Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

"Space Archeology" Uncovers Lost Pyramids

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the goodbye-mr.-jones dept.

Technology 156

krou writes "A new technique dubbed 'space archeology' using satellites and infra-red imaging has helped uncover 17 new pyramids in Egypt, as well as some 1,000 tombs, and 3,000 ancient settlements. The mud bricks used to build Egyptian structures means it has a different density to the surrounding soil, and thus shows up in the images. Dr Sarah Parcak, who pioneered the technique, said that 'Indiana Jones is old school, we've moved on from Indy, sorry Harrison Ford.'"

cancel ×

156 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

goodbye-mr.-jones dept (3, Funny)

oztiks (921504) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248022)

should be goodbye-dr.-jones dept

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (3, Funny)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248044)

should be goodbye-dr.-jones dept

He belongs in a museum.

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (3, Funny)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248104)

You think that's the worst mistake in the article? If you were ever exposed to "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" you'll already know that Dr. Jones is well up on his "space archaeology" already.

If anything this is another instance of life imitating art, even if it is some of the most atrocious "art" you've ever had the misfortune to witness.

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (2)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248410)

I'm not sure what was worse: shoehorning Shia LeBoef into it, in a manner that can only be described as "high school play-quality" acting, the "super magnetic bones" or that we've displaced "jumped the shark" with "nuked the fridge" as a comment.

Indiana Jones always had an element of the supernatural about it - look at some of the key plot elements in Temple of Doom, and especially Last Crusade, so aliens are not an enormous stretch away from the norm. I can stay engaged in the story if it's presented in a plausible fashion (for the story), but doing things like the fridge scene just pull me right out of the story and go "well, that was crappy, even for a fantasy film... oh, I'm watching a film" and completely breaks the mood.

I know it's common in films (like characters shrugging off beatings that would hospitalise normal people without even causing bruises, and seemingly being immune to bullet wounds that don;t affect the use of their limbs at all etc), but sometimes it's pushed beyond suspension of disbelief. There were so many things wrong with the fridge scene it was as if they were intentionally trying to piss us all off.

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (4, Interesting)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249480)

I still think the fridge scene would make for a great Mythbusters episode. Obviously, they can't detonate a nuclear device (Jamie want BIIIIIIIG boom!), but they could put Buster with some shock discs in a fridge and drop it from the approximate height that Indy fell to simulate how much he'd have been hurt from the fall. They could also go back to the place that they ran the "Cockroaches survive nuclear bomb" experiment and put the fridge in the chamber with some equipment inside to test for radiation. Of course, the finale would be burying some explosive (C4?) under the fridge with shock-disc-enabled Buster inside and blowing the whole thing up.

I'm pretty sure the whole scene would be Busted, but it would turn that awful scene into something that was actually fun to watch!

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248578)

You think that's the worst mistake in the article? If you were ever exposed to "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" you'll already know that Dr. Jones is well up on his "space archaeology" already. witness.

Ugh, they should've just made The Fate Of Atlantis into a movie instead of making that turd. Friggin' Lucas can't stop ruining perfectly good trilogies.

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (0)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249750)

If anything this is another instance of life imitating art, even if it is some of the most atrocious "art" you've ever had the misfortune to witness.

You've never seen Gigli [imdb.com] , have you?

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248212)

*points*
You caw him Docta Jones!
*stamps foot*

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (2)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248222)

Well, they may have moved away from Indiana Jones, but they've moved on to Han Solo.

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248266)

Uh oh, they'd better not sit down and have a drink with him then ;-)

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (1)

ldobehardcore (1738858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248286)

Heh if he doesn't shoot first you might have half a chance to keep from getting fried like greedo

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (2)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248304)

Und zis is how ve say gutbye in Germany, Dr Jones!

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (1)

physburn (1095481) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248906)

Dr Daniel Jackson, would be very at home though. I the did still need spades to dig them up somewhere down the line though.

Re:goodbye-mr.-jones dept (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249168)

I believe he found the Ark and the Cup of Christ... What have you found? huh? Some buildings? Great! Good for you!

