Re: Brideshead and paleo anthropology revisited

On 13.9.2024. 5:52, JTEM wrote:

  Mario Petrinovic wrote:

         Don't you get it, what you (and everybody else) is saying doesn't have the slightest of senses.

 I stated what is:  Monkeys are on both sides of the Atlantic, but they
are not on the other side of the Wallace Line.
 Your "Ideas," if I may call them that, ignore reality.

No, I completely agree with the reality, yes, monkeys are at the both sides of Atlantic, but they didn't cross the Wallace Line. The problem is that from that reality you drew a conclusion that monkeys crossed the wide water, yet they were unable to cross narrow water. I am still puzzled, first, how somebody can draw such illogical conclusion, and second, how somebody doesn't see the illogicity of it, even if it is repeatedly pointed out to her? It is like saying one million is smaller than one hundred, and insisting on it. Why? I mean, even if you would have some other idea, you cannot insist in that my logic is wrong, because one million *isn't* smaller than one hundred, whichever way you put it. If I say that Atlantic Ocean is far wider than the Wallace Line, I, simply, cannot be wrong, and you insist that I am wrong at that. Jesus Christ.