Is the Kensington Rune Stone Related to the Masonic Select Master Degree through a Number Code?

5/18/2016

I must admit to being a bit surprised by the apparently good news I read today in Bloomberg News about the changes coming to National Geographic as a result of its takeover by Rupert Murdoch. According to the report, the National Geographic Channel’s tabloid trash had long been National Geographic’s profit center, and the crappy taste of cable TV audiences exerted pressure on National Geographic to dumb down in print and online. In fact, the report says that TV executives bristled that National Geographic’s leadership thought the shows should be fact checked and scientifically responsible. But now as part of a larger company, the National Geographic branded media products no longer are the tail wagging the dog after being diluted into the Fox empire, and their new boss, James Murdoch, the son of Rupert and head of 21st Century Fox, intends to transform them into a luxury brand for quality science journalism and entertainment, describing the new vision as “HBO” for science.

I’ll believe it when I see it, but it sounds a lot better than Discovery’s strategy of flooding TV with reality crap and creating whole networks for paranormal pseudoscience

Speaking of pseudoscience, Jerry Lutgen recently posted an article summarizing Scott Wolter’s new claims about Freemasonry and the Kensington Rune Stone to the Kensington Rune Stone International Supporters Club Facebook page in a posting on May 9. Lutgen is a friend of Wolter, a former guest on America Unearthed, and the creator of a Talpiot Tomb website. He is currently working with HistoryTec, a nonprofit corporation dedicating to pursuing Wolterian fringe ideas, namely the Talpiot Tomb and Pre-Columbian European contact with America. His paper summarizes Wolter’s presentation to the Anoka, Minnesota Freemasons last month.

According to Lutgen’s summary, Wolter places particular interest on the numbers that appear in the text of the Kensington Rune Stone:

8 Götalanders and 22 Northmen on an exploring (or acquisition) expedition from Vinland west. We camped by 2 skerries one day’s journey north from this stone. We were a-fishing one day; after we came home we found 10 men red with blood and dead. A.V.M. (= Ave Maria) Save from evil.

(There) are 10 men by the sea (or lake) to look after our ships 14 days’ journey from this island (or peninsula). Year 1362. (adapted from trans. George T. Flom)

These numbers, then, are 8, 22, 2, 1, 1, 10, 10, and 14.

Wolter wants us to see the 22 as referring to the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet and therefore to the Kabbalah, even though there is no Kabbalistic material in the text. He assumes that 22 is also related to the Egyptian mystery religions of Isis and Osiris. The number isn’t associated with them so far as I can tell, but it does appear in a tangential way because some New Agers allege that the 22 trump cards of the tarot derive from the Egyptian mysteries. This is mostly due to Antoine Court de Gébelin, a Freemason who helped invent the esoteric interpretation of the tarot in 1781. He alleged that the tarot’s trumps represented the twenty-two letters of the Egyptian alphabet (which he saw as identical to Hebrew—this was before the decipherment of hieroglyphics) and were invented by Hermes Trismegistus, who was, of course, also Enoch, inscriber of the Pillars of Wisdom. Gébelin was a Freemason, so basing any interpretation of ancient history on his Masonic occultism becomes an exercise in circular reasoning.

According to Wolter, as summarized by Lutgen, if we “reassemble” the Masonic story of Hiram Abiff in the Select Master degree in chronological order, the sequence of numbers exactly follows that of KRS. It’s rather lengthy to quote the text in full, so I will instead link you to it. You have to love the internet—all of the secrets are somehow revealed, especially those in the public domain and no longer covered by copyright. Lutgen quotes selectively from the following passage as his example of confirmation of Wolter’s hypothesis. The quoted material is in boldface:

The ninth Arch was erected by our three Grand Masters as a place wherein to deposit a true copy of all the Holy Vessels and Sacred Treasures contain in the Sanctum Sanctorum above; also to meet in Grand Council to confer the Master Mason degree when the Temple should be completed. There were employed on the other eight Arches, twenty-two men from Gebal, a city of Phoenicia, together with Ahishar and Adoniram, all of whom were well skilled in the arts and sciences generally, but particularly in sculpture. Their hours of labor were from nine at night till twelve, the time when prying eyes are closed in sleep.