New? Hardly. (2, Insightful)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248040)

Dr Sarah Parcak should study her history - because she's "pioneered" a technique first used in the 30's from aircraft and more recently from any number of orbital platforms.

Re:New? Hardly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248098)

Archeologist Dr. Sarah Parcak should study her history. I saw what you did there :)

Re:New? Hardly. (2)

tqk (413719) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248332)

Archeologist Dr. Sarah Parcak should study her history. I saw what you did there :)

I didn't. WTF are you saying?!?

Damn, I hate you AC posers.

Re:New? Hardly. (1)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248418)

It's a weak pun : archaeologist/history...

Re:New? Hardly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248272)

"and more recently from any number of orbital platforms."

You mean.... the deathstar?!

Re:New? Hardly. (1)

Elledan (582730) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248338)

Even if it isn't entirely new, it's been used very effectively here, with the uncovering of so much archaeological material to study it'll keep archaeologists occupied for decades. And this was just the first run. I'm very excited about what else will be uncovered, now that someone finally bothered to use this methode, be it old or new.

Re:New? Hardly. (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248972)

Next are the Prothean ruins.

Re:New? Hardly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249060)

SAR satellite images (radar images) have been used for a long long time to locate Mayan pyramids.

Re:New? Hardly. (3, Insightful)

jamesh (87723) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248458)

So... the technology has existed for 80 years and yet she and her team are the ones who are finding the pyramids? I think they deserve just a little kudos... i'm betting that they had to do a bit of work to make the technology be able to find the pyramids they found.

Re:New? Hardly. (5, Insightful)

pnot (96038) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248572)

Dr Sarah Parcak should study her history - because she's "pioneered" a technique first used in the 30's from aircraft and more recently from any number of orbital platforms.

Absolutely! She should, for example, read the 28-page historical introduction and 32-page bibliography of the excellent book Satellite remote sensing for archaeology by... oh look, it's by Dr Sarah Parcak. Turns out she literally wrote the book on this stuff. Seriously, do you think she's spent a scientific career doing this work without bothering to check what's been done before? If someone is a "Dr", they have written a doctoral dissertation, which means they know how to review literature.

Yes, the BBC article (not the researcher) used the word "pioneered". I imagine there must be some pioneering about work that located several thousand hitherto unknown structures and seventeen pyramids. (If it's all old hat, why didn't someone find them "in the 30's from aircraft?") Even if it's not "pioneering", the fault is with the reporter who chose to use that word.

Sure-fire recipe for a snarky Slashdot reply: if it's successful work building on previous accomplishments, say "huh, that's not new, she's just repeating what someone else did". If it's groundbreaking work previously unachieved by anyone else, say "huh, that's just ivory-tower tinkering, nobody's replicated it and it'll never work in the real world".

Re:New? Hardly. (1, Funny)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249136)

Sure-fire recipe for a snarky Slashdot reply: if it's successful work building on previous accomplishments, say "huh, that's not new, she's just repeating what someone else did". If it's groundbreaking work previously unachieved by anyone else, say "huh, that's just ivory-tower tinkering, nobody's replicated it and it'll never work in the real world".

Other people have pointed that out in a much better way.

(You knew that was coming, right?)

Re:New? Hardly. (1)

ildon (413912) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249194)

I thought I'd heard something about this before on a TV documentary a while ago, but with Mayan ruins. I found a link [nasa.gov] . Now I'm not saying she didn't pioneer the technique or whatever, since apparently she's been working on stuff like this since at least 2004, but it seems to me like these people should work together (if they're not already).

Re:New? Hardly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249206)

Actually Dr. Tom Sever [wikipedia.org] at NASA has been doing this from a while now, although he tends to work almost exclusively in South America. [nasa.gov]

SGC (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248046)

Stargate Command had this covered years ago. Nothing new.

'space archeology' (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248060)

Jaffa... KREE.

Re:'space archeology' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248326)

Pyramids as landing platforms?! Absurd, Dr. Jackson.

Re:'space archeology' (1)

lucian1900 (1698922) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248982)

I read that as "Jaffa CAKE". Now I'm hungry.

Re:'space archeology' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249224)

Sorry, but the cake is a lie.

