Re: U of South Carolina Releases Topper Radiocarbon Dates

From: Seppo Renfors (Renfors_at_not.com.au)
Date: 11/28/04 

Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 07:45:56 GMT

IE Johansson wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@not.com.au> skrev i meddelandet
> news:41A7CA98.4D2FB6C3@not.com.au...
> >
> >
> > IE Johansson wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Seppo,
> > > "Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@not.com.au> skrev i meddelandet
> > > news:41A6D738.A6D2E1EF@not.com.au...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I E Johansson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@not.com.au> skrev i meddelandet
> > > > > news:41A6B797.305CB71E@not.com.au...
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > > > As I suggested, there are a whole raft of artefacts, and evidence that
> > > > points to pre-Columbian contact - the view I tried to show is
> > > > non-specific of any particular item, artefact etc. It is the whole -
> > > > all of them together that makes the claim "no pre-Columbian contact -
> > > > barring LAM" implausible. There is just too much of it for it ALL to
> > > > be fake - just too much, even if SOME are found to be fakes (and
> > > > probably are).
> > >
> > > But definitely not the majority. Had they been brought over by later
> > > settlers, as some try to make belive, there wouldn't have been enough
> room
> > > for the people who emigrated nor for their food in the ships sailing
> with
> > > migrants over the Atlantic .... :-)
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think there are much better bits of evidence than the axe cut to
> > > > rely on - The KRS is such, it cannot be refuted - sanely that is.
> > > > There is no point in going over the same ground, round and round in
> > > > circles with the same naysayers who have no genuine interest in
> > > > anything much at all.
> > >
> > > Had it only been one axe cut and not other artifacts and more ax cuts
> > > turning up, I might have agreed. As for KRS I will not say that it's
> > > definitely from 1362 since I have good documented named person who
> sailed on
> > > a ship from Copenhagen via Marstrand in 1521 among the group of seven
> named
> > > persons and a lot of unknown to retake lost land.
> >
> > Inger THAT scenario is relying on exactly the same kind of "what if"
> > claims the nay-sayers use to claim it is a fake - we have gone through
> > this scenario and it simply is not plausible for numerous reasons
> > already mentioned in the past.
>
> No it isn't. He travelled there - to the mid of NA. At least it was to that
> area his relative tried to go in late 17th century 'since the relatives' in
> NA hadn't been heard of for 150 years. Thus we know he aimed for that area
> and that there were other relatives then him living there at the time he
> travelled. What we don't know from his relative's diary notes is if the
> later made it there in late 17th century. The ones written before departure
> are here, and we know he travelled from Scandinavia, but we don't know if
> the later arrived and such.
>
> We also know that there were a ship in the inner parts of Hudson Bay in
> 1470's. One of the noblemen onboard is said to have written a diary. I
> tracked it's where-abouts but haven't had time to contact the private
> owner(a descendant to the Dutchman who became a Swedish Nobleman).

None of that matters as it isn't proof of any rune stone at all. It
would take a written confession or like and that doesn't exist.

> > There are only TWO options - the KRS is genuine for the year on it
> > 1362 - else it is fake. Now, the nay-sayers & Co have been UNABLE to
> > prove it to be a fake - then it is genuine fo the year carved on the
> > stone. Williams is in agreement with this too.
>
> Not entirely. Williams once has argued that the runes looks more like 1500's
> than 1360's. You can read about it in 'Historiska Forum' at Historiska
> Museet's site.

I rely on his statement that in his view if it isn't an 19th century
forger then it is a genuine article of the date indicated. Well, it
isn't a 19th century forgery!!

[..] 

-- 
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Relevant Pages

  • Re: U of South Carolina Releases Topper Radiocarbon Dates
    ... One of the noblemen onboard is said to have written a diary. ... None of that matters as it isn't proof of any rune stone at all. ... Williams is in agreement with this too. ... forger then it is a genuine article of the date indicated. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: U of South Carolina Releases Topper Radiocarbon Dates
    ... One of the noblemen onboard is said to have written a diary. ... None of that matters as it isn't proof of any rune stone at all. ... Williams is in agreement with this too. ... forger then it is a genuine article of the date indicated. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)