Skeptic

Gordon Rugg’s work showed that the Voynich Manuscript could have been hoaxed. Whether or not the manuscript actually was a hoax was another question. A key problem was finding a suitable type of statistical analysis. A breakthrough comes with the publication in Cryptologia this April of an article by Austrian researcher Dr Andreas Schinner, a theoretical physicist and software engineer at the Johannes Kepler University.Schinner analysed the text of the manuscript using specialist statistics capable of handling quasi-stochastic distributions, and found that the manuscript’s statistical properties were consistent with a hoax consisting of meaningless gibberish produced using Rugg’s method or a similar quasi-random method.

This does not prove that the manuscript is a hoax, but it strongly suggests that the hoax theory is correct. If there is meaningful coded material in the manuscript, then either:- there is only a small amount, surrounded by largeamounts of meaningless padding – otherwise the statistics would have come out differently, or - if there is a large amount of meaningful coded material, then it must have been encoded using a method which just happens to produce the same statistical properties as a quasi-random gibberish generator.

View: Full Article | Source: Knowledge Modelling

The relics of Joan of Arc’s body housed in a church museum are forgeries and not the remains of the 15th-century French heroine and saint, it was reported Wednesday. Instead, the sacred items were manufactured from the remains of an Egyptian mummy, scientists say. The relics include a charred-looking human rib, chunks of seemingly burnt wood, a six-inch strip of linen and a cat femur—consistent with the medieval practice of throwing black cats onto the pyres of alleged witches. They are housed ina museum in Chinon that belongs to the Archdiocese of Tours, in France.

The finding of the fabrication was reported by news@nature.com, the online site of the journal Nature. Philippe Charlier, a forensic scientist at Raymond Poincare Hospital in Garches, near Paris, France, who examined the remains, said he was “astonished” by the results. “I’d never have thought that it could be from a mummy,” Charlier told Nature. The researchers used a host of techniques to investigate the remains, including infrared and atomic-emission spectroscopy, mass spectroscopy, electron microscopy, pollenanalysis and, more unusually, the help of the leading “noses” of the perfume industry.The sniffers detected hints of vanilla in the remains, which is inconsistent with cremation. “Vanilla is produced during decomposition of a body,” Charlier explained. “You would find it in a mummy, but not in someone who was burnt.”To view the rest of the article, please visit the source

Source

Submitted by Da Verminator: Scottish, English and British monarchs have been crowned on the ancient coronation stone since the ninth century.It spent 700 years under the chair in Westminster Abbey after it was seized in 1296 by King Edward I, and was finally returned to Scotland 12 years ago.It has since been viewed at Edinburgh Castle by tens of thousands of people, and is regarded as a symbol of Scottish independence. According to legend, Jacob used the ancient stone as a pillow when he dreamt of a ladder to heaven.But Scotland"s First Minister is convinced that it may be no more than a worthless lump of Perthshire sandstone.He believes it was passed off as the real coronation stone when Edward stormedScone Abbey in 1296.Mr Salmond said: "If you"re the abbot of Scone and the strongest and most ruthless king in Christendom is charging toward you in 1296 to steal Scotland"s most sacred object and probably put you and half of your cohorts to death, do you do nothing and wait until he arrives or do you hide yourself and the stone somewhere convenient in the Perthshire hillside? I think the second myself."He is not even convinced that the "fake" stone plundered from Scone was the same one that was returned to Scotland by Michael Forsyth, the then Tory Scottish Secretary, in 1996.On Christmas Day 1950, the Stone of Destiny was stolen from below the coronation chair in Westminster Abbey by a group of radical nationalist students.There have long been rumours that a Glasgow stonemason, Baillie Robert Gray, made copies of the stonewhen he was asked to repair it after it broke in two during the raid.After a brief sojourn north of the border it was later handed back to British authorities and was used in the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953."There"s no question that Bertie Gray made copies," said Mr Salmond.

"It"s like the Loch Ness monster, it"s certainly a puzzle and a mystery which is best not definitively answered."The First Minister revealed his views on the eve of the premiere of a Hollywood film about the theft of the stone.

View: Full Article | Source: The Telegraph

For ten years, the modern skeptical movement has wielded a cudgel against claims of the paranormal: the James Randi Million Dollar Challenge. In many debates over the possibility of psi abilities, the Challenge provides a final word for one side..."has so-and-so applied for the Challenge?" The financial reward offered by the James Randi Educational Foundation is seen by many skeptics as providing an irresistible motivation for anybody with paranormal ability - after all, if someone could genuinely exhibit such powers, surely they would step forward to take the million? However, after ten years, the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) says nobody has evengot past their preliminary testing.

Furthermore, none of the "big fish" - medium John Edward, spoon-bender Uri Geller, psychic Sylvia Browne - have applied. And now, perhaps as a result of that fact, James Randi has announced that the Challenge will come to an end in two years, on March 6th, 2010. But does the challenge really make a statement about the existence of the paranormal and/or psi abilities? According to paranormal investigator Loyd Auerbach (who, like Randi, is a member of the magic fraternity): The suggestion that ending the Challenge after 10 years supports any statement that psi does not exist or someone would have won the challenge, is absurd on many levels. The procedures for the Challenge included several hurdles in favor of, and multiple "outs" for Randi andthe JREF that any discerning individual capable of any kind of extraordinary human performance would think twice about (and here I"m not just referring to psychics and the like). What are these hurdles that Auerbach refers to? Chances, of Anything... First, and perhaps the most important, is the effect size required to win the challenge. While the JREF says that "all tests are designed with the participation and approval of the applicant", this does not mean that the tests are fair scientific tests.

View: Full Article | Source: The Daily Grail