are we finished yet
If we were doing this the proper way:
First stepwill take a few days, as it isnt on lineis to read the article mentioned and see what it actually says, because to some of us it seems a very strange assertion
Second stepwill take a good deal longer to see if anyone has specifically contradicted him 
  or criticized him.
And could someone say exactly how both the impressed letters and the stylus touchups could have been reproduced in the relevant period? 
This is really OR; I'm going to at least read the article, since I'm curious. 
Can someone please tell me what a printing press would be if it were not a machine? 
The general article is printing. 
the printing press article talks about printing presses. 
block printing talks about  block printing. 
movable type has to go somewhere, it was voted not to have an art of its own before I got here, so it goes here unless someone has a better place that doesn't contradict the RfD. 
And the phaistos disc article talks about the disc. As evertype says, there are lots of interesting but unlikely theories about it there. 
Would someone please like to write something more where we need it, instead of this. Start here, we need material on the 17th 18th and 19th centuryit doesnt take deep scholarship , just enough to summarize. There are plenty of easily available sources.  
This isnt the page to argue about east asian printing presses.
GPM, I know it isnt required, but some of us have posted some information about ourselves on our user pages.