5 Comments

While I understand that science can be harmful and that appropriate restrictions should be put in place to prevent harm, this law is far from appropriate. A few examples of the kinds of censorship that result from this law demonstrate the absurdity of using archaeology as a politically expedient target accomplishing for social justice goals.

ILLEGAL: A CSU professor studying what people ate in the past.

ILLEGAL: A CSU student measuring flakes from a surface scatter of chipped stone

ILLEGAL: A CSU professor studying how past peoples stewarded California's natural resources

ILLEGAL: A federally recognized tribe in California hiring a CSU professor to do archeological research

ILLEGAL: An indigenous student working on a graduate degree at a CSU studying their own past through material remains

ILLEGAL: A CSU researcher using data from archaeological sites to establish ecological baselines for modern marine ecosystems.

It really bums me out to see the political party that claims to care about science ban the scientific study of the human past with zero debate.

Expand full comment

You may be interested in a couple of my links on these issues. The first is my Op-Ed on AB275, which caused much more hysteria than my tweet. Had I been a repatriation-loving archaeologist, no one would have had any issue with my tweet (as evidenced by the many similar photos by archaeologists)

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/08/31/8314049-native-american-remains-uc-ab275-graves/

and, my most recent op-ed

https://californiaglobe.com/fr/california-buries-science/

And, for a longer read on the issue of teaching collections, my article in Skeptic with James W. Springer:

https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A766112775/EAIM?u=nysl_oweb&sid=sitemap&xid=e6c9eed5

Expand full comment

Thanks, and sorry for missing a couple of these. Lots of information to cover on this issue!

Expand full comment

I feel like Alice through the looking glass when I contemplate this. Your comment about insanity ( which was my favorite line) May well be the only context in which to understand this travesty. Isn’t there an old country/western song about the tail wagging the dog? If not, there should be. Thanks for shining a 100 watt light on a 25 watt decision.

Expand full comment

This is a mind-bogglingly bad law, and the net result will be fewer people learning about, caring about, and protecting native heritage. Meanwhile, CRM work won't dry up, so the early career people doing native American archaeology will be going in without any experience, which means it will be much more likely that sites will be destroyed and artefacts damaged in salvage etc.

I know I'm preaching to the crowd here, but I cannot fathom how any good can come of this. What a terrible law.

Expand full comment