Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] RE: Re: Chilton on Carlson & Secret Mark

Expand Messages
  • Stephen C. Carlson
    ... Actually, in my book, I specifically compared the photos of Smith s MS against three manuscripts from Mar Saba: Sabas 452, 518, and 523 (See FIGS. 2A, 2B,
    Message 1 of 17 , Nov 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      At 09:36 AM 11/3/2006 -0500, David Hindley wrote:
      >I am not directing this response to you in particular Ken, but if one is
      >making the claim that evidence for tremors almost certainly means forgery
      >(or whatever semantic term we wish to employ for rhetorical effect), and I
      >think Stephen has essentially done so in his book, he *should* include an
      >examination of similar documents for indications of, or lack of, similar
      >tremors. In other words, there has been no control study to compare the
      >manuscript photos against. The fact that a tremor can be an indication of
      >forgery, when other evidence rules out a contrary explanation, does not mean
      >that these tremors prove forgery. This is basic scholarly method, as without
      >controls we are only making allegations.

      Actually, in my book, I specifically compared the photos of Smith's MS
      against three manuscripts from Mar Saba: Sabas 452, 518, and 523 (See
      FIGS. 2A, 2B, and 2C, respectively).

      Stephen Carlson
      --
      Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
      Weblog: http://www.hypotyposeis.org/weblog/
      Author of: The Gospel Hoax, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932792481
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.