Tap! Tap! Clunk! Clunk!

That noise you can hear in the background, particularly if you live in the UK,  is the sound of undistinguished heritologists scraping the ‘barrel’ to vindicate, acquit, or explain even, their pin-up boy Sam Hardy’s academically mauled  anti-metal detecting hypothesis. Well, good luck with that one!

Continue reading

Advertisements

Kismet, Hardy, et al.

Oh, how I’m loving this. It’s truly gratifying, heart-warming even, for an old sceptic like me, watching the anti-detecting brigade’s  turd polishers in full panic mode. Here they are rushing about  like headless chickens  trying to burnish both the heavily tarnished ersatz data that is Heritage Action’s widely censured ‘Artefact Erosion Counter,’ and Dr Sam Hardy’s laughable, academically slammed, anti-metal detecting research Paper.  The  fox of truth is running wild in the  henhouse of bullshit. *Update

Continue reading

There are two ways of lying. One, by not telling the truth and the other, making up statistics.

So said Josefina Vazquez Mota. Nevertheless, some in the anti-collecting/detecting posse are undeniably skilled claptrap merchants who rarely cease trying – albeit unsuccessfully – to pass off synthetic data as serious stuff when it’s simply 24-carat conjecture usually of their own making. Imagine my delight when an international team of six eminent and distinguished academics impressively demolished Sam Hardy’s anti-metal detecting Research Paper.

Continue reading