> but they made a good attempt to address reasonable concerns.

I am guessing that, too.

It is weird how you can do extremely easy things in a field of application that is novel to the method and get huge amount of praise. I bet they will be called to speak on many archaelogy conferences to talk about it.

I am not jealous at all. And I truly respect the people behind the paper for doing something that no one else is doing. They are at least doing something new. And they deserve praise from people in their fields.