This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the
whole list)
o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o +
Jim Enterline says: "The "two-pronged attempt to authenticate" are
your words, not mine. All I'm trying to do just yet is shoot a hole
in the claim that it has been dis-authenticated.... for 32 years I
have been trying to get you or someone else to perform this
experiment, which you yourself just said is critical."
I did not just say that? It was 32 years ago, Jim! I said then it was
a two-pronged attempt, and it was. The experiment was critical to your
scheme to de-dis-authenticate = authenticate?... the map. You are
playing with words using semantics.
What shoots holes, just then and just now, in your "just yet" scenario?
(1) the anatase has not been found on the parchment. It occurs
primarily in the underlying yellow-brown line not in the overlying
carbon black line. I said this in my review 32 years ago and again a
few days ago.
(2) the carbon ink result plays directly into the scenario you
suggested, with the originator quickly retracing his failed
gallotannate ink with carbon ink. The scribe quickly retraced the
entire map and text... almost perfectly?
(3) your experiment (as I wrote earlier) did not (and does not) follow
what you must require: "the recommended procedures of the day".
PS to Jim (and anyone else): Any idea why the Davis group never found,
not even once, any of ...
(a) Mrs. Olin's "precipitate"
(b) the Abrahamson/McCulloch clay-anatase
(c) Your transferred anatase or
(d) Cahill's fortuitous paint flakes from a library ceiling...
...after studying 159 samples by PIXE? Didn't find even one place? Not
even by accident? Missed them all? Brown and Clark (supporting
McCrone) found them without difficulty and found one even where the
Davis group had already been. How is that possible?_______________________________________________
MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography
hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of
the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of
Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for
the views of the author.
List Information: http://www.maphist.nl
Maphist mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist
