摘要:When we published our response to the earlier (2006) attack by João Zilhão and his colleagues on the Châtelperron stratigraphy in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in January 2007, we never expected that they would take this conclusive refutation of their extraordinary “excavation backdirt” model quietly. And of course we were right. In our earlier paper we presented a series of about eight separate arguments bearing on the “backdirt” interpretation for Henri Delporte’s repeatedly published (1952, 1955, 1957, 1964, 1999) stratigraphy at Châtelperron, any one of which, in our view, was sufficient to make the entire backdirt model both untenable and, frankly, bordering on the archaeologically bizarre. Nevertheless they have now returned with a further series of arguments which (insofar as we can understand them) are even more extraordinary than those presented—and subsequently refuted by us—in their earlier paper.