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=- 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.