Re: Why are the sites in North and South America with claims for great age all on the East side?

Eric Stevens wrote, 25/05/2008 00:54:
On Sat, 24 May 2008 11:59:39 +0200, Peter Alaca
<p.alaca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

--- snip ----

Major archaeological finds made in Washington:
[...]
And you wrote: "Archaeologists find nearly nothing
of importance on their own."
Please explain why you see a contradiction.

The statement is wrong because archaeologists
/do/ find important things all the time on their own.

The operative word is 'nearly'. Lee Olsen was trying to make the point
that the majority of finds are not made by archaeologist but by people
digging for other purposes. Presumably archaeologists are later called
in to investigate the finds.

It makes sense that the set of all archaeological finds is larger than
the set of archaeological finds made by archaeologists.


But most important things are found by archaeologists.




Of course early archaeologists were nothing more than looters
paid by museums, so we can't count those.
Does this also apply to Washington archaeologists?
Possibly, as long as they were early.

I meant: 'also pply only ...

I replied to what you wrote.



Eric Stevens
.

Relevant Pages