Skip to comments.
Squirrels Unearth Ancient Artifact In Roseville
(CBS13) ^
| Jul 13, 2007
| Dennis Shanahan
Posted on 07/13/2007 1:10:32 PM PDT by Daffynition
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: SunkenCiv; blam
Please tell me you haven't posted this yet ...please.
2
posted on
07/13/2007 1:11:55 PM PDT
by
Daffynition
(The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear.)
To: SunkenCiv
GGG Ping.
"Hey Rocky! Watch me pull an ancient artifact out of my hat!"
"That trick never works!"
L
3
posted on
07/13/2007 1:12:51 PM PDT
by
Lurker
(Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
To: Daffynition
it is illegally for humans to dig them up Great editor.
To: Daffynition
"Please tell me you haven't posted this yet ...please." LOL. Nope.
However, the people who were here 8-10,000 years ago are not the same people we today call Native Anerican/American Indians.
5
posted on
07/13/2007 1:16:47 PM PDT
by
blam
(Secure the border and enforce the law)
To: Daffynition
What a tease! No info. =(
6
posted on
07/13/2007 1:16:56 PM PDT
by
Clara Lou
(Fred Thompson, '08-- imwithfred.com)
To: Daffynition
Cool thing is, the squirrel archeologists don’t care that they are being paid peanuts...
7
posted on
07/13/2007 1:19:11 PM PDT
by
Hegemony Cricket
(You can take the boy out of the country, but you just can't get the smell off his shoes.)
To: blam
Man...when squirrels start digging up their weapons caches you just know there’s going to be trouble in California.
8
posted on
07/13/2007 1:22:21 PM PDT
by
Covenantor
(America's Fifth column is in the White House and Capitol)
To: Daffynition
"We only find what the squirrels are giving us right now. And that's OK. We don't want to dig." said Park Specialist Chuck Kritzon. Well, of course not. He works for the government, after all...
9
posted on
07/13/2007 1:25:05 PM PDT
by
EternalVigilance
(With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
To: Clam Digger
And this one, “It’s a carefully carved tool or ceremonially object”.
The author seems to have a thing for adding “ly” to words.
10
posted on
07/13/2007 2:02:01 PM PDT
by
Hugin
(Mecca delenda est.)
To: EternalVigilance
"We only find what the squirrels are giving us right now. And that's OK. We don't want to dig." said Park Specialist Chuck Kritzon.Well, of course not. He works for the government, after all...
Your cheap shot misses its mark. Haven't you heard of "conservation archaeology"?
Our goal is to preserve sites as much as possible, not to excavate them.
11
posted on
07/13/2007 2:05:33 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: Hegemony Cricket
Cool thing is, the squirrel archeologists don’t care that they are being paid peanuts... Just doing the work you cannot get an illegal to do.
12
posted on
07/13/2007 2:54:29 PM PDT
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: Slings and Arrows
This article has 2 elements that I enjoy — GGG/Sunken Civ type of archaology and some irony. Maybe worthy of your ping list.
13
posted on
07/13/2007 3:23:24 PM PDT
by
Kevmo
(We need to get away from the Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party ~Duncan Hunter)
To: Daffynition
ceremonially object
A ancient whatchamacallit or a doohicky.
14
posted on
07/13/2007 3:28:13 PM PDT
by
csvset
To: Coyoteman
Our goal is to preserve sites as much as possible, not to excavate them. Then what the hell is the point?
L
15
posted on
07/13/2007 3:46:56 PM PDT
by
Lurker
(Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
To: Daffynition
From a long time ago, in a county far, far away...
16
posted on
07/13/2007 4:18:45 PM PDT
by
mikrofon
(Ancient Astronuts)
To: Covenantor
Ironically, the tool was a squirrel skinner.
17
posted on
07/13/2007 4:21:07 PM PDT
by
bert
(K.E. N.P. +12 . Happiness is a down sleeping bag)
To: Lurker
Our goal is to preserve sites as much as possible, not to excavate them. Then what the hell is the point?
Archaeologists, borrowing from the physical and biological sciences, have more and more tools each year with which to analyze sites. Our goal is to save sites, as much as we can, for those more advanced tools.
There are plenty of sites that need to be excavated now, as they may be under a planned building or freeway, to keep the research data flowing. But we need to plan for the future as well.
If we were working in 1950, instead of now, we would not have access to radiocarbon dating, DNA analysis, computer analyses of various kinds, or a host of other techniques we routinely use today. Sites that were destroyed in 1950 were lost before those newer techniques could be used. There is no reason to think that there won't be many new techniques in the next 50 years.
18
posted on
07/13/2007 5:45:32 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: Clam Digger
Isn’t that sweet. I didn’t know if I was allowed to put in a “sic” in the article...but it gave me a chuckle.
19
posted on
07/13/2007 6:17:57 PM PDT
by
Daffynition
(The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear.)
To: blam
Maybe the squirrels weren't either!
20
posted on
07/13/2007 6:22:30 PM PDT
by
Daffynition
(The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson