Can somebody help me by answering ten Yowie questions?

[Zibethicus]

G'day, all;

I'm currently doing a TAFE course in Communication and Media, and one of my assignments calls for me to interview two people with opposing viewpoints on a 'newsworthy' issue.

Having been vaguely interested for years in cryptozoology and 'forteana', I seized on the recent (apparent?) Bigfoot hoax over in Georgia to make a quick overview of the current Yowie situation.

I should say in passing that my own position is firmly agnostic; while I don't see a good case for postulating another indigenous primate in Australia besides us humans (but who knows?), a survey of the sightings leaves me fairly convinced that people are sighting a fairly consistent something out there, and have been for a long, long time. Just what the something really is I don't pretend to know. Who says that it has to be anything physical - or material in the sense that a 'real' animal would be - in the first place?

Anyway, as part of the assignment I've written up a short list of ten fairly specific questions, about things like the Gigantopithecus theory and dermal ridges, and I'd be very grateful if someone on this board could find perhaps ten minutes of their time to answer them for me. The answers will never be published or used otherwise than in the assignment, which I'm sure will be instantly forgotten once it is marked.

If anyone cares to put their hand up I can either email the questions to you if you give me an address or post them to the board, if this is all right with the moderators. I'll check back in a day or two, and if more than one person puts their hand up I'll roll the dice. It doesn't have to be an expert opinion, but informed opinons are very welcome!

Thanks in advance for any help which is offered...

Zibethicus

[Dean Harrison]

Hi Zibethicus,

Everyone would be pleased for you to post your questions on the board.

Thanks for dropping bye,

DMH

[Yowielover1]

How about posting all the questions here...I'm sure that we would all like to see them and the answers that will be provided by those in the know.

[iwanttobelieve]

Sounds like a plan Yowielover1.

I'm sure everyone would like to read the questions and most importantly the answers.

Maybe Zibethicus can post the essay when it's complete so we can all mark it!

[Zibethicus]

Thanks very much to everyone who offered to help. Sorry it took so long for me to get back; pressure of work. I'd be more than happy to post my little essay if anyone wanted to see it; I'm currently waiting for feedback from a 'sceptical' scientific source from the other side of the fence. The whole Yowie phenomenon is so fascinating in so many different ways that many books could be written about it...if only I had the time...

Here's the ten questions; anybody's free to supply answers if they want to, of course. Please don't assume any overall scepticism on my part; the questions have to be phrased to be applicable to both points of view.

1. Do you have a general opinion about the legitimacy of the many ‘yowie’ sightings which have been reported in Australia, and, if so, what is that opinion?

2. What, in your opinion, is the likelihood of a previously undiscovered species of anthropoid ape, relict hominid, or other cryptid corresponding to a ‘yowie’ actually existing in Australia?

3. Do you have an opinion on what such a postulated life-form might be, if it does exist? Is there any possibility that, as has been suggested, an indigenous marsupial species might have evolved to parallel a hominid form? If not, why not?

4. The lack of tangible ‘hard’ evidence like a carcass is often invoked by sceptics as grounds for dismissing cryptid sightings. Yet the total known fossil remains of Gigantopithecus, a large ape presumed extinct but thought to have been once abundant, consist of a handful of teeth and mandibles, and Bigfoot researchers claim that it is extremely rare to discover a carcass of any of the known apes in the wild. Comment?

5. Have you personally examined any of the sighting reports or other evidence? If so, do you regard any of it as credible and/or worth further research?

6. Recently, the supposed existence of ‘dermal ridges’ in casts of alleged Bigfoot prints from America has been claimed to strongly suggest the prints were made by a non-human, non-ape species hitherto unknown. But researcher Matt Crowley claims to have reproduced the ‘dermal ridge’ phenomenon as an artefact of common casting processes (http://www.csicop.org/sb/2006-09/bigfoot.html). Do you regard ‘dermal ridges’ as valid evidence in this field?

7. What part do you believe that hoaxes, misidentifications and supposition play in this matter? Given a general lack in Australia of occasionally bipedal animals, such as bears, which are invoked elsewhere to explain away ‘Bigfoot’ and ‘Yeti’ sightings, how do you account for the consistent reports of bipedalism if a large proportion of the reports are misindentifications? What is it that people are seeing and hearing, or think that they are seeing and hearing?

8. In his book 'Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality' (Sphere, London, 1976), the distinguished anatomist, anthropologist and primatologist, the late Professor John Napier, commented in his conclusions (Chapter 8, p. 170), that “I am convinced that the Sasquatch exists...[t]here must be something in north-west America that needs explaining, and that something leaves man-like footprints.” Is there anything “that needs explaining” in Australia?

9. The 2004 discovery of ‘Homo floresiensis’ led Henry Gee, then-editor of Nature, to comment that “The discovery that Homo floresiensis survived until so very recently, in geological terms, makes it more likely that stories of other mythical, human-like creatures such as Yetis are founded on grains of truth ... Now, cryptozoology, the study of such fabulous creatures, can come in from the cold.” (Quoted in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfoot .) Comment?

10. Is there anything else that you would like to add?

*

Thanks in advance for any help...

->Zibethicus<-

[iwanttobelieve]

Great questions Zibethicus.

It's clear you've done your homework and I think we're all appreciative of that.

Personally I'd be far from the most qualified to answer your questions (Dean is your best bet) but I can't wait to see what answers get posted (from both sides of the debate) and I really look forward to reading your completed essay.

Cheers.

[stickyfingers]

...Zibethicus... welcome to the AYR Forums... as Iwanttobelieeve said ...I imagine that people such as Dean and Pixie are probably the best people to get the information from... others on these forums have had some form of experience in all things Yowie in some aspect or another... myself... I'm a newbie to the Yowie side of things... but I am interested in your final report... if you can post it on here... that will be really cool... again... welcome... cheers... Stickyfingers.

[Dean Harrison]

Do people want long answers or short answers? If long ones like this, I will have to get to each point whenever I can and post them individually.

Reply to Q1:


In the whole, I believe “most” reports are legitimate. Most sightings go un reported and many are totally confidential due to fear of ridicule.

The “ignorant of the facts sceptic”, however will never be convinced no matter what you put forward because they feel important being sceptical.

I remember talking to the head of the Australian sceptic society in the late 90’s after he had said some rather unflattering comments. Turned out the HE HIMSELF had a Yowie encounter at Daylesford, Vic, a few years prior. A very clear and apparent encounter.

I then asked how could he question something he witnessed with his own eyes that he knew very well was not a native Australian animal? He responded with “Because I didn’t have a TEAM of Scientists with me viewing it from all angles, taking photo’s and blood samples”. You pretty much leave the debate right there and then when your dealing with such childish irrationality.

Many people use phrases like “With all today’s technology, surely we would have found one by now”. Well, we HAVE found them. We’re finding them almost every day without even looking for them – we just haven’t caught one yet (God forbid).

That kind of thinking was no different in the late 1700’s when the first settlers arrived in Sydney. The Aboriginals told the Whites about the giant hairy man of the forest. We were sceptical because we thought we knew it all. We also thought this is most likely a story to try and scare the White people away.

It wasn’t too long before reports were being sent to Newspapers describing a Gorilla of sorts, which was being encountered by the pioneers as they were hunting, building roads and travelling. Reports were not isolated to NSW, they were now spread all over the Country. Some people moved out of their homes back to the Cities after encounters, some would not ride along the same tracks again, while many loggers refused to work certain areas in fear of being attacked.

By the time the mid 18th Century arrived, they were common knowledge in many parts.

These were times when the internet, fax, phones or other mediums of communication did not exist. There was no way for all these people, ALL over the Country, to collaborate ALL these stories and DESCIBE every DETAIL of these creatures EXACTLY the same. Heck, a lot of these people could not even read a paper to try and plagiarise an encounter and/or live in areas that had papers!

My point here is that there are hundreds of years of sightings. It’s not a new phenomena by any means.

Which brings me back to today.

Sure, there is no question that some people have created hoaxes – bound to happen. There has probably been close to ten thousand reported sightings. How many have remained unreported? 10 to 1? 20 to 1? 30 to 1? When you do the calculations on those figures, suddenly your looking a far larger picture.

Lets say 10% are the figment of peoples imaginations and 5% are hoaxes. Base that on the 20 to 1 theory. That would be 20,000 sightings minus 10%, which brings us back down to 17,000.

Many of these people were not alone during their sightings and many of them were certainly not fleeting glances. Some encounters have lasted for an hour, and many have been on going in the same area for decades. Neil Frosts house is a prime example, as too Geoff Nelsons property (just to name a couple).

If a Bank robbery occurs and you have 5 witnesses, what is the process of the Courts? They bring in the 5 witnesses to identify the person.

If you brought in 100 people into a Court (which we probably could), to identify what they witnessed in the forest, are all these people suddenly less credible than the 5 that convicted the robber?

