2 ms·
That article says that the Rhode Island Marine Archaeology Project didn’t agree with the identification. This new article is about a published article on the di
by hluska 1y ago
That article says that the Rhode Island Marine Archaeology Project didn’t agree with the identification. This new article is about a published article on the discovery. The articles are totally different.
- madaxe_again 1y agoI read it not so much as a disagreement over identification but over publication rights, which is the norm in academia.
- bredren 1y ago> who said the finding was “premature” and a “breach of contract”, claiming that it was the lead organisation for the study “Premature” and “breach of contract” are very different things. I wonder what additional work was done so as to find that announcement now, years later, is okay.