|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? 225 messages | Select a forum: |
An admission that the guy they uphold as a shining figure, Mr Atkinson, brought the conservation about because he screwed the job badly the first time would be welcome too. The earlier tunnellers share some responsibility, but they were not in possession of the equipment and 20th century knowhow, and there was no evidence of any subsidence before 1969. Aye, and I think I said elsewhere that the BBC should be made to cough up something to support (financially) the present 'conservation' project. It was the BBC's screwed up idea (or at least its support) for the Atkinson tunnel that has led to the present mess (and as it was the licence-fee payer's money that was used to fund the 1968 programme in the first place there's no reason why that same source of revenue should not now be use to fund Silbury's conservation). A typical and predictable silence of course has fallen upon the Beeb - perhaps they don't want to get involved, perhaps too much coverage of the present 'Silbury Conservation Project' would show them in an unfavourable light. Then again, perhaps this is a perfect opportunity for one of the Davids (David Attenborough or David Dimbleby) to do a one off 'Save Silbury' prog - entitled perhaps, Oops, we buggered that one up. Nice idea, but don't hold ya breath. Reply | with quote |  26th June 2007ce 20:13 In reply to: Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (slumpystones) |
Messages in this topic: |
|