Oracle wrote:YFred wrote:Oracle wrote:DT. wrote:YFred wrote:DT. wrote:Oracle wrote:YFred wrote:
No it is not. Lurucina is shown as 4 times the size. If you look the current border, it was within that and less. Kochat is the same. These maps are not to scale.
Next
What are you on about? It's not showing Lurucina but the blooming area occupied.
Surely you've demonstrated how clueless you are enough times for today ....
You know, this allergy to learning that Yfred's demonstrating is starting to explain the funny twitters he's been releasing lately.
http://twitter.com/Yfred
That's not funny, that site has nothing to do with me sunshine.
don't be shy mate they're great twitters..."have you seen my concentration?" priceless
Don't insult the poor woman's intelligence by suggesting she has anything to do with our number cruncher from "Lurucina Land" ... as only visible by him!
Ok just this time I'll try to educate you and mark the Lurucina lands on the map, but I wouldn't hold my breath, I like living.
I know where it is you dumbwit! The TCs occupied the area around there. They didn't all just live in your house!
Who is being dumb dearest that is the Lurucina lands after 1963. Even less after 1974.