3800 YEAR OLD ALPHABET FOUND INTACT....

Wrinsewind at aol.com Wrinsewind at aol.com
Fri Sep 29 03:54:20 EDT 2000


      Mr Washburn has, in defence of his positions, shown himself to be 
scholarly and thorough. Much of what he has said has been beyond my sparse 
knowledge of the subject matter. Using words such as "orthographic", he has 
me constantly reaching for my dictionary, and siting such an extensive 
bibliography, I doubt I should find any of his sources in any nearby library. 
( I probably have the most extensive hebrew library in my town, consisting of 
the BDB and the Tanach.)

      So, when I saw that he had responded to this particular post, I opened 
his message with trepidation, waiting to read his brilliant and erudite 
assessment. I found his analysis of the photo insightful. I would tend to 
agree with him. However, I was disappointed, because, like so much of what he 
has said, the conclusions he reached in the rest of his post I could not 
follow. Such as how any "affiliations," in and of themselves, render 
someone's findings ...  well, whatever he was trying to render them. Also, 
the "thing" that is being tried, how does it differ from someone like himself 
studying, coming to conclusions and publishing the findings. Like an eager 
student sitting at the feet of the master, I await enlightenment. What, pray, 
tell, are the "similar affiliations?" And what is the "thing" that is being 
tried?
      
Lance Petersen



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list