New World Ancestors Lose 12,000 Years
maff
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/science/25HUMA.html?pagewanted=all&position=
By NICHOLAS WADE and JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
Scientists have found genetic evidence that the first human migrations
to the New World from Siberia probably occurred no earlier than 18,000
years ago.
Melchizedek
"maff" <maf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0307...@posting.google.com...
-----
The Collapse of Darwinism
ftp://creation-evolution:creation-...@65.127.169.45/index.html
Chris Merli
"Melchizedek" <Melch...@as-if.com> wrote in message
news:24gUa.12891$%v5....@news.randori.com...
Oh good Janet Folger, who has no degree in any science, will now explain all
science to us. Too bad I could not get these to run, I bet they would have
been quite humorous.
Chris Merli
I was right these are quite funny.
>
>
Chris Merli
Too bad there turn out to be simply sad. Many of the same refuted
arguements used before.
Mark K. Bilbo
So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites musta been by aliens!
--
Mark K. Bilbo #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
________________________________________________________________
"In order to achieve the most noble accomplishments, the leader
may have to 'enter into evil.' This is the chilling insight
that has made Machiavelli so feared, admired and challenging
we are rotten....It's true that we can achieve greatness if,
and only if, we are properly led."
- Michael Ledeen, neoconservative leader
raven1
I like the tag line: "Scientific discoveries refute Darwin's theory of
evolution". So, when are you presenting these findings to the Nobel
committee?
Lane Lewis
The Y chromosome marker continues to revolutionize paleontology by affixing
firm dates to modern humans journey out of Africa. We left Africa 60 tya and
reached Australia 45 tya now finally reaching the Americas 18 tya. Genetic
research confirming paleontology will be the death of "scientific
creationism" leaving "Intelligent Design" as the only alternative to the
fundamentalist position of "teach the controversy".
Few fundamentalist have the sophistication to argue against genetic evidence
and it will be interesting to see what their strategy will be.
Lane
Space-time tells matter how to move, matter tells space-time how to curve.
- Wheeler
Ron Okimoto
"Mark K. Bilbo" wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:57:53 +0000, maff wrote:
>
> > New World Ancestors Lose 12,000 Years
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/science/25HUMA.html?pagewanted=all&position=
> > By NICHOLAS WADE and JOHN NOBLE WILFORD Scientists have found genetic
> > evidence that the first human migrations to the New World from Siberia
> > probably occurred no earlier than 18,000 years ago.
>
> So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites musta been by aliens!
> --
> Mark K. Bilbo #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
The dates of those old sites have always been controversial and this date is going
to be just as controversial.
Ron Okimoto
Bobby D. Bryant
> Few fundamentalist have the sophistication to argue against genetic
> evidence and it will be interesting to see what their strategy will be.
But the corollary is that since few have the sophistication to understand
the evidence or to distinguish good arguments from bad, this will continue
to be a playground for barnumites indefinitely.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
AC
I don't really see what's so controversial about this. I thought the
evidence over the last decade or two has been showing that there have been
multiple migrations from Asia to the Americas. I know there is a very hot
political element to all of this, with scientists concerned that precious
bones are going to be repatriated to Native American tribes that probably
have nothing to do with the remains.
--
Aaron Clausen
Thomas P.
It will be what it has always been - distort and lie.
Thomas P.
Mark K. Bilbo
Of course.
Thing that bugs me is that an older date is resisted but earlier dates get
coverage all *over the place.
Interesting that...
--
Mark K. Bilbo #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Mark K. Bilbo
Oh no. No, no, no. The Nobel committee is run by Satanists. Din't you know
that? I mean, they only give awards to... to... SCIENTISTS.
<brrrr>
August Pamplona
news:3F21AD31...@mail.uark.edu...
Consider also, that earlier migrations, if they existed, need not
have any contact with newer migrations and their descendants (it is not
unthinkable that the populations could have died out before contact with
subsequent migrations had a chance to occur). Also, I assume that Y
chromosomes can become lost through chance --an event which would render
older genetics innaccesible to this study.
August Pamplona
--
"No, jew. Your jew opinion doesn't matter no matter what, jew. Your
writings deserve no comprehension, merely scorn, jew. You are jew."
-Lysis on m.f.w.
a.a. # 1811 apatriot #20
To email replace 'necatoramericanusancylostomaduodenale' with
'cosmicaug'
Steve Knight
<iskan...@hoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:57:53 +0000, maff wrote:
>
>> New World Ancestors Lose 12,000 Years
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/science/25HUMA.html?pagewanted=all&position=
>> By NICHOLAS WADE and JOHN NOBLE WILFORD Scientists have found genetic
>> evidence that the first human migrations to the New World from Siberia
>> probably occurred no earlier than 18,000 years ago.
>
>So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites musta been by aliens!
Shhhhhhhhhh....
The EAC is watching.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
www.sonic.net/~wooly
David Jensen
<pan.2003.07.26...@eac.org>:
>On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 21:49:06 +0000, raven1 wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 20:08:06 +0000 (UTC), "Melchizedek"
>> <Melch...@as-if.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"maff" <maf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:18510aff.0307...@posting.google.com... New World
>>>Ancestors Lose 12,000 Years
>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/science/25HUMA.html?pagewanted=all&position=
>>>By NICHOLAS WADE and JOHN NOBLE WILFORD Scientists have found genetic
>>>evidence that the first human migrations to the New World from Siberia
>>>probably occurred no earlier than 18,000 years ago.
>>>
>>>
>>>-----
>>>The Collapse of Darwinism
>>>ftp://creation-evolution:creation-...@65.127.169.45/index.html
>>
>> I like the tag line: "Scientific discoveries refute Darwin's theory of
>> evolution". So, when are you presenting these findings to the Nobel
>> committee?
>
>Oh no. No, no, no. The Nobel committee is run by Satanists. Din't you know
>that? I mean, they only give awards to... to... SCIENTISTS.
>
><brrrr>
They given them to writers, too. We know that creationists won't win in
science because they don't do science, but if the creationists want a
Nobel they should try writing better novels than LaHaye's successful
series.
--
We are, in fact, the moral backbone of the nation: brights take their
civic duties seriously precisely because they don't trust God to save
humanity from its follies. -- Daniel C. Dennett
JTEM
"maff" <maf...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Scientists have found genetic evidence that the first
> human migrations to the New World from Siberia
> probably occurred no earlier than 18,000 years ago.
Feh!
There's some hard evidence suggesting otherwise.
JTEM
"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com> wrote
> So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites
> musta been by aliens!
Myself, I've seen hard dates in the range of 22,000
years.
Jim Lovejoy
news:eQhUa.17655$BB6.4...@twister.tampabay.rr.com:
That's simple, if the evidence shows that dates are younger that orginally
thought, that "proves" the earth was created 6000 years ago.
>
> Lane
>
maff
Human skulls are 'oldest Americans'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2538323.stm
Tests on skulls found in Mexico suggest they are almost 13,000 years
old - and shed fresh light on how humans colonised the Americas.
Viral clue to American settlers
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/542201.stm
Ancient inhabitants of the Andean mountains were infected with the
same virus as modern-day Japanese people, suggesting travellers from
Asia colonised South America thousands of years ago.
'First Americans were Australian'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/430944.stm
The first Americans were descended from Australian aborigines,
according to evidence in a new BBC documentary.
The Peopling of the Prehistoric Americas and the Extinctions of the
American Megafauna
http://kurellian.tripod.com/pamer1.html
maff
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:57:53 +0000, maff wrote:
>
> > New World Ancestors Lose 12,000 Years
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/science/25HUMA.html?pagewanted=all&position=
> > By NICHOLAS WADE and JOHN NOBLE WILFORD Scientists have found genetic
> > evidence that the first human migrations to the New World from Siberia
> > probably occurred no earlier than 18,000 years ago.
>
> So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites musta been by aliens!
It doesn't mean there weren't any Native Americans who came there
before. It only means that current Native American populations were
mainly from Siberia.
Andrew Criddle
Given the large error range in this sort of genetic
analysis I don't see 22,000 years as a real problem
the 30,000 year old dates are another matter.
Andrew Criddle
Louann Miller
wrote:
Cite? I mean that in the "interested in the subject, would be glad to
find more to read about it" sense rather than the "sez you" sense.
Until February 2002 I worked for the Anthropology department at SMU in
Dallas. David Meltzer was one of my favorite professors to work for
and I picked up bits of info on what he was doing from time to time.
Last book I read on the topic was Advasio's "The First Americans."
--
If God wanted us to believe we were related to chimpanzees,
he'd have given us DNA 95% identical to theirs.
Richard Uhrich
> maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote in message news:<18510aff.0307...@posting.google.com>...
>
....
> 'First Americans were Australian'
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/430944.stm
> The first Americans were descended from Australian aborigines,
> according to evidence in a new BBC documentary.
>
"Stone tools and charcoal from the site in Brazil show evidence of human
habitation as long ago as 50,000 years."
Any opinion from DrGH?
....
--
Richard Uhrich
---
"so skeptical, I can hardly believe it" -- Penn Jillette quoting Chip Denman
Mark K. Bilbo
I've seen upwards of 40K. But what's interesting is that dates closer to
the old "land bridge" idea are immediately accepted. Anything else is met
with massive resistance regardless of the quality of the data...
Mark K. Bilbo
Since when has that stopped cretinists?
AC
Mark K. Bilbo <iskan...@hoo.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 05:16:57 +0000, JTEM wrote:
>
>>
>> "Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com> wrote
>>
>>> So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites musta been by aliens!
>>
>> Myself, I've seen hard dates in the range of 22,000 years.
>
> I've seen upwards of 40K. But what's interesting is that dates closer to
> the old "land bridge" idea are immediately accepted. Anything else is met
> with massive resistance regardless of the quality of the data...
This is unfortunately one of these issues where long-held orthodoxy and
politics merge to confound researchers pushing the boundaries. There are
decades of research on the land bridge theory, and the though that thousands
(possibly many thousands) of years earlier, other Asians made it to the
Americas via another route (the hypothesized sea-route along the coastlines)
is such an extreme reversal that it seems, on the face of it, outrageous.
Then there is the political element, involving Native Americans. Federal
law demands remains of American Indians be returned to tribes.
Unfortunately, some of the bones being found are not morphologically like
modern Natives or their ancestors that we know of. The fear is becoming
realized that before anyone can actually properly date these remains, that
they will be removed and buried or otherwise taken permanently out of the
reach or researchers. Native Americans obviously do not want potential
remains of their ancestors being poked and prodded, but its difficult to see
how they can argue that these ancient remains have anything to do with them
at all. Unfortunately, it is courts where these issues are decided, and not
in the scientific arena.
--
Aaron Clausen
maff
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 05:16:57 +0000 (UTC), "JTEM" <jay...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com> wrote
> >
> >> So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites
> >> musta been by aliens!
> >
> >Myself, I've seen hard dates in the range of 22,000
> >years.
>
> Cite? I mean that in the "interested in the subject, would be glad to
> find more to read about it" sense rather than the "sez you" sense.
>
> Until February 2002 I worked for the Anthropology department at SMU in
> Dallas. David Meltzer was one of my favorite professors to work for
> and I picked up bits of info on what he was doing from time to time.
>
> Last book I read on the topic was Advasio's "The First Americans."
The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology's Greatest Mystery
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375505520/
by J. M. Adovasio, Jake Page (Contributor)
maff
Society > History > By Region > North America > Ancient Age
http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/History/By_Region/North_America/Ancient_Age/?il=1
Floyd
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com> wrote
> >
> >> So then those 30,000 year old archaeological sites
> >> musta been by aliens!
> >
> >Myself, I've seen hard dates in the range of 22,000
> >years.
>
> Cite? I mean that in the "interested in the subject, would be glad to
> find more to read about it" sense rather than the "sez you" sense.
22KYA is roughly the date of the start of the last major glacial
advance (+/-2ky), so my off-the-top-of-my-head guess would be that the
22k figure will be used in the sense of "they had to have entered
before the ice advanced again." That's a pretty common style of
argument, and it makes a certain amount of sense, *if* people entered
by foot.
By 18KYA, accotding to the Geological Survey of Canada, the "ice-free
corridor" was definitely closed, and it stayed closed until the
terminal Pleistocene.
So, the argument runs, humans must have entered the Americas prior to
18KYA because:
1) humans of the time were obligate big game hunters
2) mammoths can't swim long distances
3) so mammoths must have entered on foot through the IFC,
4) followed by human hunters.
It's basically the "Clovis First" model, pushed back a few thousand
years to compensate for Monte Verde and the palaeoclimatological and
geological evidence. It shares another important similarity with the
"Clovis First" hypothesis too; it's almost certainly wrong.
Both models absolutely rely on humans being obligate big game hunters,
but the only reason we associate Clovis with mammoths is that a few
tools have been found in association with mammoth bones, while none
have been found in association with the bones of smaller mammals. The
reson for this differential association is, IMHO, almost certainly an
artifact of recovery and not an actual distributional difference.
Ranchers who see rabbit bones eroding out of gullys don't call
geologists or archaeologists, but ranchers who find mammoth bones
sometimes do. The folks who first arrived here may very easily have
been hunting small game, perhaps for thousands of years, and we simply
wouldn't know it because we're not looking for it.
>
> Until February 2002 I worked for the Anthropology department at SMU in
> Dallas. David Meltzer was one of my favorite professors to work for
> and I picked up bits of info on what he was doing from time to time.
>
> Last book I read on the topic was Advasio's "The First Americans."
Adovasio is a good writer, and an excellent excavator, but his dates
for Meadowcroft are questionable, at best. The carbon was very likely
contaminated, and the rest of the site looks Holocene. The fauna from
the cave doesn't look like periglacial tundra animals, but like
eastern woodlands animals. I know Jim says that Meadowcroft may have
been a warm refugium during the Pleistocene, but at *best* I don't
think he's made the case, and in my more critical moments, I fear that
he's got wrapped up in "Guinness Book-ism" and is emphasising the
"first" bit over much.
His critique of the Clovis First model is good reading, but
Meadowcroft is useful supporting evidence for that critique, IMO. Of
course opinions differ among archys, and the whole debate is one of
the more contentious issues in the field right now. Lots of archys
have some emotional investment in one side or the other, so the debate
has occasionally turned into a big pissing contest, which is neither
helpful, nor interesting, but it does reveal a great deal about some
remnants of our glorious primate heritage. ;-)
-Floyd
JTEM
"Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com> wrote
> JTEM wrote:
> > There's some hard evidence suggesting otherwise.
> Since when has that stopped cretinists?
No kidding.
What I want to know is, if a land bridge is necessary, where
was the land bridge to Australia?
JTEM
"Floyd" <far...@u.washington.edu> wrote
> The folks who first arrived here may very easily
> have been hunting small game, perhaps for
> thousands of years, and we simply wouldn't know
> it because we're not looking for it.
What's really strange is that the sea would be the first
and most obvious source of protien for early man.
Shelfish are for the simple plucking while fish can be
speared with even the most primative weapon.
johac
AC <maureen-t...@alberni.net> wrote:
This is what I read too. There was the 'Kennewick Man' whose skeleton
showed features different than those of Native Americans. Was he one
of the remaining survivors of a previous migration? There are still
many questions to be answered.
--
John Hachmann, aa #1782
"In those parts of the world where learning and science has prevailed,
miracles ceased; but in those parts that are barbarous and ignorant,
miracles are still in vogue." -Letters of Ethan Allen to Thomas Jefferson
Lane Lewis
The waters that far north are very inhospitable compared to the waters of
Australia. Fishermen in a storm could have traveled to Australia without a
problem.
Lane
Lane Lewis
"AC" <maureen-t...@alberni.net> wrote in message
news:slrnbi5dsn.14k.m...@whop-paC-006c.alberni.net...
Nova did a show where archeologist found 10 ty old fossil skulls that
had European features which they thought could not have been the ancestors
of native Americans but know with recent genetic evidence that we all came
from Africa 60tya European skull features probably are African related also.
Lane
Frank J
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/25/science/25HUMA.html?pagewanted=all&position=
> > By NICHOLAS WADE and JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
> > Scientists have found genetic evidence that the first human migrations
> > to the New World from Siberia probably occurred no earlier than 18,000
> > years ago.
