Re: Vinland Map and New Math

From: Steve Marcus (smarcus_spamout__at_cox.net)
Date: 02/27/05 

Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:31:57 -0500

"I.E_Johansson" <inger_e.johansson@telia.com> wrote in message
news:O5rUd.131417$dP1.470544@newsc.telia.net...
>
> "Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
> news:cra421dpa85iu0ik5lm8h7814c5bqqqmne@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:30:28 +0100, "Alaca" <P.Alaca@is.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Eric Stevens wrote in: 4ii2219ms5ve7dri8pvjrrh6bgcpc7rrh3@4ax.com,
>> >
>> >"Alaca" wrote:
>> >>> Eric Stevens wrote
>> >>>> "Alaca" wrote:
>> >>>>> Odd Erling N. Eriksen wrote
>> > >>>>> Alaca wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Inger,
>> >>>>>>> I take it that you haven't learnt how to deal in a scholarly
>> >>>>>>> way with facts? You claim that Vinland Map is authentic -
>> >>>>>>> That's not proven. NO WAY.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> -Sigh. Nowhere in the article you are responding to did she
>> >>>>>> claim that the Vinland Map is proven to be authentic - she only
>> >>>>>> claims that it is not proven to be false, which is a different
>> >>>>>> matter altogether.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> To say that something is not proven is _not_ the same as to say
>> >>>>>> that the opposite is proven.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Please read again:
>> >>>>>>> Dom,
>> >>>>>>> I take it that you haven't learnt how to deal in a scholarly
>> >>>>>>> way with facts? You claim that Vinland Map is a *deception* -
>> >>>>>>> That's not proven. NO WAY.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Inger,
>> >>>>>> I take it that you haven't learnt how to deal in a scholarly way
>> >>>>>> with facts? You claim that Vinland Map is *authentic* - That's
>> >>>>>> not proven. NO WAY
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Search as I may, I cannot find the word 'authentic' in the article
>> >>>> to which you originally responded.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Inger may have used the word 'authentic' in that context at some
>> >>>> time in the past but she has changed her username so many times
>> >>>> over the years that a Google search to find out is impractical.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sorry for the confusion, but Inger is claiming here the VM is
>> >>> not proven fake. No "facts" of course, only "an opinion and
>> >>> an assumption", with a 'cattle of prime sauce'.
>> >>> In that way replacing one word is enough to 'proof' the VM
>> >>> is not authentic.
>> >>> A complete waste of time of course,
>> >>> both the exercise and Inger.
>> >>
>> >> Far from wanting to reopen an old argument, claiming that the VM is
>> >> not proven fake is not the same as claiming that it is genuine.
>> >> There is always the third 'middle' condition of don't know.
>> >
>> >You are right and in fact we still don't know.
>> >
>> >For me this is not discussing the VM, but only (Ingers) logic.
>> >No need to reopen the 'absence of evidence ..' discussion for
>> >me; I regognise the mistake I made. Therefore let me refrase
>> >that sentence: In that way replacing one word in Ingers statement
>> >is enough to doubt the authenticity of the VM.
>>
>> The new (to me) information that the map is coated with a material
>> dating from circa 1950 and which underlies the ink seems to be fatal
>> to any claim to authenticity if it can be confirmed. That the vellum
>> has been washed and treated with something is well known. That the
>> treatment underlies the ink is not.
>
> It seems that not even you knows that it's above the ink and that it was
> the
> normal way to preserve medieval documents when they were in for
> restauration
> in qualified workmen's shops. I have seen it done same way up to late
> 80's.
> it's a specific liquid which is added to the so called coat which is/was
> normally 2-3 layers of extremly thin material. the material had small
> holes
> so the liquid + material made the underlying ink, I have as I said seen it
> done at Museums, 'grow' upwards so you might believe that it's drawn on
> top.
> The procedure was normal procedure for restauration of Medieval books from
> 40's, not 50's. For those who aren't aware of the procedure it would be
> very
> very hard even under electronmicroscope to observe that the ink origin
> from
> under the material.
>
> Inger E

Wrong, Inger.

