Re: [meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
Dean & Keith, Perhaps the problem is the interpretation of the word, "flake," as in "picking up a flake of LDG..." This can be interpreted as: 1) picking up any little bit 2) picking up a piece of flaked tool or piece of debutage made of LDG Best wishes, Michael on 6/12/04 5:37 AM, dean bessey at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > WOW KEITH. YOU REALLY CANT GET YOUR THOUGHTS STRAIT. > FIRST YOU MISQUOTE AND PUT WORDS INTO AN ARCHAELOGISTS > MOUTH THAT HE NEVER SAID. AND NOW YOU ARE EVEN > MISQUOTING YOURSELF. NOW YOU SAY: >> In this case, you are the person very confused about >> my arguments. I perfectly agree with you that there > is >> ***nothing** illegal about picking up or collecting >> natural, unmodified pieces of LDG. My discussion had >> nothing to do with the collection of natural pieces >> of LDG > BUT TWO DAYS AGO YOU SAID: > Despite what you have stated, he and other > professional archaeologists have made it very clear, > contrary to you have claimed, me that even picking > an LDG flake up off the shifting sandy desert floor > and transporting it / exporting it without permission > from either Egypt or Libya is unethical and illegal > behavior. It doesn't matter if this Egyptian or Libyan > > artifact is in a museum of not. It is still looting > and > it is still unethical and immoral according to the > archaeologists, whom I have talked to. > SO NOW YOU 100% CONLICT WITH WHAT YOU SAID TWO DAYS > AGO. > MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST NOW CHANGED YOUR MIND? > CHEERS > DEAN > PS: THE CAPS IS SO THAT PEOPLE CAN EASILY TELL MY > WRITING FROM YOUR MISQUOTES. > > > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. > http://messenger.yahoo.com/ > __ > Meteorite-list mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- "It is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." - Hermann Goering -- When Jesus said "Love your enemies" I think he probably meant don't kill them. Anonymous -- For perspective, try THIS: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/index.html -- cool message fro Ben & Jerry: www.TrueMajority.org/oreo -- AMAZING photos of Aurora Borealis, etc. http://faculty.rmwc.edu/tmichalik/atmosphere.htm -- Hubble space telescope - AMAZING photos!: http://wires.news.com.au/special/mm/030811-hubble.htm -- http://www.costofwar.com/ -- SUPPORT OUR TROUPS: http://www.takebackthemedia.com/onearmy.html -- Worth Seeing: Earth at night from satellite: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights_dmsp_big.jpg -- - Interactive Lady Liberty: http://doody36.home.attbi.com/liberty.htm -- Earth - variety of choices: http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/vplanet.html -- Michael Blood Meteorites: http://www.michaelbloodmeteorites.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
Dear Keith, LIST, So, archaeology ~smarkeology, lets get back to meteorite topics and stave this trouble making duck of what's seemingly become a personal agenda. Let the archaeology duck seek somewhere else to squawk and discharge waste product. Sincerely, Dave F. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dean bessey wrote: FIRST YOU MISQUOTE AND PUT WORDS INTO AN ARCHAELOGISTS MOUTH THAT HE NEVER SAID. AND NOW YOU ARE EVEN MISQUOTING YOURSELF. NOW YOU SAY: I am not misquoting the archaeologist, as far as the potential illegal and unethical nature of trading and owning artifacts composed of Libyan, which is what was being discussed. What the archaeologist stated in a post made by a professional archaeologist to the "Archaeology List". The full post can found at: http://listserv.tamu.edu/cgi/wa?A2=ind0406&L=arch-l&F=&S=&P=4205 If anyone is putting completely false words into s person's mouth, it is Mr. Dean. When I talked about flakes below, I ***wasn't** talking about natural pieces of Libyan Desert Glass when I wrote: Despite what you have stated, he and other professional archaeologists have made it very clear, contrary to you have claimed, me that even picking an LDG flake up off the shifting sandy desert floor and transporting it / exporting it without permission from either Egypt or Libya is unethical and illegal behavior. It doesn't matter if this Egyptian or Libyan" When I was using the term "flake" I was using the term in its archaeological definition. In this definition, a flake is a man-made artifact. In that case, I was talking about artifacts, not natural pieces of LDG. I apologize if that terminology wasn't clear. However, if had bothered to look at the context of the discussion, instead of flying off the handle, you would have seen that I consistently referred to **artifacts** composed of Libyan Desert Glass in the discussion as being potential illegal to trade in. Dean wrote: SO NOW YOU 100% CONLICT WITH WHAT YOU SAID TWO DAYSAGO. MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST NOW CHANGED YOUR MIND? I didn't change my mind, it is just that their some confusion of the definition of "flake"/ If Dean would bother to read the various posts it is quite clear that only artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass is being discussed. Only time will tell whether people need to be careful about trading in artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass. Yours, Keith Louisiana __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
dean bessey wrote: >FIRST YOU MISQUOTE AND PUT WORDS INTO >AN ARCHAELOGISTS MOUTH THAT HE NEVER >SAID. AND NOW YOU ARE EVEN >MISQUOTING YOURSELF. NOW YOU SAY: I am not misquoting the archaeologist, as far as the potential illegal and unethical nature of trading and owning artifacts composed of Libyan, which is what was being discussed. What the archaeologist stated in a post made by a professional archaeologist to the "Archaeology List". The full post can found at: http://listserv.tamu.edu/cgi/wa?A2=ind0406&L=arch-l&F=&S=&P=4205 If anyone is putting completely false words into s person's mouth, it is Mr. Dean. When I talked about flakes below, I ***wasn't** talking about natural pieces of Libyan Desert Glass when I wrote: >Despite what you have stated, he and >other professional archaeologists have >made it very clear, contrary to you >have claimed, me that even picking >an LDG flake up off the shifting sandy >desert floor and transporting it / >exporting it without permission >from either Egypt or Libya is unethical >and illegal behavior. It doesn't matter >if this Egyptian or Libyan" When I was using the term "flake" I was using the term in its archaeological definition. In this definition, a flake is a man-made artifact. In that case, I was talking about artifacts, not natural pieces of LDG. I apologize if that terminology wasn't clear. However, if had bothered to look at the context of the discussion, instead of flying off the handle, you would have seen that I consistently referred to **artifacts** composed of Libyan Desert Glass in the discussion as being potential illegal to trade in. Dean wrote: >SO NOW YOU 100% CONLICT WITH WHAT YOU >SAID TWO DAYSAGO. MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST >NOW CHANGED YOUR MIND? I didn't change my mind, it is just that their some confusion of the definition of "flake"/ If Dean would bother to read the various posts it is quite clear that only artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass is being discussed. Only time will tell whether people need to be careful about trading in artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass. Yours, Keith Louisiana __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
WOW KEITH. YOU REALLY CANT GET YOUR THOUGHTS STRAIT. FIRST YOU MISQUOTE AND PUT WORDS INTO AN ARCHAELOGISTS MOUTH THAT HE NEVER SAID. AND NOW YOU ARE EVEN MISQUOTING YOURSELF. NOW YOU SAY: > In this case, you are the person very confused about > my arguments. I perfectly agree with you that there is > ***nothing** illegal about picking up or collecting > natural, unmodified pieces of LDG. My discussion had > nothing to do with the collection of natural pieces > of LDG BUT TWO DAYS AGO YOU SAID: Despite what you have stated, he and other professional archaeologists have made it very clear, contrary to you have claimed, me that even picking an LDG flake up off the shifting sandy desert floor and transporting it / exporting it without permission from either Egypt or Libya is unethical and illegal behavior. It doesn't matter if this Egyptian or Libyan artifact is in a museum of not. It is still looting and it is still unethical and immoral according to the archaeologists, whom I have talked to. SO NOW YOU 100% CONLICT WITH WHAT YOU SAID TWO DAYS AGO. MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST NOW CHANGED YOUR MIND? CHEERS DEAN PS: THE CAPS IS SO THAT PEOPLE CAN EASILY TELL MY WRITING FROM YOUR MISQUOTES. __ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
