1362-The Kensington Runestone

Originally posted by Mr Headshot
I thought it was a generally accepted fact that the scandanavians were here before the other Europeans?

This is still neat, but I didn't think this was still a point which needed proving...

Yeah...umm...like...what he said. It's common wisdom where I'm from.
2nd Line
3rd if necessary

reply to post by sharps


It's known they were here, but this was in a different, more northern part of the country.

These stones may be evidence of them moving further through the country, but there are enough indiscrepancies to cast doubt against the stones.

In case you didn't know, that won't enrich your bank account either!
Harte

Unless....you work in the Persian Gulf there you can make some money and its tax free. Generally short of native English speaking math teachers.

Rates go from 3,500 to 6,500 a month BUT you have to live in the Persian Gulf!

But we go off subject

Back on subject

Yep the Norse were bouncing around the NE corner of NA for a century or two and Greenlander are thought to have continued to have come to Labrador for wood once the colonization attempt had failed.

One is talking very small numbers and limited contact-AFAIK

reply to post by Hanslune


A buddy of mine is trying to talk me into going to dubai with him to work.


I dont think id like the humidity though, or thr lack of a good sierra nevada pale ale.

reply to post by punkinworks


Dubai is very modern and you can get alcohol there but the traffic is hideous and the city is very expensive to live in. This means you have to live in Sharjah or Ajman and the traffic from there to Dubai is basically evil. Humidity isn't that much a problem - more a problem in Manama and Doha (IMHO). You can get nearly the same pay by going to Abu Dhabi, RAK, Fuji or Al Ain - if anyone mentions Sheikh Zayed city - run. (on the Saudi border and the empty quarter)

I lived in Dubai for 14 years, left in Feb 2008

[edit on 8/10/09 by Hanslune]

reply to post by Hanslune


Such is why it was called Markland, for the trees, it was their major supply of wood, and supposedly they even brought back saplings to plant..? Dunno if true though.

reply to post by Ridhya


They use to get a lot of drift wood - which is one reason they went looking for the source. Sapling? Hadn't heard of that but with the cooling period that started circa 1450 none of them would have survived for very long. IWT

Originally posted by Hanslune
Yep the Norse were bouncing around the NE corner of NA for a century or two and Greenlander are thought to have continued to have come to Labrador for wood once the colonization attempt had failed.
One is talking very small numbers and limited contact-AFAIK

I just caught up to this report again, from May '09:

Vikings in Nunavut?
Find may indicate medieval Norse presence on Baffin Island
One of Canada's top Arctic archeologists says the remnants of a stone-and-sod wall unearthed on southern Baffin Island may be traces of a shelter built more than 700 years ago by Norse seafarers — a stunning find that would be just the second location in the New World with evidence of a Viking-built structure. www.canada.com...

It remains interesting to note that this is not without debate:

The theory is a controversial one. University of Waterloo archeologist Robert Park recently challenged the dating of artifacts and Sutherland's interpretations of evidence in a paper published by the journal Antiquity.

...which only goes to show that the bar is set high...even amidst the academic community. So, if some of us come off sounding like Eeyore, we're not alone.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Yes this is how it works, battle and debate within peer-review publications. You can see that in the case of the Hobbit with tempers flaring!

Based solely on the evidence in the news article I'd say it was Norse-but I'd have to read the actual published site report. Odd no mention of fire and that useful carbon stuff.

Start humor mode

It amazes me that the NWO would allow the concept of more Norse habitations on the NA to be found...their entire evil plan could collapse!

End humor mode



[edit on 8/10/09 by Hanslune]

When we say someone 'discovered' such-and-such, it is a relative statement. For example, who discovered North America? The first people to step foot upon it's shores of course. So who was that exactly? Most likely the discoverers were Asians because that is the genetic trail leading backwards from the natives of North America.

So, you see, the idea of who discovered what is not really a relevant idea at all. This concept is what we call a 'nationalistic ideal'. To think of ourselves as Canadians, Americans, Chinese, etc. has got to go! We are Humans of the planet Earth and until all of us begin to think as such we will be hindered greatly in our progress!

Originally posted by AlienEyes
When we say someone 'discovered' such-and-such, it is a relative statement. For example, who discovered North America? The first people to step foot upon it's shores of course. So who was that exactly? Most likely the discoverers were Asians because that is the genetic trail leading backwards from the natives of North America.

True, but what I find fascinating about the Norse visits to North America goes deeper than that. When you consider that Mankind (gender-neutral) left Africa and dispersed, the Native discovery of North America represents the flow of Humanity heading east. Our species also went north, into Europe and eventually west to North America, and completed the circle. This, to me, is a profound achievement.

Hmmmm... I haven't seen anyone mention it yet, but didn't anyone see the History Channel special they did on this subject? I think it was like 2 hours long, and totally intriguing. I think it was called "Holy Grail in America".

Look it up, it was a great show =]

Interesting read, there are a lot of possibilities brought up here.

Does anyone have any idea how many of these rune stones exist? I wonder why they would take the time to carve such a stone with such a basic story, especially it the story of the dead men indicates they were killed by native Americans. I would think they would be in too much of a hurry to leave the area before the attackers returned to carve a story into a stone. It hardly seems reasonable that the guy who found this stone would go to such an elaborate extent to create such a hoax.

As far as the carbon dating of the Newport tower, it is pretty solid evidence that the tower's mortar hardened in 1680, but that doesn't necessarily prove that is is when the tower was actually built, has has been shown. Here is an interesting article on how this carbon dating process for mortar was developed.

www.americanscientist.org...

However, on the first page, there is a picture of the Newport tower, and when you click on it to get a better view, the link clearly states:

www.americanscientist.org...

To help settle the question, samples from deep within the walls of the tower were subjected to carbon-14 dating, which revealed that the mortar hardened (a process that captures carbon dioxide from the atmosphere) around 1680.

It has been noted that mortar deep inside a structure can take a very long time to harden.

This was an extremely new process when the Newport tower was tested, and the people who did the testing are not the people who took the sample, so there is considerable room for debate as to how accurate the testing was, and so old the tower really is. It seems that a far larger sample would be needed to get a scientifically accurate date, which would be very destructive to the small structure.

Hanslune keeps saying 95% certainty, but from what peer reviewed journal does this number come from?

Blackmarketeer does a very good job of providing credible evidence to demonstrate possible problems with the carbon dating referencing credible sources. Isn't anything published by someone with a reputation at stake peer reviewed?

It seems to me that there is still quite the mystery here.

reply to post by jammer2012


This is very informative. But as to the replies that wonder if there were people hear before Columbus. Has anyone here heard of the kenewick man. These skeletal remains although not confirmed as that of scandanavian decent they were not decended from native americans either. The amazing thing is that they were dated as being around 8,000 years old.

I beleive in the scientific approach to the authenticity of the Kensington Runestone. There are things buried both underwater and on land that have been unseen for tens of thousands of years.

If the stones at Pumopunku can exist and be authentic then I guess The Kensington Runestone can exist and be authentic also.

I would love to hear any new information that may become available either pro or con.

Originally posted by Duane319
Has anyone here heard of the kenewick man. These skeletal remains although not confirmed as that of scandanavian decent they were not decended from native americans either. The amazing thing is that they were dated as being around 8,000 years old.

The closest match to the very-well studied Kennewick Man is the Japanese Ainu, who are an indigenous Asian population.

It may have already been mentioned, but some say it is a relic of a Knights Templar claim to the entire MS river water shed. That the formation of one of the letters isn't bad penmanship, but a distinctive from certian K T outpost. It was an entire 4 hr topic on C2CAM