Objectivity in archaeology

[troll]

Agreed sir. We are indeed both passionate and although are polar opposites-are not mutually exclusive in our approach. Best wishes and no offence meant Vulpes.:face-approve:

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[Austin Ainsworth]

Looks like the good/bad old days are back.

[BAJR Host]

One of the great things about the BAJR Forum.. (one of many )

that people can challange each other, that we can all talk, no matter who or what we are.. on BAJR we are all equals

as Kevin so rightly says

quote:One of the great unwrittens in UK archaeology is the committment of individuals to the 'cause'- Unfortunately this rarely gets acknowledged. Mainly I guess cos the guilty tend to write the history. But before this goes too far, I do think you two guys should recognise that more unites you than separates you....

Passion .. commitment, it is what unites us, we may not agree, but what a dull world that would be. Thank the stars for Vulpes and VoR, for Troll and Kevin, for RedEarth and Sparky.. for i_love_rocks and Dr P. everyone with different views, everyone willing to make a contribution.

good/bad old days are here again!

"Entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage."
Niccolo Machiavelli

[vulpes]

Ooh I feel a FOI request coming on.....

[oldgirl]

Sounds painful......

I'm wondering, given the current situation with layoffs, how many sites will now be written up by people other than the original excavators. In which case, do we think that will be more or less objective?

[garybrun]

Less! (Well I had to chime in somewhere)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce70k5ewGpA

Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[troll]

Mornin all.
I`m not altogether sure that sites were really ever written up by the original excavators and in the current climate-I`m wondering if PPGs requirement of the "minimum" will now be re-interpreted to further lower the already iffy standard. Wouldn`t be at all surprised if archaeology within a planning framework was pared down significantly by government under pressure from developers at Government level either.....:face-huh:

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[vulpes]

The EH 'word' at the recent IFA conference session on replacing PPG16 was that existing levels of protection will be retained - of course it was pointed out that that could just be government-speak for we ain't giving you any more. However, lets see what the draft PPS looks like and make our views known at consultation.

[troll]

Hi Vulpes.
I`ve been thinking about your last post. Maybe I`m just so far away from the UK at the minute that I`ve completely missed this little nugget of information. How do you feel about starting a new thread to get the details out about the potential for a re-assessment of PPG 16? Would love to know more about this......many thanks for flagging this up and best wishes from the Med.:face-approve:

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[peteraf]

Dont see why they dont just use WOC 60/96 well on reading it yes I do its a lot tighter than PPG16