Stone Pages Archaeo News: Japanese rock image a fake

Stone Pages Archaeo News: Japanese rock image a fake

What is disturbing about this report is the archaeologist's statement that this artifact had never been investigated "since it was considered an important historical object".

Is that the standard in archaeology? The more important an object, the less it is studied?

I have several times recommended the reexamination of the Turin Canon by new thermoluminescence methods, since I am sure some of the pieces of this important historical papyrus have been mis-pasted during reconstruction. My suggestions have fallen on deaf ears in Egyptology circles, for the same reason as given above - the object is "too important" to study.

Is this good science? No.