I believe witness reports is the best evidence ever, other than a body. People don’t give reports the credit they deserve.

When your in a position such as I and many other researchers, you receive calls from all over the Country, and have done so for many many years.

When you hear grown men cry, hard men, men of the land suddenly shattered and their entire perception of the Australian bush flung out the window, you know its real. When elderly people come to you and say “I have never told a soul, however I must now get this off my chest before I die”, you know its real. When can hear a confused shaky voice stumble through their story, you know they are telling the truth. Farmer have come to us saying “I’ve lived out here for 65 years, never seen anything strange, until………..”. I have had truck drivers in tears!

These people have NOTHING to gain by coming forward. Quite the opposite in fact. The people who wish to remain anonymous have nothing to gain.

So yes, I do believe the majority of reports are authentic.

DMH

[Foil_Hat_Guy]

Hi all, sorry had to rejoin under a slightly different name given the new "security measures".

I felt a moral obligation to post so as to inform Zibethicus of the risks of posting his assignment/essay on here before it has been marked.

Plagiarism is considered a heinous crime in the circles of academia, and these days, unscrupulous students can freely download readymade essays via the Interweb. To counter this, educational institutions such as Universities and TAFEs use a program called Turnitin which uses an algorithm to search the Internet based on the text of the student's essay/assignment.

Of course, Zibethicus would reference this site as a source of information, however it wouldn't hurt to make particular reference to the forum and thread where the interview was held. (This holds true for where the skeptic interview is held too).

It is far less hassle to outline these things in advance than to have to front up to an "academic misconduct committee" and prove your innocence. (You also avoid any chance of an unscrupulous student copying from you before you've put your name on your work!)

In any case, Zibethicus, I wish you well with your assessment and whichever way you decide to argue, I think your essay/assignment would be a welcome addition to this site!

[_Daniel_]

Hey foil hat guy, when u say u had to sign in under a new name, what was your old one?
Dean that was a great answer to the question, i look forward to hearing the rest..
cheers
anonimust..

[Dean Harrison]

Question 2 & 3 (Both similar questions so I have conbined them) -

"What, in your opinion, is the likelihood of a previously undiscovered species of anthropoid ape, relict hominid, or other cryptid corresponding to a ‘yowie’ actually existing in Australia?"

You’re American?

Wearing an F&B Cap.......

What is the likelihood of and undiscovered Species living in Australia? What is NOT the likelihood? Of course it is, otherwise they would not be here and we wouldn't be researching the topic.


Whatever they may be, they/these obviously obtain a thinking mind, of which all Animals have, however ‘perhaps’ on a larger mental capacity to most other Animals. This enables them to understand an awareness of themselves, and the dangers of being exposed to the dangers of the Human threat. This would be instilled in them from the time they were born.

When in contact with them, they display certain traits in their movements that provide an insight into their thinking. Along the sandy streams and creeks closer to Human habitat, they rock hop, as not to leave prints. Quite often you will find its only the younger that leave the prints because they are not quite as diligent as the adults yet. They move from tree to tree then stop, listen and watch, and again move on, which makes it almost impossible for people who are ‘not looking for them’, to know they are about. They can also sneak up on you without you knowing when in stealth mode.

Again, having said all that, there have been some naive ones that make mistakes like we all do. I call that laziness.

Its amazing how easy it is to hide from people who aren’t looking for you.

I can go to my local park that contains a few pockets of trees and undergrowth and stay there for months without being detected providing I am savvy enough to know what I can and can’t eat naturally. A tiny little pocket of cover such as that would be more than enough coverage to remain undetected.

I would never in my wildest dreams have expected a Yowie to be lurking in the small area of bush land between Ormeau and Norfolk. How could it get in there without being seen? Why would it want to be in there? The only reason we all know about him is due to his impulsive nature to antagonise Humans, otherwise we would still never know of his existence.

I’m sure most of us have flown between VIC, NSW and QLD, looked out the window and been amazed at the never ending unchartered mountainous forests. Thousands of Km’s of unhospitable bush land reaching out from the South to the North to the East and to the West that no Human spends much time in, yet alone totally explored. A lot of these areas would require a Helicopter to gain access.

These areas are so wide stretching, that they cover more land than entire European Countries! And unchartered! Think about that………

Which brings me back to my local Park down the road. If I could hide in there without being seen, and the Ormeau Yowie can spend so much time in a tiny thin pocket of bush – then IMAGINE how long they can remain undetected in “Countries worth” of unchartered hostile terrain where nobody is looking for them? Nobody to bother them? They can roam freely as they like and their food source is abundant.

Stage two of the question. What are they?

In the late 90’s I made a determined effort to learn as much as I could regarding Paleontology because like others, I needed to know what the Yowie is.

I brought books from the 60’s onwards and started in the early days. I learnt a lot. Then I read books from a few years later, and discovered that I now had to unlearn what I had just read, because the former theories were now outdated and the views of Science had changed since the previous book was written
I read on and then again had to unlearn what I had to relearn because there were new discoveries that debunked the old findings, which then the new findings.

This continued and continued until I finally gave up because I knew that the last thing that I learn will most likely not going to be fully correct either. The conjecture and debate will always be rife in this field and the goal post are constantly changing.

I am no longer interested in putting a Genus to them, but more importantly, accepting they are here and learning more about them. Labelling can come later.

If I were to theorise, I would say that we are dealing with a few differing species. I will put my hand up for most of them. But Giganto? Who knows, we have only found fragments of the jaw structure, so I don’t know why everyone still goes running in that direction.

Again, I no longer tie myself up with such thoughts, as for me, I don’t find the question as important as I once did. There is NO definitive answer. Anyone who claims they know categorically is fooling themselves.

The only answers, the only true answers, contain nothing more than hypothesis, conjecture and theories – so why go there. Concentrate on researching the creature itself rather than being roped into a debate with no conclusion.

DMH

[Dean Harrison]

Question 4. Why no Body and Giganto?

Again as I wrote previously, how anyone could possibly come to a FIRM conclusion that Giganto is the culprit, and further more, the ONLY culprit, begs for reason. It may be one of them, but as written previously, who is to know? There are no definitive answers.

As to the lack of firm physical evidence such as a body would more than likely be contributed to their intelligence. They are not a simple animal and should not be regarded so.

How many times have we been bush walking and came across a body of a Koala that had keeled over and died of natural causes lying on your track or open ground? A Kangaroo that had a brain aneurism on a walking track or open ground? Any non-fenced in animal that has suddenly dropped dead from a heart attack or any other “NATURAL” causes? You won’t find it often.

People rarely venture away from walking tracks, and when walking are often tunnel visioned ‘most of the time’. If your going to find a body, chances are you won’t on a walking track or open ground unless the creature has been attacked and killed. In that case, you could find the carcass anywhere, but natural causes, I doubt in most cases.

Now, what if you didn’t have any predators to attack and kill you for your body to be dragged off and found pretty much anywhere?
Not being huge fans of Humans means you use the thick forests to navigate, more so than Human walking tracks and open ground where you could leave your footprints to be found and increase the chances of being seen.

The chances of finding a Yowie body that has died of natural causes in a wide open area in Human habitat (tracks and alike), would be very remote.

Further more, lets add heightened intelligence to the equation. They have communities, family structures and share the same common interests. If YOU were a Yowie, and YOU found a body of one of your own, what would you do? Step over it and think “Looks like SOMEONE’S having a bad day….” OR think “Geeezus Frank, why did you drop dead there for, I have to get you out of here before one of those Humans discover your body, because that would be the end for us all.”

Plus on top of that thought, you would more than likely, being a thinker in a community, you would want to burry poor old Frank anyway. The moment Frank began to stink up a little, your nose would have lead to him pretty quickly to check it out.

You know, they probably do check out such smells just in case it *IS* one of their own, and promptly remove the body.

With all the bodies that were left in Vietnam, you know how many were retrieved? Hardly any. Why? Rodents and acidic soil. The soil basically dissolves bones.

Finding fossils and bones is the exception rather than the rule. Bones do not naturally fossilise, nor remain for ever.
Think about how many animals there are in Australia in total. Now think about how many animals there have been just over the past few hundred years alone. Millions/Billions/Trillions? How many bones make up Billions of animals? Whats more than Trillions (I can’t count that high)?

Where ARE they all? Where are all of these bones that have been scattered around the forests for hundred of years, thousands of years? Within the last year??????

A fossil is caused by an event such as a sudden landfall and the body is entrapped, thus semi protected. You will mostly ever find then through digging in the middle of the forest (if you are EXTREMELY lucky) – not walking along a bush track and driving your car down a Hwy.

To suggest people should be stumbling across the bodies of a Yowie, is very naive.

DMH

[Dean Harrison]

Question 5.

Is it just me or is that basically the same question as #1?

In fact, I think I have already covered the rest of the questions. I would just be repeating myself.

