More Menzies junk
Doug Weller
* River Charles and Merrimack
* These are about a days sailing north of the Taunton River around Cape Cod
with the prevailing wind. Beside both rivers are a series of tilted rocks
each propped up by a smaller rock at the bottom. They have to be seen for
their extraordinary impact to be felt – at Savoy, Upton, Barre, Royalston,
South Peabody, Concord, Chelsmsford, and Acton – around the perimeter of
Boston. On some rocks are unexplained carvings, a ship or junk at
Chelmsford. It is possible these tilted rocks are the debris of glaciers
of long ago but as far as I am aware no such concentration of tilted rocks
has been found anywhere else. In posture the rocks closely resemble that
of the Cape Verde Islands and of the famous Khaikitiyo shrine of Burma, a
pilgrimage place of great importance to Therevada Buddhists. 40 miles west
of these tilted rocks, reached via the Connecticut River is the Shutesbury
Stone carved with the classic pose of Buddha contemplating aging. A new
technique has been evolved using infrared technology to excite crystals in
rock. This may enable us to date the carving of the Shutesbury stone.
Results will be posted on the website. Near the estuary of the Connecticut
River is another carved stone similar to the Dighton Rock, High Tor and
Mount Hope stones.
*
*
* Did the First European Settlers find a Chinese Colony when they arrived
in New England in the early seventeenth century?
*
* The first European settlers arrived a century after Verazzano had found
Chinese near what is now New York. With the above background here is the
gist of a very strange story, which came to our attention in December 2003,
which GM investigated in January 2004. The source is a New England
gentleman who lives in the house which his family have owned for a very
long time. The house is at the centre of perhaps the oldest village in New
England located some 20 miles north of Boston. It is therefore possible
the family home was built by the first settlers. Here is the story as told
to GM in December 2003 and January 2004.
*
* “About twenty years ago I became very interested in local history. In
the centre of our village was a very old Inn, which had been turned into a
museum. The Museum had a collection of letters that passed between the
first English people who settled here and their relatives back home. I
should say that the first English settlers came well before the Pilgrim
Fathers.
*
* “They had landed near what is now called New Plymouth and were surprised
to find a well built stone harbour with stone quays and a stone tower
nearby. A well made road led inland.”
*
* “Some time after they had settled they came across a city of two story
houses built of blue stone. The city was well laid out with stone
watercourses and sewers lined with lead. Their first thought was that they
had stumbled across a deserted Roman colony. Being fearful that the Romans
might return to reclaim their land, they decided to dismantle the city and
use the stones as foundations for their own houses. They did so and you
can see those stones in the foundations of our village houses today.”
*
* “They then came across a line of deserted junks moored beside the Charles
River. They reassessed their earlier decision believing now that the city
had been built by Chinese. Although the city had been dismantled, they
feared the Chinese might return to claim the junks. These had to be
destroyed and the only effective method was by blowing them up. Gunpowder
was in short supply and obtaining enough proved difficult – resulting in a
number of letters between the settlers and “notables”. Eventually they
succeeded. The hull wood should still be there alongside the Charles River
and you should be able to find it.”
*
* “Whilst the argument continued about the identity of their predecessors –
whether Roman or Chinese” they corresponded with their relatives in
England. Those remaining in England favoured the Chinese for they said a
huge Chinese fleet of red sailed ships had visited England in the 1420’s.
They had presented their credentials to the “Dowager Queen” complaining
that they had been discourtesly received in Spain and Portugal. They were
now en route to Muscovy. Before leaving they presented the Dowager Queen
with valuable vases, which she had displayed in her Palace outside London!
*
* “When the village was being cleaned up for the bicentenary celebrations,
it was decided to replace the thatch of the museum, the former inn. The
records I have referred to were on the first floor under the thatch. They
were removed for safekeeping whilst the work was carried out and appear to
have been lost. I think they were accidentally buried in a land fill as
were other old records but have been unable to find out.”
*
* The Blue Stones taken from the Ancient City
* On 4th January GM photographed these – they do indeed line the
foundations of the old houses. Some are very large and many very well cut.
They do have lead drainage holes – GM has samples of lead and mortar for
dating. The position of the lead holes is only explicable by the stones
coming originally from another place. The stones have another
extraordinary unique characteristic. Along the leading edge, about nine
inches apart are grooves incised into the stone. These grooves are about ¾
inch wide and 1 ½ inches long and ½ inch deep. If one imagines a clay
mould the shape of the stone, it is as if a man with a small penis had
impressed it into the clay every nine inches. There is no evidence that
the grooves were for nails as no iron nor traces of iron are present. The
only other place GM has seen similar (almost identical) grooves are in
stones beside the slipway at Bimini and those removed from Bimini to line
the ship channel in Miami. A local (Islington) stonemason is examining the
grooves, to date he is baffled.
*
* The ‘Blown Up’ junks beside the Charles River
* We are told that when excavating the port area beside the Charles River
in Central Boston, tea was found in the sludge – evidence of the Boston Tea
Party?! However, we are told the tea was dated long before the Boston Tea
Party. We have not seen the test reports and would welcome any information
to corroborate or dispute ours. Also in this position the remains of a
very old jetty have been discovered, provisionally identified as a Viking
one.
*
* Chinese Fleet sail from New England to Europe in 1422
* Evidence is contained in Appendices 32,33 and 34. It seems to me there
is little doubt a huge fleet did land in Greenland and Iceland and that
some ships reached Ireland and Scotland, others France, Portugal and Spain.
There is no evidence they reached England.
*
* The “Dowager Queen”
* Strangely, there was a “Dowager Queen” in England in the 1420’s, Joan of
Navarre, Henry V’s stepmother. Henry V died on campaign in France in 1422
leaving his young son (born December 1421) and his teenage widow, Katherine
of Valois. Katherine, who was entitled to do so, started an affair with
her dresser, Owen Tudor (hence the Tudors). She fell out of favour with
the court and was temporarily, unlawfully imprisoned.
*
* Joan of Navarre had been imprisoned being accused of witchcraft. This
was orchestrated by Henry V who wanted to get his hands on her jewels and
dowry. When Henry V died in 1422, Joan reasserted her authority and, de
facto, acted as Dowager during Henry VI infancy and Katherine’s
imprisonment.
*
* Joan did have a Palace outside London – Leeds castle, Henry V family
home.
*
* When researching 1421, GM spent some time examining public records in the
Museum of London, the Public Record Office, the British Museum and British
Library and has found no hint of any foreign visit in the 1420’s. We would
welcome any leads or clues to resolve this strange story one way or
another.
And from http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=177
* European Accounts of Chinese in Europe in 1420’s
* Van Eyck – ‘Adoration of the Lambs’ – Ghent Cathedral
*
* Circumstantial Evidence Chinese Ships in Europe
* (i) Rice cultivation in Po Valley started in early 15th century – (Lionel
Wong)
* (ii) Wrecked Chinese Junks Adriatic coast of Italy (Coast shown on
Kangnido)
* (iii) Blue Magpies, Gyanopica Cyanos (common to China) found in South
Spain (Ferry Van Mansum)
* (iv) Wang Da Yuan and Chao Ju Kua describe Etna erupting.
*
* Chinese claim in official history of Ming dynasty, written during Qing
that Zheng He’s Fleet reached ‘Franca’ where he met “tall people with
beards, long noses, deep eye sockets… and red hair.”
*
* Zhu Fan Zhi (Description of Various Barbarians) by Zhao Ru Kua, 1170-1228
describes Venetians gathering coral by dropping five claw iron anchors to
root up coral, which was then hauled in with pulleys.
*
* France
* Linguistics
* · The Chinese, Basque and Navajo languages all belong to the
Dene-Caucasian language group. Could this be coincidence, or could the fact
that Zheng He's fleets visited all of these areas have resulted in this
linguistic distribution?
*
* DNA and Chinese features
* · Residents of the south-west part of the Brittany peninsula, locally
known as Pays Bigouden, display Mongolian features, most notably the shape
of their eyelids and the ”Mongolian spot," a blue-black birthmark on the
buttocks or lower back of babies. Though commonly associated with people of
Chinese origin the spot has also been found in the Americas where DNA tests
show that “Close similarity between the Chinese and native Americans
suggests recent gene flow from Asia” (Pierre Jego)
*
* Italy
* Chinese Records and Claims
* · Ming Shi (History of Ming Dynasty), in the chapter headed "Various
Kingdoms in the Sea" they describe Sicily, and Mount Etna. The description
of their sighting of Mount Etna has been corroborated by her eruption on
11th August, 1408 by the Smithsonian Institution.
* · In Zhu Fan Zhi (Description of various barbarians) by Zhao Ru Kua
(1170-1228 AD) in 1225 AD, there is a chapter on “Coral Tree” which says
that this is the product of Venice. He describes in detail how Venetians
would drop five claw iron anchors tied to long silk rope and lead weights
into the sea to root up coral. The rope was tied to the side of the boat,
pulleys were used to raise up the coral. This is a clear indication of
China trading with Venice in the Song Dynasty
*
* Shipwrecks/ Chinese anchors and fishing gear
* · Remnants of ancient Chinese ships along the western coastal areas of
Italy (Wendy Shaw)
*
* Plants found indigenous to another continent
* · Evidence of rice cultivation in the Po Valley, Italy, starting in the
early 15th century (Lionel)
*
* Spain
* Chinese Records/ Claims
* · The Chinese had traded with Europe since the Song Dynasty. In Zhu Fan
Zhi (Description of various barbarians) by Zhao Ru Kua (1170 - 1228 A.D.)
there is a chapter about “Mulanpi Kingdom”, identified by Rockhill as the
Al Murabitum kingdom of Spain. In Ming Shi (History of Ming Dynasty) in the
'Foreign Countries chapter it says "... Year 6 (1408) Zheng He went to
Hormuz (Persian Gulf) and other foreign countries, returned home in year 8
(1410). The countries visited but which did not return tribute are listed
as an appendix..." This appendix lists "Mayidong, Kalimanjan, Misr (Cairo)
, Mulanpi, Kilin, Sunha...” There are vivid descriptions of the Chinese
junks leaving Damietta (Nile Delta) and setting sail west across the
Mediterranean for Spain. We believe Mulanpi to be Granada or Malaga.
*
* Animals
* · The Azure-Winged Magpie (Cyanopica cyanus) is to be found only in
southern Spain/ Portugal and China.
* · Chinese ship’s dogs (B Chang)
* · Cattle ‘Baida Oriental’ and ‘Roulin Naked’ from China (Darwin, Chapter
xx).
*
* DNA
* Spanish Gypsies have close genetic similarities with Chinese – Katsushi
Tokunaga and colleagues
Doug
Inger E Johansson
It wasn't Chinese who carthographed the oldest map I know of which still
exists in 2 copies, or at least it safest to say 1 copy definitely still
exist the other existed as late as 1939 in Villa Medicia, Italy, were as I
have told you and other in this group carthographed by Nicholas of
Thingeyre(I checked and no matter what Icelanders called him he was called
the same by Papal representants in his own days) between 1121 and 1124
before he returned directly to Norway where he left one of the maps to the
Archbishop before he set out to the Holy Land. He gave the other map to the
Pope. It was owned by the Papal Church up to the time Cardinal Alexandro
de'Medici became Pope Leo XI. At that time the map was brought to Villa
Medici. The existence of the map was noted here and there over the
centuries.
So what ever the author behind the url you sent believe,
it wasn't the Chinese who carthographed New England.
In fact there was a Norse-Basquian merchandise place in New England before
the Chinese set sail on their voyage.
But that's an other story which the Basques seems to remember best.
Oh I forgot to tell you that there was an Emissary sent from the Swedish
King Magnus Erikson with among other things a white-headed eagle to the
Emperor of China in 1350's.
Inger E
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
> Excerpts from http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=343
>
> * River Charles and Merrimack
> * These are about a days sailing north of the Taunton River around Cape Cod
> with the prevailing wind. Beside both rivers are a series of tilted rocks
> each propped up by a smaller rock at the bottom.
This site has been excavated before in 1952 by a Mr Pohl and a Dr.
Maurice Robbins of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society. I have
posted this before.
They found a cellar hollow that has been covered over by a road.
Aerial photographs show a dark-stained rectangle that measures 92.5 X
111 feet = 15 X 18 Norse fathomers, confirming its ancient origin
(from sagas presumably). Partial excavation of the rectangle revealed
a row of post moulds with an average depth of 9 inches, 3 to 5 inches
in diameter. The claimed dates for this are around 1000 -> 1010.
Pohl searched the south shore of Follins Pond and found a gully 160
feet long that rose five feet above high tide (of that time
presumably). In the water adjoining the beach there was a clear space
30 feet wide, lined with boulders on either side, apparently cleared
by human hands. This was to pull ships up for the winter as per Norse
practise.
In the gully were the remains of the sod walls of a ship shed having
an interior width of about 21 feet. Along the centre of the gully,
they found a row of posts resting on flat stones, and on either side,
rows of stakes slightly inclined toward the centre, suitable for
shoring up the hull of a Viking ship. Placement of the posts and
stakes showed that the ship was double-ended with a straight keel like
other Viking ships, and was about 69 feet in length with a beam of 18
feet. This conforms closely to the 9th-century Gokstad ship Norway is
76.5 feet long with a beam of 17 feet.
In 1960, Pohl and George McGrath searched the area around Mill Pond
and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse fathomers,
suitable for a shelter to provide sleeping platforms for the crew. A
hard-packed floor, and earth discoloured by rotting wood, are evidence
of construction. At the old shore line there is an excavation of
proper dimensions for shoring a Viking ship. Pohl has apparently
written a book on this.