Keith wrote: > I perfectly agree with you that there is > ***nothing** illegal about picking up or collecting > natural, unmodified pieces of LDG. My discussion had > nothing to do with the collection of natural pieces of > LDG. The only mention of this was that collecting of > any kind in the area containing LDG was prohibited > because of looting of ***artifacts*** in the strewn > field area. In that case, the people collecting only > LDG, not artifacts, were victims of the pothunter > / arrowhead collector types. > > I fully agree that people should be able to collect > and take home natural and unmodified pieces of LDG. > Keith, So why bring this up on a meteorite list? We're not hunting/trading/collecting/selling/studying archaeological artifacts... That's another group isn't it? > my bread and butter geologic work involving finding > sand, gravel, and road fill for companies; generating > oil and gas prospects, which I can sell Some might consider those practices of yours as unethical or morally bankrupt... Though not me - just pointing out that it's easy to nitpick when it comes to moral behaviour. I tend to live and let live - if some poor Arab can sell some pieces of LDG for some barley and oil, that's fine by me... especially pieces that are here today and buried for thousands of years tomorrow. The same goes for mining oil, lead or what ever else people legally engage in to put bread on their table. There are more significant artifacts/sites worthy of study, so many in fact that it would probably take a thousand years to study them all (and by that time they'll be studying us). I don't see picking up flakes as immoral no matter how many academic eggheads say so. Scientists don't have moral leg to stand on if you look at their past behavior. Besides, I know numerous respected PhD's from research one universities who don't agree with most of the current politically correct rhetoric that infects many places of learning these days. I bet many of the "respected" archaeologists you speak of have looted artifacts in their collections, both private and institutional. Seems a bit hypocritical... > prohibit the export of antiquities without permits. If a > person doesn't have the paperwork, which documents > that his Libyan desert glass artifact was exported legally, > a case can be made that the artifact was exported in > violation of either the laws of Egypt or Libya. Since > legally exported artifact are suppose to be sold with > documentation proving that they are legal, the lack of > such, even if the result of negligence on the part of the > person selling it to you failing to provide it, can be used > to argue that the Libyan desert glass artifacts are illicit. > It the owner that has to prove that an artifact was > legally exported with a documented chain-of-custody > going back to the person, who originally received the > license to exported it. If a person doesn't have the > paperwork and don't have this chain-of-custody, the > person don't have the proof that artifact is legal and > the country of origin, whether it be Egypt or Libya > can reclaim it. I think this is wrong. The dealers who were successfully prosecuted in the US & England (for looting in Egypt) weren't successfully prosecuted because they didn't have paperwork - pieces from old collections do not necessarily have documentation. What nailed the case was the fact that they found the detailed journal of the collector which revealed his activities. Most importantly they found some stone reliefs/carvings in his house that were hacked out of a monument. They were exact matches the reliefs that were recently stolen from that monument. In addition, I'm pretty sure that you face prosecution if you are in possession of items of $5,000 or more in value. > Again, someone needs to do a detail study of the antiquity > laws of Egypt, Morocco, and Libya in reference to LEG > artifacts. It seems like people are being much too > complacent about the legally of collecting, buying, and > selling these artifacts. Regardless of whether a minority > of LDG artifacts might be legal, the overall illict trade > in these artifacts is contributing to the destruction of > valuable archaeological sites. Again, I think the laws regarding the possession of "LDG artifacts" has no bearing on the meteorite list. I'll just have to agree to disagree whether the study of flake chippings "contribute to the destruction of valuable archaeological sites". I don't know if I'm engaging in "flaming" here, but I get frustrated with these chicken little/holier that thou arguments. And I'm a bit fatigued after spending the night doing some stargazing and am probably rambling. :-) Respectfully, Mark Bowling __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
