1st February 2012, 11:53 AM
Ok, here is a test for quintaine. and one that I will use as a reply. with a real name attached so people know it is you that holds to the reply.
This is a reply to the self same post: Now, how would you reply? Are you happy with this people called the Ancients?
Alan Borky
Oh, by the way, you will have to read up about this, and ensure you don't reply with a knee-jerk scoff.
While discussing this, do not forget that the future is already here. the steps we take into the future are from the materials and thoughts we already have. ie... you can't have a telephone unless you have a wire you can't have a mobile phone without a wire telephone you can't have a mobile 4G computer without a mobile phone etc...
So to use this as a reason we should waste time on pseudo archaeologists. ... uh-u
From Leonardo to Darwin to Dawkins... they all build on what was known before and make it better and take it forward. for the next generation. Darwin based his ideas on what? Don't forget to discuss all his points.
Now finally./ You (quintaine) asked for an archaeological theory that had been proved. Rudely using the counter question rather than answer my original one. This is a cheap shot... but here we go. in return. You give me a similar number of pseudo theories that have been verified.
Here we go....
Archaeology has proved that there was a progression of technologies and various times and in various locations that each precede and directly allow the subsequent technology.
So Stone is followed by Ceramic technology is followed by metal technologies
Iron Age people in Britain lived in circular structures on average 8m-9m in diameter. They ate a variety of foodstuffs including pig, cattle and grain (we even know what type of grains)
The battle of Prestonpans (1745) was in a different location that previously thought, and given the mix of round shot and cannister shot, it is clear that the govt forces fired more than one round of fire.
The spacing of British troops at Isandwana would have a direct impact on the reasons for the defeat
Roman hypocaust systems and the technical functioning of the systems are well understood.
The earliest cereal farming takes place in the levant /mesopotamia and anatolia
Early churches are often located on earlier ritual sites.
The location of the quarry for stonehenge bluestones is known.
Roman field systems and farms overlie Iron Age systems.
I dunno, I could go on.
I seem to be just stating knowns. but you can't actually do that for pseudo archaeology.
er... Arthur exists.. um Camelot is here? We are genetically manipulated by alien technology? 'the Ancients' built Bosnian Pyramids? The Maya had such a super accurate calendar and time system that they could predict the end of the world? Atlantis exists in teh Bahamas/Atlantic/Spain etc oh and Romans/Egyptians/Phoenicians/ West African tribes all sailed to America, but never told anyone. Crystal Skulls are real?
So your mission is to answer the above comment and answer my question. while keeping a straight face.
To help... watch this --- to Kevin... I don't think the argument is whether there are archaeologists who go to far. It is whether we waste time with pseudos who don't even try to have evidence (or it is so dubious as to be worthless)
[video=youtube;jDKvWiToj8Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDKvWiToj8Y[/video]
etc.
This is a reply to the self same post: Now, how would you reply? Are you happy with this people called the Ancients?
Alan Borky
Quote:‘The Vindicated Thinker’ who embarks on a quest ‘tackling some terrific mystery or secret of the past’ and finally emerges as the hero that brings sensationalist news that requires “rewriting the history books from page one”.Do you think this is right and also should this be pursued. after all, this is just as valid a research topic. "Adrienne Mayor only revealed in the last decade or so archaeologists'd been throwing away for centuries inconvenient dinosaur fossils found during excavations of ancient temples in spite of the fact the ancients themselves believed them to be remnants of the very giants, dragons, etc their belief systems were based on."
That right there is the history of Science according to Dawkins with Darwin as the Vindicated Thinker and Natural Selection the Great Secret which rewrote the history books.
As for cranks and pseudoscience: the history of science's filled with people like Leonardo Davinci (who against the laws and taboos of his times performed - and recorded by drawing - an autopsy on a pregnant human cadaver) or sociopaths if not downright psychopaths who filled the pockets of the likes of Burke and Hare just to lay their hands on murdered to order young corpses.
Darwin himself was so immensely distressed by the appalling and vicious brutishness of a scientist performing surgery on a fully conscious unaneasthetized dog (by way of demonstrating the effectiveness of anaesthesia on another doggy specimen) he had to be 'persuaded' not to make an issue of it in case it impaired the future progress of science.
In short most of science's founding fathers were precisely the same sort of nutty driven DESPERATE (to use Bronowksi's description of Newton) individuals who precisely by going against the accepted beliefs and mores of their times effected the so-called scientific revolution.
Yet if they behaved the same way today not only'd they be called crackpots and cranks - they'd be locked up for life as mentally ill (as opposed to hung drawn and quartered if they'd been caught in yesteryear).
And remember much of this sort of thing didn't even occur so much as a hundred or even fifty years ago.
Clinton only got round to apologising to syphilis ridden African Americans for Tuskegee in '97.
Adrienne Mayor only revealed in the last decade or so archaeologists'd been throwing away for centuries inconvenient dinosaur fossils found during excavations of ancient temples in spite of the fact the ancients themselves believed them to be remnants of the very giants, dragons, etc their belief systems were based on.
And of course right up to date we have the seemingly never ending scandal of more and more kids being revealed to've been buried with their brains etc missing.
So maybe Johan your 'mate' Holtorf has a point.
Oh, by the way, you will have to read up about this, and ensure you don't reply with a knee-jerk scoff.
While discussing this, do not forget that the future is already here. the steps we take into the future are from the materials and thoughts we already have. ie... you can't have a telephone unless you have a wire you can't have a mobile phone without a wire telephone you can't have a mobile 4G computer without a mobile phone etc...
So to use this as a reason we should waste time on pseudo archaeologists. ... uh-u
From Leonardo to Darwin to Dawkins... they all build on what was known before and make it better and take it forward. for the next generation. Darwin based his ideas on what? Don't forget to discuss all his points.
Now finally./ You (quintaine) asked for an archaeological theory that had been proved. Rudely using the counter question rather than answer my original one. This is a cheap shot... but here we go. in return. You give me a similar number of pseudo theories that have been verified.
Here we go....
Archaeology has proved that there was a progression of technologies and various times and in various locations that each precede and directly allow the subsequent technology.
So Stone is followed by Ceramic technology is followed by metal technologies
Iron Age people in Britain lived in circular structures on average 8m-9m in diameter. They ate a variety of foodstuffs including pig, cattle and grain (we even know what type of grains)
The battle of Prestonpans (1745) was in a different location that previously thought, and given the mix of round shot and cannister shot, it is clear that the govt forces fired more than one round of fire.
The spacing of British troops at Isandwana would have a direct impact on the reasons for the defeat
Roman hypocaust systems and the technical functioning of the systems are well understood.
The earliest cereal farming takes place in the levant /mesopotamia and anatolia
Early churches are often located on earlier ritual sites.
The location of the quarry for stonehenge bluestones is known.
Roman field systems and farms overlie Iron Age systems.
I dunno, I could go on.
I seem to be just stating knowns. but you can't actually do that for pseudo archaeology.
er... Arthur exists.. um Camelot is here? We are genetically manipulated by alien technology? 'the Ancients' built Bosnian Pyramids? The Maya had such a super accurate calendar and time system that they could predict the end of the world? Atlantis exists in teh Bahamas/Atlantic/Spain etc oh and Romans/Egyptians/Phoenicians/ West African tribes all sailed to America, but never told anyone. Crystal Skulls are real?
So your mission is to answer the above comment and answer my question. while keeping a straight face.
To help... watch this --- to Kevin... I don't think the argument is whether there are archaeologists who go to far. It is whether we waste time with pseudos who don't even try to have evidence (or it is so dubious as to be worthless)
[video=youtube;jDKvWiToj8Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDKvWiToj8Y[/video]
etc.