Re: The Vinland Map's Ink

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 12:45:29 +0200, Thomas Zahr
<ThomasZahr0503@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>David B posted:
>
>> Eric Stevens wrote in message
>> <4j3j515l37hgn41pcg3pg086ft0vnpp6ib@xxxxxxx>...
>>>
>>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 10:06:43 GMT, "David B"
>>> <tronospamchos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I must remind you of the question Ken posed:
>>>
>>>>>>> If the map is really medieval, what is a PLAUSIBLE
>>>>>>> explanation for the appearance AND composition of the
>>>>>>> inks that is consistent with the age of the parchment?
>>>>>>> Can Mr. Stevens, Mr. Renfors or Ms. Johansson answer
>>>>>>> this question without digressing onto other topics or
>>>>>>> making further ad hominem comments?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your reminder is misplaced. First, I was responding
>>> directly to you. I used the term 'plausible scenario' as
>>> this was the term used by you in the article to which I was
>>> responding.
>>>
>>> Second, we started heading down this particular branch of
>>> the discussion when Thomas Zahr wrote:
>>>
>>> "If the map is authentic, it must be possible to describe
>>> the
>>> process followed to produce it, taking all it's
>>> properties into account."
>>
>> Fair enough. I happen to agree with you that the phrasing
>> of Thomas's claim goes a bit further beyond what Ken
>> originally proposed than I would. But not that much
>> further, try a slight modification to: "If the map is
>> authentic, it must be possible to describe the process
>> followed to produce it, taking all its KNOWN properties
>> into account". ...
>
>Fair enough, even though I have really not expected anybody
>to take unknown properties into account ;-)

Previously unknown properties seem to be an essential ingredient for
most hypotheses.




Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages