One of my classes ran late today, but the other got out really early! This is because the keynote address of the symposium on the Beaufort Inlet Wreck (the alleged Queen Anne's Revenge) is tonight, and Dr. Ewen is involved in the organization. I'm heading up there soon, as there are free munchies and socializing before the talk. Now, I am interesting in the BIW for various reasons. If it is the QAR, then the research there woill be really significant to the work I want to do. The speech tonight is about early North carolina and Blackbeard, which shoudl be fun, because I already know a lot of this stuff, and I want to hear what is going to be said ;) Also, did I mention free food?
But the controversy surrounding it is also curious. two of the proffs here, Dr Richards and Dr Rogers, recently published an article in the International Journal of Nautoical Archaeology saying that they don't think it is the QAR, or at the very least, that the researchers are approaching it wrong, and too strongly promoting the idea that it *is&, when the claims are not solid enough to do so. i haven't read the article yet... I've got too much other stuff to read (ugh -_-) But I am planning on it. I guess the issue for me is trying to decide if the fact that they are using so much caution because it is being toted as such a historically important ship is justifiable or not. I am sure that other ships have been identified based on more scanty evidence, so it is acceptable that it is such a big deal in this case? Should we hold the identifuication process to higher standards because it is, maybe, Blackbeard's ship, or should it *not* get special treatment? Anyway, I'm off for the free snacks, and hopefully a good lecture! the actual symposium starts tomorrow, at 8:45, and I am trying to decide if I want to go to all of it, or use some of the day to start writing papers.
In either case... is anyone going to be around later tonight?
But the controversy surrounding it is also curious. two of the proffs here, Dr Richards and Dr Rogers, recently published an article in the International Journal of Nautoical Archaeology saying that they don't think it is the QAR, or at the very least, that the researchers are approaching it wrong, and too strongly promoting the idea that it *is&, when the claims are not solid enough to do so. i haven't read the article yet... I've got too much other stuff to read (ugh -_-) But I am planning on it. I guess the issue for me is trying to decide if the fact that they are using so much caution because it is being toted as such a historically important ship is justifiable or not. I am sure that other ships have been identified based on more scanty evidence, so it is acceptable that it is such a big deal in this case? Should we hold the identifuication process to higher standards because it is, maybe, Blackbeard's ship, or should it *not* get special treatment? Anyway, I'm off for the free snacks, and hopefully a good lecture! the actual symposium starts tomorrow, at 8:45, and I am trying to decide if I want to go to all of it, or use some of the day to start writing papers.
In either case... is anyone going to be around later tonight?