Given the assumptions in one segment of the TAR studies, some people would be absolutely astounded at the claim that the ground rules are stacked against the archaeos. If, buried deep within the TAR, an opaque pro-archaeology bias existed, then questioning the "ground rules" could give opponents ammunition. But it's obviously something that people who are in favour of the 21's argument would not discuss on a public forum so, even if it existed, we would not get to discuss what that might be.

The 21 archaeos are the experts and, no doubt, will have taken all this into account. If any opaque bias in their favour already exists, they will probably be researching and developing their arguments so that they enhance that position rather than force a re-evaluation.