3rd April 2011, 08:51 PM
You will be glad to know that I am under attack (again) ah, me.. nothing like taking a story and using it to continue a personal attack.
It is sad that a story that demands more questions asked - and does demand further questions - can be used as a vehicle for vendetta. It seems that once again we UK archaeologists are all artefact hunter loving huggers.
I think however, that rising above this, it is worthwhile reading his posts.
Ignore the anti-connolly/BAJRite stuff and ask, what is going on. (ps... I am not an_archaeologist, that is only MR B trying to accuse via association - if he wishes to challenge that , then that's his perogative with evidence of course)
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/04...angry.html
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/04...re-tv.html
It is worth noting that I have never been a supporter of Rallies, and neither am I a supporter of artefact looters. I am however a supporter of people who find and locate information that is added to our record. :face-approve:
Evidence is a great thing, and I could not help but notice that this was not forthcoming in the article, that Rescue sadly just used
Remember that this is the offical statement from the BM
It is sad that a story that demands more questions asked - and does demand further questions - can be used as a vehicle for vendetta. It seems that once again we UK archaeologists are all artefact hunter loving huggers.
I think however, that rising above this, it is worthwhile reading his posts.
Ignore the anti-connolly/BAJRite stuff and ask, what is going on. (ps... I am not an_archaeologist, that is only MR B trying to accuse via association - if he wishes to challenge that , then that's his perogative with evidence of course)
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/04...angry.html
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/04...re-tv.html
It is worth noting that I have never been a supporter of Rallies, and neither am I a supporter of artefact looters. I am however a supporter of people who find and locate information that is added to our record. :face-approve:
Evidence is a great thing, and I could not help but notice that this was not forthcoming in the article, that Rescue sadly just used
Quote:While metal-detector enthusiasts have unearthed some of Britain's most valuable historical discoveries, their actions can create "collateral damage" to the sites they plunder, preventing serious archaeologists from studying artefacts in situEvidence please...
Quote:"The apparent endorsement of this destructive activity by a body such as the British Museum will do nothing to lessen its impact on our buried archaeological heritage."Apparently?
Remember that this is the offical statement from the BM
Quote:The British Museum last night dismissed concerns about the TV series. "The museum has made it clear that its co-operation is dependent on the issues involved in the discovery of objects by the public – especially metal detectorists – being dealt with in a responsible way," it said.So... there is a story here... one that need to be seriously investigated.. BUT.. lets remember that detecting carried out responsibility actually enhances. Many new sites have been located and archaeologists called in to continue the work. So.. the more this happens the better, BUT our shared enemy is the nighthawk or should I say the site burglar.. a real thief of our heritage.