Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

May 6, 2024, 11:46 am UTC    
August 14, 2001 09:25AM
<HTML>Everyone without exception approaches a subject matter with a level of bias. We all operate in different worldviews.

Predictions will arise due to the results obtain from other sites and the patterns which can be seen emerging. What happens with a new site is excavated, or an existing site re-excavated and/or its materials re-evaluated, is that comparitive tests are done to see whether the predictive power of various constrasting theories is really up to scratch. If it isn't up to scratch then the evidence forthcoming devalues the strength of that particular theory and new hypothesis have to be formulated to explain and incorporate the new material. In this fashion science advances, although by its very nature we will never know the 100% truth. "Truth" in science is an elusive concept.

Mike.</HTML>
Subject Author Posted

Repeatability in archaeology

Martin Stower August 14, 2001 06:47AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 08:09AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 08:36AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 09:02AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

John Wall August 14, 2001 09:12AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 09:14AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 10:07AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Stephen Tonkin August 14, 2001 10:41AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 02:26PM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 08:34AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 09:07AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 09:25AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 02:29PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login