The Dilemma of Joe the Archaeologist
|June 7, 2006||Posted by crandaddy under Intelligent Design|
Joe is an archaeologist at a major university. Not long ago, he came across evidence which was strong enough to convince him that there lies somewhere in the Andes a fabulous ancient city which has since been lost and forgotten. Confident that he knew the location of the city, Joe was able to acquire a grant to fund an excavation and traveled to a village not far from where he had planned to dig. However, after lengthy conversation with the villagers, Joe discovers that the lost city is most likely not where he had originally planned to dig and could very well be at either of two other locations–both of them far less easily accessible than the original site.
Joe decides to send scouting teams to each of the sites to investigate and search for any signs of past civilization. After conducting thorough investigations, the teams were only able to find one anomaly each (labeled as site A and site B).
Joe only has enough funds and resources to dig at one of these sites. At which (if either) of these sites should he dig and why?