Real archaeology (3, Informative)

fremsley471 (792813) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248072)

Talk about old and buried- NASA Archeological Remote Sensing. [nasa.gov] Adobe PageMill 2.0!

Re:Real archaeology (1)

johnjaydk (584895) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248180)

Adobe PageMill 2.0 puts it after 1997.

Re:Real archaeology (1)

fremsley471 (792813) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248236)

Yeah, I know, I read the wikipedia entry too- wasn't expecting it to pre-date the lost pyramids.

Still, it's 14 years old and still makes Google's front page. That says a lot about either the high-value of the site's contents or how low are the prospects for new discoveries in space archaeology.

Re:Real archaeology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248426)

What, no LIDAR? They are so behind the times.

Re:Real archaeology (1)

theolein (316044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249346)

The ironic thing about that page is that it's about 90% more legible than the crap that web 2.0 and html 5 brought us.

anyone care to check out (1)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248082)

my deep space radar telemetry studies?

Re:anyone care to check out (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248298)

Why? Do you keep your reproductive organs on the inside instead of the outside?

Earth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248106)

Al-way know that there were more on earth that we can see from space, let the world get some insight!

Grail (1)

Jaro (4361) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248108)

So when will we finally find the place Mr. Jones missed on his quests for the Holy Grail?

dengli (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248114)

Watch movies online, download the latest movie, TV series and cartoon online. Watch free movies at allmovies-watch.com

all movies watch [allmovies-watch.com] all movies watch

Re:dengli (1)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248132)

Sounds legit.

Re:dengli (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249156)

How does this help me get my porn more efficiently?

That's not how you spell "archaeology," but... (1)

Mr. Somey (1200447) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248136)

If only we could use similar technology to uncover new satellites and infrared imaging gear in outer space, think of the money we could save on rocket fuel.

Re:That's not how you spell "archaeology," but... (1)

grouchomarxist (127479) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248280)

There are multiple accepted spellings of http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/archeology [reference.com]

Re:That's not how you spell "archaeology," but... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248538)

There are multiple accepted spellings of http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/archeology [reference.com]

No, archaeology is the only correct UK/British spelling, I assume archeology is the US version.

Re:That's not how you spell "archaeology," but... (1)

grouchomarxist (127479) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248622)

Uh, meaning there are multiple spellings in international English.

Dr Jones. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248190)

Dr. Jones Dr. Jones, calling Dr. Jones, Dr. Jones, Dr. Jones wake up now (Wake up now).

Re:Dr Jones. (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248218)

Dr. Jones Dr. Jones, calling Dr. Jones, Dr. Jones, Dr. Jones wake up now (Wake up now).

Harrison Ford is turning 70 next year. Let the old bugger have his naps, he's earnt them! As a bonus, maybe then he won't make any more bad films that wreck the childhood memories. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was so named because to enjoy it you had to have a skull made out of crystal. (ie. no brains)

Re:Dr Jones. (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248364)

As a matter of fact, I think it's quite arguable that Kingdom is not any worse than the earlier installments. The main difference is that the novelty has worn off by this time.

If you look at Raiders for example, the premise (ghosts and super weapons invented by a god) is just as ludicrous as the premise of Kingdom (aliens and spaceships). In the third one, the premise is a living thousand year old knight and a cup of water that can heal everything - again not very realistic. The second movie is probably the most realistic of the lot overall, although the jump out of the airplane with a rubber boat stretches the imagination a bit.

I think the first Indiana Jones movie had the freshness and originality, the second one had a great chemistry between the leads, and the third was already running out of steam, except Sean Connery added a coolness boost factor. The fourth just didn't have the same calibre of characters, but the supernatural elements were par for the course imho.

p.s. The OP was talking about the Aqua song [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Dr Jones. (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248490)

I think the first is remembered so well because it has a good script, strong chemistry, good villains and an exciting story. I think the second one had a great premise but sunk because the chemistry between the leads was nonexistent. Kate Capshaw played a stupid screamy bimbo who Indiana probably derived a few casual screws from before being dumping her ass in Calcutta or somewhere. The third installment was okay but almost holed by execrable CG effects and retreading somewhat back into the same domain as episode 1 - Nazi's, deserts, holy relics and so on. I didn't even bother watching the fourth. It got such a panning from reviews that I never felt motivated to ever watch it. Someday I'll catch it on TV I guess.

