The Archaeological Fantasies Podcast – Episode 1

The inaugural episode of the Archaeology Fantasies podcast, hosted by Sarah and co-host Dr. Ken Feder, delves into the realm of pseudo-archaeology, exploring its definition, how to identify it, and the critical role professional archaeologists play in debunking these fringe theories. Dr. Feder shares his journey into archaeology, sparked by the pseudo-scientific claims of figures like Erich von Däniken. Both hosts emphasize the importance of evidence-based science and the need for public education to counteract the misleading narratives perpetuated by popular media. They advocate for the fascinating truths of genuine archaeological discoveries over sensationalized myths.

• The podcast focuses on addressing hot topics in Fringe archaeology and alternative history from a critical perspective.
• Hosts: Sarah (archaeologist, known online as ArchyVance) and Dr. Kenneth Fader (archaeologist and professor at Central Connecticut State University).

• Ken Fader is an archaeologist and professor in the Department of Anthropology at Central Connecticut State University.
• He has been involved in archaeology for over 30 years, directing the Farmington River Archaeological Project.
• Fader is interested in public perceptions about archaeology and Fringe archaeology ideas.
• Authored notable works such as "Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology" and "The Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology."

"I'm an archaeologist, I'm a professor at Central Connecticut State University... I've been doing archaeology for over 30 years."

• Fader's work includes both prehistoric and historical archaeology, with a focus on debunking pseudoscientific claims in archaeology.

• Fader's interest in pseudo-archaeology began during his college years in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
• A pivotal moment was encountering the book "Chariots of the Gods" by Erich von Däniken, which claimed that extraterrestrials built the pyramids.

"I read the book and it was... archaeological pornography... it bore no relationship to what archaeology really is about."

• This experience led Fader to track and critique similar works, noting their lack of evidence-based claims.

• Fader developed a course on ancient mysteries and pseudoscience in response to student interest in Fringe archaeology topics.
• The course aimed to debunk and critically examine popular but unfounded claims.

"I spent the semester essentially debunking or disabusing them of all this stuff... and that class worked so well."

• The course became a regular offering, highlighting the importance of archaeologists addressing public misconceptions.

• Fringe archaeology ideas have become increasingly extreme and prevalent in media.

"As crazy as it was back in the late 60s, early 70s... things have gotten increasingly crazy especially recently."

• Shows like "Finding Bigfoot" and "Ancient Aliens" continue to perpetuate unverified claims, often prioritizing sensationalism over scientific accuracy.

"Finding Bigfoot... they have never found Bigfoot... they should call it not finding Bigfoot."

• The popularity of such shows indicates a public fascination with pseudoscience, despite the lack of supporting evidence.

• Archaeologists face the challenge of combating misinformation while engaging with a public that is often captivated by sensational claims.
• The role of archaeologists includes providing accurate information and fostering critical thinking.

"It's become the funny thing is we've become the alternative now... sober calm and reason science... nobody listens to anymore."

• Fader and other professionals aim to offer a reasoned and evidence-based perspective to counteract the spread of pseudoscientific ideas.

• Both hosts reflect on the difficulty and importance of correcting public misconceptions without discouraging interest in archaeology.

"I feel like I'm stepping on a puppy when I do that... but I don't want them to be lied to and to be deceived all of their life."

• They emphasize the need for honesty and accuracy in presenting archaeological findings, despite the popularity of sensationalized pseudoscience.

• The media plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions of archaeology, often prioritizing entertainment over factual content.

"I don't know how TV works... but clearly these shows must be doing well when they go on for several years."

• The podcast aims to provide an alternative narrative, grounded in scientific inquiry and critical examination.

• The podcast serves as a platform for addressing and debunking pseudoscientific claims in archaeology.
• It highlights the importance of critical thinking and evidence-based research in understanding the human past.

• Discussion on whether individuals who promote pseudo-archaeological theories genuinely believe in them.
• The potential negative impact of pseudo-archaeology on public understanding and perceptions of historical and archaeological facts.

"Does it really matter? People who are peddling nonsense are peddling nonsense and whether they're doing it for a dollar or doing it because they really truly earnestly believe this, that doesn't have, there's no relationship to at all to whether or not they're having a negative impact on people's perceptions."

• The speaker questions the relevance of whether pseudo-archaeologists believe their own claims, emphasizing the harm caused by spreading misinformation regardless of intent.

"I have to agree with you a thousand percent, especially here in the United States. Just people, adult human beings, vote, and in their votes, they're voting for things related to historical sites preservation, environmental preservation legislation, that legislation that directly affects our ability to preserve the past, to interpret the past, and to present that past to the public in national monuments and national parks and on and on and on."

• The speaker highlights the importance of public knowledge in voting on matters affecting historical preservation, stressing the danger of misinformation influencing these decisions.

• The impact of pseudo-archaeology on public understanding and its potential to misguide decisions related to historical preservation.
• The profession's responsibility to combat misinformation and educate the public.

"It's really important that people who are voting and whose votes are going to affect the future of the past, in essence, if all they know about archaeology is the stuff that they read in Fringe books or see on cable TV, we as a profession, we've got a real problem."

• The speaker emphasizes the critical need for accurate public knowledge to make informed decisions about archaeological and historical matters.

• Challenges in making archaeological information accessible to the public.
• The perception of archaeologists as elitist and the need for better public engagement.

"There's a lot in archaeology that isn't easy for the common person to get a hold of because for different reasons like you're not going to publicize big sites because you're trying to prevent looting and you're not going to publicize certain artifacts because you're trying to protect it or you're just not ready to come out with your findings yet."

• The speaker discusses the difficulty in making archaeological information accessible due to concerns about looting and the timing of releasing findings.

"We have the burden of being perceived often as we're Ivory Tower Eggheads. We're in our Ivory Towers, and we just theorize and we're kind of armchair scientists, and that the real people are out there in the field finding out the true story."

• The speaker acknowledges the perception of archaeologists as detached and elitist, stressing the need to bridge the gap between professionals and the public.

• The extensive time and effort involved in archaeological excavation, analysis, and reporting.
• The public's misunderstanding of the archaeological process and the importance of context in interpreting artifacts.

"After an excavation's been done, it can be two years or more before all of the analyzing and the writing of the reports are done, and two years I think is like a quick report."

• The speaker explains the lengthy process of analyzing and reporting archaeological findings, which can take several years.

"The time involved in actually carefully extracting material, the time involved in analyzing it back in the lab, the time involved and then putting it together and publishing it, it can be years and years and years before that report is finally finished."

• The speaker elaborates on the extensive time required for careful excavation, analysis, and publication of archaeological work.

• The significance of contextual information in interpreting artifacts.
• The limitations of isolated artifacts in providing meaningful historical insights.

"An isolated artifact isn't that big of a deal. I get a lot of people who send me pictures or ask me questions about individual artifacts that they've discovered by cruising the internet or they think they've found somewhere, and they're like, what about this? And it's like, well, yeah, but what about the context surrounding that artifact?"

• The speaker stresses that individual artifacts without contextual information are of limited value in archaeological interpretation.

"People put too much value on the story surrounding the artifact. Like with this guy, it was found in an estate sale in Virginia. How else could it possibly have gotten there? I have a theory, and it's like, yeah, but where's your evidence?"

• The speaker critiques the overemphasis on anecdotal stories about artifacts, highlighting the need for concrete evidence and context.

• The difficulties faced by archaeologists in effectively communicating with the public.
• The need for approachable and engaging methods to educate the public about archaeology.

"I feel like when the average person reaches out to the average archaeologist with kooky ideas or strange questions, I feel like they're just brushed off a lot of the time and pooh-pooed and not even acknowledged."

• The speaker points out that dismissing public inquiries can lead to distrust and alienation, emphasizing the importance of respectful and informative responses.

"There are probably thousands of these things floating around, but if you don't know that, if you don't know the context that you can buy these in America and that finding one not in an archaeological site in situ in Virginia but buying one in an estate sale means exactly nothing."

• The speaker illustrates the importance of understanding the broader context of artifacts, using the example of common oil lamps sold in antique shops.

• The speaker's personal experience with pseudo-archaeology and its influence on their career in archaeology.
• The role of family and education in developing a critical and skeptical approach to archaeological claims.

"My dad wasn't watching them because he believed them. My dad was watching them because they entertained him. I learned from him how to be skeptical and how to evaluate claims and evidence when they're presented."

• The speaker credits their father's influence and a skeptical upbringing for their ability to critically assess pseudo-archaeological claims.

"I started investigating these things, and this was just a hobby at first. It wasn't until about seven years ago that I got really serious about it because Ancient Aliens was starting, and I was like, this is a bunch of Hui and this is stupid and why are people believing this?"

• The speaker describes their transition from a casual interest in debunking pseudo-archaeology to a serious commitment, motivated by the rise of shows like Ancient Aliens.

• The importance of education in fostering critical thinking and skepticism.
• The potential for pseudo-archaeological claims to inspire genuine interest in archaeology when approached critically.

"I've made the argument sometimes that look, maybe these shows are terrible, but if it inspires somebody like you to inquire further and then you actually go into the field, maybe there's a silver lining to the dark cloud."

• The speaker suggests that while pseudo-archaeology can be harmful, it may also inspire some individuals to pursue genuine archaeological inquiry and education.

"I think you'll find a lot of people who do that. I mean, it's entertaining to me now. Now I enjoy watching them and I enjoy reading funny stories."

• The speaker acknowledges that pseudo-archaeological content can be entertaining and may serve as a gateway to deeper, more critical engagement with archaeology.

• The speaker avoids getting too much into nomenclature and emphasizes the importance of defining what science is.
• Science is described as a fact-based way of knowing, involving hypothesis testing against hard data.
• Scientists are open to reevaluating hypotheses when new data is available, contrary to the accusation of being close-minded.

"What we do in science is we look at the world around us, there's a real physical world around us, and there are all these data points and we try to see if we can figure out if there are patterns, correlations, causes, and effects."

• Explanation: This quote highlights the scientific method, focusing on observation, pattern recognition, and hypothesis testing.

"When people say you scientists, you're just so close-minded, it is so the opposite of science."

• Explanation: The speaker refutes the notion that scientists are close-minded, emphasizing that science is inherently open to new data and hypotheses.

• The discovery of the Norse settlement at L'Anse aux Meadows is used as an example of scientific skepticism and acceptance.
• Before the discovery, there was controversy over the interpretation of the sagas due to the lack of physical evidence.
• Once the site was found and evidence was provided, archaeologists embraced the new information.

"Before the L'Anse aux Meadows site was found, there was a lot of controversy about the interpretation of the sagas."

• Explanation: This quote sets up the context of skepticism in the scientific community regarding the Norse sagas.

"Archaeologists saw that evidence, and once they read that evidence, they embraced it."

• Explanation: This quote illustrates the scientific community's willingness to accept new evidence and revise their understanding accordingly.

• The speaker expresses excitement about potential groundbreaking discoveries, such as finding extraterrestrial artifacts or evidence of Atlantis.
• This enthusiasm is shared among scientists, contrary to the stereotype of scientists being uninterested in extraordinary claims.

"If tomorrow somebody excavating under the Pyramid of the Moon at Teotihuacan were to find a crashed Flying Saucer, I would be surprised, but I don't think anybody in the world would be happier than I would be."

• Explanation: This quote shows the speaker's excitement for potential extraordinary discoveries, contradicting the notion that scientists are uninterested in such findings.

"If we were to find out that Atlantis existed, man, I'd sign up to be one of the first people to go dig there."

• Explanation: The speaker expresses a willingness to explore and validate extraordinary claims if credible evidence is found.

• There is a misconception that the title "archaeologist" has a legal meaning or requires specific credentials.
• The speaker clarifies that anyone can claim to be an archaeologist without formal training or experience.
• This leads to issues with credibility and the public's understanding of professional qualifications.

"Anybody in the world can put up a sign outside their house and say Joe Smith, archaeologist, and you're not breaking any law."

• Explanation: This quote highlights the lack of legal restrictions on who can call themselves an archaeologist, leading to potential credibility issues.

"You see somebody on TV where it says archaeologist, that doesn't mean anything necessarily."

• Explanation: The speaker cautions that the title "archaeologist" on TV or in media does not guarantee professional qualifications or credibility.

• Formal training, field experience, and peer-reviewed research are emphasized as important aspects of being a credible archaeologist.
• While formal credentials do not guarantee correctness, they indicate a higher likelihood of reliable expertise.
• The speaker compares the situation to hiring a professional plumber or doctor, where training and experience matter.

"People who have gotten a legitimate PhD had to have a lot of training and a lot of experience in writing about and doing field archaeology."

• Explanation: This quote underscores the extensive training and experience required to earn a PhD in archaeology, indicating a higher level of expertise.

"It's probably better to go to somebody who has trained in that profession... rather than somebody who says, 'Well, I get my healing powers through divine revelation.'"

• Explanation: The speaker uses an analogy with medical doctors to illustrate the importance of professional training and experience in achieving reliable results.

• The speaker acknowledges that some self-taught individuals can achieve high levels of expertise and be respected by the professional community.
• These individuals often adhere to modern methods and maintain rigorous standards, earning professional recognition despite lacking formal credentials.

"Somebody like Don Crabtree, who was a rancher with an amateur's interest in archaeology, became probably the best-known lithic replicator of stone tools that America has ever produced."

• Explanation: This quote highlights an example of a self-taught expert who gained professional respect and contributed significantly to the field.

"If my choices are between that amateur archaeologist and your friend who brought you all those pictures, I'm gonna pick the guy who the community says is a good person to work with."

• Explanation: The speaker emphasizes the importance of community recognition and adherence to professional standards when evaluating the credibility of self-taught individuals.

• The speaker stresses the importance of evaluating evidence rigorously and maintaining high standards for accepting claims.
• They encourage others to provide credible sources and data to support their arguments.
• The speaker is open to changing their mind if presented with compelling evidence but maintains a high threshold for what constitutes credible evidence.

"Show me your evidence, show me what you think you've got, I will evaluate it, and I will tell you if I will accept that evidence."

• Explanation: This quote emphasizes the speaker's commitment to evaluating evidence rigorously before accepting any claims.

"Your evidence needs to be at least as good as mine before I'm going to change my mind."

• Explanation: The speaker sets a high standard for evidence, indicating that they require credible and robust data before reconsidering their position.

• There are challenges in public perception and communication, as many people do not understand the qualifications and rigor involved in professional archaeology.
• The speaker discusses the frustration of being misunderstood or misrepresented by the public and media.
• They emphasize the importance of clear communication and education to bridge the gap between professionals and the public.

"A lot of people think that the term archaeologist has some legal meaning... but actually, anybody in the world can call themselves an archaeologist."

• Explanation: This quote highlights a common misconception about the title "archaeologist" and the need for better public understanding.

"People don't understand the experience that goes behind the name and the title and the work."

• Explanation: The speaker points out the lack of public awareness regarding the extensive training and experience required to be a credible archaeologist.

• Skeptics demand strong evidence to accept extraordinary claims.
• Verifiable physical evidence, such as skeletons, is crucial for validating claims about historical phenomena.
• Skeptics remain unconvinced without concrete evidence.

"Show me the skeleton because then I look at that skeleton or a physical Anthropologist forensic anthropologist looks at the skeleton and says Yep this is a hominid and it's 12 feet tall."

• An actual skeleton would provide undeniable proof, turning skeptics into believers.

• Cult science involves performing scientific rituals without understanding the underlying principles.
• Cargo cult religions are an example, where people mimic scientific practices without grasping their purpose.
• Proper scientific analysis takes time and involves thorough examination and peer review.

"People who go through the motions of performing science or performing archaeology without understanding why they're doing certain things and also without understanding all of the steps that go into it."

• Mimicking scientific practices without understanding them leads to superficial and flawed conclusions.

• Hyper diffusionism suggests that major cultural developments originated from a few "brilliant" cultures and spread globally.
• This theory undermines the capabilities of other cultures to develop independently.
• Diffusion does occur, but hyper diffusionism lacks the required high level of evidence.

"The basic notion of diffusionism is that people for the most part are pretty conservative and slow and dim-witted and they're only a very few very limited number of kind of brilliant cultures in the world."

• Hyper diffusionism is considered insulting and unsupported by concrete evidence.

• Superficial use of scientific tools and terminology does not equate to genuine scientific research.
• The presence of scientific equipment or numerous footnotes does not validate a scientific claim.
• Proper scientific research involves unbiased data analysis and logical conclusions.

"It's not the equipment that makes somebody a scientist; it's the overall approach."

• Genuine scientific research is characterized by a comprehensive and methodical approach.

• Misinterpretations arise when similar structures or symbols are found in different cultures.
• Simple shapes like pyramids and crosses are common and can independently appear in various cultures.
• The term "pyramid" can be misleading as it encompasses a wide range of structures.

"If you're going to pile up a lot of rocks, it kind of makes sense to make it big on the bottom and smaller as you go up because if you do it the reverse... they keep falling over."

• Similar architectural solutions can emerge independently due to practical reasons.

• Real archaeology is based on evidence and provides a fascinating and accurate account of human history.
• Pseudoarchaeology, such as ancient alien theories, undermines the achievements of ancient cultures.
• Understanding the true capabilities of ancient civilizations is more intriguing than fabricated stories.

"The real deal of the archaeological record is a whole lot more interesting and more fascinating and more important than the fantasies that people make up about the human past."

• Authentic archaeological discoveries offer a more compelling narrative than pseudoarchaeological claims.

• Skeptics and traditional archaeologists value evidence-based research.
• Misinterpretations and pseudo-scientific practices distort the understanding of human history.
• The true story of human achievements, based on solid evidence, is both exciting and enlightening.

"It's so much more fun to say that the ancient Greeks actually knew Clockwork and knew how to use steam technology and that's how they were able to create the antithereum mechanism."

• Real historical achievements, such as the antithereum mechanism, showcase human ingenuity and are more fascinating than mythical explanations.