<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_21_0258255</id>
	<title>Stone Tools Found On Crete Push Back Humans' Maritime History</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266778980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>The New York Times reports that stone tools discovered on the Greek island of Crete, and reported last month at an academic conference, are strong evidence for <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/science/16archeo.html">rethinking the maritime capabilities of early humans</a>. The researchers who found the tools (hand-axes, cleavers, and scrapers) estimate them to be at least 130,000 years old; if they're right, humans have been traveling long distances at sea (Crete is 200 miles from the northern African coastline) for at least several tens of thousands of years longer than earlier believed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The New York Times reports that stone tools discovered on the Greek island of Crete , and reported last month at an academic conference , are strong evidence for rethinking the maritime capabilities of early humans .
The researchers who found the tools ( hand-axes , cleavers , and scrapers ) estimate them to be at least 130,000 years old ; if they 're right , humans have been traveling long distances at sea ( Crete is 200 miles from the northern African coastline ) for at least several tens of thousands of years longer than earlier believed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The New York Times reports that stone tools discovered on the Greek island of Crete, and reported last month at an academic conference, are strong evidence for rethinking the maritime capabilities of early humans.
The researchers who found the tools (hand-axes, cleavers, and scrapers) estimate them to be at least 130,000 years old; if they're right, humans have been traveling long distances at sea (Crete is 200 miles from the northern African coastline) for at least several tens of thousands of years longer than earlier believed.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31248942</id>
	<title>Re:First Post</title>
	<author>Tubal-Cain</author>
	<datestamp>1266957720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even more mystifying was the -1 Redundant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even more mystifying was the -1 Redundant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even more mystifying was the -1 Redundant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31220854</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>pic or it didn't happen</htmltext>
<tokenext>pic or it did n't happen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pic or it didn't happen</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216886</id>
	<title>Re:Not Necasrily?</title>
	<author>aralin</author>
	<datestamp>1266784920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Crete is 200 miles from coast now. How high was middeterean see during the ice age and have there been islands in between? Maybe they did not travel 200 miles but much lower distance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crete is 200 miles from coast now .
How high was middeterean see during the ice age and have there been islands in between ?
Maybe they did not travel 200 miles but much lower distance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crete is 200 miles from coast now.
How high was middeterean see during the ice age and have there been islands in between?
Maybe they did not travel 200 miles but much lower distance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216868</id>
	<title>Bah.</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1266784560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Don't talk to me about humans' maritime history. It's nothing but primitive stone tools, sodomy, and the lash."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do n't talk to me about humans ' maritime history .
It 's nothing but primitive stone tools , sodomy , and the lash .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Don't talk to me about humans' maritime history.
It's nothing but primitive stone tools, sodomy, and the lash.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219556</id>
	<title>Re:it's my beach party</title>
	<author>Disfnord</author>
	<datestamp>1266776460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hate to be one of those people who shout "WRONG", but your wrong, many times over. Those tools are quartz, quartz is not an uncommon raw material (although not a very good one), and any number of fine grained rocks can be used for chipped stone tools, not just the three you listed. For example, you'll find that the majority of chipped stone tools in the Aleutians are made from basalt. Northern Minnesota has a large quantity of siltstone tools (and central MN has a large percentage of quartz tools). Also, quartzite can be a great raw material. Hixton Quartzite from Wisconsin is a dream to work with, one of the best raw materials in the area. Finally, while obsidian is easy to work, it is quite brittle and unsuitable for many tasks. But given the number of artifacts recovered at this site, they most likely were using local materials, not ones they brought with them. Quartz, as shitty as it is as a raw material, might have been the best available to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to be one of those people who shout " WRONG " , but your wrong , many times over .
Those tools are quartz , quartz is not an uncommon raw material ( although not a very good one ) , and any number of fine grained rocks can be used for chipped stone tools , not just the three you listed .
For example , you 'll find that the majority of chipped stone tools in the Aleutians are made from basalt .
Northern Minnesota has a large quantity of siltstone tools ( and central MN has a large percentage of quartz tools ) .
Also , quartzite can be a great raw material .
Hixton Quartzite from Wisconsin is a dream to work with , one of the best raw materials in the area .
Finally , while obsidian is easy to work , it is quite brittle and unsuitable for many tasks .
But given the number of artifacts recovered at this site , they most likely were using local materials , not ones they brought with them .
Quartz , as shitty as it is as a raw material , might have been the best available to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to be one of those people who shout "WRONG", but your wrong, many times over.
Those tools are quartz, quartz is not an uncommon raw material (although not a very good one), and any number of fine grained rocks can be used for chipped stone tools, not just the three you listed.
For example, you'll find that the majority of chipped stone tools in the Aleutians are made from basalt.
Northern Minnesota has a large quantity of siltstone tools (and central MN has a large percentage of quartz tools).
Also, quartzite can be a great raw material.
Hixton Quartzite from Wisconsin is a dream to work with, one of the best raw materials in the area.
Finally, while obsidian is easy to work, it is quite brittle and unsuitable for many tasks.
But given the number of artifacts recovered at this site, they most likely were using local materials, not ones they brought with them.
Quartz, as shitty as it is as a raw material, might have been the best available to them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266784200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I knew someone was going to say that.</p><p>Many primitive stone tools look like plain rocks at first glance, but there are distinctive chip and wear patterns on tools that just don't occur by chance.  An expert will be able to tell you very quickly if you're dealing with an actual tool or just a rock that's assumed a suggestive shape.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I knew someone was going to say that.Many primitive stone tools look like plain rocks at first glance , but there are distinctive chip and wear patterns on tools that just do n't occur by chance .
An expert will be able to tell you very quickly if you 're dealing with an actual tool or just a rock that 's assumed a suggestive shape .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I knew someone was going to say that.Many primitive stone tools look like plain rocks at first glance, but there are distinctive chip and wear patterns on tools that just don't occur by chance.
An expert will be able to tell you very quickly if you're dealing with an actual tool or just a rock that's assumed a suggestive shape.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31224500</id>
	<title>More we don't know than we do know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266763440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fully expect that one day we will find evidence of a pre-historic civilization that is more advanced than the oldest historic civilizations, or maybe even recent ones. If there was something as advanced as what we have today we would probably have found evidence by now; Geological processes wouldn't wipe out rebar that fast. But how much would be left of, say, a civilization at the level of ancient Greece or even Rome after 50,000 years?</p><p>It's amazing when you stop to think about it, but if you pick any subject there's probably more we don't know than we do know. Even of our own species' history we don't know more than a few thousand years with any certainty or detail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fully expect that one day we will find evidence of a pre-historic civilization that is more advanced than the oldest historic civilizations , or maybe even recent ones .
If there was something as advanced as what we have today we would probably have found evidence by now ; Geological processes would n't wipe out rebar that fast .
But how much would be left of , say , a civilization at the level of ancient Greece or even Rome after 50,000 years ? It 's amazing when you stop to think about it , but if you pick any subject there 's probably more we do n't know than we do know .
Even of our own species ' history we do n't know more than a few thousand years with any certainty or detail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fully expect that one day we will find evidence of a pre-historic civilization that is more advanced than the oldest historic civilizations, or maybe even recent ones.
If there was something as advanced as what we have today we would probably have found evidence by now; Geological processes wouldn't wipe out rebar that fast.
But how much would be left of, say, a civilization at the level of ancient Greece or even Rome after 50,000 years?It's amazing when you stop to think about it, but if you pick any subject there's probably more we don't know than we do know.
Even of our own species' history we don't know more than a few thousand years with any certainty or detail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216788</id>
	<title>First Post</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a related story, next to one of the axes they found a mast with the words "First Post".<br>But the amazing part was the -1 Offtopic heading right beside the inscription.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a related story , next to one of the axes they found a mast with the words " First Post " .But the amazing part was the -1 Offtopic heading right beside the inscription .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a related story, next to one of the axes they found a mast with the words "First Post".But the amazing part was the -1 Offtopic heading right beside the inscription.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217026</id>
	<title>Whaddaya know? It's true.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's so easy, a seaman could do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's so easy , a seaman could do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's so easy, a seaman could do it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217018</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>germ!nation</author>
	<datestamp>1266744600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>See those repeated scallops that define the edge? That is not a naturally occuring stone.</p></div><p>I always take issue with statements like this. Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains (and cognitive bias) are fantastic at reading into things that aren't there. I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.</p><p>Which is not to say these aren't the real deal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>See those repeated scallops that define the edge ?
