[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Yuri's smoking guns (was: Testing Gourd Diffusion?
On 22 Dec 1996, Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
> Jeffrey L Baker (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> : The REAL "smoking gun" keeps changing. For awhile it was the gourd,
> Incorrect. It was never the gourd. If you care about your credibility, I
> encourage you to produce evidence where I said otherwise.
> : then
> : the coconut,
> Incorrect again. It was never the coconut. If you care about your
> credibility, I encourage you to produce evidence where I said otherwise.
> : most recently the chicken.
> Another false statement. I never said so.
Yuri appears to have a short memory. I haven't bothered to check on the
coconut or the gourd, but here is what he said on the chicken. On Dec. 12
he posted a message on the thread "Re: Smoking Guns? Yes" that included
the following quote:
"Carter marshals VERY IMPRESSIVE EVIDENCE that the chicken was indeed
known and WIDELY SPREAD pre-Columbus. If this is true -- THIS WILL BE THE
BIGGEST SMOKING GUN EVER."
> : Now it appears that he is going to
> : use maize. Let me guess, there are pieces of art in India that have
> : objects that resemble maize?
> : This proposition has been thoroughly
> : debunked in a number of articles (and in this newsgroup).
> Incorrect. This evidence has not been mentioned here yet. This is fairly
> recent research that was published in late 80s.
Yes it has. Not by you, but the subject of maize was discussed on
sci.archaeology a year or two ago.
I have seen one reference that purports to find evidence for maize in
India that was published ca. 1992. Nothing new in that article, that
hadn't been criticized before.
> It's coming. The reason I delay offering it for discussion is because I
> want to finish up with the discussion of the chickens. One thing at a time
> is preferable to me, as I, for the most part alone, have to contend with
> many determined and unforgiving critics, many of whom use unethical
> strategies of distortion and malicious and deceitful accusation.
> Distortion is clearly evidenced in this very post I'm replying to from
> you, Jeffrey.
The chicken is dead and cooked. No smoking gun there. Bring on the next