Main Discussion Area > Flintknapping
question for AncientTech
caveman2533:
OMG GIVE IT A REST
AncientTech:
--- Quote from: mullet on September 25, 2015, 08:37:11 pm ---Maybe I should have worded it different; like taking up empty space with the same pictures of the same flakes and same rocks over and over on every thread you post.
--- End quote ---
The reason that I showed some of the same flaking more than once is to give certain individuals here a chance to acknowledge what they are seeing. But, before Philip Churchill (possibly world's greatest Danish dagger replicator) died last year, he told me that nothing I ever do will be good enough, for some of these people, who are here now. So, Philip's words have proven to be prophetic even after his death, as can now be seen.
Philip jumped off their "anti-Ben" bandwagon, back in 2011. He looked at the historical/archaeological evidence that I had tried to get the flintknapping community to LOOK AT, and concluded that they are wrong. He told them that they are wrong, on a public forum, and in a public manner. After that, he apologized to me publicly, and he followed it up with TWO sincere letters of apology, which have since been deleted, along with my account on another forum. Meanwhile, he said that the historical, and archaeological, evidence that I had produced was the biggest "boatload" of evidence, regarding unknown flaking practices, that he had ever seen, in fifteen years of study.
So, why would one of the world's greatest professional replicators say that I am right, and the rest of the crowd is wrong, when he used to be one of my "detractors"? Why did he do this BEFORE he ever saw this outrepasse flaking, made in a raw stone with a deer tine? And how is it that he accurately predicted the outcome of their behavior? Some of these people demanded to see proof. And, I have showed them what is akin to "walking on water", because I have produced full blown outrepasse with a deer tine tip, in raw stone. So, is it good enough for them? Or, are they still behaving exactly the way Philip Churchill told me they would behave, before he died?
Also, nine months has passed since I first showed this. So, if I am a "know nothing", and they are "know somethings", then why don't they produce the same thing with the same tool? I mean, they have had nine months to figure it out. And, they previously decided that the evidence is not worth looking at. So, where are all the gurus now?
The truth is that many other people could have figured this out before I did, IF they had diligently studied the evidence that I presented between 2010, and 2011. But, as it stands, no one is even close. Look at the poster who calls it "indirect percussion". Indirect percussion is just a small piece of the pie. If a person looks at the knowledge that was collected, regarding Native American flintknapping, prior to the 1920's, it would be easy to see that the European method of defining flaking methods is an over-simplification, that DOES NOT accurately reflect flaking dynamics. Of course, instead of looking at why American researchers knew this, a hundred years ago, they will simply call the knowledge "old science". Well, Ishi was part of "old science" (1916). So, should we throw out Ishi, too?
Anyway, the reason why I posted some of the photos more than once is so that some of the flake scar gurus would have a second chance of acknowledging what they are looking at. But, in this case, Philip's words are proving to be prophetic, though he is already deceased.
AncientTech:
--- Quote from: caveman2533 on September 25, 2015, 10:54:50 pm ---OMG GIVE IT A REST
--- End quote ---
If you had listened to Philip Churchil, before he died, none of this would be happening. And, the flintknapping community would be far better off.
Dalton Knapper:
Well, here's one of your posts, Ancient Tech, that you are likely referring to. You describe at least one of your techniques here. It's about the 13th one down dated November 30th, 2010 at 10:32 PM. Not all your posts are deleted and you were being nice in this one, as was everyone else and it is interesting overall:
http://paleoplanet69529.yuku.com/reply/348635/What-can-we-learn-from-flakes#reply-348635
Hummingbird Point:
Ben,
I've been knapping almost 8 years. I have followed your posts previously on Knappers R Us (if I am remembering the name correctly) and Paleo Planet. I have no interst in wading into any controversy, arguments or other such venom. I am very interested in exploring alternative abo knapping techniques. I have my own unusual tools and techniques, which I have explained at length over on Paleo Planet, using this same user name, under the Old-Tool/Aboriginal Knapping forum. In the past 10 weeks, knapping about 10 hours a week I have made 151 points, mostly medium sized, and nother great by modern knapping standards. Of those, 76 are quartzite, 47 quartz, 11 raw chert, 7 heat treated chert, 3 rhyolite, 5 argillite, 1 glass and 1 Rainy Buttes. A "billet" was not used on any of them.
You and I are alike in thinking there is much yet to be learned concerning possible ways the old timers worked stone. I suspect we differ considerably on actual techniques and some of our respective underlying assumptions. Still, a day spent sifting through a ton of gravel to find a few gold nuggets is a worthwhile day, and it is possible we could both benefit from some collaboration. When you have some spare time please look into what I have put out there the past few years. If interested in discussing further, please private message me. This community appears to be of the majority opinion that the topic has run its course. The desire to "give it a rest" should be honored.
Keith
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version