1st February 2012, 09:55 PM
Quote:Can I not choose the third option of understanding where pseudo archaeologists are coming from, be entertained by the colourful theories scant as they often are on evidence after all the first keepers of the human story were, aparently, the story tellers.
You do that. Perhaps when you "work" with one... I guess it would not be so easy.
I suggest you tell me you are e entertained by the colourful theories of teh Bosnian Pyramids. or worry at the false ideas that will take tyears to disentangle... or Rosslyn Chapel (in teh county I was a development control archaeologists) and the misinformation which has now become "true" or the nationioalism and bitterness that this creates... it is dangerous and often funny, but deep down it is dangerous.
With a colleague I can at least debate, with a crank (and I can tell you from experience ) I can't. there is no third way with a crank. archaeology is indeed not black and white, but a crank... I am afraid it is. You can't come out both enlightened... you really can't... you can't debate. have you ever tried? it is not a war, but it is also not worth my time... I have real archaeology to do, with other archaeolgosits, other locals, other people. who don't need a fantasy to make the past interesting.
this list
Troy
The Egyptian and Mayan pyramids
The Nazca Lines
Stonehenge
Woodhenge
Newgrange
Tykal
I can only ask... WTF... so these are all the work of pseudo archaeolgoists.
Actually Troy... good point... I see it as a succession of bronze age cities... until they find the sign saying welcome to troy.
and I can go to them, dig em and subject them to analysis. the pseudo does not allow that scrutiny.