That is not a naturally occuring stone.I always take issue with statements like this .
Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains ( and cognitive bias ) are fantastic at reading into things that are n't there .
I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.Which is not to say these are n't the real deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See those repeated scallops that define the edge?
That is not a naturally occuring stone.I always take issue with statements like this.
Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains (and cognitive bias) are fantastic at reading into things that aren't there.
I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.Which is not to say these aren't the real deal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217252</id>
	<title>I read a lot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266749580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know I read a lot. Especially things that have to do with history. I find that shit fascinating. In fact, I don't know if you know this or not, Greeks were spawned by niggers.</p><p>It's a fact. Greeks have nigger blood pumpin' through their hearts. If you don't believe me, look it up. You see, hundreds and hundreds of years ago the Turks conquered Greece. And Turks are niggers. Way back then, Greeks were like the wops in Bulgaria. Blond hair, blue eyes. But, once the Turks moved in there, they changed the whole country. They did so much fuckin' with the Greek women, they changed the blood-line for ever, from blond hair and blue eyes to black hair and dark skin. I find it absolutely amazing to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, Greeks still carry that nigger gene. I'm just quotin' history. It's a fact. It's written. Your ancestors were niggers. Your great, great, great, great, great- grandmother was fucked by a nigger, and had a half-nigger kid. That is a fact. Now tell me, am I lyin'?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know I read a lot .
Especially things that have to do with history .
I find that shit fascinating .
In fact , I do n't know if you know this or not , Greeks were spawned by niggers.It 's a fact .
Greeks have nigger blood pumpin ' through their hearts .
If you do n't believe me , look it up .
You see , hundreds and hundreds of years ago the Turks conquered Greece .
And Turks are niggers .
Way back then , Greeks were like the wops in Bulgaria .
Blond hair , blue eyes .
But , once the Turks moved in there , they changed the whole country .
They did so much fuckin ' with the Greek women , they changed the blood-line for ever , from blond hair and blue eyes to black hair and dark skin .
I find it absolutely amazing to think that to this day , hundreds of years later , Greeks still carry that nigger gene .
I 'm just quotin ' history .
It 's a fact .
It 's written .
Your ancestors were niggers .
Your great , great , great , great , great- grandmother was fucked by a nigger , and had a half-nigger kid .
That is a fact .
Now tell me , am I lyin ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know I read a lot.
Especially things that have to do with history.
I find that shit fascinating.
In fact, I don't know if you know this or not, Greeks were spawned by niggers.It's a fact.
Greeks have nigger blood pumpin' through their hearts.
If you don't believe me, look it up.
You see, hundreds and hundreds of years ago the Turks conquered Greece.
And Turks are niggers.
Way back then, Greeks were like the wops in Bulgaria.
Blond hair, blue eyes.
But, once the Turks moved in there, they changed the whole country.
They did so much fuckin' with the Greek women, they changed the blood-line for ever, from blond hair and blue eyes to black hair and dark skin.
I find it absolutely amazing to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, Greeks still carry that nigger gene.
I'm just quotin' history.
It's a fact.
It's written.
Your ancestors were niggers.
Your great, great, great, great, great- grandmother was fucked by a nigger, and had a half-nigger kid.
That is a fact.
Now tell me, am I lyin'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216850</id>
	<title>Maybe they walked to Crete</title>
	<author>Spy Handler</author>
	<datestamp>1266784260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>Crete has been an island for more than five million years, meaning that the toolmakers must have arrived by boat. So this seems to push the history of Mediterranean voyaging back more than 100,000 years, specialists in Stone Age archaeology say.</p></div><p>There have been some pretty severe ice ages within the last million years when the sea levels were very low. For instance Japan used to be connected to Korea (and the Sea of Japan was a lake) only 18,000 years ago. Crete was probably really close to Greece back then too, maybe even connected.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : Crete has been an island for more than five million years , meaning that the toolmakers must have arrived by boat .
So this seems to push the history of Mediterranean voyaging back more than 100,000 years , specialists in Stone Age archaeology say.There have been some pretty severe ice ages within the last million years when the sea levels were very low .
For instance Japan used to be connected to Korea ( and the Sea of Japan was a lake ) only 18,000 years ago .
Crete was probably really close to Greece back then too , maybe even connected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:Crete has been an island for more than five million years, meaning that the toolmakers must have arrived by boat.
So this seems to push the history of Mediterranean voyaging back more than 100,000 years, specialists in Stone Age archaeology say.There have been some pretty severe ice ages within the last million years when the sea levels were very low.
For instance Japan used to be connected to Korea (and the Sea of Japan was a lake) only 18,000 years ago.
Crete was probably really close to Greece back then too, maybe even connected.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217106</id>
	<title>Atlantis</title>
	<author>troll8901</author>
	<datestamp>1266746340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did any of them discover a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana\_Jones\_and\_the\_Fate\_of\_Atlantis" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">moonstone</a> [wikipedia.org]?</p><p><b>Nur-Ab-Sal! Nur-Ab-Sal!</b></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did any of them discover a moonstone [ wikipedia.org ] ? Nur-Ab-Sal !
Nur-Ab-Sal !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did any of them discover a moonstone [wikipedia.org]?Nur-Ab-Sal!
Nur-Ab-Sal!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216978</id>
	<title>it's a riddle</title>
	<author>thelonious</author>
	<datestamp>1266743760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's long, hard and full of seamen?  Stone tools, of course!</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's long , hard and full of seamen ?
Stone tools , of course !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's long, hard and full of seamen?
Stone tools, of course!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219568</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1266776580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Trillions of rocks on the planet and you seem to think that it would be impossible for random chance to create "distinctive wear patterns"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Trillions of rocks on the planet and you seem to think that it would be impossible for random chance to create " distinctive wear patterns "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Trillions of rocks on the planet and you seem to think that it would be impossible for random chance to create "distinctive wear patterns"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217472</id>
	<title>Re:they WALKED (not on water)</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1266754680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, you are thinking of the black sea. The mediteranean is 5 million years old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , you are thinking of the black sea .
The mediteranean is 5 million years old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, you are thinking of the black sea.
The mediteranean is 5 million years old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217822</id>
	<title>Sorry .... those were mine ...</title>
	<author>joelsanda</author>
	<datestamp>1266761280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>left behind when some friends and I were camping. You can keep them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>left behind when some friends and I were camping .
You can keep them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>left behind when some friends and I were camping.
You can keep them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218630</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1266769680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago. The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.</p></div><p>Good point.  The size of the glaciers in the last ice age peaked about 18k years ago so the sea levels would have been lowest about then (the water had to come from somewhere).  So potentially people could have either walked to Crete around that time frame, or it would have been a much easier boat trip so the boats need not have been very sophisticated, maybe no more than rafts.
</p><p>Just putting forward an alternate explanation, I'm no expert in this area.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago .
The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India 's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago , so extrapolating ( a dangerous game I know = ) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable , or a very short sea voyage.Good point .
The size of the glaciers in the last ice age peaked about 18k years ago so the sea levels would have been lowest about then ( the water had to come from somewhere ) .
So potentially people could have either walked to Crete around that time frame , or it would have been a much easier boat trip so the boats need not have been very sophisticated , maybe no more than rafts .
Just putting forward an alternate explanation , I 'm no expert in this area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago.
The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.Good point.
The size of the glaciers in the last ice age peaked about 18k years ago so the sea levels would have been lowest about then (the water had to come from somewhere).
So potentially people could have either walked to Crete around that time frame, or it would have been a much easier boat trip so the boats need not have been very sophisticated, maybe no more than rafts.
Just putting forward an alternate explanation, I'm no expert in this area.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786</id>
	<title>Obligatory ...</title>
	<author>Webster9</author>
	<datestamp>1266783240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>132,010 BC @ 00:12 Webster9 wrote:</b>
First Post</htmltext>
<tokenext>132,010 BC @ 00 : 12 Webster9 wrote : First Post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>132,010 BC @ 00:12 Webster9 wrote:
First Post</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358</id>
	<title>they WALKED (not on water)</title>
	<author>dltaylor</author>
	<datestamp>1266752160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>130,000 years ago the Mediterranean basin was dry.</p><p>It only refilled after the sea levels rose as the last Ice Age maximum melted off and restored some water to the oceans.  Best evidence is that was within the last 20000 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>130,000 years ago the Mediterranean basin was dry.It only refilled after the sea levels rose as the last Ice Age maximum melted off and restored some water to the oceans .
