Replies

Publicity is key. We both know it is a forgery. Others’ speculating and reporting that it is a forgery, regardless of the precision of their particular technical analysis (or lack thereof) is welcome.

I agree that publicity is needed, but the problems are that (1) faulty research is being publicized, and (2) much more is required than the precision of one's analysis.

The difficulty to replicate his work is one factor that casts a dark shadow on his results, as are the facts that run counter to his theory.

The reason why replication and validation are critical here, is because if any part of his work is disproved, then the entire process for finding forgeries is permanently damaged.

This is a case of one bad apple spoiling the whole bunch.