Re: The Vinland Map's Ink

On Wed, 4 May 2005 20:27:13 +0100, "David B."
<davidb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Steve Marcus wrote in message ...
>>
>>"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>
>>> Usually I don't have enough information but what I don't know usually
>>> tells me where to look for what is missing. There is no guarantee I
>>> will find it.
>>
>>LOL
>>
>>How will you ever *know* that you have all the information??
>>
>>I'll answer the question myself: You'll *know* that you have all the
>>information when the information reaches a conclusion that you or your
>>client (not necessarily the same thing) want to reach. And don't we all
>>just *know* that you quite often go back to a client and say "Sorry, all
>the
>>available evidence points to X conclusion, but there may just be more out
>>there and I can't write my report until that evidence surfaces (if it ever
>>does)."
>>
>>Once again, LOL.
>>
>>It's the same game that you play on sci.archaeology. Which is why I
>*know*
>>that you aren't being at all truthful regarding the methodology with which
>>you claim to conduct your business.
>>--
>>The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
>
>Too right it isn't.
>
>The situation as I see it (and as I have stated before) is that Eric is
>trying to bring the whole ethos of forensic analysis (basically, the result
>is what matters, outweighing all other considerations) to historical study
>(where the evidence is what matters, and results are expected to be
>modified as new evidence becomes available, because it is rarely worthwhile
>trying to find a "definitive" answer to a problem in one go). As I
>suggested earlier, with no hope of any prosecutions there is no point in
>applying the forensic ethos to the Vinland Map- the cost would almost
>certainly far outweigh the benefits. Applying the historical ethos, we find
>that the evidence so far- not just about the ink but about the map as a
>whole- leads to the belief that the map is a forgery and therefore not
>worth the attention of medieval historians. If anybody cares enough to
>search for new evidence (as I did myself, adding another couple of kilos to
>the "forgery" side of the balance) that's fine, but it's not something
>people should lose sleep over.
>

It's even simpler than that. I have already at least twice, in effect,
said of the VM that presently I don't really know what I'm talking
about. For that reason I refuse to talk about it. I can't think of
anything simpler than that. I know some people might find that a novel
idea, but that's the way I feel about it.

As for the rest, which is a little closer to the picture you painted
above, I regard the pronunciation of conclusions about the ink in the
absence of the most basic knowledge of what the ink actually is, is
mere pontification with no real substance. I refuse to join in.



Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >there and I can't write my report until that evidence surfaces (if it ever ... trying to bring the whole ethos of forensic analysis (basically, ... whole- leads to the belief that the map is a forgery and therefore not ... worth the attention of medieval historians. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Vineland
    ... > giving evidence I am an officer of the court. ... choose to define "the ink") has been dated ... Steve Marcus is a patent attorney and used to ... truth by directing attention away from the truth, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Re: Pete Rose: "I Bet On Baseball Every Night"
    ... >> Your intellectual dishonesty is breathtaking. ... What evidence do you have on which to base that comment? ... There is evidence to support the figure of 6 million. ... is universally accepted by all serious historians. ...
    (rec.sport.baseball)
  • Re: Can you love your enemy and still kill him
    ... There are independent historical records of Socrates; there are none of Jesus. ... There are no records independent of his disciples and his disciples' disciples save one problematic reference in a contemporary play which is so unlike the Socrates presented to us by his disciples that in the end the only thing they have in common is the name, hardly "independent" evidence for his existence. ... Hopefully we're talking as historians here. ... There is in addition the mention of him in Josephus 60 years after his death.You mention in a later post that Josephus wrote 3 generations later, not sure how you measure that. ...
    (rec.arts.books.tolkien)
  • Re: All Evidence is Subjective...
    ... Argument from silence reiterated. ... evidence does not have that evidence. ... which includes Josephus and the Roman historians. ... There are no contemporary references to Jesus (including the Gospels, ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading