[split] Authority and the Appeal to it.

[Koen G]

If, for example, a computational linguist were to raise well-founded objections here, they should definitely be taken seriously.

I think this is in part where some of the tension comes from. Comparing scripts can be done in a very computational way, like the way Marco and I went about comparing scripts to that of the marginalia. Cut it into as many "binary" components as seem relevant, and hand out points. Note that even this approach is not objective at all, because you need to scan a page for a few forms of the glyph (which are never exactly the same) and make a decision on which form of the binary the average leans most. You can then hope that on average, over many tracked features, the data will tell an objective story.

But on the other extreme, it is perfectly valid to say that someone with enough experience can intuit when two hands are not the same. I am now reminded of something I saw on tv a looong time ago, in one of those shows where people show off special talents. This was some mechanic who had worked with trucks his whole life, and he could tell from the sound of an engine starting which specific model it was. Now imagine you're that guy, and you have to tell a bunch of other guys how you tell the difference by ear (and they believe you're cheating). 

In Lisa's paper and the discussion around it, there is some friction between these two components, which are both valid parts of handwriting analysis. The more it leans into the first category, the more it can be tested. But part of the analysis leans on a certain degree of intuition, which makes it hard to test and we shift into "trust expertise" territory.