Re: Vinland map and Historia Tartarorum, question
ie wrote: ZslSe.145592$dP1.501926@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Mr Towe,
is it common among Smithsonian's employes that a man in your position
not tackle the issue but try namecalling?
It that a usual tactic for Swedish primary schoolma'ams?
I would have expected anyone who passed major levels to know the
importance of proper Scientifical methods and to at least have basic
knowledge of argumentation, what's needed for an assumption to be
valid, premisses and such.
I would also have expected a man in your position to present if not
valid so almost valid arguments in the debate. As every scholar ought
to know it's not possible to start from an unproven assumption, in
your
case that anatase in form found on VM couldn't have existed in nature
before 1920. That's a false assumption.
Is this your way to show your knowledge of "proper Scientifical
methods"? "Premisses and such"?
Which I proved long ago
You proved not a thing. You wrote about sand, that's all.
Where are the documents with that sand?
Where is the sand?
What is the composition of the sand?
Where is the anarase?
showing that it did exist in exact that form and size in sand used
to dry ink,
How do you know?
sand from sandpits ...
Armpits are more likely
... close not only to the suggested monestry in mid Europe but also
close
to two of that times other major copycentres for maps, seacharts and
books.
Before you proven that to be impossible you haven't presented
anything to strength your case!
You first. Prove the sand, the sandpits, the monasteries, maps,
seacharts, books, ...
Ken Towe did his research and published it. You did nothing of
the kind. You only squirt your diarrhoea in some newsgroups.
(That is against EU law, you know. You must use an injector
for that.)
Anyhow if a person, scholar or not, uses an unproven assumption for
his thesis and go on from that point, he hasn't proven anything but a
'what if'. In other word under condition Z, I take it that you at
least have knowledge of why this is the case?, this or that leads to
conclusion W.
In your case you repeatedly written the contents found on VM, but are
you aware what some of those contents tells those that knows a bit
about usage of plast, nylon and other non cotton-gloves by persons
working with VM before the map was analyzed.
Are you claiming that these clove-people have seen anatase?
What's even more asthonishing is that you aren't aware of how VM or an
identical map ended up in the Spanish monestry from which it's at
least said to be stolen?
Towe researched certain aspects of the s.c. Vinland Map.
That has nothing to do with any other map.
He collected techical facts, not concoctions of Swedish
schoolma'ams.
If you aren't aware of the documentation presented for the map
brought from the Vatican to Spain short before Columbus set sail. How
do you belive a potential forger should know that? That question is a
billion-dollar question no matter what until you managed to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that your today unproven assumption is valid.
"Until you manage to prove" one single of your fantasies
"beyond reasonable doubt that your today unproven
assumption is valid"
When I studied Statistic back in early 70's we had a splended
introduction book written by Huff Darell:
Today that is standard highschool stuff, at least in my world.
How to lie with statistics, New York : Norton, 1954
That is all you know, a fifty year old book?
ISBN: 0-393-09426-X (hft)
ISBN: 0-393-05264-8 (inb.)
Have you both?
in that book Huff presented an example of misusage of presented
figures demonstrated in a drawing,
Yes, about the intelligence of Bohuslän girls.
where alike in your own
presentation of anatase found on VM and what you believe to be 1920's
'industrial' anatase the scales aren't the same.
As Huff and many other scholars of statistic stated during the years:
It's important to use same scales whenever a comparing with example A
and example B is at hand, if not the person who doesn't tries to lie
to make his/her case.
Nonsense. Can't you read the axes and the captions?
Is that because they are in English?
That's why it's important for your case that you do address the
issues and arguments presented against your study's assumptions
and conclusions. If you don't you simple haven't taken the chance to
prove one valid argument against VM.
Inger E
Inger, it is very simple. You are not qualified in Ken Towe's
field, so you better keep your mouth shut.
If you feel the need to give additional information based on
your expertise, you are more than welcome. But only if you
give facts and refrerences.
Until then: stifle yourself woman.
--
º°º°º°º < Peter Alaca > º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°
.
Relevant Pages
- Re: Vinland map and Historia Tartarorum, question
... >> where the 1430's map ... >> ink on the Vinland ... >> a plate of stone containing anatase chrystals it will ... > documents, diplomas or books. ...
(sci.archaeology) - Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
... You are fixed with the ink itself, that's one thing but I take it you are ... why there can be anatase in some part of the map and not in other. ... The size of the anatase found correspond to the size natural anatase in sand ...
(sci.archaeology) - Re: The Vinland Map Find Or Fraud?
... > idea as deriving anatase for the VM ink from clays. ... > then appear in an ink on the Vinland Map. ... > anatase without kaolinite is like finding a needle or two in a haystack ...
(sci.archaeology) - Re: The Vinland Map Find Or Fraud?
... that has NO RELEVANCE to anything at all being discussed. ... "Anatase particles having all of these properties can only have been ... relevance to the Vinland Map inks." ... content of nanogram flakes of the yellow ink itself, ...
(sci.archaeology) - Re: TiO2 and bogus claims
... >> Either anatase can or can't exist in same sizes as found on VM. ... >> As long as the naysayers of Vinland map haven't shown that they are ... > surprisingly the True Believers don't want to even attempt to answer ... > of Anatase production in Europe at the relevant time. ...
(sci.archaeology) |
|
