tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post9169246911048868966..comments2024-03-12T17:34:02.225-04:00Comments on NT Blog: Successes in Correcting Material on "the Jesus Discovery" websiteMark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-69143365186171939662012-04-08T14:57:14.162-04:002012-04-08T14:57:14.162-04:00More than twice, in fact. All still there to this...More than twice, in fact. All still there to this day.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-86755315306012096392012-04-08T14:34:58.720-04:002012-04-08T14:34:58.720-04:00Mark, what happened to those 17 errors in their 20...Mark, what happened to those 17 errors in their 2007 book/film which you twice pointed out and were twice ignored?Skeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08997457019628016315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-5077087426937247702012-04-05T09:54:28.767-04:002012-04-05T09:54:28.767-04:00Thanks, Bob; good points. And in several of those...Thanks, Bob; good points. And in several of those cases, the changes happened with speed too, so there was no waitng around, unlike in 2007. One could make the same point about the lack of acknowledgement on the site itself, but that might be a bit of a grumpy thing to do.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-22186632318849803762012-04-05T08:46:41.813-04:002012-04-05T08:46:41.813-04:00we should also add (to their credit) the fact that...we should also add (to their credit) the fact that they have corrected the caption on the photoshopped 'composite' image to now say 'cgi' or wholly computer generated. that was a correction.<br /><br />see <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uasOhbi7exs" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uasOhbi7exs</a> for details.<br /><br />also, again to their credit, they updated the caption on the 'fish in the margins' image to at least designate it as 'marked' (meaning they placed digital ink the same color as the engraved portions into what they believe to be the engraved area), when they previously did not indicate that they had digitally altered the image.<br /><br />likewise, again to their credit, they uploaded an unaltered (except for the spotlighting) 'fish in the margins' image, so that viewers can see the digital ink they had placed in the original 'fish in the margins' image.<br /><br />see <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkLuqzhWAxc" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkLuqzhWAxc</a> for details.<br /><br />those are all steps forward.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01139547360019959563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-55492513273116257212012-04-05T00:23:35.871-04:002012-04-05T00:23:35.871-04:00Thanks, James. Sorry if I came across disgruntled...Thanks, James. Sorry if I came across disgruntled, which wasn't my intention. I just wanted to put down a marker, as it were. I appreciate your acknowledgement of these things in your blog and here, but just hadn't seen it in any of the "official" places. Cheers, MarkMark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-6501030886488853902012-04-05T00:21:06.306-04:002012-04-05T00:21:06.306-04:00Mark I have acknowledged your help on this correct...Mark I have acknowledged your help on this correction more than once and I thank you again. I have asked our web person to make the correction and appreciate it greatly. I have also mentioned that I will credit you in our official publication. Thanks again...James D. Taborhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18137109228365359971noreply@blogger.com