There is a very big difference in "used to be" and "IS"
You could say that this is a PAS success story and have reached out to
Is the transformation something to be applauded and positive thing.
I know Steve works hard to tell other detectorists about the "gospel of
I think your punching below the belt Mr Swift.
From: British archaeology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Nigel Swift
Sent: 30. juni 2008 19:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Sustainable archaeology - was archaeology v.
In a message dated 30/06/2008 12:11:04 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Paul Barford and archaeologists
sharing his anti detecting stance have done more wholesale damage to the
archaeological record than any amount of chemical or plough damage will
What an extraordinary statement.
How the blazes has Paul "done wholesale damage to the archaeological record
And does anyone else find it bizarre and unacceptable that such a wild
public accusation should come from someone who has just announced to the
list that they used to be a nighthawk?