Re: 'Return Stonehenge' says archdruid

From: Diarmid Logan (diarmidlogan_at_gmail.com)
Date: 07/12/04 

Date: 12 Jul 2004 08:22:37 -0700

"JMB" <jmb@utvinternet.ie> wrote in message news:<ccs5rh$96f$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> "Diarmid Logan" <diarmidlogan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:622d5dd0.0407060726.4e57897d@posting.google.com...
> > "JMB" <jmb@utvinternet.ie> wrote in message
> news:<cc9dqp$m1v$1@kermit.esat.net>...
> > > "Diarmid Logan" <diarmidlogan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:622d5dd0.0407010805.3d0bc5ff@posting.google.com...
> > > > "JMB" <jmb@utvinternet.ie> wrote in message
> news:<2kg0jaF1sbl4U1@uni-berlin.de>...
> > > > > "Diarmid Logan" <diarmidlogan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:622d5dd0.0406300546.626bdcf@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > "JMB" <jmb@utvinternet.ie> wrote in message
> > > > > news:<2karqoF331gU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> > > > >
> > > > > --SNIP--
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not too bright, are you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, just brighter than you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not very bright at all, are you? The fact that you have to try and
> change
> > > > > the topic as you have no answer. The fact that Wales consists of
> people
> who
> > > > > are descended from Irish colonialists doesn't change, regardless as
> to
> > > > > whether or not the Irish Republic governs Wales.
> > > >
> > > > They are not descended from Irish colonists. This is something that
> > > > you have created in your own diseased imagination.
> > >
> > > That is something that is fairly well known in all the history books on
> the
> > > topic. I refer you to Foster, R. 1991. "The Oxford Illustrated History
> of
> > > Ireland" Oxford University Press. That's one example, there are many
> more
> > > if you do a bit of research.
> >
> > *Sigh* There is no archaeological evidence for such an invasion. If
> > such an invasion occurred there would be archaeological evidence of
> > it.
>
> There is plenty of evidence for it. Some of the most obvious evidence is in
> the form of the Ogham stones. There is also much historical evidence.

There is no evidence for it. Your diseased imagination is not
evidence.

> > *Sigh* More silly nonsense from you.
>
> Just because you are not very well educated doesn't make well known facts
> "silly nonsense".

Your fantasies do not qualify as "well known facts".

> > > > *Sigh* Please read this:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> http://web.archive.org/web/20010723223003/http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/archive/11-6-19101-0-51-36.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > Already did. You should read the research paper, not the newspaper
> article,
> > > if you want to discuss it.
> >
> > Post a link to it.
>
> Go find it in a library as I did.

*Sigh* If there is no link to it I can't comment on it since I have
nothing to back it up with on the net.

> > *Sigh* The Neanderthals died out 30,000 years ago.
>
> Yes, so? They were still in the area when Sapiens arrived on the scene.
> Either those Sapiens where the Basques, and displaced the Neanderthals, or
> those Sapiens where later displaced by the Basques. Either way, the Basques
> displaced somebody.

How do you equate dying out with extermination? The Neanderthals were
already dying out when Homo sapiens turned up. Look at this:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994586

Big chill killed off the Neanderthals
  
19:00 21 January 04
 
It is possibly the longest-running murder mystery of them all. What,
or even who, killed humankind's nearest relatives, the Neanderthals
who once roamed Europe before dying out almost 30,000 years ago?

Suspects have ranged from the climate to humans themselves, and the
mystery has deeply divided experts. Now 30 scientists have come
together to publish the most definitive answer yet to this enigma.

They say Neanderthals simply did not have the technological know-how
to survive the increasingly harsh winters. And intriguingly, rather
than being Neanderthal killers, the original human settlers of Europe
almost suffered the same fate.

Led by Tjeerd van Andel of the University of Cambridge, a team of
archaeologists, anthropologists, geologists and climate modellers have
compiled a vast new set of biological, environmental and social
evidence on life between 20,000 and 40,000 years ago.

It includes data from sediment cores and 400 or so archaeological
sites, and information gleaned from fossil bones and stone tools. To
this they have added the most up-to-date climate models, and
radiometric dates of human and Neanderthal sites and artefacts.

The result is a definitive series of maps covering climate change over
time, the appearance of animal and plant populations, and how human
and Neanderthal communities migrated with the seasons. The resolution
is so good that, for the first time, researchers can reliably trace
the movements of both hominid species.

Ice cores recovered from Greenland in the 1970s show that Europe's
climate varied hugely during the last ice age, especially in the
period between 70,000 and 20,000 years ago. Cold glacial periods were
punctuated by warmer times, and the average temperature could rise and
fall several degrees within a decade or so.

Studies of permafrost patterns, the remains of small animals and
pollen grains, as well as fossil bones, show that such changes had a
dramatic effect on the flora and fauna of the time, including Homo
sapiens and Neanderthals.

The maps show that, facing temperatures that plummeted to -10°C in
winter (see map), Neanderthals retreated south from northern Europe
30,000 years ago, a migration which coincided exactly with the
southern march of the ice sheets (Neanderthal and Modern Humans in the
European Landscape of the Last Glaciation: Archaeological Results of
the Stage 3 Project).

It is surprising "the extent to which Neanderthals seem to have been
deterred by the cold, and retreated as the going got tough," says
archaeologist William Davies, a co-editor of the report based at
University of Southampton, UK.

The maps also reveal that the earliest modern humans, the Aurignacian
people, who appeared around 40,000 years ago, could not cope with the
glacial cold either. They retreated south until 25,000 years ago when
they were reduced to a few refuges, such as southwest France and the
shores of the Black Sea.

The new maps show that even at the height of the last glacial period,
18,000 to around 22,000 years ago, continental Europe supported
extensive grasslands which were fodder for huge numbers of migrant
animals such as reindeer and bison.

The archaeological evidence strongly suggests that both hominids
coexisted in southern Europe for thousands of years, but competed for
ever diminishing resources. And that might have been the end for both
Homo sapiens and Neanderthals but for the arrival of the
technologically advanced Gravettians.

The Gravettians appeared in eastern Europe 29,000 to 30,000 years ago
complete with flash new tools, such as javelin-like throwing spears
and fishing nets, which allowed them to catch a greater range of prey.

They also had clothing to keep the cold out, such as sewn furs and
woven textiles, and possibly more specialised social structures. Their
ability to tough out the colder climes dominating Europe 18,000 to
25,000 years ago revitalised the human population.

The Neanderthals, however, without either new blood or new technology,
found it impossible to survive and died out, probably around 28,000
years ago.

For Neanderthal expert Paul Pettitt of the University of Sheffield,
UK, the evidence that climate adversely affected the Aurignacian
people as much as the Neanderthals is fascinating. When the going got
tough in northern Europe, says Pettitt, both adopted a "get out of the
kitchen strategy".

In contrast, Gravettians used their technological prowess "to
reorganise the way the kitchen was used". Pettitt says that step was
just as revolutionary as becoming modern Homo sapiens in the first
place.

 

> > They died out about 30,000 years ago.
>
> And how long ago do you think Sapiens arrived?

Check above for the extinction of the Neanderthals.

> In what way do you think I'm confused? You seem to think that Homo Sapiens
> are relatively recent immigrants to Europe. When exactly do you think we
> arrived?

You are the one who is confused. You think that Homo sapiens
exterminated the Neanderthals when it was the cold that killed them
off.

> > Only a fool would consider animals to be equal to humans. The fact
> > that you are taking this position just shows that you have no
> > intelligent arguments to support your positions.
>
> A biologist would point out that animals are just as complex (some even more
> so) as humans. Unless you want to act on faith, and assume that some god
> decreed that humans are better, then there is no reason to think of humans
> as better than animals, other than the fact that we are the dominant species
> on this planet for now. That being the case, then the dominant cultures
> within humans would have a similar claim to being better than the cultures
> they dominate.

*Sigh* I regularly eat animals. According to you, I am no better than
a cannibal.