"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...

On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:



You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.

deowll wrote:
"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...

On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:



You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.

These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.

Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill

large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"One must not assume that an understanding of science is present in
those who borrow its language"
Louis Pasteur

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

deowll wrote:

"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...


On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:




You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.


These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.


Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.


large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces—---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.

Lee Olsen wrote:

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

deowll wrote:

"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...


On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:




You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.


These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.


Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.


large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces—---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"A fool can no more see his own folly than he can see his ears."
William Makepeace Thackeray

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:


"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


deowll wrote:


"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...



On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:





You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.



These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.



Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.



large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces—---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL

The hogs were on the menu but people that hunt hogs the old fashioned way
did get hurt fairly often as did the dogs after they had them. Due to the
unusally tough skin of hogs I'm not sure that a hand ax would be a very good
choice to use on one but then Uncle Gilbert killed a hog with a rock so who
knows?

Lee Olsen wrote:
"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:


"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


deowll wrote:


"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...



On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:





You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.



These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.



Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.



large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces?---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL



I guess you don't even need to throw the hand axe if the animals are
going to "tear themselves to pieces". Just leave it laying around and
"the animals do it to themselves"! This shows the desperate lengths a
wacko will go to to justify a wacko theory. Of course anytime this
wackiness is questioned,

all he can do is try to change the subject.
Very crackpotty. The facts are your silly little theory that large
animals can be killed by throwing hand axes at them is totally
unsupported by any tests in which a large animal is killed by throwing
hand axes at it. It's that simple, you claim it can be done, then just
do it. But you won't, you won't even try because you know how silly it
is. Total loon.

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"One must not assume that an understanding of science is present in
those who borrow its language"
Louis Pasteur

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<127Yb.5876$WW3.5808@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


Lee Olsen wrote:



"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...



deowll wrote:



"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...




On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:






You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.




These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.




Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.




large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces?---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL



I guess you don't even need to throw the hand axe if the animals are
going to "tear themselves to pieces". Just leave it laying around and
"the animals do it to themselves"! This shows the desperate lengths a
wacko will go to to justify a wacko theory. Of course anytime this
wackiness is questioned,


Questioned? You still babbling about your goat molesting test? Your
sick.


all he can do is try to change the subject.
Very crackpotty. The facts are your silly little theory that large
animals can be killed by throwing hand axes at them is totally
unsupported by any tests in which a large animal is killed by throwing
hand axes at it. It's that simple, you claim it can be done, then just
do it. But you won't, you won't even try because you know how silly it
is. Total loon.


http://www.law.utexas.edu/dawson/cruelty/cruelty.htm
All states have laws that prohibit cruelty to horses and other
animals. Every state makes it a crime to engage in certain cruel acts
toward animals.

167.320. Animal abuse in the first degree.
(1) A person commits the crime of animal abuse in the first degree if,
except as otherwise authorized by law, the person intentionally,
knowingly or recklessly:
(a) Causes serious physical injury to an animal; or
(b) Cruelly causes the death of an animal.

The only reason you keep whining about using live animals for tests is
because you know few people are as unethical and immoral as you are
and therefore are not going to do such a test.

Lee Olsen wrote:

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<127Yb.5876$WW3.5808@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


Lee Olsen wrote:



"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...



deowll wrote:



"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...




On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:






You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.




These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.




Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.




large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces?---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL



I guess you don't even need to throw the hand axe if the animals are
going to "tear themselves to pieces". Just leave it laying around and
"the animals do it to themselves"! This shows the desperate lengths a
wacko will go to to justify a wacko theory. Of course anytime this
wackiness is questioned,


Questioned? You still babbling about your goat molesting test? Your
sick.


all he can do is try to change the subject.
Very crackpotty. The facts are your silly little theory that large
animals can be killed by throwing hand axes at them is totally
unsupported by any tests in which a large animal is killed by throwing
hand axes at it. It's that simple, you claim it can be done, then just
do it. But you won't, you won't even try because you know how silly it
is. Total loon.


http://www.law.utexas.edu/dawson/cruelty/cruelty.htm
All states have laws that prohibit cruelty to horses and other
animals. Every state makes it a crime to engage in certain cruel acts
toward animals.

