curious, if sensational

An interesting archaeological site I haven't heard of before... I'm definitely going to have to look up more details... especially more details that are less sensational and more, y'know, interested in archaeology rather than myth. No offense to the writers, but I like my science with a bit more science than this article. Although it did turn out a lot better than I'd expected from the headline, I'm still... hmm. Dubious. I'm lacking my textbooks and research stuff at the moment (yay, lunch break) but I'm pretty sure this isn't the first sign that humans of the era in question were capable of moving a few stones around. Am sufficiently intrigued by the whole thing (especially the cache of skulls, which I expect is more of a funereal arrangement than a sign of human sacrifice, as the article seems to want to believe) that I'd like to know more, though. :)

Anybody heard anything about this one? windrose, is there any chatter in the professional world about it?

And, while I'm linking stuff, here's an article about some wackjob woman who's trying to tell women that they'd all be perfectly happy if they'd just submit to making their entire lives all about making their husbands happy. Somewhere, I suspect Jesus is thinking "Hey, I never said that!"

ARGH. And here's yet another example of government-condoned honor killings, this time in Chechnya. I'm going to stop looking at the news, now, before I get totally pissed off and depressed.