I understand how archaeology works. I spent a semester working on a dig site. The professor was an experienced archaeologist. She had worked at sites in the Mediterranean.
I have read reputable archaeology magazines (Archaeology, BAR, National Geographic) and have watched programs that have focused on the methodology of archaeology.
Archaeology is a slow process. A site is selected. The site is divided into grids. A team is broken up into units; each unit is assigned a grid. They use trowels to remove the dirt. Shovels are frowned upon as they might damage an artifact. The dirt recovered is sifted for the smallest artifact. Context is vital for archaeology. That is why an artifact that has been removed from its location has lost value.
Archaeology is also influenced by the personalities of the people involved. And archaeology has become specialized. There are people who study the botany of a site, there are people who study the artifacts, there are people who study the language of a people, and so on. All these different specializations are integrated. Archaeologists are expected to file a report; many don't and this has created an issue in the community. Or someone can have an opinion that is wrong and that can slow the understanding of an ancient people. This person may hold great clout during their life and after they died. I know of one linguist who held up the translation of the Mayan language for fifty years.
So, my dear madam, before you state that I am ignorant or anyone else is ignorant, maybe it would be better for you to explain what you think people are not understanding before going into full judgment mode.