| Archeologists and the Status Quo |
| (1/8) > >> |
|
sammyseaman: Okay, does anyone have a good reason why there’s so much stubbornness and closed-mindedness of most (not all) archeologists and scholars. I’m aware that a lot of their sticking to very conservative beliefs and not being too “out there” is directly related to funding but why is that? Also, there’s so many instances where these “too out there” theories prove to be true so I’m not too sure why they’re so narrow minded. Wouldn't it be more prductive to think a bit outside the box? Funding and ego are two of the main reasons for this but I would think most archeologists would be free thinkers. And I’m not talking Ancient Aliens type free thinkers. I’m talking guys like these two: "For decades, scientists thought that the Clovis hunters were the first to cross the Arctic to America. They were wrong — and now they need a better theory As caches of Clovis tools were uncovered across North America over subsequent decades, nearly all archaeologists signed on to the idea that the Clovis people were the first Americans. Any evidence of humans in the New World before the Clovis time was dismissed, sometimes harshly. That was the case with the Washington-state mastodon kill, which was first described around 30 years ago1 but then largely ignored. Intense criticism also rained down on competing theories of how people arrived, such as the idea that early Americans might have skirted the coastline in boats, avoiding the Bering land bridge entirely. “I was once warned not to write about coastal migration in my dissertation. My adviser said I would ruin my career,” says Jon Erlandson, an archaeologist at the University of Oregon in Eugene." http://www.nature.com/news/ancient-migration-coming-to-america-1.10562 "J Harlen Bretz and the great Scabland debate The process to change the prevailing dogma of the day was a tremendous struggle for Bretz despite his use of a great deal of very good evidence - and that is what is most interesting about this story. Many people think that scientists are dispassionate in their investigations, conclusions and their general search for truth. As we will soon discover, most scientists have always been very passionate people who, just like most of the rest of us, do not like to admit a long-held error even in the face of otherwise overwhelming evidence." http://www.detectingdesign.com/harlenbretz.html There are many examples out there (don’t even get me started on Egyptologists and their pyramids were tombs hogwash) and as a big fan of history I’m left wondering how can we change this? |
|
CosmicCowboy: Quote from: sammyseaman on May 03, 2012, 12:45:56 PM There are many examples out there (don’t even get me started on Egyptologists and their pyramids were tombs hogwash) and as a big fan of history I’m left wondering how can we change this? Pyramids were landing strips for the Vimanas. Everyone knows this. :headscratch: |
|
county: In the 1960's the medical community believed autism was caused by "refrigerator moms"... Some years prior to that science held that the earth was flat.... I am not getting your point.... |
|
CLAY: It's human nature. You think you are right, so you throw everything in to defending it until the evidence becomes overwhelming. Cool article, by the way. :thumbsup: |
|
bomber: it's the little man acting like a big man in a small pond routine . . . .you can see it here on the board, when one of our pundits states something that not all immediately agree with . . . . . . Q: How do you change human behavior? A: With great difficulty. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |