crunch 03/12/2009 21:32 wrote:
On Dec 3, 2:47 pm, Tom McDonald wrote:
crunch wrote:
On Dec 3, 11:28 am, Garry Williams wrote:
On Dec 1, 12:06 pm, VtSkier wrote:
Well maybe, except:
This is not the first time this has been posted.
The part about civilisation falling apart. There was
no civilisation at the time.
Well, strictly speaking, shouldn't one qualify that with, "that we
have any evidence of"?
Just asking.
Garry
My method is to probe recent Google Scholar articles -
Keywords: archaeology civilization "Younger Dryas" Europe
I got 235 hits.
Big whoop. Oddly, scholarship is not done on the basis of what
gets jammed into GS, nor on the basis of hits on keywords.

Strawman argument.

What is the srawman argument?

But you wouldn't understand, since you think you are a
professional, well, lots of stuff you aren't.

Forget your career of maligning me as an egotist.

Here's one relevant article. Please note that

the author says "our reconstructions of prehistoric culture history",
not civilization -
But the ****ing article you posted said 'civilization'. You are
too incompetent to understand why that is wrong for the time.
...

Take your carping off usenet.

David Christainsen - Meteorologist


So **** off, because this is sci.archaeology.