News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:High court victory for Stonehenge campaigners as tunnel i... by nextaccountic on Monday August 02, 2021 @02:12AM (#28033407)
> Same with a deep tunnel. I don't think 150m down there would be substantive archeology. I don't think anyone is willing to countenance going below the remains is viable.

Usually it's the opposite: things well buried tend to last longer.

Re:High court victory for Stonehenge campaigners as tunnel i... by KirillPanov on Monday August 02, 2021 @05:01AM (#28034423)
Sort of like the joke among those building Finland's nuclear waste repository: they'd dig a mile under the bedrock to create a storage chamber for the waste, and what they'd find in the mining spoils would be... perfectly preserved, 500,000 year old copper canisters. Filled with formerly-radioactive waste.
Re:High court victory for Stonehenge campaigners as tunnel i... by ummonk on Monday August 02, 2021 @02:56AM (#28033661)
The point is that 150 meters down would likely be older significant human inhabitation of the area.