Re: Explain 'Little Lucy's deposition?

Paul Crowley wrote:


I don't understand your use of 'floating'.
The body was clearly in contact with the
ground.

A floater is defined as:
http://tinyurl.com/yxbe24
from
http://www.slate.com/id/2126310/
and see
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/water.pdf

The bones could not have broken at the location
they were found, nor very close to it. All, or most,
of the breakages probably occurred at one place.

Your two sentences are contradictory.
Excavations are done in layers. Artifacts can then be left atop little
pinicles. Anatomically adjacent bones that are broken and lie lower
in the strata can assumed to have been pushed down into the mud by
trampling, as opposed to the unbroken bones that are above. This is
exactly what happened to a couple of bones at the 15000 site.

That must have been fairly early (possibly caused
by a hippo) with the broken parts being held
together by muscles and ligaments, which then
rotted, allowing the parts to drift.

Over extended imagination at work.


Contrary to who? The same person who thinks:
Message-ID: <1160837514.938748.252...i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Paul Crowley: "Chimps do NOT have the capacity to dig."

Your 'diversionary' tactics are so childish
and transparent that they are almost amusing.
Do you think that they fool anyone? The
only reasonable explanation is that they do
fool you. You 'think' they constitute an
answer.

Your imagination is amusing. But it could fool someone, like Read More.


Here you cannot deny the initial 'shallow
grave' -- but nor can you admit it. Childish
abuse is your only recourse.

The abuse you are doing to yourself.
I can and do deny a shallow grave. You are even confused about the
definition of "grave."


Crocodiles are (and were) widespread in
Africa. Their presence should be assumed
almost everywhere water is seen. In any
case, there are plenty of other scavengers.

Mountains are widespread in Africa, this does not mean the entire
continent is a mountain.
Of course there were other scavengers. It is thought that some of the
marks on the skeleton are from small catfish or turtles.


Sorry, but I wasn't there. But I'm saying that
the parsimonious theory is that he was
buried in a lake or river bank, which later
flooded, partially exposing the body (under
water) allowing some minor scavenging.

There is nothing parsimonious about imagining evidence that is contrary
to the words of the excavators.


A hippo stepped on the decomposing body,


Nope, the teeth fell into the depression while it was still a floater.
The body then drifted slightly farther from wave, wind, or being bumped
by animals OR some combination of the above. The bones could not have
been broken until enough decomposition had occured for them to sink to
the bottom. Only then could some have been broken by animals. Ever try
to step on a floating beach ball?

broke bones, caused the teeth to fall, and
moved and dispersed the corpse, which
then settled in the mud.

Nope. Wouldn't it be easier for you to save yourself further
humiliation by just reading the report?


They have NO hypothesis as to how he
died or was initially buried -- and nor do
you.

Delusional liar, I never claimed anyone knew how he died. I cited works
that said no one knows. You can't read is the problem.
Silts from slow moving over-bank flooding is exactly how he was covered
until someone else can prove otherwise with impirical evidence. Lip
service and negative arguments based on imagination that contradict
the primary researchers conclusion is absolute lunacy.


The authors will suggest NO possible
explanation of either fact. Everyone knows
that, including you -- even if you pretend
otherwise. Of course, then you will claim
that since the authors attempt no explanation,
you feel obliged to do the same. It will follow
the pattern of 15000 and 1808.

IOW, you haven't read that report either. But you know what they were
thinking because you are Swami Paul, psychic reader.



The only 'conspiracy' is one of blind
incompetence and foolishness -- roughly
equivalent to, say, the belief, held for
centuries, in the efficacy of bleeding with
leaches as a medical treatment, or in the
usefulness of studying the entrails of
sacrificed goats, or in astrology -- one
which is still prevalent today (what's your
star sign?). They do not realise that their
quasi-Biblical beliefs are just as soundly
based.

Says Swami Paul, psychic reader and geologist that believes rocks turn
to dust on a beach in a matter of months.



Strangely, you can show neither to be untrue.

No one can disprove a negative, you ignorant oaf.



What is a swamp in one decade, or century,
or millennium, will be dry ground in another.

Yep, that's why they have the layers drawn out in the report. However,
the body occupies only one layer, the swamp layer (except for the bones
pushed into the layer below by trampling).


You have not the faintest conception of
geological or evolutionary time. Let's say
that there was no major change in that
environment in the 10,000 years after 15000
died, and there were 100 hectares of thorn
trees in that area. How many tons of thorns
would have been produced in that time?
What fraction of them would have left
fossil traces?

Why do you think there are no traces? Why did the authors even mention
thickets if there was no trace? Why would the authors want to dig up
the entire valley looking for thorns?

A swamp requires water. What happens
when the water dries out? (Something that
happens to ALL swamps at regular, if not
frequent intervals.) There was a swamp
there at times and in parts -- especially
AFTER the bones were deposited and
started the process of fossilisation. Yet
again you have no idea of the scale of
evolutionary time.

That's why site reports show layers. The body was IN the swamp layer.
Why don't you just go read the report and save yourself the humiliation
of always looking like a ignorant fool.


Note the automatic dodge. No attempt at
an answer.

Why should I have to retype the answers clearly given in a report
because you are to lazy to go to the library and read it for yourself?
Even if no library near you has it, interlibrary loan can get it. There
is no excuse for the total ignorace that you are demonstrating.


The vast bulk of animals get scavenged and
leave no trace. Those that do leave fossils
have often got stuck in mud, presumably
when they trying to get a drink of water.

Yep, I already said that, one in a million wasn't it? Ditto for
hominids. They are found in the same proportions that any other animals
are found. No more no less. However, if 3 million years of burials did
actually take place, then hominds should be found in greater
proportions than chance alone would dictate. While you are at the
library checking out the 15000 monograph, check out a few books by Boaz
also. Shoreup your complete ignorance with some empirical data.


Such animals are NOT totally incapacitated
in the way 1808 was.

No animal of around 50-100 Kg will die of a
crippling disease and then get stuck in mud
as the result of its own actions.

Why not? You have to die somewhere.


Before cleaning in the lab, a few bones found at the site were thought
to have been part of the 15000 skeleton were later rejected as not
being hominid. Did this unknown animal species also use this spot for a
graveyard? Of course not, only Crowley could jump to such a ridiculous
conclusion.

Presumably this animal got stuck in mud in
the usual way -- and not after dying from a
tooth infection.

What makes you think a person can only have one disease, or illness at
a time??????? Since you know what is in a site report without even
reading it, I suppose you can do an autopsy the same way?




Paul.

.

Relevant Pages

  • I-40 pavement needs to be repaired
    ... DOT officials plan to make emergency repairs by Thanksgiving to the ... contractor how to do it correctly, says a 43-page report by Applied ... Concrete added atop the original four travel lanes was improperly ... cut into the 3-inch top layer were supposed to extend through it to ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: SCSI over USB showstopper bug?
    ... Then please file a proper bug report. ... The limits are communicated from the usb layer to the block layer via ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: KDT cant see different needs with his puny little brain.
    ... Perhaps when a layer asks me if I sent a report via email, ... If proof of reception was ever in doubt in a case before a judge, the ISP has ample records to determine the authenticity of an email. ... Go back to loving Apple, you're much better at wasting your life away with punctuated spurts of joy every time you dream up something positive to post about Apple;) ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: KDT cant see different needs with his puny little brain.
    ... went to their spam folder? ... Perhaps when a layer asks me if I sent a report via email, ... So, if the person refuses to send a read receipt, you still don't have ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Using GPS data to secure fiber/ethernet
    ... Paul Crowley wrote: ... >I can see no secure way of doing it; if you think you can, ... the following report may be relevant: ... See particularly pages 33-34 for a discussion of GPS spoofing threats. ...
    (sci.crypt)