View Single Post
Old 12th November 2012, 07:47 AM   #4054
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Meacham had an unusual courage (between sindonists). He rectified his first comment about Kouznetsov in “The amazing Dr. Kouznetsov”, Antiquity, Volume: 81 Number: 313 Page: 779–783; http://sindone.weebly.com/meacham.html.

But Dr. Kouznetsov continues his amazing career and now is director of two(?) scientific(?) journals: http://www.sciencedomain.org/editori...mbers.php?id=7 and
http://www.sciencedomain.org/editori...bers.php?id=12.

Gian Marco Rinaldi told me that now Kouznetsov has left sindonism for “normal” science. I don’t know if he continues with his “kouznetsovisky” way of making “science”.

It is true that sindonist are yet praising the Kouznetsov’s ancient papers. As the official page of the Sindon does here: http://www.sindone.org/santa_sindone...l_tessuto.html .
Thanks for the Meacham link- and for the other goodies, too.

Originally Posted by catsmate1 View Post
If you mean by "real science" creationism and IDiocy.............
He's still making false claims and citing non-existent papers and journals.
More on DK's "career".
Catsmate1, as always, you come up trumps.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- The following is why, in broadest terms, the issue of blood and “serum clot retraction rings” is relevant to our debate re the validity of a carbon dating of the 14th century for the Shroud.
- I claim that the probability of a 14th century artist being able to create an image that includes numerous “serum clot retraction rings” on it approaches zero. Since I constitute one of the sides in this debate, my claim is relevant by definition.
- See what I mean?
--- Jabba
I'll see it more clearly when I see your sources for these claims, so I'm looking forward to having you post them up.
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top