tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post3956925665896395172..comments2024-03-28T11:48:17.788-07:00Comments on Publishing Archaeology: How archaeology is distorted by Science magazine and the National Geographic SocietyMichael E. Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03942595266312225661noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-47859241469860383762020-12-21T09:55:15.205-07:002020-12-21T09:55:15.205-07:00As a history nerd my comment is one word regarding...As a history nerd my comment is one word regarding putting the boots away and Scan,scan, scan....YES!!!Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15346317315123838674noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-42094986233293316552019-06-27T18:50:43.571-07:002019-06-27T18:50:43.571-07:00Aldous Huxley reminded everyone that the ends can&...Aldous Huxley reminded everyone that the ends can't justify the means because the nature of the means determines the nature of the ends.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-81412066225140407702018-08-26T23:01:39.595-07:002018-08-26T23:01:39.595-07:00I love your writing. It was really wonderful.
I love your writing. It was really wonderful.<br />Oscar Fernandezhttps://www.clippingsolutions.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-15763909470968200222018-08-13T23:02:17.015-07:002018-08-13T23:02:17.015-07:00I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say t...<br /><br />I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.<br /><a href="http://www.tjprc.org/journals/journal-of-agricultural-science" rel="nofollow">Science Journal</a><br /><a href="http://www.tjprc.org/journals/journal-of-ecology" rel="nofollow">Journal Of Ecology</a><br /><a href="http://www.tjprc.org/journals/journal-of-medical-sciences" rel="nofollow">Journal Of Medical Sciences</a><br /><a href="http://www.tjprc.org" rel="nofollow">Research Paper Publication</a><br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00357941815652274964noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-1808241584227734502018-03-13T10:57:25.805-07:002018-03-13T10:57:25.805-07:00@Chris - Excellent points. @Chris - Excellent points. Michael E. Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03942595266312225661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-25422325543852637052018-03-13T09:06:46.701-07:002018-03-13T09:06:46.701-07:00Hey Mike, we've published more then a couple b...Hey Mike, we've published more then a couple but that's OK, more will be forthcoming, probably for the rest of my career. I'm sure everyone can be accused of not publishing enough - well - maybe not Gary and Linda. The work at Angamuco was part of a full-coverage survey and so falls into a more traditional theoretical path IMO - the Mosquitia work is a bit different. <br /><br />Archaeology - 21st Century media - and how to best project out discipline - this is an important question that needs a long considered meeting somewhere. <br /><br />A more important point centers on why we should actually do LiDAR scans. Massive earth system change is placing unprecedented pressure on cultural and ecological patrimony. We are racing the clock in terms of being able to document known and unknown archaeological resources. LiDAR, and what will follow, record at a very high resolution in 3 dimensions creating indelible data sets that do not degrade. It is my hope that researchers will be analyzing these data for decades to come using increasingly sophisticated technologies with new sets of questions. <br /><br />Let's face it - we are fighting a war - and archaeologists are lovers not fighters. I'm a field archaeologist and so it pains me to say this but it's time to put our boots in the closet for the next decade or so and scan, scan, scan before it's to late. This is the responsibility that we have to the people of the past that are represented in the archaeological record. Chris Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03861628730582089345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-83898287436660826772018-03-13T07:58:29.832-07:002018-03-13T07:58:29.832-07:00@Chris - Yes, you have published a couple of paper...@Chris - Yes, you have published a couple of papers about the LiDAR at Angamuco, but they are very preliminary, without the data needed to discuss the number of structures, the population, etc. This was the point of my prior post about LiDAR - that initial results are not very useful until they are analyzed with specific research questions in mind. I guess it is useful to be able to say, "Oh, look, there are more archaeological features in this area than people had thought previously." But that in itself is not much of a scientific advance. <br /><br />As for the Honduran case, I should probably leave comments on that to the experts on Honduras, which does not include me. Regardless of the extent to which NGS did or did not fund work in Honduras, I think my basic point about NGS being more interested in sensationalism, clicks, and commerce is valid. Perhaps that wasn't the best example to show that, though.Michael E. Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03942595266312225661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-893525464356785152018-03-12T18:27:23.066-07:002018-03-12T18:27:23.066-07:00If the "City of the Monkey God" was a ma...If the "City of the Monkey God" was a massive scientific fraud, then why Preston's book is entitled "The City of the Monkey God"? The scientific team emphasized that this city was a myth, but National Geographic seemed to be eager on associating the archaeological research with this legendary city. So many misleading and confusing narratives. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2971081717687612908.post-14947547358158223582018-03-12T06:43:54.363-07:002018-03-12T06:43:54.363-07:00Hello Mike
I don't usually comment on blog pos...Hello Mike<br />I don't usually comment on blog posts because they are regulated by the author. I'm traveling, typing this on a phone, and so will make it brief. In terms of Angamuco I've been saying this for the last couple of years and the new size of the site was published last year.<br /><br />https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040618216303871<br /><br />We have mapped over 7,000 structures and landscape features from Angamuco which represents roughly 17% of the total foundations at the site. We have a pretty good idea how to interpret the LiDAR results, what a cultural feature looks like, etc. If you want to have a conversation about LiDAR survey and sampling buy me a beer in DC - it's an interesting topic. <br /><br />I use the Manhattan comparison with the goal of getting people to think about urban variation, population density, and to compare past cities to modern examples. There is no consensus on the total number of buildings in Manhattan but it's around 40,000 - the same as Angamuco. But . . . and this is covered in the original Guardian news article - there are over 16 million people living in Manhattan while for Angamuco the potential maximum was 100,000 if all the buildings were occupied at once which of course they weren't. These kinds of comparisons are necessary to better apply what we have learned from the past for future solutions - which for me is the goal of archaeology. <br /><br />And as a point of fact all of the Angamuco coverage is the result of a single interview. All of the subsequent articles, posts, etc are all based on that original piece in the Guardian. None of the Mexican papers - including El Pais - contacted me. <br /><br />In terms of the Honduras work this has been covered ad nauseam in the popular press, academic literature, and in Preston's Monkey God book. The Mosquitia region is certainly poorly known archaeologically and sites identified in the LiDAR survey had never been documented before, and no archaeologists had visited them/worked there. We cover some of this in a peer-reviewed PlosOne article <br /><br />http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159890<br /><br />Nat Geo did not fund any of the LiDAR scan or 2015 field verification. They did partially fund the salvage excavation from 2016 of objects from the cache which we are in the process of publishing and will be presenting at the upcoming SAA. <br /><br />Preston's book is written for a public audience but it covers much of the above and is accurate. He also demonstrates conclusively that the whole idea of a 'City of the Monkey God' was a massive scientific fraud. It's a good book, you should read it, I'll send you a copy. <br /> <br />Chris Fisher<br /> Chris Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03861628730582089345noreply@blogger.com