The device shows the data it receives and the user tries to understand what is happening by analyzing the differences there. Underground imaging systems are not like detectors and field scanning. The user can reach these conclusions by analyzing the measurements he made and the data he received. is It does not overwrite the data received from the device in this way. They measure the magnetic field vectors coming from underground using magnetic sensors. The basic things that the user can learn from the data received in the underground imaging products are soft soil, void, water, fill, excavated closed place, wet ground, rock, metal, structure, tunnel, cellar, etc. There is no metal discrimination, the comment made by the user after the analysis of the incoming data is important.
The key question is "Should I use metal detectors?" "How can I best use the metal detector?" Several university programs and field school, undergraduate and graduate students have begun to incorporate metal detection training, although detailed information to teach this subject, expertise and experience has remained only a limited number of professional archaeologists. Advanced Metal Detection for archaeologists from the website can recognize these formations in their own words. AM, archaeologists will provide an opportunity for information technology and practical skills liable to present updates and expansions'. Most of the current archaeologists, metal detectors "devil's tool" at a time when education was seen as acceptable and that the archaeologists to benefit from formal education. Staff training and the suitability of metal detection devices are the twin elements of a successful research efforts that use metal detectors. In addition, many professionals are not aware of the developments in metal detector technology, and unfortunately most are using outdated models. Another institution 'Advanced Metal Detection for archaeologists' school is still archaeologist and metal detector is an organization providing education users. '' Use of metal detectors and history, has appeared several professional archaeologists metal exploration experience in archeology generally not accepted since it started in the best way they receive training in how to maximize their interests.
The historical artifacts found by the users of gold prospecting detectors are purchased by the states or museums and contribute to the tourism sector. 3 million pounds. The Staffordshire treasure was valued at 3. Another example could be the Ringing Cup, this cup was valued at £270 thousand and this gold cup was purchased by the British Museum from the detector user who found the artifact. To give an example of some magnificent historical artifacts found by users of metal detectors, this could be the Staffordshire treasure. Crosby Garrett helmet was purchased by an anonymous buyer in exchange for 2. If we want to multiply the examples, West Bagborough the treasure was purchased from the detector is 40 thousand 650 pounds payment made by the user Somerset Museum. Other examples are as follows; Milton Keynes treasure was purchased by the British Museum and 290 thousand pounds. Stirling -kolyeleri- 462 thousand pounds of torque and funded by the National Museum of Scotland toplanılarak detector was purchased from users. 285 million pounds and was purchased by the Birmingham Museum from the detector user.
We also share these concerns of archaeologists that unconscious excavations are increasing cultural damage, so recently enacted laws in the Netherlands and Flanders allowing unprofessional metal detection after a decades-long ban have imposed metal detector search activity within 30 cm of the top of the ground. (Dutch Heritage Act 2016, art. This is true where 'treasure hunters' (whether or not they use a metal detector) remove an object from its archaeological context, thereby irreversibly destroying its association with structures, artifacts and other features at an archaeological site. With similar policies, the level of cultural damage will be reduced when the concepts of treasure hunter and metal detector user are separated, when metal detector users are licensed, for example, in exchange for training, and when these people are provided to work in cooperation with archaeologists. And also, are stricter laws really causing metal detectors to drop? Or is it easier to regulate by legalizing metal prospecting and to know which artifacts were unearthed from where? He is asking his question. Any citizen or farmer can destroy or unearth an archaeological structure while plowing his field. 2, art. 2. In her article Suzie Thomas – she completed her PhD looking at relationships between archaeologists and metal detector users in England and Wales – says there are no clear statistics to show how the scale of damage from metal prospecting compares to other threats to cultural heritage. However, it is not known what percentage of the people called treasure hunters are detector users. restrictions were created. 1, Onroerend Erfgoed, 2016, hoofdstuk 33)''. It is assumed by archaeologists that the 'unscientific extraction' of archaeological artifacts in itself, which occurs when the metal detector user digs and picks up an object from the ground, is inherently damaging.