This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o +
Hi Of course the VP is authentic. There had been many ships sailing to America, not only from China, but also Sinclair's and others as well. http://www.somalilandtimes.net:80/sl/2007/290/10.shtml<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://www.somalilandtimes.net/sl/2007/290/10.shtml> http://yakushi.pharm.or.jp/FULL_TEXT/125_7/pdf/583.pdf<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://yakushi.pharm.or.jp/FULL_TEXT/125_7/pdf/583.pdf> These people sailed to America to,with help of maps: http://www.robertlomas.com:80/Freemason/Origins.html<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://www.robertlomas.com/Freemason/Origins.html> http://www.thedigitalfreemason.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=30<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://www.thedigitalfreemason.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=30> Sir William was the grandson of Prince Henry St. Clair of Orkney, known as 'the Navigator' (Henry Sinclair of Roslin), who many believe led an expedition to America around a hundred years before Columbus's 'discovery' of the New World in 1492: evidence to support this is seen in the carbon-dating of the 'American' corn sculpted at Rosslyn. Various evidence suggest Prince Henry St. Clair crossed the Atlantic in 1398 and landed in an area he named Nova Scotia in honour of his beloved Scotland. http://www.edinburgharchitecture.co.uk/rosslyn_chapel.htm<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://www.edinburgharchitecture.co.uk/rosslyn_chapel.htm> http://law.missouri.edu/whitman/England/Rosslyn/Rosslyn%2520Chapel.html<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://law.missouri.edu/whitman/England/Rosslyn/Rosslyn%2520Chapel.html> Nothing new with this info. The celtic cross has nothing to do with christianity. Google "the working Celtic Cross" and you will find a site that explains it all. The "inventor" or rediscoverer of this (Crichton Stewart I belive is his name) had a UK patent awarded. Using a Celtic Cross and a plumb line ancient mariners could tell thier position (lattitude and longtitude) anywhere on the earth . [...] The intercontinental travel of sea going peoples is the answer to what is called diffusion and debate still rages amongst academics over the unusual distribution of spear points known as Clovis on both sides of the Atlantic dating to the end of the last Ice Age Thor Heyerdhal proved the ocean going capability of ancient ships but the last bastion of academics clutching to the official line was the supposed inability of our ancestors to find longitude. The destruction of the Library at Alexandria by succesive religious extremists wiped most of our real history out, but circumstantial evidence points to discoveries made in Solomons Temple during the Crusades that ressurected some of that information to the benefit of those who became known as Templars who also travelled by sea. There is a chart kept in the vatican known as the Ribero World Chart created between 1510 and 1520AD which shows the the Atlantic and Pacific sides of the USA in almost perfect longitude, 200 years before the solving of longitude by The Royal Navy with the help of Harrisons Chronometer and the invention of the sextant. Are we expected to believe that the world was mapped by sailing ships that could only voyage at certain times of the year and circumnavigate the Americas without the benefit of the Panama Canal 18 years after the discovery of America by Columbus? In my opinion, this is an underground knowledge kept by a secret society for over 1000 years under the noses of established religion that leads from our ancient sea faring past to creation of the American Constitution with the help of the thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment . Henry the navigator was not the first, French Fishermen sailed to the Grand banks long before Columbus as did the Irish monk Brendan the Navigator around the time of Constantine and the Vikings also did their bit Petroglyphs in Scandinavia show the wheel cross with ships 1500 BC Seafaring and navigation requires a knowle http://heritage.scotsman.com/ViewArticle.aspx?articleid=2802504<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://heritage.scotsman.com/ViewArticle.aspx?articleid=2802504> Keep swimming! [?] Karl *From:* John A W Lock<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected]> *Sent:* Friday, January 22, 2010 12:26 PM *To:* Discussion group for map history<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected]> *Subject:* Re: [MapHist] Vinland Map -- _Could_ be authentic? This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + ------------------------------ Even if it's the flogging of a dead horse it does provide us bystanders with a useful insight into innovative flogging techniques. I have found the inks discussion quite useful as it has made me think about inks a little harder than I might otherwise have done. I'm sure I'm not alone! regards John A W Lock ----- Original Message ----- *From:* Kenneth M Towe<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected]> *To:* Discussion group for map history<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected]> *Sent:* Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:10 PM *Subject:* Re: [MapHist] Vinland Map -- _Could_ be authentic? This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + ------------------------------ Golly! Jim Enterline is concerned! No one is responding to his seemingly endless "technical" discussion. He feels that I am using last-resort debate tactics. Frankly, I was hoping that this quixotic venture of "hope" to save a forgery through the use of illogical, ever changing, unfinished and indefensibly complex scenarios might die a natural death through use of the delete button by others here. Maybe it has? Nobody else has complained. Nobody else has offered a defense of his scenario. But, if there is anyone out there who has not used the delete button already, PLEASE re-read my January 5th post through to the end. Jim said (1/4/2010) that for him, at least, the Vinland Map was "still a religious matter". His sect wants to hold out for an "undoubtedly small", "single occurrence"...just one that they hope will make the Vinland Map genuine; just one that will explain everything plausibly. A minor miracle? Such admissions, beliefs and wishful thinking make any attempt at objective scientific discussion virtually impossible. No matter what is said, what evidence is placed in front of him he will dismiss, ignore, or garble it, falling back on other "possibilities". Nevertheless, if there is anyone still reading this stuff, please note that from my January 4th post Jim has not answered any of the questions that were raised...not one. Jim keeps defending illogical progressions and keeps making statements that are misleading, purely speculative or without documentative substance. There is obviously no end to this twisting and turning. This is what is really indefensible. Jim writes: "I'm not clear why you keep coming back to differentiating between paper and parchment inks. Are you suggesting that people writing on parchment avoided iron gall ink?" No, Jim, people did not avoid iron gall inks. They avoided carbon inks...on parchment. There are citations support this, including your own source: ** "A good quality carbon ink had a blue-black appearance. Such an ink would not discolor with age but *could easily smudge* with high humidity and was *easy to remove* from a document." "Iron-gall ink was very useful because it did not rub off documents. *Unlike paper, parchment was not absorbent, so carbon-based ink easily rubbed away*. Iron-gall ink ate into the parchment by reacting with collagen in the parchment." *"In the later middle ages carbon ink, made from soot and gum mixed with water, was sometimes used. This formed a very black ink, but it **simply adhered to the surface** of the page rather than bonding into it. Carbon ink was used in early printed books."