To: SunkenCiv
the stones could be over 4,000 years old That right there is funny, I don't care who you are.
3 posted on
09/15/2013 6:43:10 AM PDT by
ClearCase_guy
(21st century. I'm not a fan.)
To: ClearCase_guy
Hey, have you ever tried dating a stone?
4 posted on
09/15/2013 6:47:32 AM PDT by
Hegemony Cricket
(The emperor < still > has no pedigree.)
To: ClearCase_guy
Geez....I suppose the writer meant that the stones are thought to have been shaped & emplaced by humans perhaps 4,000 years ago, but coherence in writing is a dying art.
6 posted on
09/15/2013 7:05:22 AM PDT by
elcid1970
("In the modern world, Muslims are living fossils.")
To: ClearCase_guy
16 posted on
09/15/2013 8:06:31 AM PDT by
Nifster
To: ClearCase_guy
the stones could be over 4,000 years old
That right there is funny, I don't care who you are. I agree. Let's fix it.
". . .the circular layout of the stones could be over 4,000 years old. . ."
There, all fixed.
25 posted on
09/15/2013 11:52:57 AM PDT by
Swordmaker
(This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue...)
To: ClearCase_guy
the stones could be over 4,000 years oldMick is pretty wrinkly but I would never have guessed...
31 posted on
09/15/2013 4:42:40 PM PDT by
ThanhPhero
(Khách sang La Vang hanh huong tham vieng Maria)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson