Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: "Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 17:48:17 GMT
"JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1133974810.546864.60990@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Jim McGinn wrote:
>> "JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:1133936627.252319.113000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > Jim McGinn wrote:
>> >> "JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
>> >>
>> >> >> Read upthread. We're not talking about the same books here.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > What book are you talking about, Jim? I mentioned two books. Which
>> >> > one did you read?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Well, if you read upthread, as I suggested, you'd be able to answer
>> >> your
>> >> own
>> >> question. Okidoke?
>> >
>> > No, dickless, it didn't answer the question. I mentioned two books.
>> > You said you read that book but didn't specify which one. That is
>> > unless the answer is that you're a lying sack of *** and you didn't
>> > read a damn thing. That answer is one we already knew though.
>> >
>>
>> Are you saying there's anything in these books that has direct bearing on
>> my
>> hypothesis? Indirect? Anything? Anything at all?
>
> I am saying that the foundation claims you've put forward are false.
> Building upon a false foundation is doomed.
>
> I do not believe that you actually read any book and your own claim
> that you were skiing when you claimed to be at the library furthers
> this. You are a liar and a fool.
>
>> If so then what is it?
>
> You have made baseless claims regarding domestication and regarding
> your claim that there wasn't such a thing as a hunter-gatherer. Your
> claim is based on the silly putty that inhabits your head. I have
> provided references on actual work that people have done on the
> archaeology of domestication and archaeology of hunter-gatherer
> populations that counters your claims.
Such as . . . ?
I'd say you were a total fraud,
> but fraud elevates you to something that someone actually believes and
> in your case, the only person who doesn't think you're insane is you.
>
>> If not then why are you asking me these questions?
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- References:
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: spiznet
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Prev by Date: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Next by Date: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Previous by thread: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Next by thread: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Index(es):