|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Stonehenge and its Environs Forum | Start a topic | Search |
202 messages | Select a forum: |
Lefturn wrote: 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. Thanks for your input - I thought Julian Richard's longer youtube film gave a clear, jargon free view of the problems the current tunnel proposals would present - the clincher being the close proximity to the iconic Bush Barrow. The only well known archaeologist I am aware of (who is not directly employed by NT or EH) speaking in favour of the tunnel proposal is Mike Pitts - he has possibly changed his mind, haven't seen anything from him for a while. Reply | with quote |  20th February 2017ce 20:03 In reply to: Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel (Lefturn) |
Messages in this topic: |