To: Bubba_Leroy
The article says that the grave was found 2,231 feet below ground level. That is awfully deep. That can’t be right, can it?No, it sure can't!
29 posted on
02/04/2013 9:19:03 AM PST by
HomeAtLast
( You're either with the Tea Party, or you're with the EBT Party.)
To: HomeAtLast; Bubba_Leroy
The article says that the grave was found 2,231 feet below ground level. That is awfully deep. That can’t be right, can it? I suspect excessivly precise Euroish to British conversion
0.68 metres=2.231 feet
Which looks about right from the in situ photo
30 posted on
02/04/2013 10:31:49 AM PST by
Oztrich Boy
(I think, therefore I am what I yam, and that's all I yam - "Popeye" Descartes)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson