Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: "Makouli" <men@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 08:54:18 -0600
<claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:16f179bf-30ef-443b-a1e4-24fb7c16dfb9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Dec 16, 6:21 am, "Makouli" <m...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:[classic Dimmy banter]
IOW, perhaps your original rubber-headed question
really is rubber-headed....?
You are so desperate to evade these questions that you are trying to
revert to past arguments. You didn't answer those questions either
you idiot. If you go back in the archives all you'll find is more
evasiveness.
Oh, please do. And thanks for the lovely .sig:
C'mon, you evasive twit, just answer the question. What are you
afraid of?
"C'mon, you evasive twit, just answer the question.
What are you afraid of?" Dimmy --12/17/07
I'll just add that one to my collection....
"This is plainly amateurish nonsense."
--Dimmy 12/24/2005
.
- References:
- Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: Claudius Denk
- Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: Thy Bone
- Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: Claudius Denk
- Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: Makouli
- Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: Claudius Denk
- Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- From: Makouli
- Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- Prev by Date: Chimps vs. humans
- Next by Date: Re: Chimps vs. humans
- Previous by thread: Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- Next by thread: Re: Homo Erectus was *not* a hunter/runner.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|