+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Ancient Civ Talk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again (/showthread.php?tid=18980)
Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Jona Lendering - 06-15-2011
There's a delicious piece of pseudoarchaeology here. A carbon test of an object made of lead. Lovely.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Titvs Statilivs Castvs - 06-15-2011
Hahahaha! Idiot. :-P
(Your piece however, is lovely written, I must say.)
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Epictetus - 06-15-2011
It's funny how confused some people are about this.
I saw a documentary once where they carbon dated wood found underneath a wall to try and determine when the wall was built. I don't know if that is an accepted method or not, but it seemed one way to use the technology to try and date a non-organic structure.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - M. Demetrius - 06-15-2011
I also read somewhere about a living sea clam whose shell carbon dated at 5800 years old. That's a real grandpa clam! Environmental input can sometimes interfere with the carbon content of some objects.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Nurglitch - 06-16-2011
The text reads "carbon tests to determine the authenticity of lead-sealed metal books". This may mean carbon tests of lead sealing, but more likely means carbon tests of the books sealed in lead. The scrolls are made of parchment and papyrus:
http://www.thestrongwatchman.com/christian-world-view/55-commentary/742-update-70-metal-lead-sealed-books-and-scrolls-in-jordan.html
which are definitely organic.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Robert Vermaat - 06-16-2011
Quote:The text reads "carbon tests to determine the authenticity of lead-sealed metal books". This may mean carbon tests of lead sealing, but more likely means carbon tests of the books sealed in lead. The scrolls are made of parchment and papyrus:I don't think so. The article is about the 'lead books', which are not parchment/papyrys scrolls, but entirely made from lead. The 'sealed' refers to the seals (lead-ring bindings) driven into the edge.
http://www.thestrongwatchman.com/christian-world-view/55-commentary/742-update-70-metal-lead-sealed-books-and-scrolls-in-jordan.html
which are definitely organic.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - kazeryu - 07-21-2011
Yes, but where were the books? Sitting on the remains of a shelf? Next to a leather bag? Buried in a refuse pile?
It's still poor journalism, but there doesn't seem to be enough rope to really hang him with.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Robert Vermaat - 07-24-2011
Quote:It's still poor journalism, but there doesn't seem to be enough rope to really hang him with.Not sure what you mean by that, but for me none of the arguments hold any water.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - kazeryu - 07-25-2011
I haven't looked into this in depth - perhaps there is some external source which conclusively classifies it as a hoax.
But if we look exclusively at the quoted journalist's text:
Quote:According to the Department of Antiquities (DoA), initial carbon tests to determine the authenticity of lead-sealed metal books billed as the greatest find in biblical archaeology since the Dead Sea scrolls have been “encouraging”.
...initial carbon tests to determine the authenticity of lead-sealed metal books...
This implies that the books were tested (which obviously doesn't make sense), but it doesn't actually say "We carbon dated the books". He might have just been summarizing a more detailed message like this:
...initial carbon tests {of rushes/wood/organic scraps found adjacent to the books} to determine the [strike]authenticity[/strike] {approximate time of deposition} of lead-sealed metal books...
All I'm saying is that the foolishness of "carbon dating lead" might have been sloppy journalistic work, and not necessarily malice/deceit on the part of the original source.
Re: Jordan Lead Codex Hoax Again - Jona Lendering - 07-25-2011
Quote:All I'm saying is that the foolishness of "carbon dating lead" might have been sloppy journalistic work, and not necessarily malice/deceit on the part of the original source.Yup, you are right about that. And under normal circumstances, I would agree with you; archaeological journalism is usually not of the highest quality. I have "fond" memories of an interview; I explained everything I wanted to explain, the journalist understood why checks and doublechecks were so extremely necessary, and I OK'd the final text. What I did not know, was that a summary would be placed on the front page.
What I had actually said was that the people, dwelling in the marshes of what was later to become Amsterdam, might have seen a Roman ship, every day, passing through the waters, to visit the naval base of Flevum, and that those hunters and gatherers were aware of the existence and power of the Roman Empire. The summary was, of course, that Amsterdam was founded by the Romans.
To return to the lead codex, there is more evidence that it is a hoax; read about it here. So for once, it's not sloppy journalism, although that would be the most plausible explanation.