Perhaps archeologists are solely focussed on the academic process. That requires close analysis of finds, not to mention years of university study, field study and hanging out with other academics. So I think there's a general reluctance by the archeological community to acknowledge observations that aren't entrenched in that process. I see a face, looks like it's been carved, but where does it fit in the academic process? Good to see a question like this. (I haven't visited this forum for a while)