Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Sat behind copy of the Bible, underneath a picture of unicorn and wearing a fancy wig and an ornamental dressing gown, Justice Williams denounced a religious leader who looks like a Jethro Tull album cover as being a bit ludicrous.
Sat behind copy of the Bible, underneath a picture of unicorn and wearing a fancy wig and an ornamental dressing gown, Justice Williams denounced a religious leader who looks like a Jethro Tull album cover as being a bit ludicrous.
These skeletons were only around 1000 years old so would have potentially better preserved DNA than the Stone Henge ones so, granted, extraction would be easier/quicker. But 9 months compared to 8 years?
...IMHO It smacks of the 'research gravy train', like the stream of 'recent research shows . . .' stories from the BBC.
The recent research shows stories are what you get from journalists, who look at some scientific paper/press release, and then make a story out of the bit that they understand. Sometimes seemingly frivolous research has serious applications. So the study on the physics of beer bubbles has possibilities in predicting volcanic eruptions, or monitoring food stability over time. The headline you get is "Beer produces bubbles, scientists show".
Maths is a prime example of pure knowledge for the sake of it. But when physics has need of it, the maths is (usually) already there. Even though no-one knew what the application would be. And when the engineers need the physics, it's already been worked out.
As I'm not an expert in the field, I don't know what there is to learn; a quick glance at the Wikipedia page about bioarchaeology, followed by a look on Amazon at some of the books relating to the subject, suggests that there probably is a lot to be found out.
8 years is probably sufficient time for you or I to become an expert in the field and carry out the tests... Just saying like
No not at all, my cynicism revolves around what further knowledge they hope to ascertain over the next 5 years that they have been unable to glean in the preceding 3.
These are after all bones, not a fully preserved corpse à la Ötzi (who was incidentally from a similar era). Once the bones have been carbon dated, DNA tested, checked for the remnants of any ancient diseases is there really that much more that's possible?
As I'm not an expert in the field, I don't know what there is to learn; a quick glance at the Wikipedia page about bioarchaeology, followed by a look on Amazon at some of the books relating to the subject, suggests that there probably is a lot to be found out.
So basically, knowledge is worthless unless you personally can think of a use for it?
No not at all, my cynicism revolves around what further knowledge they hope to ascertain over the next 5 years that they have been unable to glean in the preceding 3.
These are after all bones, not a fully preserved corpse à la Ötzi (who was incidentally from a similar era). Once the bones have been carbon dated, DNA tested, checked for the remnants of any ancient diseases is there really that much more that's possible?
Pretty much what Ravello said. What can there possibly still be to find out after three years research, that merits another five years funding. Even if these were the bones of the first Kings and ruling class, as he suggests, so what? It has no bearing on present day Royal lineage.
IMHO It smacks of the 'research gravy train', like the stream of 'recent research shows . . .' stories from the BBC.
So basically, knowledge is worthless unless you personally can think of a use for it?
They've had the bones for 3 years already... and what are they hoping to find out from 5,000 year old remains?
Oh and NF
Pretty much what Ravello said. What can there possibly still be to find out after three years research, that merits another five years funding. Even if these were the bones of the first Kings and ruling class, as he suggests, so what? It has no bearing on present day Royal lineage.
IMHO It smacks of the 'research gravy train', like the stream of 'recent research shows . . .' stories from the BBC.
Leave a comment: