The article states that the science of archaeology was faced with serious problems and limitation in Britain. However, the professor mentions that in 1990 a new guide line was adapted, and helped to solve all the problems that mentioned in the article, and this clearly disagrees with what the Author’s wrote.
First, the reading asserts that many valuable artifacts were lost to construction projects. The professor refutes this point by saying that in the new guide line, before any construction’s site would start, an archaeologist must observes the site and declares that the site doesn’t have any artifacts. She adds that if the archaeologist found anything, the construction must changes the place or builds near the old site but not at the same spot.
Second, the article posits that many archaeologists felt that the financial support for research was inadequate. On the other hand, the professor contends that after the new guide line the archaeologists have a new source of financial support rather than the government. According to the professor, the construction’s company needs to pay for the archaeologist to work for their site and declare that it doesn’t contain any artifact.
Third, the article claims that it was difficult to have a career in archaeology because there were never many positions available. The professor refutes this point by saying that after the constructional guide line approved, expert archaeologists needed and hired in all constructional sites. She adds that this action creates many jobs and more people want to have a career in archaeology in Britain.
The
article
states that the science of archaeology
was faced
with serious problems and limitation in Britain.
However
, the
professor
mentions that in 1990 a
new
guide
line
was adapted
, and
helped
to solve all the problems that mentioned in the
article
, and this
clearly
disagrees with what the Author’s wrote.
First
, the reading asserts that
many
valuable artifacts
were lost
to
construction
projects. The
professor
refutes this point by saying that in the
new
guide
line
,
before
any
construction’s
site
would
start
, an
archaeologist
must
observes
the
site
and declares that the
site
doesn’t have any artifacts. She
adds
that if the
archaeologist
found anything, the
construction
must
changes
the place or builds near the
old
site
but
not at the same spot.
Second, the
article
posits that
many
archaeologists
felt that the financial support for research was inadequate.
On the other hand
, the
professor
contends that after the
new
guide
line
the
archaeologists
have a
new
source of financial support
rather
than the
government
. According to the
professor
, the
construction’s
company
needs to pay for the
archaeologist
to work for their
site
and declare that it doesn’t contain any artifact.
Third, the
article
claims that it was difficult to have a career in archaeology
because
there were never
many
positions available. The
professor
refutes this point by saying that after the constructional
guide
line
approved, expert
archaeologists
needed and hired in all constructional
sites
. She
adds
that this action creates
many
jobs and more
people
want to have a career in archaeology in Britain.