Best evidence is that was within the last 20000 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>130,000 years ago the Mediterranean basin was dry.It only refilled after the sea levels rose as the last Ice Age maximum melted off and restored some water to the oceans.
Best evidence is that was within the last 20000 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31230878</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>RockDoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1266861600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.</p></div></blockquote><p> True.</p><blockquote><div><p>This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago.</p></div></blockquote><p> That's the number-one reason on that time-scale.</p><blockquote><div><p>The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago,</p></div></blockquote><p> Seems reasonable, and you're using the Indian coast as a proxy for "global sea-level" because you think that have been no significant vertical movements of that part of the coast over that time-scale. Which is OK - we know that the Pakistan and Myanmar coasts are relatively active (Rann-of-Kutch earthquake of a couple of years ago ; the 2006 tsunami) ; it's less well-known that the east coast of Africa is rather wobbly - until you look at the movements further inland on the rift valleys ; looking for coastal stability in the Mediterranean is pretty much a <a href="http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/Waste+Of+Money,+Brains+And+Time" title="thefreedictionary.com">WOMBAT</a> [thefreedictionary.com]. So yeah, I'd take 100m relative drop in sea level as a first approximation.</p><blockquote><div><p>so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.</p></div></blockquote><p>As you know, extrapolation is a dangerous game. 100m of sealevel decrease means completely different things depending on the steepness of the coastal regions and seabed. On the west coast of Scotland, you might acquire 50 to 200m of horizontal distance on your coastline ; on the east coast here, you'd acquire tens of kilometers for the same sea level fall. In the southern North Sea you'd change it from being sea to being low, rolling land. (I grew up over 100km from the coast in southern Englandshire, and at an altitude of barely 100m.) What effect you get from a particular fall in sea level depends entirely on how steeply the seabed decreases in your area under study. So you need a bathymetry map. (Greek : <i>bathos</i> = depth ; <i>-metry</i> = measurement) Google Earth has the data you need : explore the coasts of Egypt/ Lybia and the south coast of Crete. You'll find that the 100m depth contour is indistinguishable from the coast along the southern shore of Crete (at least, at the resolutions that I used), but lies around 10km off the coast on the Lybia/ Egypt side. So, by dropping sealevel by 100m (if that's what happened in the Mediterranean ; funny things have happened in the past at Gibraltar), you turn a 360km-odd journey into<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 350km. Big deal.<br>You may be remembering hearing about the Mediterranean drying up completely. That was (several times) around 5 to 7 million years ago in the Miocene, and the Med dried out several times. A lot of the seabed of the Med has up to a kilometre of salt deposited from that event, below 1.5 to 2 km of water. But the prospect of protohumans crossing the Med during the "Messinian Salinity Crisis"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... not plausible, I think.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete , but what they seem to have failed to take into account ( or at least mention in the article ) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower .
True.This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago .
That 's the number-one reason on that time-scale.The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India 's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago , Seems reasonable , and you 're using the Indian coast as a proxy for " global sea-level " because you think that have been no significant vertical movements of that part of the coast over that time-scale .
Which is OK - we know that the Pakistan and Myanmar coasts are relatively active ( Rann-of-Kutch earthquake of a couple of years ago ; the 2006 tsunami ) ; it 's less well-known that the east coast of Africa is rather wobbly - until you look at the movements further inland on the rift valleys ; looking for coastal stability in the Mediterranean is pretty much a WOMBAT [ thefreedictionary.com ] .
So yeah , I 'd take 100m relative drop in sea level as a first approximation.so extrapolating ( a dangerous game I know = ) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable , or a very short sea voyage.As you know , extrapolation is a dangerous game .
100m of sealevel decrease means completely different things depending on the steepness of the coastal regions and seabed .
On the west coast of Scotland , you might acquire 50 to 200m of horizontal distance on your coastline ; on the east coast here , you 'd acquire tens of kilometers for the same sea level fall .
In the southern North Sea you 'd change it from being sea to being low , rolling land .
( I grew up over 100km from the coast in southern Englandshire , and at an altitude of barely 100m .
) What effect you get from a particular fall in sea level depends entirely on how steeply the seabed decreases in your area under study .
So you need a bathymetry map .
( Greek : bathos = depth ; -metry = measurement ) Google Earth has the data you need : explore the coasts of Egypt/ Lybia and the south coast of Crete .
You 'll find that the 100m depth contour is indistinguishable from the coast along the southern shore of Crete ( at least , at the resolutions that I used ) , but lies around 10km off the coast on the Lybia/ Egypt side .
So , by dropping sealevel by 100m ( if that 's what happened in the Mediterranean ; funny things have happened in the past at Gibraltar ) , you turn a 360km-odd journey into ... 350km. Big deal.You may be remembering hearing about the Mediterranean drying up completely .
That was ( several times ) around 5 to 7 million years ago in the Miocene , and the Med dried out several times .
A lot of the seabed of the Med has up to a kilometre of salt deposited from that event , below 1.5 to 2 km of water .
But the prospect of protohumans crossing the Med during the " Messinian Salinity Crisis " ... not plausible , I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.
True.This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago.
That's the number-one reason on that time-scale.The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, Seems reasonable, and you're using the Indian coast as a proxy for "global sea-level" because you think that have been no significant vertical movements of that part of the coast over that time-scale.
Which is OK - we know that the Pakistan and Myanmar coasts are relatively active (Rann-of-Kutch earthquake of a couple of years ago ; the 2006 tsunami) ; it's less well-known that the east coast of Africa is rather wobbly - until you look at the movements further inland on the rift valleys ; looking for coastal stability in the Mediterranean is pretty much a WOMBAT [thefreedictionary.com].
So yeah, I'd take 100m relative drop in sea level as a first approximation.so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.As you know, extrapolation is a dangerous game.
100m of sealevel decrease means completely different things depending on the steepness of the coastal regions and seabed.
On the west coast of Scotland, you might acquire 50 to 200m of horizontal distance on your coastline ; on the east coast here, you'd acquire tens of kilometers for the same sea level fall.
In the southern North Sea you'd change it from being sea to being low, rolling land.
(I grew up over 100km from the coast in southern Englandshire, and at an altitude of barely 100m.
) What effect you get from a particular fall in sea level depends entirely on how steeply the seabed decreases in your area under study.
So you need a bathymetry map.
(Greek : bathos = depth ; -metry = measurement) Google Earth has the data you need : explore the coasts of Egypt/ Lybia and the south coast of Crete.
You'll find that the 100m depth contour is indistinguishable from the coast along the southern shore of Crete (at least, at the resolutions that I used), but lies around 10km off the coast on the Lybia/ Egypt side.
So, by dropping sealevel by 100m (if that's what happened in the Mediterranean ; funny things have happened in the past at Gibraltar), you turn a 360km-odd journey into ... 350km. Big deal.You may be remembering hearing about the Mediterranean drying up completely.
That was (several times) around 5 to 7 million years ago in the Miocene, and the Med dried out several times.
A lot of the seabed of the Med has up to a kilometre of salt deposited from that event, below 1.5 to 2 km of water.
But the prospect of protohumans crossing the Med during the "Messinian Salinity Crisis" ... not plausible, I think.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217138</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>phantomfive</author>
	<datestamp>1266747480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Will Durant said, "Civilization is always older than we think.  Beneath our feet were also people who lived and loved."  Indeed, it never is a good idea to think that we've found everything.  Not even close (which is what still gives me hope for FTL travel lol).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Will Durant said , " Civilization is always older than we think .
Beneath our feet were also people who lived and loved .
" Indeed , it never is a good idea to think that we 've found everything .
Not even close ( which is what still gives me hope for FTL travel lol ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will Durant said, "Civilization is always older than we think.
Beneath our feet were also people who lived and loved.
"  Indeed, it never is a good idea to think that we've found everything.
Not even close (which is what still gives me hope for FTL travel lol).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217422</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266753480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>See those repeated scallops that define the edge? That is not a naturally occuring stone.</p></div><p>I always take issue with statements like this. Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains (and cognitive bias) are fantastic at reading into things that aren't there. I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.</p><p>Which is not to say these aren't the real deal.</p></div><p>Gee thanks for the meta-dialetic FUD. So enlightening. Follow that logic and the (impossible) infinite number of monkeys will, eventually, produce the entire works of Shakespeare...</p><p>Now I need another beer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>See those repeated scallops that define the edge ?