* Please note that on Jan. 5th I asked Jim about this: "Where can one actually see and study a medieval iron gall ink with added carbon black written on parchment, not on paper?" His answer? No answer... yet. Jim goes on... "You keep repeating the Brown & Clark comment on the weakness of carbon in the TR ink, but as I said before, only very small amounts of carbon are needed to have a visible effect on virgin iron-gall ink." Very small amounts are visible? Jim's references or documents in support of this "small amount" have not been presented here. Will Jim provide us with an example and tell us what the "small amount" is? This might make his reliance on the Tartar Relation, and on Mrs. Olin's statement about carbon: "evidenced by its [very small] presence" defensible. He adds: "Be careful how you use their [Brown & Clark] statement about the TR ink, "...the general appearance of the ink (brown-black), is suggestive of an ink which is essentially composed of iron gallotannate. The black ink on the VM, however, is not of the same composition, as it is carbon-based [your emphasis]" That statement was made under the assumption that the carbon on the VM is a separate overlay, before there was a suggestion that it comes from separation of internally contained carbon." And under which anatase is careful to slip in? Yes, the VM carbon is a separate overlay. It has flaked away, not smudged away. The carbon is present as separate "dark particles", "black specks". The VM ink is NOT an IRON-gall ink. Internal carbon separation? This is another of Jim's suggestions, pure speculations; a new theory; another possibility. Has he provided any evidence that this has happened to any iron gall ink, much less his speculative gall ink without iron? No, he has not. Will he? His track record has not been good to date. Carbon black in the Tartar Relation ink, never mind its separation, is presumed by its "presence". There is no internal separation; another presumption. As a "presence" it has neither smudged nor is it flaking away. The hypothesized separation is not there, even in "small amounts". The TR ink is a typical IRON-gall ink while the VM ink is not. This will be my last post in response to the Vinland Map as a "religious matter". Not because I'm trying to sneak away or walk out by using some [imputed] last-resort debating tactic but because Jim is ignoring facts in evidence, is not providing his own documentary evidence, and is ignoring logical parsimony... all rarely successful tactics. Unless Jim Enterline can answer some of the questions that have been asked, can provide examples of actual documents in support of his myriad possibilities for comparison, and can complete his unfinished, changed-from-2002 scenario in a plausible fashion it is useless to continue. On the other hand, if someone else at MapHist wishes to ask questions and/or provide some added input from relevant factual sources this situation can change. Otherwise it is clear that most here are tired of this endless beating of a dead horse. On Jan 16, 2010, at 11:38 PM, James Enterline wrote: This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the whole list) o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + Kenneth Towe seems to have walked out of our technical discussion on the ink of the VM. That is a well known debating tactic of last resort when a discussant gets backed into an indefensible corner. It's been a week since my last posting without any response from him in spite of his established record of a day or so. On the other hand, it's completely conceivable that other exigencies have interrupted his schedule. I will be incommunicado myself for the coming week. If I don't find a response waiting when I return, I'll post a summary of the progress we have made in undermining the McCrone scenario. Jim Enterline _______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:http://www.maphist.nl/> Maphist mailing list [email protected]<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected]> http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist Dr. Ken Towe 157 Broadlands Drive Eatonton, GA 31024 [706] 923-0097 [email protected]<wlmailhtml:{E1E73D08-4DC9-4FE3-B925-324114F7B117}mid://00000344/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected]> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl Maphist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl Maphist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist 2010/1/17 James Enterline <[email protected]> > This is a MapHist list message (when you hit 'reply' you're replying to the > whole list) > o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + o + > > Kenneth Towe seems to have walked out of our technical discussion on the > ink of the VM. That is a well known debating tactic of last resort when a > discussant gets backed into an indefensible corner. It's been a week since > my last posting without any response from him in spite of his established > record of a day or so. > > On the other hand, it's completely conceivable that other exigencies have > interrupted his schedule. I will be incommunicado myself for the coming > week. If I don't find a response waiting when I return, I'll post a summary > of the progress we have made in undermining the McCrone scenario. > > Jim Enterline > > _______________________________________________ > MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography > hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. > The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of > the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of > Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for > the views of the author. > List Information: http://www.maphist.nl > > Maphist mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist >
<<B56.gif>>
_______________________________________________ MapHist: E-mail discussion group on the history of cartography hosted by the Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Utrecht. The University of Utrecht does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. List Information: http://www.maphist.nl Maphist mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.geo.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/maphist
