The Fonts Of All Knowledge

[[old] neilb]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Jan 19 2005, 03:02 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (PaulS @ Jan 19 2005, 03:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> becz,<br><br>I don't see very much name calling (your middle option), and mostly your third option seems to be the initial response to questionable information.<br><br>Unfortunately your first option is where many end up because those with "less experience" seem to go with the middle option when questioned, and the effort involved in responding to that sort of thing is rarely very rewarding, but often necessary.<br><br>So how do you characterize this response to your post?<br><br>Probably could have gone with option 1 but then we are back to a pretty boring and useless forum. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> Paul,<br><br>I think that part of the difficulty is that there are so many different theories and views some of which work for some people.<br><br>I am fairly new to this but have spent a lot of time trying to understand the various approaches/theories and from this I am starting to work out how I propose to train (and actually enjoy it) for the next 12 months. In this process I have sort of arrived at a short list of people whose opinions I will tend to favour. Thinking about it this is because what they say seems to make sense based upon my experience of different types of training and they support it by good facts/experience.<br><br>It may not give me the ideal result but it is showing benefits and I am comfortable with what I have taken from the site (and with what I have left there!).<br><br>I think that the "third option" is a necessary way albeit that it may not be rewarding, because it allows people with less experience to form their own views based on logical facts/opinion. <br><br>There is always a danger that people accept at face value the " this is the answer" and even if it may be entirely correct (and I appreciate that everything is offered with best intentions) it may not always suit or benefit them personally. <br><br>To me some of the better advice starts with the quest for more details/info/background on the person raising the question as this helps tailor the advice. It does place more onus/time on the experienced people but most who use this forum are happy to spend time in giving good advice.<br><br>I have no problem with the more experienced "correcting" the less experienced and I really appreciate the time and effort that both categories take. What I tend to find is that where there is no logic or as becz puts it "class" then I am less inclined to accept what is being said. (I suppose I should have more confidence to question or test this; leaving the more experienced to challenge it or attempt to dismiss it).<br><br>The expalantory response you refer to may not be rewarding directly but is certainly of great benefit to me and I am sure many others; let this be your reward!<br><br>Neil. <br><br>

[[old] DavidA]

<!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Jan 19 2005, 05:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (PaulS @ Jan 19 2005, 05:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What's the skull for? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> Maybe he is a skuller

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-DavidA+Jan 20 2005, 02:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (DavidA @ Jan 20 2005, 02:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-PaulS+Jan 19 2005, 05:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (PaulS @ Jan 19 2005, 05:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What's the skull for? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br>Maybe he is a skuller <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> Okay, that's pretty punny. <br><br>Well, he said he was a lightweight, but that may be carrying things just a bit too far...

[[old] becz]

The skull is actually that of <i>Homo floresiensis</i>, a recently discovered early human skeleton. I thought the description sounds a lot like a typical rower...<br><br><i>...shows a unique mixture of primitive and advanced characteristics.</i><br><br>Replace "characteristics" with "technique" and I think it's a fair description.<br><br>In fact, it's thought that <i>H. Flores</i> may have reached its isolated location by making some kind of a boat. Coincidence?

[[old] peterb]

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are 1487 forum members, of which:<br><br>* 764 have posted at least once<br>* The Top Ten posters have enetered 25.67% of the posts (4,080 posts)<br><br>Just found this interesting and thought I would share<br><br>All the Best, peterb <br><br><!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <br><br>Will this help narrow down the potential culprits?? <br><br>All the Best, peterb

[[old] Rocket Roy]

How did they know the name of the owner of the skull? Did they find his wallet nearby?