Re: Kensington Runestone - Nielsen and Wolters.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 08:35:51 -0500, "Steve Marcus"
<smarcus_spamout_@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>
><m_zalar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:1135341716.414812.104330@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> Steve Marcus wrote:
>>> And the other logical quirk is this: the "secret" dots yield the date
>>> 1362.
>>> But that date is already carved on the stone. So what was the big secret
>>> conveyed by the dots??
>>
>> The practice of double dating an inscription does appear to have been a
>> practice in medieval time, as shown in Nielsen/Wolter (see my post on
>> the Easter Table). If so then this would tend to confirm the KRS as a
>> medieval document, a forger having no need to do so.
>
>Sigh.... Is there nothing that these guys can't cook up? I'm certain that
>they can even find examples of triple dating, etc. So what?

It shows that there is precedent for embedding a hidden date in the
text.

>The point is
>that this newly discovered date is in a "code." Their theory is that is
>obtained by plugging the dotted runes in to an Easter table, something that
>not everyone would be familiar with or know how to use. Yet, the "coded"
>message is identical to the message plainly inscribed on the stone,
>presumably available to anyone who could read the runes. What in the world
>would the point of doing that be? By using the dotted runes, were the
>necessarily concealing the date from anyone not friendly to them? After
>all, knowledge of the Easter Table doesn't necessrily make anyone an ally of
>the inscribers.

An obvious application of this technique would be to ensure (for
example) that someone doesn't substitute another (stone) document for
the original. Someone could, for example, carve another document with
another message but still bearing the date 1362. Embedding an
authentication code in the text would ensure that an attempted forgery
of some kind would immediately be detected.
>
>Again, it is amazing that someone could allege that the dots on the KRS were
>not observed previously.

Why should you be amazed when the facts show that this is what
actually happened?

Are you trying to argue from incredulity?

>The stone had been repeatedly subjected to
>examination by Holand and experts in Europe. The allegations that
>runestones in North America bear "Easter Table" dates is not new, either.
>See: http://www2.privatei.com/~bartjean/chap9.htm

That is not what is claimed in the URL you have cited.
>
>I'll reserve judgement on the book until I read it. I expect to have a copy
>in 4-6 weeks. But the logic of the situation that is being reported by
>those who have read the book is beginning to have a bad smell. As does this
>sort of thing:
>
>http://wcco.com/specialreports/local_story_143121108.html

Arguement by innuendo?
>
>See also:
>http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=41564

DEfinitely. You prefer to steer us to a page posted by someone who
writes

"An elaborate hoax, or real?

There are some curiosities, but I'm no expert on runes."

You could of course have taken us directly to the City of Kensington
web page http://kensingtonmn.com/runestonepg.html but you had to get
your little piece of innuendo in first.
>
>for this: "When we plotted these three things we got a year: 1362," Wolter
>said. "It was like, oh my God, is this an accident? Is this a coincidence? I
>don't think so.
>
>"We think, if it's the Templars, they confirmed the date which is on the
>stone -- 1362 -- by using a code in the inscription."
>
>But why would Templars come to America, carve this stone and code the date?
>Particularly since by 1362, they had been wiped out _and their resources
>given over to others_?

Not only 'why' but 'how'?

>See:
>
>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14493a.htm and
>
>http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/section/KnightsT2_PersecutionandDestructionoftheTemplars.asp
>
>short version of 2nd link:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/cds8w
>
>>
>> Michael
>>
>Steve



Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Kensington Runestone - Nielsen and Wolters.
    ... >>> the Easter Table). ... >>message is identical to the message plainly inscribed on the stone, ... >>presumably available to anyone who could read the runes. ... it is amazing that someone could allege that the dots on the KRS ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Kensington Runestone - Nielsen and Wolters.
    ... > Steve Marcus wrote: ... >> But that date is already carved on the stone. ... > the Easter Table). ... By using the dotted runes, ...
    (sci.archaeology)