Keith, Keith, if you think this was fun I suggest you go bother some other list. This list is for serious discussion, considered arguments and good natured humor. Your contributions on this topic were none of these. Do it again? More of the same? Forget it! For those who want to read the UNIDRIOT document on stolen cultural property, which is one of many statements on the subject, follow these links: Here is the Website for the UNIDROIT document, which includes a definition of cultural property: http://www.unidroit.org/english/conventions/c-cult.htm And here is a critique of the UNIDROIT document: http://www.city.ac.uk/artspol/schneider.html I'm still waiting to see your list of significant LDG artifacts aside from the scarab. And waiting to see your bibliography of archaeological studies of LDG artifacts. I'm out of town until July... Cheers, Nick __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
dean bessey pounded out with his key caps stuck as if he drunk an entire pot of Lousiana Community Coffee in 2 minutes: ..ranting deleted... >WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT YOU >ARE BAISNG YOUR OPINION ON THAT >PICKING UP UNALTERED LDG IS ILLEGAL In this case, you are the person very confused about my arguments. I perfectly agree with you that there is ***nothing** illegal about picking up or collecting natural, unmodified pieces of LDG. My discussion had nothing to do with the collection of natural pieces of LDG. The only mention of this was that collecting of any kind in the area containing LDG was prohibited because of looting of ***artifacts*** in the strewn field area. In that case, the people collecting only LDG, not artifacts, were victims of the pothunter / arrowhead collector types. I fully agree that people should be able to collect and take home natural and unmodified pieces of LDG. ..ranting deleted... >NO IT DOES. EXPORTING ARTIFACTS >FROM EGYPT IS ILLEGAL. NOBODY >DISPUTED THAT ..ranting deleted... If you would read the various posts, you would find the discussion was concerned only ***artifacts** manufactured from LDG. In fact, many people greatly disputed to what degree, if at all, whether it was either illegal, legal enforceable., unenforceable, moral, immoral, ethical, or unethical to collect **artifacts** manufactured from LDG and export them from Egypt and under what circumstances. Dean you really need to read what you are commenting on and unlock the caps key before composing a post. Also, even if I disagreed with you, which I don't, it would help your arguments, if you used standard punctuation and wrote in logical sentences instead of just shouting what nasty, evil you-know what I am. Yours, Keith Louisiana __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
> It was a fun and spirited discussion about the > "legality" of trading in / owning prehistoric > artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass. NO IT WASNT. IT WAS A DISCUSSION WHERE YOU WERE TRYING TO CONVINCE EVERYBODY THAT PICKING UP A FLAKE OF GLASS IN THE DESERT WAS ILLEGAL AND YOU MISREPRESENTED A ARCHAELOGISTS TO MAKE YOUR ARGUEMENT >a middle ground on this discussion doesn't exist; NO IT DOES. EXPORTING ARTIFACTS FROM EGYPT IS ILLEGAL. NOBODY DISPUTED THAT 2.some people find my arguments as unconvincing ESPECIALLY SINEC YOU ARE MISQUOTING PROFESSIONAL ARCHAELOGISTS TO MAKE YOUR ARGUEMENTS > Although I disagree with them, WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT YOU ARE BAISNG YOUR OPINION ON THAT PICKING UP UNALTERED LDG IS ILLEGAL? > (It might be fun to write a paper about this topic > for the Newsletter of the Delta Chapter of the > Louisiana Archaeological Society or even give a > talk on it at the Annual Meeting of the Louisiana > Archaeological Society. It not much, but that is > best that an amateur like me can expect to do.) WHY WOULD THEY BE INTERESTED? THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN OLD ROCKS NEVER BEFORE SEEN BY MAN > I think it would be fun to discuss this topic in > more detail in about 6 to 7 months, HOPEFULLY WHEN YOU HAVE SOME ACTUAL FACTS TO ENLIGHTEN US WITH >which I can sell; and, in my spare time, research the >topic of Egyptian artifacts THIS IS A METEORITE DISCUSSION LIST. THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING TOPIC AND THERE ARE DISCUSSION GROUPS FOR IT BUT SINCE THIS IS A METEORITE LIST THIS TOPIC IS NOT RELEVENT HERE > An archaeologist friend has suggested that > interested parties can have a "rematch" on a mailing >list associated REMATCH ABOUT WHAT? NOBODY HAS ANY DISAGREEMENTS WITH YOUR ARCHAELOGISTS. YOUR ARCHAELOGISTS SAID THAT EXPORTING ARTIFACTS FROM EGYPT IS ILLEGAL - WITHER THE ARTIFACT IS MADE FROM SILVER, GOLD, SAND OR LDG. AND EVERYBODY HERE AGREES WITH HIM. > Finally, this discussion inspired my archaeologist > lady friend to come up with a "killer" idea for a > research proposal that the U.S. Customs Service > and the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquites have > expressed interest in providing joint funding for > a period of 9 months. Anyway, she thanks you-all > for all of the always