[..]
--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
benlizross
Doug, I'm a bit worried. I see serious cracks developing in this theory.
For example:
> * When researching 1421, GM spent some time examining public records in the
> Museum of London, the Public Record Office, the British Museum and British
> Library and has found no hint of any foreign visit in the 1420+IBk-s.
Can you believe it? An entire metropolitan region, a major world
capital, and no evidence of a Chinese visit in 1421! This is really
disturbing news.
And what about this?
> * Linguistics
> * +ALc- The Chinese, Basque and Navajo languages all belong to the
> Dene-Caucasian language group. Could this be coincidence, or could the fact
> that Zheng He's fleets visited all of these areas have resulted in this
> linguistic distribution?
But think about the implications a little longer -- The Swahili, Spanish
and Maori languages all *do not* belong to the Dene-Caucasian language
group. Given the fact that Zheng He's fleet visited all these areas, how
can we account for this anomalous fact of linguistic distribution??
Could we all have been led astray?
Ross Clark
Duncan Craig
Cranial-rectal inversion?
Steve Glines
(I drive past the Westford knight 3 times a week). I'd like to know more
about the carvings in Chelsmsford. I never heard of them.
SG
Seppo Renfors
Seppo Renfors wrote:
The thread has been renames as the subject matter no longer
corresponds to that introduced by Dougie.
Ingstad initially calculated the distance from Greenland to Vinland
from the Sagas. LAM does not fit those calculation, but Pohl's find
does. Details to be found at:
http://viking.hgo.se/Newsletter/NEWS3.pdf
Page 15 (centre column)
Frederick J. Pohl also claims the following:
"We have now had eighty-nine identifications of sailing directions and
geographical observations stated or implied in the sagas, including in
the count several archaeological discoveries. Since each
identification is placed in correct compass direction in relation to
all others, as described in or deducible from the sagas, the pattern
of the viking voyages to Vinland as told in the sagas would seem to be
established. Is it too much to claim that the old Vinland puzzle has
been solved?" (14:255)
Obviously it is, as Pohl's find isn't even recognised by anyone even
though I know of nothing refuting it (other than one conspiracy
theorist). Only that LAM appeared on the scene and Cape Cod site was
simply forgotten. Pohl has written the following books:
"The Lost Discovery" (New York 1952)"
"The Vikings on Cape Cod"
"Atlantic Crossings Before Columbus"
"The Viking Explorers"
"The Viking Settlement of North America"
Helge Ingstad in fact quoted Pohl's first book "The Lost Discovery" in
Instad's book "Vesterveg til Vinland" (1972).
Why has this site been ignored almost completely?
Interesting information:
http://www.bwpowell.com/archeology/osseous/follins.html
Inger E Johansson
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.pollis.net.au> skrev i meddelandet
news:4046D3BC...@not.pollis.net.au...
I know, observe my word, from what I was told by the Elderly in my youth
that Vinland was a much larger area then either sites. Vinland was said to
be on the far west of the Western Sea(the Atlantic) ranging from north to
south from the land south of Greenland to islands in the Southern
Sea(Mexican Gulf). In south-west there was a river and in north it was a
large Bay in which the northen parts had islands southwest of Greenland. Not
only the Elderly but several who were around 35-40 years in 1950's had been
with their Elderly fishing for fat-cod 'better than the Icelandic cod and
that directly south of Greenland'. Some still went there in first half of
1950's. That fish tasted much much better.
Inger E
Doug Weller
> Doug - I live 2 towns away from Chelsmsford and right next to Westford
> (I drive past the Westford knight 3 times a week). I'd like to know more
> about the carvings in Chelsmsford. I never heard of them.
>
No surprise there.
An acquaintance at the Peabody Museum at Harvard was going to write up his
work on the alleged Westford knight, but has never found the time.
Doug
Seppo Renfors
The measurements calculated on the days sailing does bring Cape Cod
into play as a site for Vinland - or at least part of it. I find it
VERY curious that there appears to have ben no action at all after
Pohl & Co on that site. Perhaps I'm wrong, and just can't find
references to anyone else doing any work on that site. I suppose that
now all evidence has simply been bulldozed and hoses built over it
now.
Steve Glines
a friend of multiple contacts: http://www.neara.org/MiscReports/1421.htm
If NEARA has a problem with Chinese Junks in Chelmsford MA then so do I.
Cheers
SG
Mjolnir
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.pollis.net.au> wrote in message
news:404728D7...@not.pollis.net.au...
Since when is 43 divided by 7 come to the same as 18 divided by 3?
You are making mistakes here. This measurings fit however precisely into
sizing in Long Babylonian Cubits as 9 x 21.5 which is in ratio terms 2.3888
recurring - almost the mathematic constant 'e' which is significant. This is
to do with 'logs' and therefore navigation as we know. These can then have
no Viking connection, you are wrong!
> > > > suitable for a shelter to provide sleeping platforms for the crew. A
> > > > hard-packed floor, and earth discoloured by rotting wood, are
evidence
> > > > of construction. At the old shore line there is an excavation of
> > > > proper dimensions for shoring a Viking ship. Pohl has apparently
> > > > written a book on this.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ingstad initially calculated the distance from Greenland to Vinland
> > > from the Sagas. LAM does not fit those calculation, but Pohl's find
> > > does. Details to be found at:
> > > http://viking.hgo.se/Newsletter/NEWS3.pdf
> > >
> > > Page 15 (centre column)
> > >
> > > Frederick J. Pohl also claims the following:
> > >
> > > "We have now had eighty-nine identifications of sailing directions and
> > > geographical observations stated or implied in the sagas, including in
> > > the count several archaeological discoveries. Since each
> > > identification is placed in correct compass direction in relation to
> > > all others, as described in or deducible from the sagas, the pattern
> > > of the viking voyages to Vinland as told in the sagas would seem to be
> > > established. Is it too much to claim that the old Vinland puzzle has
> > > been solved?" (14:255)
Solved - I think not? This all nonsense, going around in circles.
It is not Vinland of which you are thinking, but "Nu Babylonia", as long
before was named when discovered and inhabited by Iraqis. Why else you think
Red Indians have all black hair and the warlike tendencies we all know of?
Vikings landing on this shore were heavily kicked out and called
"pooftahstribe". You should surely know of this?
> The measurements calculated on the days sailing does bring Cape Cod
> into play as a site for Vinland - or at least part of it. I find it
> VERY curious that there appears to have ben no action at all after
> Pohl & Co on that site. Perhaps I'm wrong, and just can't find
> references to anyone else doing any work on that site. I suppose that
> now all evidence has simply been bulldozed and hoses built over it
> now.
These hoses have causing much confusion about who owns water and where it
ends up. Your convenience I am supposing that there remains no evidence of
archoealogy and of a historical nature to claim Iraqis never made voyage in
there reed boats (look up "marsh arabs" the technolology is pretty oblivious
I think?)
You are very foolish felow to be thinking Vikings ever got anywhere first!
t(nospam)kavanagh
Oh, Great. I was born in Vinland!
tk
Tom McDonald
> Oh, Great. I was born in Vinland!
>
> tk
tk,
Join the club. Minneapolis, 1948 for me.
Tom McDonald
Seppo Renfors
That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
You are attempting a very poor quality piss taking - a TROLL - nothing
more.
[..]
Martin Reboul
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
news:40493271...@not.ollis.net.au...
Dear me! Seps, your basic arithmetic is almost as poor as your trigonometry!
I think the meaning was that 43 and 18 have no common divisor, which is
absolutely right. I must admit, I think it unlikely we are looking at cubits
or Persians here, but Mjolnir has an excellent point - the 'errant nonsense'
is entirely yours. Hammered again!
> You are attempting a very poor quality piss taking - a TROLL - nothing
> more.
I suppose that is a cheap rascist taunt about Mjolnir's (Thor's Hammer?) use
of English? What hypocrisy! More Sepponification....
Cheers
Martin
Inger E Johansson
"t(nospam)kavanagh" <"tkavanag"@(nospam)indiana.edu> skrev i meddelandet
news:c2b3rr$9r7$1...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>
> Oh, Great. I was born in Vinland!
>
> tk
tk,
I am surprised that it took you so long to realise that. :-)Btw have you got
hold of the reference I sent you or do you want me to send it via snailmail
to your work-address?
Inger E
Seppo Renfors
Martin Reboul wrote:
>
[..]
PISS OFF you racist hypocrite!
Martin Reboul
>
>
> Martin Reboul wrote:
> >
> [..]
>
> PISS OFF you racist hypocrite!
Tut tut... I see your temper hasn't improved since we last spoke?
Even so, I'm glad to see you being more 'directly expressive' and not just
devious, hysterical and dishonest as you normally are. I'd even go as far as
saying 'succinct' in fact. A definite improvement - some new medication
perhaps? There may even still be hope for you yet, who knows?
Cheers
Martin
Doug Weller
Or perhaps of the wrong dimensions.
Birgitta Wallace, in Vikings in the West, writes about Pohl's claim:
"Among the features he cites is a gully where post remains were found in an
alignment that suggested they had served as support for a vessel 69 feet
long with a beam 18 feet wide. According to Pohl, it must have been a ship
of the Gokstad type..This reasoning, however, along with the
misinterpretation of some crucial saga passages, contains several flaws.
"First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was outdated
and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical means of transporting
people and goods across the Atlantic. Proportionally shorter, deeper and
stouter than the Gokstad ship, the knarr does not fit the Follins Pond
berth. Second, according to the local archives the gully was used as a
beaching and repair place for fishing boats throughout most of the 19th
century...This tallies with the fact that a carpenter's adze of this period
was also found in the berth. Third, of three radiocarbon dates on the berth
posts, two gave the result 'modern' and one 250 plus or minus 120
BP...indicating that the berth is modern."
Doug
Inger E Johansson
Birgitta Wallace is no scholar of History, if she has or hasn't a degree in
Archaeology earlier discussion never been able to settle. She had no degree
when she left Gothenburg and she might have written a dissertation or a
thesis in Archaeology but Library personal who helped me look for such work
hasn't found one. I find it difficult to understand why you continue to put
forward her word without realising that she never proven any one of the
statements you refer to nor is she as I said above in any way to be treated
as a reliable scholar for History. Being Scandinavian doesn't qualify her to
anything related to History outside the area L'anse Medow where she has been
working for a major part of her life.
But was is worst of all is the part about the Gokstad ship.
If Pohl is correct or not can be disputed but later years excavations show
that when types of Viking ships is discussed a bee don't make a summer.
Inger E
"Doug Weller" <dwe...@ramtops.thisremove.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:ln17jzl0edtq.e1ofl508hqoq$.dlg@40tude.net...
Soren Larsen
meddelelse news:CHn2c.85219$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net
Topposting corrected
>>
>> Or perhaps of the wrong dimensions.
>>
>> Birgitta Wallace, in Vikings in the West, writes about Pohl's claim:
>> "Among the features he cites is a gully where post remains were
>> found in an alignment that suggested they had served as support for
>> a vessel 69 feet long with a beam 18 feet wide. According to Pohl,
>> it must have been a ship of the Gokstad type..This reasoning,
>> however, along with the misinterpretation of some crucial saga
>> passages, contains several flaws.
>>
>> "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
>> outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical means
>> of transporting people and goods across the Atlantic. Proportionally
>> shorter, deeper and stouter than the Gokstad ship, the knarr does
>> not fit the Follins Pond berth. Second, according to the local
>> archives the gully was used as a beaching and repair place for
>> fishing boats throughout most of the 19th century...This tallies
>> with the fact that a carpenter's adze of this period was also found
>> in the berth. Third, of three radiocarbon dates on the berth posts,
>> two gave the result 'modern' and one 250 plus or minus 120
>> BP...indicating that the berth is modern."
>>
> Doug,
> Birgitta Wallace is no scholar of History, if she has or hasn't a
> degree in Archaeology earlier discussion never been able to settle.
> She had no degree when she left Gothenburg and she might have written
> a dissertation or a thesis in Archaeology but Library personal who
> helped me look for such work hasn't found one.
Idiot!
If you tried opening a book on the subject, you would see that
Birgitta Linderoth Wallace is a respected and often qouted scholar
in the field.
My first pick "Viking Voyages to North America" Roskilde 1993
even had her as a contributor and listed as archaeologist by the
Canadian Parks Service.
I suggest you contact them if you dare to qoustion her credentials.
Ingers ridicoulous nonsense about norse boats snipped
.
Soren Larsen
Erik Hammerstad
>
> Birgitta Wallace is no scholar of History...<snip>
By the ratio of published peer-reviewed papers, BW is infinitely
more a scholar than Inger ;>)
Todd A. Farmerie
> Doug,
> Birgitta Wallace is no scholar of History, if she has or hasn't a degree in
> Archaeology earlier discussion never been able to settle. She had no degree
> when she left Gothenburg and she might have written a dissertation or a
> thesis in Archaeology but Library personal who helped me look for such work
> hasn't found one. I find it difficult to understand why you continue to put
> forward her word without realising that she never proven any one of the
> statements you refer to nor is she as I said above in any way to be treated
> as a reliable scholar for History. Being Scandinavian doesn't qualify her to
> anything related to History
Don't be so hard on Inger.
> outside the area L'anse Medow where she has been
> working for a major part of her life.
Oh, wait, this is Inger calling someone else black.
taf
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Mjolnir wrote:
>
>>>>>Seppo Renfors wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In 1960, Pohl and George McGrath searched the area around Mill Pond
>>>>>>and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse
>>>>>
>>fathomers...
>>
>>Since when is 43 divided by 7 come to the same as 18 divided by 3?
>
>
> That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
> Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
> the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
> as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
Your analysis gets a ZERO. There is no division sign, but there
is an equivalency, which when solved for, produces a division.
This runs as follows:
there is a ratio (r) of the number of feet (f) per Norse fathom
(Nf), such that
feet (ft) = Norse fathoms (Nf) x ratio (r) (ft/Nf)
your equivalency (18 by 43 feet equals 3 by 7 Norse fathoms)
indicates that
in the x dimension, 18 feet equals 3 Norse fathoms
18ft = 3Nf x r ft/Nf
solving for (r),
r ft/Nf = 18ft/3Nf = 6 ft/Nf
but,
the y dimension is 43 feet, which equals 7 Norse fathoms
43ft = 7Nf x r ft/Nf
solving for (r),
______
r ft/Nf = 43ft/7Nf = 6.142859 ft/Nf
basically, he was busting your chops for rounding off, which may
be pointless, but is not errant nonsense.
taf
Doug Weller
And whether or not she has a degree, she is, as you say, a respected
scholar (not a perfect one, granted, but a respected one).
I've looked at Inger's post now. I don't know what excavations have thrown
up since Birgitta Wallace wrote this in 1982, but that's irrelevant --
there seems to be no good reason to think that Follins pond represents a
Viking landing.
[SNIP]
Doug
Inger E Johansson
never ever again call me an idiot. You and many others better look around
for B Wallace isn't mentioned among the scholars that counts in this
questions. She simply isn't a scholar of History and her opinions have never
ever been presented in a way where premisses needed, valuations and such can
be checked for accuracy. By now I have asked two University Library's to
help me find any work where she and she alone has presented such
information. Up to now they haven't been able to do so. Can you present such
work, I am not talking about articles from symposium or articles written
together by other, if you can please inform us other about ISBN-number etc.
Birgitta W. is respected for L'anse Medow work nothing else no matter what
you believe she never been able to make it to the scholars in History nor in
Viking Age History! That's only those who aren't accustomed with the real
respected scholars who tries to put this forward!
For your information here are some of the best and most respected scholars
of Viking Age history, Medieval Scandinavian History and/or archaeology:
Professor Birgit Sawyer, Trondheim
Professor emeritus, Peter Sawyer; editor of the Oxford Illustraded History
of the Vikings http://www.longitudebooks.com/find/p/51525/mcms.html
and many other real good works about Vikings and Late Medieval Scandinavia.
Dick Harrison Professor Lunds University
I could add some other from Norway, Denmark, Finland and England.
But BW has never been put forward as an equal to any of the above mentioned
nor to the others.
Inger E
"Doug Weller" <dwe...@ramtops.thisremove.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:1h098l33cy048$.1j8sqz3uf7aem.dlg@40tude.net...
Doug Weller
> Doug,
> never ever again call me an idiot.
Never, ever, tell me I have written something I haven't. You had better
have proof that I called you an idiot. As I understand what you have
written, there are laws against that sort of false accusation.
[SNIP]
> You and many others better look around
> for B Wallace isn't mentioned among the scholars that counts in this
> questions.
[SNIP]
I don't care, Inger. What is important is the truth of what she wrote, not
her credentials.
>
>> I've looked at Inger's post now. I don't know what excavations have thrown
>> up since Birgitta Wallace wrote this in 1982, but that's irrelevant --
>> there seems to be no good reason to think that Follins pond represents a
>> Viking landing.
>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
I stand by what I wrote about.
Doug
Erik Hammerstad
(whose topposting is corrected as usual)
Let the idiot ask the Swedish Gotland University who publishes
Birgitta Wallace: http://viking.hgo.se/Newsletter/Newissue.403.html
And for a peer-reviewed publication:
1991 L'Anse aux Meadows: Gateway to Vinland. Acta Archaeologica
61:166-197. Copenhagen.
And Birgitta Wallace was one of the many scholars - which also
included Peter Sawyer - who contributed to:
2000 Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga, edited by W. W. Fitzhugh
and E. I. Ward, pp. 208-216. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington.
A scholar is a scholar regardless of the field, only a non-scholar
would question that. And having _no_ peer-reviewed publications
really marks one out as a non-scholar.
Todd A. Farmerie
> Inger E Johansson wrote:
>>
> > Doug,
> > never ever again call me an idiot. You and many others better look
> around
> > for B Wallace isn't mentioned among the scholars that counts in this
> > questions. She simply isn't a scholar of History and her opinions
> have never
> > ever been presented in a way where premisses needed, valuations and
> such can
> > be checked for accuracy. By now I have asked two University Library's to
> > help me find any work where she and she alone has presented such
> > information. Up to now they haven't been able to do so. Can you
> present such
> > work, I am not talking about articles from symposium or articles written
> > together by other, if you can please inform us other about
> Let the idiot ask the Swedish Gotland University who publishes Birgitta
> Wallace: http://viking.hgo.se/Newsletter/Newissue.403.html
>
> And for a peer-reviewed publication:
>
> 1991 L'Anse aux Meadows: Gateway to Vinland. Acta Archaeologica
> 61:166-197. Copenhagen.
>
> And Birgitta Wallace was one of the many scholars - which also included
> Peter Sawyer - who contributed to:
>
> 2000 Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga, edited by W. W. Fitzhugh and E.
> I. Ward, pp. 208-216. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.
>
> A scholar is a scholar regardless of the field, only a non-scholar would
> question that. And having _no_ peer-reviewed publications really marks
> one out as a non-scholar.
(. . . or just one who has yet to publish their research.) It
should also be pointed out that real scholars in scientific
fields rarely publish alone - they share authorship with those
who have contributed to the project - students, assistants,
collegues who have added particular expertise to analyzing the
discovery, etc. To dismiss a co-authored study as not
representing scholarship demonstrates a lack of familiarity with
the broader research community.
taf
Erik Hammerstad
Birgitta Wallace is obviously regarded as the equal of the
Sawyer's in some places:
Vikings: The Speaker Series
In concert with the Vikings exhibit, The College of Liberal Arts,
the Center for Scandinavian Studies
and the Center for Medieval Studies at the University of Minnesota
will be hosting a speaker series
between November 24, 2002, and April 30, 2003.
Professor Karras reports that the series will showcase “speakers
of international scholarly repute who
will bring to audiences the latest discoveries and analyses in
medieval Scandinavian studies”. Graduate
students at the University can meet with the speakers while
students in Professor Karras’ Freshman
Seminar on the Vikings will enjoy “a rare opportunity to meet with
internationally renowned scholars”.
The speaker series, says Professor Karras, “will be an opportunity
to remind the public that the study of
medieval Scandinavia is one area in which the University of
Minnesota is very strong.”
Viking Speaker Series Schedule
November 24, 2:00 PM Opening weekend: William Fitzhugh, curator of
the Smithsonian exhibit
March 13, 7:00 PM: Vesteinn Olason, Director of the Arni Magnusson
Institute in Reykjavik, Iceland,
on the Icelandic sagas
March 20, 7:00 PM: Arne Emil Christensen, curator of the Viking
Ship Museum in Oslo, on Viking
ships
March 27, 7:00 PM: Elisabeth Ward, Smithsonian Institution, on
Viking women
April 3, 7:00 PM: Birgitta Wallace, Senior Archeologist Emerita
with Parks Canada, on “L’Anse aux
Meadows and the Vinland Connection”. Wallace directed the
excavations at L’Anse aux Meadows,
Newfoundland, which proved the existence of Scandinavian
settlements in North America. Wallace
will also present a seminar on Viking-age archeology on campus on
April 4th (time to be announced later)
April 24, 7:00 PM: Birgit Sawyer, Professor of History at Norges
Teknisk-Naturvitenskaplige
Universitet in Trondheim, Norway, on runic inscriptions
April 30, 7:00 PM: Peter Sawyer, Professor Emeritus of History,
University of Leeds, England, on
“Vikings and their Impact on History”.
Soren Larsen
> Doug,
> never ever again call me an idiot.
You are an easily confused idiot.
>You and many others better look
> around for B Wallace isn't mentioned among the scholars that counts
> in this questions.
Indeed she is.
That comes with the quoting of her work.
>She simply isn't a scholar of History and her
You have been told explicitly that she is an archaeologist.
Do try to get it right.
> opinions have never ever been presented in a way where premisses
> needed, valuations and such can be checked for accuracy. By now I
> have asked two University Library's to help me find any work where
> she and she alone has presented such information. Up to now they
> haven't been able to do so. Can you present such work, I am not
> talking about articles from symposium or articles written together by
> other, if you can please inform us other about ISBN-number etc.
You are an idiot Inger. You claim to have access to "The frozen echo".
You will see that Seaver quotes Wallace - check p392.
But Seaver is perhaps neither a scholar in this field?
>
> Birgitta W. is respected for L'anse Medow work nothing else no matter
> what you believe she never been able to make it to the scholars in
> History nor in Viking Age History! That's only those who aren't
> accustomed with the real respected scholars who tries to put this
> forward!
>
> For your information here are some of the best and most respected
> scholars of Viking Age history, Medieval Scandinavian History and/or
> archaeology:
Neither of those people are archaeologists
Neither of those very talented people has done any substantial work on
the Norse in the arctic and America.
I doubt Dick Harrison has done much work on Vikings at all ,
but I could be wrong.
Like always Ingers idiocy betrays her.
>
> Professor Birgit Sawyer, Trondheim
>
> Professor emeritus, Peter Sawyer; editor of the Oxford Illustraded
> History of the Vikings
> http://www.longitudebooks.com/find/p/51525/mcms.html
> and many other real good works about Vikings and Late Medieval
> Scandinavia.
>
> Dick Harrison Professor Lunds University
>
> I could add some other from Norway, Denmark, Finland and England.
I doubt it very much that you would be able name these people.
> But BW has never been put forward as an equal to any of the above
> mentioned nor to the others.
>
Since neither of those people has done any work on the Norse in
America and Wallace has, she is more than their equal in that particular
field..
Soren Larsen
Inger E Johansson
Due to your way of rearranging my post from top-posting which is easy to
follow I had problems reading the re-arranged lines and interceptions in
this case of Sören and yourself. I am sorry that I misread the Idiot part. I
regret but it's due to the hopless situation in reading '>' and '>>' inside
each other.
As for BW she isn't among the 100 most respected in regards of Viking Age or
Medieval History when L'anse Medow isn't on the agenda.
As for excavations of Viking ships I guess you must have missed a lot of
them. And I am not talking about the new one under excavation in Norway at
present either. The Gokstad ship is excellent but even if other aren't so
well preserved there are many others known from excavations the last 10
years.
http://www2.rgzm.de/navis/ships/ship092/Ship092.htm
and same type of boats were still built in 1800's:
http://axelnelson.com/skepp/ovvik.htm (English summery in the end of the
page)
As you can read there you will find that same type of boats were built into
1800's in part of Sweden. Without the dragon-heads of course but same type
of boats.
Inger E
"Doug Weller" <dwe...@ramtops.thisremove.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:1rnrgsbdjuhg2.1vpb1rbkyitl4$.dlg@40tude.net...
t(nospam)kavanagh
>
> Doug,
> never ever again call me an idiot.
Inger, dear, you really should learn how to read usenet postings.
It was not Doug, but Soren who called you an idiot.
I make not evaluation on that judgement.
tk
Seppo Renfors
"Todd A. Farmerie" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors wrote:
> >
> > Mjolnir wrote:
> >
> >>>>>Seppo Renfors wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>In 1960, Pohl and George McGrath searched the area around Mill Pond
> >>>>>>and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse
> >>>>>
> >>fathomers...
> >>
> >>Since when is 43 divided by 7 come to the same as 18 divided by 3?
> >
> >
> > That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
> > Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
> > the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
> > as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
>
> Your analysis gets a ZERO.
I have no intention of entertaining trolls.
Seppo Renfors
[..]
> >
> >>> > > suitable for a shelter to provide sleeping platforms for the crew. A
> >>> > > hard-packed floor, and earth discoloured by rotting wood, are
> > evidence
> >>> > > of construction. At the old shore line there is an excavation of
> >>> > > proper dimensions for shoring a Viking ship. Pohl has apparently
> >>> > > written a book on this.
> >>> > >
>
> Or perhaps of the wrong dimensions.
>
> Birgitta Wallace,
Hmmm.... trotting out one of the Chiefs of the pre-Columbian Brick
Wall maintenance crew immediately, I see.
> in Vikings in the West, writes about Pohl's claim:
> "Among the features he cites is a gully where post remains were found in an
> alignment that suggested they had served as support for a vessel 69 feet
> long with a beam 18 feet wide. According to Pohl, it must have been a ship
> of the Gokstad type..This reasoning, however, along with the
> misinterpretation of some crucial saga passages, contains several flaws.
Ahhh... the "unidentified misinterpretation".... yeah they carry a lot
of weight.... like a feather!
> "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was outdated
> and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical means of transporting
> people and goods across the Atlantic."
I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim with?
She could always point to two things, a date in the sagas of the first
Vinland voyage, and a date the Gokstad ship was discontinued. But
there is a further error of logic here. WHY a "Knarr" - after all it
wasn't known if there was any cargo to carry from there. As for the
"misinterpretation of some crucial saga passages", Birgitta is guilty
as all hell of closing her eyes to certain passages. A KNARR doesn't
have the crew the sagas speak about!
Fragments of a 9th century ship like the Gokstad ship were found in
the Schelde river in Belgium. But to my knowledge, the Gokstad ships
existence date from 900+ AD and are smack-bang in the target era. So
she is resorting to bullshit already there. See also: Christensen,
A.E., Guide to the Viking Ship Museum, Oslo, 1987, p. 26.
