Haran

Professor Krumbein directly addresses their reports:

"The conclusions noted in the reports by Goren, Ayalon and their colleagues, originate from a series of errors, biases, mistaken premises, use of inappropriate methodology, mistaken geochemistry, defective error control, reliance on unconfirmed data, disregard of information (such as the cleaning and preservation actions performed [on the ossuary], and the use of a comparative isotope methodology despite the fact that the [James ossuary] inscription fail[s] to meet the cumulative prerequisite conditions for such tests and comparisons." Each charge is documented in detail in Krumbein's report.

I thought that was a pretty strong condemnation of the work done on the ossuary by Goren, Ayalon, et al.. The .pdf file contained more detail on these various points.

I understand what you're getting at, but it seems that a "strict" analysis is good. I certainly wouldn't want a "loose" analysis to lead to the rejection of authentic achaeological artifacts.

I believe this may be a misconstrual of what Krumbein was saying. This "certainty" that we was referring to was not about the results of tests but the "inputs" to the tests which could have been controlled with much more certainty.

...On Krumbein's examination in 2005, however, he "saw no traces of such granular coating inside these letters, because these had been recently removed by the IAA/police." Krumbein then observes, "This could be taken as a documentation of deliberate manipulation of the inscription patina by the IAA and/or police during the custody period."

Perhaps not "tamper", but this was again pretty strong language coming from an expert with such credentials.

Good point, but I don't think it can necessarily be assumed that he is naive with respect to fakes, and we don't really know exactly what he knows about forgers and forgeries. Perhaps experience or lack thereof with respect to forgeries will come out on cross-examination.

Vorkosigan

I think the fact that he thinks the Jehoash Tablet is authentic speaks volumes about his ability to detect fakes. To wit:

• "The engraving of the Jehoash inscription predates the original fracture, which was created at least many decades ago and possibly several centuries ago."

Jehoash is even more obviously a fake than the James Ossuary. I think Steve is right. This is a misdirection strategy to get Golan off the hook by creating evidence for possibility that Golan is peddling old fakes and not new ones.

Krumbein makes an even more serious charge than that Goren was incompetent. He also accuses the Israeli police of altering the items -- he says that they were altered while in its custody. There is a long passage on p22 where he claims that object was altered while in police custody. This sets up Golan's second defense: "it's a conspiracy against me!"

*sigh*

Michael

Haran

It doesn't seem very skeptical to me to brand Krumbein naive with respect to forgeries just because he does not believe these artifacts to be forgeries. Since his specialty is geology, it seems to me that his experience would enable him to tell the difference between natural and unnatural geological formations.

I think I read something in the .pdf file that mentioned another more detailed analysis. I can't remember what page it was on, but it either stated outright or implied that a more detailed analysis could be found elsewhere. I believe the .pdf file is a "dumbed down" version of his analysis, but I could be wrong.

I would be very interested to see any rebuttals, especially from the accused Goren and company. I haven't been over to the new ANE list much lately, has anyone presented this to see if/how Goren responds? Perhaps he can't comment because of the on-going case...I don't know.

Clarice O'C

Ain't Christianity grand!

Just needed to say something so I'll get notifications of this thread so I'm in on the real scoop.

Best,
Clarice

Vorkosigan

Jehoash is a bad fake. It has no almost defenders. So what is Krumbein doing? He has to evolve a global defense for Golan that takes in all the artifacts. So he has to attack the work on Jehoash. The problem is that it threatens to undermine the credibility of all his work. I'll be interested to see how that gets handled in subsequent attacks on Krumbein. Bottom line: Jehoash is one huge vulnerability for Krumbein, since it says: if Krumbein's methodology turns this obvious fake into a possible authentic artifact, then how good can it be on the ossuary?

Vorkosigan

Haran

You do realize that you are accusing him of fraud?

I think you are overstating the case against Jehoash as well. Many did denounce it as a fraud, but there were still some good scholars who urged restraint in judgement about the JI's authenticity even after geological analysis.

Vork, I have to ask if you are so against this thing being authentic because you do not believe in the existence an historical Jesus? Do you even leave room for the possibility that he did exist and for the possibility that the ossuary (and other relics) could be the targets of a witchhunt?

I shall leave all possibilities open, but this is certainly an interesting new development. I do hope to hear the rebuttals that are sure to follow shortly. Perhaps a certain "expert" will lend an opinion.

Toto

I was on a jury case once - an airplane parts salesman who was arrested driving with a blond on his lap late one St. Patrick's day in west LA - but that's another story.

Since it was his second DUI (as we learned later), and he had money and a creative attorney, he produced a credible, well regarded expert who explained why the breathalizer test might not be definitive, and why the gentleman could actually have had a blood alcohol level under the legal limit.

It took us, the jury, a few days to figure out what was going on and realize why the judge, prosecutor, and arresting officer could barely conceal their hostility and/or boredom, but we ended up convicting the guy. The attorney and the expert witness were well paid.

I don't think that expert lied or was deceptive. He had a job to do, he testified as to things that he knew, and the drunk got his day in court. Justice was served all around.

I suspect that Krumbein will play a similar role.

Vorkosigan

No, I'm accusing him of strategy.

No, I am so against this thing being authentic because of the motherfuckers on XTALK who crapped all over everyone who thought it was fake, and the personal attacks that came offlist as well. I want to see all of them eat their own shit. I love yanking their chains and pointing out at every turn how fucking stupid they were to ever buy into that thing.

And that, my friend, is God's own truth.

I couldn't give a flying fuck in a rolling doughnut how this relates to the historical Jesus (even if authentic, it doesn't relate anyway). If it in fact somehow establishes the existence of a historical Jesus, I'll just change my view. I've already done that three times now. That's the beauty of being an atheist, Haran -- it doesn't commit you to any position on the HJ. I am not a strident mythicist -- I don't abuse people who are HJers for being HJers. I do, however, abuse them when they abuse mythicists. In that sense, I am strident in defense of mythicism as a viable position on the HJ.

Don't get all confused, here.

Vorkosigan

Steven Carr

A faked inscription is not a natural geological formation.

A un-faked inscription is not a natural geological formation.

What use is his experience then?

Especially as it appears that even the most expert geological analysis is unable to say anything about an artefact, once it has been cleaned by somebody's mother.

Ted Hoffman

Carlson,

Thanks for the well-written, objective and critical take on this new development. Now, Vork, we await your take on both the strategy by businessmen with a fake artifact in their "collection", of shoving a credentialed scientist to the fore and wriggling their slimy bodies in the wide path of ambiguity that he beats, and the failure of such scientists to point out that the blotches on the bread are actually flyshit. Instead of just folding up their napkins and saying that the bread looks stained.

I am referring to Krumbein's failure by to indicate how "temperatures higher than temperatures typical of a sealed cave environment" could have been achieved. Someone baked the damned thing. Why?

Now, please pass the popcorn Weimer.