I think the problem with Spielberg and Lucas over time is their movies have gotten more by the numbers and there is that feeling that they have so much creative control that no one is in a position to rein them in from mediocrity or really stupid ideas.

Re:Dr Jones. (1)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248626)

The second movie is probably the most realistic of the lot overall, although the jump out of the airplane with a rubber boat stretches the imagination a bit.

THAT's the part that bothered you? Not the mind control by potion, voodoo doll, or live cardioectomy that doesn't kill the patient?

Re:Dr Jones. (1)

cowboy76Spain (815442) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249014)

My main point against Kingdom is(*1):

*: The way to introduce the history. In other films, it starts slowly with Indiana not knowing where he is getting into. In these, it is like if they count you half the story (where did they find the skull? for example). Also, from the beginning the bads are bad and the goods are good (even the traitor at the end is the traitor at the beginning).

*: There is less of a path... in other films they try to find a solution, make plans... there they just follow the skull (or the memories left by the skull) while being pursued... just a "physical" challenge, not a mental one.

*: Maybe because of that, or just because is trendy, overdone and long FX. Bigger is not *always* better. At least for me, there is some point where I think: "Awesome. Please wake me when people start acting again".

Also, yes, we are older and we have seen a lot more things (films included). The same "deus ex machina" solution that was breathtaking in Raiders would probably leave us empty stared, because now it is more difficult to find any surprising FX, now FX is accesory to the rest of the film, and because we probably have grown to think more about the story and people and less about big bangs.

*1: Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!

Re:Dr Jones. (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249192)

[...] we probably have grown to think more about the story and people and less about big bangs.

Please explain Michael Bay.

kali ma... kali ma!!! ....KALI MA!!!!!!! (2, Funny)

lewko (195646) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248234)

She won't be so smug when Mola Ram is trying to rip her heart out or she awakens Imhotep and people like Indiana Jones and Rick O'Connell have been put out of a job.

Re:kali ma... kali ma!!! ....KALI MA!!!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248382)

Hardly; when Indiana Jones will be jealous that he didn't have an HEV suit and all the small arms training that the Space Archologists get from their physics degrees.

Re:kali ma... kali ma!!! ....KALI MA!!!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248386)

But if one turns out to be an ancient chair weapon, she'll be VERY smug. Or turn into an ancient Steve Ballmer.

Re:kali ma... kali ma!!! ....KALI MA!!!!!!! (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249088)

You should be calling Jack O'Neill then....

old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248248)

OLD....

No imagination... (2)

Battal Boy (544978) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248258)

'Indiana Jones is old school, we've moved on from Indy, sorry Harrison Ford.'

I'm calling bullshit on this. Once the sites have been pinpointed from space someone still has to go in and do the dirty work. If fact, it sounds like the ideal sequel:

'Dr Jones, you probably heard we've located a previously unknown ancient settlement using satellite technology. However, what you probably haven't heard is that this settlement displays a very unusual feature that has completely flummoxed our scientists...'

Re:No imagination... (1)

Olivier Galibert (774) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248400)

That's called "Alien vs. Predator".

    OG.

Re:No imagination... (1)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248414)

In fact, it sounds like the ideal sequel: 'Dr Jones, you probably heard we've located a previously unknown ancient settlement using satellite technology. However, what you probably haven't heard is that this settlement displays a very unusual feature that has completely flummoxed our scientists...'

This is basically the plot of Aliens vs Predators. Space telescope finds a pyramid under the ice of Antartica. It's radiating heat because a reactor inside has started up to warm an Alien queen.

Although you could argue that is all just the plot of "At The Mountains of Madness" by that terrible racist Lovecraft. Alien city at the polar region, age-old battles between horrors from beyond the stars, and so forth.

