16th September 2013, 08:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 16th September 2013, 08:36 PM by Unitof1.)
sorry should read: "our" context resource
no digging is the first and only solution for an archaeologist. Geophysics is the solution for a geophysicist. Normally geophysics is used to find minerals and oil and gas. It normally does it by finding what it can do most easily ie your saves time, money back approach. But with polluter pays archaeologists can have a go at finding "all" the archaeology on a site. By all I mean "total archaeology"- single context recording methods of excavation. Archaeologists require "evaluation" to put a cost to this. Geophysics cannot in any way do this. Archaeologists already have a site based on the landowners planning application. All you are doing is selling landowners the promise that they can reduce their archaeological evaluation costs by doing geophysics. You are confusing discovering a potential site with evaluating a site for excavation. Stop it, we already have a "site" of archaeology, we don't need you.
no digging is the first and only solution for an archaeologist. Geophysics is the solution for a geophysicist. Normally geophysics is used to find minerals and oil and gas. It normally does it by finding what it can do most easily ie your saves time, money back approach. But with polluter pays archaeologists can have a go at finding "all" the archaeology on a site. By all I mean "total archaeology"- single context recording methods of excavation. Archaeologists require "evaluation" to put a cost to this. Geophysics cannot in any way do this. Archaeologists already have a site based on the landowners planning application. All you are doing is selling landowners the promise that they can reduce their archaeological evaluation costs by doing geophysics. You are confusing discovering a potential site with evaluating a site for excavation. Stop it, we already have a "site" of archaeology, we don't need you.
Reason: your past is my past