*blink* Again, all I see is a few big sharpened stones. I guess how you could see them as axes, but their use as tools for regular people still could be plausible, simply as something different than an axe.
My Good Duke and Friend Moabarmorgamer,
I am not going to make the extra time to parse all over again what seems to be the exact same debate I had last week with the Good Duke Devoidless but I do want to make a few points to your post.
I pray you understand my meaning. It sadly appears that you only looked at the picture I provided and did not read the article. Please forgive me if I am wrong. I certainly do not want to come across as crass.
I have to say your debate is not with me Sir Moabarmorgamer but with the scientists who are the ones who proclaimed these rocks to be "giant axes".
I will agree with you however. They are indeed rocks. There is no denying that. As were most arrow and axe heads of what we like to call "Primitive Man", they were typically made of rocks. You have no disagreement with me there.
You will also find no disagreement that:
a few giant rocks seen by few to be axes won't prove anything there.
You are quite correct Good Sir. It does however amuse me that if this story were not connected to "Giants" it would be obvious that these are of course axes used by primitive man. Actually, if I had only shown the picture and not given the link to the story and said, "Look at this nice collection of arrowheads found in an ancient lake bed" I would say almost every person would assume that these were indeed arrow heads. Why? Preconceived notions my boy! Just as you refuse to believe the scientists own findings because the word "Giant" is attached to said picture, so would it be that were same word not attached, the belief would be opposite. This of course is only admitted speculation on my part and obviously cannot be proven.
Yet I press on and state my opinion for if I had a dollar for how many times I have been down this path over the years I would have a nice chunk of change right now
However Kind Sir this one statement by you does indeed befuddle me entirely:
Allow me to explain, I believe; Giants do not exist. Thus it is nulled.
Is this a universal and absolute statement? Or is this just your opinion? I would hope for your own intellectual preservation it is the latter. Again I do not desire to come across as crass and certainly not condescending. I just want to be clear on your own choice of word usage.
It is obvious though Good Sir that from your parsing of my comments we should agree to disagree for otherwise we will continue to go nowhere. I provided a link with scientific evidence and you chose to not accept the scientific evidence as evidence. This of course is your prerogative and does nothing to change my respect for you in any way.
I truly believe you mean well Good Duke but as I said, this seems to be the same debate I have already had with Duke Devoidless, only the names have changed. The premise remains the same.
It is good to see you on this thread Good Duke Moabarmorgamer and I pray you are blessed in a mighty way this day and in the days to come.
RM24