> "Proportionally shorter, deeper and
> stouter than the Gokstad ship, the knarr does not fit the Follins Pond
> berth. Second, according to the local archives the gully was used as a
> beaching and repair place for fishing boats throughout most of the 19th
> century...This tallies with the fact that a carpenter's adze of this period
> was also found in the berth. Third, of three radiocarbon dates on the berth
> posts, two gave the result 'modern' and one 250 plus or minus 120
> BP...indicating that the berth is modern."
Where is this study, and where are site reports, as obviously someone
(not mentioned), other than Pohl has done work there. C14 dating
wasn't heard of when Pohl was involved in the dig. It is most unlikely
any support poles would have survived from early Norse times. It is
more likely, as already admitted, that the same place had also been
used by others more recently. The dating of the claimed "sod walls"
would be far more interesting. The dating of items, common sense says
are very unlikely to have survived is misleading, potentially
deliberate so, considering the source for these claims.
Also it is the "housing" found that are of real interest:
"Aerial photographs show a dark-stained rectangle that measures 92.5 X
111 feet = 15 X 18 Norse fathomers, confirming its ancient origin.
Partial excavation of the rectangle revealed a row of post molds with
an average depth of 9 inches, 3 to 5 inches in diameter."
NOTE: NO posts, only holes, as one would expect (as was in LAM) Then
there is the earlier mentioned "rectangular hollow..." etc etc.
Nothing said about this at all.
So if Brigitta Wallis is trotted out and she is pushing hard to
poo-poo it, it almost guarantees there is a certain amount of
legitimacy at least to it, considering her past performance.
I was hoping for something rather more believable that a bloody
revisionists opinions.
Inger E Johansson
dear tk,
you have always treated me like a gentleman that's why I gladly send you
information for your use. If you find it worthwhile or not is up to you.
As I told you so many times I am dyslextic. Guess you understand now why I
say that I have a hard time following debatour's 'input' when the post isn't
top-posted. I make an exception for those I know don't interfere with my
lines so I still can follow what I wrote myself......
I offered to send you some documentation snail-mail, I have an edited
version of the affidavits in the Beardmore case in front of the computer at
present. I think that you should find it well worth reading because the
persons who put forward objections against James Edward Dodd's found
artifact most certainly haven't read the affidavit of the person they refer
to...... Background material checking isn't always as popular as I would
wish and I guess you agree upon that or what?
Thanks for your lines
Inger E
Eric Stevens
<Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote:
--- snip ---
>> Since when is 43 divided by 7 come to the same as 18 divided by 3?
>
>That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
>Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
>the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
>as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
>
>You are attempting a very poor quality piss taking - a TROLL - nothing
>more.
I see your mathematics hasn't improved.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
This is bizarre.
Rather than concluding that the Follins Pond find can not have been a
knarr, Wallace concludes that by her assumed dating it must have been
a knnrr and therefore the dimensions must be wrong.
I take the point about the later usage but this can only be resolved
by the original excavation report.
In fact, the radio carbon date carries as much weight as anything
else.
Eric Stevens
Soren Larsen
> As for excavations of Viking ships I guess you must have missed a lot
of
> them. And I am not talking about the new one under excavation in
Norway at
> present either. The Gokstad ship is excellent but even if other aren't
so
> well preserved there are many others known from excavations the last
10
> years.
But there is zero evidence for a Gokstad type ship being in a America
in the medieval period.
This brings Pohls and yours argument down in flames
>
> http://www2.rgzm.de/navis/ships/ship092/Ship092.htm
>
> and same type of boats were still built in 1800's:
> http://axelnelson.com/skepp/ovvik.htm (English summery in the end of
the
> page)
> As you can read there you will find that same type of boats were built
into
> 1800's in part of Sweden. Without the dragon-heads of course but same
type
> of boats.
Idiot!
The type of boat that carried dragon-heads was warships.
Nobody built norse warships in the 1800's - with or without
dragonhead.
Soren Larsen
Soren Larsen
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
news:404AC23C...@not.ollis.net.au...
Can you name _ANY_ Gokstad type ship from archaeology or history
at the time of the Vinland exploration ?
I thought not
> She could always point to two things, a date in the sagas of the first
> Vinland voyage, and a date the Gokstad ship was discontinued.
No more Gokstad types after the early 900's. Their functions are
being taken over by knarrs and the classical slender longships
But
> there is a further error of logic here. WHY a "Knarr" - after all it
> wasn't known if there was any cargo to carry from there.
A) Vinland was discovered by mistake
B) At the later exploarations when the Norse knew about Vinland
we are told by the sagas that the expeditions return with rich cargoes.
>As for the
> "misinterpretation of some crucial saga passages", Birgitta is guilty
> as all hell of closing her eyes to certain passages. A KNARR doesn't
> have the crew the sagas speak about!
A knarr doesn't need a large crew.
This however does not mean that it cant have many people onboard.
It was afterall the chocen Norse emmigration ship
>
> Fragments of a 9th century ship like the Gokstad ship were found in
> the Schelde river in Belgium. But to my knowledge, the Gokstad ships
> existence date from 900+ AD and are smack-bang in the target era. So
> she is resorting to bullshit already there. See also: Christensen,
> A.E., Guide to the Viking Ship Museum, Oslo, 1987, p. 26.
Let us see what the actual guide sold at the museum has to say about
Gokstad:
Thorleif Sjøvold, 'The viking ships in Oslo' , Universitetets
oldsakssamling.
p 56:
"But like the Oseberg ship it is a "karvi", a fairly small vessel for
cruising
along the coast"
That experiments have shown that Gokstad can be sailed at sea
is in no way evidence that it was indeed crossing the Atlantic in the
medieval period.
snip
>
> Where is this study, and where are site reports, as obviously someone
> (not mentioned), other than Pohl has done work there. C14 dating
> wasn't heard of when Pohl was involved in the dig. It is most unlikely
> any support poles would have survived from early Norse times.
Pohls claim was based on those posts:
"Placement of the posts and stakes showed that the ship was double-ended
with a straight keel like other Viking ships, and was about 69 feet in
length with
a beam of 18 feet. This conforms closely to the 9th-century Gokstad ship
Norway"
Thank you for shooting that sillyness down.
>It is
> more likely, as already admitted, that the same place had also been
> used by others more recently. The dating of the claimed "sod walls"
> would be far more interesting. The dating of items, common sense says
> are very unlikely to have survived is misleading, potentially
> deliberate so, considering the source for these claims.
The bottomline is that the location sofar proves modern.
Other evidence may come from the sod walls or elsewhere,
but until then it has to be considered a modern location.
>
> Also it is the "housing" found that are of real interest:
Why?
There is no particular reason it should be believed Norse
after the Gokstad claim was shot down.
If there was modern activity at the place nobody should
be surpriced by finding traces of housing.
>
> "Aerial photographs show a dark-stained rectangle that measures 92.5 X
> 111 feet = 15 X 18 Norse fathomers, confirming its ancient origin.
Confirming!? You must be joking.
> Partial excavation of the rectangle revealed a row of post molds with
> an average depth of 9 inches, 3 to 5 inches in diameter."
>
> NOTE: NO posts, only holes, as one would expect (as was in LAM) Then
> there is the earlier mentioned "rectangular hollow..." etc etc.
> Nothing said about this at all.
Oh dear!
A rectangular hollow, then there must be Norse around.
>
> So if Brigitta Wallis is trotted out and she is pushing hard to
> poo-poo it, it almost guarantees there is a certain amount of
> legitimacy at least to it, considering her past performance.
She would probably give almost anything for identifying a
second Norse location.
If you had bothered to read her, then you would know that
her theory is that LAM was only a base or staging point
for further Norse activities in Vinland ie she has everything
to win by finding such a place.
But then she is a proffessional unlike Pohl and Inger so
she needs real evidence.
Soren Larsen
Doug Weller
I think that was an error not picked up by proofreading. Or, it may be that
neither fits and her writing was sloppy. It's a strain to assume that it
is 'bizarre', and neither do I think that you meant to write knnrr. :-)
> I take the point about the later usage but this can only be resolved
> by the original excavation report.
>
> In fact, the radio carbon date carries as much weight as anything
> else.
And the adze?
Doug
Erik Hammerstad
The only thing that's bizarre here is Eric Stevens' use of the
word (discounting the mathematics above). Wallace has no reason to
explicitly draw the conclusion he wants her to since she is
adressing Pohl's claims. Implicitly she of course is drawing that
conclusion, but why go further since the find does not seem to be
Norse based on the other evidence?
Seppo Renfors
Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 02:07:46 GMT, Seppo Renfors
> <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote:
>
> --- snip ---
It's poor for to delete context before starting to accuse, you know.
[restore text]
> >>>>>>In 1960, Pohl and George McGrath searched the area around Mill Pond
> >>>>>>and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse
> >>>>>>fathomers...
[end restore]
>
> >> Since when is 43 divided by 7 come to the same as 18 divided by 3?
> >
> >That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
> >Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
> >the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
> >as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
> >
> >You are attempting a very poor quality piss taking - a TROLL - nothing
> >more.
>
> I see your mathematics hasn't improved.
You too are pissing into wind, and getting splattered!
It has sweet FA to do with "mathematics" really. It is an AREA defined
by measurements in the X and Y axis. IN the event you are carrying on
about the conversion to another AREA measurement, you have to define
what exactly a "Norse fathomers" was in about 900 -> 1000 AD (the
relevant time). You need to prove that 43 feet = 7 "Norse fathomers"
etc. In any event the troll is attempting a DIRECT comparison,
ignoring the DIFFERENT measurement types - an absolute NO-NO. So if
you think it is OK to use "apples" to claim "oranges" you better go
back to school!
Now, even IF you know the ancient measurements and can do the
conversion that way (and I doubt it) will it make anyone accept it as
"genuine"? HELL NO, so it doesn't bloody well matter even if it
doesn't match to the old Norse measurements. The measurement in feet
still exist, the site exists. NO MATHS INVOLVED! This is an IRRELEVANT
side issue of no real interest.
In any event it is as close as damnit and nothing wrong in any case,
when the CORRECT method is used! But in case you want to argue about
4.8 inches in the X axis, it should be 18.4 feet to be just about spot
on.
Have you ever heard about a highly technical gadget called a "slide
rule" and "proportional measurements" worked out just like [snap] that
on one of them, hmmm? Here, I'll even teach you.
First you line up the 43 on the slide with 7 on the side opposite it,
look up on the same side for 3 and cross to the slide and see it
compares to 18.4 near as damnit on the slide. That proves that the
measurement are proportionally correct to each other - that they cover
the same area. Got that now? Any more lessons you want, hmmm?
It is about time you gave up on accusing me of not knowing maths,
considering that YOU end up with egg on your face every time you try!
Seppo Renfors
Are you stupid or what? Do you get called "Birgitta" around home, do
you?
I asked for SUBSTANTIATION of the claim - the proof of the claim made.
YOU provide none, only STUPIDITY as I have come to expect from you!
No doubt the rest is of like ilk and I need not waste my time on it.
[..]
Steve Marcus
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
news:404AC23C...@not.ollis.net.au...
Read it and weep, Butthead:
http://cma.soton.ac.uk/HistShip/shlect77.htm
See also:
http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1997/ONN.04/0537.html
http://www.web-connection.org/archive/crusback/1997/vik0815.htm
To understand why a knarr would commonly be used on voyages of "exploration"
or "colonization of new lands" versus a warship, see:
http://www.wsd1.org/SargentPark/JrHigh/JH_Main_Heritage_Fair/hfair2000/vikings.htm
>
> Fragments of a 9th century ship like the Gokstad ship were found in
> the Schelde river in Belgium. But to my knowledge, the Gokstad ships
> existence date from 900+ AD and are smack-bang in the target era. So
> she is resorting to bullshit already there. See also: Christensen,
> A.E., Guide to the Viking Ship Museum, Oslo, 1987, p. 26.
Nope. As is typical, you are the one resorting to bullshit, Seppo.
>
>
> > "Proportionally shorter, deeper and
> > stouter than the Gokstad ship, the knarr does not fit the Follins Pond
> > berth. Second, according to the local archives the gully was used as a
> > beaching and repair place for fishing boats throughout most of the 19th
> > century...This tallies with the fact that a carpenter's adze of this
period
> > was also found in the berth. Third, of three radiocarbon dates on the
berth
> > posts, two gave the result 'modern' and one 250 plus or minus 120
> > BP...indicating that the berth is modern."
>
<snip figments of Seppo's diseased imagination.>
>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
--
The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
because we do not have an attorney-client relationship, and
should not be construed as either. This posting does not
represent the opinion of my employer, but is merely my personal
view. To reply, delete _spamout_ and replace with the numeral 3
Steve Marcus
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
news:ogpl40lf0qop2tlaa...@4ax.com...
That's because if Leif Ericsson or his contemporaries did any
visting/exploring in North America in the 11th century or later, they would
have been using a knarr.
>
>
> Eric Stevens
Soren Larsen
> Soren Larsen wrote:
>>
>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
>> news:404AC23C...@not.ollis.net.au...
>>>
snip
>>>
>>>> "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
>>>> outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical
>>>> means of transporting people and goods across the Atlantic."
>>>
>>> I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim with?
>>
>> Can you name _ANY_ Gokstad type ship from archaeology or history
>> at the time of the Vinland exploration ?
>
> Are you stupid or what? Do you get called "Birgitta" around home, do
> you?
Seppo the clown realises he has lost another argument in the first round
>
> I asked for SUBSTANTIATION of the claim - the proof of the claim made.
