<<By comparing it to the Makapansgat pebble, anyone who know the
anthropological literature knows That they are talking about the earliest
possible piece of art.>>
You and I both know the Makapansgat pebble was not manufactured. It was not
art. Leakey calls the comparison a "coincidence," hardly a stunning
position, and concludes that the whole idea is "open to question."
<<I think she is dead. This will truly be an interesting trip.>>
No stranger than some of the trips you've been taking lately!
<<I asked for where in the Bible it was, If you don't know what the Bible
is,
then I suggest using a dictionary>>
If I don't answer irrelevant questions, don't have, as they say in India, a
cow. It's my attempt to keep things on track. You attempt to cloud the
issue. We have been talking about the archaeological record. You've quoted
scientists chapter and verse. That's the playing field. So why do you
suddenly ask for irrelevant data? You're the one who is constantly taking
Christians to task for not dealing with the observable facts.So what
happens when I point out that you aren't dealing with it either? You fly
off with some irrelevant Bible question.
Please stay focused.
Jim