Re: Barbara Thiering Refuted!




Eric Stevens wrote:

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.]

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.

I would like to make what I belueve to be a reasobable request.
Could you and those who are responding to you please create a
thread for this discussion and move it out of the current thread?

Discussing another hypothesis by someone else clouds the issuue
of of Barbara Thiering's crackpottery, especially if, as appears
to be the case, this other hypothesis *was* explained well enough
that it is possible for someone else to test it.

Thanks!



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 5000 year old city in Peru.
    ... "Eric Stevens" wrote in message ... >>You mean fantasy tells like eqyption pharoahs teaching Olmecs ... on an older script that was developed in America. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Barbara Thiering Refuted!
    ... hypothesis that a number of petroglyphs employed a precursor subset of ... the particular script. ... point is that gaining insight into what Thiering seems to be doing is ... Someone who is determined to prove the error of Thierings pesher ...
    (sci.archaeology)