archaeology general

>>2538076
What's the current most recent relevant archaelogical finding, OP?

>>2538076
I have a large bone that needs to be examined

What is your opinion on fossil records? Do you find them scientifically solid or does something about them give you doubts?

>>2539567
I'm not OP, but I have a lot more experience in archaeology than he does (finishing up a master's degree). In general, fossils don't' have much to do with archaeology, since we deal with artifacts, and most of those come from periods where fossilization hasn't happened yet. The only real exceptions are for artifacts made by very early, non-Homo Sapiens hominins like H. habilus and H. erectus.

That being said, they're pretty solid. Palentologists know what they're doing. The fossil record is generally more complete than the general public realizes, and a very good idea of the variety of animal of the past does exist. As far as the dating and stuff tied with it, that's also solid. Tons of research has gone into verifying different dating methods and understanding the limitations and positives of each. As long as someone is working within the parameters of a test and using a good lab, that's shit's about as solid as biological sciences can get. The people who criticize this stuff generally either don't understand it, or obviously misrepresent it.

What are your thoughts on the Smith and Wesson Mk.II Hand Ejector?

>>2539578
how do you know that dating is solid?

>>2539567
>Archaeology
>Fossil record
WEW LAD
E
W

L
A
D

>>2539578
Thoughts on Lloyd Pye and his 'Everything You Know Is Wrong' presentation?

>>2539585
the op picture literally has a human skull.

Just in case I mistakingly thought that human remains are part of fossil records: I meant human remains.

>>2539583
Read the papers and monographs by the chemists and physicists that have figured out how to do the dating. We don't date the shit, we send it out to labs that specialize in doing that.

If that sounds like a copout, I'm just admitting that I don't' know the intricacies of something that isn't my field. This stuff has been the subject of serious study for decades and has been accepted by the entire scientific community.

>>2539586
It's absolute garbage. Pretty much nothing he says is right, or makes sense in any way, given what is known about the archaeological record. It's just /x/-tier conspiracy and psuedoscience that only makes sense to people who don't know any better. I understand why some people take it seriously, because I probably would have as a teenager (it's interesting, and I love things that talk about the human past in different ways - it's why I got into this field in the first place), but he's fundamentally wrong about pretty much everything, and it's not very hard to figure out how. Just do some basic research and don't dismiss every [iece of established science you find as disinfo shilling.

File: 21ea6e090dd3e00d16d0caf6b2d397cd_okay-meme-gallery-okay-meme_600-600.jpg (39KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x600px

>>2539605
>Pretty much nothing he says is right, or makes sense in any way

>>2539616
It's not a sad thing that crazy shit like that isn't right. Trust me, as a person who grew up believing most of that shit, and later got into actual archaeology: the actual science is much more interesting.

>>2539627
I just always felt enchanted by the idea of a North American ape hiding out in the deep woods