Why don't you read the link provided to the NOVA television program? You
might try explaining what the problem is with this exchange that took place
on the program: (Harbottle is the gentleman who did C14 testing of the map
for Yale, and Henchman is a Prof. of Chemistry at Brandeis University, with
his Ph.D being from Yale University:

"NARRATOR: Harbottle sliced a thin sliver from the map into six samples. The
first sample tested dated to the 1950s. Thinking the modern date a mistake,
perhaps due to contamination or a poor attempt at conservation, Harbottle's
team cleaned off the surface of the remaining samples with acetone.

GARMAN HARBOTTLE: Acetone, which should have no effect on parchment at all,
was extracting about 30 percent of the weight. In other words, the weight of
the parchment was one third foreign matter. That's a lot, 30 percent.

NARRATOR: With the foreign matter removed, he then tested the remaining
parchment samples. Instead of 1950, these dated to around 1440. Harbottle
concluded that the Vinland Map was drawn on authentic medieval parchment.
But other scientists were puzzled by the discrepancy.

MICHAEL HENCHMAN: When I first heard about the results from this, what I
heard was crazy. One measurement had said that the map was modern and the
other measurement had said that the map was old.

NARRATOR: What could account for such radically different test results? One
possible answer is a crude attempt at conservation carried out in the 1950s.
Another answer lies in a centuries old process for turning rough animal skin
into finished parchment by adding a coating that provides a smooth writing
surface.

MICHAEL HENCHMAN: Somebody took an old piece of parchment, dating back to
1440, stripped off the surface, and replaced it with a new surface.

NARRATOR: This new surface could explain why the first sample, which was not
cleaned with acetone, dated to 1950. The body of the parchment is ancient
but the surface is modern.

MICHAEL HENCHMAN: The map we see today was put down on the surface of the
parchment and therefore we can only conclude that the map was put on the
parchment since 1950.

NARRATOR: These findings suggest that a forger took an ancient parchment,
resurfaced it in the 1950s, and, upon it, drew the infamous Vinland Map. If
true, this would eliminate Father Fischer-who died in 1944-as a suspect.
Ferrajoli remains at the center of the mystery, but any information he had
about the identity of the forger went to the grave with him in 1966."

Now, let's see your references for your claim that the surface was "above
the ink." It appears to be equally likely that the ink was written on a
fresh surface prepared as described in the NOVA program.

>>
>>
>>
>> Eric Stevens
>>
>
>

Steve 

-- 
The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
because we do not have an attorney-client relationship, and
should not be construed as either.  This posting does not
represent the opinion of my employer, but is merely my personal
view.  To reply, delete _spamout_ and replace with the numeral 3

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Vineland
    ... I understand that it is generally accepted that the parchment comes ... >am unclouding the issue by arguing that the map lacks proper ... >> I think not, since Eric's point was that saying that the ink ... >a wider range if the history of anastase is incomplete. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... The Vinland map appears in the late 50's ... Its parchment can be defined as out of synch with the ... There are inconsistencies and irregularities in the Ink. ... The map elements should be similar to other map elements ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: VM reading lesson
    ... > was that the map as far as can be determined is genuine. ... Please observe that they doesn't seem to have any of Towe's thoughts ... information it seems to be all about the parchment. ... The ink problem is no more ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >>>If the map is authentic, it must be possible to describe ... Its parchment can be defined as out of synch with the ... There are inconsistencies and irregularities in the Ink. ... The map elements should be similar to other map elements ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >>> very difficult to apply a second layer of ink indetectably. ... >>direct quotation of your position) regarding the lines on the Vinland Map ... claim of impossibility was B.S. then, ... criticized Brown/Clark (and by inference McCrone) for offering an opinion ...
    (sci.archaeology)
Loading