Re:No imagination... (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249226)

"Aliens vs. Predator" had a plot? I don't think I can bring myself to try watching it again, so I'll only have your word for it. So... are you sure? This isn't one of those cognitive dissonance things where you expected one thing, saw something else, so your mind collaborated a new version of reality to make everything make sense again?

Re:No imagination... (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248422)

'Indiana Jones is old school, we've moved on from Indy, sorry Harrison Ford.'

  I'm calling bullshit on this. Once the sites have been pinpointed from space someone still has to go in and do the dirty work

You mean, go in and steal the artifacts?

Re:No imagination... (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249264)

You mean, go in and steal the artifacts?

One could conceivably argue that this is indeed what happens sometimes. Though theoretically it happens less now than in the past. At least when reputable scientists are involved. There's still plenty of unscrupulous looting anywhere you find things of archaeological interest, but it's generally more for business than science.

Re:No imagination... (1)

Battal Boy (544978) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249266)

Yes, but on the behalf of all Mankind, of course... :-)

Nonsense (1)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248290)

Ancient structures have been detected from space for at least thirty years. Techniques may improve but this has been going on for quite some time. There is nothing new about it.

Re: Nonsense (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249296)

This particular discovery is new. If you're more interested in new techniques than discoveries, I can see how this would bore you. Otherwise, I think it's rather exciting. Particularly because this discovery will likely be adding to humankind's store of knowledge for a very long time. I look forward to see what happens with it.

Wait a minute (1)

sosume (680416) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248300)

I patented the technique of finding pyramids from space years ago! Time to sue them for damages.

Re:Wait a minute (0)

Ulmeco (154825) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248370)

I patented the technique of finding pyramids from space years ago! Time to sue them for damages.

Well I patented the technique of patenting stuff so I believe you owe me some money.

Re:Wait a minute (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248420)

I patented the technique of finding pyramids from space years ago! Time to sue them for damages.

Well I patented the technique of patenting stuff so I believe you owe me some money.

Sorry, but I patented the technique of being owed money.

Re:Wait a minute (1)

azalin (67640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248588)

Well there is prior art to my technique and so I probably can't get a patent on it, but Mr 9mm still says this bag of money comes with me.

Re:Wait a minute (1)

lewko (195646) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248748)

I patented the act of clicking "Reply to this".

Re:Wait a minute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249286)

Hi I'm a Patent lawyer, please send me money, to act on your behalves.

The cameras can... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248336)

"pin-point objects less than 1m in diameter on the earth's surface".

I guess it means it can pinpoint most Americans.

100 years ago, (1)

Meneth (872868) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248352)

A satellite detected an object under the sands of the Great Desert. An expedition was sent...

Re:100 years ago, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249672)

I love this game...

sss (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248502)

squish, squish, squish goes the cock in the vag

Archaeology is for top men (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248704)

We have top men working on it right now.
Who?
Top men.
How high up?
100 miles up...in Low earth orbit.

Old school (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36248728)

I was under the impression that "old school" was usually used in a positive sense.

Re:Old school (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249320)

That might only apply to "kicking it". I'm not certain, though. This requires further study.

Desert - civilization link? (1)

retroworks (652802) | more than 3 years ago | (#36248860)

I think that it's the use of the satellite to see under sand which distinguishes it. Since reading about the history of deforestation, e.g. how Turkey had been covered with sequoia-sized trees, I've wondered if all deserts (like the Sahara) have human civilization as a contributor or cause. It will be interesting to see if they find ancient cities in places we don't know about, buried in the Sahara, the Gobi, Arizona...

New technique? (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249012)

I'm currently reading the book Sky Walking by astronaut Tom Jones, who relates, among other mission details and adventures, some of the scientific experiments performed by his crew on the Space Shuttle during the early 1990s. In his book, Mr. Jones talks about how they used a new satellite radar imaging systems to not only measure and map the entire Earth, but as an archeology tool to uncover old ruins and buried landmarks.

If this is the same, it's been going on for at least 15 years.

          -dZ.

Re:New technique? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249258)

http://www.affs.org/html/geoarcheology.html [affs.org] yes it goes back to the 1980's with shuttle imaging radar (SIR-A) via Space Shuttle Columbia in 1981.

Re:New technique? (1)

eyenot (102141) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249742)

so what you're saying is, it's not unusual.

Think about the future... (1)

grizzifus (2021406) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249096)

Slightly off topic but related to the technology and all that.

I often imagine archaeologists 300 years in the future angry because they're able to put a couple of little probes in the ground, run some quick scans, collect every conceivable iota of data on what's in the ground and how it got there, and then use computers to generate simulations of the entire history of the location with amazing accuracy.... well they would be able to .... if 20th-21st century archaeologists hadn't dug everything up thinking they were being helpful. :)

Re:Think about the future... (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249476)

A lot of that stuff would further decay, be disturbed by land development or natural disasters and just get looted in those 300 years. Besides how would the science advance if we're not out in the field, better to do the best we can to save what we can find.

Re:Think about the future... (2)

Punko (784684) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249498)

Many new finds will have portions of the find left unexcavated/unopened for the explicit reason that better techniques may be available in the future, so they leave them alone until then.

Re:Think about the future... (1)

eyenot (102141) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249694)

oh, yeah, sure.

we could've done it your way, said 'don't touch anything until the technology arrives to get it done withotu disturbing a single thing', and let's see, we'd have no sites of any value left because they'd all be subdevelopments, factories, parking lots and minimarts, aand let's see, we'd finally get our big break in the year 3000 when we figure out what the technology should be doing. we'll discover our first, undisturbed prehistoric skeleton of ANY kind in the year 3012. THANKS!

It's about time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249154)

They've move on from grave robbing Ancient Egypt? Good for them!

Cool! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249214)

So when do we summon the predators and awaken the queen and see a deathmatch take place in a buried pyramid in the antartic?

wtfe (-1, Flamebait)

eyenot (102141) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249302)

this isn't new.

like, two YEARS ago, they did the same thing and found all these cities and shit under the sahara desert. so the technique is nothing "new"-new, just "new-ish".

and i RESENT the tone of the article. this bullshit about archeaological techniques being outdated. the bitch is just overcompensating for the fact that no archaeology, ever, is EVER going to extract these finds from under the desert because you can't excavate a desert. it's impossible. we'll never, ever see the shit that's down there for real and she's just salty over it, and taking it out on her predecessors. she probably just winged through college with a 3-half or some shit and is jaded about real ACTUAL smart people who get shit done on their own. all she did was run up to a fucking arcade table "gimme gimme", grab the joystick and push the cursor over to Egypt. and then turn around and bitch at the people who were playing already when she ran up, and then pretended to have invented the fucking game.

fucking BITCH!

Anyone want to start a pool? (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249362)

The choices are:

1. Conspiracy theorists who get this wrong and claim that these artifacts were found on another moon or satellite.

2. Conspiracy theorists who get it right, but claim that things were found which have been hushed up because scientists "can't explain them."

Bets are on which ones will get more air time. Who's in?

My money's on the second. The first might have some initial popularity, but that will wane quickly as corrections are hastily issued. Then the second will take hold for the long run.

Re:Anyone want to start a pool? (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249372)

Moon or satellite? That's what I get for not proofreading enough. It was meant to say "planet or satellite".

Re:Anyone want to start a pool? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249570)

Don't go too far out on a limb, I mean, there are still people that have pagan beliefs thousands of years after Jesus came.

stargate reference? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36249490)

no stargate reference - and you call yourselves nerds!

Old hat (1)

Pf0tzenpfritz (1402005) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249566)

Satellite photography including radar and infrared exposures have been used to detect agricultural and "urban" structures of all ages for decades. Almost the complete reconstruction and research of wooden settlements, pole buildings and the great migrations, even reconstructions of defense lines in the 30 years war are mostly based on air and satellite imaging. Every first semester in archiceture or archeology could tell you a lot more about that, than the article does.

She's just jealous. (2)

Chas (5144) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249626)

Because she'd look silly in a fedora and she can't handle a whip.

cool beans (1)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 3 years ago | (#36249684)

Awesome to hear that there might be even more treasure from our past which could bring us one step closer to really knowing where we all came from....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>