Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a boring, overplayed, anti-science trope. The uncertainty is even visible in the title: "Romans may have destroyed..." It's a headline to draw interest to the story about a dig. Journalists need a hook. Nobody clicks on "Archaeologists found a pot on Tuesday."
Mostly agree, but I would click the shit out of "Archaeologists found a pot on Tuesday." :)
Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
11–20 of 32 posts
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#12This is a good example of why archeologists shouldn't be believed. They've extrapolated the universe from a piece of fairy cake here. They found : burned buildings and a pot inside another pot. There are an infinite number of explanations for those two findings.
I think you’re reading journalists, not the actual archeologists. They saw evidence and suggested a hypothesis, not a conclusion. I personally have never read an archeologist state a conclusion they didn’t directly observe. Sometimes they’ll note loose threads for further study. Scientific literature has gotten terrible about drawing conclusions from too few points and over reliance on flawed statistical analysis. Bu…
Ritual. It's literally a running joke, and it's every. single. paper.
https://animalarchaeology.com/2018/10/09/what-is-old-is-new-...
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#13Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#14What have the Romans ever done for us?
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#15This is a good example of why archeologists shouldn't be believed. They've extrapolated the universe from a piece of fairy cake here. They found : burned buildings and a pot inside another pot. There are an infinite number of explanations for those two findings.
The idea is that a group of archaeologists find a derelict motel in the future and try to explain what the mundane items were used for. It’s hilarious.
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#16This is a good example of why archeologists shouldn't be believed. They've extrapolated the universe from a piece of fairy cake here. They found : burned buildings and a pot inside another pot. There are an infinite number of explanations for those two findings.
I think you’re reading journalists, not the actual archeologists. They saw evidence and suggested a hypothesis, not a conclusion. I personally have never read an archeologist state a conclusion they didn’t directly observe. Sometimes they’ll note loose threads for further study. Scientific literature has gotten terrible about drawing conclusions from too few points and over reliance on flawed statistical analysis. Bu…
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#17This is a good example of why archeologists shouldn't be believed. They've extrapolated the universe from a piece of fairy cake here. They found : burned buildings and a pot inside another pot. There are an infinite number of explanations for those two findings.
This is a boring, overplayed, anti-science trope. The uncertainty is even visible in the title: "Romans may have destroyed..." It's a headline to draw interest to the story about a dig. Journalists need a hook. Nobody clicks on "Archaeologists found a pot on Tuesday."
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#18It may have also been torched by the workers before they fled to prevent it from falling into Roman hands.
> When it was excavated in the 1950s by Richmond, a large pit was found in the summer of 1960 containing 875,400 complete iron nails (Square shaft) ranging from 50–410 mm (2–16 in) plus another 28 (round shaft nails) weighing 7 tons, together with other iron objects, including cartwheel rims weighing a combined total weight of ten tonnes (Inchtuthil Nails by “Roddy Fraser”). The pit was elaborately concealed, and the nails and ironwork were almost certainly buried by the troops to deny them to the local tribes when they dismantled the fortress before they finally left.
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you’re reading journalists, not the actual archeologists. They saw evidence and suggested a hypothesis, not a conclusion. I personally have never read an archeologist state a conclusion they didn’t directly observe. Sometimes they’ll note loose threads for further study. Scientific literature has gotten terrible about drawing conclusions from too few points and over reliance on flawed statistical analysis. Bu…
> I personally have never read an archeologist state a conclusion they didn’t directly observe. Ritual. It's literally a running joke, and it's every. single. paper. https://animalarchaeology.com/2018/10/09/what-is-old-is-new-...
Re: Romans may have destroyed Moray metal-working site
#20"Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgacus
Although I am originally from Moray I now live in Fife and the hill behind our house is where Agricola's army is said to have camped on the way North after having crossed the Firth of Forth.