Dunn's most salient point is that the shapes of these objects, their accuracy, and their precision are more characteristic of machine parts than of artefacts of superstititious bumpkins.

He is obviously correct and this point is being ignored most of the time.

Even if we could explain these objects as mere "fluff" we still need to explain how they achieved such precision and why. Since we can't show they are fluff and tomb debris it makes sense to withhold judgement as to their function and nature.