::::::I don't quite follow your first sentence, but I think you're saying that the finding that the GJW is written in the same hand as another piece from the same collection is ascientific finding. I wouldn't characterise things that way myself but that's not a major point. The main point is that there are multiple strands of evidence indicating forgery and only two - the age of the papyrus and the chemical signature of the ink - indicating authenticity. That's what produced the consensus, and it needs to be covered far more exhaustively.