I laughed out loud. Good joerb, submitter.

Snarf!

Why would you do this? What would the authorities do?

I puked in my coffee! Good job, submitter.

/nothin'.

kalispera sas, ti kanete?

She didn't want a reward? Or even credit?.... It's FAKE, i tells ya, FAKE!

Or maybe im just too cynical.

probably the latter.

That's not a pendant; it's a Greek man's version of a chastity belt. Or a pretty big pull tab from a beer can.

HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I love this:

The flat, roughly ring-shaped prehistoric pendant probably had religious significance and would have been worn on a necklace by a prominent member of society.

coupled with:

"It belongs to the Neolithic period, about which we know very little regarding the use of metals, particularly gold," she said.

So, basically, the thought process goes something like this: (A) it's a pendant, so it "would have been worn on a necklace" (DUH!), (B), it's gold, so it would have been worn "by a prominent member of society" (DUH!), and (C), we don't know a farking thinking about the society or its use of gold, so it "probably had religious significance" (BECAUSE WE'RE FREAKING CLUELESS ARCHAEOLOGISTS AND ALWAYS SAY THAT because we think having an answer, even a completely empty and baseless one, is better than leaving its purpose completely unstated.)

That's just a copy of one of this go arounds Olympic Gold Medal.

hehehe...blah blah blah...something witty about Battle Cat

Where's Mum-ra, the Everliving?

/snarf

need sleep, wrong cartoon

gimme sight beyond sight!

/got nothin

"By the eye of Thundera, give me sight beyond sight!"

Hey now! The Omni is red! Give it back so they can fix time!

/read it first as "thunderbird"
//the thunderbirds are a GO!

Submitter, I think I love you.

Isn't this the artifact that is supposed to be used to awaken Cthulhu?

Oh nooooes! Put it back! Put it back quick, and maybe no one will notice it was missing. :-)

Who loses something like that?

Thundercats bloopers (pops)

People who do these kinds of "good deeds" are just really naive and don't understand their fellow man OR history.

wippit: Hey now! The Omni is red! Give it back so they can fix time!

Great reference!. Man, I remember when it was on as a little kid knowing that they got history wildly wrong even after they made it 'right'

Who wants to take odds that someone soon will decide that it represents a "fertility goddess"?

It took a second but I got it. Nicely done submitter. For the younger Farkers, here are the Thundercats:

Aulus: What's Greece's laws on "finders keepers"? Im just curious. I mean this wasn't stolen from a museum. Of course if this was found on state property, then I guess the authorities could claim it. It was found. Also, does the US have similar laws where even if you find an archeological artifact (lets even say on your own property, hypothetically) is it yours? or can the state claim it?

cuibono: BECAUSE WE'RE FREAKING CLUELESS ARCHAEOLOGISTS AND ALWAYS SAY THAT because we think having an answer, even a completely empty and baseless one, is better than leaving its purpose completely unstated.

Heh, I was thinking the same thing. In 8,000 years, when the ruins of our society is dug from the earth, the television will be declared a major religious icon. After all, it's an apparently useless object displayed in a prominent location throughout the house. What else could it be for?

What does that have to do with the thunder cats?

/enlighten

just kat :

Since they haven't found many gold objects from the period, it will be very difficult to determine an age based on the artifact alone. Since you can't use C14 dating on metal (only organic materials that might have been found with it) they won't be able to pin down a specific time. That's why it's so important to find unique artifacts in context, the pendant is only a fraction of the puzzle.

matt2891: I assume you havn't seen any of the Indiana Jones trilogy (soon to be a quadrilogy?)... Indiana says that artifacts should be donated to a museum



Do you want to fark with him?

Cuibono and Fish in a Barrel: Why do you think you're smarter than the archaeologists? They may have valid reasons for believing the pendant had religious significance (similar pendants in societies from the same era, or at nearby locations, may have had religious significance). In any case, it's not something worth excoriating the scientists over.

cankersnore
Cuibono and Fish in a Barrel: Why do you think you're smarter than the archaeologists? They may have valid reasons for believing the pendant had religious significance (similar pendants in societies from the same era, or at nearby locations, may have had religious significance). In any case, it's not something worth excoriating the scientists over.

I was expecting a response like this.

I'm in a field parallel to the archaeologists (Classics), and I've had both the good fortune and the misfortune to work with several of them. The good ones will admit when they do not know what a thing is and will leave it at that. They make huge contributions to their discipline and to mine. The bad ones (most of them) will just make up an explanation and then argue for it when all they're really doing is exercising their imaginations. They fill the scholarship with useless conjecture. Saying that something about which little or nothing is known has religious significance (especially saying that it has to do with a fertility goddess) is something of a joke: it's the standard answer when all else fails, much like how in a Roman context they like to say that any room whose function is not immediately obvious is a "dining room".

In this particular article, the quotes say straight out that they have very few similar pieces, almost no idea about the cultural, and particularly little knowledge about metal, especially gold. This makes it VERY likely that the "religious" significance is just a fall-back position to sound like they at least know something, and it fits very well with what I know of archaeologists and their profession.

So what are you doin' here in Thessaloniki?

"And so, this hiker shall never know the glory of becoming the Pumaman."

cuibono: So, basically, the thought process goes something like this: (A) it's a pendant, so it "would have been worn on a necklace" (DUH!), (B), it's gold, so it would have been worn "by a prominent member of society" (DUH!), and (C), we don't know a farking thinking about the society or its use of gold, so it "probably had religious significance" (BECAUSE WE'RE FREAKING CLUELESS ARCHAEOLOGISTS AND ALWAYS SAY THAT because we think having an answer, even a completely empty and baseless one, is better than leaving its purpose completely unstated.)


Wow! A bitter archeologist!!!

:D

She didn't try to sell it on eBay???

Fool!

JakeElwood: So what are you doin' here in Thessaloniki?


She is SOOOOO hot!!!! One of my favorite women ever!

With all the looting and digging that goes on today, I wonder how often it happened in the past that someone would loot something from a tomb or whatnot and then ship it off somewhere far away. Then a modern guy comes in and finds it and thinks it's local. Is that common? What's going to happen in the future when we have all this Egyptian stuff? Future societies will have less and less to "discover" the more we find.

Chastity belt version 1.1, they improved upon it later.

Where's the obscure-actor-with-the-other-half-to-form-double-dragon guy?

Dr. Cheevz: Do you want to fark with him?


I learned this from Indiana Jones - NEVER take a whip to a gun fight!!!

:D

ZipBeep: One of my favorite women ever!

Probably still got it too.