Archaeology or Pseudoarchaeology?

Please read the article: MacLaren Walsh, J. (2008, May/June). Legend of the crystal skulls. Archaeology, 61(3), 3641. Using the library or Internet resources, find a different example of pseudoarchaeology. Write a paper (500 to 600 words) describing the example you have chosen and an explanation of why this is considered pseudoarchaeology. Archaeology as a Scientific Method Surveying, analyzing, and mapping, to name a few, are skills you still need to learn and develop before you can become a skilled field archaeologist. However, these skills are beyond the purview of our course, but for now, you get the picture. You should know that research questions in archaeology tend to fall into two general categories. The first consists in finding out the what, where, who, and when. Essentially it means understanding what you are excavating and the age of the sites or artifacts or fossils. The second category is more about answering the why things happened. For example, as you excavate your site, you may find that pottery styles change drastically over a very short period of time. Describing the pottery, how they are made or decorated and their age is part of the scientific method. Why the changes in styles occur however belongs to a category of question. Was there a change in the technology used to make pottery or was it because it was imported from elsewhere or was it because the pottery represents the arrival of a new culture in the area? While it is not always possible to accurately answer the why of things in archaeology, careful analysis and using the comparative approach usually yield probable answers that can be tested by further analysis and/or excavation. Remember that without the scientific method, archaeology would just be making up stories. However, we have to remember that it is people in the past who are often the agents of change.