16th September 2013, 06:12 PM
To be fair, it is how you use it that matters to me/ I would always search every off summit south facing slope for sites in a particular area... as a majority of prehistoric sites were found in that area. and it was easier to argue to planning that there was a good reason to do this... HOWEVER> this did not mean that I would ignore any north slope or summit etc... when I started using PM it acually helped my hit rate... though it was down to added data... which helps. though never removed the need to investigate the unknown with all methods that I could ask for.
Currently a lovely Neolithic / Bronze Age site is being excavat3ed that I placed conditions on about 8 years ago. as I predicted a site and was able to strengthen that argument after the consultants added geophysics to the mix. and after some negotiations worked out a way for the site to be dug and the client to be (reasonably) happy so one method should be relied on...
and now I guess we have managed to come as far from the thread origins as I can imagine
HOWEVER> I do agree that predicting is as much an art as a science. --- probably more!
Currently a lovely Neolithic / Bronze Age site is being excavat3ed that I placed conditions on about 8 years ago. as I predicted a site and was able to strengthen that argument after the consultants added geophysics to the mix. and after some negotiations worked out a way for the site to be dug and the client to be (reasonably) happy so one method should be relied on...
and now I guess we have managed to come as far from the thread origins as I can imagine
HOWEVER> I do agree that predicting is as much an art as a science. --- probably more!