Results of my study

I believe that action is not thought, it is surely a manifestation of thought.

The globularist question, certainly, is a yes or a no if anything is?

_________--------___________ No to Both

How?

Alas, to open ones mind to the possibility of the ages.  For many months I have pondered the vast vista of my thoughts. My one with nature the pulse of my life and sleep.  I have wondered about Eratosthenes, and the way he determined the curve of the earth.  The common theme in this vast deep of knowledge and wonder is that the Earth is not round, but flat as a disk.  There can be one and only one answer as to the reason that his measurement of the pillars was wrong.  He had hired a man, now this man's job was to traverse the distance between Alexandria to Syene and return to provide Eratosthenes with a number, now this number was supposed to be the distance between, about 800 KM. From this he determined that the earth was flat by putting some shadows into a formula he came up with a answer.  There is a problem, the man he hired most likely was the town drunk, this man was very much of a lower capacity.  Its foolish enough to be told to travel 800 km and return with a number between to places.  So on the way he stopped at every tavern from every direction.  By the time he came back he was in a drunken stooper and could not give an accurate answer.  This is the fist example in history as to why history has failed man

after we determine the location of many points on this earth as ro the positions of the sun, then maybe we'll decide what a kilometer is.

In vino falsitas.

If Herodotus is to be believed, the hireling of Eratosthenes would have drunk barley beer, rather than wine, as the Egyptians lacked the proper agricultural conditions and infrastructure for vineyards (Herod. II.77.4). However, it should not be assumed that its properties were anything like our contemporaneous beers of modernity, in fact by the Ancient Greek metric (i.e. by comparison to wine) the Egyptian zythos (the beer) was considered extremely strong (Xen. An. IV.5.27). If wines average at a strength of 10% volume (for the sake of argument), there are 10ml, i.e., one unit of pure alcohol per 100ml. Let us assume that Egyptian beer was somewhat stronger - let's use the conservative figure of 12% (12ml alcohol per 100ml).

Egyptians drank beer from oval jars, such as this typical specimen pictured below, discovered at Giza by AERA:


Based on the scale, the jar looks to be approximately oval-shaped, roughly 15cm around and 30cm tall.
Treat the jar turned on its side as an oblate spheroid for the purpose of approximating its volume.

Let 'a' and 'b' = equatorial radii of the beer jar, and let 'c' = polar radius of the beer jar

(i.e., a = 15cm, b = 7.5cm, c = 7.5cm).

The volume of any ellipsoid is equal to (4/3) * π * a * b * c.

Therefore the volume of the beer jar is approximately (4/3) * 3.14 * 15 * 7.5 * 7.5 cm³.

4/3 = 1.33...

1.33 * 3.14 * 15 * 7.5 * 7.5 = 3523.66... cm³.

Assume 1ml of beer per cubic centimetre. Therefore the capacity of the beer jar is approximately 3523ml, or 3.5 litres of potent Egyptian beer.

If we assume that this degenerate stopped at Naucratis, Merimda, Heliopolis, Memphis, Itjtawy, Heracleopolis, Oxyrhynchus, Thebes, Coptos and Sebennytus, consuming on average one jar of powerful Egyptian zythos in each of these towns, he would have imbibed 4 litres of pure alcohol by the time he reached Syene, enough to kill a normal human four times over (the median lethal dose of alcohol in mammals is around 1.4g/kg bodymass. If a human weighs 70kg, the median lethal dose will be 98g [i.e., ml]). This gives you some idea of the level to which our globularist hero, Erastothenes' Earth-measurer, would have sunk. He was either incredibly fat, incredibly resilient to alcohol - from years of abuse - or, most likely, a combination of both. By the time he reached Syene he was, in any case, if the above estimations are correct, as drunk as a lord.

If he had only been better at measuring his crippling alcohol dependency, he might just have been a little better at measuring the Earth.


REFERENCES

Herodotus. The Histories.
Xenophon. Anabasis.

UCSB Laboratory Safety Program. (2008) 'Basic Toxicology'. University of California Website. Retrieved 22/04/10 from URL: http://www.ehs.ucsb.edu/units/labsfty/labrsc/lstoxicology.htm

Ancient Egypt Research Associates. (2007) 'AERA - Ancient Egyptian ceramics, Ancient Egyptian pottery'. AERA Website. Retrieved 22/04/10 from URL: http://www.aeraweb.org/lost_city_age.asp

The grand citadel of the mind, is thrust down below the pain of debate.  For is it not the way of the mind to require sleep.  We live to be but seventy-five, but live less twenty-five.  Where has the though but to vanish in ones dreams. To what use does it use. To what force drains the bastion of the thought.

            Thou shall look upon himself with no doubt and with do no solace.  As one but lays his head upon the sum sheets of a pillow and cloth, he may fact wonder about the musings of the day hath gone past.  Worry upon the coins of credit and finny, the tide of romance.  Half past the hour of midnight. On knowing the church of anew. Canst a fullsome man no naught?  The mind wax through the night. Recalling the rennies of days gone past.

   Slender is the proby of thought.  Art one to know his mind and his teachings.  I have done much to impact the study which lays before me. It is of most care that I nurture its growth, its but a passion in my midst.  Untainted, allowing the reader to embrace the thoughts spoken in the vast cavern of binary.  For one need not have a pour of thought studst the words.  From the sailing ships upon the sea, to the horse stalled upon the stable, the car in its bay.  Width using ones thoughts, thy may sail through the ocean of mind, and, find within him, a fortune not in gold but a fortune in the thoughts.  Whether you be but young, old, Sir or lady. You may find naught cruelty in thy study, but find you enjoy your year cometh upon.

Life, health, a sound mind.  These things elude us as did the imagine of Homer.
"Young men's minds are always changeable, but when an old man is concerned in a matter, he looks both before and after."  These words are of Homer, in his Lion quest of Iliad.  Gone are the men of the past, but leave with them not but scribe upon a canvas.  The quote is but of a sound thought.  Words spoken to a people of decades pro.  

I sometimes fear youth is my only weakness.

     As the flot parts a path of steady onhreran, the voice of a gull is but drowned by the voice of the constant tide.  For it is not that we question its motive or its intent.  We know without measure that it will always flow.  It will flow as does the earth shall breath.  Knowing full of its miht, we press it for answers.

I look to nature for inspiration for my studies.  The university at which I teach pales before the journey which has no road.

   One of my colleagues, a man of the sea and true Bargemaster, were discussing the methods of past travel and navigation upon the sea.  Both of us thoroughly disgusted by the sailors of new, and their constant reliance and dependence on satellite navigation.   In thought of this I took to his attention the old navigation device called The Chip Log, it allows you to estimate your speed of travel.  For those to whom are negligent with your studies of the past, I will do my best to rekindle your thoughts.

   The Chip Log works on the idea that if you put a large piece of wood upon the sea, you can chart your course of travel and the given knots.  By doing so you may calculate your movement upon the sea, and to estimate your time of arrival.  By close examination of the fallen wood tree you may hath find your current speed.  Although a trained seafaring captain can use this without fail, there was a need to improve it for the junior and less competent.  A rope was tied to its mass, and with upon it knots (this is the origin of the speed measurement Knot) were tied at intervals, by calculating its passing from the fairlead to the bow, it was able to provide a precise measurement, but, much less than the skilled and honoured Capitan, but, solid enough for the jesters of old.   It has been said that the sailors of the past were true to their craft, and the boatmen of today are reliant on computers and are scabs to the coin, unable to navigate much less than a fool.

             I would like to add that Brother James has recommended reading Problems with Philosophy by Bertrand Russell.  I have been reading this book for over two years now, I find this to be beneficial to anyone here trying to understand their life.  Most important the chapter titled Truth and Falsehood.  I would recommend this book here to most of the people who care of the world in which we live.

Russell is indeed a perceptive and engaging writer, with an excellent grasp of all the big issues in philosophy. Some logicians only really know logic, and some metaphysicians only really know metaphysics. Russell knows his way around all the major branches of philosophy, from ethics to epistemology.

Russell is indeed a perceptive and engaging writer, with an excellent grasp of all the big issues in philosophy. Some logicians only really know logic, and some metaphysicians only really know metaphysics. Russell knows his way around all the major branches of philosophy, from ethics to epistemology.

Coincidentally, although I do value the very negative critique made by Trotskyites of Fabians and most moderate western leftists (who essentially represent some form of imperialism with a democratic facade), I had recently become interested in Bertrand Russell's very fair 1920 constructive critique of Bolshevik politics from a democratic perspective (in spite of Russell's automatic assumption of a protestant prejudice with reguard to the Christian anchorites of the Egyptian desert as expressed in the preface), especially in view of the fact that Russell welcomed the Bolshevik revolution.

