Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: "Carl" <pchristainsen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 12 Jan 2007 11:31:40 -0800
prd wrote:
...
I had already come to that conclusion based on the sites
he kept plugging. I don't think he understands what is
commonly good acedemic standards, at least to acedemics.
Alot of this debate is polarized by religious beliefs.
You don't understand the difference between citing references and
"plugging".
Also, my conversation has not drawn upon religious beliefs. If you
doubt this, check
the close detail I wrote on the Qumran roundel or sundial in a previous
Thread I started.
I would like it if you kept polemic off the newsgroup.
Best,
Dave
.
- References:
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Carl
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Tom McDonald
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Carl
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Carl
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Carl
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Carl
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- From: prd
- Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- Prev by Date: Re: A problem with evolutionary theory
- Next by Date: Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- Previous by thread: Re: Ancient latrine fuels debate at Qumran
- Next by thread: Topper River Site (SC,USA) Goodyear claims RC date of 50kya?
- Index(es):