mainstream control strategy: restrict education, enforce dogma, reject politically-incorrect evidence HOME time tables seasons reason cusp countdowns map any date 2001-2028 Sacred EquinoX ©THF must see video survey west to east > Hollywood mid-America Ireland France United Kingdom Egypt |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
An Analysis of A Great Mystery by Dr. Everett W. Fish, MD, 1880, PDF of > ⅕ of book |
Edit War video from a decade ago re: content in Wikipedia Archaeoastronomy dispute |
archive: controlling authors diminish pyramids' impact in 'History of Archaeoastronomy' |
archive: same authors remove 'Politics of Archaeoastronomy' then use clout to force me out |
|
History of archaeoastronomy as it appeared for less than 6 hours on Wikipedia, April 10, 2008 archival record is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Archaeoastronomy&oldid=204595095#History_of_archaeoastronomy insert edit In 1777, two hundred years before Michell wrote the above, there were no archaeoastronomers and there were no archaeologists, but there were astronomers and antiquarians.  And way back in 1646 when Oxford professor of astronomy John Greaves published on his Egyptian pyramid surveys, no one imagined Great Britain would wrestle over the Great Pyramid two centuries later in a fractious, nationalistic debate enduring decades.[6] The French metric system was threatening to replace familiar English measures in the late 1800's. So when Scotland's Astronomer Royal Charles Piazzi Smyth surveyed the Great Pyramid and determined the British inch to be all but identical to the pyramid inch, traditional Britain seemed relieved and vindicated. Yet the belief by Piazzi Smyth and others that this measurement was decreed by God shocked science into a reformation of sorts. Astronomer Richard Anthony Proctor, a prolific author and international lecturer, blasted Piazzi Smyth's thesis in his 1883 book ''The Great Pyramid: Observatory, Tomb and Temple''.[7] Proctor quoted from Plato's Timaeus:
For we learn from Proclus that the pyramids of Egypt (which, according to Diodorus, had existed 3,600 years before his history was written, about 8 B.C.) terminated above in a platform, from which priests made their celestial observations.Astronomy had matured and was on the verge of diversifying. Great Britain's metrology debate was a catalyst for novel scientific specialties as the antiquarian age was drawing to a close. end of my edit pre-existing text resumed The term archaeoastronomy was first used by Chesley Baity (at the suggestion of Euan MacKie) in 1973... |
|
History of archaeoastronomy April 10, 2008 6 hours later archaeologist Alun Salt redacted all, restoring his and Steve McCluskey's intro:
The term archaeoastronomy was first used by Chesley Baity (at the suggestion of Euan MacKie) in 1973,[2] but as a topic of study it may much older, depending on what you say is archaeoastronomy. Clive Ruggles[3] says that Heinrich Nissen, working in the mid-nineteenth century was arguably the first archaeoastronomer. Rolf Sinclair[4] says that Norman Lockyer, working around the late 19th and early 20th Centuries could be called the 'father of archaeoastronomy.' Euan MacKie[5] would place the origin even later, stating: "...the genesis and modern flowering of archaeoastronomy must surely lie in the work of Alexander Thom in Britain between the 1930s and the 1970s. History of archaeoastronomy April 10, 2008 13½ hours after Salt muzzled me, McCluskey added a superficial acknowledgement, 1 sentence: Late in the nineteenth century astronomers such as Richard Proctor and Charles Piazzi Smyth investigated the astronomical orientations of the pyramids.[8] The token consolation, which survives even into 2018, obscures antiquarian pyramidology as a key factor in archaeoastronomy's genesis. During our dispute Salt and McCluskey were rallying their academic pals to win a Wikipedia award of distinction for their work. My contribution seemingly harmed that effort, which was ultimately unsuccessful. Considered a pseudoscience, pyramidology was scorned by high-brow posturing within mainstream archaeology and anthropology. In late April the co-conspiratorial authors sought and achieved my removal as a contributor by appealing to Wikipedia umpires. My career began as a journalist in the mid-1970s. A decade later I was tracking compelling archaeoastronomy in mid-America; and since then, archaeology has persisted in ignoring an extensive collection of regional, non-indigenous sites dismissed for cultural inappropriateness, mentioned by archaeology only to ridicule fringe thought and dissent. Sanitizing history, especially for partisan appeal, is unprofessional. Rejecting evidence that could undermine orthodox American archaeology's opposition to diffusionism is unscientific. Science is obliged to examine meritorious claims archaeology shreds. Astronomers, however, returned to witness the 2017 autumnal equinox at Oklahoma's Anubis Caves following a tour of the remote site nearly a year earlier. What qualified or entitled those who dig in the dirt to grab exclusive managerial authority over archaeoastronomy? Why does this paradigm persist? Footnotes (abridged and renumbered for simplicity) 1. Bostwick, T.W. (2006). "Archaeoastronomy at the Gates of Orthodoxy: Introduction to the Oxford VII Conference on Archaeoastronomy Papers", in Todd W. Bostwick and Bryan Bates: Viewing the Sky Through Past and Present Cultures: Selected Papers from the Oxford VII International Conference on Archaeoastronomy, Pueblo Grande Museum Anthropological Papers 15. City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department, 1-10. Amazon Books 2. Sinclair, R.M. (2006). "The Nature of Archaeoastronomy", in Todd W. Bostwick and Bryan Bates: Viewing the Sky Through Past and Present Cultures: Selected Papers from the Oxford VII International Conference on Archaeoastronomy, Pueblo Grande Museum Anthropological Papers 15. City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department, 13-26. Amazon Books. 3. Ruggles, C.L.N. (2005). Ancient Astronomy ABC-Clio. Amazon Books 4. Sinclair, R.M. (2006). "The Nature of Archaeoastronomy", in Todd W. Bostwick and Bryan Bates: Viewing the Sky Through Past and Present Cultures: Selected Papers from the Oxford VII International Conference on Archaeoastronomy, Pueblo Grande Museum Anthropological Papers 15. City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department, 13-26. Amazon Books. 5. MacKie, E. (2006). "New Evidence for a Professional Priesthood in the European Early Bronze Age", in Todd W. Bostwick and Bryan Bates: Viewing the Sky Through Past and Present Cultures: Selected Papers from the Oxford VII International Conference on Archaeoastronomy, Pueblo Grande Museum Anthropological Papers 15. City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department, 343-362. New Evidence for a Professional Priesthood in the European Early Bronze Age (PDF) 6. Reisenauer, E.M. (2003). "The Battle of the Standards: Great Pyramid Metrology and British Identity, 1859-1890". Historian - Albuquerque then Allentown- 65:4:931-979. Michigan State University Press. 7. Proctor, R.A. (1883). The Great Pyramid: Observatory, Tomb and Temple. R. Worthington, New York, NY. Amazon Books 8. Michell, J. (2001). A Little History of Astro-Archaeology. Thames & Hudson. Amazon Books |