| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 62 (05/06/08 4:12 PM) |
Which has been my point all along, see my post about logarithmic enforcement of laws. Besides, the selection bias comment wasn't referring to you. Consensus regarding "reality" requires a sample size a little bit larger than one. |
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 35 (05/07/08 9:36 AM) |
I think I misunderstood you then. I thought this was your point all along:
Sorry. |
||
|
rockman |
|||
|
Posts: 433 (05/07/08 10:47 AM) |
Supernaut wrote: "Further he believed there isn't a fish cop or court in the country that would care or try to convict you."
I wouldn't take his word for it. A fish cop doesn't know what artifact is important to archeologist, he just knows to keep people from picking them up. But like I said it depends on the cop. He may not care, and then again he might. Personally, I don't care to find out. I understand there are tons of artifacts boxed away in storage and tons in private collections. The proposal above is not a bad idea. The problem is once the artifact is removed it's out of context. So then the idea is to call an archeologist or the equivelent to come and note the artifact before removal. This would be a headache because there isn't enough money to pay the amount of people it would take to do this. Archeologist can't keep up now. If certified amateurs are going to do it, then you would probably have a number of other problems. Ego comes to mind. The only sure fire way to know where an artifact came from is to study it where it lays, in it's proper context. What really needs to be done is that all the artifacts that archeologist find during an excavation need to be catalogued and certified and sold to the highest bidder. What the museums don't want. Title and number it, that way a paper trail can be followed if it ever needs to be studied again. This would also make the artifacts worth more to collectors, seeing the proliferation of fakes. (see E-Bay) What the states and federal government are concerned about is not the folks who are on vacation and happened to find an arrowhead. They are more worried about people who jump every time it rains to go run and clean up all they can find. The "arrowhead on the brain" people. These kind are a shovel away from being looters. Ironically, these same people would probably make good archeologist with the proper education. If there exist such an incredible drive and love for arrowheads and artifacts, why not be an archeologist? |
||
|
SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 63 (05/07/08 1:09 PM) |
Yeah, I figured you didn't read a single word I typed in subsequent post #6. Sorry. Doubt it. |
||
|
SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 64 (05/07/08 1:13 PM) |
That is a great question for every member of this board. |
||
|
rockman |
|||
|
Posts: 435 (05/07/08 4:28 PM) |
Hey SuperNaut,
Don't get me wrong though. I like to find a nice point as much as anybody. Anymore I just look on river sandbars. I'm still looking for that big pink clovis! Good luck to you on your hunts. |
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 36 (05/07/08 7:08 PM) |
Yeah, I figured you didn't read a single word I typed in subsequent post #6. Sorry. Doubt it. True, but I did read it. I was aware your posts say more about you as an individual than they say about anything pertaining to anything else. For that reason I tend to read posts all the way through. Jack |
||
|
SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 65 (05/07/08 9:32 PM) |
I agree completely, it is amazing how quickly some posters will resort to distorted strawman mischaracterizations and ad-hom attacks. When, sadly, all they had to do was read what was actually written. Oh well, we both know that reading, and reading comprehension, are two different things. |
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 40 (05/08/08 6:41 AM) |
Disagreeing with an inaccurate statement hardly constitutes an attack. Nor does anything else I've posted in this thread, ad hominen or otherwise
|
||
|
softy |
Funny !!! | ||
|
Posts: 760 (05/08/08 7:28 AM) |
SuperNaut wrote:
Hi SuperNaut, LOL. That is just too funny !!! Read it five times, still cracking me up.
(:X |
||
|
softy |
correct | ||
|
Posts: 761 (05/08/08 8:07 AM) |
Hi highmountaineasy,
Hey don't worry about the native americans getting offended by things like Chaco, Where do you think the archys got the idea on what to look for? http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/html/e4-explore2.html
"But this whole romantic idea that this was just a bunch of happycampers living in a utopia is not the case," he said. "Thisplace was a sorcerer's nest, an evil place," said Stein, whoseviews about Chaco reflect Navajo clan beliefs.
