I don’t think Stephen Jones understands the the repair theory at all when he writes today in another installment:
Pro-authenticist explanations of the discrepancy (e.g. contamination with newer carbon, invisible repairs with 16th century cotton) don’t work.
Why don’t the explanations work? Stephen doesn’t explain why. So far he has relied mainly on statements by Hall and Gove that have no bearing on the subject of reweaving. And he has questioned the quad mosaic, which is questionable anyway. The fact of the matter is that if there is reweaving in the quantities that are being proposed, the “[p]ro-authenticist explanations” will work. They cannot fail to work. He doesn’t realize this. This is the danger of working alone, refusing to read anything that goes against one’s own presuppositions, and refusing to allow dialogue.
Beyond that, this hacking stuff: Read Stephen’s posting. So, what is the difference between evidence and conspiracy theory?