7th March 2006, 06:35 PM
Quote:quote: In response to my concerns over the competence of a IFA approved archaeologist, '1 man, 1 desk' responded
"No-one can be disciplined for publishing rubbish (unless they are publishing primary evidence, e.g. information from their own excavations, and can be shown to be deliberately distorting it)".
As Mr ****** is described as 'Chief Archaeologist' within his 'organization', just how the heck do you think he arrived at his ridiculous theories sir ?
They can only have come from excavations carried out by him and his buddies, as they contradict every piece of literature I have ever read in three decades of researching this subject !
You may or may not be right, but you don't need to jump to conclusions just because the theories are ridiculous. It should be easy enough to show whether or not they were based on primary excavation evidence or, as would be common in a book of this sort, on secondary sources (i.e. data previously published by others. All you have to do is look at the references used in the book. Personally, I'm not going to check (mainly because I would be surprised if it is available in any libraries near me, and I am not willing to buy it), but if you are going to fling accusations at a reputable professional body then you should check your facts first.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
