16 Days Ago......an observation.

I think it's often forgotten that just because we're autistic, it dosen't mean that we don't have the same range of interests as NT's, I too find it hard to discuss things on here. Sometimes I just go for it though and to hell with the consequenses, especially with political and religious topics, someone always posts that these topics aren't suitable for the dinner table, but I'm at my computer, not the dinner table?

How are we supposed not to end up in opinion bubbles if we're not allowed to discuss things?

I can happily confess here, to reporting that Gil Scott Heon is one of my heroes!  And yet, I don't feel the "need for a hero" either!

Sorry the photos are a bit messed up and I have replied to myself! This website isn’t easy for things like this!

Thank you Martin. I like many things to do with ‘lithics’ which is a general archaeological term for stone tools, debris and raw material from an archaeological site. Here is the definition of ‘coprolite’ in archaeological terminology, from my old copy of ‘The Oxford Concise Dictionary of Archaeology’ referenced in photo. I may have to do the three photos one at a time. 

Again... I appreciate the confirmation from a known scientist and "bloke who has proven himself knowledgeable on most/all matters of science that I know to extend beyond my own)....and who's opinion I respect and choose to pay attention to.  Thank you sir.

Disambiguation - ArchaeC - please be assured that I mean not slight to you and your knowledge, by this independent heartfelt thanks to Martin here too.  Frustratingly, I know that you would feel no "slight" in that regard......but I also know that "we" must perform to a "wider audience" these days, when communicating in public fora, for fear of being misunderstood.

Targeted links, on specifics, from folk like you are SO welcome.  It saddens me that any alternative reality could exist in the perceptions of others.  Thank you.  I will dig-in later on that.....and I most sincerely thank you for your time....."bothering".....as it were!

The suffix '-lite' means stone, ultimately derived from the Greek 'lithos'.

Another link eeeek! https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305440314003938

Parasitic evidence in coprolites! 

We were both correct in our understanding of coprolites!

I am glad you asked me about the definition, because I am not an expert in the study of coprolites and I can be mistaken about things. In archaeology, the people who study these coprolites generally are part of the archaeological laboratory team, or the samples can be sent to a separate lab attached to a university or research institute. I recall reading the results of lab reports in archaeological site reports. I “ducked ducked” (search engine, I don’t  google any more) the term and came up with this link (SORRY!). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12520-020-01242-8  I have even seen history programmes talk about medieval coprolites! I am not an archaeological scientist. In the past, I have let other people do the scientific analysis and I would have read their results and considered if and how that might fit into my analysis of the site and object. If you search online with something like “coprolite archaeological definition versus geological definition” or try paleontology, geo archaeology. You should be able to read more. Archaeology overlaps with anthropology and in the US, anthropology has a different definition to archaeology too. Coprolite analysis is amazing but I think I would rather have your fossilised remains in my home than a medieval t…!

I do love old stuff, and old knowledge.  Having a desiccated tur d in my life......is not my idea of joy & happiness.....btw.......what do you think of me ?!

On a more serious note, and again, tbh, I have always believed that coprolite always referred to the fossilized "form" of that matter.  Not wishing to "cast shade" on you nor your expertise (AND because I MUCH prefer to learn from humans [as does AI]), are you sure you are correct?

Disambiguation = I intend no offence in asking for your "degree of confidence" in your answer.

It’s  not obvious to me that your coprolite is a true fossil. The term coprolite is used differently in archaeology than in geology or some other disciplines. In archaeology, coprolite can refer to remains that are not fossils, but may have a fossil like state, in that the remains are desiccated or partial mineralised matter remains. The different terminology between disciplines happens all the time but perhaps more so in archaeology. I had visions of getting your coprolite analysed and discovering all sorts of unknown facts. It is still a wonderful thing to think of what went before us!  

I didn't realise you were a jazz fan

Yea - following a thread like this in just a nightmare!  In answer to all your questions, I can safely answer "don't know".....but its old enough to be a fossil, obviously, and clear enough to be evident.

I am losing track of the order if this thread - a common occurrence! Please excuse if I miss replying. Gosh scat and coprolites, how fascinating! Is the scat from the cat or from one of your explorations? Where is the coprolite from, who or what and how old? Archaeology is such a broad subject but some archaeologists and scientists specialise in scientific analysis of coprolites and things like food remains. Analysis has unveiled all sorts of hidden secrets from the past. I can understand you wanting to share your thoughts in private message format. I have been hesitant to use such a format, although I haven’t seen any complaints about abuse or security other than complaints that messages were held in moderation. I am realising the time-sink issue all too well. Self discipline is required on my part, not easy.

Sorry Peter - that was a joke.......if you can be bothered to read any of the below (I don't recommend it), then you'll get it.....perhaps...Disambiguation = your words, nor you are the butt of that joke.

Scat ?

the only thing most of us have in common is autism ... and this forum doesn't actually talk about autism all that much. In fact if anything we are activly discuraged from discussing autism here. Consider the type of conversations about autism you would typically have. They tend to fall in to several common catagorise:

1. Conversations about discrimination. - These tend to get legal in nature and run afoul of the no legal advice rule (No. 6).
2. Conversations about public services. - These tend to either get legal in nature (rule 6) or political. And political discusions tend to get into teritory some people find disrespectful (Rule 7). If the services are medical it can also lead to acusations of breaking rule 6 again for medical advice.
3. Conversations about interpersonal dificulties. - These tend to turn into discussions about blaim which can fall fowl of rule 7 or in somecases lead to accusations of political incorectness (rule 5). If the interpersonal dificulties are also sexual in nature it may lead to acusations of breaking rule 4 (offencive content).

As autistic people we don't have a lot in common to talk about that isn't covered by the above 3 catagories.

Salt and smoke.  Those were the keys in the good olde days?!

It was quite a while before I realised Bear Grylls was a person and not a survivalist BBQ.

I like Ray Mears, I really like his series on what our Neolithic ancestors ate, he was curious fo rthe same reasons I am, if you read some books you get the impression that the Romans brought all food stuffs except venison and fish to Britiain.