13th March 2006, 10:51 PM
Dear Archae-logical,
The reply to your question about what I am doing to try and prevent the quarry (and the ploughing), can be found on the same page as your posting (its only a little way up) and was posted on 12/03/2006: 21:32:39 (look at the very bottom if you don?t have time to read it).
It was a reply to Pixies same question too me, I suppose she hasn?t seen it since when you talked to her she would have told you about it.
As to your comment about conscience, forgive me if I?m wrong but I suspect you see me as the enemy because I am an archaeologist who has worked at the Henges.
Is this what you mean?
If you come to this conclusion, please explain when you have time why you believe this.
Once again, in relation to what I perceive as prejudice, I refer you to the posting above and more on page 17.
But it is really unacceptable attack a persons opinions and and then admit that you have not even read their idea?s.
When you have time, and I can wait as long as you want (summers OK), I?d appreciate you reading all the postings, including mine and then replying (if the debates gone off the message board by then, you can always start a new one simply to reply, alternately I?m happy to talk to anyone over the phone, or meet up if its possible to arrange it via the host).
When you apologise for, being ?uncivil to anyone?, I presume you are apologising for being uncivil to me?
If so, then I accept your apology.
It?s been really puzzling me, why Ventutius, Pixie and yourself have replied to my postings as if I'm the 'enemy'..
But I think I?ve worked it out.
Is it that you all think I?m arguing for the archaeology to be excavated so that the impediment to the quarry can be removed?
Do you really think I?m a closet quarry supporter!!
Can I give you all my word that this is not true (if you had read all my postings from the first to the last, without preconceived prejudice you would have known this) and I have already clearly stated that I am against the quarry for ?other reasons? unconnected with the archaeology.
So please. I politely encourage you all to reply to my specific questions and not attack me for opinions you have decided I must have, when in fact I don?t have them.
So, I?ll end there, in comradeship with the campaign to ?Save the Henges? (or more accurately the Henges and the ritual landscape surrounding the Henges) and patiently await Ventutius and Pixies reply, whilst happy to wait for yours in the summer.
Arthus
The reply to your question about what I am doing to try and prevent the quarry (and the ploughing), can be found on the same page as your posting (its only a little way up) and was posted on 12/03/2006: 21:32:39 (look at the very bottom if you don?t have time to read it).
It was a reply to Pixies same question too me, I suppose she hasn?t seen it since when you talked to her she would have told you about it.
As to your comment about conscience, forgive me if I?m wrong but I suspect you see me as the enemy because I am an archaeologist who has worked at the Henges.
Is this what you mean?
If you come to this conclusion, please explain when you have time why you believe this.
Once again, in relation to what I perceive as prejudice, I refer you to the posting above and more on page 17.
But it is really unacceptable attack a persons opinions and and then admit that you have not even read their idea?s.
When you have time, and I can wait as long as you want (summers OK), I?d appreciate you reading all the postings, including mine and then replying (if the debates gone off the message board by then, you can always start a new one simply to reply, alternately I?m happy to talk to anyone over the phone, or meet up if its possible to arrange it via the host).
When you apologise for, being ?uncivil to anyone?, I presume you are apologising for being uncivil to me?
If so, then I accept your apology.
It?s been really puzzling me, why Ventutius, Pixie and yourself have replied to my postings as if I'm the 'enemy'..
But I think I?ve worked it out.
Is it that you all think I?m arguing for the archaeology to be excavated so that the impediment to the quarry can be removed?
Do you really think I?m a closet quarry supporter!!
Can I give you all my word that this is not true (if you had read all my postings from the first to the last, without preconceived prejudice you would have known this) and I have already clearly stated that I am against the quarry for ?other reasons? unconnected with the archaeology.
So please. I politely encourage you all to reply to my specific questions and not attack me for opinions you have decided I must have, when in fact I don?t have them.
So, I?ll end there, in comradeship with the campaign to ?Save the Henges? (or more accurately the Henges and the ritual landscape surrounding the Henges) and patiently await Ventutius and Pixies reply, whilst happy to wait for yours in the summer.
Arthus