An interesting parallel between art certification and psi debunkers

#1
I just discovered an interesting BBC series called "Fake or Fortune". It seeks to research various paintings to determine whether they are genuine or not. In the first season's first episode, a Monet is investigated. The problem is that the Wildenstein foundation, the authority on Monet, has previously rejected the painting as authentic. They say that in the absence of forensic evidence of previous ownership, it cannot be authenticated. The show's expert's then work to determine whether the provenance of the painting can be uncovered. They succeed, but the Wildenstein refuses to consider the evidence, despite their having asked for it, as well as considerable objections from various experts. Somewhere around the 50-55 minute mark, the narrator of the show has a comment on evidence that has a parallel in psi debunking. Here is a link to the episode on youtube:

AP
 
#2
Was this the quote that seemed so relevant, Andy?

"The facts seem to count for nothing. The Wildensteins have moved the goal posts."

The journalist seemed shocked that the facts didn't speak for themselves. The Wildensteins were asked what evidence would be required to change their minds about the provenance of the painting. They were given exactly what they said would change their mind, and still refused to do so.

It certainly sounds like some "skeptics" I know.
 
Top