Journal Retracts Paper Claiming Gunung Padang Is an Ice Age Mega-Pyramid

​When the journal Archaeological Prospection published an article claiming that the Indonesian site of Gunung Padang was a massive pyramid complex that dated back to the Ice Age, archaeologists sighed and fans of Atlantis-style lost civilizations cheered. The article’s lead author, Danny Natawidjaja, is a fan of Atlantis (and a beneficiary of publicity from Graham Hancock) who made wild claims about Indonesia being Plato’s intended lost continent. His methodology for dating Gunung Padang was so suspect even non-archaeologists like me recognized the problem immediately: Natawidjaja carbon dated random bits of organic material from within the volcanic hill but did not prove that it was associated with human activity, so the dates were worthless as proof that the hill was a human-made pyramid from the Ice Age.

Now, after an outcry from professional archaeologists, a New York Times piece on the controversy, and a months-long investigation by the Wiley, the journal’s publisher, Archaeological Prospection has retracted the paper:

Following publication of this article, concerns were raised by third parties with expertise in geophysics, archaeology, and radiocarbon dating, about the conclusions drawn by the authors based on the evidence reported. The publisher and the Co-Editors-in-Chief have investigated these concerns and have concluded that the article contains a major error. This error, which was not identified during peer review, is that the radiocarbon dating was applied to soil samples that were not associated with any artifacts or features that could be reliably interpreted as anthropogenic or “man-made.” Therefore, the interpretation that the site is an ancient pyramid built 9000 or more years ago is incorrect, and the article must be retracted. Danny Hilman Natawidjaja responded on behalf of the authors, all of whom disagree with the retraction.

​The journal did the right thing, but it never should have gotten to this point. Between the peer reviewers and the editors, someone should have seen such a massive error, and even after publication it should have been obvious enough not to require a lengthy investigation to confirm. It’s another example of the paradoxical way that sensational, fantastical claims like the Hopewell “exploding comet” or the Sodom-destroying “airburst,” seem to receive less scrutiny and are held to a lower standard in academic journals.

UPDATE: Just to prove my point, the New York Times covered the story on March 20 by failing to acknowledge that Gunung Padang is not a pyramid and then extensively quoting Graham Hancock about suppression of science.