On 11/4/15, [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> John Wood,
> > I have misgivings about "stratigraphy". The notion "deeper is older" can be
> challenged. And dating by C14 or other radiometric methods can be
> misleading. Since this assumes the age of everything in the same strata is
> the same.
The problem I see here is that you, like so many others, like to
concentrate your efforts on sites that fall into the category of 'the
exceptional'. These tend to attract fantastical theories based around
very little archaeological evidence.
Most archaeologists spend most of their time working on more mundane
sites, ones that won't ever appear in 'The Fortean Times', where the
sites are excavated stratigraphically hence the significance of
stratigraphy as a relative dating methodology.
Perhaps you ought to take the opportunity to work on an excavation
then you might learn some of the fundamentals and understand why
archaeologists use the techniques that they do. If you spent just a
little time on an excavation it would soon become very apparent why
archaeologists depend so much on stratigraphical dating.
Don't knock it until you have tried it!