While the full text is much longer, it is notable for not containing several of the numbers from the KRS, notably 10 and 14. The numbers 1 and 2 are too common to ascribe any significance to, but both appear in both texts. Further, it should easily become apparent that while 8 and 22 appear in both places, several other numbers occur in the Masonic text but not on the KRS: 9, 3, 12. So how does Wolter plead for us to ignore these numbers? He argues that the KRS has 9 lines of text on the front and 3 on the side, so which add up to 12, thus matching the numbers from the story.

Wolter calls this the “Ritual Code” and argues that accepting the numerological importance of the KRS eliminates the need to interpret the text literally, and he says that there is now no reason to interpret it allegorically either. Under this new interpretation, the text is irrelevant except for the coded numbers. Unfortunately, Lutgen’s summary does not indicate how or if Wolter squared this with his earlier assertion that the translation of one particular phrase as “taking up land” (or “acquisition”) was essential to interpreting the KRS as a Templar land claim. Are the words relevant or not?

All told, there is much less to Wolter’s alleged correlation between the KRS and the Select Master degree than he implied. It might be the case that the numbers 8 and 22 were meant to reflect the Masonic numbers, but it isn’t necessarily so. The numbers aren’t exactly important to Masonry (the reference is to 8 of the 9 Arches, which is the important number), or rare. Here’s Daniel Defoe using the same numbers in Robinson Crusoe: “In the middle was another, not above twenty-two paces round, but built stronger; being eight-square in its form…” Prior to that, William Dampier, in his Voyage around the World, reported that on night in 1699 he measured “at Eight in the Evening, twenty-two” fathoms off the coast of New Guinea. Here’s a line from the Domesday Book of 1086 that includes four of Wolter’s numbers: “There are two ploughs in the demesne, and twenty-two villains with ten bondsmen have eight ploughs” (trans. Henshaw and Wilkinson).

Even Lutgen recognizes that the connection requires “speculation” in order to accept, but he says that Wolter has an explanation for any discrepancies: The two texts are not directly related to one another but instead both derive from a secret stream of occult numerology. “Therefore, he is claiming that both the KRS and the Masonic stories are actually derived from material available to a 14th century Cistercian monk.” Unfortunately, Lutgen adds that Wolter cannot provide a plausible path for this material to have arrived at its alleged end points. Lutgen further asks whether a Freemason of the nineteenth century could have been responsible for creating the KRS, and his only argument against that hypothesis is Wolter’s own geological work, which even he recognizes is not sufficiently conclusive.

68 Comments

Wim-v-d-s

5/18/2016 11:57:30 am

Scott Wolter should write fiction. In the field of science, he doesn't amount to much. This is another good example of speculation that's not firmly rooted in science. In this way, anybody can claim anything.

Clete

5/18/2016 12:24:27 pm

Please, do not accept that Scott Wolter could write even passable fiction. A good fiction author knows how to write and assemble ideas so as to make sense and produce something that people would want to read. Scott Wolter babbles on (both verbally and in print, see one of the prior posts about his presentation) beating his one and only real idea about the Kensington Rune Stones.

Only Me

5/18/2016 12:43:41 pm

Clete, your doubts only harden his resolve. Of course he's going to beat it!

Time Machine

5/18/2016 05:16:07 pm

Scott Wolter is not writing fiction but pseudo-history.
There is a difference between fiction and pseudo-history.

5/18/2016 05:18:29 pm

Snow much on "Know it all Mountain".

5/18/2016 12:07:06 pm

I'll be interested to see how the "Ritual Code" can also be applied to Wolter's inclusion of the Newport Tower, the other two of his "Big Three" rune stones and Oreo™ cookies. I mean, it's all interconnected and he has all the answers, right?

5/18/2016 05:12:54 pm

Joe Scales link

5/18/2016 01:58:21 pm

By Wolter's logic, or better put... lack thereof, one could conclude from his same points that the Kensington Rune Stone was a Masonic hoax.

