« Four Stone Hearth #10 | Main | When readings science blogs pays off »
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Cameron's Jesus tomb debunked
The other day I wrote about the manufactured circus surrounding the discovery of a cave reportedly containing the ossuaries of Jesus, Mary, and Mary Magdalene. The scientific evidence is to be presented not in an academic journal but on a Discovery Channel TV special this Sunday. Unsurprisingly, archaeologists all over the world are starting to speak out. William Dever is one of them and his comments in a Washington Post article pretty much sum up my feelings as well:
"I'm not a Christian. I'm not a believer. I don't have a dog in this fight," said William G. Dever, who has been excavating ancient sites in Israel for 50 years and is widely considered the dean of biblical archaeology among U.S. scholars. "I just think it's a shame the way this story is being hyped and manipulated."
Dever goes on to comment:
"I've know about these ossuaries for many years and so have many other archaeologists, and none of us thought it was much of a story, because these are rather common Jewish names from that period," he said. "It's a publicity stunt, and it will make these guys very rich, and it will upset millions of innocent people because they don't know enough to separate fact from fiction."
Jodi Magness, a UNC-Chapel Hill archaeologist as quoted in the same Post article:
[Magness] expressed irritation that the claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this," she said.
Posted by Will at February 28, 2007 04:03 PM in In the News
Comments
I couldn't disagree more. What a failed system is peer review--and any honest person who really deals with it knows it.
Who chooses whom to protect from data? This is government-think.
No, the media is the place. If they get shot down by a "vast majorities" of scholars, let majorities find a way to have a voice.
Why is it "academic?" I don't even know what that means. Why not make the bulk of this information free access? Why not record and make available "academic" conference proceedings?
What is there to hide?
We all saw what happened with the Dead Sea Scrolls which were hidden needlessly to protect puny careers.
Let the sun shine in!
Posted by: Ryan Lanham ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.anthroblogs.org/nomadicthoughts/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 2, 2007 02:52 PM
This goes beyond any qualms with academia and the publishing process. It has to do with good science vs. bad science. I have yet to see any genuinely good science appear anywhere other than academic publications. In other words, until a major scientific advancement is proposed on a cable television network and subsequently accepted by the scientific community, I'll disagree with you.
Posted by: Will at March 4, 2007 12:03 AM