Re: The Vinland Map's Ink



Ken Towe wrote:
>
> I believe that I asked those who favor authenticity to use any and all
> evidence that they find would be useful in order to come up with a
> scenario for the VM.

THAT is all done and dusted, long ago and need not be done again.
However if you want to stick your fingers in your ears and chant
LALALALALALLALAL to prevent yourself hearing, that is entirely your
prerogative - only don't make foolish claims like the above.

> They do not have to accept anything at all that
> others see as solid reasons for it to be a forgery.

Please explain then why you demand such BE accepted and responded to
as if your lopsided "theory" was fact?

> Yet, what we get
> from them is more diversion, off-topic discussions, irrelevancies, but
> not even ONE attempt to provide a logical medieval description.

There we are again - the "LALALALALALALA" chanting once more, but no
response to anything.

> If they
> demand that a natural source of anatase, or some as-yet-to-be-described
> sand be used, that's fine with me,

Look out for the low flying pigs!!

> but these sources need to be identified,

....but the nay-sayers chanting their mantra (as in your message here,
Ken) requires no such thing, right? *IF* one prescribed to the "its a
fake" claim of the true believers and proscribe its authenticity, then
such things are not needed, isn't that so! Like any ink using
manufactured anatase as a compound of ink at the relevant time - also
how that ink ended up on the map. No..... if one is a "True Believer",
then such things are not required!

> described mineralogically and chemically,

Sure - "anatase" and "TiO2" - there all done once more.

> and then placed
> into context with an ink and the scribe who used it.

....in the manner you have done regarding the "forger" - well, let me
be really polite and say after you, my dear chap, AFTER YOU!!

> That is just standard scientific procedure.

....which does NOT apply to "True Believers" who have decreed it
superfluous for their religion that only requires FAITH after all -
and that IS all we see produced from them too!

> So far, there has been nothing but
> hoplessly incorrect and undocumented comments about such sources.

....like relying on "documented" statements by a certain "Ken Towe",
you mean!

> It is
> amazing to me that none of these believers can come up with even a
> primitive start-to-finish model of what happened.

Pssstttt...... it isn't rocket science you know Ken. An early 1400's
map maker picks up his writing/drawing instrument and draws a map on a
parchment he obtained earlier - adds certain text information to it
and there you are. No mystery, no somersaults or conspiracies involved
at all, just normal everyday drudgery for a map maker!

> Again, I must assume
> that they have no idea at all of how to put a plausible scenario
> together...even if they are allowed to use whatever evidence they want.

ALL done already. You know you should read the story about the VM one
day.

> All they seem to be able to do is continually criticize.

......and first Ken invites the criticism, then he BITCHES when it is
provided...... there really is no pleasing some people. But does he
actually engage anyone in debate about the issues? HELL NO!


--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
.

Quantcast