Re: "I've never liked the Savannah hypothesis. The savannah one is pretty much out the window now."

On Aug 16, 5:04 pm, "Rick Wagler" <taxid...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"Marc Verhaegen" <m_verhae...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:C4CD1D7C.137FE%m_verhaegen@xxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/c...300857029.html

You posted your reference with a link that suggested the statements
appeared in the respected Australian broad*** newspaper, the Sydney
Morning Herald.

Liar.

It's right there in black and white, Marc. You included a broken link
that implies that this article was in SMH. It's your responsibility
to make sure that your sources cannot be misinterpreted. Your
attitude is inexcusable.

- my boy, why would i include broken links??
- i didn't imply anything
- somebody said: The savannah one is pretty much out the window now. i
liked that & copied the whole thing from AAT
- i had no problem opening the link
- whether some part of it came from some newspaper or not,
"respected"(:-D)
or not, i have no idea & don't care
- why are there always some maniacs that make simple things complicated??

Because some would-be scholar is so densely uncritical of
the sources he uses that absolutely nothing he says can be
taken at face value. You and DD have consistently posted
data as information without qualifying introductions as to
source etc that has turned out to be absolute garbage.

Is that reason enough for you? But you're right. Now that
you and DD have established a track record I suggest that
we all simply ignore such posts as frima facie nonsense. For,
as Jim Moore points out, you clowns can post this garbage
at a much faster clip than Ross or I or anyone else can clean
it up.

Rick Wagler

Rick talking out of his other orifice again? Note how 'humid' human
feces is (even among today's savanna-entrained tribes) compared to
actual savanna mammals. Everything about humans is water-costly,
obviously dependence on water has always been priority 2, right after
dependence on air to breathe.
.

Loading