JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH Archives

BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH  February 2009

BRITARCH February 2009

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Tree ring proxies unreliable estimates of global temperature

From:

Jonathan Ferguson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

British archaeology discussion list <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:01:04 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (91 lines)

I take your point Andy, and of course archaeology as a discipline
includes many scientific techniques. But you must admit that in the
*interpretation* at least it is closer to History (and is often working
with evidence more open to interpretation than even that, dependent upon
period). It includes "Art" in at least equal measure, I would say.

Is it more correct then to speak in terms of "hard" and "soft" sciences
(arch being the latter)? Because there's a clear difference I think. You
only have to read an archaeological report versus say, a
palaeontological one. Archaeological stuff tends to be more open to type
3 inference and outright speculation - in order to make some sense of
the hard evidence. Clearly interpretations can be refined, as you say.
But phenomenological approaches for example - not scientific.

Perhaps it's most true to say that archaeology is a science in
principle, but not always in practice?


Jonathan Ferguson


-----Original Message-----
From: British archaeology discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andy Holland
Sent: 18 February 2009 09:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Tree ring proxies unreliable estimates of global
temperature

I'm not wishing to contribute to discussions of Mikes beliefs about
Climate Change but.....

I would like to address one major point. Archaeology IS science.

I am an Archaeological Scientist and I object to the "its not proper
science" sentiment which seems to be common.

Why is it science? Because it uses the scientific principles as its
underlying methodology. More specifically it makes observations,
formulates a hypothesis on the basis of these observations, then
re-assesses the hypothesis in reference to wider or newer data. If the
hypothesis falls then a new/re-worked hypothesis that has a closer fit
to the data is examined and tested etc.

In this way science if evolutionary - hypotheses evolve to fit changing
(and one hopes improving quality) data.

So to answer Mikes question about why archaeologists won't admit they've
been lieing to everyone all this time.... well because they haven't!
What they have been doing is promoting the current hypothesis that is
based on the best view of the data - if that data was flawed due to a
problem with the way it was derived (i.e. if as you suggest Tree rings
etc. are not reliable) then they will re-assess the current hypothesis
once the flaw is proven.

However - Mr Haeseller's comments are NOT science! 
Why? Because he is breaking the most important rule of science - He has
decided what the answer should be in advance - You should NEVER
formulate your theory then find the data to fit it and ignore anything
else that contradicts - that's dogma not science. 
Mikes other issue is that he has an agenda about climate change and
science should be a-political and his is not, Science is worst served
when the Media, special interests and Politics get hold of it and use it
as a bludgeon to push an agenda.
Worst off all for Mike is that by following this unscientific approach
he does a disservice to his argument and to himself - if his is a
plausible argument it should stand on its own merits and be self evident
to all once pointed out and he undermines his own authority by his
method.

As to whether Mike is correct or not - I have a personal opinion, but
like any scientist I'll look at the data with an open mind and make an
informed hypothesis (which I'm always re-assessing).

Thanks

 Andy



The comments contained within this post/email are entirely the authors
personal comments and may not considered as reflective of any position,
opinion or view of the CBA.


”The world's greatest dressmaker.” Jean Muir: A Fashion Icon.
http://www.nms.ac.uk/jeanmuir

National Museums Scotland, Scottish Charity, No. SC 011130

This communication is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the addressee please inform the sender and delete the email from your system. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of National Museums Scotland. This message is subject to the Data Protection Act 1998 and Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. No liability is accepted for any harm that may be caused to your systems or data by this message.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager