Re: VInland Map

"David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> "David Christainsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Doug Weller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>  news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > Al Magary has provided these links to a study that says the ink is genuine:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/wj8d
> > > http://tinyurl.com/wj8n
> > >
> > > Doug
> >
> > Friends,
> >
> > Jacqueline Olin
> >
> > Vindication for Vinland map: New study supports authenticity
> > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-11/acs-fv112403.php
> >
> > Best,
> > David Christainsen
> 
> Nope: This proves nor disproves anything. All she is arguing about is one of the
> conclusions made in re. the ink. She does not say that the ink is authentic. What 
> Olin
> does say is .."the ink may help prove the map's authenticity, .."
> The article indicates that Olin also states "There has also been no discussion about 
> the
> significance of the other elements ,....copper, aluminum and zinc - all found in the
> Vinland Map's ink.
> The controversy Olin is addressing is about the composition of the ink and if it is
> consistent with inks produced in the 13th century.
> 
> Personally I'll still stick with Kirsten A Seaver'd theory of the twentieth century 
> Jesuit
> attempting to play an elaborate joke on the Nazi regime. Aside from the composition 
> of the
> ink there are too many cartographic elements that do not add up. One being that the 
> Norse
> did not make maps!

I never offered SCI.ARCHAEOLOGY my personal opinion
as to whether the Vinland Map is genuine or whether Jacqueline Olin
knows
what she is talking about.

I merely reported Olin's article because debate has raged for the past
four decades about whether the map is genuine; it was reignited last
week
by Olin's announcement.

Certainly, lack of provenance is a major consideration.  See Seaver
---

The chart before the Norse
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20031129/COVINL29//?query=seaver

For the time being, I am still weighing judgment on the arguments pro
and
con.  I am still interested in further debate and discussion on our
newsgroup.  Can anyone now come in with some decisive factors?

Best regards,
David Christainsen