The article takes a critical look at archaeoastronomy as a marginalised area of research and dwells upon the so-called “bad examples” with an aim to highlight the methodological reasons why archaeoastronomy is not considered a true science. The elicited examples are indeed made by amateurs, yet with an academic research background, and published in academic format. Thus, these treatments can potentially find their way into the knowledge of common people and shape their worldview. Until now, critical reviews of the elevant treatments have been non-existent, and the following article attempts to analyse the problematic issues in archaeoastronomy related treatments and bring out certain generalisations as to why such strange conclusions have been reached.
free text keywords: archaeoastronomy, archaeology, archaeomythology, astronomy, cup-marked stones, source criticism, stone walls, lcsh:Ethnology. Social and cultural anthropology, lcsh:GN301-674