Reply to: King Arthur Pendragon

[TestMangler]

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.

Covered in the Mash

This one ?



or this one ?

[Pondlife]

c) rocked up in full druid gear...

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.

Covered in the Mash

[Ravello]

That might be irrelevant.

They sound like suitable specimens for university bio-archaeology students to learn analysis techniques. They have got to practice on something.

That is likely the point that King Arthur Pendragon was trying (unsuccessfully) to pursue through his court case.

He might have even stood a chance if he hadn't

a) represented himself
b) changed his name by deed poll to King Arthur Pendragon, and
c) rocked up in full druid gear...

[Doggy Styles]

They've had the bones for 3 years already... and what are they hoping to find out from 5,000 year old remains?

That might be irrelevant.

They sound like suitable specimens for university bio-archaeology students to learn analysis techniques. They have got to practice on something.

[wobbegong]

I suppose I'm comparing it, rightly or wrongly, with a local example. 51 skeletons found during the building of the Weymouth relief road in 2009.

Nine months later data collected and colclusions reached.

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?

[NotAllThere]

...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.

[wobbegong]

So basically, knowledge is worthless unless you personally can think of a use for it?

Yes. That's exactly right.

(Ravello has beaten me to it again.) There is only so much hard data you can glean from bones, after which the guesswork and hypothesising starts.

[Ravello]

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

[NickFitz]

Go on then Nick, I'll bite...



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.

[Ravello]

Go on then Nick, I'll bite...

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?

[Ravello]

Hey Rav! You sober?

Churchy!!

I'd be lying if I said yes right now, but I think I was pretty close when I posted earlier

[NickFitz]

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?

[wobbegong]

What makes you think the research is pointless?

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.

[pacharan]

Hey Rav! You sober?

Who he?

[Churchill]

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

Hey Rav! You sober?