actually, i didn't respond, because i really don't know much about that, and
when i am ignorant, i have an instinct to protect and hide that ignorance.
sorry.
i really am interested in archeological sites, i used to read on and on
about macchu picchu and aztech civ. (another reason why mormons kinda piss
me off, here in utah, with their "american history")
does anyone on this list ascribe to what i think people call catastrophism?
where real advanced (well, more than conventionally believed) civilizations
may have existed much further back than usually thought, and blown, bred, or
diseased themselves out of existence? in the same vein are theories that the
egyptians had a rudimentary knowledge of electric theory, that the number
systems in ancient maya approached calculus level, stuff like that. it
fascinates me, but it's hard to find "speculative historians", i guess you
might say.
thanks for the in, to discuss something totally different, by the way. and
yes, i did check out nan madol, and i wonder if anybody knows how many
people are going there to look at it? will we see it in national geographic?
justin
>Not a single response. Hmm. OK, maybe I *have* been under a rock and
>everyone's just too polite to point that out. Yeah, right. :-)
>
>Or maybe nobody here cares about archaeology. We're more future oriented
>than past oriented, right? Well, yeah, but we're smart enough to realize
>that the past has valuable lessons.
>
>Maybe everyone's too busy working riddles. But Nan Madol is real world
>riddle whose solution would benefit mankind, not just boost the egos of
>those who can solve it.
>
>I'm stumped. I can't figure out why nobody else seems to care...
>
>-Dave
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:18 MDT