That is not a naturally occuring stone.I always take issue with statements like this .
Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains ( and cognitive bias ) are fantastic at reading into things that are n't there .
I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.Which is not to say these are n't the real deal.Gee thanks for the meta-dialetic FUD .
So enlightening .
Follow that logic and the ( impossible ) infinite number of monkeys will , eventually , produce the entire works of Shakespeare...Now I need another beer ; -p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See those repeated scallops that define the edge?
That is not a naturally occuring stone.I always take issue with statements like this.
Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains (and cognitive bias) are fantastic at reading into things that aren't there.
I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.Which is not to say these aren't the real deal.Gee thanks for the meta-dialetic FUD.
So enlightening.
Follow that logic and the (impossible) infinite number of monkeys will, eventually, produce the entire works of Shakespeare...Now I need another beer ;-p
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894</id>
	<title>it's my beach party</title>
	<author>networkzombie</author>
	<datestamp>1266785220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>These are quartzite.  The three types of stone that can be cleaved to make tools are quartzite, obsidian and flint.  Quartzite is the worst of the three because it doesn't cleave well.   If these hominids were "going to sea" you would think they could trade up for flint or obsidian.  I'd guess that stone-age teenagers used the area for beach barbeques (the stoned-age).  A few thousand tools simply mean a well used party spot.  Turning a few old tools into a theory that humans were sea travelers a hundred thousand years before previously thought is a stretch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are quartzite .
The three types of stone that can be cleaved to make tools are quartzite , obsidian and flint .
Quartzite is the worst of the three because it does n't cleave well .
If these hominids were " going to sea " you would think they could trade up for flint or obsidian .
I 'd guess that stone-age teenagers used the area for beach barbeques ( the stoned-age ) .
A few thousand tools simply mean a well used party spot .
Turning a few old tools into a theory that humans were sea travelers a hundred thousand years before previously thought is a stretch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are quartzite.
The three types of stone that can be cleaved to make tools are quartzite, obsidian and flint.
Quartzite is the worst of the three because it doesn't cleave well.
If these hominids were "going to sea" you would think they could trade up for flint or obsidian.
I'd guess that stone-age teenagers used the area for beach barbeques (the stoned-age).
A few thousand tools simply mean a well used party spot.
Turning a few old tools into a theory that humans were sea travelers a hundred thousand years before previously thought is a stretch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216926</id>
	<title>Not so far from Greece</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266785940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its pretty easy to island hop from mainland Greece to Crete. You would be looking at 20km at a stretch. Thats very easy in a modern sea kayak. Even if proper hulls were beyond them they could build a sailing raft. There was more wood around in those days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its pretty easy to island hop from mainland Greece to Crete .
You would be looking at 20km at a stretch .
Thats very easy in a modern sea kayak .
Even if proper hulls were beyond them they could build a sailing raft .
There was more wood around in those days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its pretty easy to island hop from mainland Greece to Crete.
You would be looking at 20km at a stretch.
Thats very easy in a modern sea kayak.
Even if proper hulls were beyond them they could build a sailing raft.
There was more wood around in those days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218184</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1266765120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to TFA(or at least one of the many I've read on this subject so far), the tools are of a style used by pre-humans 700,000 years or so ago. They're not saying that these tools are necessarily that old, or that they're made by pre-humans, just that the tools are of that style. It's a bit like finding a katana in a rubbish tip in New Jersey. You can't say that it was made by someone who was Japanese, but you can say that it might have been. The discovery is very new, and they'll find out more in due time.</p><p>As to the rest of it, what does it matter whether they came from Greece or from Africa. They think based on the evidence(the style of the tools, the known populations at that time) that it's more likely Africa, but it doesn't really matter.</p><p>Two thousand tools is a hell of a lot, you're talking about a large number of individuals even if they weren't all there simultaneously. That means at the very least a community of some description, and likely a fairly large one for that kind of time period. To get a population that large you'd have to get there, likely on purpose. Yes 20 miles is a lot less impressive than 200, but it's still sea travel. It's still taking enough people to build a population 20 miles over the sea. To get from mainland Greece they'd have to do it several times. Even under those circumstances it's a hell of a lot more than we thought people at that time were capable of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to TFA ( or at least one of the many I 've read on this subject so far ) , the tools are of a style used by pre-humans 700,000 years or so ago .
They 're not saying that these tools are necessarily that old , or that they 're made by pre-humans , just that the tools are of that style .
It 's a bit like finding a katana in a rubbish tip in New Jersey .
You ca n't say that it was made by someone who was Japanese , but you can say that it might have been .
The discovery is very new , and they 'll find out more in due time.As to the rest of it , what does it matter whether they came from Greece or from Africa .
They think based on the evidence ( the style of the tools , the known populations at that time ) that it 's more likely Africa , but it does n't really matter.Two thousand tools is a hell of a lot , you 're talking about a large number of individuals even if they were n't all there simultaneously .
That means at the very least a community of some description , and likely a fairly large one for that kind of time period .
To get a population that large you 'd have to get there , likely on purpose .
Yes 20 miles is a lot less impressive than 200 , but it 's still sea travel .
It 's still taking enough people to build a population 20 miles over the sea .
To get from mainland Greece they 'd have to do it several times .
Even under those circumstances it 's a hell of a lot more than we thought people at that time were capable of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to TFA(or at least one of the many I've read on this subject so far), the tools are of a style used by pre-humans 700,000 years or so ago.
They're not saying that these tools are necessarily that old, or that they're made by pre-humans, just that the tools are of that style.
It's a bit like finding a katana in a rubbish tip in New Jersey.
You can't say that it was made by someone who was Japanese, but you can say that it might have been.
The discovery is very new, and they'll find out more in due time.As to the rest of it, what does it matter whether they came from Greece or from Africa.
They think based on the evidence(the style of the tools, the known populations at that time) that it's more likely Africa, but it doesn't really matter.Two thousand tools is a hell of a lot, you're talking about a large number of individuals even if they weren't all there simultaneously.
That means at the very least a community of some description, and likely a fairly large one for that kind of time period.
To get a population that large you'd have to get there, likely on purpose.
Yes 20 miles is a lot less impressive than 200, but it's still sea travel.
It's still taking enough people to build a population 20 miles over the sea.
To get from mainland Greece they'd have to do it several times.
Even under those circumstances it's a hell of a lot more than we thought people at that time were capable of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31225454</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266770460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>An expert will be able to tell you very quickly if you're dealing with an actual tool or just a rock that's assumed a suggestive shape.</p></div></blockquote><p>A suggestive shape <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/27/ancient\_phallus/" title="theregister.co.uk" rel="nofollow">Indeed</a> [theregister.co.uk]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>An expert will be able to tell you very quickly if you 're dealing with an actual tool or just a rock that 's assumed a suggestive shape.A suggestive shape Indeed [ theregister.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An expert will be able to tell you very quickly if you're dealing with an actual tool or just a rock that's assumed a suggestive shape.A suggestive shape Indeed [theregister.co.uk]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216796</id>
	<title>Humans are pretty damn clever...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and pretty much have always been.</p><p>Humans didn't evolve genetically to this modern technological state, the cleverness has always been inherent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and pretty much have always been.Humans did n't evolve genetically to this modern technological state , the cleverness has always been inherent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and pretty much have always been.Humans didn't evolve genetically to this modern technological state, the cleverness has always been inherent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216976</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>pitchpipe</author>
	<datestamp>1266743760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.</p></div><p>So you're saying that the oceans didn't even exist 1,529,360 years ago!?  I know, snarky, but I couldn't resist.  Hey, you said it was a dangerous game!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India 's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago , so extrapolating ( a dangerous game I know = ) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable , or a very short sea voyage.So you 're saying that the oceans did n't even exist 1,529,360 years ago ! ?
I know , snarky , but I could n't resist .
Hey , you said it was a dangerous game !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.So you're saying that the oceans didn't even exist 1,529,360 years ago!?
I know, snarky, but I couldn't resist.