fascinating, entertaining, > and novel arguments and the inspiration. NOW WE ARE IN AGREEMENT. I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE MORE RESEARCH INTO WHAT HAPPENS WITH ARTIFACTS, AND HOW COUNTRIES VIEWS THEIR CULTURAL LAWS, AND HOW THE LAWS LIKE UNESCO AND UNDROIT PROTECTS OR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISTRUCTION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY. A SERIOUS EFFORT SHOULD BE DONE TO SEE HOW IT WORKS RATHER THAN THE CARTE BLAUNCH ATTIDUDE THAT CERTAIN COUNTRIES HAVE ABOUT EVERYTHING WITHER THEY EVEN WANT IT IN A MUSEUM OR WILL DESTROY IT BECAUSE IT IS SUCH LOW VALUE AND TO EXPENSIVE TO STORE. IN FACT I WISH THAT I COULD BECOME A PART OF SUCH A SERIOUS GOVERNMENT EFFORT. I HAVE A LOT OF OTHER DEALERS WHO WOULD GET INVOLVED TO WHO WANT TO MAINTAIN A BUSINESS WHILE RESPONSIBLY AQUIREING NEW ARTIFACTS. IF THERE WERE REASONABLE GUIDLINES DEALERS WOULD COOPERATE AS WILL AS PEOPLE WHO SEARCH FOR STUFF AND IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR EVERYBODY. IF YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH A SERIOUS STUDY WITH AN OPEN ATTITUDE YOU COULD WELL BE SOMEBODY WHO IS FOREVER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF MORE WORLD CULTURAL PROPERTY THAN ANYBODY ELSE IN THE WORLD. BRITAIN HAS A CULTURAL LAW TO BE PROUD OF. ANYTHING NEWLY FOUND HAS TO BE OFFERED TO THE MUSEUM COMMUNITY AT A PRICE DETERMINED AS FAIR MARKET VALUE BY A GROUP OF DEALERS. IF NO MUSEUM WANTS IT THEN IT GETS AN EXPORT PERMIT. A COUNTRY LIKE EGYPT WITHOUT THE RESOURCES COULD CLAIM ANYTHING THAT THEY WANT TO STORE OR STUDY AND ANYTHING NOT OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST COULD BE EXPORTED FREELY WITHOUT BEING DESTROYED. THAT WOULD BE A REAL CULTURAL LAY THAT WOULD WORK. BUT THIS IS NOT AN ARTIFACT AN DMY DISCUSSION IS NOT RELEVENT HERE. SINCERELY DEAN __ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Thank You - Was A fun Libyan Desert Glass Debate
It was a fun and spirited discussion about the "legality" of trading in / owning prehistoric artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass. Given that 1. it is quite obvious that between I and some people, a middle ground on this discussion doesn't exist; 2. some people find my arguments as unconvincing as I found their arguments, and 3. I and other people have expressed themselves enough for the lurkers to understand each other's position, this is a good time to agree to disagree about this topic and let the topic cool down. Although I disagree with them, I found your arguments quite interesting and I shall think them over, while I attend to other business. (It might be fun to write a paper about this topic for the Newsletter of the Delta Chapter of the Louisiana Archaeological Society or even give a talk on it at the Annual Meeting of the Louisiana Archaeological Society. It not much, but that is best that an amateur like me can expect to do.) I think it would be fun to discuss this topic in more detail in about 6 to 7 months, while I focus on my bread and butter geologic work involving finding sand, gravel, and road fill for companies; generating oil and gas prospects, which I can sell; and, in my spare time, research the topic of Egyptian artifacts composed of Libyan Desert Glass in more detail. An archaeologist friend has suggested that interested parties can have a "rematch" on a mailing list associated with the Ancient Near East ANE mailing list created specifically for this topic whenever people are ready for it this Fall. In that venue, some of the archaeologists on the ANE Mailing Lists can also participate and give us benefit of their expertise concerning the complex legal and ethical questions that entangled this discussion. It might even be possible to find some sort of middle ground or formulate guidelines for this controversy. Since this topic is more archaeology than meteorites, it will be on-topic and appropriate to discuss matter on such a mailing list. For interested people the archives of the ANE mailing list can be found at: https://listhost.uchicago.edu/pipermail/ane/ http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/ANE/OI_ANE.html Finally, this discussion inspired my archaeologist lady friend to come up with a "killer" idea for a research proposal that the U.S. Customs Service and the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquites have expressed interest in providing joint funding for a period of 9 months. Anyway, she thanks you-all for all of the always fascinating, entertaining, and novel arguments and the inspiration. Thank You-All and Best regards Keith ST. Tammany Parish, LA __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
