> What attitude would that be? The one which makes attacks on
> Vyse’s character an ersatz for relevant evidence? Were you
> saying that, I’d agree.
> But no, what we have here is the tired old “you’re just being
> emotional” ploy. Odd that you fail to say the same about the
> conspicuous wishful thinking and rationalisation of the forgery
> Odd that you think it appropriate to comment on motivation and
> psychology in ruling my comments on the same things
> inappropropriate. How exactly is that scientific?
No. He clearly stated;
The genuine, enquiring mind requires that the evidence is tested, fully tested.
And this was the crux of the post.
The problem is that orthodoxy simply buries their heads rather than measure, analyze, experiment, or test.
I tend to agree with you that there might not be enough basis in the accusations to even bother to "do the science". But real scientists are looking for the facts and there are ample reasons to test this just as there are ample reaons to do the other testing and measurements that so frighten Egyptology. The attitude seems to be "we don't need no stinkin' facts".
What they're afraid of is that none of the actual facts will fit their preconceptions so they avoid simple science and basic measuring.