Re: Question re. Copper artifact Canadian Arctic formerRe:CopperCasting In America (Trevelyan)

From: Seppo Renfors (Renfors_at_not.com.au)
Date: 07/18/04 

Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 14:34:18 GMT

"Floyd L. Davidson" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors <Renfors@not.com.au> wrote:
> >"Floyd L. Davidson" wrote:
> >
> >You LIE again - I have made no such claim of "no wood" or even about
> >your wooden boat building nonsense!! You are the one with the big
> >mouth - back your claims, but all you can to is lie!
>
> You've made exactly that claim several times. It is wrong.

Repeating that LIE doesn't make it true you know - it remains a LIE.
You have resorted to that fabrication several times from words totally
unrelated:
---------------
<87iscql60a.fld@barrow.com>

Inger wrote:
>Your comments are funny. So funny that is' not worth doing anything but
>laughing.

First you think
there is no wood in the Arctic, and conclude that therefore
Eskimos wouldn't see any value to having a carpenter's plane.
----------------
<87brihk74l.fld@barrow.com>
Inger wrote:
>Good Night until you done your homework and at least send valid OBS valid
>contra-argument from Scandinavia and Greenland.

No wood available to Greenland Inuit people!
----------------
<87vfgpimkh.fld@barrow.com>
Inger wrote:
> There
>obviously are a lot who still try to lean to Icelandic Sagas forgetting all
>other documents, diplomas, donation length, ships documents and annals.....

Tell us again how there is not a stick of wood to be had in all
of Greenland.
----------------
<87y8llgppr.fld@barrow.com>
SIR wrote
>Unlike you - I don't make stupid claims about them either.

Oh, no not a bit... just tell me again how there ain't a single
stick of wood to be used for making boat frames anywhere in all
of Greenland.
----------------
<87fz7sgv5p.fld@barrow.com>
SIR:
>So where is your proof? You open your mouth wide, but can't back it
>up.

Are you still being silly enough to claim there was no wood available
to Greenland Inuit?
-----------------
<878ydmn66v.fld@barrow.com>
SIR:
>Sure but then deer antlers and the like can be shaped with steel
>knives, axe etc - not so good with a plane.

What is this "lack of wood" business?
----------------

There are 6 instances quoted out of many more where YOU have
fabricated the claim!! So there we see the LIES you have resorted to
and proof of your text in this post are LIES as well. Neither Inger
nor I have said "there is no wood on Greenland". But that hasn't
stopped you making that claim, has it!!

> >First of all, do you understand the difference between "skin boats"
> >and "wooden boats"? Your claim has been WOODEN BOATS! Where is your
> >EVIDENCE? It isn't anywhere, is it, because it doesn't exist, doe it!
>
> Seppo, please stop fabricating. I have *never* used the term
> "wooden boats". Not once.

You do not have to to have said it - all you need to do is AGREE it is
true - and you have:

<87fz7sgv5p.fld@barrow.com>
SIR:
>boat building of wood is what YOU have claimed that was part of the
>Inuit industry for thousands of years - on GREENLAND!!

Actually, for more than 1000 years and maybe for as much as 4000
years, on GREENLAND.
----------------

THAT is an agreement with my "boat building of wood" statement!!

<87y8llgppr.fld@barrow.com>
SIR:
>Nor do I discount boats using the odd
>bit of wood - but I REJECT totally your claim of making boats out of
>WOOD - which you now try and obfuscate with a lot of snake oil about
>SKIN BOATS - not "wooden boats"!

Ah, Seppo The Great, who has spent his entire adult life avoiding
Eskimos, knows all about their history,
-----------------

SO here we see you sneer and be derogatory in rejecting that it is
SKIN Boats you refer to. So you have indeed said "wooden boats", even
if you haven't used those words specifically.

> I have said they use wooden frames for
> the skin boats. You have said 1) there is no wood in Greenland,
> and 2) they use only whale bone for the frames of skin boats.

...and there is the lies again - I have posted 6 instances of where
YOU fabricate the claim "there is no wood on Greenland", and falsely
attribute that to ME this time, Inger at other times.
>
> You are wrong, and it has been proven well beyond any reasonable
> doubt that there have been wood framed skin boats in Greenland for
> thousands of years (a date you also denied).

YOU haven't proven anything other than your capability for fabricating
lies.
>
> But it *is* fun to post lots of information, that is in fact
> interesting, in the process of making it obvious that you are
> not willing to learn anything.

Really! When I have posted PROOF of claims YOU called "lies" - while
engaging in the practise of fabricating lies yourself. I have yet ot
see proof of your claims - one such claim OF YOURS is "there is no
wood on Greenland"!
 
> >"SKIN BOAT FRAMES"..... so what happened to the Inuit WOODEN BOAT
> >building industry that is 4000 year old? Skin boats don't qualify you
> >know - it's a different type boat we ALL know exist. It is your claim
> >of the WOODEN BOATS you need to prove, or cry "Uncle" and admit you
> >LIED about them. Alternately plead ignorance of the language!
>
> So now, in an offhand way, you are admitting that *everything* I
> said was true.

WRONG - I am merely pointing out where you have been resorting to
bull***. Further more where is your proof of the 4000 year boat
building INDUSTRY on Greenland?

INDUSTRY - noun (pl. -ies) 1 [mass noun] economic activity concerned
with the processing of raw materials and manufacture of goods in
factories - OED.

I will be happy with a (semi) continuous production of these boats and
a proven trade in them to qualify as "industry".

> The only thing we see that is false is your claims, e.g., about
> "wooden boats", which is a term that I've never used.

THAT has already been dealt with and THAT is a statement you have had
more than ample opportunity to DENY - instead you have agreed to it a
number of times. 

-- 
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Loading