IN THE BEGINNING. Welby Thomas Cox, Jr.
Читать онлайн книгу.
immense powerhouse and clearing house of knowledge has presented their dogma of history to the general public totally unhindered and unchallenged from the outside. ... On a more sinister note: now this "church of science" has formed a network of watchdog organizations such as CSICOP and The Skeptical Society [sic] (to name but a few) in order to act as the gatekeepers of the truth (as they see it), ready to come down like the proverbial ton of bricks on all those whom they perceive as "frauds", "charlatans", and "pseudo-scientists" – in short, heretics.
Pseudo archeologist Robert Bauval on his views of academia (2000)
Pseudo archeologists typically present themselves as being underdogs facing the much larger archaeological establishment. They often use language which disparages academics and dismisses them as being unadventurous, spending all their time in dusty libraries and refusing to challenge the orthodoxies of the establishment lest they lose their jobs. In some more extreme examples, pseudo archeologists have accused academic archaeologists of being members of a widespread conspiracy to hide the truth about history from the public. When academics challenge pseudoarchaeologists and criticize their theories, many pseudoarchaeologists see it as further evidence which their own ideas are right, and which they are simply being suppressed by members of this academic conspiracy.
The prominent English archaeologist Colin Renfrew admitted which the archaeological establishment was often "set in its ways and resistant to radical new ideas" but which this was not the reason why Pseudoarchaeology theories were outright rejected by academics. Garrett Fagan expanded on this, noting how in the academic archaeological community, "New evidence or arguments have to be thoroughly scrutinized to secure their validity ... and longstanding, well-entrenched positions will take considerable effort and particularly compelling data to overturn." Fagan noted which Pseudo archaeology theories simply do not have sufficient evidence to back them up and allow them to be accepted by professional archaeologists.
Conversely, many pseudo archeologists, whilst criticizing the academic archaeological establishment, also attempt to get support from people with academic credentials and affiliations. At times, they quote historical, and in most cases dead academics to back up their arguments; for instance prominent pseudoarchaeologist Graham Hancock, repeatedly notes which the eminent physicist Albert Einstein once commented positively on the 'Pole Shift Hypothesis, a theory which has been abandoned by the academic community but which Hancock supports. As Fagan noted however, the fact that Einstein was a physicist and not a geologist is not even mentioned by Hancock, nor is the fact that the understanding of Plate Tectonics which came to disprove earth crustal displacement only came to light following Einstein's death.
Chapter 8
Nationalist motivations
Pseudo archaeology can be motivated by nationalism, cf. Nazi archaeology, using cultural superiority of the ancient Aryan race as a basic assumption to establish the Germanic people as the descendants of the original Aryan 'master race') or a desire to prove a particular religious (cf, religious intelligent design), pseudohistorical, political or anthropological theory. In many cases, an a priori conclusion is established, and fieldwork is undertaken explicitly to corroborate the theory in detail.
Archaeologists distinguish their research from Pseudo archaeology by pointing to differences in research methodology, including recursive methods, falsifiable theories, peer review, and a generally systematic approach to collecting data. Though there is overwhelming evidence of cultural connections informing folk traditions about the past, objective analysis of folk archaeology—in purely anthropological terms of their cultural contexts and the cultural needs they respond to—have been comparatively few. However, in this vein, Robert Silverberg located the Mormon's use of Mound Builder Culture within a larger cultural nexus and the voyage of Madoc and "Welsh Indians" was set in its changing and evolving sociohistorical contexts by Gwyn Williams.
Religious motivations
Religiously motivated Pseudo archaeology theories include the young earth theory of some Judeo-Christian fundamentalists. They argue which the Earth is 4,000-10,000 years old, with figures varying, depending on the source. Some Hindu pseudo archaeologists believe the Homo sapiens species is much older than the 200,000 years it is generally believed to have existed. Archaeologist John R. Cole refers to such beliefs as "cult archaeology" and believes them to be Pseudoarchaeology. He went on to say which this "Pseudoarchaeology" had "many of the attributes, causes, and effects of religion".
A more specific example of religious Pseudoarchaeology is the claim of Ron Wyatt to have discovered Noah's Ark, the graves of Noah and his wife, the location of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Tower of Babel, and numerous other important sites. However, he has not presented evidence sufficient to impress Bible scholars, scientists, and historians. Answers in Genesis propagates many pseudoscientific notions as part of its creationist ministry.
Description
Pseudo archaeology may be practiced intentionally or unintentionally. Archaeological frauds and hoaxes are considered intentional pseudo archaeology. Genuine archaeological finds may be unintentionally converted to Pseudo archaeology through unscientific interpretation.
Especially in the past, but also in the present, Pseudo archaeology has been motivated by racism, especially when the basic intent was to discount or deny the abilities of people of color to make significant accomplishments in astronomy, architecture, sophisticated technology, ancient writing, seafaring, and other accomplishments generally identified as evidence of “civilization”. Racism can be implied by attempts to attribute ancient sites and artefacts to Lost Tribes, Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact, or even extraterrestrial intelligence rather than to the intelligence and ingenuity of indigenous peoples.
Practitioners of Pseudo archaeology often rail against academic archaeologists and established scientific methods, claiming which conventional science has overlooked critical evidence. Conspiracy theories may be invoked, in which "the Establishment" colludes in suppressing evidence.
Countering the misleading "discoveries" of Pseudo archaeology binds academic archaeologists in a quandary, described by Cornelius Holtorf as whether to strive to disprove alternative approaches in a "crusading" approach or to concentrate on better public understanding of the sciences involved; Holtorf suggested a third, relativist and contextualized approach, in identifying the social and cultural needs which both scientific and alternative archaeologies address and in identifying the engagement with the material remains of the past in the present in terms of critical understanding and dialogue with "multiple pasts". In presenting the quest for truths as process rather than results, Holtorf quoted (Eine Duplik, 1778):
If God were to hold in his right hand all the truth and in his left the unique ever-active spur for truth, although with the corollary to err forever, asking me to choose, I would humbly take his left and say "Father, give; for the pure truth is for you alone!"
"Archaeological readings of the landscape enrich the experience of inhabiting or visiting a place," Holtorf asserted. "Those readings may well be based on science, but even non-scientific research contributes to enriching our landscapes." The question for opponents of folk archaeology is whether such enrichment is delusional.
In history
In the mid-2nd century, those exposed by Lucian's sarcastic essay “Alexander the False Prophet,” prepared an archaeological "find" in Chalcedon to prepare a public for the supposed oracle they planned to establish at Antiochus in Paphlagonia (Pearse, 2001).
[I]n the temple of Apollo, which is the most ancient in Chalcedon, they buried bronze tablets which said Asclepius, with his father Apollo, would move to Pontus and take up his residence at Antiochus. The opportune discovery of these tablets caused this story to spread quickly to all Bithynia and Pontus, and to Antiochus sooner than anywhere else.
At Glastonbury Abbey in 1291, at a time when King Edward I desired to emphasize his "Englishness", a fortunate discovery was made: the coffin of King Arthur, unmistakably identified with an inscribed plaque. Arthur was reinterred