Pahoran wrote:A scholar makes some mistakes in the transcription of some characters. The mistakes are plausible enough that a colleague at first thinks they are correct, but subsequently takes a different view. We have yet to hear whether the first scholar, having had these mistakes pointed out to him, agrees that he was wrong.
How long ago did Schryver distance himself from Gee's analysis? It is not "par for the course" for a reputable scholar to remain silent for this long after his analysis has been called into question.
So the next time you see Mr Graham ranting that someone is a "proven liar," or that they are guilty of "deception," remember this thread.
I will remember this thread as a case where Kevin did an excellent job of cutting through apologetic misinformation.