LOL! You think the council of Nicaea (and the other sometimes violent meetings between the early Cristian cults) was about removing the blatantly fake shit?
Don't kid yourself.
I'd agree that's a simplistic reading of early church councils, but I have a feeling you aren't particularly aware of early church, and especially early ecclesiastical, history.
It's not the same as physics
It isn't a science full stop. Social sciences are not sciences.
good archaeology follows the scientific method. Hypotheses are based on empirical data, they can be falsified. Sure, there's probably a lot more interpretation due to the human element in play, but it's not like it's some philophy, wer epeople sit on their ass making shit up.
There's a lot wrong here. First of all it's been accepted for many decades now that there is no
the scientific method. There are scientific methods. It's a descriptive not prescriptive term.
Secondly archaeology as a discipline is not experimentational, a core but not sufficient trait of the sciences.
Third of all I have a feeling you know little to nothing about philosophy, which both science and archaeology derive from. This isn't even an argument. You are just asserting philosophy is garbage without really giving a concrete reason, ironically while also praising science which gained and in its self-understanding, which I admit I think is incorrect, maintains legitimacy due to philosophy.
You're pretty clearly not an academic, so I don't understand what your horse in this race is other than just ironically sitting on your "ass making shit up".