> >
> >
>
> firm dates to modern humans journey out of Africa. We left Africa 60 tya and
> reached Australia 45 tya now finally reaching the Americas 18 tya. Genetic
> research confirming paleontology will be the death of "scientific
> creationism" leaving "Intelligent Design" as the only alternative to the
> fundamentalist position of "teach the controversy".
>
> Few fundamentalist have the sophistication to argue against genetic evidence
> and it will be interesting to see what their strategy will be.
Same as it is now. They already know that they will not convince any
science-literate person who has not previously decided to sell out
(pseudoscience is stll more lucrative than science), they will target
mostly science-illiterate audiences. As another poster suggested, any
evidence that says "younger" is immediately yanked out of it's context
to let the clueless reader infer some sort of YEC myth.
>
> Lane
>
> Space-time tells matter how to move, matter tells space-time how to curve.
> - Wheeler
Louann Miller
wrote:
>Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<tf15ivkh3dfq394ps...@4ax.com>...
>> Last book I read on the topic was Advasio's "The First Americans."
>
>The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology's Greatest Mystery
>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375505520/
>by J. M. Adovasio, Jake Page (Contributor)
Was this footnote really necessary? The rest of us have search engines
too, you know.
Floyd
Indeed! In fact, if we look at the distribution of human habitation
sites throughout history and prehistory, there is quite clearly a
pronounced preference for coastal areas. (Even today, all seventeen
people who live in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else.
;-)
Klassies River Mouth has evidence of fishing, and humans had no real
difficulty reaching Australia, so our ancestors were knowledgable and
competent seafarers at least 50-60 KYA, and probably much earlier.
The Ice-Free Corridor model is based entirely on the assumption that
we somehow "forgot" how to make boats in the time between colonisation
of Oz and colonisation of the Americas, so we had to walk.
Not that I'm a big Fladmark fan or anything like that, but the IFC/big
game hunting/Clovis First hypothesis simply doesn't add up, and I'm
happy to see it falling apart, since it's ultimately going to be the
decisive blow against Martin's overkill model as well (or would be if
Martin hadn't successfully immunized the model against any possibility
of falsification). Cheers;
-Floyd
Richard Uhrich
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 20:32:22 +0000 (UTC), maf...@yahoo.com (maff)
> wrote:
>
>
>>Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<tf15ivkh3dfq394ps...@4ax.com>...
>>
>
>>>Last book I read on the topic was Advasio's "The First Americans."
>>>
>>The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology's Greatest Mystery
>>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375505520/
>>by J. M. Adovasio, Jake Page (Contributor)
>>
>
> Was this footnote really necessary? The rest of us have search engines
> too, you know.
>
>
Not necessary, but handy. i wouldn't have bothered to look it up but for
maff.
JTEM
"Lane Lewis" <lanej...@hotmail.com> wrote
> "JTEM" <jay...@yahoo.com> wrote
> > What I want to know is, if a land bridge is necessary, where
> > was the land bridge to Australia?
> The waters that far north are very inhospitable compared to
> the waters of Australia.
Oh, boy...
I don't think anybody is disputing the fact that the Americas
WERE NOT only ever "discovered" and populated by a
single, distinct group.... a few hundred people one day
wandering across to Alaska.
What is at question is whether or not the present population
of American natives all trace their heritage to a single population
of arrivals (and no other population), or whether the present
population represents a genetic "amalgamation" of various waves
of arrivals.
I'm sorry to say it but, what DNA "evidence" there is is consistent
with both models. Exchanges between human populations,
including genetic exchanges, are rarely between equals. And, even
in those rare instances where they are, they appear between
instances where they were not.
One example of an unequal exchange: "We can breed with your
women but you can't breed with ours," such as was the case here
in north America, for more than 300 years. Given enough time,
and isolation, it would be possible (even if you view it unlikely)
for the European mtDNA linage to have completely died out here
in North America. The dominate population (white) would be
breeding with both A & B while the dominated population (black)
was breeding exclusively with B.... the result being that 'B' would
have the opportunity to completely replace 'A' over time.
maff
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 20:32:22 +0000 (UTC), maf...@yahoo.com (maff)
> wrote:
>
> >Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<tf15ivkh3dfq394ps...@4ax.com>...
>
> >> Last book I read on the topic was Advasio's "The First Americans."