Hey, you said it was a dangerous game!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218576</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1266769260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Those look like rocks to me, not "stone tools".</p></div><p>To the uneducated, a lot of source code just looks like bug ridden inane rantings from incompetent software people who have no social skills and have yet to get out of their parents basement.  Oh wait - bad example.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those look like rocks to me , not " stone tools " .To the uneducated , a lot of source code just looks like bug ridden inane rantings from incompetent software people who have no social skills and have yet to get out of their parents basement .
Oh wait - bad example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those look like rocks to me, not "stone tools".To the uneducated, a lot of source code just looks like bug ridden inane rantings from incompetent software people who have no social skills and have yet to get out of their parents basement.
Oh wait - bad example.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216884</id>
	<title>The article assumes too much.</title>
	<author>voodoo cheesecake</author>
	<datestamp>1266784920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not so sure the find is suggestive of "maritime capabilities". To prove such a statement, you would have to prove evidence of navigation. Even if it were only celestial navigation, stronger evidence would be to find more than one such remote site with similar styles of survival technology.

From the article: More than 2,000 stone artifacts, including the hand axes, were collected on the southwestern shore of Crete, near the town of Plakias.

The question, at least for now, should be whether or not they went back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not so sure the find is suggestive of " maritime capabilities " .
To prove such a statement , you would have to prove evidence of navigation .
Even if it were only celestial navigation , stronger evidence would be to find more than one such remote site with similar styles of survival technology .
From the article : More than 2,000 stone artifacts , including the hand axes , were collected on the southwestern shore of Crete , near the town of Plakias .
The question , at least for now , should be whether or not they went back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not so sure the find is suggestive of "maritime capabilities".
To prove such a statement, you would have to prove evidence of navigation.
Even if it were only celestial navigation, stronger evidence would be to find more than one such remote site with similar styles of survival technology.
From the article: More than 2,000 stone artifacts, including the hand axes, were collected on the southwestern shore of Crete, near the town of Plakias.
The question, at least for now, should be whether or not they went back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216906</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266785340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Totally offtopic note: I have been to crete and it is one of my favorite places in the world. There is something about visiting the place where Zeus supposedly came into being is quite cool.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Totally offtopic note : I have been to crete and it is one of my favorite places in the world .
There is something about visiting the place where Zeus supposedly came into being is quite cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Totally offtopic note: I have been to crete and it is one of my favorite places in the world.
There is something about visiting the place where Zeus supposedly came into being is quite cool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219060</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>Natural Join</author>
	<datestamp>1266773640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Despite this, they never really say why this changes their view on sea-faring of ancient times. Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower. This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago. The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.</p></div><p>Not if the sea floor was anything like it is today. A drop of 100m/328 ft would get you about 7 miles further off the coast of Africa than with today's sea levels. On the Crete side, the sea floor drops precipitously off the southern coast, and 100m gets you only about 1 mile. So the lower sea level you cite would shave less than 10 miles off the 200 mile journey.

</p><p>You can verify the sea floor elevation with Google Earth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite this , they never really say why this changes their view on sea-faring of ancient times .
Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete , but what they seem to have failed to take into account ( or at least mention in the article ) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower .
This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago .
The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India 's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago , so extrapolating ( a dangerous game I know = ) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable , or a very short sea voyage.Not if the sea floor was anything like it is today .
A drop of 100m/328 ft would get you about 7 miles further off the coast of Africa than with today 's sea levels .
On the Crete side , the sea floor drops precipitously off the southern coast , and 100m gets you only about 1 mile .
So the lower sea level you cite would shave less than 10 miles off the 200 mile journey .
You can verify the sea floor elevation with Google Earth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite this, they never really say why this changes their view on sea-faring of ancient times.
Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.
This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago.
The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.Not if the sea floor was anything like it is today.
A drop of 100m/328 ft would get you about 7 miles further off the coast of Africa than with today's sea levels.
On the Crete side, the sea floor drops precipitously off the southern coast, and 100m gets you only about 1 mile.
So the lower sea level you cite would shave less than 10 miles off the 200 mile journey.
You can verify the sea floor elevation with Google Earth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218552</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Kozz</author>
	<datestamp>1266768960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've got a stone which myself and family have long thought could be a tool.  Essentially it's a "flattened golf ball" sized pebble stone with a 1/4"-diameter depression approx 1/2" deep in one flattened side.  Everything looks smooth, though, with no visible grooves/striations.  Tool (like a spindle handle), or just a coincidence of erosion, etc?  I tried looking online for comparisons but found nothing like it.  Got any references for tools of this nature?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've got a stone which myself and family have long thought could be a tool .
Essentially it 's a " flattened golf ball " sized pebble stone with a 1/4 " -diameter depression approx 1/2 " deep in one flattened side .
Everything looks smooth , though , with no visible grooves/striations .
Tool ( like a spindle handle ) , or just a coincidence of erosion , etc ?
I tried looking online for comparisons but found nothing like it .
Got any references for tools of this nature ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've got a stone which myself and family have long thought could be a tool.
Essentially it's a "flattened golf ball" sized pebble stone with a 1/4"-diameter depression approx 1/2" deep in one flattened side.
Everything looks smooth, though, with no visible grooves/striations.
Tool (like a spindle handle), or just a coincidence of erosion, etc?
I tried looking online for comparisons but found nothing like it.
Got any references for tools of this nature?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217022</id>
	<title>Re:it's my beach party</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1266744660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"Turning a few old tools into a theory that humans were sea travelers a hundred thousand years before previously thought is a stretch."</i>
<br> <br>
The article states Crete has been an island for five millions years. It also states that previously the earliest known sea crossings were 60Kya.
<br> <br>
How did the tools get there without some species of hominoid crossing the water? 200 miles is a long way to swim, so how did the hominoids cross the water? What makes you think they brought the tools with them? How do you know that quartz is not the only suitable tool making rock found on Crete?
<br> <br>
Nobody is suggesting they deliberately navigated to Crete but it's not a streach to think they were "going to sea" in some sort of raft/boat that was used for near shore spear fishing. Nor is it a streach to think a some of them were swept away to sea by currents/storms and ended up accidently colonising Crete.
<br> <br>
Science is about the best available explaination that fits the evidence, do you have a better explaination of how hominoids got to Crete other than the one that says they arrived by some sort of prehistoric boat/raft?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Turning a few old tools into a theory that humans were sea travelers a hundred thousand years before previously thought is a stretch .
" The article states Crete has been an island for five millions years .
It also states that previously the earliest known sea crossings were 60Kya .
How did the tools get there without some species of hominoid crossing the water ?
200 miles is a long way to swim , so how did the hominoids cross the water ?
What makes you think they brought the tools with them ?
How do you know that quartz is not the only suitable tool making rock found on Crete ?
Nobody is suggesting they deliberately navigated to Crete but it 's not a streach to think they were " going to sea " in some sort of raft/boat that was used for near shore spear fishing .
Nor is it a streach to think a some of them were swept away to sea by currents/storms and ended up accidently colonising Crete .
Science is about the best available explaination that fits the evidence , do you have a better explaination of how hominoids got to Crete other than the one that says they arrived by some sort of prehistoric boat/raft ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Turning a few old tools into a theory that humans were sea travelers a hundred thousand years before previously thought is a stretch.
"
 
The article states Crete has been an island for five millions years.
It also states that previously the earliest known sea crossings were 60Kya.
How did the tools get there without some species of hominoid crossing the water?
200 miles is a long way to swim, so how did the hominoids cross the water?
What makes you think they brought the tools with them?
How do you know that quartz is not the only suitable tool making rock found on Crete?
Nobody is suggesting they deliberately navigated to Crete but it's not a streach to think they were "going to sea" in some sort of raft/boat that was used for near shore spear fishing.
Nor is it a streach to think a some of them were swept away to sea by currents/storms and ended up accidently colonising Crete.
Science is about the best available explaination that fits the evidence, do you have a better explaination of how hominoids got to Crete other than the one that says they arrived by some sort of prehistoric boat/raft?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218210</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>Sique</author>
	<datestamp>1266765420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.</p></div><p>They did. Because the Mediterrean is very deep (average ~1500 metres), especially in the southern part, lowering the shore line doesn't do very much to the distance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete , but what they seem to have failed to take into account ( or at least mention in the article ) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.They did .
Because the Mediterrean is very deep ( average ~ 1500 metres ) , especially in the southern part , lowering the shore line does n't do very much to the distance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.They did.
