|
|
Re: Human penises, was Re
Rkeeologi (rkeeologi@aol.com)
8 Jul 1995 08:15:44 -0400
Believe me, Bryant, I am plenty familiar with selectionist and
sociobiological frameworks, have just spent the past two months being
educated almost daily by Rindos (sorry you find this name dropping... A
tad jealous perhaps?) However, I have a 5 page abstract due for next
year's SAAs, a paper on my genitalia effigy pottery to complete, and
haven't the slightest inclination at getting into an argument over two
approaches, neither of which I support. Its bad enough I have to spend my
time battling on sci.arch with someone who is convinced that the
PaleoIndian period peaked in New England at 7500 rather than 10,000 B.P.,
and others who believe that virii released from newly cultivated soil, and
not European-borne diseases, caused the Contact Period epidemics... These
things are within my specialty.. Fortuanately, other than Neiman's _Amer.
Antiq_ article and Leonard's unfounded assertions that selectionism is the
_only_ viable model for contact-studies, these frameworks have not
impinged upon my own interests, and thus, I shall continue to ignore them
(maybe, like a bad dream, they'll go away <g>)
Cheers,
MB Williams
Wesleyan
rkeeologi@aol.com/ghostofmb@wesleyan.edu
*Some people are so educated they can bore you on almost any subject* ~
Anonymous
|