Ancient? Skeleton in Brass Armor

[jkaler48]

Ok guys what do you think of this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skeleton_in_Armor

[Epictetus]

I've never heard of this one. It's unfortunate that it has been lost. The accounts from the time don't seem very convincing to me, so personally I would withhold judgement unless there are other pieces of evidence available.

[Alanus]

Ok guys what do you think of this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skeleton_in_Armor

Vell, yomping yimmini

I think he was an extra-terrestial.
He was so extra that they couldn't fit him back on the flying-yurt.

He could have been an extra-testicle, but it's too late to tell now. :roll:

[Gaius Decius Aquilius]

There was a copper using group circa 4000 BCE in the Great Lakes region. If this find is not a fraud, it is not impossible that this might be related to this group. Trade wares can travel a great distance. Here in the southwest, we find some pottery called St. Johns polychrome that is found some 300 miles from the original source and found in a context of dating some 200 years or more after the manufacture. I think it more likly that this was some hand-me-down trade ware rather than than some Egyptian or Cartheginian what not. There has never been any undesputed European or Asian contact ouside Viking settlements in any pre-Columbus contact, wishful thinking not withstanding. There is money to be made in psudo-science and lets not forget that motive. Noah's arc has been found some dozen times or more and there is always some accident or unfortunate circumstance that prevented the "discover" from bringing back "proof". Breaking the camera, falling off a snowy ledge, etc. All they need is more money to go back and "prove" the find. Yada yada. If you want psudo-science watch the history chanel.

Frankly, an undisputed pre-columbian contact find would galvaniseand re-invigorate Archaeology which can get stagnate at times. Proof is by independant testing that reaches the same conclusion, not just "it is true because I say so". The idea that Archaeologist are "hiding the truth" does not wash either. When I was doing Archaeological field work I had to deal with a lot of whakos who claimed all sorts of things and expected to be made academic heros for some nonsense that was easily shown to be sheer unsuportable conjecture. I am not trying to offend anyone by saying this, but that is why the profession usually avoids dealing with the public on many issues because all it does is get you into meaningless arguments. Most of the times I was trying to impress some hot looking babe at a party by telling her I was an Archaeologist, and then it never failed that I got cornered by some fool who wanted to tell me (for hours)about some so called "theory" he had about Atlantis and the flying saucers, which was not a theory and the hot looking babe left the party with some one else before I could ditch the yammering idiot. Life is just not fair. Finally the guy would beam at me ans ask me what I thought of his theory. I guess he expected me to run around, call the department chairman and put him on television or something. Then you yawn and have to explain what the scientific method was and the dude would always get torqued off.

One of the good things about reenactment is that it can be, and is, used as reconstruction Archaeology. This is one of the the areas where people can work together, and has had good results.

Ralph