Re: Bad Archaeology

On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 20:05:33 +0100, Doug Weller
<dweller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 17:03:12 -0000, in sci.archaeology, J.LyonLayden
wrote:

Having said all of that, I do understand the need for hard "just the
facts" archeology. My problem is with how ruthlessly ideas that make
alot of sense are attacked by mainstream archeologists, and how the
rebuttals and ooparts are ignored.

Very few mainstream archaeologists even look at this sort of stuff because
they are busy doing their job.

the only problem with that is that the majority of mainstream
archaeologists are working under strict funding parameters and thus
tend to tailor their findings to the predetermined box that thier
benefactors will allow.

there is too quick a judgement placed on anything that proposes
alternate theories. i dont personally go for the ancient astronaut
theories, but that doesnt make sitchin's research into the
mesopotamian era (as an example) any less important. "grains of truth"
and all that.

amateur archaeologists (like han***, mentioned previously in this
thread) are the ones out there for the pursuit of KNOWLEDGE rather
than the pursuit of TENURE. their ideas may not be wholly accurate,
but then again, those that first began postulating about the
moundbuilders in north america were completely off base too, only
"getting" a little of the picture they were seeing as it was colored
by their preconceptions.

heres my local example. i live in the maritimes in canada. we have
here, very analogous to sites in the northeastern states, propped
boulders and lithic sites that do not conform to the mythologies of
the most recent indigenous populations. government-sanctioned
archaeologists lump them all in under the heading "glacial erratic"
and ignore the fact that there is a strong preponderance to numbers of
"pegstones" holding these massive boulders up, a similarity in shape
and orientation, and a VERY strong resemblance, both in style and
placements, to the saami seids of northern europe.

halifax, nova scotia sits on a richly detailed "sacred ground" when
viewed comparitively to sites such as vottavaara in karelia, northern
russia. academia will ignore this, those reindeer herders and
sealhunters were too PRIMITIVE to make it HERE.

and maybe thats what makes your assertion above so sad...

"they are busy doing their job"

which could be read as "they are busy making sure they KEEP their
jobs" if you refuse to OBJECTIVELY look at all the facts AND fanciy,
you'll be left behind. a dogmatic approach is the worst thing to make
claim to as a scientist. that leads to stagnation of knowledge.

im sure of only one thing. we do not know a TENTH of our civilizations
history, never mind what went on before. there are too many mysteries
left in the world, and if we leave it to academia to try and solve it,
they will be swept under the rug of inconvienient anololies, like the
long necked crystal vases found inthe stepped pyramid at saqqara or
the libyan "desert glass".

abvhiael
.

Quantcast