I think quite a number of professional archaeologists have gone record saying the current proposal should be rejected.

There has been an awful lot of online discussion among the archaeology community and most of what I've read hasn't been positive. There's a wide range of opinions though, some object to the particular route, length, siting of entrances etc and some to the whole idea of digging any tunnel.

I'm sure a cursory look at social media sites will provide you with particular names if you want them.

[edited for typos]

Perhaps surprisingly, I'm not trying to wind you up, just trying to assess whether or not experts who are not professional archaeologists would, or even could, make any effective contribution to the archaeological arguments in the consultation.

If I've understood, the known archaeologists in Julian's camp are Mike PP, who is said to have mentioned it in a talk, and a research group who have issued a very strong report to a WHS Steering Group. There may be other professional archaeologists who have not said anything as yet.