Re: Kensington runestone Vegetation)in the Scandinavian press

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:52:44 +0200, "Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>Eric Stevens wrote: o0tua11fn7dml15jomk43d8jvrus194av3@xxxxxxx,
>
>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 01:44:54 +0200, "Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> -- snip ---
>>
>>>> I have in other articles today posted a URL for a map:
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/cmf7c
>>>
>>>
>>> Nothing new with that map.
>>> And did you compare the differences in level of
>>> KRS 'valley' and the surrounding lakes?
>>> And if so, do you understand the consequences?
>>
>> With respect to the original question of whether or not there were
>> swamps around Runestone Hill, there are no consequences but, what do
>> you have in mind?
>
>It is clear that the answers to my two questions is 'no'.
>The subject was the definition of the natural composition
>of the landscape and for some unknown reason your
>'discussion'point was the wetness of a blot on the map.
>And still you never had a look at the most important
>factors: morphology, relative height and slope.
>And you even don't unterstand my suggestion above.
>Why trying to participate in a discussion if the subject
>is too difficult for you?
>How about doing some homework first?

You are jumping to conclusions. I have done my homework. As I have
just posted elsewhere, this was beaten to death in this news group
several years ago. I don't know what information you have found but
all the information which came out last time round was to the effect
that the original swamps which surrounded Runestone Hill were being
drained starting about the time of Ohman and that the water level was
(5 years ago) lower than it had been originally. That's why, as in the
article to which I previously referred, it was stated that the 19th
century water level was being restored by the construction of dams.
This information has been confirmed by people who live in the area. I
also have photographs of then and now which confirm the changes.
>
>>You provide not a shred of new information, only evidence
>>of your ignorance and your inability to read and digest
>>and understand the postings of others.
>>Nobody here has ever denied that KRS 'valley' was a
>>swamp. On the contrary, I wrote earlier that there was
>>probably much more water in the area.The question here
>>was not if that was a swamp or not, but what the character
>>of the landscape was. But you, and your old lady, denied
>>without any foundation and clearly without any knowledge
>>that it a was parklandscape.

I've never denied that. To the best of my knowledge I have never even
discussed it. Anyone who can read a map and study photographs can see
exactly what it was.




Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Kensington runestone Vegetation)in the Scandinavian press
    ... Nothing new with that map. ... Nobody here has ever denied that KRS 'valley' was a swamp. ... On the contrary, I wrote earlier that there was probably much more water in the area.The question here was not if that was a swamp or not, but what the character of the landscape was. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >>Eric Stevens wrote in message ... ... >>>expect anyone to provide an explanation for the composition of an ink ... > hypothesis as to the mechanism by means of which the map was ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >> Eric Stevens wrote in message ... ... >> relationship between the two in "The Vinland Map and the ... >to the ink. ... >Saga and archaeology supports this, the VM map seems to be ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The Vinland Maps Ink
    ... >Eric Stevens wrote in message ... >"If the map is authentic, it must be possible to describe the process ... taking all its KNOWN properties into account". ... >contradict any of the points in that description, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Scandinavians and North America
    ... >>lovely if it could offer a program in Hydrology and Waste ... > Eric Stevens ... The PSY Chair at LPU? ... own map, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
Loading