Re: A list of archaeological connections would be nice

On Jul 16, 10:11 pm, Daryl Krupa <icycal...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 15, 1:15 pm, Carl wrote:> On Jul 15, 2:56 pm, Daryl Krupa wrote:
On Jul 15, 11:37 am, Carl wrote:
<snip>
You must be drunk.
False, calumnic, specious, and cheap.
I am heartily ecstatic that I have got your attention!
Did you really think I really thought you were drunk?

<snip>

I take it from this Socratic retort that we are not to
trust in the veracity of your expressed opinions.



You have no idea of what abuse is; I do.
<snip>
Did you notice I invited Eric to check Glenn Milne out? He is a
top-flight academic in Britain who does inundation analysis and
is respected in the scientific community worldwide.
<snip>
I gave no proper reference to force any interested party to do his/her
own homework with the search engine. I am like that sometimes as
I was an extremely tough grader when I was a teacher way back when.

Oh, Dear, I fear that I do.
I know you; or rather, I know your type.
Despairing of ever inspiring respect,
you chose to abuse the trust and authority
that had been mistakenly placed in your hands
by inspiring fear in children,
blaming them for your own professional
inadequacies and deficiencies.
Roger Waters was inspired by your type
when he wrote "The Wall".
Woody Allen knew you:
"Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
Those who can't teach were sent to our school."
You have a bully's appreciation of pedagogy.
It is a very good thing that you are no longer
allowed to exercise control over young minds.

Quite specifically, if you get and read Han***'s book
"Underworld..." (2002),
you will note Milne did work for Han*** that got into Han***'s book.
It's the Milne maps inside; do you get it?

No.
You wrote that Milne is a "top-flight academic" who is
"respected in the scientific community worldwide".
If he "did work for Han***", then that cannot be true.
I very much doubt that Milne intended that his work
be published in a book by Graham Han***.
That Han*** re-printed adapted versions of maps
published originally in a work by Milne
does not necessarily convict Milne of
aiding and abetting Han*** in his activities.
That would be the literary equivalent of
cutting out the head of a respectable person from
a picture in a magazine and then
gluing it over the head of some disreputable degenerate
performing a disgusting act of unspeakablerdepravity
in another picture and publishing it in a book.
It puts the respectable person in a compromising
position, but none of the fault and error and blame
associated with the false impression thus created
should be placed on the respectable person.

Han*** is apparently shameless; he issued
an updated edition of his book on the supposed
"giant face on Mars", which was updated only by the
inclusion of a couple of newer images showing that
there was no giant face on Mars.
The text remained the same: an extended exposition
on the ramifications and fantastic implications of a
giant face on Mars.
I got the impression that Han*** has no respect
for people like you, his willing victim, a.k.a. his
volunteer sales promotion agent.
I'd be willing to bet that if he has read your writing
regarding his book, then he has laughed at you and
your gullibility.

<snip>> I do not say I necessarily agree with Han*** but I want to know in
close detail from any
interested sci.archers exactly where Han*** went wrong, if he did.

<snip>

Han*** is not a reliable reporter.
First, you must tell us wherein Han*** is correct.
Han*** has a reputation of not being worth discussion.
We need to be convinced that what he has written is
substantially correct.
To do that, you need to go to his sources and compare
what they have written to the way in which Han*** has
represented their work.
If you can show that Han*** has not only correctly
and accurately represented that work, but has also
something interesting to say about it, then we might
condescend to entertain thoughts of possibly
discussing the knock-off work of a known fabulist.

In this particular instance, you have a great handicap:
maps are not presentable through Usenet.
Maps can be difficult and frustrating to analyze,
if the original maps were altered for later publication.
You must first obtain high-resolution copies of
the original maps, and then you must compare them
line-by-line with the re-production version.
If there are substantial differences, then the later
re-production versions are unreliable as illustrations of
the ideas presented in the written text that
the original maps accompanied, and one must then
discuss the original maps, only, which is damned-near
impossible in Usenet if they are not available on
a publicly-accessible website.
Even if you encounter no substantial differences,
you must engage the services of someone familiar
with both the subject of the maps, and with
cartography (map production), to either
confirm to you that your analysis is correct or
indicate that you missed
one or more important variances either
between the two versions of the maps or
between the original version of the maps and
the written text that they accompanied and
were intended to illustrate, and then it must be
established that the written text is an accurate
and/or interpretation of the available evidence,
which should itself be investigated for credence
and applicability.
Sam Clemens said that
"There are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics."
Maps and graphs carry that progreesion to a new level.
What you see in Han*** is fourth-hand.
Your expectations regarding "Milne's" maps
cannot be satisfied here.
You must engage the services of a competent
professional in that matter.
Contact me through e-mail to obtain a schedule of
my rates and fees for service.

- Daryl Krupa

P.S.: I require payment in advance.

Highly amusing post from you. I sincerely thank you.

As I told Eric recently, I knew I was playing with fire when I brought
up
Han*** on sci.arch but the careful and interested reader will notice
that my argument on Mehrgarh does not depend on Han***, although
he was the pointer for me, but rather is always or can be always
backed up
by academic authority.

.

Loading