According to some Navajo clan traditions, they included aruthless ruler known as the Gambler, who gained control of peopleby defeating them in various games of chance."The Navajo will tell you it was a powerful place ruled by a manwho misused his power for black magic," Stein said. "This placewas in the service of the devil," he said.http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0405c&L=aztlan&P=315Google: Chaco Canyon Evilfor tons more,,,,there are stories of some objects removed which were brought back...want to guess why???
(:X
|
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 41 (05/08/08 8:07 AM) |
Great pic! Those two jellicle cats watching from a safe distance are probably wondering whether they're next. Even if they're the ones called in the
cavalry.
Thanks for the laugh. Jack |
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 42 (05/08/08 8:18 AM) |
"But this whole romantic idea that this was just a bunch of happycampers living in a utopia is not the case," he said. "Thisplace was a sorcerer's nest, an evil place," said Stein, whoseviews about Chaco reflect Navajo clan beliefs. According to some Navajo clan traditions, they included aruthless ruler known as the Gambler, who gained control of peopleby defeating them in various games of chance."The Navajo will tell you it was a powerful place ruled by a manwho misused his power for black magic," Stein said. "This placewas in the service of the devil," he said.http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0405c&L=aztlan&P=315Google: Chaco Canyon Evilfor tons more,,,,there are stories of some objects removed which were brought back...want to guess why??? (:X
Nope. They definitely weren't happy campers just harmonizing with nature.
A decade or two ago I was wandering around looking at the big houses, came across a Dineh gent with a wheel-barrow doing some digging and maintenance on one of the floors. Knowing the Navajo taboos about coming in contact with the dead, I asked him if he wasn't concerned he would create a lot of inconvenience for himself with having to go through cleansing et al.
"Not working over here," was his answer. "But that butte over there's got thousands were thrown off the top still on that slope below. I don't go near that."
Modern fantasy-seekers about ancient life prefer not to know that side of things.
Thanks for the reply, Jack |
||
|
SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 66 (05/08/08 8:35 AM) |
Ah, the "you must be special" comments were just disagreement, and the mischaracterization in your post #27 was just you funnin'.
It's ad-hominem. Well highmountaineasy, at this point I have a choice. I can choose to allow your snarky replies and your lack of reading comprehension to anger me. Or, I can write you off as yet another internet keyboard commando. Or there is always a third way, so: We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, have a wonderful day! |
||
|
SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 67 (05/08/08 8:37 AM) |
(S)he may have a heart condition softy. Didn't want him/her to blow a gasket. |
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 43 (05/08/08 9:01 AM) |
supernaut: If you're the owner/moderator you'd best block me from the group [I volunteer]. I wouldn't survive long anyway given your standard for
civil discourse and disagreement.
If you're not, probably it's up to the people running things to decide what's snarky and what isn't. |
||
|
SuperNaut |
|||
|
Posts: 68 (05/08/08 10:02 AM) |
Not once was I rude, not once did I get personal, and not once did I say anything untrue.
I am sorry that you have confused disagreement with hostility. |
||
|
highmountaineasy |
|||
|
Posts: 45 (05/08/08 10:27 AM) |
And I'm sorry you have also, supernaut. I still don't know whether you're owner moderater or in a position of authority, but I'd like to.
If you are, this definitely isn't the group for me. If you aren't I'll just ignore your posts and you and I won't have anything to disagree about. Have a great one Jack |
||
|
softy |
??? | ||
|
Posts: 767 (05/09/08 12:48 PM) |
rockman wrote: Not in New Mexico, it is all federal, state, Indian, or owned by Ted Turner. {Barney Fife} (:X
|
||
|
Black Deadrick |
|||
|
Posts: 88 (05/26/08 12:05 PM) |
Come on Softy, Ted Turner only owns about one million acres in New Mexico..hehehehe.
|
||
