Keyser wrote:Guest wrote:ambient wrote:reverse engineering what you think of as a "wee Scots lassie" is not archaeology, you might as well put a pic of wee Burney Sturgeon on there
Cunt
Christ almighty, is there any need for that ! What the hell is your problem ? This is a bloody forum not Cambridge University...get a bloody grip man !
Cherry de Voured wrote:Keyser wrote:Guest wrote:ambient wrote:reverse engineering what you think of as a "wee Scots lassie" is not archaeology, you might as well put a pic of wee Burney Sturgeon on there
Cunt
Christ almighty, is there any need for that ! What the hell is your problem ? This is a bloody forum not Cambridge University...get a bloody grip man !
The internet is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, we can access zettabytes of information - everything from history, to Science, to literature, to moonshine recipes and cats memes.
On the other, it has the contributions of users that are as thick as pig shit.
ambient wrote:Cherry de Voured wrote:Keyser wrote:Guest wrote:ambient wrote:reverse engineering what you think of as a "wee Scots lassie" is not archaeology, you might as well put a pic of wee Burney Sturgeon on there
Cunt
Christ almighty, is there any need for that ! What the hell is your problem ? This is a bloody forum not Cambridge University...get a bloody grip man !
The internet is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, we can access zettabytes of information - everything from history, to Science, to literature, to moonshine recipes and cats memes.
On the other, it has the contributions of users that are as thick as pig shit.
And pretentious cunts with a seemingly endless source of animated avatars
luddite wrote:I have to agree with Ambient here I'm afraid.
I have a local museum and some of the artifacts on display aren't described correctly.
I went to a museum in York 30 years ago and saw remains which were described as being 3.4 million years old, when I went recently the notice hadn't been updated and still said 3.4 million years.
So when I see pictures of dinosaurs I go yeah right, that's what they looked like.
Doomlord wrote:I know this isn't archaeology but to age that 400 year old shark the way they do it is to grind up the eyeball.
Keyser wrote:Doomlord wrote:I know this isn't archaeology but to age that 400 year old shark the way they do it is to grind up the eyeball.
I hope you enjoyed the links.
In a way it is archaeology - except the ancient artifacts are alive!
Doomlord wrote:Keyser wrote:Doomlord wrote:I know this isn't archaeology but to age that 400 year old shark the way they do it is to grind up the eyeball.
I hope you enjoyed the links.
In a way it is archaeology - except the ancient artifacts are alive!
I haven't looked....there might be my nemesis Papyrus there.....
rollup wrote:Aerial pictures reveal England’s ancient archaeological sites
https://www.newscientist.com/article/20 ... cal-sites/
Keyser wrote:rollup wrote:Aerial pictures reveal England’s ancient archaeological sites
https://www.newscientist.com/article/20 ... cal-sites/
I accidentally posted some history stories in the science thread last night.
Return to The Sleeping Dogs' Arms
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests