> If nearly three years of reaching out to the
> archaeological community only to be met with the
> equivalent of them placing their fingers in their
> ears while chanting la la la la la have taught me
> anything it would be that my persistence is
> nothing more than an effort in futility with
> regard to that arena. None have offered any
> scientific reasoning or anything of substance that
> would indicate anything other than utter
> complacency on their part. Persistence, however,
> doesn't necessarily need to be wasted on only one
> venue and can certainly be redirected. We will see
> if it takes three years to gain an audience with
> the NSF budget committee for instance. It seems
> all that is required for the evidence to speak for
> itself is a mind of reasonable intelligence to
> present it to which has not been psychologically
> conditioned to reject it.
20th century "science" to a very large extent is just a long winded apology to the errors of 19th century science. Sure, 19th century scientists were among the best ever produced but they were wrong about almost everything and we can't seem to jettison the errors. This is especially a problem in areas like psychology, archaeology and Egyptology. We have built huge constructs called paradigms on bad assumptions and bad guesses. No matter how much evidence accumulates to topple the nonsense it is all propped up by peers and their massive egos and protecting their position in the pecking order.
Now days the nonsense is even leaking into the hard sciences. People see all the new technology and assume it's the result of theory and understanding but they are wrong.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 14-Aug-18 02:13 by cladking.