User talk:Theriac/Sandbox

General suggestion: The use of archaeology in engineering textbooks is almost completely uncritical, suggest you use different sources. For example 11 years prior to Spier, Vandiver et al, 1990 actually looked at the composition of the clay and found only silty loess. The idea that they were formed with the addition 'bone, fat, and ash'to the was the construction of Ablonson in 1938. As for the Geopolymer Institute News, a nice indication of the failure of archaeology to escape the ideas laid down in the late 1800s and early 1900s but hardly a suitable source. The 'teachings of prehistory' have not been teaching any such thing for 50 odd years, his dates are well off and most of the other ideas are decidedly 19thC. I would shy away from such sources in writing a submission of this kind. Also check your dates, they are sometimes a long way off kilter. :) Best wishes.

Vandiver, P., O. Soffer, B. Klíma, J. Svoboda 1990. Venuses and wolverines: the origins of ceramic technology, ca. 26,000 B.P., in: W.D. Kingery (ed.), The changing roles of ceramics in society: 26,000 B.P. to the present (volume V), 13-81. Westerville. ]