Contrary to the Hobbesian prediction of anarchy (freedom) and brutish or unproductive results in the event that elites (often termed 'beneficent paternalism') aren't fostered: we find lots of evidence that team play and open organizational structure actually creates more civilized and productive governance. Lincoln Electric in Cleveland is a well-documented example of how sharing the wealth and responsibility builds communication and profit. A Brazilian city named Porto Allegro that opened itself to citizen involvement and socialist ideals is flourishing as corruption wanes. It was predicted they would fail financially but more than a decade of good results has been the outcome. Singapore reduces government as a percentage of GDP and is fully modernized. Instead of 'expertise' being the solution, it might well be these technocrats in bureaucracies are the problem. Archaeology Magazine has a frequent contributor named Professor Wiseman who comes under our critical gaze for all his fine 'expertise'. He truly has struck a sore spot in our view of what is real about the Runestone at Kensington. Most importantly he did his duty just after he was proven wrong in a conference of 'experts' from many of his own colleagues as well as other disciplines. It was February, 2001 when we read his 'Camelot in Kentucky' attack on the most speculative of all articles that hit the newsstands in early 2001, about Europeans in America or Diffusionist History. Shortly thereafter this organ of the gods of archaeology had a piece on the natural landforms of the desert that became the Sphinx and Pyramids. No credit due to man and science in ancient times is allowed, it seems. In fact all of us are mere 'post-modern speculative' trash as he would have it. We hit the ceiling and laughed simultaneously. Let's allow his own words to prove our point (again). "Perhaps unwittingly, Stengel follows in the footsteps of the hyper-diffusionists, raising old hoaxes exposed long ago. He brings up once again the Kensington, Minnesota, Rune Stone with its account of Scandinavian visitors in 1392, which over the past century has been repeatedly rejected as a forgery by scholars, most recently by Stephen Williams, a curator emeritus of Harvard's Peabody Museum, in his book Fantastic Archaeology... Refutation of baseless speculation {That is YOU, if you are thinking!} and repeated resurrection of previously exposed frauds and forgeries is a seemingly endless task. So it seems to the teachers who must explain year after year to new groups of students that reports of Celtic inscriptions in the Precolumbian Midwest or Phoenicians in Brazil are false. The problem is aggravated by a spreading notion in Western society that all opinions should be given equal weight and are valid until proven wrong. In this Post-Modern democratization of ideas, utter speculation by the uninformed ranks alongside the reasoned hypotheses of scholars and other experts in the field."(9) The Midwest Archaeology Conference held at the Radisson in St. Paul, Minnesota in the November before this article was printed found a completely different and more complete investigational answer. They had only one 'debunker' dissenter who thought Wiseman might be right. The historian with the records from the royal court of Norway. The top linguist who showed the flaws in earlier scholarship. No one alive at the time this stone was discovered could have known what information was held within the syntax and vernacular usages of the time it actually was written or inscribed. It was shortly thereafter that scholars saw these things yet it has been a hundred years and many books have been written. Three questionable witnesses have said their father or grandfather forged the stone. I guess you could liken them to jailhouse confessions but why did they need three different 'confessors' when only one did it in each case? The chemical engineer and all the other archaeologists present at this meeting were engaged in "utter speculation by the uninformed ranks" according to Prof. Wiseman and Archaeology Magazine. There are people today engaged in ridiculing Farley Mowat because he is showing how the Scots of St. Albans came here before the Norse (if there is any difference between Pictish Scots and Gothic Norse) who settled L'Anse-aux-Meadows. You would think these people would know when they are beat, but the BIG LIE affects a large percentage of people who never really evaluate the facts. Mowat was a key factor in the battle to get the Norse point of view across in his book Westviking. One such ridiculer or paid hatchetman said Mowat has no experience in the north of the Canadian Arctic. My oldest brother's first wife's father was a missionary in the Arctic before becoming a Chartered Accountant. He lived with Farley for two years there. Farley came to our lake and visited, but I never met him. Let me assure you the experts often have no integrity. Their example is part of the reason why our kids lie and cheat (on tests in American schools, Reader's Digest said 78% ADMIT cheating.) or grow up to be lawyers and politicians. |
