To each his own. Truth and accuracy require no justification regardless what toes they may step on.
>Your comments don't really have any direct relevance to what I posted.
But I beg to differ. They are in direct response to it.
>You seem to have a gripe about the word 'science' itself.
I have no such gripe, as long as the word "science" is not coopted by non-scientific agendas such as "global warming". However, 'science' is not the bastion of purity and objective honesty that some would like to believe. It is intensely political.
>For lots of reasons (egos, budgets, political correctness) 'discoveries' in archaeology have not been subjected to the same kind of rigorous peer review one finds in physics, say.
We certainly agree on that. Of course 'peer review' is too often another political joke. Peer review is not the bastion of purity and objective honesty that some would like to believe. It is intensely political. That is the way the world works.
>Your comments about history are true.
Thank you. I was only expressing admiration for your wording of the thought:
...Most tenured American archaeologists were blindered by the 'religion' of certain prevailing belief models that prevented them from considering any evidence that went counter to their credo.
and expanding it to apply more generally. I suspect your uneasyness with my long time academic interest and research into the Lost Tribes of Israel is blindered by the 'religion' of certain prevailing belief models that prevent you from considering any evidence that goes counter to your credo.
No, it has more to do with boredom, although your statement is clever. I'm not the least bit uneasy about your work: whatever floats your boat. I've encountered so many conflicting legends about the Lost Tribes I confess to tuning such discussions out for the most part, although I've read a few things recently about possible Lost Tribe connections in India and South Africa that appear to be more scientifically based than most. But I promise to read your material as objectively as possible.
As for your comment: However, 'science' is not the bastion of purity and objective honesty that some would like to believe. It is intensely political, that was the precise point of my post. While politics always plays a major role in human affairs, I believe the political games of the past 50 years have been extraordinary (but certainly not unique). The East/West polarization since about 1941 has been intense, and the post-war impact of Marxism on academic thought has been frightening. They've both had a huge negative impact on archaeology, and have led to a continuing emphasis on archaeology of the Mediterranean instead of worldwide considerations, which was the point I was originally responding to.