Archaeologist Johan Normark fights back against cranks

[quintaine]

Woooo hold your horses there a moment Q go back and look at your posts you are accusing our very generous host of exactly the same attitude you have. This is no longer a debate, you have an issue obviously, but you are not taking on board what others are saying to you are you?
Goodbye

I don't think this was ever a debate, it was a group lecture. You are all agreeing with each other and making the most preposterous pronouncements on what constitutes valid archaeological discourse. At least you pretended to ask me a question based upon previous posts but you are no more receptive to an alternative view then anyone else here. Instead you project your reluctance to listen on to me. You all seem to be convinced that to be an archaeologist you must have a university degree.

That other people involved in the field of so-called "pseudo" archaeology should be subject to the controls of academic scrutiny.

That the field of archaeology should be policed by academic archaeologists.

That all theories of pseudo archaeologist should be ignored or prevented and are inferior to mainstream arcaheologists because some of these theories are racist, elitest and contain bizarre unverifiable facts, from the point of view that is, of mainstream archaelogy.

I have an opinion on this, share it, then you patronise me by saying "I have an issue" because I do not change my opinion that archaeology should be free and open for everyone to explore and enjoy. Instead I have had to endure personal attacks, have my credibility questioned, have my privacy invaded time and time again and be accused in wild leaps of logic of "being happy with Nazi principles in archaeology".

It seems the ethics of "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" is firmly entrenched in this forum.

You accuse me of not taking on board what others said to me.... did you take on board anything I said? did anyone?
I suggest you are the ones who are not listening, and given the palpable fear I sense on this site of opening up archaeology to "the great unwashed" you are the ones with issues.

[quintaine]

I have been called a few things... but neo colonialist is a new one I try to ignore that, and reply.

Show me where I called you that!

[Wax]

I firmly believe archaeology is for all but if an individual wants a theory to be taken seriously the theory must stand up to intellectual scrutiny. That does not mean the individual has to have a degree nor does it mean that the theory must be approved by an academic elite. All I require is that it can hold up against accepted standards within the scientific and academic world.

You are very concerned about not being patronised and not patronising the great "unwashed". I firmly believe it is very patronising to go down the route of sensationalist archaeology for its own sake. Give the public some credit most of them are perfectly capable of understanding the reservations archaeologists have about pseudo archaeology when they are given access to the facts rather than fed the pseudo archaeology agenda.
I really should not rise to your bait but you are shooting yourself down rather magnificently and I look on in awe at the ensuing wreck.

[tom wilson]

If I recall correctly, David C doesn't have any formal qualifications, and he's far from being the only one.
Just saying.
I woudn't want any 'facts' to get in the way of anyone's 'interpretations' of this thread, which they are perfectly entitled to and are just as valid as anyone else's.

[quintaine]

I firmly believe archaeology is for all but if an individual wants a theory to be taken seriously the theory must stand up to intellectual scrutiny.

That does not mean the individual has to have a degree nor does it mean that the theory must be approved by an academic elite. All I require is that it can hold up against accepted standards within the scientific and academic world.

Why? and who sets these standards?

Give the public some credit most of them are perfectly capable of understanding the reservations archaeologists have about pseudo archaeology when they are given access to the facts rather than fed the pseudo archaeology agenda.
I really should not rise to your bait but you are shooting yourself down rather magnificently and I look on in awe at the ensuing wreck.

I do give the public credit by allowing them differentiate facts from fiction but you want to make the decision for them. You want to subject all findings to "accepted" standards within the scientific and academic community, limit the material available and urge them in the right direction. How is that giving the public credit? Can they too not make educated decisions and separate the wheat from the chaff. It sounds like you don't trust them to do so.

I am not "baiting" you as you suggest I am answering a point you made, politely, and the best you can do is close with a sarcastic put down.

whose baiting whom here?

but I do notice an interesting habit you all have, when I fail to capitulate entirely to your POV and I mean entirely, you take it as a grave insult and issue a sarcastic, juvenile and sometimes personal comment, you cannot seem to resist it. It may take two or three posts but you always succumb.

Is this the kind of open adult respectful forum for archaeology you want to promote?

[quintaine]

I have had enough of your forum. I thought you were open to discussion in an adult and open way about all matters archaeology and especially this topic but instead you want a platform to vent your spleen at those you feel not worthy to be called archaeologists in some kind of perverted bitch-fest. You are too full of your own self importance to, even for one second, consider any other opinion and harass and badger them till they leave, aptly named forum I'll give you that.

I only hope I don't have the misfortune to encounter any of you professionally, because that'll be the day when I'll be fired for gross professional misconduct. You may get away with your insults here but I won't be so tollerant. It's a wonder you are still alive talking down to people the way you do.

Congratulations, you have your own little private world again

(and moderator, David,C or whatever you wish to be known as, I want an apology for the name-calling on this thread or I will have a libel writ issued on Monday and I am not even close to kidding, understand, after all one of your friends was kind enough to clarify my identity for the whole world- without my permission)

[BAJR]

Cut me and I bleed.
Thank you Wax. I think that quintaine has misunderstood my request for a person with the word archaeologist in their title to earn it and prove it. Thinking that it is about them (it is often not all about them) it is about the pseudo-archaeologist - the actual point of this, ahem heated debate.

I do take exception to being called a bully - dictator - proponent of colonialist attitudes and this paragraph is - shall we say . way beyond AUP

When you have nothing useful to bring to a discussion you keep repeating the same old tired joke, a phoney pseudo theory. Do you even know what the expression "no names no packdrills" means - then you go and use the name. Your true colours are exposed, you are a bully, you don't debate, you decree and have everyone fall into line out of fear. The power has evidently gone to your head. I was trying to make valid points and you return with wild childish inuendo and petty retorts and you have the audacity to call yourself an archaeologist.

It is a bit like allowing someone to storm into your front room - stand on a chair - and then shout at you. Well. that is what BAJR is not about. This place is for people to use, and every single response has been met with aggression or put-down. quintaine, you are a guest and have been treated as such. You have been allowed to share your views, and been allowed to continue to do so.

Your insults and insinuations have upset many people. I have sent you a message to ask for a some sensible communication. I think however, the thread has run its' course.

The lesson is confused and grey - listen to everyone . Allow the most media friendly theory to prevail but don't allow the media to control it, but er... well. To me and others it was simple. an archaeologist does archaeology. people can get involved and have their own theories, from hidden Roman underground harbours in Scotland, to Maya 2012ers but we should not waste too much time trying to engage with them, as it is never going to change their views. These views are often dangerous and political. (the City of David excavations or the Bosnian super civilisation) and where ever they are, they should be opposed, to stop nationalism from swamping our profession. Bad archaeology is bad archaeology.

as a post script, I am currently being trained in archaeo-astronomy :face-approve:

Be nice people, it is a lovely morning

[BAJR]

Just read the rest.. missed this last page

and have to apologise to forum members for this.

Quintaine, I will look forward to your writ.

[BAJR]

As to identity disclosure. I did it out of respect for the AUP, and to be honest you did give us all your identity on the first line of your first post.

My dissertation was about how archaeologists appear in the visual media. "

So to be honest if the worst that you can do is threaten a writ for disclosing your name, which you already did, and feel being called a smarty pants is a terrible insult. then I look forward to it. I see quite a lot of insults in your writing, and have of course now backed up the entire thread - it is all on hard drive now.

On reading your acknowledgements I can see you are often a victim. I am sorry about that. truely. But I do suspect you make it so.

Thread closed folks. lets get back to work!