Because the Mediterrean is very deep (average ~1500 metres), especially in the southern part, lowering the shore line doesn't do very much to the distance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216948</id>
	<title>Oh Those Crazy Cretans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266743220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just when you think you've figured them out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just when you think you 've figured them out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just when you think you've figured them out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219180</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>Bruce Perens</author>
	<datestamp>1266774600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although Crete is 200 miles from the coast of Africa, there are lots of intervening islands between it and Greece, and the crossings are more like 10 and 20 miles rather than 200. You can see one island from the next. These are still formidable crossings for ancient humans, but not so grand as a single 200-mile trip.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although Crete is 200 miles from the coast of Africa , there are lots of intervening islands between it and Greece , and the crossings are more like 10 and 20 miles rather than 200 .
You can see one island from the next .
These are still formidable crossings for ancient humans , but not so grand as a single 200-mile trip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although Crete is 200 miles from the coast of Africa, there are lots of intervening islands between it and Greece, and the crossings are more like 10 and 20 miles rather than 200.
You can see one island from the next.
These are still formidable crossings for ancient humans, but not so grand as a single 200-mile trip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216794</id>
	<title>Not Necasrily?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does this give evidence that we have been traveling for longer periods of time. Is it because the stove is from Africa, because than it just shows that stone on Crete was from Africa, and so could have washed up onto the beach. Or am I missing the point<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does this give evidence that we have been traveling for longer periods of time .
Is it because the stove is from Africa , because than it just shows that stone on Crete was from Africa , and so could have washed up onto the beach .
Or am I missing the point : - ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does this give evidence that we have been traveling for longer periods of time.
Is it because the stove is from Africa, because than it just shows that stone on Crete was from Africa, and so could have washed up onto the beach.
Or am I missing the point :-)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217492</id>
	<title>Re:they WALKED (not on water)</title>
	<author>wish bot</author>
	<datestamp>1266755280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need to read less science fiction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to read less science fiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to read less science fiction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217320</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory ...</title>
	<author>DMUTPeregrine</author>
	<datestamp>1266751080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>And God said "First Post. Oh, and someone turn on the damn lights!" And there was Light...</htmltext>
<tokenext>And God said " First Post .
Oh , and someone turn on the damn lights !
" And there was Light.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And God said "First Post.
Oh, and someone turn on the damn lights!
" And there was Light...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218340</id>
	<title>Cretan Hop?</title>
	<author>c10</author>
	<datestamp>1266766740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's no stoppin' the cretins from hoppin'
You gotta keep it beatin'
For all the hoppin' cretins

Cretin! Cretin!

I'm gonna go for a whirl with my cretin girl
My feet won't stop
Doin' the Cretin Hop

Cretin! Cretin!

1-2-3-4
Cretins wanna hop some more
4-5-6-7
All good cretins go to heaven</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no stoppin ' the cretins from hoppin ' You got ta keep it beatin ' For all the hoppin ' cretins Cretin !
Cretin ! I 'm gon na go for a whirl with my cretin girl My feet wo n't stop Doin ' the Cretin Hop Cretin !
Cretin ! 1-2-3-4 Cretins wan na hop some more 4-5-6-7 All good cretins go to heaven</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no stoppin' the cretins from hoppin'
You gotta keep it beatin'
For all the hoppin' cretins

Cretin!
Cretin!

I'm gonna go for a whirl with my cretin girl
My feet won't stop
Doin' the Cretin Hop

Cretin!
Cretin!

1-2-3-4
Cretins wanna hop some more
4-5-6-7
All good cretins go to heaven</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31220556</id>
	<title>200 mi from Africa, 5000 mi from the Jersey Shore</title>
	<author>toboldh</author>
	<datestamp>1266781440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>and 100 miles from Greece.  So what?  Come on folks, look at the bloody map.  It's only 50 miles from Turkey.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and 100 miles from Greece .
So what ?
Come on folks , look at the bloody map .
It 's only 50 miles from Turkey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and 100 miles from Greece.
So what?
Come on folks, look at the bloody map.
It's only 50 miles from Turkey.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217758</id>
	<title>How about a simpler explanation?</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1266760380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So we found stone tools. Can we actually carbon date stone or how did we end up with the explanation that these things have to be 120k years old? By the logic that human created stone tools back then?</p><p>Well, I can make stone tools. Sure, it might take a while to get it right, but there's plenty of material lying around. So gimme a few weeks/months and presto, 120k year old stone tools.</p><p>Now why would I do such a thing? Well, what would I do if there was nothing else around that I could make tools out of? Imagine this: A group of sailors stranding on a far away island after a horrible storm that pushed them away from their usual routes. They have no idea where they are and have no idea where they could go, and the island is able to supply them, so... why bother going into the perils of the sea again? Only problem: No copper, no iron, no nothing to make tools out of.</p><p>I guess you can imagine the rest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So we found stone tools .
Can we actually carbon date stone or how did we end up with the explanation that these things have to be 120k years old ?
By the logic that human created stone tools back then ? Well , I can make stone tools .
Sure , it might take a while to get it right , but there 's plenty of material lying around .
So gim me a few weeks/months and presto , 120k year old stone tools.Now why would I do such a thing ?
Well , what would I do if there was nothing else around that I could make tools out of ?
Imagine this : A group of sailors stranding on a far away island after a horrible storm that pushed them away from their usual routes .
They have no idea where they are and have no idea where they could go , and the island is able to supply them , so... why bother going into the perils of the sea again ?
Only problem : No copper , no iron , no nothing to make tools out of.I guess you can imagine the rest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So we found stone tools.
Can we actually carbon date stone or how did we end up with the explanation that these things have to be 120k years old?
By the logic that human created stone tools back then?Well, I can make stone tools.
Sure, it might take a while to get it right, but there's plenty of material lying around.
So gimme a few weeks/months and presto, 120k year old stone tools.Now why would I do such a thing?
Well, what would I do if there was nothing else around that I could make tools out of?
Imagine this: A group of sailors stranding on a far away island after a horrible storm that pushed them away from their usual routes.
They have no idea where they are and have no idea where they could go, and the island is able to supply them, so... why bother going into the perils of the sea again?
Only problem: No copper, no iron, no nothing to make tools out of.I guess you can imagine the rest.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218350</id>
	<title>Re:I read a lot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266766740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Your great, great, great, great, great- grandmother was fucked by a nigger, and had a half-nigger kid. That is a fact. Now tell me, am I lyin'?"</p><p>No, because all humans are descended from Africans, including the ancient Greeks, the ancient Turks, and you and me.  Humanity is all one big happy family.  Well, except for the few nutbars that think they are somehow completely different from the rest.  They're usually not as happy because they are in deep denial of the reality that we're all quite closely related, and they miss out on the beauty that is possible to see within the diversity of humans around today.  It's sad, really.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Your great , great , great , great , great- grandmother was fucked by a nigger , and had a half-nigger kid .
That is a fact .
Now tell me , am I lyin ' ?
" No , because all humans are descended from Africans , including the ancient Greeks , the ancient Turks , and you and me .
Humanity is all one big happy family .
Well , except for the few nutbars that think they are somehow completely different from the rest .
They 're usually not as happy because they are in deep denial of the reality that we 're all quite closely related , and they miss out on the beauty that is possible to see within the diversity of humans around today .
It 's sad , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Your great, great, great, great, great- grandmother was fucked by a nigger, and had a half-nigger kid.
That is a fact.
Now tell me, am I lyin'?
"No, because all humans are descended from Africans, including the ancient Greeks, the ancient Turks, and you and me.
Humanity is all one big happy family.
Well, except for the few nutbars that think they are somehow completely different from the rest.
They're usually not as happy because they are in deep denial of the reality that we're all quite closely related, and they miss out on the beauty that is possible to see within the diversity of humans around today.
It's sad, really.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31228984</id>
	<title>Re:it's my beach party</title>
	<author>T.E.D.</author>
	<datestamp>1266852300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How did the tools get there without some species of hominoid crossing the water? 200 miles is a long way to swim, so how did the hominoids cross the water?</p></div><p>Perhaps they swam or rafted over <strong>from the North</strong> instead? Crete is only about 74 miles from mainland Greece, and there are island chains between them. During an Ice Age sea levels would be lower so there would probably be even more and larger islands between them.
</p><p>Crete is nearly as close to Asia Minor (Turkey), also w/ island chains in between.
</p><p>I really don't understand the author's decision to quote the distance to the African coast. The only reason I can think of is appalling geographic ignorance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How did the tools get there without some species of hominoid crossing the water ?
