Re: Vineland
From: Eric Stevens (eric.stevens_at_sum.co.nz)
Date: 02/19/05
- Next message: Eric Stevens: "Re: Vineland"
- Previous message: Eric Stevens: "Re: Generic Dog ancestor"
- In reply to: Philip Deitiker: "Re: Vineland"
- Next in thread: Steve Marcus: "Re: Vineland"
- Reply: Steve Marcus: "Re: Vineland"
- Reply: David B: "Re: Vineland"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:07:05 +1300
On 18 Feb 2005 23:22:04 GMT, Philip Deitiker <Nopdeitik@att.net.Spam>
wrote:
>The argument
>was over whether that date range is meaningful and how it is
>meaningful.
The argument was over whether or not the INK has been dated. As far as
I know it has not.
A date range may be assigned to the anatase but that is not
necessarily the same as the ink. Even if it is, its not a date, its a
date range.
Eric Stevens
- Next message: Eric Stevens: "Re: Vineland"
- Previous message: Eric Stevens: "Re: Generic Dog ancestor"
- In reply to: Philip Deitiker: "Re: Vineland"
- Next in thread: Steve Marcus: "Re: Vineland"
- Reply: Steve Marcus: "Re: Vineland"
- Reply: David B: "Re: Vineland"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]