The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism
By Bertrand Russell
http://www.amazon.com/Practice-Theory-Bolshevism-Bertrand-Russell/dp/1104322889

-------------------------------------------------------

Interesting post about navigation.  Here are a couple of links on traditional navigation:

Foundation For Promotion of Art of Navigation
http://navigationfoundation.org/

Celestial Navigation Net
http://www.celestialnavigation.net/
http://www.celestialnavigation.net/resources.html

Celestial Navigation Books and Equipment
http://www.celestaire.com/

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on August 28, 2010, 07:21:15 AM

Russell is indeed a perceptive and engaging writer, with an excellent grasp of all the big issues in philosophy. Some logicians only really know logic, and some metaphysicians only really know metaphysics. Russell knows his way around all the major branches of philosophy, from ethics to epistemology.

Coincidentally, although I do value the very negative critique made by Trotskyites of Fabians and most moderate western leftists (who essentially represent some form of imperialism with a democratic facade), I had recently become interested in Bertrand Russell's very fair 1920 constructive critique of Bolshevik politics from a democratic perspective (in spite of Russell's automatic assumption of a protestant prejudice with reguard to the Christian anchorites of the Egyptian desert as expressed in the preface), especially in view of the fact that Russell welcomed the Bolshevik revolution.

The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism
By Bertrand Russell
http://www.amazon.com/Practice-Theory-Bolshevism-Bertrand-Russell/dp/1104322889

Bertrand Russell was not alone in his opinion.  Lenin's friend and fellow Bolshevik Maxim Gorky preceeded Bertrand Russell by at least two years with the exactly same opinion.

Untimely Thoughts
By Maxim Gorky
http://www.amazon.com/Untimely-Thoughts-Revolution-Bolsheviks-Literature/dp/0300060696

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on August 28, 2010, 07:21:15 AM

Russell is indeed a perceptive and engaging writer, with an excellent grasp of all the big issues in philosophy. Some logicians only really know logic, and some metaphysicians only really know metaphysics. Russell knows his way around all the major branches of philosophy, from ethics to epistemology.

Coincidentally, although I do value the very negative critique made by Trotskyites of Fabians and most moderate western leftists (who essentially represent some form of imperialism with a democratic facade), I had recently become interested in Bertrand Russell's very fair 1920 constructive critique of Bolshevik politics from a democratic perspective (in spite of Russell's automatic assumption of a protestant prejudice with reguard to the Christian anchorites of the Egyptian desert as expressed in the preface), especially in view of the fact that Russell welcomed the Bolshevik revolution.

The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism
By Bertrand Russell
http://www.amazon.com/Practice-Theory-Bolshevism-Bertrand-Russell/dp/1104322889

Russell's critiques of Soviet society do make for a good read, and even more so when you consider that at the time of writing, it was extremely unfashionable to be pro-communist and at the same time anti-Soviet in British left wing circles. My only criticism of his social essays is that they to tend to generalise and make sweeping statements (the latter something Russell does a great deal in most of his writings), and that he is unduly dismissive of Flat Earth Theory, though he is far from alone in that respect.

My only criticism of his social essays is that they to tend to generalise and make sweeping statements (the latter something Russell does a great deal in most of his writings), and that he is unduly dismissive of Flat Earth Theory, though he is far from alone in that respect.

Bertrand Russell's out of hand dismissal of the flat earth movement seems to be akin to the prejudice that led to his automatic dismissal of the desert monasticism of early Christians as futility.  Many protestants, especially the religious ones, have a similar prejudice.  The rise of protestantism - which is a religion largely devoid of Christian tradition - paralleled the rise of modern pseudo-science which became very much of a religion itself.  I am sure that Russell would understandably feel uncomfortable being compared to religious protestants, but he does have a common background with them in so far as they both accepted much of modern "science" and they both rejected most Christian traditions.  Those twin developments are legacies of the protestant revolt (which actually did not go far enough since further searching would have inevitably led them eastwards) and the occult so-called scientific revolution.  Many or most of the founders of protestantism such as Lutherans like Melancthon and Anglicans like John Dee were deep into occultism.  The same applies to the founders of modern "science."

