This will be all over the media in the next 24 hours. Just published in Nature:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-28969-8#
Looks very impressive, but the evidence for the west Wales connection is so scanty that one wonders what all the fuss is about. Take a look at the article, folks -- I will return to it shortly, when I have read it again. Suffice to say I am singularly unimpressed.......
13 comments:
my money is on Ashby De La Zouch! or Dartmoor, or Cornwall....
PeteG
"Correspondence to Christophe Snoeke", Brian et al. [ stated at the end]. I think I've spelt his name right.
I tend to agree with you, Pete. The fact that this was published in "Nature" says a lot about the decline in science. How on earth did this get into print? We see the bootprints of MPP all over it......
I will indeed be in touch with Christophe -- I have corresponded with him before.......
Have you had any useful response from Christophe previously?
The authors say that after ten years or so of living in one place, the bone isotope ratio reflects the the local geology. Since isotope ratios are nearly everywhere larger than on Salisbury Plain and we have no idea how long these persons were living and eating around Stonehenge before their death, surely the measured isotope ratios can only be a lower bound on those at their place of origin, since the ratio would have declined steadily with time spent on Salisbury Plain. In other words they could have come from anywhere with a ratio larger than or equal to that measured. So it really makes no sense to use a change of 0.0001 in the ratio to try to pinpoint a specific place of origin as in their Figure 3.
Tony -- Christophe was very defensive when I corresponded with him before on the matter of the teeth! he implied that I'd better wait with bayed breath, because more blockbuster stuff was on the way. Well here it is at last, and it is not going to do his reputation any good at all.
OOps -- bated breath.....
I think you are right, Pete. The more I think about the research, the more dodgy it appears.....
Whilst I was an Undergraduate studying Geography (and also 1st Year Psychology) STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE TECHNIQUES were an essential component of learnt research methods!!
How on earth can MPP and his pals justify these trumped - up [apologies this time to the President] conclusions and impact - grabbing banner headlines........UNLESS it is all part of a cunning plan [hope you are reading this, SIR Tony Robinson].
Anyhow, this is a clear example of how Archaeology is unable to claim to be a Science, at least in instances like this! Perhaps it should best find a home within Media Studies.
MPP and the crew and Sheffield University and now London University - these are not serious people for science. Their resolute refusal to engage with well articulated and based objections is not indicative of a scientist, or any seeker after truth.
I was forcefully reminded of the dangers of fake news today. A visitor to our candle workshop today saw my new book with "Stonehenge" on the cover and immediately said: "Isn't it fantastic? I see that Oxford University has just done some research on the DNA of people buried at Stonehenge, and they have proved that the builders of Stonehenge came from north Pembrokeshire!"
In saying that, the poor fellow had it wrong on almost every count. The research was not done by Oxford University -- it was done by a D Phil student as a part of his thesis, with contributions from assorted specialist colleagues. The study was not on the DNA of buried people, but on the strontium ratios in cremated human bone fragments. And the researchers sure as eggs did not demonstrate anything about the origins of the builders of Stonehenge, or about any geographical origins for the individuals who were studied, apart from the fact that some were apparently local and others weren't.
But of course it was the clear intention of Parker Pearson and the others involved in this study to develop their myth further and further, by deliberately misrepresenting the research findings via press releases and statements to journalists.
Of course one should feel angry about this cynical misuse of science, but it also makes me feel rather sad that individuals should feel the need to behave like this.......
Exactly.
SIR Tony Robinson used to regularly link up with presentations of the findings of MPP's Stonehenge Riverside Project on ITV, and he always liked to give off the Persona of being the objective, sceptical one. Then he picked up his Knighthood and is placed upon a pedestal above the rest of us. He's done his own programmes on aspects of Physical Geography around the British Isles, so what's YOUR next assignment going to be, Tony R? Or are you another one, like a few TV Archaeologists, who is just a Legend In Your Own Lunchtime??
The other sad/ simply WRONG thing about these strontium - based claims is that the Stonehenge Visitor Centre may put on ANOTHER INTERPRETATION DISPLAY which will lead astray those paying royally to use that facility at the S.V.C.
SUE GREANEY is probably the person who is currently responsible for these displays. She is on Twitter, folks!
Post a Comment