KRS weathering
   Author:   Yuri Kuchinsky
   Date: 1998/07/21
   Forums: sci.archaeology, soc.culture.nordic

   _________________________________________________________________
   
Some posters here are again suggesting that the weathering of the KRS is
somehow not right, that there's something wrong with the weathering.
Nothing can be further from the truth.

Since KRS was apparently lying buried in the ground face down for many
centuries, the inscription on the face of the stone is quite well
preserved. Nevertheless, some runes may be possibly missing from lines 2
and 3, as there's a substantial spalling on the stone in this area. In
fact, many commentators think something _is_ missing from line 2.

Take a look at:

http://thehistorynet.com/HistoricTraveler/images/1997/0597_1l.htm

Some experts, like Dr. Winchell, when they first looked at the
inscription, were quite surprised that the state of preservation was
apparently so good, and Winchell recorded his first impressions in his
notebook. Later, after some careful investigation with the microscope, and
after further studying the physical properties of this particular rock
(greywacke) Winchell came to the conclusion that KRS is authentic.

Here's this from my old post:

"Three nationally known geologists (including glacial geologist Dr. Warren
Upham and Minnesota State Archaeologist Prof. N. H. Winchell) ... were so
impressed by the evidence of the weathered appearance of the inscription
that they voluntarily wrote opinions favouring its authenticity." (Holand
1940, 130) He quotes Prof. W. O. Hotchkiss, State Geologist of Wisconsin,
"The inscription ... must have been made at least fifty to a hundred years
ago and perhaps earlier." (Nilsestuen, p. 27.)

[end quote]

Later on, some rather dishonest critics, like Stephen Williams, the author
of fairly notorious volume FANTASTIC ARCHAEOLOGY, that contains other
numerous errors, used the technique known as _selective quoting_ to
distort the views of Dr. Winchell. They only quoted his initial opinion
that the inscription looked "fresh" at first glance, but rather curiously
neglected to cite his considered opinion.

There's no doubt that Dr. Winchell was an active supporter of KRS
authenticity, based on the weathering, and on the circumstances of the
discovery which he, himself, investigated very carefully.

Well, this is all that needs to be said on the subject. I appeal to the
recent very biased critics, please get yourself informed about the
circumstances of KRS discovery.

Regards,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- [19]http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku  UPDATED

We should always be disposed to believe that that which
appears white is really black, if the hierarchy of the
Church so decides -=O=- St. Ignatius of Loyola
   _________________________________________________________________


Click here to go one level up in the directory.