Origyptian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What "claim" did Audrey make? I was responding to
> her challenge to the previous claim made by
> others that the stones are too tightly
> positioned to get a brush in there. I challenge
> that claim as well. The photos I've seen by
Dr
. Dowell do not show very tight joints. In
> fact, they show Schoch and some painted graphics
> in the joints that are clearly visible in the
> photo and would allow a brush in there. So unless
> Audrey was referring to different joints, I think
> the evidence does suggest it's possible to paint
> those marks in situ.

Yes, those are the joints I was referring to, the only ones of which phots are publically available. I should have thought it obvious that I was challenging a claim. But I guess if one is so consumed with rage, one cannot think calmly and rationally.

So instead of discussing how it would be possible to paint in the joints, some prefer to shout about how the challenge is made, rather than the actual challenge.

Is it a coincidence that the mainstreamers are quick to anger and the first to throw insults? Seems they carry quite a bit of rage. And this rage is focused on the person, and not the data that contradicts. Or is it both?