Marty I'll ignore the sarcasm - it is getting a bit predictable.
Here we have another example of
apophasis. No one passes over things in silence more masterfully than yourself.
It is a pity that none of the artifacts dug up and tested have clear provenance to Earhart or Noonan, isn't it?
I've added a comma and a question mark to your sentence.
It now corresponds to the ordinary rules of English grammar, which are objective and easily applied to words.
Some of the tests have shown that the artifacts are of the proper time period so that they
might have been from AE and FN. That is a valid part of archaeology (digging and dating).
Some of the tests have shown that the artifacts cannot have come from AE and FN (e.g., the
knotted cloth).
The
metallurgy reports have excluded some items, I believe, but left others as possible candidates.
2-2-V-1 is still in play.
The apparent
rouge and
mirror pieces are suggestive of a Western woman at the Seven Site.
I'm glad that they are testing the various bones from the campfires. I value expert opinions when the experts are talking about their area of expertise. The
"putative poop" and the
"fickle finger of fate" were also worth testing.
I suppose if you know the outcome of a scientific test in advance, you don't really need to run the test.
If you're trying to determine what you don't know, the tests may be helpful.
I don't share your belief that archaeology without artifacts to examine is superior to archaeology with artifacts.