For another review of this material Wolter recently presented at the prestigious Paradigm Symposium from a University of Minnesota professor's blog, see here:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/05/15/paradigmsymposium-scott-wolters-the-kensington-runestone-the-holy-grail-the-secret-treasure-vault-of-the-templars-and-the-founding-of-america/

I could sum it up for you as follows:

"... the speaker was so happily riding the clown train to silly town."

David Bradbury link

5/18/2016 03:10:54 pm

Yes, apart from the year of creation, Wolter has essentially arrived at the same conclusion I did after the finding of the Larsson papers a decade ago.

Unfortunately, the year of creation is what really matters in this case ...

5/18/2016 05:14:38 pm

The year of creation is what Scott Wolter says it is.
That's all that matters.

5/18/2016 07:36:50 pm

Interesting point. If I had been cocksure enough to get my own TV series, would my arguments become more valid?

Joe Scales

5/19/2016 11:31:08 am

I checked out your third way site Mr. Bradbury. One grave error is presupposing the 40 year age of the tree that allegedly grew over the KRS. When the phenomenon was investigated by Winchell's committee more than ten years after the fact, only one vague account had the trees at the location at 40 years growth. Most estimates had them between 10 to 30 years, with the more reliable at 10 years tops. The actual witnessing of the stone being discovered at the point when the tree was toppled was also vague. Ohman was there, but there is a question as to when the three others arrived (two of Ohman's very young children and a neighbor). Again, recollections were recorded more than ten years after the fact. Then you have the strong likelihood that if a tree grew over this stone in such a manner for forty years, the acids and CO2 from its roots would have broken it down to rubble; and at the very least would have worn down the runes carved in the calcite portion making them illegible.

David Bradbury

5/19/2016 02:50:26 pm

I only "presupposed" the 40-year age of the tree in the sense that there was an obviously relevant historical situation which would be consistent with the tree being up to 40 years old (but if the Stone was made around 1867 and buried beneath a tree which was easily moved, then we're probably looking at more like 33 years old).
As the Stone was face down, tree root damage to the inscription would be less of an issue, but of course it is indeed very notable that the lettering on the calcite is not significantly more eroded than the lettering on the greywacke, which makes 200+ year ages very unlikely indeed.
On the other hand, the witness reports that the roots were flattened where they had been in contact with the stone suggest that the tree had been growing over it for a reasonable amount of time, so we cannot confidently claim that Ohman had any witting part in the hoax.

5/20/2016 11:42:02 am

Once again, witness interviews were done over ten years after the alleged discovery. There were discrepancies in regard to the size of the roots and which ones went which way. Though there was an allegation of flattened roots, Winchell's conclusions in this regard were more like "no one was found... who questioned the flatness of the roots caused by long contact on the stone." Here's where an arborist might have helped them, because flattening of tree roots would have limited oxygen flow through them and the tree likely would not have grown to ten years, let alone forty.

No, the root issue was likely a fabrication imagined due to the root like appearance of branching stains on the stone itself; most likely caused by water flow long, long ago wherever this stone might have been situated. There was also at least one other fabled tale back in Europe predating the KRS discovery of such findings unearthed under tree roots as if to solidify authenticity.

Because the runes themselves have long been discredited as modern incarnations, you're not likely to find many to even bother challenging they myth of discovery itself. But it is clearly a hoax, on all levels.

5/20/2016 03:18:05 pm

But "back in Europe" lie the keys to the whole saga, because it was concocted by people who were at most a single generation from Scandinavia. We know the runes and numbers came from Sweden, and probably the version of Freemasonry too.

Annie Cloutier

5/18/2016 07:46:45 pm

Do any of you realize that S.Wolter joined Freemasons not too long ago, and he was in Attelboro Massachusetts at an open meeting inside Masonic Hall, selling his books with his wife, David Brody, British writer Alan B., Newport Tower Museum curator too.
I went to the lecture, Wolter also spoke at other Freemason closed meetings while he was in the general region. Business of selling books. It would not be allowed if S.Wolter shared any secrets in a publication. The Brothers should be cautious, and when reflection time comes around to judge if he should be allowed to continue the stages in Freemasonry, I hope they have both eyes opened.