200 miles is a long way to swim , so how did the hominoids cross the water ? Perhaps they swam or rafted over from the North instead ?
Crete is only about 74 miles from mainland Greece , and there are island chains between them .
During an Ice Age sea levels would be lower so there would probably be even more and larger islands between them .
Crete is nearly as close to Asia Minor ( Turkey ) , also w/ island chains in between .
I really do n't understand the author 's decision to quote the distance to the African coast .
The only reason I can think of is appalling geographic ignorance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did the tools get there without some species of hominoid crossing the water?
200 miles is a long way to swim, so how did the hominoids cross the water?Perhaps they swam or rafted over from the North instead?
Crete is only about 74 miles from mainland Greece, and there are island chains between them.
During an Ice Age sea levels would be lower so there would probably be even more and larger islands between them.
Crete is nearly as close to Asia Minor (Turkey), also w/ island chains in between.
I really don't understand the author's decision to quote the distance to the African coast.
The only reason I can think of is appalling geographic ignorance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217724</id>
	<title>Re:The article assumes too much.</title>
	<author>s\_p\_oneil</author>
	<datestamp>1266759960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ever watch a documentary on how the Hawaiian islands were found by Polynesians with no instruments, and before they learned how to write and do any kind of math? The could find islands that were hundreds of miles away by watching for certain cloud patterns in the sky. Compared to that, even sailors who were completely brain dead could find land sailing around in the Mediterranean. I mean, any direction you go from any point, and you'll find land.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ever watch a documentary on how the Hawaiian islands were found by Polynesians with no instruments , and before they learned how to write and do any kind of math ?
The could find islands that were hundreds of miles away by watching for certain cloud patterns in the sky .
Compared to that , even sailors who were completely brain dead could find land sailing around in the Mediterranean .
I mean , any direction you go from any point , and you 'll find land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ever watch a documentary on how the Hawaiian islands were found by Polynesians with no instruments, and before they learned how to write and do any kind of math?
The could find islands that were hundreds of miles away by watching for certain cloud patterns in the sky.
Compared to that, even sailors who were completely brain dead could find land sailing around in the Mediterranean.
I mean, any direction you go from any point, and you'll find land.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216946</id>
	<title>Could ancient humans do the backstroke?</title>
	<author>HouseOfMisterE</author>
	<datestamp>1266743220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they were just very good swimmers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they were just very good swimmers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they were just very good swimmers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217000</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1266744240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most of the primitive tools here at Slashdot don't have any marks to indicate they had any kind of function at all.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the primitive tools here at Slashdot do n't have any marks to indicate they had any kind of function at all .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the primitive tools here at Slashdot don't have any marks to indicate they had any kind of function at all.
;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217572</id>
	<title>Africanswallows</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266757020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>299 miles is not far for a swallow to fly, even if its not migrating.</p><p>Were there coconuts too?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>299 miles is not far for a swallow to fly , even if its not migrating.Were there coconuts too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>299 miles is not far for a swallow to fly, even if its not migrating.Were there coconuts too?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218180</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266765060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure some of the Galactica people landed around there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure some of the Galactica people landed around there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure some of the Galactica people landed around there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800</id>
	<title>They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Futurepower(R)</author>
	<datestamp>1266783420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Those look like rocks to me, not "stone tools".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those look like rocks to me , not " stone tools " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those look like rocks to me, not "stone tools".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216792</id>
	<title>FIRST BOAT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yay, now I'm a troll too</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yay , now I 'm a troll too</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yay, now I'm a troll too</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217014</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory ...</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1266744540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The only <i>obligatory</i> remark is of course re. "from the perhaps-a-swallow-brought-them-there dept.":<br> <br>
Would that be an African Swallow, or a European Swallow?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only obligatory remark is of course re .
" from the perhaps-a-swallow-brought-them-there dept .
" : Would that be an African Swallow , or a European Swallow ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only obligatory remark is of course re.
"from the perhaps-a-swallow-brought-them-there dept.
": 
Would that be an African Swallow, or a European Swallow?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218216</id>
	<title>Re:Not so far from Greece</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1266765540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And to the best of my knowledge, a modern sea kayak would have been substantially beyond what it was believed humans were capable of over 100 thousand years ago. I can drive from one side of the country to the other in a car in just a few days. Even a few hundred years ago, that trip would have been considered almost impossible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And to the best of my knowledge , a modern sea kayak would have been substantially beyond what it was believed humans were capable of over 100 thousand years ago .
I can drive from one side of the country to the other in a car in just a few days .
Even a few hundred years ago , that trip would have been considered almost impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And to the best of my knowledge, a modern sea kayak would have been substantially beyond what it was believed humans were capable of over 100 thousand years ago.
I can drive from one side of the country to the other in a car in just a few days.
Even a few hundred years ago, that trip would have been considered almost impossible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217594</id>
	<title>Re:it's my beach party</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1266757500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> If these hominids were "going to sea" you would think they could trade up for flint or obsidian</p></div><p>Actually, I'd expect the opposite.  You don't embark on a potentially fatal sea crossing if you're one of the successful hunter gatherers back home.  I'd imagine that the ones building the raft were the outcasts from the tribe, who were lucky to have any tools at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If these hominids were " going to sea " you would think they could trade up for flint or obsidianActually , I 'd expect the opposite .
You do n't embark on a potentially fatal sea crossing if you 're one of the successful hunter gatherers back home .
I 'd imagine that the ones building the raft were the outcasts from the tribe , who were lucky to have any tools at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If these hominids were "going to sea" you would think they could trade up for flint or obsidianActually, I'd expect the opposite.
You don't embark on a potentially fatal sea crossing if you're one of the successful hunter gatherers back home.
I'd imagine that the ones building the raft were the outcasts from the tribe, who were lucky to have any tools at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216880</id>
	<title>Re:They're just rocks.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266784860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To the untrained eye that is all they would appear, sure. I dont think the troll moderation was entirely fair - I would bet that a lot of readers looked at the photo at the top of that page and thought the same thing.</p><p>But, look for instance at the second piece from the right at the top of the story. Look at the top-left edge. See those repeated scallops that define the edge? That is not a naturally occuring stone, that is a hand-axe or "chopper" which has been intelligently worked and shaped for a purpose.</p><p>The article is pretty crappy though (as is expected with "science reporting" unfortunately.) The commentary regarding early human sea-crossing capabilities is a bit... well... warped. Even though there is a throwaway mention of non-modern humans it is given no context and the rest of the text appears quite ignorant of it. The fourth paragraph is one big facepalm. It implies several times that this find somehow indicates a 200-mile crossing from Africa, when it does nothing of the sort. Given the loose dating (prior to 130kya by geological strata) it would seem quite likely that the ancient population who made these tools crossed at or near a glacial maximum, when sea levels were much lower than today, making for much less open sea even if they did come directly from the African coast. And, at least from what I can see, there is no reason whatsoever to think they came from that direction anyway. More likely they came in over much shorter distances from the north, at a time when sea levels were low and the voyage would have been very short. If the dating comes in as early as some of the quotes indicate, this could even have been at the same time that the hippopotamus made the same journey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To the untrained eye that is all they would appear , sure .
I dont think the troll moderation was entirely fair - I would bet that a lot of readers looked at the photo at the top of that page and thought the same thing.But , look for instance at the second piece from the right at the top of the story .
Look at the top-left edge .
See those repeated scallops that define the edge ?
That is not a naturally occuring stone , that is a hand-axe or " chopper " which has been intelligently worked and shaped for a purpose.The article is pretty crappy though ( as is expected with " science reporting " unfortunately .
) The commentary regarding early human sea-crossing capabilities is a bit... well... warped .
Even though there is a throwaway mention of non-modern humans it is given no context and the rest of the text appears quite ignorant of it .
The fourth paragraph is one big facepalm .
It implies several times that this find somehow indicates a 200-mile crossing from Africa , when it does nothing of the sort .
Given the loose dating ( prior to 130kya by geological strata ) it would seem quite likely that the ancient population who made these tools crossed at or near a glacial maximum , when sea levels were much lower than today , making for much less open sea even if they did come directly from the African coast .
And , at least from what I can see , there is no reason whatsoever to think they came from that direction anyway .
More likely they came in over much shorter distances from the north , at a time when sea levels were low and the voyage would have been very short .
If the dating comes in as early as some of the quotes indicate , this could even have been at the same time that the hippopotamus made the same journey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To the untrained eye that is all they would appear, sure.
I dont think the troll moderation was entirely fair - I would bet that a lot of readers looked at the photo at the top of that page and thought the same thing.But, look for instance at the second piece from the right at the top of the story.
Look at the top-left edge.
See those repeated scallops that define the edge?
That is not a naturally occuring stone, that is a hand-axe or "chopper" which has been intelligently worked and shaped for a purpose.The article is pretty crappy though (as is expected with "science reporting" unfortunately.
) The commentary regarding early human sea-crossing capabilities is a bit... well... warped.
Even though there is a throwaway mention of non-modern humans it is given no context and the rest of the text appears quite ignorant of it.
The fourth paragraph is one big facepalm.
It implies several times that this find somehow indicates a 200-mile crossing from Africa, when it does nothing of the sort.
Given the loose dating (prior to 130kya by geological strata) it would seem quite likely that the ancient population who made these tools crossed at or near a glacial maximum, when sea levels were much lower than today, making for much less open sea even if they did come directly from the African coast.
And, at least from what I can see, there is no reason whatsoever to think they came from that direction anyway.
More likely they came in over much shorter distances from the north, at a time when sea levels were low and the voyage would have been very short.
If the dating comes in as early as some of the quotes indicate, this could even have been at the same time that the hippopotamus made the same journey.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31233140</id>
	<title>Re:Not so far from Greece</title>
	<author>RockDoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1266868320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Even if proper hulls were beyond them they could build a sailing raft. There was more wood around in those days.</p></div></blockquote><p>Was there? 100000 to 200000 years ago (the authors do put pretty broad limits on their dating) had temperatures around 4 to 8 centigrade colder than present, which would make for a greatly different climate, and probably rather less wood.<br>OTOH, previous climatic postdictions I've seen for the Sahara in the same time period has it considerably more clement and wood-rich.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if proper hulls were beyond them they could build a sailing raft .
There was more wood around in those days.Was there ?
100000 to 200000 years ago ( the authors do put pretty broad limits on their dating ) had temperatures around 4 to 8 centigrade colder than present , which would make for a greatly different climate , and probably rather less wood.OTOH , previous climatic postdictions I 've seen for the Sahara in the same time period has it considerably more clement and wood-rich .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if proper hulls were beyond them they could build a sailing raft.
There was more wood around in those days.Was there?
100000 to 200000 years ago (the authors do put pretty broad limits on their dating) had temperatures around 4 to 8 centigrade colder than present, which would make for a greatly different climate, and probably rather less wood.OTOH, previous climatic postdictions I've seen for the Sahara in the same time period has it considerably more clement and wood-rich.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832</id>
	<title>Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>carp3\_noct3m</author>
	<datestamp>1266783960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although they state that the tools have been dated to be around 230-190k years ago, but that tools could have been made far prior to that, giving a possible estimate of the tools being up to 700k years old. Despite this, they never really say why this changes their view on sea-faring of ancient times. Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower. This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago. The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage. It should also be noted that the technology is of the Acheulean type. Regardless it is still a fascinating discovery, and it never ceases to amaze me at how much we underestimate our ancestors, until we slowly find things that we never thought possible before, for example the Antikythera mechanism. Who knows what we'll find out tomorrow.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although they state that the tools have been dated to be around 230-190k years ago , but that tools could have been made far prior to that , giving a possible estimate of the tools being up to 700k years old .
Despite this , they never really say why this changes their view on sea-faring of ancient times .
Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete , but what they seem to have failed to take into account ( or at least mention in the article ) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower .
This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago .
The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India 's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago , so extrapolating ( a dangerous game I know = ) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable , or a very short sea voyage .
It should also be noted that the technology is of the Acheulean type .
Regardless it is still a fascinating discovery , and it never ceases to amaze me at how much we underestimate our ancestors , until we slowly find things that we never thought possible before , for example the Antikythera mechanism .
Who knows what we 'll find out tomorrow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although they state that the tools have been dated to be around 230-190k years ago, but that tools could have been made far prior to that, giving a possible estimate of the tools being up to 700k years old.
Despite this, they never really say why this changes their view on sea-faring of ancient times.
Currently the north shore of Africa is about 200 miles from crete, but what they seem to have failed to take into account (or at least mention in the article) is that in ancient times sea levels were much much lower.
This is estimated to be due to deglacification around 7k years ago.
The National Institute of Oceanography states that in studies the sea level of India's coast were about 100m lower about 14k years ago, so extrapolating (a dangerous game I know =) we could say it may be possible that at some point the voyage to Crete was either walkable, or a very short sea voyage.
It should also be noted that the technology is of the Acheulean type.
Regardless it is still a fascinating discovery, and it never ceases to amaze me at how much we underestimate our ancestors, until we slowly find things that we never thought possible before, for example the Antikythera mechanism.
Who knows what we'll find out tomorrow.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217486</id>
	<title>Re:they WALKED (not on water)</title>
	<author>dreamchaser</author>
	<datestamp>1266755040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Med has not been a dry basin for millions of years.  You could have learned that if you'd RTFA or just did a little basic homework before spouting off a totally false statement like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Med has not been a dry basin for millions of years .
You could have learned that if you 'd RTFA or just did a little basic homework before spouting off a totally false statement like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Med has not been a dry basin for millions of years.
You could have learned that if you'd RTFA or just did a little basic homework before spouting off a totally false statement like that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217722</id>
	<title>Re:Bah.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1266759900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it's true. Whatever human ever did, he did it for the one big reason...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's true .
Whatever human ever did , he did it for the one big reason.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's true.
Whatever human ever did, he did it for the one big reason...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216868</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216822</id>
	<title>Phil Wiper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice Post, Keep it up.<br>Please tell more.</p><p>Visit me here in <a href="http://www.philwipermortgages.ca/" title="philwipermortgages.ca" rel="nofollow">Windsor Mortgage</a> [philwipermortgages.ca]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice Post , Keep it up.Please tell more.Visit me here in Windsor Mortgage [ philwipermortgages.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice Post, Keep it up.Please tell more.Visit me here in Windsor Mortgage [philwipermortgages.ca]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217752</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266760320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shouldn't that be First Boat?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't that be First Boat ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't that be First Boat?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219210</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting Article But...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266774780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Because the Mediterrean is very deep (average ~1500 metres), especially in the southern part, lowering the shore line doesn't do very much to the distance.</p></div><p>Except that Crete is much closer to Greece than it is to northern Africa, and while the Mediterranean as whole may be quite deep, the Aegean Sea is quite shallow. Also as some other poster pointed out, there is a chain of islands from  Greece to Crete. So the GP could very well be right. 130,000 years ago, Crete was probably a not overly long walk or a worst a series of short water crossings from Greece.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the Mediterrean is very deep ( average ~ 1500 metres ) , especially in the southern part , lowering the shore line does n't do very much to the distance.Except that Crete is much closer to Greece than it is to northern Africa , and while the Mediterranean as whole may be quite deep , the Aegean Sea is quite shallow .
Also as some other poster pointed out , there is a chain of islands from Greece to Crete .
So the GP could very well be right .
130,000 years ago , Crete was probably a not overly long walk or a worst a series of short water crossings from Greece .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Because the Mediterrean is very deep (average ~1500 metres), especially in the southern part, lowering the shore line doesn't do very much to the distance.Except that Crete is much closer to Greece than it is to northern Africa, and while the Mediterranean as whole may be quite deep, the Aegean Sea is quite shallow.
Also as some other poster pointed out, there is a chain of islands from  Greece to Crete.
So the GP could very well be right.
130,000 years ago, Crete was probably a not overly long walk or a worst a series of short water crossings from Greece.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216900</id>
	<title>Re:Obligatory ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266785280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amazing <b>Webster9</b>,  you knew about hand sex, cleavage and strippers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amazing Webster9 , you knew about hand sex , cleavage and strippers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amazing Webster9,  you knew about hand sex, cleavage and strippers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31230878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31225454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31248942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31220854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31228984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31233140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_0258255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217724
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217022
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31228984
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216900
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31230878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218210
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217758
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31233140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31225454
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218552
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31220854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31219568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218184
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217018
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31217422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31218576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31248942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_0258255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_0258255.31216792
</commentlist>
</conversation>
