Re: Barbara Thiering Refuted!

On Mar 8, 3:08 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>

My subsequent comment stems from an experience I had some years ago
when I asked persons qualified to read a particular script, to test a
hypothesis that a number of petroglyphs employed a precursor subset of
the particular script. [I'm being coy here because I do not want to
reopen old arguments.]

....as you reopen an old argument. Coy, shmoy; let's talk frankly.

I COULD NOT GET THESE PEOPLE TO TEST THIS HYPOTHESIS for the simple
reason that they could not bring themselves to even consider the
possibility that it might just be correct. THEY WOULD NOT DO IT.

John Byrne did. You appear to think otherwise for your own reasons--in
which I am not interested. If you want to explain why John is no true
Scotsman, tell it to the wind.

But there are several groups of people for whom carrying out Larry's
work would be exactly their cup of meat.

NONE OF THOSE PEOPLE, AFTER ALL THESE YEARS, HAVE STEPPED UP TO TEST
THIS HYPOTHESIS for the reason...what was the reason, now? The
argument that they couldn't bring themselves to even consider the
possibility that Larry might have been right absolutely does not
obtain. YET THEY WOULD NOT DO IT.

Money cannot be an issue. Those folks have found ways to pay for lots
of more costly investigation. It cannot be due to lack of interest. In
homage to St. Fell and his interest in 'American Ogham', and to
McGlone et al., finishing Larry's work would seem to be right in
NEARA's et al. wheelhouse.

It cannot be lack of capacity. Kelley, and many others, are certainly
capable of looking up the straight lines and crunching the numbers. I
am flummoxed to think of any reason why others have hot-potatoed this.
Even Larry's abrasiveness would seem to be no bar to the final
vindication of Fell's ideas.

Yet we, who have spent the blood of our children and the best years of
our lives on this discussion, get dissed by you for not fulfilling
your desires.

Huh.

Why do you not do it, Eric? You have the interest, the math skills,
the open-mindedness, and a pretty fair file cabinet full of the
discussion, and most if not all of the straight lines. You have some
time, as you certainly read up on stuff, and have time to spend on-
line. Go for it, Eric. Let's see how it's done.

John will be so impressed.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Barbara Thiering Refuted!
    ... the particular script. ... John Byrne did. ... THIS HYPOTHESIS for the reason...what was the reason, ... capable of looking up the straight lines and crunching the numbers. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Searching through a directory.
    ... that is exactly what was wrong with this script. ... John ... >>But for some reason, the IF statement did not work. ... >whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of ...
    (perl.beginners)
  • Re: Roadshows, Part V
    ... each of the "skits" with John and Miles, there was a part where Miles ... script with cues for the lights and sound folks. ... "Listen, you know I really dig that Priscilla chick, right?" ...
    (soc.religion.mormon)
  • lk-changelog.pl 0.325
    ... This script is used by Linus and Marcelo to rearrange and reformat BK ... +'christoph:lameter.com' => 'Christoph Lameter', ... 'hawkes:oss.sgi.com' => 'John Hawkes', ... 'lethal:unusual.internal.linux-sh.org' => 'Paul Mundt', ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Sony FX1 (or Z1U)??
    ... thanks so much for the recap John i absolutely loved the build at the end. ... become the STANDARD like sony used to be with beta. ... one reason stated to me sounded ... >>camera recording in all the camera control phases as well as both SD 4:3 ...
    (rec.video.production)