Clint Knapp

5/19/2016 07:47:53 am

Yes, we are well aware Scott Wolter joined a local Masonic lodge in Minnesota. It's been covered on this blog before, and acknowledged more than once on Wolter's blog.

I believe the general consensus is that he thinks he's getting the secret keys to all his conspiracy theories, and downplaying the fact he's outright accused the Masons themselves of being part of said conspiracies in the past.

To me it reads as a secret desire to be one of the conspirators - a common theme in such individuals who trumpet their "findings" in hopes of getting noticed or proving themselves worthy of being the new-elite when the old-elite are ousted by their valiant efforts.

5/19/2016 11:20:36 am

There is no doubt that Wolter joined the Freemasons to further his fringe industry; the commercial nature of which is actually forbidden by the organization itself. But today's Masons are probably enamored and seduced by his distorted version of history, as if they're part of some secret circle above all. That's how he's getting away with such an otherwise obvious commercial ploy.

The Freemasons advertise on local radio for membership these days. I would strongly suspect that truly mysterious, secret societies don't have such tactics in their playbooks in recruiting new members. Embracing Wolter is only evidence of their decline.

JJR

5/19/2016 05:13:45 pm

Joe Scales - Much as I think that you've hit the nail on the head regarding Mr. Wolter's interest in becoming a Freemason, I don't think it's fair to characterize contemporary Masons so broadly. We heard, for example, firsthand evidence from a Minnesota Mason just a few weeks ago that Mr. Wolter's ideas have generated real tension in the Lodges of Minnesota:

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/scott-wolter-in-radio-interview-sphinx-dates-to-10000-bce-pirate-culture-valued-lead-more-than-silver.

5/20/2016 07:57:04 am

A very astute observation by the Bothers of Freemasonry.
The purpose of review and the work of the Freemasons is pretty clear for anyone who ask to join. or did he get invited by one ?

5/20/2016 11:48:59 am

JJR, that's just my read on human nature. Wolter has already clearly demonstrated untoward commercial ambitions through his membership, both in writing and action, which never would have been tolerated in the past. Of course this is abhorrent to some members, yet it is so far being allowed by others. This to me acts to discredit the organization. Wolter is a fraud.

Not Sancho

5/23/2016 01:34:50 pm

@Clint Knapp: You are right on all counts on this. I've sat in tyled (closed) Masonic meetings with Wolter and have been a part of several discussions with him about Masonry, including his odd interpretation of the numerology Jason posted about on May 18.
I also made the previous comment linked to by JJR.

It's really getting quite out of hand here in Minnesota. He was not "invited" to join the Craft in the usual sense of the word. We have a strict prohibition against blatantly asking someone to join, but like many rules, people work around it with a wink-wink-nudge. Wolter avoided joining for years while working on AE, He claims that he did so as to give the appearance of objectivity in his "research."

He later decided that he wanted to join, and that's all it took. One particular friend who is a Mason put on the Masonic Booster Pack and absolutely fell all over himself getting Wolter into lodge (Wayzata Lodge #205, Wayzata, MN) and the York Rite bodies. He is also a Scottish Rite Mason.

He still has his fanboys, but the initial shine has worn off. New Guy Wolter the TV Star is now just another guy who will bend your ear at meetings about what he thinks is right. He likes to play I Know More Than You About Masonry and Look at What I Read, and in us Masons, he will never run out of willing players.

Most of us now just blow him off, except his fanboys who would rather have Masonic interpretation spoon-fed to them than think for themselves.

Frank Johnson

5/18/2016 09:54:37 pm

Maybe natgeo can hire you and I to debunk the ancient astronauts claims. We can do a show together.

Jerry Lutgen

5/18/2016 11:21:23 pm

Jason, you wrote: "According to Wolter, as summarized by Lutgen, if we “reassemble” the KRS story in chronological order, the sequence of numbers exactly follows that of the Masonic legend of Hiram Abiff in the Select Master degree."

What I actually wrote was: "Wolter observed that when this story is reassembled in chronological order that there are eight numbers in the Hiram Abiff story that appear in exactly the same sequence as they appear on the KRS. Wolter reasons that this eight number sequential match cannot possibly be a coincidence and it is proof that there is a deep connection between the KRS and this Masonic ritual material."

It is the Masonic story that needs to be reassembled in chronological order not the KRS story. This matters a great deal when you set about to determine if there is a match between the KRS and the Masonic material.

David Brody

5/19/2016 09:54:26 am

Jerry, if you've come here expecting any kind of journalistic integrity, I'm afraid you will be disappointed. Jason has a clear agenda--he is a debunker. As such, he is not above misquoting, parsing, twisting, etc. This is not a site for a fair and open discussion (though, to be honest, I have recently been treated fairly and with courtesy here). This is a site where people gather to, again, debunk. They are free to do so, though I wish Jason were more transparent in his agenda rather than couching himself as some kind of investigative journalist searching for the truth.

Gunn Sinclair (aka Bob Voyles) link

5/19/2016 11:53:30 am

May I reenter this notorious venue only to suggest that it is my own learned opinion that the inscription on the Kensington Runestone is certainly not the result of medieval numerology?

Peace, everyone.

I have recently proven that a portion, at least, of the KRS message is absolutely true...that being the part about the party of men being camped a day's journey north of Runestone Hill, by a lake with two skerries. The so-called Erdahl Axe was found like a time-capsule on the west bank of Davidson Lake in 1894. A widow's affidavit (original landowner) confirms that the iron medieval Norse weapon was found a foot and a half deep under a two-foot stump a few rods from a pool of water. This puts the location of the discovery at an exact spot on the slightly elevated west bank of the aforementioned lake, which is the uppermost lake in a series of lakes originating off the Chippewa River...the same river the men used to venture up past Runestone Hill.

With a bit of difficulty, I got the Minnesota Historical Society to accept my findings into their KRS-related archives.

Therefore, it now grieves me to see the KRS being reduced down to medieval numerology. I have taken a lot of time to prove that a part of the inscription on the KRS is absolutely true. The presence of the Erdahl Axe on the west bank of a lake with two skerries a day's journey from Runestone Hill proves that Norse men were camped there, and the axe also suggests that a struggle may have taken place, especially when combined with the history of the nearby Brandon Axe.

I have openly debated this issue with Scott on his website, and he has been very cordial to me, in allowing me to rant on and on about stoneholes. Well, as a friend in nearby South Dakota likes to say, "These stoneholes have stories to tell." Indeed.

The stoneholes are telling me that evidence of a large land claim are at hand and easy to behold, but that the land claim is not featured by the KRS. Rather, a stonehole code-stone I discovered last year seems to be indicating that something related to medieval surveying and attempted land claiming is currently buried on a lonely ridge near Appleton, MN. Both the code-stone and modern technology (ferrous metal detector) indicate that something is buried there, precisely where the Pomme de Terre River discharges into the Minnesota River. (The Pomme de Terre reaches farthest north in to the MN River watershed.)

I am at a loss at getting any official, professional help from the State of MN in this matter, even though the discovery site of the Norse Code-stone is on State land...of course, because the "party line" is that no Europeans were in this region before the 1600's French.

Maybe Jason can help. I guess Scott couldn't, and the State of Minnesota can't. Basically, everyone seems to be constipated.

- Gunn

5/19/2016 03:01:33 pm

Has the claim that the Erdahl Axe had the mark of a manufacturer near Versailles, France, c1800, been debunked?

Mark L

5/20/2016 05:50:00 am

Would you say that if a disinterested observer read everything you've put online in, say, the last year, they'd think you might be guilty of "having a clear agenda" too?

5/20/2016 07:13:21 am

Hi Gunn.

Just one thing: did you ever actually find proof that a bunch of randomly placed holes in rocks are indeed a verified medieval Norse method of claiming land? Or are we still backforming this "code" from cherrypicked examples and ignoring the blasting hole bore hypothesis?

