[MD] Tweaking the emergence

[Carl Thames]

Mark:
> The statements are just statements.  What is important is what they
> represent in terms of Quality.  Have you read his books with that in
> mind?  Why would he say that intellectual thought began about 3000
> years ago?  Have you thought this through or are you still on a
> superficial read of Lila and ZAMM?

Carl:
This is just bizzare.  Haven't they dated the pyramids to over 10k years 
old?  Don't they represent intellectural thought?  This one threw me.  Then 
there are the cave paintings in France.  The paintings are of stylized 
animals, not direct representation.  They are over 20k years old.  Then 
there are the archeological sites with graves containing grave goods, which 
were weapons, personal effects, whatever that the people felt the dead 
person might have a use for in the afterlife.  They are over 40k years old. 
Do you see why a statement like that would throw me?  Also, Greg Braden was 
on Coast to Coast last night, and he said that there are some archeological 
finds now that are casting a LOT of doubt on Darwin.  They call them 
"archeological anomalies" and ignore them.  Strange.

Sorry for the brief interruption.  It was just that "intellectual thought 
began about 3000 years ago" thing.  I know YOU weren't saying that, just 
commenting on Pirsig.  I don't know why he would say that either.  It makes 
no sense.

Later,
Carl