Serious question, did anyone else think the new dating for the Antikythera Mechanism was rushed?

I spent about $80 on the special journal issue from the University of Athens team last month, and honestly, it felt like a waste. Their big press release about moving the date to 200 BC seems based more on one style of lettering than the machine's actual tech. I've seen more careful work on Roman nails from a small dig in Cornwall. Has anyone else read the full paper and had doubts?

2 comments

2 Comments

loganl229h ago

Wait, you actually spent eighty bucks on that journal? That's wild. Brian_ramirez is right about the flashy finds getting rushed, but charging that much for a paper that feels thin is another level. Hanging the whole new date on letter shapes when the gears could tell a different story seems like putting the cart before the horse.

brian_ramirez9h ago

You mentioning the Roman nails in Cornwall really hits home. It feels like the flashiest finds get rushed out for headlines, while the quiet, careful work gets ignored. I see it with tech launches all the time, a half-baked phone update gets a huge event, but the real fix comes in a silent patch months later. It makes you trust the slow, boring reports way more.