Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Does anyone know how to do a search on AP and find the original article? (please do)
1 posted on 10/30/2002 4:15:55 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: blam
I think the ATF agent with the M16 and sunglasses [in front of the horse] might be suspicious?
2 posted on 10/30/2002 4:25:38 PM PST by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
Riding a horse???
3 posted on 10/30/2002 4:26:18 PM PST by Mike Darancette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
The guy must have recieved his education at a government school in Massachusetts.
4 posted on 10/30/2002 4:29:09 PM PST by Little Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
Somebody's going to come in here and tell us that men were not riding horses as early as 40,000 years ago.

But, of course, this picture is clearly that of a hunter who has lept on top of a giraffe and is preparing to slaughter it!

No horses here!

5 posted on 10/30/2002 4:29:25 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
It looks like the Silica Rockettes, paleolithic
version of the famous New York group, doing
high kicks.
6 posted on 10/30/2002 4:29:40 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
For sure, the earliest known horseback rider if the dating is accurate. I have me doubts, too.
7 posted on 10/30/2002 4:32:59 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
1.) Recorded history didn't begin 40,000 years ago.

2.) Sandstone is layered sediments, that looks more like granite.

3.) Riding animals weren't domesticated that long ago.

4.) Tools of hunting weren't used 40,000 years ago.

5.) Those guys were extremely well hung. I'm jealous.
8 posted on 10/30/2002 4:42:18 PM PST by CruisinAround
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
are they wearing clothing of some kind?
11 posted on 10/30/2002 5:03:26 PM PST by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
China is digging up some remarkably old artifacts. India is feeling the pressure to find even older ones. High-marking contest.
15 posted on 10/30/2002 5:25:05 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
Well, that grey man standing to the left of the horse is rather proud of his "third leg."
16 posted on 10/30/2002 5:25:56 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
everything would seem wrong for the Paleolithic period... it is the earliest period of the stone age...a time when prehistoric man was just using rough or chipped stone implements...according to scientists and historians... Maybe the article gave the wrong date...or Eureka!
17 posted on 10/30/2002 5:41:38 PM PST by ruoflaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: blam
Maybe it's the sandstone that is 40k years old, not the painting. Hmmm? This doesn't say how the dating was done.
20 posted on 10/30/2002 6:05:54 PM PST by HangThemHigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson