[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Yuri's Credibility Problem
- Subject: Re: Yuri's Credibility Problem
- From: "Paul E. Pettennude" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: 13 Dec 1996 05:56:53 GMT
- Newsgroups: sci.archaeology.mesoamerican
- Organization: Home
- References: <email@example.com> <19961209194000.OAA20484@ladder01.news.aol.com> <01bbe5f6$f7e02cc0$b8c4b7c7@tekdiver> <pmv100.107.32AD642D@psu.edu>
We ain't going to save the world. Yuri is a crackpot and anybody who
believes this nonsense probably won't believe the truth either.
I have an idea, let's let him rave on for a couple of months. We continue
to post intelligent information among ourselves. Yuri will probably
escalate his attention-getting tantrums amd burn himself out. I for one
have better things to do.
In a couple of months I will be back down in the Usumacinta Region looking
for the lost canal between the Rio Candelaria and the Usumacinta which
colonial Spanish documents claim. I also plan to dive in the Rio
Usumacinta if the current isn't ripping at 2+ knots at Yaxchilan and
Piedras Negras. If we find the canal we will be on our way to a new theory
of how the Chontal Maya were able to move into the great river's basin and
disrupt classic civivization from Altar downward. I would like to get a
better feeling for the theory that a bridge spanned the Usumacinta at
Yaxchilan. Since Yaxchilan is in a protected crook of the river, I know
that if evidence exists, I'll be able to locate it under water. From there
I head back down to the Itzamkanac/El Tigre area. I have a three month
field season to conclude before I go to Belize and look for ancient ports.
It will be up to you to save lost souls from everything including floating
coconuts to transatlantic chickens. I will be glad to see what incredible
conctions Yuri has posted. God forbid those who believe him, but P.T.
Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."
Peter van Rossum <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in article
> In article <01bbe5f6$f7e02cc0$b8c4b7c7@tekdiver> "Paul E. Pettennude"
> >Until he publicly apologizes for his deception, I for one will not
> >in further dialog with him. I urge you do likewise. By all means
> >to post and converse with others, but refrain from subsidizing an
> >Paul E. Pettennude
> Paul, In general terms I agree with you. The only problem is that as
> soon as Yuri is not challenged on his fantasies he will immediately claim
> victory. Hell, I only had to let his most recent "evidences" lay for a
> of days while I did some background research for him to claim that I was
> completely ignoring him because I was overwhelmed by the evidence.
> What a load of crap.
> But there seems to be no end of lurkers (I get mail from 'em all the time
> when they are unwilling to defend their opinions in a public forum) who
> are willing to believe that if you or I or Ben or any the other rational
> voices don't have an immediate retort to his claims then it must mean
> they are correct.
> While continued engagement may in some ways legitimize the charlatan,
> my only hope is that at least some will see him for what he is - a
> spewer of second hand information who is unwilling or incapable of doing
> logical background checks of the miniscule number of sources he cites
> and from which he steals all his "ideas" to claim that "only a select
> of specialists" (himself included) really understand the topic.
> And for you Yuri, yes all the above are insults directed directly at you
> the vain hope that maybe they will spur you to get off your lazy ass and
> see that there is much more to archaeological method and theory than
> simply believing that whenever two things look similar they must be the
> result of contact.
> Peter van Rossum