Re: Archaeology and speculation

David <pchristainsen@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:

On Sep 9, 4:06 pm, "Peter Alaca" <p.al...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:
On Sep 9, 9:23 am, "Peter Alaca" <p.al...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:
On Sep 8, 12:28 pm, Kendall K. Down <webmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In message <1189264014.217157.98...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
David <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

For the sake of argument, let's agree that Egypt might have been
one of Han***'s mistakes. I invite you to get specific about
it.

Just read the blurb on the cover of his books; that tells you all
you need to know.

However, my context is Han***, India, Mehrgarh, marine
archaeology, Vedas, his 2002 book "Underworld...".

It is hard to believe that someone can write garbage on one
subject and then write similar stuff on another subject and be
worth reading.
IMHO Graham Han***'s 2002 book "Underworld..." on marine
archaeology is well worth a read because he shows he has paid his
dues.

Your HO is worthless.
Piss off, troll

--
p.a.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I resent your clutter. Eventually, other people on the NGs will
tell you to stop.

How many time people on this ng have asked /you/ to stop?

I always spoke from some sort of basis in truth, even if I sometimes
made mistakes.
I actually learned from Tom McDonald over the months.
If I disagree with Inger about pre-vikings in North America, I tell
her so.

You learned from Tom to disagree with Inger? Hou dare you !
But here is one of your other problems. You never answer questions.

--
p.a.

.

Quantcast