FWD [forteana] Re: James Ossuary and Jehoash Inscription are fakes

From: Terry W. Colvin (fortean1@mindspring.com)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 21:38:46 MDT

  • Next message: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky: "Re: More Hard Problems Using Bayes' Theorem, Please"

    Rachel Rote;
    >
    > There's also a very interesting article on the script used on both at
    > <http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/altmanupdates.htm>.
    >
    Barbara Babbles;

    First a grumble <rant alert> and then a question.

    I do wish some folk would provide a glossary sometimes, particularly
    where they're using old terminology in a very new way, so "new" that it
    hasn't reached the textbooks yet. EG what on earth is a "script
    designer" (someone who designs writing systems or handwriting methods)?
    I've seen "typeface designer" morph in the computer age to "font
    designer" (technically a "Font" is a fixed point version of a "Typeface"
    and in computerese these have become synonyms) but "script designer"
    would involve yet another step away from original meanings.

    And what was meant by "tracking the graph"; discovering the equations
    between a letterform's Hershey points, or was "graph" short for
    "grapheme" (the smallest graphical unit of a writing system, such as an
    individual letterform) in which case I'd have understood the phrase as
    "charting the graphic chronological morphology of the grapheme" (which
    would technically mean ignoring the phonological morphology)? Which, or
    something else again?

    Likewise the writer spoke of the "fonts" on the objects, what on earth
    were they on about? As fonts are mechanically produced were they taking
    as given that the inscriptions were not done by hand? What did they mean
    by "font"?

    Now my knowledge of typographers' lingo and DTP lingo is up-to-date as
    of my last textbooks (2002 and 2001 respectively) and in their
    terminology the article made no sense at all. I know I'm not too behind
    the times because I've met young Typography students at the local
    university's library and we've understood each other perfectly. Either
    the author is very knowledgeable in a field of which I've never heard of
    and have no insight into, or incredibly ignorant about typography.

    And so full circle back to my original moan; why on earth do folk assume
    that everyone uses terminology in the same way they do? And why don't
    folk provide a glossary of technical terms? (even if they make the first
    assumption a glossary is needed for the enlightenment of those outside
    the author's specialist field).<grumble, mutter>.

    Now what I Think the author was saying was that the different parts of
    each inscription were exact copies or tracings (hand inscribed) of
    Aramaic computer fonts. Thus showing that the inscriptions were done by
    a person or persons who couldn't make ancient inscriptions without
    reference to a modern source, or had learned their letterforms from a
    modern source, and hence the inconsistencies which had puzzled experts
    in other disciplines? yes/no?

    Barbara

    -- 
    Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@mindspring.com >
         Alternate: < fortean1@msn.com >
    Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
    Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
          U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
    ------------
    Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
       TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
    Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 07 2003 - 21:50:30 MDT