Japanese Jomon rock image a fake - 237 LexiLine Journal

See the Stone Pages Archaeo News at
http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/000447.html
for a story concerning a Japanese rock image - allegedly from the
Jomon period - as a fake.

What is disturbing about this report is the archaeologist's
statement that this artifact had never been investigated
before "since it was considered an important historical object",
i.e. people just accepted it as legitimate on its face.

Is that the scientific standard used in mainstream archaeology? The
more important the object - the less seriously it is investigated?

As some of you know, I have several times recommended the re-study
of the Turin Canon by new thermoluminescence methods, since I am
sure some of the pieces of this important historical papyrus have
been mis-pasted in the reconstruction process. Thermoluminiscence
would easily determine where the pieces should properly be pasted
(by grains on the paper, etc.). My suggestions have fallen on deaf
ears in Egyptology, for the same reason as given above - the object
is "too important" to study - it might be damaged.

And so, erroneous conclusions drawn from a - surely - falsely
reconstructed document are used to map the chronology of ancient
Egypt, for which the Turin Canon is of eminent importance.

Is this good science? Not in my book.