“I didn’t realize this earlier – Rav Shlomo Miller wasn’t saying that plant indigo is not kala ilan. He was saying that since murex trunculus is the same exact chemical(s) as plant indigo, mimayla murex trunculus is also kala ilan. This answers your kashya of why the gemara didn’t warn against using murex. It did. The Gemara warned against using Kala Ilan, which includes Murex Trunculus.”
1. We know they are NOT chemically identical and I must have said that 5 times since the begining of this “thread”. Rav Tavgar writes that in his response to Rabbi Miller. http://www.tekhelet.com/pdf/tavger_miller_2.pdf
2. Based on what they have found, indigo was weaker.
3. The rishonim I listed above all say that kala ilan is from a PLANT called indigo. See the aruch.
So Mheichi teisi to argue on rishonim and say that murex is kala ILAN.
And back to our fist argument on this thread, being they did not warn against the Murex obviously it is techeiles.
About those mishnayos in bechoros and keilim, you quoted me from the radzhiners “understanding” of them, which he naturally interpreted to mean his thing, so I am not meshubad to your (or rather dr. singer’s) understanding of it as snake shaped extensions or whatever else. In fact look in sefer Luloas Techeiles where he explains that the radziner’s interpretation on CHilazon NAchash was based on an empty space in his aruch in which there was meant to be a picture. The Radzhiner assumed what they shape was meant to be. However in lulaos techeiles he showes what the picture of original printing and how it shtims with the murex. ???? ??