Gunn link

5/23/2016 10:16:41 am

From David Bradbury: "Has the claim that the Erdahl Axe had the mark of a manufacturer near Versailles, France, c1800, been debunked?"

Yes, David. I have personally found photos online of Scandinavian axe-heads like the Erdahl Axe. The nearby-found Brandon Axe is very similar, also. The axes are not of "modern" French design. I have seen this same mark on the Erdahl Axe on another Scandinavian axe, but in multiple markings.

The Erdahl Axe was discovered in 1894, even before the Kensington Runestone, by the original settler-landowner. An affidavit accompanied the axe...an affidavit signed by an old lady who had no more interest in fabricating a lie than our dear friend, Olof Ohman. (Such mistreatment to a person's memory is rather deplorable, I'd say.)

David, the Erdahl Axe was discovered very much like a time-capsule near pools of fresh water on the slightly elevated west bank of a lake having two skerries (Davidson Lake), about a day's actual journey north of Runestone Hill, as described in detail in the message inscribed on KRS--which in turn was discovered in 1898, four years after the Erdahl Axe was discovered beneath a stump two feet in diameter.

To Mark L: Yes Mark, I have a clear agenda. Simply put, it is to attempt to locate evidences related to medieval Norse exploration in the Dakota/Minnesota regions, and to turn the results over to professional archaeologists. My task-oriented agenda has paid off handsomely, in that I have been blessed by God Almighty in recently finding the "Norse Code-stone," which shows in miniature an arrangement of stonehole rocks concealing something on a nearby ridge.

In effect, my severe interest in medieval stoneholes has translated into a "miracle of discovery," for the ultimate purpose of God receiving glory.

(Some readers here may recall that I used to have an OCD-like interest in medieval Norse stoneholes...I still do.)

Hi Clint: Your question and questioning can best be answered by reading this article I wrote a few months ago for the Norwegian-American Weekly (now the Norwegian American). You will come away highly enlightened and completely updated about stoneholes...always a wonderful topic of discussion.

http://www.norwegianamerican.com/featured/in-defense-of-the-kensington-runestone-stoneholes/

- Gunn

5/23/2016 02:26:23 pm

"Such mistreatment to a person's memory is rather deplorable, I'd say"
What mistreatment? Mrs Davidson's affidavit related only to the circumstances of the finding, not to the age of the axe, which she could not possibly have known except by inference from the diameter of the tree-stump under which it was found (useless information without knowing the species of the tree).

Jason Colavito link

5/19/2016 12:03:12 pm

Thank you for pointing out that I wrote the sentence backward. I have rewritten it to correct the error. David Brody may think I intentionally falsify material, but I do take seriously making sure that I summarize material as accurately as possible. That said, the mistake in how I wrote the sentence (it was a writing error, not a reading error) does not change my conclusion that the numbers do not imply the existence of a secret conspiracy dating back to ancient Egypt. Brody may fume about my skepticism, but he offers no argument for why we should suspect those numbers had any meaning before Freemasonry gave them one.

5/19/2016 12:41:13 pm

Jason, I would appreciate you answering a simple question, which I believe proves my point: When you first read Jerry Lutgen's summary of Scott Wolter's theory, was your first reaction (a) Wow, what an interesting theory, I wonder if he's on to something? or (b) I can't wait to knock this one down!

If the former, then I owe you an apology.

5/19/2016 02:43:14 pm

There is no inherent contradiction between thinking something a good story and concluding that it cannot be true. The medieval Arabic pyramid myth is a very interesting story, but also utterly untrue. This particular story managed to be both untrue and uninteresting.

I didn't find it interesting because the evidence presented did not make a prima facie case. Even if you accept everything at face value, it doesn't add up to the conclusions claimed for it.

Even if you did believe it, it's uninteresting except to Freemason conspiracy obsessives since the "ritual code" rejects the plain meaning the KRS as well as most of the fringe history that rose up around it in favor of an obscure Egyptian-Jewish Kabbalistic occultism; in short, it would make the rune stone less interesting, not more, for being just another piece of useless symbolism. Proto-Freemasons traveled all the way to Minnesota in 1362 (if we could even believe that, since the inscription, Wolter says, isn't literally true) just to write magic numbers on a rock? That's much less interesting that Vinlanders suffering some obscure fate on an expedition.

