/sci/ - Science & Math

yes thats a real science,

Good then, I shall continue to discuss it. Has anyone heard of Pre-Clovis and Clovis points found in the eastern United States?

I vaguely remember it only being along the west coast of North America, and a brief scan of wikipedia seems to reinforce that memory

http://allendale-expedition.net/publications/AL_ORIGN1.PDF

That's a PDF file detailing some sites in the eastern US as to where they found points, blades and other tools that stratigraphically fit before Clovis.

No, there's a reason you get a BA and not a Bsc.
It's subjective interpretation of circumstantial evidence in an ipse dixit manner.

This shit belongs on >>>/x/

>>2665664

>>2665581

About as much as forensic science is.

>>2665612

Are you trying to discuss the possibility that the natives of America arrived over the Atlantic from Europe before the migrations from Asia?

>>2665664
I realize you're a troll, but I'll humor you as far as proving that archaeology is a science. Observation and experimentation fit into archaeology. First, we take geological rules (such as the law of superposition and the principle of horizontality) to find trends or association - this is observation. Archaeologists could not figure out how to create spearpoints, until they finally figured it out through trial and error - experimentation.

>>2665685
Honestly, I've heard from other archaeologists that there are more similarities with points found in the eastern US and eastern Europe than there are with points in the US and in northeastern Siberia. I think more evidence must be found, but it's a good start to wonder if the landbridge was the only way people got into the US, and how early people actually were in the US.

>>2665678

>>2665723

Brute forcing something is not science.Making observations is not science. Cherry picking data that fit you idea is not science. Suppressing data that prove you wrong is not science.

If archaeology is a science then why does it give a BA instead of a BSc?

>>2665803
Observations form scientific discovery.

>>2665803
If the data was suppressed how do you know about it? You must be an archeologist yourself.

>>2665803
>Cherry picking data that fit you idea is not science. Suppressing data that prove you wrong is not science.

Are you so stupid you just generalised every single person in an entire field?

Archeology is a humanities. It's studying human culture/civilization as oppose to the making of everything that science studies.

>>2665803

Take note that this man saged. That means he is mad.

BTW bro, sounds like you are describing "anthropology" which even anthropologists is bullshit and not a science.

Errybody in the club knows that Archaeology is a science.

only in a very general sense.
aka not one that would belong on this board.
there are sub-categories of archaeology that are scientific.
but archaeology as a whole is not.
as a rule of thumb, I don't consider any field exactly scientific unless information is generally understood through use of the scientific method.
The scientific method and reason form the backbone of science.

http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html
>>2665664
>>2665803
>>2665934

Since it seems people need a refresher as to what the scientific method is.

hey, there's nothing wrong with archaeology even if it isn't a science.
there are many subjects of vital importance that are not sciences.
archaeology does use science enough that i wouldn't report a thread on /sci/, in whicchq. the topic was archaeology.

>>2665976
How is the scientific method not used in archaeology?

>>2665856
>>2665876
>>2665877
>>2665919

The truth hurts

>>2665986

How is it?

It's history nigger.

>>2666003
That's not a rebuttal. The point has been made that the scientific method has been employed in archaeology.

>>2666003
That's not a rebuttal.

The point has been made that the scientific method has been employed in archaeology.

You mad. You very, very mad. Which "sage" post were you?

>>2666049
Then backed up with no evidence

>>2666063
>>2666049

>>2665803
lol

"Cherry picking and suppressing data"?

Seriously?

If you had ever actually been involved with archaeological excavation, you would know that you are required by law to record EVERYTHING that you encounter in painful detail. NOTHING is ever left out, ignored, suppressed, whatever. Archaeologists are very serious and committed to accuracy and employing the scientific method properly in their work.

True archeology proposes hypotheses, conducts excavations and experimentation to test their hypotheses, examines the data, and re-evaluates their hypotheses. That's scientific method if I ever saw it. I would say that archeology is indeed a science.

It's not as mathematical as the elitists on /sci/ think all science should be so they get pissy

not a great video but it's what I found in a search and it's fairly related.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znQk_yBHre4

>>2666400

required by law to record EVERYTHING
required by law
law

Better watch out or the history police will come and arrest you.

>>2666826
They'd lose their standing and probably their job. Recording the exact location and depth an artifact is discovered at has become vitally important for stratigraphy and association purposes.

>>2666826
Try taking an artifact from the ruins in another country home with you. Then tell me who stops you with handcuffs at the terminal.

>>2666089
And which sage were you little girl?

it's more of a hobby

>>2665664
Okay then, I think this point pictured was used for cleaning ears. My point has been validated by your idea, and is now an archaeological truth.