Re: Kensington Runestone Wikipedia 28th July 2005



Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
>
> kenney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > In article <pSaJe.6957$_41.3610@xxxxxxxx>,
> > tmcdonald2672@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Tom McDonald) wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps you'd like to actually present evidence. The Little
> > > Johnny One-Note you do on the need to name a forger to validate
> > > the skeptical view as respectable is, frankly, tired.
> >
> > We still do not know who forged "Piltdown Man" but that does not mean
> > it is genuine.
> >
> > Ken Young
>
> Yes, the Piltdown Man forgery... I knew it was gona come up
> sooner or later in this discussion...
>
> AFAIK the Piltdown Man is the only case of a clear forgery,
> where the forger still remains anonymous (although some
> pretty good guesses have been offered). This case might be
> considered as an exception.
>
> Any other such case?

Yes - a fossil compilation from China and taken to the US (since
returned to China). It showed the "missing link" between the dinosaur
and a bird. Only the really quirky thing about this was that the bits
it was compiled from independently supported and confirmed the link
between the dinosaur and birds!

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