27th March 2014, 01:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 27th March 2014, 01:11 PM by Marc Berger.)
You nit yourself. I am not sure that is the whole requirement. To join the ifa you have to agree to abide by the ifa codes of conduct-and for example would show detectorits to understand what archaeologists attitudes to "plough soil" mean. A lot of the loops that the PAS put detectorists through presumably are based on the ifa codes set by the "archaeologists" running the PAS. Why don't detectorits go the full hog and get the benefit of detecting within the ifa codes of conduct. The situation at the moment seems to be very patronising-you don't need a degree to become a ifa member but if you are a detectorist we would like "them" to understand things differently to how we would. Obviously there is the problem that the PAS will not "identify" what archaeologists find.
It might be interesting to know if the PAS have a definition for "plough soil". Could be something like: all soil in which metal detectors find stuff.
It might be interesting to know if the PAS have a definition for "plough soil". Could be something like: all soil in which metal detectors find stuff.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist