Yes, I read the article the first time you posted it... Did you read the response on I posted? It points out how science was ignored...
your article says "The court held only that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the inscription was a forgery. But it surely did not find that the inscription was authentic."
possibility is the key word in your discussion...the addition of 'slim' to that would not be inappropriate
The big supporter of its truth is the guy that revealed it...the writer of your article...the one who stands to make the most money and fame off it, the one that wasted the courts time for seven years...
"
Prosecutors relied on a parade of archaeologists and other scholars. These men and women were accustomed to addressing respectful colleagues and students. They had no experience defending their conclusions against the highest-paid lawyers in Tel Aviv.
Like scholars and scientists everywhere, their work doesn't reach a level of precision that can withstand legal cross-examination. They acknowledge doubts. Their opinions don't always agree in the particulars, even when they arrive at a consensus.
And while the scientists for the state conducted their investigations and testified for free, the defense paid for-hire scientists, who were willing to say the objects at issue were entirely authentic.
In the end, the judge explicitly declined to rule on the authenticity of the objects. "The prosecution failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt what was stated in the indictment: that the ossuary is a forgery and that Mr. Golan or someone acting on his behalf forged it," the judge stated. "This is not to say that the inscription on the ossuary is true and authentic and was written 2,000 years ago.... [T]here is nothing in these findings which necessarily proves that the items were authentic."
But that's a fine point. Supporters of the ossuary and the other objects that had been discredited by the state's investigation hailed the acquittal as a legal stamp of approval.
The ossuary's loudest supporter is American lawyer and publisher Hershel Shanks, whose magazine Biblical Archaeology Review first revealed the object. Shanks has spent the last seven years attacking the "pack of scholars" at the Israel Antiquities Authority and one in particular, an archaeologist named Yuval Goren who found modern silicone glue in the carved ossuary inscription.
Goren, a vice dean of the faculty of humanities at Tel Aviv University, is a mild-mannered expert in materials that ancient craftsmen used to make pottery and art. He testified that a simulated patina had been applied over the inscription, a substance containing powdered calcite and limestone, charcoal and corroded bronze particles and adhered with modern glue he dubbed "James Bond." That testimony was discredited partly because the test Goren carried out removed the substance from the surface of the box.
Goren's findings were hardly the only evidence against Golan. Eventually an Israeli police officer tracked down an Egyptian who admitted having worked for Golan, creating objects that were meant to look ancient.
The craftsman told police that he made objects under Golan's direction "with a hammer and chisel, following the sketch. He [Golan] printed out a sheet from the printer and gave it to me." Later the officer asked: "But it's clearly not ancient." The craftsman responded: "That's right, it's new." But thanks to the vicissitudes of Arab-Israeli relations, the Egyptian couldn't be forced to testify, so the interview couldn't be introduced in court."
