Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel | Forum

thesweetcheat Feb 20, 2017 18:55:39

Replying to nigelswift

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]

nigelswift Feb 20, 2017 19:00:56

Replying to thesweetcheat

thesweetcheat wrote:

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

Well yes I thought that from the start but sometimes when you suspect you're being wound up it's worth just riding with it. ;)

Lefturn Feb 20, 2017 19:02:16

Replying to thesweetcheat

thesweetcheat wrote:

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 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 proxide you with particular names if you want them.

Following this for the RSPB I think you will find miles of difference between what might have been postured before and after the announcement of the details. If anyone thinks any independent professional archaeologist anywhere is going to back a proposal to put a portal on the threshold of Bush Barrow and four lanes of tarmac alongside Prophet's barrows then they are clearly attention seeking and not worth engaging with.

Highways England Consultation — A303/Stonehenge