Re: Some of the Logic of KRS discussion

Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> says in
news:gstha11vdodl0mqad9vgomt50fdjo6vllr@xxxxxxx:

>>I was neutral to the KRS. I was calling people kooks because of
>>the style of their proofs for its authenticity. For example,
>>proclaiming that a deceased C.1362 organization carved the stone
>>is a kooky idea.
>
> That wasn't even suggested until probably a year later.

Alright, some of the silly issues being proposed when I 'regulared'
in this group were 'Red Indians/White Indians'. This was offered as
proof, the blond haired blue eyed Mandam that the madam has never
seen was being offered as proof that Norse reached minnisota early.
Let us not also forget the beardmore paraphanalia and Mooring holes
on the Missouri, Mississippi and rivers in appalachia.

Mandam as a lost tribe of europeans- foolishness and racist.
Red Indians/White Indians 3rd hand racist accounts based on myth.
BeardMore viking, like KRS either a hoax, possibly a transplant or
something else.
Mooring and blasting holes, absolute foolishiness.

OK. We have been through these:

Next we went into

Newport Tower, foolishness, obviously built by colonist.
Let us not forget 77 viking ships, Nicholas of Lynn the north pole
and little green screaming pygmies, king authors men, otherwise
known as santa claus and his merry elves. Incredible use of myth
and foolishness, Nth hand accounts and bar tales.
You offered up a picture of vancover as it fits the vinland map,
wonderful and cairns showing that the irish has been
circumnavigating the north polar ice cap. Somehow we are to believe
that these vikings were heading to vinland on the pacific, as if
they knew d'hell where they were going? If they knew where they
were going, Louis and clark could clearly explain to them, Don't go
that way, and La Salle could teach them don't go south either, And
the spanish could tell them what awaits them taking a northward
route.

We have enough fantasies in this group offered up as proof that the
vikings were in minnisota in 1362 to write several volumens of good
fiction, a few screen plays and at least one miniseries.

>>> Go back through the threads and you will find a consistent
>>> pattern of bias and arguing from ignorance. What he calls
>>> 'trivia' are the facts of the matter.
>>
>>Give me a break, they are bull***. You don't prove that the sun
>>exists by looking at the reflections of light off planets of
>>distance suns.
>
> I suppose you consider gravitational microlensing equally KOOKY.

You look at the fricken sun to prove the sun exists, not at the yeast
growing under your toenails.

>>You can't seem to answer basic quetion and yet you claim to have
>>the firmest understanding of the facts.
>
> Of course I can't answer some of the more basic questions.
> Nobody can. All I claim about my knowledge of the facts is that
> it is firmer than yours.

But they are completely fricking useless. If Wolters is your 'facts'
stop while your ahead.

.