TV’s Not-So-Great Pyramid

I'm confused about the reasoning behind the destruction of the "pyramid". The last few minutes of the show explained the destruction as a product of Roman occupation and the easy of obtaining pre-cut stone. I have no archaeology background, so this question might seem silly. Why would anyone harvest the building materials from this pyramid site when other sites were much more accessible? Just doesn't make sense to me...

I'm confused about the reasoning behind the destruction of the "pyramid". The last few minutes of the show explained the destruction as a product of Roman occupation and the easy of obtaining pre-cut stone. I have no archaeology background, so this question might seem silly. Why would anyone harvest the building materials from this pyramid site when other sites were much more accessible? Just doesn't make sense to me...

Something is always better than nothing. At least we do have a show on the pyramids. I'm looking forward to seeing it when one day it finaly makes it to Australian TV.

I find these shows interesting, but they're often full of supposed experts who like the camera more than the truth. It's almost a popularity contest in who can propose the most wild idea about history or archaeology. I want the truth, even if it's dull and boring than wild hypothesis about how people might have lived.

Now that sounds like a very interesting job does it not?

JT
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com

"Rameses: Wrath of God or Man?" on the Discovery Channel a few years ago was hollow and repetitive, hyping the drama and revealing nothing new or of substance. The recent traveling exhibition was actually "King Tut and the Golden Age of the Pharaohs", containing few actual Tut artifacts and few impressive artifacts at all. I was so disappointed that I was tempted to ask for my money back. Lately, it's all marketing.

Wow Chris Paris. I am a former archeology student and Newsweek is correct. They're not "trashing" anything but the less than honest coverage on the subject and artificial hype created around it. I get the impression that you have some excess baggage you need to sift through.

This was really what we have learned to expect from Newsweek, as it is presented in MSNBC. It is another obtuse attack on people outside of your own orbit. Sure History Chanel hyped it. Do you blame them? It is not easy to get people to pay attention to something that is not related to Clinton Obama. Newsweek, you have become old and dull, your politics stink, and your relevance is marginal.