Re: The Vinland Map's Ink

Eric Stevens wrote: 
On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 09:54:40 +0200, Thomas Zahr
<ThomasZahr0503@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I.E_Johansson posted:


David,
you and Ken are making a hugh mistake believing that an
assumption from which you start your argumentation in
anyway could and can be used as proof. What's been done
from your side as well as from others who believe the VM to
be a forgery, is to forget that nothing what so ever has
been put on the table which can be used against VM no
matter if you refer to anatase - which exists in same size
in nature for example in parts of Norway, outside a
monestry in England as well as in two areas in the Alps
close to monestries; or it's your fictive trying to argue a
double ink - as long as the ink hasn't been identified,
AND
as long as double ink hasn't been proven to exist,
there is no way anyone using scholarly methods can use that
against VM! That's basic argumentation methods limits you
are trying to 'walk over'. You can't.


I'm sorry, but all this is besides the point.

There are two possible scenarios:

a) the map is authentic

If the map is authentic, it must be possible to describe the
process followed to produce it, taking all it's properties
into account.



Hmm. Would you go so far as to say then that the Great Pyramid is a
fake?


We have come a long way toward describing 'the process followed to produce it' wrt the GP, taking all of its properties into account. Along the way, and still today, this effort has involved scientific and other investigations in a number of areas, and our current understanding is based on the outcomes of those investigations. As our knowledge has increased through the application of these findings, we have been able to rule out certain hypotheses, and most W.A.G.s.

IOW, the requirement that it should be possible to describe the process by which an artifact was produced is really a requirement in principle, not a requirement to be omniscient at the current state of the art. In any case, artifacts are generally considered authentic unless there is a good reason for caution. As there is in the case of the VM, and as there is not in the case of the GP.

In the case of the VM, ISTM, IMHO, that as investigations have occurred, it has become harder to maintain the position that the map is an authentic pre-20th century artifact.

Tom McDonald
.