Although it is important to counter bad information with the correct information, I do not particularly believe it is a responsibility of all Archaeologists to confront and counteract pseudoarchaeologists.  This stance comes mainly from the idea that I believe alternative Archaeologists and conventional Archaeologists should rather work together to solve mysteries currently unknown to us.  That is not to say that Pseuoarchaeologists are correct in everything that they say and look for, however, individuals such as Graham Hancock, Zechariah Sitchen, and Randall Carlson have interesting ideas that should definitely be explored in more depth by Archaeologists.  Again, my position does not go to say that Archaeologists should accept every single claim made by alternative Archaeologists, however, instead of immediately dismissing them as crazy Archaeologists should carefully examine Pseudoarchaeological claims and see if they truly hold any wait in the academic world. 

            This idea mainly comes from my belief that sometimes, alternative Archaeologists get dismissed as being “crazy” or just wrong without anybody taking a look at their findings.  Of course, most pieces of “evidence” that these individuals claim is false and out of context.  However, in certain instances I believe Pseudoarchaeologists may be right—take the age of the Sphinx for example.  I would have like to see more examples of aeolian erosion that appears like of the Sphinx, only because I have seen many different Archaeologists agree with the belief of Graham Hancock and others that the erosion on the Sphinx appears to be made from water.  That does not go to say everything these people say is true, on the contrary, they should be critiqued just as much, if not more, than academic Archaeologists.

            That being said, if a piece of Pseudoarchaelogical information clearly jumps the bounds of reality, and after examination still seems outright crazy, then of course academic Archaeology should not accept these claims as fact.  The only time I feel that Archaeologists should have a responsibility of addressing Pseudoarchaeological claims should be when a certain claim or idea gains traction in the minds of people all over the world, when that idea is completely false.  Not because people should not be allowed to do their own research and believe what they want to, but because certain ideas that fall into the Pseudoarchaeological path can be extremely dangerous, as seen with the Ahnenerbe and the Nazi regime.  When it does come to confronting outrageous claims, Archaeologists should dismiss them just as they always have done.  Writing in academic journals, and confronting Pseudoarchaeologists directly seems to be the best way to counteract bad information.  Journals should be the preferred method due to their reputation as scholarly material.

            Overall, it is important to remember that most people do not wish to do harm with things like Pseudoarchaeology. This does not dismiss the fact that most damage comes without the intent of doing so. That being said it should be a priority of Archaeologists to work with alternative Archaeologists to either correct their claims or seek further information on a claim that seems to possibly have legs.  Although most people do not wish to do harm, there are outliers of course and these individuals should be pointed out and made an example of in the academic community.

-Damian Gonzalez