Jessie Johnson's message sums up the problem very well, "This whole thread
has been less about what's right or wrong and more about information
dispersal"   Mr Adams substantiates this point (I don't believe the message
was for the whole list, I hope Mr Adams won't mind).  He states that he
"missed the publication" warning of the dangers of whiteout.  No, Mr. Adams
didn't miss the publication.  If one ever appeared in a journal accessable to
archeologists, I am unaware of it.  I found out by seeing a pile of labels in
the bottom of a box.  Trying to match a labeled chip to a discolored spot on
bone is great fun believe me.
 
My part in this debate stems from irritation with the lack of information,
the disparity in advice, and the manner in which some of the advice received
is given.  I find it irritating to know that collections I prepared in good
faith will have to be rehabilitated because I received bad advice.  I also
find it irritating to be addressed in tones suggesting personal stupidity and
professional incompetence because I have followed advice given by someone who
allegedly knew what they are talking about.  All of this is irritating enough
that I want to know exactly where that advice is coming from.
 
As for the lack of communication, brief notes in archeology journals would
probably be helpful.  It appears that something on whiteout and nailpolish is
greatly needed.  Personally, I intend to start a bibliography on the studies
I've been talking about (as if I didn't have enough to do). It's something my
office can use and frankly I've adopted the Missouri state motto.  I intend to
 find out for myself
 
Thanks to all who have provided information.
 
 
Jim Barnes
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
1222 Spruce St.
PD-AC
St. Louis, MO   63103
(314) 331-8863
[log in to unmask]