Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,761 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 787,884
Pageviews Today: 926,221Threads Today: 153Posts Today: 2,397
07:37 AM

Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing

Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´

05/24/2005 06:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´
Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´

May 24, 2005 10:15 am US/Central

Kensington, Minn. (WCCO) Researchers have found new evidence of a secret code concealed on the Kensington Runestone, one of the most controversial pieces of Minnesota history.

The rock was found near Alexandria, Minn. a century ago. It bears an inscription that places Norwegians here in 1362.

Were Vikings exploring our land more than 100 years before Columbus? Or is the Kensington Runestone an elaborate hoax?

New research suggests the rune stone is genuine, and a hidden code can prove it.

"Eight Goths and 22 Norwegians on an exploration journey ... 10 men red with blood and dead ... 14 days journey from this island ... year 1362."

The Kensington Runestone´s carved words have haunted the Ohman family for more than 100 years.

Olof Ohman has been accused of authoring Minnesota´s most famous fraud. The farmer claimed he found the stone buried under a tree in 1898.

Critics believe the language on the rune stone is too modern and that some of the runes are made up. They say Ohman carved it himself to fool the learned.

The Ohman family´s faith in the stone has never wavered, however.

"I just never had any doubt," said grandson Darwin Ohman. "I mean, I was very emphatic about it. Absolutely it´s real. There´s no doubt."

"(Critics are) calling (Olof Ohman) a liar," Minnesota geologist Scott Wolter said. "If this is a hoax, he lied to his two sons, he lied to his family, lied to his neighbors and friends and lied to the world."

Wolter and Texas engineer Dick Nielsen believe hidden secrets are carved in the Kensington Runestone.

"It changes history in a big way," Wolter said.

In 2000, Wolter performed one of the very few geological studies on the Kensington Runestone. He said the breakdown of minerals in the inscription shows the carving is at least 200 years old, placing it before Olof Ohman´s time.

Wolter´s findings support the first geological study that also found the stone to be genuine, which was performed in 1910.

"In my mind, the geology settled it once and for all," Wolter said.

Linguistic experts believe some of the stone´s runes are made up, but Nielsen said he found one of the disputed runes in a Swedish rune document dating back to the 14th century.

"If they were wrong about that, what else were they wrong about?" Wolter said.

Wolter documented every individual rune on the stone with a microscope.

"I started finding things that I didn´t expect," Wolter said.

Wolter discovered a dot inside each of four R-shaped runes.

"These are intentional, and they mean something," Wolter said.

Wolter and Nielsen scoured rune catalogs and found the dotted R´s.

"It´s an extremely rare rune that only appeared during medieval times," Wolter said. "This absolutely fingerprints it to the 14th century. This is linguistic proof this is medieval. Period."

Wolter and Nielsen traced the dotted R to rune-covered graves inside ancient churches on the island of Gotland off the coast of Sweden.

"The next thing that happened is, we started finding on these grave slabs these very interesting crosses," Wolter said.

Templar crosses are the symbol of a religious order of knights formed during the Crusades and persecuted by the Catholic Church in the 1300s.

"This was the genesis of their secret societies, secret codes, secret symbols, secret signs -- all this stuff," Wolter said. "If they carved the rune stone, why did they come here? And why did they carve this thing?"

Wolter has uncovered new evidence that has taken his research in a very different direction. He now believes the words on the stone may not be the record of the death of 10 men, but instead a secret code concealing the true purpose of the stone.

Linguists single out two runes representing the letters L and U as evidence Olof Ohman carved the stone. They are crossed, and linguists say they should not be. A third rune has a punch at the end of one line.

"Maybe they´re saying, ´Pay attention to me,´" Wolter said.

Each rune on the stone has a numerical value. Wolter and Nielsen took the three marked runes and plotted them on a medieval dating system called the Easter Table.

When we plotted these three things we got a year: 1362," Wolter said. "It was like, oh my God, is this an accident? Is this a coincidence? I don´t think so.

"We think, if it’s the Templars, they confirmed the date which is on the stone -- 1362 -- by using a code in the inscription."

But why would Templars come to America, carve this stone and code the date?

"If it´s the Templars, who were under religious persecution at the time, that would be a pretty good reason to come over here," Wolter said. "Maybe the rune stone is a land claim.

"I´m sure a lot of people are going to roll their eyes and say, ´Oh, it´s "The DaVinci Code,"´ and if they do, they do. This is the evidence, this is who was there, this is what the grave slabs tell us. It is what it is."

Wolter and Nielsen said they expected their work to be criticized. The developments in their research are too recent to have been reviewed by other rune stone experts.

The pair are preparing a book, "The Kensington Rune Stone: Compelling New Evidence," for future publication.

[link to wcco.com]
12/08/2005 10:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´
Who were the Templars, NIGHTMARE?

And, do you know what the dotted R´s mean?

12/08/2005 10:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´
The operator
12/08/2005 10:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´
Anonymous Coward
12/08/2005 10:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Unlocking Minnesota´s ´DaVinci Code´
The Climax Fire Steel

article by Holand in response to and article by M.M.Quaife, Minnesota History, June 1937

In the March issue of this publication Mr. M.M.Quaife has an article on the distribution of fire steels among the Indians. This leads him to a brief discussion of a fire steel found near Climax, Minnesota, on the bank of the Red River. He mentions that I, in my book concerning the Kensington stone, have included this find among several other ancient implements unearthed in Minnesota as coroborative proofs of the authenticity of the Kensington inscription. He concludes, however, that the "chance discovery of a fire steel ner Climax in 1871 shed no conceivable light on this interesting question." The reason for this conclusion, he asserts, is that "Mr. Holand evidently overlooked... the use of fire steels in the Indian trade." (1)

This is incorrect. I have mentioned the use of fire steels among Indians in many of my writings, and I did not supress it in the book which Mr. Quaife refers to for his information. On page 177, in immediate connection with my discussion of the Climax fire steel, I say:

Fire-steels were early intorduced among the Indians and specimens may be seen in museums. These fire-steels were very crudely made and quite small, usually permitting only two fingers of the hand to be inserted within the fire-steel. the Climax fire-steel is quite different in size, style, and material from the Indian fire-steels. (2)
The overlooking is therefore not mine, but Mr. Quaife´s.
The reason I attach any signivicance to the Climax fire steel is mentioned in the last sentence of the above quotation: "The Climax fire-steel is quite different in size, style, and material" that is, in metallurgical compositioin. Inasmcuh as it is so different, it is worthy of scientific attention. I have made numerous inspections and inquiries in many museums between the Mississippi River and the Atlantic, and I have failed to find any Indian or pioneer fire steels of this type.

But Mr. Quaife quite properly states that "the argument form negative evidence... is valid only when one explores all possible sources of information." In order to explore all possible sources of information, I went abroad in 1928 and visited a large number of museums in England, France, the Netherlands, Germany, and the Scandinavian countries. Somewhere in one of these countries the museums ought to reveal other fire steels of the same type, unless the Climax fire steel were a freak. My search was not in vain. In one country, but only in one, I found a museum containting a large quantity of fire steels of exactly the same type as the Climax specimen. This was the university museum in Oslo. In order that there should be no doubt about this fact, I asked the museum to give me a written statement. Here it is:

Upon request... I will state that the fire-steel which carries the same mark in its entire form with the spireal ends is of exactly the same type as the fire-steels which in great numbers have been found in Norwegian graves from the Viking Age... Eivind S. Engelstad (3)
Insasmuch as the Climax fire steel is of the Norwegian type which goes way back to the Viking Age, there remain only two reasonable explanations of its Presence here. It was either brought over by one of the first settlers in the Climax area, or it was left by some Norwegian explorer who penetrated to the Red River before this region was settled. In any case it is not an Indian or a French fire steel.
The first alternative is impossible because it was found by the first settler in the Climax vicinity, deep in the soil, an before the land was plowed.(4) There remains the second alternative - that it was brought in by an early explorer. This explorer must have left it there a very long time ago, because it was found two feet down in the ground in a layer of charcoal and ashes. This implies that it was lost while a fire was being made, and it would presumably take many hundred years for two feet of soil to accumulate bover the fire steel. We know of only one party of Norwegian explorers who are reported to have visited thsi part of America hundreds of years ago. They were the explorers mentioned on the Kensington stone as having visited this region in 1362. The must hav ecarried just such fire steels as this, and their route lay right past the spot where the fire steel was found. The only logical conclusion, there fore, is that thsi fire steel is a memento of the explorers who penetrated into the present state of Minnesota in 1362.

All the facts mentioned above concerning theis fire steeel, including the statement from the Oslo University museum that the Climax fire steel is of exactly the same type in all details as those in use in Norway in the Middle Ages, are mentioned in my book on the Kensington stone, to which Mr. Quaife refers for his information. But for some reason Mr. Quaife does not allude to them. He gives the reader the impression that there is nothing peculiar about this fire steel - that it is merely an Indian fire steel. Why where the facts in this case suppressed?

Hjalmar R. Holand
Ephraim, Wisconsin