  For the most part, religious protestants are far less intelligent than people like Bertrand Russell (especially on issues like social matters or politics) because they retain more of the baggage of their pathetic (artificial) traditions than Bertrand Russell did which blinds them to understanding things like the "why" of the Bolshevik revolution which was a surprise to many religious papists and protestants who predictably and unfortunately opposed it.  This is still the truth with the blindness of the religious right who are stuck in the eighteenth century.  This blind religiousity is even true of many "Orthodox" Christians.  If it were not so, then the Bolshevik revolution would not have been necessary.  It is left to far sighted men like the Russian priest Georges Florovsky to chronicle the reality of this truth.

http://www.amazon.com/Georges-Florovsky-Intellectual-Orthodox-Churchman/dp/088141137X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1283742576&sr=1-1

http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/florovsky_ways.html

       Neurologist Oliver Stacks, the revered professor of psychiatry and neurology at the Columbia University Medical Center, is, the author of several case studies in the field of neurological science.  Stacks has studied cases from the far reaches of medical science.  He has documented in his illustrious career, people, living their lives on the far side of human reason.  A few of his writings have garnered my attention, and, are fit to mention.  The book entitled "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat" is an excellent example.


       One of the studies that I find interesting  in the book is called "The man who fell out of bed"  In short, this is a man who thought his leg was fake due to the fact that he had no feeling in it, by not being able to feel it, he treated it as such.  Throwing it around and out of his bed regularly.  Along with that, there is another called "The Lost Mariner"  This man was a 19 years old, handsome, and who operated a radio on a Submarine during the Second World War. From stress or other events he was left severely mentally crippled, he is/was unable to remember events after the 1940's so as such he lives his life as if he is still 19 years old, but equipped with a advantageous knowledge of Science and Mathematics.


       There are numerous stories in this book from Doctor Stacks clinical studies.  It talks about people who do not fall into the mainstream acceptance of how one should act and behave, be it in an academic, social or professional setting.  Who is to say what the correct way to behave is. Society has claimed a stake on what is allowed, and, what is forbidden.  To do else, is but to be cast as having a mental condition or a sociological destructive condition.  As an example, we do not ask people that hear voices in their head what the voices are saying, or, what message they are trying to convey.  We cast them as having delusions or having hallucinations.  We do not take the time to ask them of what it could mean, or, possibly understand the message being wrote in their mind.  Agreed 99 percent may have a disorder, but what can be said for the other 1 percent.

       As we look to assimilate all of man into a direction of servitude and obedience, it takes someone from the outside of common thought to examine what is wrong with the way we conduct our beliefs and actions.  This has been the way of evolution.  99 percent are the same but there may be the one percent with a particular set of thoughts and mind, that can bring about change for the rest of us, in an incredible and beautiful way.  This is what I believe that Dr. Stacks is aiming for in his work and it would be wise to open our eyes and look for the truth hidden among the rocks of life.

"There is only a fingers difference between a wise man and a fool"  This is a quote by the Greek philosopher Diogenes of Sinope.  Throughout my day I apply this to my actions.  Knowing full well that most live behind a wall of Cynicism.  So dependant are we as a people on the complexities of life, we fall into a guise of moral duty to ourselves and to forget the outside world as if it does not exist.  As it does not exist beyond our comfortable house and home.  

When consumption entertains our every being returning to that of a simple life is of most calm and full pass not love.  We have within our means to live our life not in the mannerisms of comfort and luxury, but to live it the way nature intended.  This is man's sword and Diogenes lived by it.

By choice, not by status he lived as a poor man, begging and abstaining from comforts of life.  Plato addressed him at times, and with his addresses, they discussed what is before his eyes, and how they can be deceived.  Plato, the fool that he was spoke to Diogenes about the lunch on his table and the thirst he had on the hot day.  "I can see the cup on the table, but I can not see the cupness"   In  analysis how can we say that a cup can ever have a purpose.

For my Masters Degree, I had to propose a thesis.  I had spoken to my professor about doing the life of Diogenes.  I lived in my car for one year, this was an extended thesis, but none the less I spoke to my teacher and was given permission to live a simple life.  I lived off the Earth as did Diogenes.  I lived on the street as a simple man, living in my car and rummaging the garbage bins.  This was for my thesis but it gave me an understanding of how a dog on the street did.  Twenty years later I can apply this to my life today and I can view it from the life histories most famous Philosopher.  

