Comment Highlights a vulnerability in Islam (Score 1) 622
From what I have read on this subject, the dating does relate to the parchment (papyrus), not the ink. The type of script used on the papyrus in question is apparently evidence that the text that is visible was written much later, likely written over the top of earlier writings (papyrus was scarce and hence re-used). This is not challenging to orthodox Muslim beliefs.
Still it is a fascinating subject that highlights a vulnerability of Islam. If there emerges text that is identical or very similar to text in the Koran and that text is proven to have been written before Muhammad, then that will be a real head spin for most Muslims. It would prove that the text was not revealed to Muhammed after all but was actually already in circulation.
It may be that a uniform religious text was gathered together at the time from existing material by the new Arab empire for political purposes. The story of Muhammad may have been a massive embellishment on a kernel of an idea (political leader and warrior who preached a faith). Most knowledge of Muhammad is drawn from hadiths (a collection of sayings and stories of the prophet) that were only compiled much, much later (around 300 years later). There are many contradictions in the hadiths, providing evidence of different stories being spun for political expediency by competing political operatives. This is a view suggested by Robert Spencer in his book "Did Muhammad exist? ...".
Of course I am not Muslim and I maintain the right to question faiths or any other dogma or body of thought.