"Thomas McDonald" wrote in message
...
"Paul R. Mays" wrote in message
...

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
...


Paul R. Mays wrote:

Cities under a few hundred feet of water and 90 or so
feet of ocean debris can wipe a few traces.. and how
much of a trace would you say a 200 foot tall stone
building would leave... after being scraped over by a
couple miles of ice.... for a 1000 years or so...

You have not produced the means to distinguish between no such city
ever, and a city wiped clean. In the absence of evidence you have not
a
square yard to stand on. All you offer us if feeble speculations not
backed up by anything other than your foolish fantasizing.

Bob Kolker



I'm not the expert and I make no claims.. I have read and considered
many areas of studies and I have found reasonable evidence provided
by many writers that actually got off their asses ( unlike you) and
researched the possibilities... Just because you have a limited mental
ability to comprehend evidence presented by many well informed and
respected researchers does not mean that a simple layman as I would
waste my time repeating the writings of those that have spent their
lives actually doing the research in order to spoon feed your knowledge
void.

http://www.guardians.net/hawass/remnants.htm
http://www.grahamhancock.com/news/index.php
http://www.grahamhancock.com/library/bookshop.php
http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/nation/2962443.htm
http://archives.mundoacuatico.com/oc...iousstones.pdf


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...kencities.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1923794.stm


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in522626.shtml
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/detail.asp?ID=32604&GRP=A
http://www.morien-institute.org/yonaguni.html
http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue1...apanunder.html


That's a start but there's a much longer list....

Paul,

Do you really suggest that the above list are the 'references' you are
using?

You do not have a clue about providing references in an orderly and
meaningful way, do you? Most of the items are crap, already shown to be
wrong. Several are links to on-line bookstores, not to information that
can
be reviewed. One, a CBS news site, gets very wrong the date at which the
Aztecs first learned about Teotihuacán; and is, in any case, a
journalistic
work (as are most of the rest of your "references"), not scientific work.

You might be posting from alt.fan.art-bell; I don't know. But the
other
three groups you're cross-posting to are sci. groups, and in science,
evidence is presented carefully, is discussed and debated in a scientific
way, and is not conducted via dueling news stories.

Maybe in a nice class room somewhere but on a few
newsgroups on the internet where the likes of TJ, Smart, Spacey
and others banter about, I think I might just be allowed to do and
say pretty much what ever the **** I want to ... and say it
in any way I wish.. When the time comes that I wish to have
a peer review of some aspect of my own postulates I will take the
time to quote from the books, provide an out line, bibliography,
organized reference lists etc.. Till then I'll just say go to the
big building in your town that has all those dusty old paper things
with all the letters printed in them.... They use to be called books...
and there's a lot of them and many have some neat stuff.....




Tom McDonald
remove 'nohormel' to reply



I'm not writing a dissertation for peer review folks....
I could sit down and go through the many books on the
subject ( I really hope you guys don't really rely on the
internet as your primary information source) then individually
post a series of supporting links and a complete bibliography
of all reference material... But I really don't care that much...

If you carefully read what I have written through this thread you
might notice that I said these are not my suggestions of evidence...

These are positions made by many writers, some I fully agree read
the evidence and make statements that are far fetched... But they
point to Evidence..... not proof... and many of the writers in the
book listing pages have many pages of calculations, physical
objects and a host of very specific pieces of evidence. To
suggest that we all should give up reading the books, and just
stick to getting your knowledge base on the internet, is a good
way to examine the presented evidence is a whole new thread...

The links I put up were just a quick capture and were not a
follow up to some claim of proof of anything.. Just a few
bits with some names of books that you can actually read and
get some very detailed pieces of presented evidence.. some of
the writers may from time to time make wild ass claims as to
what they think the evidence means but it does not make the
evidence they provide not have value.. If I found a buried bag
with a 3 pound diamond in it and claim that it must have been
left by aliens, that is a foolish claim, but the diamond a very
interesting find worthy of further study all by itself...


I'll just ask you just one thing and see if you will actually do
your own leg work and see if there's something a bit weird...

Map all the pyramids around Gaza ..... Match the positions
of the 7 stars of the Orion constellation on any star charting
software .... Rotate the constellation backward in time until
the positions of all 7 of the Gaza pyramids match the positions
of the 7 stars in the constellation... Thinks that's bunk don't ya...
Ya think its just some wild claim... Try it....

Then think about our present model...