I have decided to post a research paper that I constructed several years ago, I feel it is as valid today as it was back then.  It can put to rest many of the issues that divide this forum in a most positive way.

   

   I think it is time that we take a serious look at the issues as to why the theory for a round earth is flawed and the reasons behind it.  From the most basic mathematical equations taught in educational institutions, to the complex library of false figures and records that circulate in the academic world.  For those of you who are new to the forum it is necessary to understand the difference between an educated person that believes in a round earth, and an educated person that believes in a flat one.  Both have reasons as to why they believe in one-theory vs. the other.  Although both (people) are educated, one is educated on a belief that is founded in deception and fabrication, and the other is educated in what can be called "real world science".  I will show in this document why even the most basic mathematical equation as taught in school fails under scrutiny and why because of this, the theory for a round earth fails as well.

    When our children are educated in there early years of life, they are taught what we as a society deem is appropriate as a base for lifelong learning.  Subjects taught in early school for example is grammar and mathematics.  An example of an early basic math equation taught in the concept of addition is   1 + 1   it is common knowledge that the answer to that question is 2.  This of course works.  For example if we have one apple and we take another apple and we put them side by side on a flat table and ask 100 educated people how many apples we have on the table, assuming that there is indeed one apple beside the other apple, most of the 100 people would say that there are two apples present.  And if we asked those people to write on a piece of paper the equation that allowed them to arrive at that conclusion, most people would write something such as this 1 + 1 = 2   You could of course repeat this experiment with as many controlled groups as you would like and for the most part the documented results would be the same.

      There is of course a circumstance that occurs in nature that shows why sometimes 1 + 1 does not equal 2.  If one was to go outside during a rainy day and observe raindrops interacting with one and another, something interesting happens.  When you have one raindrop beside another, for some reason, when they touch each other, they join up and become a single raindrop.  According to the education system, 1 raindrop and another raindrop should be 2, but according to real world science one raindrop and another raindrop touching equals one raindrop.  Some of you may say but there are 2 raindrops they are just together.  What I would say to that is "As I am observing the raindrop I observe one raindrop not two." To summaries, according to the educational system that most round earth theorists refer to 1 + 1 = 2 and according to real world science that us flat earth theorists go by 1 + 1 = 1 and 1 + 1 = 2 (It really depends on the situation) In all reality we flat earth theorists are open minded, and can understand that sometimes the taught base education is wrong and this has been shown wrong in the above explanation.

      Even through I have examined the most basic mathematical equation and showed why under certain circumstances it can fail, it brings us to the most important fact at hand.  If we cannot trust the most basic mathematical equation then how can we trust anything else that modern science dictates.  The entire world runs on a system that in all simplicity can be boiled down to simple mathematics.  What I am trying to show in my documentation is that although most people are fine living in a world composed of a one sided viewpoint.  I hope people can understand that by using real world observations they can come to their own conclusions about the world that are usually correct.  You can observe almost everyday why the most basic mathematical theory fails. You can also observe the earth as you look into the horizon.  Remember no matter what anyone tells you, the ONLY place that you can read about a round earth is in scientific documents and literature (Textbooks) The only place you can observe a flat earth is well, everywhere.  Science tends to be something that is always changing and from my experience through school, is, that nothing in science can ever be trusted with all certainty.  Even if you think what I have shown in the above paragraphs is false, please remember that it is important to look at everything with a critical mind and a critical viewpoint.  Even if you think it is ridiculous to believe that the earth is flat in todays world, please remember that it is critical that you as a person examine everything that you think you know because it may surprise you.

Thank you my brother Bullhorn, it is always a pleasure to hear you speak on mathematics. I remember this point was debated before and the example of the rain drops is always an enlightenment to those who have not considered it.

Also I have begun reading the short stories of Oliver Stacks M.D., in the book The Man Who Mistook his Wife For a Hat: And Other Clinical Tales which you recommended. They are at the same time light-hearted but address fundamental aspects of philosophical and psychological problems. I am enjoying this book very much.

Clarity that comes too easily is the enemy of deeper understanding

Technology and Human Becoming
Would you agree or disagree with Dr. Hefner?

