the colour photography games of the Sinaiticus darkening deniers

Steven Avery

Administrator
This has been rather amusing as a continuation of the misdirection principle.

Various textual criticism posters see the simplicity of the colour distinction, Leipzig vs. British Library, on the Codex Sinaiticus Project online. (Remember, there are even colour bars on the pictures, Working Standard with a special standardization technical group, the same background, etc. ... so there should not be any fuzz or buzz.)

Nonetheless, these scholastic geniuses go on and on about whatever topic they can express.

Shutter speed, lighting, colour balancing, flesh and hair side, yada yada.

Then these gentlemen think they have explained the colour distinction, despite the vapidness of their explanations.

So we ask one simple question:


Are the Leipzig 43 leaves white parchment?

Obviously, since the British Library pages are shades of yellow, (a wide puzzling variety, consistent with staining rather than natural yellowing) if Leipzig is white, there is no issue.
The CSPO pictures are essentially accurate, and all the explanations you have been giving are defunct.

And if you think the photography failed, that the British Library and Leipzig are the same colour, then simply make the claim that the Leipzig pages are like those in Britain.

And give whatever support for this unusual theory you can.
Other pictures of Leipzig, perhaps?

A complaint from the Leipzig conservation team about the failed pictures?

Try to come up with .. something.

And if you are agreeing that Leipizg is in fact white parchment, then acknowledge that all your "explanations" for the colour distinction are hogwash, or lemon-water wash.


Parchment Colour - Comparison with Other Manuscripts

http://www.sinaiticus.net/other mss.html

When you really study how the Sinaiticus manuscript developed, you realize we have the perfect storm of exceptional coincidences.
 
Last edited:
Top