I can understand that argument where artefacts have gradually decayed in situ, with no interference. But when we're talking about stones that have been buried in holes dug many centuries after their erection, it's difficult to imagine what remains to be found that modern archaeology isn't capable of retrieving. To help me understand your argument, could you offer an example of the sort of thing you feel might be destroyed or lost to future generations of archaeologists as a result of re-erection?