> >
> >The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology's Greatest Mystery
> >http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375505520/
> >by J. M. Adovasio, Jake Page (Contributor)
>
> Was this footnote really necessary? The rest of us have search engines
> too, you know.
Amazon couldn't initially find the author with that name.
Richard Uhrich
.....
> One example of an unequal exchange: "We can breed with your
> women but you can't breed with ours," such as was the case here
> in north America, for more than 300 years.
>
....
Interesting that the research which motivated this thread was based upon the native American Y chromosome.
Mark K. Bilbo
> Even today, all seventeen people who live
> in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else. ;-)
There are people in Nebraska and Kansas?
--
Mark K. Bilbo #1423 EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
________________________________________________________________
"...lying is central to the survival of nations and to the
success of great enterprises, because if our enemies can
count on the reliability of everything you say, your
vulnerability is enormously increased."
- Michael Ledeen, neo-con leader
Floyd
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 19:03:15 +0000, Floyd wrote:
>
> > Even today, all seventeen people who live
> > in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else. ;-)
>
> There are people in Nebraska and Kansas?
> --
Sure, haven't you heard of Nebraska Man? That's one; the others are
on a school board, I think.
-Floyd
Harry Leopold
(in message <pan.2003.07.28....@eac.org>):
> From: "Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, talk.origins
>
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 19:03:15 +0000, Floyd wrote:
>
>> Even today, all seventeen people who live
>> in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else. ;-)
>
> There are people in Nebraska and Kansas?
You rang?
Harry F. Leopold - coming to you from Kansas
aa #2076
The Prints of Darkness
"Your god wears fuzzy pink bunny slippers."
KelvynT
>On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 23:32:07 -0500, Mark K. Bilbo wrote
>(in message <pan.2003.07.28....@eac.org>):
>
>> From: "Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, talk.origins
>>
>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 19:03:15 +0000, Floyd wrote:
>>
>>> Even today, all seventeen people who live
>>> in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else. ;-)
>>
>> There are people in Nebraska and Kansas?
>
>You rang?
They've got a phone as well?
Kelvyn
Robin Levett
message news:hnldivsicmecc747q...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 02:09:20 +0000 (UTC), Harry Leopold
wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 23:32:07 -0500, Mark K. Bilbo wrote
> >(in message <pan.2003.07.28....@eac.org>):
> >
> >> From: "Mark K. Bilbo" <iskan...@hoo.com>
> >> Newsgroups: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism,
talk.origins
> >>
> >> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 19:03:15 +0000, Floyd wrote:
> >>
> >>> Even today, all seventeen people who live
> >>> in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else.
;-)
> >>
> >> There are people in Nebraska and Kansas?
> >
> >You rang?
>
> They've got a phone as well?
>
What's even more worrying is they've got Minutemen too...
--
I don't trust camels - or anyone else that can go for a week
without a drink.
(Use rle...@ibmrlevett.uklinux.net - deleting big blue -
for email)
raven1
<iskan...@hoo.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 19:03:15 +0000, Floyd wrote:
>
>> Even today, all seventeen people who live
>> in Nebraska and Kansas came there from somewhere else. ;-)
>
>There are people in Nebraska and Kansas?
And Toto too!
Pithecanthropus erectus
"raven1" <psyched...@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:fpf9ivgt3sabcr6km...@4ax.com...
Yes, but there aren't any caves. And anyways, the caves they do have aren't
very interesting. And no cavepeople. And they cavepeople that are there
have peccary teeth.
>
> And Toto too!
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/03
PhilWoch
From: far...@u.washington.edu (Floyd)
Date: Mon, saJul jun28,01 20032002 7:52 AM
Message-id: <54522494.03072...@posting.google.com>
Seriously, for all you furriners, I understand that the population of each
state declined through most of the 20th century. If you lived in either state,
chances are that you were born there; and if you were born there, there was a
good chance that you didn't live there any more.
I understand that things somewhat turned around in the 1990's, as more young
people stayed there. ALso, quite a few Latin AMerican and Southeast Asian
immigrants have moved there. I don't know how well the descendants of German,
Scandinavian, and Slavic immigrants take to them, all told.
Apologies to all Great Plains residents, who can more than speak for
themselves.