Re: Kensington runestone in the Scandinavian press

"Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:429488B6.AAB28BD0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> Alan Crozier wrote:
> >
> > "Seppo Renfors" <Renfors@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:429328FD.A68B4496@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > > Alan Crozier wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Per Rønne" <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > news:1gwvbka.f3efll1acwslzN%spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Alaca <P.Alaca@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Who wrote that reposte?
> > > > >
> > > > > Anders Lund Hansen, MA in history. And, btw, the writer of the
first
> > > > > article isn't described as a professor of archaeology - she may
just
> > be
> > > > > a journalist. As a matter of fact I thought she was just that when
I
> > > > > read the article the first time.
> > > >
> > > > She *is* a professor of archaeology.
> > >
> > > Oh dear..... so now Erik Tunstad has had a sex change, eh? See:
> > > http://www.forskning.no/personer/1015491127.59
> > >
> > > BUT in the first article a professor is indeed mentioned as follows:
> > >
> > > "Senest den 28. april i år skrev professor Lotte Hedeager ved
> > > Universitetet i Oslo en artikkel i den danske avisa Weekendavisen der
> > > hun hevder steinens ekthet."
> > >
> > > That is to say she writes about it being genuine. So in the Battle of
> > > the Labels, the Professor beats a mere historian.
> > >
> > > > That's the frightening thing, that she
> > > > swallowed that book without the slightest critique.
> > > >
> > > > By saying that, of course, I admit to being part of the
> > > > pre-Columbian-brick-wall conspiracy.
> > >
> > > Nothing new in that.
> > >
> > > The article linked to from...:
> > > http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2005/mai/1115713815.74
> > >
> > > ...and is inaccurate as all hell:
> > >
> > > http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2005/april/1114776893.28
> > >
> > > ...was also written by Erik Tunstad. Apparently this time the KRS was
> > > discovered in the yard of Ohman's house, by his son Edward...... and
> > > it deals with unsupported conspiracies and points to Nationalism.....
> > > yeah so much for that lot!
> >
> > The writer of the first article (actually a book review)
>
> ...which was this one:
> http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2005/mai/1115713815.74
>
> ... and it was most definitely authored by Erik Tunstad. See top left
> of article. The author's name is there.

Tunstad's articles were triggered by Hedeager's review. That means that
Hedeager's review appeared first. Get your chronological order right.

If you actually read what Tunstad says, this would be evident:

In April http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2005/april/1114776893.28 Tunstad
wrote:

"Lotte Hedeager er dansk av fødsel, men professor i arkeologi ved
Universitetet i Oslo. I en artikkel i danske Weekendavisen henter hun fram
den gamle diskusjonen om Kensingtonsteinen."

In May http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2005/mai/1115713815.74 Tunstad
wrote:

"Likevel finnes det fremdeles forskere som hevder at Kensingtonsteinen er
ekte. Senest den 28. april i år skrev professor Lotte Hedeager ved
Universitetet i Oslo en artikkel i den danske avisa Weekendavisen."

And just to clarify things again, Lotte Hedeager is a woman, a professor of
archaeology, and author of the review in Weekendavisen that prompted the
riposte from Tunstad.

Alan

--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden

Alan


.

Loading