No Sale Seppo :-)
The burden of evidence is on those who claims the existence
of Gokstad type ships at the time of the Vinland travels.
But then it doesnt really matter since we all know that you fucked up
and
destroyed Pohls argument by claiming that the posts and stakes of
course
was modern.
Pohl:
""Placement of the posts and stakes showed that the ship was
double-ended
with a straight keel like other Viking ships, and was about 69 feet in
length with
a beam of 18 feet. This conforms closely to the 9th-century Gokstad ship
Norway"
Seppo the Clown backstabbing his hero Pohl:
" Where is this study, and where are site reports, as obviously someone
(not mentioned), other than Pohl has done work there. C14 dating
wasn't heard of when Pohl was involved in the dig. It is most unlikely
any support poles would have survived from early Norse times."
> YOU provide none, only STUPIDITY as I have come to expect from you!
>
> No doubt the rest is of like ilk and I need not waste my time on it.
And Seppo runs away :-)
Soren Larsen
Martin Reboul
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:404A3417...@interfold.com...
I don't like to be critical here Todd, but I fear such a 'mathematical'
explanation is liable to go over the head of one who doesn't even know what a
triangle is....?
Martin Reboul
"Doug Weller" <dwe...@ramtops.thisremove.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1rnrgsbdjuhg2.1vpb1rbkyitl4$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 22:23:08 GMT, Inger E Johansson wrote:
>
> > Doug,
> > never ever again call me an idiot.
>
> Never, ever, tell me I have written something I haven't. You had better
> have proof that I called you an idiot. As I understand what you have
> written, there are laws against that sort of false accusation.
I'd call that 'persecution' Doug, never mind defamation of character. The very
fact you can understand what she's written marks you down as a genius I'd say?
Nobody should call Inger an idiot and nobody needs to - it is plainly obvious.
> [SNIP]
>
> > You and many others better look around
> > for B Wallace isn't mentioned among the scholars that counts in this
> > questions.
Qualifications or no, she sure knows her stuff.
> [SNIP]
>
> I don't care, Inger. What is important is the truth of what she wrote, not
> her credentials.
Quite so, well said that man. Of course, I myself "know nothing about medieval
history" according to 'Tirpitz Johannsen', the Lonely Queen of the North, but
I'd not be churlish enough to sue her for all her abuse, rudeness and lies -
better laughed at I think? We are gentleman after all...
> >> I've looked at Inger's post now. I don't know what excavations have
thrown
> >> up since Birgitta Wallace wrote this in 1982, but that's irrelevant --
> >> there seems to be no good reason to think that Follins pond represents a
> >> Viking landing.
> >>
> >> [SNIP]
> >>
>
> I stand by what I wrote about.
Stand fast - your position is unassailable.
Cheers
Martin
Martin Reboul
"Soren Larsen" <soh...@tiscali.dk> wrote in message
news:c2erve$1sel81$2...@ID-131301.news.uni-berlin.de...
Not even in Minnesota?
Martin Reboul
I don't wish to appear at all churlish or unsporting here Seppo, but "a
dark-stained rectangle" is not necessarily "a house"? Nor an "ancient house".
Are you SURE it was a rectangle? I only ask, as you had such a problem with
triangles recently (a rectangle has four sides).
> So if Brigitta Wallis is trotted out and she is pushing hard to
> poo-poo it, it almost guarantees there is a certain amount of
> legitimacy at least to it, considering her past performance.
>
> I was hoping for something rather more believable that a bloody
> revisionists opinions.
What, one who says "it's Viking!" without a shred of evidence? You do have
high hopes Sep!
Cheers
Martin
Soren Larsen
meddelelse news:c2fmpv$h6$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk
Actually they did in Norway - as replicas ;-)
What Inger doesnt get is that it was ships in the knarr tradition,
that was build in Scandinavia into the 1800's as true working ships.
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Alan Crozier
news:gbs2c.85257$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net...
> For your information here are some of the best and most respected scholars
> of Viking Age history, Medieval Scandinavian History and/or archaeology:
>
>
> Professor emeritus, Peter Sawyer; editor of the Oxford Illustraded History
> of the Vikings http://www.longitudebooks.com/find/p/51525/mcms.html
> and many other real good works about Vikings and Late Medieval
Scandinavia.
>
> Dick Harrison Professor Lunds University
>
Good choices, Inger. These are indeed excellent scholars. None of them have
ever argued for the authenticity of the KRS, the VM, or any of your other
unorthodox beliefs.
Alan
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Alan Crozier
Skatteberga 1392
247 92 Södra Sandby
Sweden
TO REPLY BY E-MAIL: change Crazier to Crozier
Inger E Johansson
"Alan Crozier" <alan.c...@telia.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:npJ2c.51605$mU6.2...@newsb.telia.net...
> "Inger E Johansson" <inger_e....@notelia.com> wrote in message
> news:gbs2c.85257$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net...
> > For your information here are some of the best and most respected
scholars
> > of Viking Age history, Medieval Scandinavian History and/or archaeology:
> >
> > Professor Birgit Sawyer, Trondheim
> >
> > Professor emeritus, Peter Sawyer; editor of the Oxford Illustraded
History
> > of the Vikings http://www.longitudebooks.com/find/p/51525/mcms.html
> > and many other real good works about Vikings and Late Medieval
> Scandinavia.
> >
> > Dick Harrison Professor Lunds University
> >
>
> Good choices, Inger. These are indeed excellent scholars. None of them
have
> ever argued for the authenticity of the KRS, the VM, or any of your other
> unorthodox beliefs.
When did you speak to them last time? I have spoken to Dick Harrison several
times over the years and also sent him information of which he used some in
articles, some in books. I am not sure you have followed the Swedish debare
closely the last years. Dick H is much more open for what you call
unorthodox beliefs and so Prof B Sawyer seem to be if you followed the
Dissertations that's been up at 'her' Dept. the last years. Some of the
referenses I sent to the group origin from discussions and analyses in such
Dissertations and I also sent you ref to them, which you must have
missed.....
As for KRS the latest information Lars W gave me last week when he phoned me
was that the questions re KRS carving still is an open unsolved question. I
guess that Michael Z who probably reads this has more specific detailed
information on this one.
As for VM I guess you missed that I have sent information for one of the
1121-1124 Vinland carthographed maps. The one given to the Pope by the one
the Papal Church to this day calls Nicholas of Thingeyre no matter your and
Fridrik's discussion in the subject. The map can be followed from Nicholas
days up to 1939 and that information I have sent with referenses.
Good Night Alan.
Inger E
Soren Larsen
> news:npJ2c.51605$mU6.2...@newsb.telia.net...
>> "Inger E Johansson" <inger_e....@notelia.com> wrote in message
>> news:gbs2c.85257$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net...
>>> For your information here are some of the best and most respected
>>> scholars of Viking Age history, Medieval Scandinavian History
>>> and/or archaeology:
>>>
>>> Professor Birgit Sawyer, Trondheim
>>>
>>> Professor emeritus, Peter Sawyer; editor of the Oxford Illustraded
>>> History of the Vikings
>>> http://www.longitudebooks.com/find/p/51525/mcms.html
>>> and many other real good works about Vikings and Late Medieval
>>> Scandinavia.
>>>
>>> Dick Harrison Professor Lunds University
>>>
>>
>> Good choices, Inger. These are indeed excellent scholars. None of
>> them have ever argued for the authenticity of the KRS, the VM, or
>> any of your other unorthodox beliefs.
>
> When did you speak to them last time? I have spoken to Dick Harrison
> several times over the years and also sent him information of which
> he used some in articles, some in books.
A talented and productive chap indeed
But he has done no work on the Norse in the arctic or America .
Soren Larsen
Alan Crozier
>
> "Alan Crozier" <alan.c...@telia.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:npJ2c.51605$mU6.2...@newsb.telia.net...
> > "Inger E Johansson" <inger_e....@notelia.com> wrote in message
> > news:gbs2c.85257$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net...
> > > For your information here are some of the best and most respected
> scholars
> > > of Viking Age history, Medieval Scandinavian History and/or
archaeology:
> > >
> > > Professor Birgit Sawyer, Trondheim
> > >
> > > Professor emeritus, Peter Sawyer; editor of the Oxford Illustraded
> History
> > > of the Vikings http://www.longitudebooks.com/find/p/51525/mcms.html
> > > and many other real good works about Vikings and Late Medieval
> > Scandinavia.
> > >
> > > Dick Harrison Professor Lunds University
> > >
> >
> > Good choices, Inger. These are indeed excellent scholars. None of them
> have
> > ever argued for the authenticity of the KRS, the VM, or any of your
other
> > unorthodox beliefs.
>
> When did you speak to them last time?
I'll ask Dick next time I run into him. I see him occasionally in Lund. I
read his Ph.D. thesis (and got paid for it). Haven't seen the Sawyers since
2000 but I could easily find out their opinion.
None of these scholars has actually done any work on the Vikings in North
America. Birgitta Wallace has.
Todd A. Farmerie
> "t(nospam)kavanagh" <"tkavanag"@(nospam)indiana.edu> skrev i meddelandet
> news:c2dub3$6up$1...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>
>>Inger E Johansson wrote:
>>
>>>Doug,
>>>never ever again call me an idiot.
>>
>>Inger, dear, you really should learn how to read usenet postings.
>>
>>It was not Doug, but Soren who called you an idiot.
>>
>>I make not evaluation on that judgement.
>>
>>tk
>
>
> dear tk,
> you have always treated me like a gentleman that's why I gladly send you
> information for your use. If you find it worthwhile or not is up to you.
>
> As I told you so many times I am dyslextic. Guess you understand now why I
> say that I have a hard time following debatour's 'input' when the post isn't
> top-posted. I make an exception for those I know don't interfere with my
> lines so I still can follow what I wrote myself......
Inger, here is a hint for you. There is a header at the top of
all usenet posts that reads "From: _________" The name/address
that follows the colon is the person saying the material not
delineated by quotation (> or | ).
Considering how many different functions your dyslexia seems to
interfere with, (reading posts, translating into English, etc) it
is amazing (or perhaps not) that you can read all of the primary
documents you report 'discovering', and given the degree of your
handicap it is astounding how intollerant you are of the
scholarship of those who happen to disagree with you.
taf
Eric Stevens
As Doug suggested, the root of the problem may be careless writing.
Had she written (with my addition in []):
"First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical
means of transporting people and goods across the Atlantic.
Proportionally shorter, deeper and stouter than the Gokstad ship,
the knarr does not fit the Follins Pond berth [which therefore
cannot have been made for a knarr]."
In fact, even in that modified form, the statement will not stand
close examination.
Skuldev 1 was a knarr with a dimensions of 16m x 4.4m which gives a
length/beam ratio of 3.64.
The Follins Pond ships is claimed to have been 69' x 18' which gives a
length/beam ratio of 3.83.
The Follins pond ship was 30% longer than Skuldev 1 but
proportionately only 5% more beamy. If it was a knarr, it was a big
knarr but this is not surprising if it was built with trans-Atlantic
voyaging in mind.
I have no objection to anyone concluding, as Wallace eventually did,
that the Follins Pond ship cannot have been a knarr on the basis of
other evidence. Nor do I have any objection to Wallace arguing that
there is no evidence that it was a knarr. What did catch my attention
was her attempt to press the dimensions into the service of her claim
that it cannot have been a knarr and in this respect I think she is
wrong.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
Grrrr
>
>> I take the point about the later usage but this can only be resolved
>> by the original excavation report.
>>
>> In fact, the radio carbon date carries as much weight as anything
>> else.
>
>And the adze?
I don't think there is any doubt that the site was subject to the
passage of humans at dates subsequent to the possible presence of the
Norse. Not even a Coke bottle would surprise me.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>> She could always point to two things, a date in the sagas of the first
>> Vinland voyage, and a date the Gokstad ship was discontinued.
>
>No more Gokstad types after the early 900's. Their functions are
>being taken over by knarrs and the classical slender longships
Yes. The Gokstad ship would have been a very peculiar thing to build.
Eric Stevens
Inger E Johansson
Then you definitely have spoken to Birgit Sawyer later than I have. I
haven't spoken to her directly since she left Gothenburg for Trondheim.
I haven't sent Dick H the latest information. I spoke to him after Lee P was
here and also sent him some new information then. A scholar friend of mine
in Helsingland has had a copy of each thing I sent to Dick H. My friend and
I talked the other day he and his collegues had discussed the changes and
opening in Dick H's presentation for the last two years. I haven't read Dick
H's latest book but since he is a regular writer in Populär Historia I had
followed that and I too had noticed the difference even if I hadn't seen the
performance in different TV-channels the last year.
Dick H is as you probably know a friend of Kalle B at Linköping's University
from the time Dick H worked there. Kalle B is far the best teacher and
speaker of all scholars I have had but unfortunatly he isn't writing Had
Kalle B been more Medieval I had included him on the list.
If we are to discuss non-Historians but who due to their specific subject
are as good Historians as scholars of Religion I would have mentioned my
former teacher and new Bishop in Gothenburg Carl-Axel A is also one of the
better ones to discuss Medieval Handwritten documents with. I haven't talked
to him the last year either. I haven't had time. Last year I had 2 hours
each way to work and one don't have time to speak to people much then.
>
> None of these scholars has actually done any work on the Vikings in North
> America. Birgitta Wallace has.
Alan I think you missed a lot of the UR programs on SVT and also the
Culture-Programs. It's been a lot presented there as well as in Journals
which aren't always translated and thus you might have missed a bit.
Anyhow ALL of the scholars I mentioned above has far better knowledge than
Birgitta W re Medieval(I am not only talking Vikings you know) Age from
Vendel Age to 1500 when it comes to Scandinvians in west and east before
Columbus days. She can't be mentioned on the same level as any of them nor
of the other 100's I refered to. That's as simple as that.
Inger E
Inger E Johansson
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:d12n40lgglbes7h9n...@4ax.com...
I didn't know that that Swede, the one behind the origin design of the Coke
bottle, was so old..... :-)
Inger E
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens
Alan Crozier
> Anyhow ALL of the scholars I mentioned above has far better knowledge than
> Birgitta W re Medieval(I am not only talking Vikings you know) Age from
> Vendel Age to 1500 when it comes to Scandinvians in west and east before
> Columbus days. She can't be mentioned on the same level as any of them nor
> of the other 100's I refered to. That's as simple as that.
I think your judgement on Birgitta Wallace is coloured by the fact that you
don't agree with her. If she had the same views as you, you wouldn't care
about her supposed lack of qualifications.
Soren Larsen
news:3KM2c.51629$mU6.2...@newsb.telia.net
> news:LrM2c.85378$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net...
>> Anyhow ALL of the scholars I mentioned above has far better
>> knowledge than Birgitta W re Medieval(I am not only talking Vikings
>> you know) Age from Vendel Age to 1500 when it comes to Scandinvians
>> in west and east before Columbus days. She can't be mentioned on the
>> same level as any of them nor of the other 100's I refered to.
>> That's as simple as that.
>
> I think your judgement on Birgitta Wallace is coloured by the fact
> that you don't agree with her. If she had the same views as you, you
> wouldn't care about her supposed lack of qualifications.
And Inger might well be a bit jealous on a Swedish woman actually
working as an respected archaeologist with the Norse in America as
a core work area..
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Inger E Johansson
actually I know many many of scholars here in Sweden who have same opinion
regarding her when she speaks out of her own territory L'anse Medow. I have
heard scholars laughing at her statements to the press and media and
discussing the lack of known presented academic work of hers. That's why I
started to look for such and go thru her background. I thought it was
because she has been married more than once that they didn't know of her
work. I was wrong.
I never ever seen a scholar with so little substance presented and so much
noise. We do have one archaeologist here in Sweden who I don't like due to
his usage of incorrect referenses here and there, but while I dislike his
edited works I do respect his opinion in many other. As for BW I never been
able to find one proof for any statement of hers and that's not the same.
Not at all.
Do you know of a non-symposium article, academic essay or dissertation of
hers where she by herself has presented everything from theory/question
asked to the material(documents, artifacts etc) she speaks of in media, up
to presentation of premisses full analyse and final conclusions? If you do
you are welcome to inform me and others since we are several who have been
looking for that. What from beginning sounded as if the scholars I mentioned
above was 'dissing' her for no reason has during the years more and more
looked like 'kejsarens nya kläder'. So if you know of such work, please
present it.
Inger E
Tom McDonald
Inger,
Are you saying that her Canadian employers were negligent in
hiring and retaining her?
Tom McDonald
Inger E Johansson
"Tom McDonald" <tmcdon...@charter.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:104n78o...@corp.supernews.com...
Definitely no, they employed her at first as a helper to the archaeologist
at L'anse Medow and from there on she done a splendid work AT L'anse Medow.
But that doesn't make her a specialist scholar in History, neither Medieval
History in common nor Viking Age Prime sources in special. It's totally two
different things.
I guess that some media asked her because she 'was at hand' which almost non
of the specialist were and that's the way media works.
Inger E
>
> Tom McDonald
Erik Hammerstad
does not either) that the Gokstad ship is atypical for a Viking
warship with regard to its beaminess.
Renia
> "Todd A. Farmerie" wrote:
> >
> > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > >
> > > Mjolnir wrote:
> > >
> > >>>>>Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse
> > >>>>>
> > >>fathomers...
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
> > > Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
> > > the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
> > > as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
> >
> > Your analysis gets a ZERO.
>
Admirable sentiment.
But the last thing Todd is, is a troll.
Renia
Martin Reboul
Surly "introllerant"?
Alan Crozier
> NO Alan, my opinion of BW isn't colored,
> Do you know of a non-symposium article, academic essay or dissertation of
> hers where she by herself has presented everything from theory/question
> asked to the material(documents, artifacts etc) she speaks of in media, up
> to presentation of premisses full analyse and final conclusions?
Yes but I'm not prepared to present them to the group!
(Unless you give me the reference to that first ever published article on
the Holy Grail with almost correct information)
;-
Seppo Renfors
Really..... I didn't take him for being silly! See my reply to Eric.
--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Soren Larsen
<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:23:14 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
><egeha.is.a...@start.no> wrote:
>
>As Doug suggested, the root of the problem may be careless writing.
>Had she written (with my addition in []):
>
> "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
> outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical
> means of transporting people and goods across the Atlantic.
> Proportionally shorter, deeper and stouter than the Gokstad ship,
> the knarr does not fit the Follins Pond berth [which therefore
> cannot have been made for a knarr]."
>
>In fact, even in that modified form, the statement will not stand
>close examination.
>
>Skuldev 1 was a knarr with a dimensions of 16m x 4.4m which gives a
>length/beam ratio of 3.64.
>
>The Follins Pond ships is claimed to have been 69' x 18' which gives a
>length/beam ratio of 3.83.
>
>The Follins pond ship was 30% longer than Skuldev 1 but
>proportionately only 5% more beamy. If it was a knarr, it was a big
>knarr but this is not surprising if it was built with trans-Atlantic
>voyaging in mind.
If it was a big knarr it was still too beamy.
Why are you pointing to Skuldelev 1 when Haithabu 3 is in the class
you are looking for:
http://www2.rgzm.de/navis/ships/ship009/Ship009Engl.htm
But then it really doesnt matter since Wallace and our Seppo agrees
that the posts are modern.
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Eric Stevens
<Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>Renia wrote:
>>
>> Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message news:<404AB078...@not.ollis.net.au>...
>> > "Todd A. Farmerie" wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Seppo Renfors wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Mjolnir wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>>>>Seppo Renfors wrote:
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>In 1960, Pohl and George McGrath searched the area around Mill Pond
>> > > >>>>>>and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>fathomers...
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Since when is 43 divided by 7 come to the same as 18 divided by 3?
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > That is errant nonsense. There IS NO division sign used for a starter.
>> > > > Only a multiplication sign, further more the "X" is a substitute for
>> > > > the word "by" and lastly, "Norse fathoms" is NOT the same measurement
>> > > > as "feet". Your score is ZERO.
>> > >
>> > > Your analysis gets a ZERO.
>> >
>> > I have no intention of entertaining trolls.
>>
>> Admirable sentiment.
>>
>> But the last thing Todd is, is a troll.
>
>
>Really..... I didn't take him for being silly! See my reply to Eric.
Which one of the several thousand?
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
wrote:
Because I couldn't find Haithabu 3 in a hurry. :-)
Length/beam ratio of 3.56, which says that the exact proportions were
not set in stone.
>
>http://www2.rgzm.de/navis/ships/ship009/Ship009Engl.htm
>
>But then it really doesnt matter since Wallace and our Seppo agrees
>that the posts are modern.
The argument seems to point that way but on grounds other than the
proportions of the ship. It was Wallace's argument on the latter to
which I was taking exception.
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
<egeha.is.a...@start.no> wrote:
Who said it was?
But who said it was a knarr?
Eric Stevens
Seppo Renfors
Soren Larsen wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:404B35BB...@not.ollis.net.au
> > Soren Larsen wrote:
> >>
> >> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
> >> news:404AC23C...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >>>
>
> snip
>
> >>>
> >>>> "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
> >>>> outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical
> >>>> means of transporting people and goods across the Atlantic."
> >>>
> >>> I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim with?
> >>
> >> Can you name _ANY_ Gokstad type ship from archaeology or history
> >> at the time of the Vinland exploration ?
> >
> > Are you stupid or what? Do you get called "Birgitta" around home, do
> > you?
>
> Seppo the clown realises he has lost another argument in the first round
What argument, you haven't even answered the question, stupid!
>
> >
> > I asked for SUBSTANTIATION of the claim - the proof of the claim made.
>
> No Sale Seppo :-)
Then GO AWAY. You are irrelevant.
[..]
Seppo Renfors
Steve Marcus wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> news:404AC23C...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
> > Doug Weller wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:55:55 -0000, Mjolnir wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.pollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > > > news:404728D7...@not.pollis.net.au...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Inger E Johansson wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.pollis.net.au> skrev i meddelandet
> > > >>> news:4046D3BC...@not.pollis.net.au...
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > The thread has been renames as the subject matter no longer
> > > >>> > corresponds to that introduced by Dougie.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > Doug Weller wrote:
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > Excerpts from
> > > >>> http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=343
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > * River Charles and Merrimack
> > > >>> > > > * These are about a days sailing north of the Taunton River
> around
> > > >>> Cape Cod
> > > >>> > > > with the prevailing wind. Beside both rivers are a series of
> > > > tilted
> > > >>> rocks
> > > >>> > > > each propped up by a smaller rock at the bottom.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > This site has been excavated before in 1952 by a Mr Pohl and a
> Dr.
> > > >>> > > Maurice Robbins of the Massachusetts Archaeological Society. I
> have
> > > >>> > > posted this before.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > They found a cellar hollow that has been covered over by a road.
> > > >>> > > Aerial photographs show a dark-stained rectangle that measures
> 92.5
> > > > X
> > > >>> > > 111 feet = 15 X 18 Norse fathomers, confirming its ancient
> origin
> > > >>> > > (from sagas presumably). Partial excavation of the rectangle
> > > > revealed
> > > >>> > > a row of post moulds with an average depth of 9 inches, 3 to 5
> > > > inches
> > > >>> > > in diameter. The claimed dates for this are around 1000 -> 1010.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > Pohl searched the south shore of Follins Pond and found a gully
> 160
> > > >>> > > feet long that rose five feet above high tide (of that time
> > > >>> > > presumably). In the water adjoining the beach there was a clear
> > > > space
> > > >>> > > 30 feet wide, lined with boulders on either side, apparently
> cleared
> > > >>> > > by human hands. This was to pull ships up for the winter as per
> > > > Norse
> > > >>> > > practise.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > In the gully were the remains of the sod walls of a ship shed
> having
> > > >>> > > an interior width of about 21 feet. Along the centre of the
> gully,
> > > >>> > > they found a row of posts resting on flat stones, and on either
> > > > side,
> > > >>> > > rows of stakes slightly inclined toward the centre, suitable for
> > > >>> > > shoring up the hull of a Viking ship. Placement of the posts and
> > > >>> > > stakes showed that the ship was double-ended with a straight
> keel
> > > > like
> > > >>> > > other Viking ships, and was about 69 feet in length with a beam
> of
> > > > 18
> > > >>> > > feet. This conforms closely to the 9th-century Gokstad ship
> Norway
> > > > is
> > > >>> > > 76.5 feet long with a beam of 17 feet.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > In 1960, Pohl and George McGrath searched the area around Mill
> Pond
> > > >>> > > and found a rectangular hollow, 18 X 43 feet = 3 X 7 Norse
> > > > fathomers...
> > > >
> > [..]
> > > >
> > > >>> > > suitable for a shelter to provide sleeping platforms for the
> crew. A
> > > >>> > > hard-packed floor, and earth discoloured by rotting wood, are
> > > > evidence
> > > >>> > > of construction. At the old shore line there is an excavation of
> > > >>> > > proper dimensions for shoring a Viking ship. Pohl has apparently
> > > >>> > > written a book on this.
> > > >>> > >
> > >
> > > Or perhaps of the wrong dimensions.
> > >
> > > Birgitta Wallace,
> >
> > Hmmm.... trotting out one of the Chiefs of the pre-Columbian Brick
> > Wall maintenance crew immediately, I see.
> >
> > > in Vikings in the West, writes about Pohl's claim:
> > > "Among the features he cites is a gully where post remains were found in
> an
> > > alignment that suggested they had served as support for a vessel 69 feet
> > > long with a beam 18 feet wide. According to Pohl, it must have been a
> ship
> > > of the Gokstad type..This reasoning, however, along with the
> > > misinterpretation of some crucial saga passages, contains several
> flaws.
> >
> > Ahhh... the "unidentified misinterpretation".... yeah they carry a lot
> > of weight.... like a feather!
> >
> > > "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
> outdated
> > > and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical means of
> transporting
> > > people and goods across the Atlantic."
> >
> > I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim with?
> > She could always point to two things, a date in the sagas of the first
> > Vinland voyage, and a date the Gokstad ship was discontinued. But
> > there is a further error of logic here. WHY a "Knarr" - after all it
> > wasn't known if there was any cargo to carry from there. As for the
> > "misinterpretation of some crucial saga passages", Birgitta is guilty
> > as all hell of closing her eyes to certain passages. A KNARR doesn't
> > have the crew the sagas speak about!
>
> Read it and weep,
Ahhh.., the SHYSTER is back again.....
> Butthead:
I LOVE your signature, a really good one for a shiny bum!
> http://cma.soton.ac.uk/HistShip/shlect77.htm
....and the relevance is... NIL - it is not supporting the revisionist
Birgitta. No "Gokstad" ship mentioned.
>
> See also:
>
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1997/ONN.04/0537.html
a news group/list posting... again NO Gokstad ship mentioned -
discarded as irrelevant.
>
> http://www.web-connection.org/archive/crusback/1997/vik0815.htm
A story about the replica "Snorri" - no Gokstad ships mentioned -
discarded as irrelevant.
