Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Agents provocateur

Expand Messages
  • David Campbell <fred-dobbs@usa.net>
    This quaint old term has been replaced by the much easier spelled and typed term Troll .Lurk on brother,cyberspace ain t half full.
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      This quaint old term has been
      replaced by the much easier
      spelled and typed term "Troll".Lurk
      on brother,cyberspace ain't half
      full.
    • michael <sparky@all-ez.com>
      hi david, all jim bowles unsubscribed from this group some time ago, so im at a loss about your last two posts? he is still a member of my ancient- mysteries
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 4, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        hi david, all

        jim bowles unsubscribed from this group some time ago, so im at a
        loss about your last two posts? he is still a member of my ancient-
        mysteries group. even though we dont always agree he has never been
        a problem.


        regards
        mike



        --- In Precolumbian_Inscriptions@yahoogroups.com, "David Campbell
        <fred-dobbs@u...>" <fred-dobbs@u...> wrote:
        > This quaint old term has been
        > replaced by the much easier
        > spelled and typed term "Troll".Lurk
        > on brother,cyberspace ain't half
        > full.
      • hesiodau <Vadar@nobbys.net.au>
        David Campbell wrote, Tue, 04 Feb 2003:
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 5, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          David Campbell wrote, Tue, 04 Feb 2003:

          <This quaint old term has been replaced by the much easier spelled
          and typed term "Troll".Lurk on brother,cyberspace ain't half full.>

          Yep, that's a better word; and that particular story could also
          qualify as a "sting", using the routine overkill we've come to
          expect from our democratically elected servants nowadays.

          I completely agree with what Sparky just said too. Most amateurs
          have a life-long interest and shouldn't be discouraged and locked
          out, as though history and archaeology are the private property of
          one particular group who pretend to have all the answers - or at
          least, claim no untrained "amateur" can possibly have any.

          Amateurs often have the advantage of not being indoctrinated in the
          out-dated belief system that underpins all academic theories, and
          some of their open-minded inspiration is going to be proved right in
          the end.

          And I'm sure plenty of big-note professors will eventually be
          revealed as the strutting idiots they actually are.

          vadar
        • Moby Doc
          Hi you all...lurkers and none fixed lookers :) When any of us none lettered guys see s a report on a archaeolodical dig on a certain piece of ground ... say
          Message 4 of 4 , Feb 5, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
               Hi you all...lurkers and none fixed lookers :)
                When any of us none lettered guys see's a report
                on a archaeolodical 'dig' on a certain piece of ground ...
                say a mound which cover's many acres in size...say to a 
                 depth of 4 to 5 ft ...and the report says the people around
               at that time covered the sacred buriel site...using wooden
               spades and clam shells ...does anyone bother to think how many
               thousands of yards of material (overburdon) that would have to
               moved to complet such a task ...and just think of the amount 
              of elbow grease needed to keep the slaves and servants  from
              seizing up during the thousands days needed to end such a task ;
                I guess some people never do bother think of such trivia :)
             
                                            Pat / Moby
               
                  
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.