Lots and lots and lots and lots and lots has been going on around these "Lead Codices" among the Biblioblogs and media (and unfortunately, the latter just isn't comparing notes with the former).
After a bit more digging here and there I finally was able to come across a picture with some of the writing on it clear enough to "read" at the Examiner (shown above).
If it was in Hebrew in "code" (as the media claims), this alphabet is completely out of place from where the codices are "supposed" to come from, not to mention that some of the letter forms are simply wrong (what appears to be gimel and lamed to me is flipped compared to other letters such as mim and nun).
UPDATE: Here's an illustration of what I mean:
(Feel free to use the above image however you like, but I'd appreciate a link back here in case anyone has any comments and so its context remains intact. :-) )
On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is fake, and 5 is genuine, on consideration of the script alone, I'd give it a 1.
FURTHER UPDATE HERE: Daniel McClellan via Mark Chan realized that the inscription that the fake Bronze Codices came from a bilingual funerary inscription in Greek and Nabatean.
However upon examination I've determined that the Nabatean portion of the inscription does not match any of the text on any of the good quality pictures on the plates revealed thusfar (although I'm still running comparisons).
As such I am issuing a "Nabatean Script Watch" if any new photographs emerge so that Bibliobloggers keep an eye for any similarities to the above inscription. :-)
Peace,
-SteveLabels: Lead Codices
