|
Author
|
Topic: The continuation of art styles through a speculated flood
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
|
Message 21 of 141 (140522)
09-06-2004 9:52 PM
|
|
|
Topic!
If Rrhain would give permission I will change the topic title to remind others of what it is about. How about: "The continuation of art styles through a speculated flood" The rest of the thread is off topic. This is such a clear topic I will be tending to hand out suspension even sooner than usual.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 27 by Rrhain, posted 09-07-2004 1:42 AM | | AdminNosy has not replied |
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
|
|
Message 32 of 141 (140644)
09-07-2004 11:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 30 by agnostic
09-07-2004 10:37 AM
|
|
T O P I C !!
That is not the topic of this thread. Please concentrate or loose posting priveledges.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 30 by agnostic, posted 09-07-2004 10:37 AM | | agnostic has not replied |
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
|
|
Message 33 of 141 (140648)
09-07-2004 11:32 AM
|
Reply to: Message 31 by RAZD
09-07-2004 11:24 AM
|
|
this is off the topic.
this is off the topic. Thanks for that, but better just ignore it. This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 09-07-2004 10:33 AM
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 31 by RAZD, posted 09-07-2004 11:24 AM | | RAZD has not replied |
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
|
|
Message 40 of 141 (140767)
09-07-2004 7:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 37 by jar
09-07-2004 4:53 PM
|
|
Both parties
Let's ask both parties to give primary references for the dating of the art shall we. I don't think that was asked for in the first place of Rrhain. Robert you will be held to the same standard. You are beginning to become both an annoyance and an embarassment (to a fellow Canuck). If that continues eventually I get very cranky. Note any reference to dating methods being inaccurate will require you to go to the various dates and dating threads and support those conjectures. Simple assertions will really not work for that. This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 09-07-2004 06:23 PM
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 37 by jar, posted 09-07-2004 4:53 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 97 by Rrhain, posted 09-12-2004 1:42 PM | | AdminNosy has not replied | | | Message 98 by jar, posted 09-12-2004 1:55 PM | | AdminNosy has not replied |
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
Stay on Topic
Just the art work please. This is NOT directed at WT specifically. But at all of those who might be tempted to respond.
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
T O P I C !!
You are off topic! It's a cheap ploy to try to shift the topic when you haven't a clue how to answer the issues at hand. You may if you wish open an "ark" topic.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 86 by Lysimachus, posted 09-11-2004 8:00 PM | | Lysimachus has not replied |
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
|
|
Message 117 of 141 (142637)
09-15-2004 10:32 PM
|
|
|
Good discussion?
Did any of the last three posts contribute anything at all to the discussion? Were they in anyway necessary?
|
AdminNosy
Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: 11-11-2003
|
Topic
How did our nice, tidy, well defined, clear, bounded poor little topic get way, way off the rails? Rrhain (and others): It this gets buried in general discussions (including about the solar system) you will never be able to hold the "floodists" feet to the fire. They have avoided the oringinal point which hasn't been answered, IMNSHO, at all.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 132 by crashfrog, posted 09-22-2004 2:00 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2