>
> To understand why a knarr would commonly be used on voyages of "exploration"
> or "colonization of new lands" versus a warship, see:
>
> http://www.wsd1.org/SargentPark/JrHigh/JH_Main_Heritage_Fair/hfair2000/vikings.htm
Again another false train no Gokstad ship mentioned - discarded as
irrelevant.
So the Shyster has led a person on a merry chase after shadows again -
completely OFF TOPIC. So I shall remind the shiny bum what it was. I
said "I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim
with?" - and "that claim" was the revisionist Birgitta saying:
"the Gokstad ship was outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a
more practical means of transporting people and goods across the
Atlantic."
So the proof was required for:
(A) - the "Gokstad ship was outdated" at that time of the sagas speak
about.
FACT: This statement I have already proven to be false.
In the alternative (shysters love alternatives) is that "Gokstad ship
was outdated" for Atlantic travel ONLY. However one needs not go down
this road as that interpretation is very strained and is discarded for
that reason.
> > Fragments of a 9th century ship like the Gokstad ship were found in
> > the Schelde river in Belgium. But to my knowledge, the Gokstad ships
> > existence date from 900+ AD and are smack-bang in the target era. So
> > she is resorting to bullshit already there. See also: Christensen,
> > A.E., Guide to the Viking Ship Museum, Oslo, 1987, p. 26.
>
> Nope. As is typical, you are the one resorting to bullshit, Seppo.
That is proof tendered and remains UNDISPUTED. The Shyster loses
again..... HAH!
> > > "Proportionally shorter, deeper and
> > > stouter than the Gokstad ship, the knarr does not fit the Follins Pond
> > > berth. Second, according to the local archives the gully was used as a
> > > beaching and repair place for fishing boats throughout most of the 19th
> > > century...This tallies with the fact that a carpenter's adze of this
> period
> > > was also found in the berth. Third, of three radiocarbon dates on the
> berth
> > > posts, two gave the result 'modern' and one 250 plus or minus 120
> > > BP...indicating that the berth is modern."
> >
> <snip figments of Seppo's diseased imagination.>
The poor looser..... it hastens off to polish its butt and scratch its
head, sitting on the park bench waiting for the next ambulance....
Seppo Renfors
Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 10:39:51 +0000, Doug Weller
> <dwe...@ramtops.thisremove.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> Rather than concluding that the Follins Pond find can not have been a
> >> knarr, Wallace concludes that by her assumed dating it must have been
> >> a knnrr and therefore the dimensions must be wrong.
> >
> >I think that was an error not picked up by proofreading. Or, it may be that
> >neither fits and her writing was sloppy. It's a strain to assume that it
> >is 'bizarre', and neither do I think that you meant to write knnrr. :-)
>
I doubt very much it was other than intentional - its a typical
strawman argument.
> Grrrr
>
> >> I take the point about the later usage but this can only be resolved
> >> by the original excavation report.
> >>
> >> In fact, the radio carbon date carries as much weight as anything
> >> else.
> >
> >And the adze?
>
> I don't think there is any doubt that the site was subject to the
> passage of humans at dates subsequent to the possible presence of the
> Norse. Not even a Coke bottle would surprise me.
The only trouble is that again the issues have drifted off to
irrelevancies and side stepping potentially more important parts.
After all that area, as stated by Wallace HAD BEEN USED by others for
fishing boat repairs in recent times. So why the bloody hell would a
"genuine" researcher concentrate and focus on items almost certainly
MODERN? There can only be one reason - revisionism, and I HATE
conspiracy theories, but I can see NO other logical reason behind it.
Besides that, she has been caught out with revisionist statements
before.
Why else were the more likely to be genuine parts apparently not
touched and ignored. Was this deliberately left out by Dougie in his
quote or was it left out by Wallace? What was the reason for those
omission, irrespective of who's it was?
What Dougie has done is post about mooring holes existing in the area
that are consistent with Norse mooring holes. SO the statement,
whenever you see Birgitta Wallace come down heavily against something,
it almost guarantees SOME genuine aspects to it appears to not be such
a wild statement.
Inger E Johansson
it's as simple as that: If you can find what the scholars at the library
haven't been able to find they will have to look further. You try to
blackmail me into giving my sources for 2 articles and one manuscript away.
Sorry Alan but that's not allowed in Sweden. I present my sources when I
like to not because you or anyone else demand them.
As for BW, if she has published academic work of her own you and other who
speaks so load probably wouldn't have problem in presenting them since such
might show on what ground she made her statements in press and media.
However if she lack academic work in the History field her work at L'anse
Medow will not make her a scholar of Medieval Scandinavian History either
way.
Good Night.
Inger E
"Alan Crozier" <alan.c...@telia.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3SU2c.85411$dP1.2...@newsc.telia.net...
Soren Larsen
>
>
> Soren Larsen wrote:
> >
> > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
> > news:404B35BB...@not.ollis.net.au
> > > Soren Larsen wrote:
> > >>
> > >> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
> > >> news:404AC23C...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > >>>
> >
> > snip
> >
> > >>>
> > >>>> "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship
was
> > >>>> outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical
> > >>>> means of transporting people and goods across the Atlantic."
> > >>>
> > >>> I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim
with?
> > >>
> > >> Can you name _ANY_ Gokstad type ship from archaeology or history
> > >> at the time of the Vinland exploration ?
> > >
> > > Are you stupid or what? Do you get called "Birgitta" around home,
do
> > > you?
> >
> > Seppo the clown realises he has lost another argument in the first
round
>
> What argument, you haven't even answered the question, stupid!
Your failure to name any Gokstad type ship from from either litterature
or archaeology that fits the time period is noted, and I take it that
you concede the point.
Good move Seppo, you were beginning to look fairly stupid.
> >
> > >
> > > I asked for SUBSTANTIATION of the claim - the proof of the claim
made.
> >
> > No Sale Seppo :-)
The burden of evidence is entirely yours.
You cant ask people to prove a negative.
OTOH can you win the argument simply by producing a Gokstad ship
that fits the period and some evidence supporting that they ever crossed
the Atlantic in the medieval period.
Good luck
But in that case I'll have to remind you of that classic Seppo fumble,
where you torched the entire case for a Gokstad type ship - Those
post had to be modern didn't they ?
You just cant win Seppo :-)
>
> Then GO AWAY. You are irrelevant.
Keep dreaming newbie...
Soren Larsen
Steve Marcus
You are a liar, Seppo.
The URL quite clearly mentions "Gokstad" ship, in fact, it does so in the
first sentence:
"With the exception of the Ladby ship none of the vessels examined so far
can be regarded as a typical Norse ship. The Oseberg and Gokstad are both
grave boats and may therefore be untypical in the sense that they were the
ships of a great man or woman."
The URL then goes on to explain that the bluewater vessels that were used to
get to Iceland and Greenland wre knarrs. Which supports Wallace's position.
> >
> > See also:
> >
> > http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1997/ONN.04/0537.html
>
> a news group/list posting... again NO Gokstad ship mentioned -
> discarded as irrelevant.
> >
> > http://www.web-connection.org/archive/crusback/1997/vik0815.htm
>
> A story about the replica "Snorri" - no Gokstad ships mentioned -
> discarded as irrelevant.
You are a liar, Seppo. Wallace wrote:
"First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was outdated
and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical means of transporting
people and goods across the Atlantic."
Since you've taken the position that Wallace is wrong, the URL is highly
relevant, since the type of ship chosen to recreate Leif Ericsson's voyage
to North America was a knarr, not a Gokstad type ship.
> >
> > To understand why a knarr would commonly be used on voyages of
"exploration"
> > or "colonization of new lands" versus a warship, see:
> >
> >
http://www.wsd1.org/SargentPark/JrHigh/JH_Main_Heritage_Fair/hfair2000/vikings.htm
>
> Again another false train no Gokstad ship mentioned - discarded as
> irrelevant.
And once again, you are a liar, Seppo. The URL clearly shows anyone, even
the 8th grader who posted it, why a knarr would commonly used in blue ocean
exploration, colonization or trading.
>
> So the Shyster has led a person on a merry chase after shadows again -
> completely OFF TOPIC. So I shall remind the shiny bum what it was. I
> said "I would like to see what there is that she supports this claim
> with?" - and "that claim" was the revisionist Birgitta saying:
And so I posted three URLs that showed you exactly why Wallace's position
was correct. You've chosen to simply go off the deep end, disregarding that
Wallace claimed that a knarr, and not a Gokstad type ship would be the sort
of Norse vessel found in North America, since it was the sort of vessel that
was used to cross the Atlantic.
>
> "the Gokstad ship was outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a
> more practical means of transporting people and goods across the
> Atlantic."
And the URLs fully support Wallace's statement.
>
> So the proof was required for:
> (A) - the "Gokstad ship was outdated" at that time of the sagas speak
> about.
> FACT: This statement I have already proven to be false.
>
> In the alternative (shysters love alternatives) is that "Gokstad ship
> was outdated" for Atlantic travel ONLY. However one needs not go down
> this road as that interpretation is very strained and is discarded for
> that reason.
This is precisely the correct road, coupled with the fact that the so-called
"Gokstad" ship wasn't even a typical type of Norse vessel.
>
> > > Fragments of a 9th century ship like the Gokstad ship were found in
> > > the Schelde river in Belgium. But to my knowledge, the Gokstad ships
> > > existence date from 900+ AD and are smack-bang in the target era. So
> > > she is resorting to bullshit already there. See also: Christensen,
> > > A.E., Guide to the Viking Ship Museum, Oslo, 1987, p. 26.
> >
> > Nope. As is typical, you are the one resorting to bullshit, Seppo.
>
> That is proof tendered and remains UNDISPUTED. The Shyster loses
> again..... HAH!
Seppo, you ought to realize that _everyone_ reading my post and your reply
(with the possible exception of Inger, Queen of Idiots), understands that
you've been blown out of the water. Gokstad type ships were simply not used
for blue ocean voyages of any distance, which was Wallace's point. You may
continue to delude yourself, but you are not persuading anyone that you are
correct.
>
> > > > "Proportionally shorter, deeper and
> > > > stouter than the Gokstad ship, the knarr does not fit the Follins
Pond
> > > > berth. Second, according to the local archives the gully was used as
a
> > > > beaching and repair place for fishing boats throughout most of the
19th
> > > > century...This tallies with the fact that a carpenter's adze of this
> > period
> > > > was also found in the berth. Third, of three radiocarbon dates on
the
> > berth
> > > > posts, two gave the result 'modern' and one 250 plus or minus 120
> > > > BP...indicating that the berth is modern."
> > >
> > <snip figments of Seppo's diseased imagination.>
>
> The poor looser..... it hastens off to polish its butt and scratch its
> head, sitting on the park bench waiting for the next ambulance....
How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post the URL
that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and your
logic are ...NOT?
>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
--
The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
because we do not have an attorney-client relationship, and
should not be construed as either. This posting does not
represent the opinion of my employer, but is merely my personal
view. To reply, delete _spamout_ and replace with the numeral 3
Seppo Renfors
Soren Larsen wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:404C5231...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
> > Soren Larsen wrote:
> > >
[..]
> > > > I asked for SUBSTANTIATION of the claim - the proof of the claim
> made.
> > >
> > > No Sale Seppo :-)
>
> The burden of evidence is entirely yours.
>
> You cant ask people to prove a negative.
I CAN ask whatever I please, and that IS a fact. However, I haven't
asked any such thing, so you are resorting to fabrications again. It's
your strawman, you deal with it.
>
[snip dribble]
>
> You just cant win Seppo :-)
There is nothing TO "win" - there is a NO CHALLENGE irrelevant
strawman crap from you, nothing else and it remains irrelevant as do
you.
Seppo Renfors
Rather obviously in this thread, relating to the matters addressed by
Reina - you know, the one you blushed reading and have been evading
since. Now that wasn't exactly rocket science, was it.
Daryl Krupa
<snip re: Birgitta wallace's lack of a doctorate>
> I guess that some media asked her because she 'was at hand' which almost non
> of the specialist were and that's the way media works.
I suppose that explains the success of Richard Leakey and Jane Goodall, too.
A.L.
Daryl Krupa
> Alan,
<snip>
> You try to blackmail me
PLEASE, Alan, DON'T show us the evidence you're using!
A.L.
Seppo Renfors
Steve Marcus wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> news:404C585D...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
Hey ZOLOTA, look at what your POND SCUM crew it's back again....
> How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post the URL
> that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and your
> logic are ...NOT?
LOOK Zolota... is the HOLE IN THE HEAD of that dumb bastard another
"norse mooring hole" or is it the result of an "alien phazer test" -
they seem synonymous to you! No wonder your sleazy shyster hired help
is so pathetic. At least feed it peanuts that way you will get a
higher evolutionary form of help - a MONKEY!
Steve Marcus
>
>
> Steve Marcus wrote:
> >
> > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:404C585D...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > >
> > >
>
>
> Hey ZOLOTA, look at what your POND SCUM crew it's back again....
Almost correct. The pond scum is back again, except it's you who is the
pond scum, Seppo. Yet again, you felt the need to ignore the topic,
misinterpret references and arguments, and respond to a post demonstrating
that you were in error with shouting, swearing and ranting.
>
> > How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post the
URL
> > that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and your
> > logic are ...NOT?
>
A question that was clearly warranted by _your_post in which _you_ claimed
that this URL:
http://cma.soton.ac.uk/HistShip/shlect77.htm
no relevance to Brigitta Wallace's position that by the time of the Vinland
voyages, knarrs had taken the place of Gokstad type ships for transporting
people and cargo across the Atlantic. These were your words regarding that
URL, Seppo:
"....and the relevance is... NIL - it is not supporting the revisionist
Birgitta. No "Gokstad" ship mentioned."
