Local newspaper Skånskan recently published a highly credulous account of amateur archaeologist Bob Lind's outlandish interpretations of an Early Iron Age cemetery in Ravlunda parish. I wrote them to complain, and staff writer Karsten Bringmark asked me for a statement. Which made it onto the paper's web site, and possibly into print as well?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Local newspaper Ystads Allehanda reports on new fieldwork in Ravlunda by amateur archaeologist Bob G Lind and retired geology professor Nils-Axel Mörner. The last time the two enthusiastic gentlemen interfered with the Iron Age cemetery in question, they were reprimanded by the County…
Affärs- och Kapitalnytt reports that the Scanian bank Sparbanken Syd has given an $8300 grant (SEK 50,000) for archaeological fieldwork and research: "a first instalment for excavations" at a cemetery in Ravlunda parish. Well done!
Unfortunately, the bank has chosen to give the money to our old…
In 2009, geologist Nils Axel Mörner and Bob G. Lind (and a distinguished third author who was not consulted about having his name on the publication) had a paper published in Geografiska Annaler about the Ravlunda 169 cemetery. This was an outcome of the pair's unauthorised digging at the site in…
Bob Lind chalking some apparently quite genuine cupmarks, a ubiquitous type of Bronze Age rock art.
Alternative archaeoastronomer Bob Lind (note that I do not call him an unhinged man with crackpot theories) felt himself vindicated this past summer by the Swedish Heritage Board. On a set of new…
I see that Bob Lind has already left a reply to your comments on that page. From what I can figure out using Google Translate, he blows off your comments because you lack knowledge of archaeoastronomy -- very amusing. Good work for challenging the quacks!
That reply is pretty illustrative. It's poorly spelled and structured, it's full of invective, and out of the blue Bob starts talking about phalluses.
Good work Martin!
Well, as Bob so eloquently points out, you're not an archaeo-astronomer. Only other archaeo-astronomers may criticise archaeo-astronomical claims. Along the same lines, only homeopaths may criticise homeopathy, and the same goes for holocaust revisionists.
What on earth were you thinking, dabbling in fields outside your own area of expertise?
Basically I'm just envious of all his amazing discoveries.
Easy to fix. In the middle of a post about metaldetecting attack mispelled phalluses. Or something like that.
I can't seem to find Lind's comments, have they been removed?