167.320. Animal abuse in the first degree.
(1) A person commits the crime of animal abuse in the first degree if,
except as otherwise authorized by law, the person intentionally,
knowingly or recklessly:
(a) Causes serious physical injury to an animal; or
(b) Cruelly causes the death of an animal.

The only reason you keep whining about using live animals for tests is
because you know few people are as unethical and immoral as you are
and therefore are not going to do such a test.




Sad little nutcase, you will find any excuse to avoid testing a theory
you know is just plain silly.

Animals are killed every day for
scientific research.

A real scientist would be able to conduct such a
simple test.

But that's not you, is it?

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"One must not assume that an understanding of science is present in
those who borrow its language"
Louis Pasteur

Lee Olsen wrote:
"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:


"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


deowll wrote:


"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...



On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:





You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.



These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.



Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.



large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces?---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL



I guess

you don't even need to throw the hand axe if the animals are
going to "tear themselves to pieces". Just leave it laying around and
"the animals do it to themselves"! This shows the desperate lengths a
wacko will go to to justify a wacko theory.

Of course anytime this
wackiness is questioned,

all he can do is try to change the subject.

Very crackpotty. The facts are your silly little theory that large
animals can be killed by throwing hand axes at them is totally
unsupported by any tests in which a large animal is killed by throwing
hand axes at it.

It's that simple,

you claim it can be done, then just
do it. But you won't, you won't even try because you know how silly it
is. Total loon.

Lorenzo L. Love
http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"One must not assume that an understanding of science is present in
those who borrow its language"
Louis Pasteur

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<aMiYb.7088$WW3.608@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:


"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<127Yb.5876$WW3.5808@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


Lee Olsen wrote:


"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...



Lee Olsen wrote:




"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...




deowll wrote:




"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...





On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:







You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.





These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.





Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.





large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces?---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL



I guess you don't even need to throw the hand axe if the animals are
going to "tear themselves to pieces". Just leave it laying around and
"the animals do it to themselves"! This shows the desperate lengths a
wacko will go to to justify a wacko theory. Of course anytime this
wackiness is questioned,


Questioned? You still babbling about your goat molesting test? Your
sick.



all he can do is try to change the subject.
Very crackpotty. The facts are your silly little theory that large
animals can be killed by throwing hand axes at them is totally
unsupported by any tests in which a large animal is killed by throwing
hand axes at it. It's that simple, you claim it can be done, then just
do it. But you won't, you won't even try because you know how silly it
is. Total loon.


http://www.law.utexas.edu/dawson/cruelty/cruelty.htm
All states have laws that prohibit cruelty to horses and other
animals. Every state makes it a crime to engage in certain cruel acts
toward animals.

167.320. Animal abuse in the first degree.
(1) A person commits the crime of animal abuse in the first degree if,
except as otherwise authorized by law, the person intentionally,
knowingly or recklessly:
(a) Causes serious physical injury to an animal; or
(b) Cruelly causes the death of an animal.

The only reason you keep whining about using live animals for tests is
because you know few people are as unethical and immoral as you are
and therefore are not going to do such a test.




Sad little nutcase, you will find any excuse to avoid testing a theory
you know is just plain silly.


Loons who don't know the difference between *theory* and hypothesis,
do not understand the difference between illegal and legal.


Animals are killed every day for
scientific research.


Trying to change the subject again? They don't kill them with illegal
methods, and if they did, it would make them guilty of the same crime
you are trying to coerce others into doing. I wouldn't be surprised if
that isn't a crime in itself.


A real scientist would be able to conduct such a
simple test.


Simple and illegal, but that's too simple for you to understand.


But that's not you, is it?


But we know what you are, you have proven it----a
lying-perverted-goat-molester.
From: "Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net
Message-ID: <kMFJb.18169$lo3.10514@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net
Date: 2004-01-03 12:39:45 PST
"This "killer frisbees" theory is easy to test. Take a herd of goats
or cattle and throw hand axes at them."

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<127Yb.5876$WW3.5808@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Lee Olsen wrote:

"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<SzOXb.4762$WW3.298@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...


Lee Olsen wrote:



"Lorenzo L. Love" <lllove@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:<bwxXb.4007$tL3.3768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...



deowll wrote:



"Philip Deitiker" <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:uush20lsspeu5drb5hm5nfk8ujdf3rk3h9@4ax.com...




On 9 Feb 2004 16:57:30 -0800, paleocity@hotmail.com (Lee
Olsen) did some sarious thank'n and scribbled:






You have been told by at least 3 people on this group that such a test
would be illegal. That makes you a perverted goat molester.

We have an immense problem with ferrel hogs in Texas. I am
sure if you explained to Texas Parks and Wildlife the
neccesity of your experiment they wouldn't mind your
experiment; however I do expect they would demand a waver on
your behalf, and would probably invite out the
those folks from the '. .stupidist . . .' T.V. show to watch
as after barley missing a small herd of wild pigs they (the
pigs) suddenly realize they have a sudden windfall and
proceed to have lunch. Or perchance you hit the offspring of
some female she turns and takes great pleasure dismembering
you.
Goats would not be a fair test, I agree, they are
domesticated, You need an accurate test in which real live
wild animals with teeth, hot blood, and a zest to survive.



And Texas was one of two states I had in mind that might let someone do this
without burying the idiot who did it under the local jail.Of course they
might need to move to Texas once the word got out.




In Texas you can chain a lion to a stake and shoot it with an arrow and
let it slowly bleed to death.


Evidence does not seem to be part of your vocabulary. You don't seem
to have any concept of what is legal.
http://georgiawildlife.dnr.state.ga.us/assets/documents/Feral%20Hogs%20in%20Georgia.pdf
"RESTRICTIONS Feral hogs are free-ranging, exotic animals and may be
taken on private lands at any time of the year, by any legal means
with no bag limits."

Bows have restrictions as to minimum pounds of pull. Arrows are
controlled by strict size regulations. This is what makes the bow and
arrow legal means. You have not given any evidence that throwing
handaxes at pigs would be legal in Texas.




These pathetic excuses about not being
able to kill a domestic animal for scientific research that's going to
be killed anyway is no more then that, excuses.


"by any legal means"

But you skipped right by this comment as usual. Whittaker, a qualified
scientist, publishing in a peer-reviewed journal, did not use a live
animal in his rebuttal, and recommended against doing such a thing.




Anyone interested in
proving the validity of the preposterous idea that you can kill


Calvin never said that, so your rewriting the literature again, that
you have never read in the first place, to suit your own imagination.
This is just a further demonstration how totally irrational you are.
You are just an irrational liar.




large
animal by throwing hand axes at them could make it happen. No one has
even attempted it which demonstrates the universal lack of faith in the
whole silly thing.


Refute Calvin's neurological argument's; refute Leakey's and my friend
who raises bucking horses arguments that a wounded ungulate will tear
themselves to pieces?---the axe doesn't have to kill, the animals do
it to themselves.
Also, the large animal (zebra) that you claimed couldn't be killed
with a ordinary rock, you claimed hunting small animals (squirrels)
only with them, was only stunned, the person had to run up and cut its
throat after being hit in the head. It was killed through the actions
of the rock and getting it's throat cut. Apparently your mind is not
capable of grasping a simple two part process.



So now the prey animal is going to tear itself to pieces against a
thrown hand axe? Wackier and wackier.


You are a veterinarian too? Tell me doctor, do you know as much about
veterinary science as you do about Developed Oldowan A? ROFL



I guess


Guessing and lying is all you have been doing since the start of the
handaxe subject.


you don't even need to throw the hand axe if the animals are
going to "tear themselves to pieces". Just leave it laying around and
"the animals do it to themselves"! This shows the desperate lengths a
wacko will go to to justify a wacko theory.


Making asinine statements simply demonstrates what a loon you really
are.


Of course anytime this
wackiness is questioned,


Science fiction buffs that float around science forums, that don't
have the slightest clue as to what science is, are in no position to
question anything.



all he can do is try to change the subject.


The subject of your stupidity and ignorance is very germane to this
topic.


Very crackpotty. The facts are your silly little theory that large
animals can be killed by throwing hand axes at them is totally
unsupported by any tests in which a large animal is killed by throwing
hand axes at it.


You must be referring to the infamous Lorenzo L. Love
illegal-goat-molesting-test.


It's that simple,


Breaking the law is simple to you.


you claim it can be done, then just
do it. But you won't, you won't even try because you know how silly it
is. Total loon.


There is nothing silly about a goat-molesting-pervert. You need help.