Today I was using a disc harrow on some deer food plots. It occured to me that I was plowing the same soil that my G-G- Grandfather plowed in 1830s.  I was working in the vicinity of where he had his log cabin from 1828 until the mid 1830s.  I am the fifth generation of the family to live on this land. My son, Robbie,is the sixth generation to live here.  He lives in the house where I was born.

This is terrific to read; one of the things that is lacking in our society today is this kind of continuity.Thanks you for sharing this with us.Cheers,WallyPS Hope you get a big buck for all the work!

As I told ski in a PM, I'm close to throwing in the towel too. I knew going in that CL was a bit more devout than I am but do relish good discussions with folks that are tolerant of other perspectives… as most posters seemed to be for awhile. As I read more I found each side (devout and devoid) getting beyond what I consider proper conduct; far too easy to be nasty on the net, as for the most part we are anonymous. [T]hat does seem to be getting better but still more snippyness than subst[a]nce in too many of the posts, IMHO.I'd like to see CL continue but I doubt I can contribute much as I'm in neither of the two camps believing as I do that it's like flying… not the airline that matters; the safe arrival at one's ultimate destination that matters.Just my $0.02.Cheers,Wally

  Any thoughts?

Very much what I've discovered as well; we don't see much from the common man until later when literacy really takes hold and the middle class begins in earnest.Today however (the last 50 years or so) as mass meda really kicks in we see lots more. Witness the internet; webpages, blog, forums… Warhol's 15 minutes of fame on the web. MHO.

I think it boils down to men who are wealthy but have time on their hands like de Sade, and people who have an axe to grinde like Voltaire.  Then there are people in search of ideals like Jefferson or who desire social reforms like Dickens.  Then again trying to create molds for philosophers is always a risky business.

Agreed.

As good as any explanation I've seen.

I still find it interesting that they described the whatever fairly accurately. Maybe some ancient civilization came upon a dinosaur skeleton(s) and then the stories started to fly from there.

Most likely explanation….

For the record, I don't put much faith in man-made dating methods.  Too many variables that need to be considered. It's like AGW – using faulty climate models instead of actual climate data, and everything that goes with it, to achieve their results.

Don't think about modern computer models… look at the geologic record and the hundreds of years of field research; computers allow us to make more mistakes faster.  ???

… (and hiring all the best persuasive writers in the world to convince the public this isn't about Socialism)

“He who pays the piper….” In another thread on another board the animalness of humankind is the subject of (IMHO) a major hissing match; the fact that sooo much time and money is spent to get us all to buy a particular product, idea, candidate, or the like, demonstrates our herd mentality [and that, many of us, buy in, much of the time] and that we are a herd and indeed, animals. If your whole tribe believed in dragons you likely would too, or be judged outside the social normal and ostracized.

… makes me wonder if science is wrong about dinosaurs being extinct before man.  How else could they have been described so accurately unless they had good acheological methods back then?edit add:  There's an interesting thread on ai-jane about this.

Or a very active and complete oral tradition / mythology… [waffle alert]: I'd like see proof of Nessy and Bigfoot but that is not to say I completely discount them. I tend to believe that science is correct (geology background) but can't totally discount the unexplained as ther is too much we don't know, haven' figured out yet, or haven't even thought about.[/waffle alert]May be JKR isn't so far off about a world we muggles can't see.  ???

Is that called inductive reasoning?What if I reword it like “The NEA is asking for more funding, but the reason could be because they are doing what most union representatives do for the people they represent.  (and then with the next sentence throw in some fact such as how much money a particular state got from the feds)What if I throw in non-absolutist words like that.  (maybe, could be, it's possible)

Speaking as a Union Rep… most times the reasoning is this: the District wants to spend the $ they get on what they want (not always in the larger interest of the classrooms) so they plead not enough $. Leads the unions to have to fight to prove it's there on the one level (district) and that there isn't enough on the higher level (state and national).Sort of like asking your boss for a raise after he raised prices on your product and used the extra profit to buy a boat… he “doesn't have the money” but could raise prices more to cover your raise. Endless circle until someone gets their priorities straight.Sorry to come on like the Union Dog as my boss calls me but….Wally