A reader writes from Tucson:
Here at UA we understand. In retrospect, and only in retrospect, the 1988 lab work on the shroud was subpar and inadequate. Rogers and company were probably right. That is why everyone has been so quiet, lo these many years. But even if Rogers was not correct, the work at UA must be discarded unless the lab, in the interest of transparency, opens up to public scrutiny and demonstrates quality measurements. They should. This is a public institution. It seems only that an agreement with the British Museum would serve to preclude this. That would be telling, wouldn’t it.
Prof Jull should not have written this article. But so what. Notice that only one newspaper in France even picked up the story. Even the UA News ignored Jull’s paper.
Maybe the UA News should investigate this. A good student journalism assignment, perhaps.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
