random observations

I’m neither suggesting nor implying anything about either field, but tonight I realized something really freaking obvious about two of my favorite research interests — ghost hunting and archeology. Which is to say — they’re not terribly different.

I was watching that new PBS show “Time Team America” and it dawned on me that both ghost-hunting and archeology rely heavily on (a). grueling, tedious, frequently unrewarding legwork, and (b). (these days) magnetic- and electric-field tech — which scarcely tells the researchers anything useful at all, and only hints vaguely at stuff that might have been there a long time ago, depending on your optimistic and possibly overreaching interpretation of the meager facts.

And at the end of a productive day, everyone goes home feeling satisfied and enlightened, and certain that there’s more work to be done and more hard evidence to be uncovered, even as conclusions are drawn from sketchy facts and fragmented information.

Then, educated and well informed people bicker endlessly over the hypotheticals, details, and possible courses of future action. And onlookers merely gawk over the Sites of Interest if the professionals are lucky — and if they’re unlucky, trespassers loot those same sites, disturbing and contaminating whatever conclusive evidence might’ve been there in the first place.

I’m not sure what it says about me that archeology and paranormal investigation are two of my favorite things in the whole wide world.

But anyway. Yeah.
Don’t mind me.
Just thinking out loud here.

One thought on “random observations

  1. synde

    well in some ways ghost hunting involves archeology. You are digging through history in a different way. and they are for SURE two of my favorite things..so what are we waiting for?/let’s get to it..we could be the jay and Steve of the PNW~

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *