Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

No; Mr Kloner was implying that the idea that this even could be the tomb of the biblical Jesus failed to hold up to archialogical standards. I on the other hand pointed out that those claiming it was not/could not be the tomb of Jesus based upon supposed archialogical evidence had less of a scientific leg to stand on than those who were saying that is was/could be the tomb of Jesus. Mainly because Mr. Kloner and his coleuges gave into corporate pressure to not do their jobs properly so that "progress" could accure at the cost of knowledge. Despite the strong possibility that this is truely the tomb of Jesus; had they done thier jobs properly when the tomb was first discovered we would already know if it was not, or probably wouldn't know at all if it was. Which does raise some interesting questions about the way this was handled when the tomb was first discovered.