Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 10 May 2012 14:40:43 -0400 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; format=flowed; charset=utf-8; reply-type=original |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Message-ID: |
<4D3DCB36686E411E9D5609388A551946@drinkhail> |
In-Reply-To: |
<001501cd2edb$e2a91620$a7fb4260$@de> |
Organization: |
Hutman Productions |
Content-transfer-encoding: |
8BIT |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
My philosophy about such things is not to box them up in a museum somewhere
but if they have little or no context give them to some people and see then
what they do with them and record what happens and what if any site is
formed and how. if it doesn’t get context one time try try again....
CB
-----Original Message-----
From: geoff carver
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 2:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: WWII plane found deep in the Sahara
Good question. I knew someone who looked into “aircraft archaeology” as a
project. Basically, you can’t do anything about “patterns of human
behaviour” from crashed aircraft, but in some cases, these things are the
only remaining evidence of certain elements of technology. I’ve seen P-40s
in museums, but there are a number of aircraft of which the only known
examplars are from wrecks.
From: General Archaeology Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bronc
What’s the difference between a Clovis point found in a farmer’s field and a
P-40 found in the desert??
|
|
|