Alone in the bare broken sky


      When upon my eyes but lay the earth on its course.  To where it is going, no one hath know.  By its continue may we find its destiny.  Our life is but a flicker of a forever burning flame.  To ask to whom was it lit is to ask to whom shall it be extinguished.  The flame is but a metaphor to the earth as is the earth to our soul.  Ask a poor man if he shall wonder of the riches of man, but as a rich man if he but wonder about the style of the poor.  It is without care and regret that he no care for it.  It is without cause that the substance of life is without measure.  For in life it is important but in death it is but not.  We yet wonder about the earth, its shape and its tone.  But are we to know, are we to understand its ways.  It is not I to say what it is or for that matter what it is not.  We must look to history, the history of men from the past.  Every idea that has been, is, from history.  And history has shown that accepted ideas today are not the ideas that are true.  It is know that we are writing history, as man has done the time ago.  We must learn from the volleys of pain and insult to the mind.  We must know that we are wrong, that our ideas are as wrong as when we want to look for the truth, it is within our selves and our mind.  A man who is moneyless knows more for life that does the wealthy man.  The poor man is alone in a bare broken sky, and the rich man is together with the clouded fog of illusion, and, within him honest to the past.

The Folly of Man


   The Giant Oak reigns tall among the days of man, heed not its power we plough it down with the brush of our hand.  The fields where it hath rain are but disrobed upon the stench of power.  Heed its warning doth unknown to the bare breast where it has came.  We wonder of its nature, but care not for its destiny.  The soothing purr of a engine gnashing through yonder forest.  It resides in our life and our mind, hear the cry of timber as we plane it from its domain.
 

A new year, hath doth rein upon untold a new dawn.  In my absence has but grown as the heart yonder for strength.  Where has the time gone.  For it was just time ago I started its look less it stands on the course of triumph.  Poetry is the true test of a man`s steel.  Where he can speak in of the world without but regret in how he expresses his beliefs honour his body less his mind.  The onus is but on us the reader to express our masculine side less not our side of passion.

The Folly of Man


   The Giant Oak reigns tall among the days of man, heed not its power we plough it down with the brush of our hand.  The fields where it hath rain are but disrobed upon the stench of power.  Heed its warning doth unknown to the bare breast where it has came.  We wonder of its nature, but care not for its destiny.  The soothing purr of a engine gnashing through yonder forest.  It resides in our life and our mind, hear the cry of timber as we plane it from its domain.

Sounds like you've been reading Wendell Berry.

The Farmer

"The hardworking farmer should be the first to receive a share of the crops" (Bible Saying)

Is it not but from the hand of a Cropman does the grain doth not flow.  The fields where it has been are not the fields of today.  The farmer is but a man with less no respect.  Do we thank the ground as we serve ourselves the sweat of his brow.  Do we thank him with but only a letter of grim.
These questions are not told nor asked in the pale dawn of our thankless lives.

What one of you inspires to tend the fields of our world.  Not one but answers.  I would ask that we thank our farmers and the work that they hath done.  It is with courage they wake at dawn and eat at dusk.  With all to tend to their enjoyment is the dreams he has in his sack of slumber.

Ecclesiastes 5:9

The profit of the earth is for all; the king himself is dependent upon the field.

What one of you inspires to tend the fields of our world.  Not one but answers.  I would ask that we thank our farmers and the work that they hath done.  It is with courage they wake at dawn and eat at dusk.  With all to tend to their enjoyment is the dreams he has in his sack of slumber.

You are immigration reformers' worst enemy.
I nominate you for governor of Arizona.

Aurochs


        What link do animals of the past have on the truth.  I can think of one animal that has through its time in history come against the past beliefs.  History is such that events that have occurred, have occurred.  There is no place to question this fact.  This is why looking at the past animals we can but understand ourselves.  Aurochs was in his days, a great and powerful beast.  So powerful and masculine that he was revered until his extinction.  Standing over 6 and a half feet tall he was a massive mammal.  One could say he was on par with the great groomed Cerberus.  Forever captured in inc on cave walls as past Frenchmen were at Lascaux.  When looked upon Aurochs would strike fear into men.  As this was a factor in its extinction.  The animals bust can be viewed and examined in Estonia.  Embodying  a strength that even a young hunter in the Gallic war can not penetrate.


The link of this animal will be discussed in the coming months.