Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

Jesus BoneBox Re(re)dux

The Biblical Archaeology Society, which has been a long-time ‘supporter’ of further investigation into the James Ossuary (also confusingly called the ‘Jesus Bonebox’), has posted the results of a new investigation which argues against the current ‘hoax’ conclusion (you can find text and image PDFs.

Editor
  1. This STINKS to High Heaven
    Although it is POSSIBLE that the original investigators made one or two
    mistakes, I think it is HIGHLY IMPROBABLE that they made as many mistakes
    to such severe levels and degrees as the new investigator states.

    I saw the documentary they made, and, as a layperson, it all looked pretty
    kosher to me. (no pun intended) They did a great job showing step by step
    what was wrong and why. As “little” as I know about the science of the
    various disciplines they used, it was pretty clear that the work wasn’t
    even close to being shoddy. By at least equally notable scientists.

    And then there are all of the additional facts, as well, such as all of
    the other very obvious fakes they found in the guy’s domicile, the in-progress
    fakes that were partially completed, and all of the fakery materials
    and tools. Not to mention that they found the ossuary sitting on the
    guy’s toilet. And all of the probable fakes that the guy probably made
    and sold to the many unsuspecting customers. Most of which, as they
    stated in the documentary, will not be checked because that would not
    look good for the purchasing people and institutions.

    This looks like the typical paid expert witness working for the defense
    who needs certain results to get the guy off. And I bet he is being
    very handsomely paid. Probably ridiculously paid.

    If I’m wrong, then fine. But I would bet hard cash money that we will
    find out that the new investigator is the wrong one. Only time will tell, now.
    Stay tuned.

    1. yes it does stink
      but you need to weigh up the pro’s and con’s……..who stands to gain the most and who stands to loose the most……then have a close look……….you may be surprised.

  2. Indeed, this stinks like hell!!!
    I attempted to Google this distinguished German professor and look what I found! This “external expert” was short of quoting his own researches in his “objective” expert opinion! And this is just one out of many flaws that can be found there. His report specifies exactly the composition of the patina on the ossuary as he defined it (read it in page 8 of the PDF). Now read the opening paragraphs of the chapter “patination of rock in the geomicrobiology laboratory” and the following discussion in an article by the very same Prof. Wolfgang E. Krumbein that appears in the following URL:
    http://www.heritage.xtd.pl/pdf/full_krumbein.pdf
    If you search the web, you can see that this very same article was published in several journals during the last years (I guess this is how you reach 400 articles in a lifetime). So, one may wonder now why did the distinguished professor forget to quote his own articles in his “expert opinion”, suppose he did see some genuine patina within the letters on the ossuary (which in fact I seriously doubt by seeing the photographs). While in his “expert opinion” he claims that such patina needs about 200 years to develop, no “but” and “however”, in his articles he demonstrates how he created it in his laboratory within only eight weeks and he even advises monument conservators to adopt this method for restoration. How can this happen? Well it can only happen when someone is paying you enough cash for putting your name on a hoax.

          1. yes i am sure
            why don’t you report back to us, with any response from that professor. It would be interesting. My geochemistry is very basic.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal