Ron,
Being an easterner, I'm not familiar with this case. I certainly wouldn't 
refute your first-hand observation, but would be curious to see what the 
report submitted for peer review looked like, and who all the various 
"theys" are that wouldn't accept it for publication or who laughed at it. I 
assume there's a draft report prepared for publication, and, as a case study 
of the irrational conservatism in our own field it would be valuable to 
review it now.

As for post-modern, post-processualist "just so stories", as one of my 
collegues likes to call them, I admit my biases overlooked them completely. 
To make it explicit, I've always assumed this was just a little dead-end 
by-way in the progress of social science, and science in general. A sort of 
hiccup in the otherwise progressive digestion of knowledge. Yes, I know: 
"Old Fogey! Old Fogey!" or is it "old-new Old Fogey"?

We certainly can't require anyone who explicitly disavows the scientific 
method to adhere it's primitive terms. Writing scripts for Laura Crofts 
cartoons is probably more rewarding than stodgy old academic enquiry, so 
maybe a career change is indicated for those who don't have the stomach for 
rigorous debate.

Tim T.
Grumpy old pedant