If anyone else would like to contribute, feel free.

DMH

[Dean Harrison]

Sceptics in Australia don't have the luxury of blaming all sightings and prints on bears, as we don't officially have them, so they have to stretch a little further and pretend Australian's are a little hazy about what our National Icon (Kangaroo).

Can you pick the difference?

This is the only native animal sceptics can work with. Must have big feet.

On nearly every debate I have held with a sceptic, they always resort to the witnesses mistaken with a Kangaroo, drunk or are lying.

I don't know how being drunk would suddenly turn a Roo into a 7ft, 300lb relic Hominid?

DMH

[Yowielover1]

The “ignorant of the facts sceptic”, however will never be convinced no matter what you put forward because they feel important being sceptical.


DMH

I think they fear the truth too Dean.

[Yowielover1]

Nice answers Dean. You have put a lot of thought into this for a long time. I would love to come on an expedition with you one day with lots of equipment.

[Shar*Chi]

I think they fear the truth too Dean.

Yep, most people fear truth, because it rarely correlates with the norm, and being the norm is just so damn important.

[stickyfingers]

I think they fear the truth too Dean.

Yep, most people fear truth, because it rarely correlates with the norm, and being the norm is just so damn important.

... Shar*Chi... that is such a deep ... profound statement my friend... perhaps you should think about using it as your signature!... mine says... " BE GOOD!.....if not....enjoy every moment of it!" ... perhaps you should consider using... " Most people fear truth, because it rarely correlates with the norm, and being the norm is just so damn important" ...

... that is so good!!!... anyway my friend... it's just a suggestion on my part... the ultimate choice really is yours... cheers... Stickyfingers.

[Dean Harrison]

YL1 & Shar - not hard to present facts when stating the obvious.

Would love to bring this to Court one day, but not publically.

How could a Police Prosecutor dismiss the main tool he/she already uses (witnesses), to convince a panel at trial. 1 witness statement is enough to convict - I would love to contribute a few hundred, or perhaps a few thousand statements over the years.

Would the sceptic's Generic answer of "They must all have seen a Kangaroo" win, regardless of everyone descibing some form of relic Hominid?

DMH

[mbwmbwmbw]

Damn passwords...tried Dean..failed...tried new account u kindly verified for me..it wouldnt recognise me....tried new email..wouldnt accept it..tried this one for the last time...
Great questions..and great answers ..
For a dissenting view I thought I would quickly cobble this together.....

1. Do you have a general opinion about the legitimacy of the many ‘yowie’ sightings which have been reported in Australia, and, if so, what is that opinion?

Witnesses appear to be telling the truth..sometimes with secondary evidence...like prints and plant damage.

2. What, in your opinion, is the likelihood of a previously undiscovered species of anthropoid ape, relict hominid, or other cryptid corresponding to a ‘yowie’ actually existing in Australia?

Nil...Same odds as an new anthropoid ape form being discovered in the UK(where ape like forms are now being reported) or the US...or Canada..
Or...what ape/monkey species are found in countries like Canada/USA/Australia/Russia(UK now) which all have a oral history of sasquatch/yeti/yowie etc reports.???

3. Do you have an opinion on what such a postulated life-form might be, if it does exist? Is there any possibility that, as has been suggested, an indigenous marsupial species might have evolved to parallel a hominid form? If not, why not?

What species"lines" would "explain" the "hominid" forms appearing here and everywhere else in the "civilised" world ....that cannot be caught.
Convergent evolution is an ad hoc postulate.
The lack of fossils/skeletons in general is correct..bu the extension of that argument leads to lack of evidence for a fossil line...by implications means...'there is a fossil line waiting to be discovered".
Which may be true.
But... its back to the old "the evidence for flesh and blood is in the future.."
As it always will be.

4. claim that it is extremely rare to discover a carcass of any of the known apes in the wild. Comment?

Due to natural attrition..sure.but I am sure it happens..
Weakness in that analogy is the ape carcasses can be "discovered" when they are shot/trapped etc.
But lets continue in that context since it is often used "argument" by flesh and blood advocates.
They have often use the analogy of the discovery of the mountain gorilla in 1902 and point out how this animal stayed "hidden" from science for that long.
Fair point.
But...the problem with the rest of the narrative that they leave out..and for good reason...is this..
Within a few minutes of Beringe and co spotting the mountain gorilla...they had killed 2 of these animals.
Yet hundreds of millions of hunter man hours in the US/Canada alone has yielded how many bodies of sasquatches...??

5. Have you personally examined any of the sighting reports or other evidence? If so, do you regard any of it as credible and/or worth further research?

Yes. and yes.

6. Do you regard ‘dermal ridges’ as valid evidence in this field?

Yes...evidence of what is the question though..

7. What part do you believe that hoaxes, misidentifications and supposition play in this matter? Given a general lack in Australia of occasionally bipedal animals, such as bears, which are invoked elsewhere to explain away ‘Bigfoot’ and ‘Yeti’ sightings, how do you account for the consistent reports of bipedalism if a large proportion of the reports are misindentifications? What is it that people are seeing and hearing, or think that they are seeing and hearing?

A small % are hoaxes/liars/nuts.
I dont know what they are seeing..but it is not "just an undiscovered ape like form".
Being "really good at not being caught" is not the sign of great intelligence.
The ability to create "things"/language/ etc are signs of great intelligence.
A few sticks pushed into the ground/a few flimsy stick structures(which all may just be kids anway) proves that these animals are highly intelligent does it.??

8. Is there anything “that needs explaining” in Australia?

Yes...how an apelike form..appears here...and nearly every country on earth...and yet cannot be caught/shot/found/proved..
The "Nearly every country" minor problem(cough cough) is the spear(paranormal spear ?) through the flesh and blood theories and ideas.
If the whole "biological" problem...ie great ape like animals that cannot be caught was "just" in one country...then you might be in with a chance.
BUT...
The number of countries with the same problem reduces this chance by a major factor to somewhere around zero.
The more countries..the less chance...not the reverse...
Some of the American sasquatch hunters, f/b advocates realise this obvious problem.
Huston..we have a problem.
And lets ignore the UK as well to keep everyone happy.
http://www.paraview.com/redfern/index2.htm
Unless there are monsterous ape like creatures who are really good at hiding there as well.. geez

9. The 2004 discovery of ‘Homo floresiensis’ led Henry Gee, then-editor of Nature, to comment that “The discovery that Homo floresiensis survived until so very recently, in geological terms, makes it more likely that stories of other mythical, human-like creatures such as Yetis are founded on grains of truth ...

That "grain" may "germinate" into a form...that causes major cognitive dissonance problems to sceptics and believers alike.
And actually point to something even more profound/weirder than "just" an uncatchable ape like form that cannot be found...that is secretly living in "advanced" countries of the world.

10. Is there anything else that you would like to add?

Regarding sasquatch reports..Guttilla stated "do not occur at random relative to global geomagnetic activity, as would be expected if he were merely a hard-to-find Earth dweller."
http://www.yowiehunters.com/index.php?o ... &Itemid=69

Mike Williams

[stickyfingers]

... let me guess... "mbwmbwmbw" ... um... MikeBloodyWilliamsMikeBloodyWilliamsMikeBloodyWilli...???... I can see your frustration Mike... perserverance will prevail!... **breathe in... breathe out... think happy thoughts... breathe in breathe out...** ... cheers... Stickyfingers.

[Shar*Chi]

... that is so good!!!... anyway my friend... it's just a suggestion on my part... the ultimate choice really is yours... cheers... Stickyfingers.

Thanks mate, i mite make some other statement with a sig tho

[mbwmbwmbw]

Well...we helped you..its 19 days later ...cricket noises...the sounds of tumble weeds rolling down the street...

[Dion]

Obviously he doesn't want one of these

[iwanttobelieve]

Give him time.

He's seems to be properly researching the subject for an assignment which may not even be due yet, especially if it's an end of term paper.

[Zibethicus]

Howdy, all:

So sorry to have not replied before with due thanks. I had some password problems, and once they were settled I've had my hands full with other pressing matters. I won't bore anyone with the details.

Anyway, the assignment is in and done and marked. The academic year is over. I got everything done in time - just. You'll be pleased to hear that the assignment did well, but the necessities of TAFE cut the thing down to about a quarter of the size I began it with. It wound up truly a back-of-envelope sketch, which really concluded nothing definite.

Thanks for all the good answers. It was a fascinating theme to examine, and, as they say, "I could write a book" if only I had time and there weren't plenty of books already. But thinking about it has got me thinking more deeply about the beautiful bush all around my home in the Blue Mountains. Some days I feel like just going out and taking a look for myself...

->Zx<-

Thanks again; I'll try to stay more current with the board in future.

[iwanttobelieve]

Hey Zibethicus.

Can you post a copy of your essay?

I'm sure we'd all like to read it.

Cheers.