Jim. I am going to take a break from this thread. Your argumentation style
is getting tiresome and lawyerly. Soon we will be talking about paragraph 5
subsection b....
I fail to see why the finding of leopard paws and tail arranged as they would
be if they had been part of a Shaman's cape is not evidence deserving of more
discussion than your quick dismissal gives it. So what that Shreeve is saying
"two French archaeologists" reported in 1972". Are Frenchmen liars and thus
reporting false things? Who cares what type of chapter it is in. It is data
that needs to be discussed. If you want to say that no body in the
anthropological community believes them, then I want to hear the what they
said. A consensus of experts disagreeing with someone is important. To say
they are not to be talked about because they are "overview" is non-responsive.
The issue is NOT Shreeves opinion nor what part of the book this evidence
came from, but the actual data (leopard paws found in a burial). I strongly
suspect that we could find a library with a neanderthal hand on a book and
spectacles on the skull and you would say that this is not a spiritual being
because your theology can not accept that. There is nothing wrong with that
stance. But if that is true, it would be better simply to say that, then to
deny things that certainly have the appearance of humanlike activity. Since
I don't see much point in chasing my tail right now, I am going to take a
break from this thread. Thanks for the conversation.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm