 205/995-2099; Fax: 205/995-2099
(Enter *77*,
     press SEND) or 205/991-0304; e-mail: grifcon@usa.pipeline.com OR
     grifcon@ix.netcom.com]
     Mrs. Emma Swan Hall, 1080 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10028
     Ms. Joyce Haynes, 86 Wilson Road, Nahant, MA 01098
     Ms. Marsha Hill, c/o M M A, Dept. of Egyptian Art, 1000 Fifth
Avenue, New York, NY

In article <59aaoo$iqn@news.inforamp.net>, thehab@inforamp.net says...
>>Saida  wrote:
>>[snip]
>>Xina
>>All right, Xina, I take back every hurtful word and I hope you'll do the 
>>same.  I have posted a private e-mail from Katherine Griffis although, 
>>unlike yourself, she didn't give me permission to do so.  Well, I don't 
>>care.  Read that letter and think about what I told you.
>Just my opinion, but I think this "Saida" beast is one wacked-out 
>individual.
Big Eff'n "A" ditto ... and to think, I donated money so that the Internet 
would be wired into mental institutions ... paybacks are hell as they say ...
-- 
r/Father Jack
 
 
"I will tell you about the fiction and the fallacy ...
 as brought to you by the salesmen of salvation."
 Galen Calloway, Millennium ... Chris Carter

> Looks2Sky wrote:
> > A question for those who doubt the Biblical Universal/Global flood.  Why is
> > it that the vast majority of ethnic groups have "mythological" stories
> > dealing with a  World Flood?
Grond wrote:
> Because, sometime or other, it rains everywhere?  Given the primitive
> counting skills (one, two, many), it's not hard to imagine a local event
> becoming a world event.  Add the human enjoyment of a good story (or the
> tendency to lie to gain status), and it is more amazing that some
> cultures don't have flood legends.
Dont know where YOU live but I have lived
40 years and I havent seen a Flood yet in my local area.
And the Missouri Flood is NOT going to make me in WIsconsin
think that the whole world was flooded in 1993. In fact with no
technology, I wouldnt have seen any pictures either. So just how
does every area get a world Flood story without one.
I take it then we can also say there was no bishop named
Nicholas sainted by the Pope, and that bishops dont wear red.
In fact I would say that since the Santa Claus myth was created by media
in contrast to the church or state reality of bishop Saint Niclaus,
that none of your opinions portraying
local myths of flood can compare to the religious
and state records of all ancient religions verifying global Flood.
************
A voice crying out and going unheard,
(40 years Oct 7) Nehemiah's (9:1) 50th JUBILEE of Tishri 24 
God's 1000 years has begun Sep 14 of 1996.
The 144,000 will rule before this first year ENDS.
http://www.execpc.com/~elijah/Ezra1991CE.gif
Discover the world's true chronology thru the Bible at
          http://www.execpc.com/~elijah

Shane D. Killian wrote:
> Also Sprach David B. Greene (daveg@halcyon.com):
> > >shroud of Turin was subjected to more than one dating technique.
> > What other techniques were used?
> This isn't exactly a dating technique, but the fibers were examined by
> someone whose name eludes me, but his experience was with examining
> paintings and determining their authenticity. When he examined the "blood"
> under a microscope, it turned out to be red ocher paint.
> 
It was Walter McCrone.  He has a nice article in
Accounts of Chemical Research around 1990 (don't have
the exact year) that is readable by the scientifically
literate layman.  Nice color pictures.
It is a thin review journal, so it should not be hard to locate
the article.
Tracy Hamilton

Hello, my name is Kondo+Hiroko. I am a Japanese woman.
 I have a question. Why do almost earthen vessels in the old-time are have many marking? 
 Those should have been made in quantities, because It was easy for them to break. However, the 
people in the old-time put marking to the earthen vessels intentionally.
 Did it have consciousness of the art, or, is there an other reason? I think that they were made 
for the sell.
 I am waiting for your opinion.
-- 
    _ _             KK   KK  OOOOO  NN   NN DDDDD    OOOOO        HH   HH
   (o o )>>         KK  KK  OO   OO NNN  NN DD  DD  OO   OO   +   HH   HH
 (VVVVV   >>        KKKKK   OO   OO NN N NN DD   DD OO   OO  +++  HHHHHHH
  ~(       >>       KK  KK  OO   OO NN  NNN DD  DD  OO   OO   +   HH   HH
  W    W    >>      KK   KK  OOOOO  NN   NN DDDDD    OOOOO        HH   HH
    (   (     >>>
   ddd  ddd     >>>>>               planets@mxw.meshnet.or.jp