However, the very first sentences from that URL read:
"With the exception of the Ladby ship none of the vessels examined so far
can be regarded as a typical Norse ship. The Oseberg and Gokstad are both
grave boats and may therefore be untypical in the sense that they were the
ships of a great man or woman."
Therefore, it is clear that you are a liar, Seppo, proven by your own post.
Keep it up, Seppo, and we will all enjoy reading, yet again, about Seppo vs.
the Australian judge. Remember my words.... Unless you become a docile
little idiot, Seppo, and behave yourself, we will all refresh our
recollections about your sad, sad day in court. Remember my words ...
<snip remainder of Seppo's dribble>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
Seppo Renfors
Steve Marcus wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> news:404D9090...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
> > Steve Marcus wrote:
> > >
> > > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > > news:404C585D...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > Hey ZOLOTA, look at what your POND SCUM crew it's back again....
>
> Almost correct. The pond scum is back again, except it's you who is the
> pond scum, Seppo. Yet again, you felt the need to ignore the topic,
> misinterpret references and arguments, and respond to a post demonstrating
> that you were in error with shouting, swearing and ranting.
>
> >
> > > How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post the
> URL
> > > that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and your
> > > logic are ...NOT?
[..]
>
> Therefore, it is clear that you are a liar, Seppo, proven by your own post.
I'm not dealing with any of your fabrications - get back under your
rock again, bloody low life SHYSTER!
> Keep it up, Seppo, and we will all enjoy reading, yet again, about Seppo vs.
> the Australian judge. Remember my words.... Unless you become a docile
> little idiot, Seppo, and behave yourself, we will all refresh our
> recollections about your sad, sad day in court. Remember my words ...
As this is and ALWAYS has been irrelevant it only shows your LOSER
title, and your malice, PLAGIARISED from ZOLOTA as you are so PATHETIC
you can't even manage that on your own, what a LOSER you are!!
It is shysters and POND SCUM as introduced by Zolota who resorts to
fraudulent shit like this, and THAT is why Zolota remembers my words -
I PREDICTED THIS, that slime of all kinds will follow Zealot's POND
SCUM lead. Zolota OWNS this now.
Keep it up SHYSTER, Zolota is being reminded of his deeds with every
post of yours. He deserves every kick you give him!
> <snip remainder of Seppo's dribble>
Restore text:
LOOK Zolota... is the HOLE IN THE HEAD of that dumb bastard another
"norse mooring hole" or is it the result of an "alien phazer test" -
they seem synonymous to you! No wonder your sleazy shyster hired help
is so pathetic. At least feed it peanuts that way you will get a
higher evolutionary form of help - a MONKEY!
--
zolota
>
>
> Steve Marcus wrote:
> >
> > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:404C585D...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > >
> > >
>
>
> Hey ZOLOTA, look at what your POND SCUM crew it's back again....
>
> > How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post the
URL
> > that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and your
> > logic are ...NOT?
>
>
> LOOK Zolota... is the HOLE IN THE HEAD of that dumb bastard another
> "norse mooring hole" or is it the result of an "alien phazer test" -
> they seem synonymous to you! No wonder your sleazy shyster hired help
> is so pathetic. At least feed it peanuts that way you will get a
> higher evolutionary form of help - a MONKEY!
>
Sorry I couldn't reply sooner but we were busy making mooring holes to hold
our Knorrs after a pleasant day of paddling on the pond. Now, you were
saying?
Z
Steve Marcus
>
>
> Steve Marcus wrote:
> >
> > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:404D9090...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > >
> > >
> > > Steve Marcus wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > > > news:404C585D...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey ZOLOTA, look at what your POND SCUM crew it's back again....
> >
> > Almost correct. The pond scum is back again, except it's you who is the
> > pond scum, Seppo. Yet again, you felt the need to ignore the topic,
> > misinterpret references and arguments, and respond to a post
demonstrating
> > that you were in error with shouting, swearing and ranting.
> >
> > >
> > > > How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post
the
> > URL
> > > > that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and
your
> > > > logic are ...NOT?
> [..]
> >
> > Therefore, it is clear that you are a liar, Seppo, proven by your own
post.
>
> I'm not dealing with any of your fabrications - get back under your
> rock again, bloody low life SHYSTER!
Fabrications??
Yet another lie by Seppo. What part of the following is a lie, Seppo?
Doug Weller posted in this thread claimed that Brigitta Wallace had written:
A. "First, by the time of the Vinland voyages, the Gokstad ship was
outdated and the knarr had taken its place as a more practical means of
transporting people and goods across the Atlantic." Here's Doug's post:
B. You claimed that the above statement, attributed to Wallace, was wrong.
Here's the URL to your post:
C. I then posted that you were wrong, and Wallace was correct. This is the
first of three URLs that I posted to support that you were wrong, and
Wallace was correct:
Here's the URL to my post:
http://tinyurl.com/yvw6c and the URL I posted therein:
http://cma.soton.ac.uk/HistShip/shlect77.htm
D. With respect to the URL that I cited, you then replied:
"....and the relevance is... NIL - it is not supporting the revisionist
Birgitta. No "Gokstad" ship mentioned."
E. However, the opening sentences that appear in that URL are:
"With the exception of the Ladby ship none of the vessels examined so far
can be regarded as a typical Norse ship. The Oseberg and Gokstad are both
grave boats and may therefore be untypical in the sense that they were the
ships of a great man or woman."
Therefore, it is clear to all that you are an out and out _liar_ because you
completely mischaracterized the content of the above URL.
Now you are alleging that I fabricated the above. That too is obviously a
lie, as anyone clicking on the links can see. So it isn't _my alleged
fabrication_ that you won't deal with. It is _your out and out lie_, and
the fact that with respect to Wallace's position, you are simply wrong.
This is the same tactic that you used in that (in)famous legal action,
Seppo. And so you deserve to read all about it, yet again:
>
> > Keep it up, Seppo, and we will all enjoy reading, yet again, about Seppo
vs.
> > the Australian judge. Remember my words.... Unless you become a docile
> > little idiot, Seppo, and behave yourself, we will all refresh our
> > recollections about your sad, sad day in court. Remember my words ...
>
> As this is and ALWAYS has been irrelevant it only shows your LOSER
> title, and your malice, PLAGIARISED from ZOLOTA as you are so PATHETIC
> you can't even manage that on your own, what a LOSER you are!!
Nope, it's totally relevant, Seppo. You need to take responsibility for
your own actions and your own words, Seppo. If you want to behave like an
ass on sci.archaeology by pretending that everything you write is correct
and everything else written by others is wrong, and then attempting to prove
it by lying, twisting the words posted by others, and ignoring or
mischaracterizing references cited to you that undercut your positions, you
are going to have to pay the price for doing so. In short, _you_ have
brought this upon yourself, with your own lying words. Everyone here could
have predicted it. Remember what I've written ...
<snip the rest of Seppo's diseased babbling>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
Seppo Renfors
Steve Marcus wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> news:404E7390...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
> > Steve Marcus wrote:
Restore text:
As you piffle is and ALWAYS has been irrelevant it only shows your
LOSER
title, and your malice, PLAGIARISED from ZOLOTA as you are so PATHETIC
you can't even manage that on your own, what a LOSER you are!!
It is shysters and POND SCUM as introduced by Zolota who resorts to
fraudulent shit like this, and THAT is why Zolota remembers my words -
I PREDICTED THIS, that slime of all kinds will follow Zolota's POND
SCUM lead. Zolota OWNS this now.
Keep it up SHYSTER, Zolota is being reminded of his deeds with every
post of yours. He deserves every kick you give him!
LOOK Zolota... is the HOLE IN THE HEAD of that dumb bastard another
"norse mooring hole" or is it the result of an "alien phazer test" -
they seem synonymous to you! No wonder your sleazy shyster hired help
is so pathetic. At least feed it peanuts that way you will get a
higher evolutionary form of help - a MONKEY!
--
Seppo Renfors
zolota wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> news:404D9090...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
> > Steve Marcus wrote:
> > >
> > > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > > news:404C585D...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > Hey ZOLOTA, look at what your POND SCUM crew it's back again....
> >
> > > How's the Australian judge doing these days, Seppo? Need we post the
> URL
> > > that demonstrates exactly how polished _your_ courtroom skills and your
> > > logic are ...NOT?
> >
> >
> > LOOK Zolota... is the HOLE IN THE HEAD of that dumb bastard another
> > "norse mooring hole" or is it the result of an "alien phazer test" -
> > they seem synonymous to you! No wonder your sleazy shyster hired help
> > is so pathetic. At least feed it peanuts that way you will get a
> > higher evolutionary form of help - a MONKEY!
> >
>
> Sorry I couldn't reply sooner but we were busy making mooring holes to hold
> our Knorrs after a pleasant day of paddling on the pond. Now, you were
> saying?
Hmmmm... a "knorr" is the corkscrew shape in a pigs tail..... so it is
analogous of "twisting the pigs tail" - and that IS what I have been
doing, can't you hear the squeals to its master? Well, keep it tied up
so it doesn't escape again to defecate on the carpets....
Steve Marcus
>
>
> Steve Marcus wrote:
> >
> > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:404E7390...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > >
> > >
> > > Steve Marcus wrote:
>
> Restore text:
Ok. I'll restore text:
Seppo wrote: "I'm not dealing with any of your fabrications - get back
under your rock again, bloody low life SHYSTER!"
And I replied:
"Fabrications??
http://cma.soton.ac.uk/HistShip/shlect77.htm
And I had previously written:: "Keep it up, Seppo, and we will all enjoy
reading, yet again, about Seppo
vs. the Australian judge. Remember my words.... Unless you become a
docile little idiot, Seppo, and behave yourself, we will all refresh our
recollections about your sad, sad day in court. Remember my words ..."
To which Seppo made this pathetic reply:
"As this is and ALWAYS has been irrelevant it only shows your LOSER title,
and your malice, PLAGIARISED from ZOLOTA as you are so PATHETIC you can't
even manage that on your own, what a LOSER you are!!"
And I then replied: "Nope, it's totally relevant, Seppo. You need to take
responsibility for
your own actions and your own words, Seppo. If you want to behave like an
ass on sci.archaeology by pretending that everything you write is correct
and everything else written by others is wrong, and then attempting to prove
it by lying, twisting the words posted by others, and ignoring or
mischaracterizing references cited to you that undercut your positions, you
are going to have to pay the price for doing so. In short, _you_ have
brought this upon yourself, with your own lying words. Everyone here could
have predicted it. Remember what I've written ..."
<snip the balance of Seppo's diseased ramblings, which have no bearing on
what was previously posted, and to which Seppo can not make a coherent, or
logical, reply.
>
> --
> SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
> misled.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve
Seppo Renfors
Steve Marcus wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> news:404FA6E8...@not.ollis.net.au...
> >
> >
> > Steve Marcus wrote:
> > >
> > > "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message
> > > news:404E7390...@not.ollis.net.au...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Steve Marcus wrote:
> >
Keep memorialising Zolota being caught out resorting to racist
arguments and resorting to malicious fabrications..... oh yeah... YOU
TOO was caught out jumping on ZOLOTA's racist band wagon! So keep up
the stalking, shyster, and let the world see what you are really made
off....
Text restored:
As you piffle is and ALWAYS has been irrelevant it only shows your
LOSER
title, and your malice, PLAGIARISED from ZOLOTA as you are so PATHETIC
you can't even manage that on your own, what a LOSER you are!!
It is shysters and POND SCUM as introduced by Zolota who resorts to
fraudulent shit like this, and THAT is why Zolota remembers my words -
I PREDICTED THIS, that slime of all kinds will follow Zolota's POND
SCUM lead. Zolota OWNS this now.
Keep it up SHYSTER, Zolota is being reminded of his deeds with every
post of yours. He deserves every kick you give him!
LOOK Zolota... is the HOLE IN THE HEAD of that dumb bastard another
"norse mooring hole" or is it the result of an "alien phazer test" -
they seem synonymous to you! No wonder your sleazy shyster hired help
is so pathetic. At least feed it peanuts that way you will get a
higher evolutionary form of help - a MONKEY!
--
Inger E Johansson
Steve M once was a p.... but he is nicer now, not nice but nicer. Can't we
try to give him that eloge?
Inger E
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> skrev i meddelandet
news:40504303...@not.ollis.net.au...
Seppo Renfors
Inger E Johansson wrote:
>
> Seppo,
> Steve M once was a p.... but he is nicer now, not nice but nicer. Can't we
> try to give him that eloge?
It is HIS choice - HE elects the kind of responses he gets, he is now
very familiar with the routine.
zolota
>
SNIP
>
> It is shysters and POND SCUM as introduced by Zolota who resorts to
> fraudulent shit like this, and THAT is why Zolota remembers my words -
> I PREDICTED THIS, that slime of all kinds will follow Zolota's POND
> SCUM lead. Zolota OWNS this now.
So if I own it now, SHUT THE F*** UP!!!
Z
Inger E Johansson
>
>
> Inger E Johansson wrote:
> >
> > Seppo,
> > Steve M once was a p.... but he is nicer now, not nice but nicer. Can't
we
> > try to give him that eloge?
>
> It is HIS choice - HE elects the kind of responses he gets, he is now
> very familiar with the routine.
Might be true but still remember that he has shown better behavior lately
then the behavior of his in the past. Please remember that Seppo. We can't
expect anyone to be a Santa Claus all in once.....
Inger E