[js1138, responding to tallhappy:] If you tool the trouble to right click on theimage you would get this:
http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/
Following the links you get this:
http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=38
Oh, it's much worse than that -- in order to issue his snotty insults against me, implying that perhaps I was hiding something and that I was somehow grossly remiss for not holding his hand and explicitly telling him where the photo image came from, tallhappy had to be:
1. Too stupid, lazy, or dishonest to use the fact that I had clearly stated that we were talking about a skull Coyoteman had brought up in a post, in order to go back to that post which included the *same* photo image and follow the link which Coyoteman had *supplied* to its source . This is what tallhappy laughably tries to call "zero reference" to the origin of the photo image. I figured that anyone reading my post would be competent enough to refer back to the original Coyoteman post, but hey, I grossly overestimated part of my audience.
2. Too stupid, lazy, or dishonest to right-click the image and hit "properties" to read the site from which it originated. But wait, it gets worse than that! See #3...
3. Too stupid, lazy, or dishonest to READ THE IMAGE URL HE HAD TO HAVE GOTTEN FROM THE IMAGE IN ORDER TO INCLUDE IT IN HIS OWN POST. While writing his post, tallhappy inserted the following HTML code in order to display the image: <IMG src="http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/photos/15000.jpg"> Just how stupid/lazy/dishonest does he have to be to type or copy that into his own post, then claim he doesn't know where it came from? Hey, stupid: It came from http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils, just like it says on the URL you put into your own post. Duh!
4. Too stupid, lazy, or dishonest to do a Google on the fossil's label (KNM-WT 15000) or nickname ("Turkana Boy") which would have quickly turned up verification that the photo I posted was indeed of that particular fossil specimen. Here's another view, from NationalGeographic.com, one of the sites such a Google search returns:
No, instead, tallhappy would rather dishonestly pretend that I left the reader with no way ("zero reference", ROFL!) to verify that image if they wanted to, and that he was therefore "justified" (in a "transparently cheap excuse" kind of way) in issuing another one of his snotty posts full of insulting innuendo, like "You can make up anything you want, draw any pictures you want." (no, making things up is tallhappy's habit, not mine -- *I* at least have a conscience which prevents me from doing that), and "No one will ake [sic] you seriously (except buffoons) if you can't support every statement you make" (actually, no one will take tallhappy seriously if he keeps issuing blatantly false slanders and making extremely basic screwups in elementary biology and making childishly petulant, pathetically pointless, and fundamentally dishonest emotional outbursts like this one), and "You might want to start with the origin of the picture" (when tallhappy "might want to start" with being honest enough to admit that I had provided plenty of ways for interested readers to check the source of the image).
Just how much more pathetic and puerile can he get?
[If you want to be on/off the "tallhappy makes a fool of himself again while lamely trying to insult somebody" ping list, FreepMail me.]