for the love of it! appreciating the amateur scientist

i am riled by the pompous attitude of academia. if not for the amateur scientist, we would not have academia. most of the current information in any subject is based on the information culled from the original brilliant minds of the thinker. scholarly work is important and it must be held to standard and proven, but academia should embrace the amateur. many use technology to spread their pseudoscience and profit, but i believe the public wise enough to cull information and seek the truth. even in the physical sciences i know there needs to be controls and studies, but we are far too constricted in our degrees. in the field of medicine we are too restricted and controlled. we have lost the natural homeopathic way. we have lost touch with nature through constraints in academia. it is frustrating when your field of study is sensationalized, but the truth might not be what is written in a text. astronomers understand the importance of the amateur more than any other field of study. many of the objects we see in the night sky were discovered by the amateur. the field of archeology is currently undergoing an interesting transition. in the past sites were quite isolated and archaeologists were able to do the work as Teilhard, with a small group under their control. today archaeology is accessible to the everyday archaeologist. people are technomads that travel to many sites of interest. so much has been lost due to war, greed and ignorance. the proof may be lost in translation and time. i think academia should embrace and support the amateur for sometimes the walls of academia fall on ideas and creativity. when one has a passion for a subject, a true love for the quest for answers without reward of a profession, one finds true answers. these answers may not be what is studied. i think the amateur keeps the scholar in check. many of today's scientist are far too biased in personal opinions and religious beliefs. i will continue to enjoy shows like the quest for the lost ark. i will read historical fiction and the research cited, but i will question even the scholars. as Napoleon is believed to have said "history is a version of past events that people have decided to agree upon." the scientific theory must be followed but knowledge is fluid. archaeologist face the philosophical and the methodological issues when formulating theories. Fagan's oxford companion of archeology recommend the use of logic and reasoning and the natural sciences as scientific method. rigid narrowing methods could overlook logical answers that are culled outside of mainstream scientific data. the groves of academe are paved with many disciplines and i believe in interdisciplinarity. the changes within academia and at universities from Plato to Da Vinci to Einstein to modern times may have slowed the evolution of knowledge. could we be quantum leaps ahead if we restructure our systems? if not for amateur computer scientist, Bill Gates, you would not be receiving this enlightening information quite the way you are. as academia has splintered and become corporatist, academic freedoms are compromised. academic elitism quells personal knowledge and scientific freedoms. discursive theory has become the goal of many archaeologists and this may be the best approach. you never know if the theory of the amateur that seems so sensationalized may end up being the reality, and unfortunately you may not know until you see the face of the tetragrammaton.