Until recently it was thought that ink used before the sixteenth century did not contain titanium. However, a new typ...
AndrewArabieFebruary 6, 2023
Im not so sure there is a contradiction in the stimulus
Yes, the author does indicate that the use of titanium in ink was restricted by proposing B36 was printed by Gutenberg. But when the author brings up the Vinland map, I don't see how they're suggesting a greater prevalence of titanium in ink. Maybe the author would go on to suggest that not only is it unreasonable to double the authenticity of the map, but that it also was printed by Gutenberg. Without knowing who the author thinks printed the map, or where it was printed (if it was printed in Amazon, far away from Gutenberg) we can't say the author is engaging in contradiction.
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Hi, if the author had indeed suggested that the Vinland map was printed by Gutenberg then that would resolve the contradiction, however, the author never makes that claim. The author makes two semi related arguments here. One is that since two documents have titanium, they are likely by the same author, suggesting titanium was rare. The other is that since titanium was found in other documents, the presence of titanium cannot be used to question the authenticity of another document. The former implies it was rare and the latter that it was not rare,
