Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
15th January 2008, 07:28 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Austin Ainsworth
Gary how dare you suggest that archaeologists wantonly destroy archaeological sites.
Now where did I say that???
Your getting all defencive again.
I stated a fact and can prove it.
A couple of well known archaeologists know about the site I'm talking about. Stop putting words into my mouth.
You know nothing about me or my work to promote "cooperation and understanding"
Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.
Austin Ainsworth
Unregistered
15th January 2008, 07:32 PM
You said that in the quote noted in my post.
If you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow, you need buttermilk and cheese and an equilateral chainsaw. Half Man Half Biscuit
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
15th January 2008, 07:40 PM
quote
"Iâm sorry ... but Iâve been on land where the archaeologist just dives in thinking he has the right to everything without consideration of the landowner and just wiped away all chance of ever recording anything because he didnât use his brain or approached the matter in a sensitive and logical way."
If you want to interpret that as wantonly destruction of archaeology... so be it.
I said "without consideration" you choose the words "wantonly".
Either way I stand by my post... he did exactly as I said he had done.
I do dare to say what I think and have never been shy in coming forward
Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.
Austin Ainsworth
Unregistered
15th January 2008, 07:43 PM
Evidence for that?
If you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow, you need buttermilk and cheese and an equilateral chainsaw. Half Man Half Biscuit
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
15th January 2008, 07:46 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Austin Ainsworth
Evidence for that?
This is not the place to name names or cause legal problems for Bajr.
There is evidence. If an archaeologist posted that he agrees with me what would you say... is that enough evidence for you???
Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.
Austin Ainsworth
Unregistered
15th January 2008, 07:52 PM
No, that wouldn't be enough for me, either substantiate your claim or withdraw it.
If you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow, you need buttermilk and cheese and an equilateral chainsaw. Half Man Half Biscuit
Austin Ainsworth
Unregistered
15th January 2008, 08:02 PM
Gary,
if you can substantiate your claim there won't be any legal problems for BAJR, if not then you may be the one liable to legal action.
If you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow, you need buttermilk and cheese and an equilateral chainsaw. Half Man Half Biscuit
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
15th January 2008, 08:02 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Austin Ainsworth
No, that wouldn't be enough for me, either substantiate your claim or withdraw it.
I will not draw Bajr into a position that could cause legal problems.
I do give my word... that may not be good enough for you but it is for the owner of this site. Quite a few archaeologists do this every day by blatantly ignoring the skills that are available to them and chucking away the spoil heaps and not having a top soil survey.
I will not with draw my claim nor will I get embroiled in an argument with yourself just because you cant see further than "Im an archaeologist and your a detectorist attitude and what right have you to question our motives"
What constructive things have you done in your archaeologival career to bridge the gap and promote a better understanding between metal detectorist and the archaeological community.
How can "WE" promote the sharing of knowledge and each others expertize. This is what this thread is about. This is what Bajr is about and why I visit this site.
Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.
Austin Ainsworth
Unregistered
15th January 2008, 08:16 PM
Gary,
you say as a quote "Im (sic) an archaeologist and your (sic) detectorist attitude and what right have you to question our motives". who made this quote? certainly not I. My contribution towards a greater understanding between archaeologists and detectorists has been done in the field between detectorists and archaeologists, this has never included making pejorative comments on archaeological websites accusing archaeologists of professional negligence. Btw, I'm an ex-professional field archaeologist, in my free time I now operate in that grey area termed amateur archaeology.
If you ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow, you need buttermilk and cheese and an equilateral chainsaw. Half Man Half Biscuit
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
15th January 2008, 08:31 PM
Calm down everybody it is only a debate.
I did not take Gary comment to mean that archaeologists wantonly destroy archaeological sites. So no remark to withdraw.
The point Gary was making is about topsoil archaeology and the contribution it can make. A perfectly valid one.
I have to say that I dont agree with the holier than thou attitude about archaeologists.
In days gone by some pretty tough decisions had to be made and still mistakes can happen. For example the Copper gate helmet was found in the watching brief not the excavation.
At the BAJR conference there was discussion that the term Tresure Hunter and Metal detector user are now loaded with such baggage that we actually need a new term to describe what in many respects is becoming a sub branch of archaeology.
As for the notion that amateur topsoil archaeologist should be deployed as a matter of routine this was also discussed at the BAJR conference. The health and safety card is a major issue as it will soon become complusory more or less so anybody will need H&S safety training and accreditation.
There are many reasons why amateurs cannot be deployed within development based archaeology but that is a another debate.
Can we stick to the discussion?
Peter