Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias

Expand Messages
  • anthropmor@AOL.COM
    In a message dated 1/14/2009 2:08:54 P.M. Central Standard Time, bmuckle@capilanou.ca writes: I think that as the media itself is increasingly driving
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 14, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 1/14/2009 2:08:54 P.M. Central Standard Time,
      bmuckle@... writes:

      I think that as the media itself is increasingly driving archaeological
      research, especially that which focuses on things that make good television,
      archaeologists are going be faced with increasing challenges connvicning people
      of the value of lithic waste flakes, potsherds, and rusty bits of metal.




      I agree - I would further venture that it is a primary responsibility of the
      intro level instructor to teach that value. Any one who completes a 100
      level archy. course should be able to tell you why say, mesoamerican caves with
      teocinte & pod corn husks are more important , or at least equal to , the
      temple of the Moon.
      I would like to say that many of the Nova doc.'s haved been not only good
      TV, but also good for class. I remember one from a few years ago, loosely
      following Otzi, the Icemans discovery, that took lots of time ging over how
      C-14 dating and dates worked. Another one dealt with early neolithic smelting
      of copper.The folks who made those really were worth their funding; how it
      would affect primary excavation funding, however, is another matter entirely.
      Mike Pavlik
      **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
      steps!
      (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
      cemailfooterNO62)


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • mep1mep
      Great rant, Bob and really useful for class. Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.  Showing my age, I have both versions on VHS taped off the
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 14, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Great rant, Bob and really useful for class.

        Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.  Showing my age, I have both versions on VHS taped off the television.

        I know here in Texas a few years, ago, the Texas Historical Commission spent tons of money (millions) on building a coffer dam in Mategorda Bay to excavate the ship known as the LaBelle.  I use it as an example in class of throwing lots of money at "sexy" projects but not, necessarily, the most informative projects.

        Bob, would you consider posting your piece on my blog?  You could be guest blogger--using your name or not--its up to you.  I think its a great piece--just as it is.  I can cut and paste it and add Mike's comments.  However you all want it.  Let me know if its something you would consider.

        Pam




        ________________________________
        From: "anthropmor@..." <anthropmor@...>
        To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
        Cc: Anthro-l@...
        Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 9:57:16 PM
        Subject: Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias



        In a message dated 1/14/2009 2:08:54 P.M. Central Standard Time,
        bmuckle@capilanou. ca writes:

        I think that as the media itself is increasingly driving archaeological
        research, especially that which focuses on things that make good television,
        archaeologists are going be faced with increasing challenges connvicning people
        of the value of lithic waste flakes, potsherds, and rusty bits of metal.

        I agree - I would further venture that it is a primary responsibility of the
        intro level instructor to teach that value. Any one who completes a 100
        level archy. course should be able to tell you why say, mesoamerican caves with
        teocinte & pod corn husks are more important , or at least equal to , the
        temple of the Moon.
        I would like to say that many of the Nova doc.'s haved been not only good
        TV, but also good for class. I remember one from a few years ago, loosely
        following Otzi, the Icemans discovery, that took lots of time ging over how
        C-14 dating and dates worked. Another one dealt with early neolithic smelting
        of copper.The folks who made those really were worth their funding; how it
        would affect primary excavation funding, however, is another matter entirely.
        Mike Pavlik
        ************ **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
        steps!
        (http://pr.atwola. com/promoclk/ 100000075x121585 5013x1201028747/ aol?redir= http://www. freecreditreport .com/pm/default. aspx?sc=668072% 26hmpgID= 62%26bcd= De
        cemailfooterNO62)

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • anthropmor@AOL.COM
        me, too.? ( Why waste money getting the DVD, when there are new things to pick up?) Mike Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.? Showing my age,
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 15, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          me, too.? ( Why waste money getting the DVD, when there are new things to pick up?)
          Mike

          Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.? Showing my age, I have both versions on VHS taped off the television.




          -----Original Message-----
          From: mep1mep <mep1mep@...>
          To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: Anthro-l@...
          Sent: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:13 pm
          Subject: Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias






          Great rant, Bob and really useful for class.

          Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.? Showing my age, I have both versions on VHS taped off the television.

          I know here in Texas a few years, ago, the Texas Historical Commission spent tons of money (millions) on building a coffer dam in Mategorda Bay to excavate the ship known as the LaBelle.? I use it as an example in class of throwing lots of money at "sexy" projects but not, necessarily, the most informative projects.

          Bob, would you consider posting?your piece?on my blog?? You could be guest blogger--using your name or not--its up to you.? I think its a great piece--just as it is.? I can cut and paste it and add Mike's comments.? However you all want it.? Let me know if its something you would consider.

          Pam

          ________________________________
          From: "anthropmor@..." <anthropmor@...>
          To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: Anthro-l@...
          Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 9:57:16 PM
          Subject: Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias

          In a message dated 1/14/2009 2:08:54 P.M. Central Standard Time,
          bmuckle@capilanou. ca writes:

          I think that as the media itself is increasingly driving archaeological
          research, especially that which focuses on things that make good television,
          archaeologists are going be faced with increasing challenges connvicning people
          of the value of lithic waste flakes, potsherds, and rusty bits of metal.

          I agree - I would further venture that it is a primary responsibility of the
          intro level instructor to teach that value. Any one who completes a 100
          level archy. course should be able to tell you why say, mesoamerican caves with
          teocinte & pod corn husks are more important , or at least equal to , the
          temple of the Moon.
          I would like to say that many of the Nova doc.'s haved been not only good
          TV, but also good for class. I remember one from a few years ago, loosely
          following Otzi, the Icemans discovery, that took lots of time ging over how
          C-14 dating and dates worked. Another one dealt with early neolithic smelting
          of copper.The folks who made those really were worth their funding; how it
          would affect primary excavation funding, however, is another matter entirely.
          Mike Pavlik
          ************ **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
          steps!
          (http://pr.atwola. com/promoclk/ 100000075x121585 5013x1201028747/ aol?redir= http://www. freecreditreport .com/pm/default. aspx?sc=668072% 26hmpgID= 62%26bcd= De
          cemailfooterNO62)

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • George Thomas
          Agreed. I may read this exchange in my upcoming cultural anthro class, as I dash through sketches of the importance of linguistics, physical anthro and
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 15, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Agreed. I may read this exchange in my upcoming cultural anthro class, as I dash through sketches of the importance of linguistics, physical anthro and archaeology to cultural. There's such a large Indiana Jones influence, especially among young people, that the even more interesting (albeit so, so boring) aspects comprising 99% of archaeology get shorted. In my archaeology career, and as I continue after federal retirement, this has been one of my own issues anyway, so thanks, Bob, for the cheat notes.
            George Thomas

            Re: archaeology lists and bias
            Posted by: "anthropmor@..." anthropmor@...
            Date: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:57 pm ((PST))


            In a message dated 1/14/2009 2:08:54 P.M. Central Standard Time,
            bmuckle@... writes:

            I think that as the media itself is increasingly driving
            archaeological
            research, especially that which focuses on things that make good
            television,
            archaeologists are going be faced with increasing challenges
            connvicning people
            of the value of lithic waste flakes, potsherds, and rusty bits of
            metal.




            I agree - I would further venture that it is a primary responsibility
            of the
            intro level instructor to teach that value. Any one who completes a
            100
            level archy. course should be able to tell you why say, mesoamerican
            caves with
            teocinte & pod corn husks are more important , or at least equal to ,
            the
            temple of the Moon.
            I would like to say that many of the Nova doc.'s haved been not only
            good
            TV, but also good for class. I remember one from a few years ago,
            loosely
            following Otzi, the Icemans discovery, that took lots of time ging over
            how
            C-14 dating and dates worked. Another one dealt with early neolithic
            smelting
            of copper.The folks who made those really were worth their funding;
            how it
            would affect primary excavation funding, however, is another matter
            entirely.
            Mike Pavlik
            **************




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • mep1mep
            Bob, You are now an official Guest Ranter.  Check it out. Mike, I put your comment on the blog.  Was that okay?  I can remove it, if you like.  I left off
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 15, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Bob,

              You are now an official Guest Ranter.  Check it out.

              Mike,

              I put your comment on the blog.  Was that okay?  I can remove it, if you like.  I left off your name until I have your permission.

              Any and all guest bloggers are welcome.

              Pam
              http://teachinganthropology.blogspot.com




              ________________________________
              From: "anthropmor@..." <anthropmor@...>
              To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 8:04:01 AM
              Subject: Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias


              me, too.? ( Why waste money getting the DVD, when there are new things to pick up?)
              Mike

              Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.? Showing my age, I have both versions on VHS taped off the television.

              -----Original Message-----
              From: mep1mep <mep1mep@yahoo. com>
              To: SACC-L@yahoogroups. com
              Cc: Anthro-l@listserv. acsu.buffalo. edu
              Sent: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:13 pm
              Subject: Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias

              Great rant, Bob and really useful for class.

              Mike, I still show that Nova on the iceman in class.? Showing my age, I have both versions on VHS taped off the television.

              I know here in Texas a few years, ago, the Texas Historical Commission spent tons of money (millions) on building a coffer dam in Mategorda Bay to excavate the ship known as the LaBelle.? I use it as an example in class of throwing lots of money at "sexy" projects but not, necessarily, the most informative projects.

              Bob, would you consider posting?your piece?on my blog?? You could be guest blogger--using your name or not--its up to you.? I think its a great piece--just as it is.? I can cut and paste it and add Mike's comments.? However you all want it.? Let me know if its something you would consider.

              Pam

              ____________ _________ _________ __
              From: "anthropmor@AOL. COM" <anthropmor@AOL. COM>
              To: SACC-L@yahoogroups. com
              Cc: Anthro-l@listserv. acsu.buffalo. edu
              Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 9:57:16 PM
              Subject: Re: [SACC-L] archaeology lists and bias

              In a message dated 1/14/2009 2:08:54 P.M. Central Standard Time,
              bmuckle@capilanou. ca writes:

              I think that as the media itself is increasingly driving archaeological
              research, especially that which focuses on things that make good television,
              archaeologists are going be faced with increasing challenges connvicning people
              of the value of lithic waste flakes, potsherds, and rusty bits of metal.

              I agree - I would further venture that it is a primary responsibility of the
              intro level instructor to teach that value. Any one who completes a 100
              level archy. course should be able to tell you why say, mesoamerican caves with
              teocinte & pod corn husks are more important , or at least equal to , the
              temple of the Moon.
              I would like to say that many of the Nova doc.'s haved been not only good
              TV, but also good for class. I remember one from a few years ago, loosely
              following Otzi, the Icemans discovery, that took lots of time ging over how
              C-14 dating and dates worked. Another one dealt with early neolithic smelting
              of copper.The folks who made those really were worth their funding; how it
              would affect primary excavation funding, however, is another matter entirely.
              Mike Pavlik
              ************ **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
              steps!
              (http://pr.atwola. com/promoclk/ 100000075x121585 5013x1201028747/ aol?redir= http://www. freecreditreport .com/pm/default. aspx?sc=668072% 26hmpgID= 62%26bcd= De
              cemailfooterNO62)

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • anthropmor@AOL.COM
              of course you have permission to add my comments. Mike Pavlik **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 19, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                of course you have permission to add my comments.
                Mike Pavlik
                **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
                steps!
                (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
                cemailfooterNO62)


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.