John> Mark Leisher scripsit:
>> Herr Krojer takes Illig, and by extension, Niemitz to task quite
>> effectively, in my opinion.
John> I fed this through babelfish, and the principal argument seems to be
John> that we can correlate very nicely the predicted dates, places, and
John> times of lunar eclipses in ancient times with the testimony we have,
John> so unless that testimony is massively falsified too, the
John> conventional scale has to be correct.
In the interest of accuracy in media, I should admit that, yes, I missed the
point that Niemitz wasn't actually bludgeoning us with a bogus C14 argument.
The paper smelled so wrong so early, I immediately jumped to conclusions. A
good hallmark of bad science, some might say. I blame a bad batch of coffee.
Herr Kuhn, please stop leaving distractions in your "must read" section! :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Leisher
Computing Research Lab Television has raised writing
New Mexico State University to a new low.
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL -- Samuel Goldwyn
Las Cruces, NM 88003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 18:51:41 EST