I write about Egypt sparingly, cautiously, and only when I have to, having never been there, in the field, so to speak. Ditto Gobekli Tepe. And I only write about AE in its connection with the Ancestral Puebloans. I don't plan on going to Turkey, so I'll leave writing about the site to those that have. Nothing worse than armchair speculation.
"Both signs occur worldwide, usually not as signs, sometimes meaning something else, or nothing in the conscious domain, nothing 'real' in archaeological terms (recognisably similar interpretation by most members)." If they are not sign, well then, what are they. Pretty de-signs? This certainly means something to the natives of Arizona. [www.theorionzone.com]
"I maintain that any cross in a circle, does not have any Egyptian meaning in Khoe or Koranna or Indian engravings."
I refer you to a book by Crichton Miller called The Golden Thread of Time. [www.crichtonmiller.com] The so-called Celtic Cross is actually a navigational tool used by Neolithic global mariners.
"Regarding ‘completely different DNA and completely different cultures of Navajo and Hopi tribes’, that depends on your definitions of DNA, and culture. ‘Their’ genes and cultures are merging, and with others. Do you study this current diffusion too?"
No, for the most part I am only interested in archaeo-genetics; that is, DNA evidence recovered from Ancestral Puebloan sites and how that compares with DNA from archaeological sites in various regions. I am not interested in current Hopi/Navajo admixture, which is obvious and boring.
"Regarding “never say always”, science has to rise above common sense, or it is not science (Carl Popper)... The closer to absolutes, the more scientific, the less rhetorical."
For the record, I do not "do" science; I am a journalist, which has different epistemological objectives. I will quote the first few paragraphs of my first non-fiction book (I also write poetry).
"Because of the heterogeneous nature of The Orion Zone: Ancient Star Cities of the American Southwest, at least some portion is bound to disturb or displease almost any faction on the intellectual spectrum. Part archaeology, part astronomy, part cultural anthropology, part ethnographic theology, part historical linguistics, part comparative mythology, part metaphysical speculation, pervaded at times with an aura of poetry, the book serves as a point of convergence for a wide variety of disciplines. As the author of such a peculiar ilk of investigative research, I will undoubtedly be perceived in certain quarters as an interloper— the proverbial jack of all fields and master of none. This bias, however, is more the result of the contemporary compartmentalization of epistemology that academia reinforces or the dominance of scientism in the average layperson’s world view than it is a valid critique of such a hybrid genre. If the aim is hard science, then one best look elsewhere. Although I have rigorously collected and scrutinized a substantial amount of archaeological and ethnographic evidence to support my book’s primary thesis, its ultimate goal is not the advancement of scientific theories or the patient accumulation of data. In fact, the stakes are much higher. The implications found here involve the daunting task of helping to redefine the paradigms and parameters of the cultural evolution and history of our planet."
So, my methodology is not empirical but intuitive. After all, I am an INTP (Introvert, Intuitive, Thinking, Perception) character type, according to the Jungian schema, confirmed by the Myers-Briggs test. By the way, in 1993 North Atlantic Books published my long poem entitled A Log of Deadwood: A Postmodern Epic of the South Dakota Gold Rush.
Best of luck, though, with your structuralist research.