07-25-2011, 08:47 PM
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:
...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.
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.
--------
Ross
[url="http://galeforcearmoury.blogspot.com"] Working on a segmentata.[/url]
Ross
[url="http://galeforcearmoury.blogspot.com"] Working on a segmentata.[/url]
