Apparently on date 20 Aug 2005 00:01:00 -0700, "Franz Gnaedinger"
>> I'm talking about evidence that is "suggestive" of Norse penetration in the
>> high arctic.
>> The longitude of the place - as I am proposing it - is the same as in the
>> covered by Minnesota.
>Well then, I have come as far west as America, consider all
>the miles I walked in my life. Never have been there, but my
>possession of a HP surely suggests a penetration of Swiss
>and American culture. A Buddfha was found in a 7th century
>layer somewhere in Scandinavia, this goes to show that
>Buddhist monks have discovered Scandinavia ...
>Meanwhile I found large pictures of the Kensington Runestone
>on a website of the Ohio State University:
>I printed out all pictures in a library, scanned kens3 into
>my HP (the possession of which proves my discovery of America,
>see above), reduced true colors to 16 colors, carefully traced
>the runes, checking each sign on the screen with the ones on
>the sheets kens3 and kens6, removed the background, and changed
>the colors, well the remaining red and white, into black and
>white. The result is now looking more professional, and my
>first impression was: These runes have been carved by a fairly
>good mason who had experience carving Roman letters, but here
>he was carving runes for the first time in his life. This
>suspicion was already raised by the large R-rune I saw on the
>web. I tried to see it the other way, uneven runes carved under
>the stress of the situation - far from home, ten comrades
>killed, will we ever make it back? - but my first impression
>prevails: carved by a mason who had experience carving Roman
>letters, now carving runes for the first time in his life.
>Franz Gnaedinger, true discoverer of America (see above),
Circle, I don't dispute any of this*
But it doesn't really affect what I think. I've stated several times that I
think the KRS is a fake. Not offering proof of that, I just happen to think it
What I'm objecting to is the idea that the Norse had no capacity for travel and
exploration - and that that incapacity proves they could never have left such
an artifact. I reject this argument, rightly or wrongly. Although I reject the
KRS as proof of visitation of Minnesota, I do not accept the falsity of the KRS
as proof that the Norse never visited sites of this nature.
As ever, please ask if you aren't able to determine the extent of my
(* - except if you are arguing that your ownership of an object proves you have
personally travelled to/from the location where the object was constructed.)