Steve StC

5/20/2016 12:26:34 am

Colavito wrote, “David Brody may think I intentionally falsify material,…”

Not just David, Colavito, but any careful reader and non-acolyte of your tripe. You openly falsify and mis-quote others - and you do it deliberately to do damage and drive your agenda. Any honest researchers who has been smeared by you will back me up. You openly lie when it supports your agenda.

A perfect example is just one of many which your less lazy acolytes can examine for themselves at the link below, if they have the energy, from 3/29/2013 -

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/thomas-sinclairs-wildly-racist-claim-for-henry-sinclairs-discovery-of-america

In your “critique” of my Sinclair DNA website http://www.StClairResearch.com, I had to correct an outright lie of yours -
______________________________

The Second factual inaccuracy - in your post's first paragraph, you state "Despite his denials, his website states that he has had “no choice” but to investigate whether Native Americans intermarried with the Knights Templar and thus inherited Sinclair DNA."

This is a lie Jason. Show me where I wrote that the Native Americans intermarried with the Knights Templar. I don't buy that the Knights Templar were in North America. It makes me question whether you're not capable of understanding the details of what you're reading, or whether your agenda so clouds your view that you're openly willing to lie to your readers. Only you can answer that.
_______________________________

What followed was your usual squirming and the expected pile-on of your salivating acolytes. I feel it necessary to occasionally come on here to correct your sanctimonious statements such as, some “…may think I intentionally falsify material, but I do take seriously making sure that I summarize material as accurately as possible.”

Bull Crap !!

I openly accuse you of precisely the opposite Colavito. I accuse you of purposefully lying (telling or containing lies; deliberately untruthful; deceitful; false: a lying report. Synonyms: deceptive, misleading, mendacious, fallacious; sham).

You have a history of intentionally falsifying material, intentionally mis-quoting websites, and purposefully misleading your acolytes who are too lazy and agenda-driven to fact check you.

5/20/2016 12:32:13 am

And now the man (or more likely, woman) nicknamed Only Me will be among the first to pile on, defending his/her lovely Colavito with incredibly weak arguments or mere smears.

5/20/2016 01:07:57 am

Steve, disagreeing with you doesn't constitute a "pile on", except in your world. Don't concern yourself overly much with my gender; your obsession with fecal sandwiches is weird enough.

I don't need to defend Jason as your example is the embodiment of a weak argument. You never did provide a satisfactory answer, so all you've done since is to occasionally drop by to deliver nothing but smears.

But don't let me stop you from being wrong. I think you have quite the talent for being wrong. In fact, I'll bet you've spent most of your life being wrong, and will continue doing so.

5/20/2016 06:17:47 am

Dammit, given away my gender with my username! Ah well.

I feel bad for you, Steve. You treat what should be an attempt to discover the truth as a game of sophistry - look, a misplaced word! That invalidates every criticism against you!

5/20/2016 10:27:31 pm

Mark L (or whoever you are), you are precisely the kind of acolyte Colavito loves. You can easily look at the link I put in the comment above, and then go look at the page Colavito is “quoting” and then you will understand that he put a statement from my website in quotes and THEN added words to it. Mark, separate yourself from your desire to fit in here and look at the facts. Jason Colavito knowingly lied and added information within those quotes to fit his agenda.

Colavito wrote, “David Brody may think I intentionally falsify material,…”

Yes, Colavito, you definitely do precisely that, with the loving embrace of your acolytes.

As to the princess “Only Me” or whoever you are, who wrote, “You never did provide a satisfactory answer…” Clearly you are delusional. Read my comments at the link above and read your comment. You are a waste of oxygen. Colavito clearly lied about what he found at my website to suit his own agenda and you - you willing slobbering acolyte - are an enabler.

5/20/2016 10:44:26 pm

I read the conversation when it happened. Time has changed nothing; you failed to provide an answer.

Oh, and remind me again how much you detest "weak arguments" and "mere smears" so I can understand how your use of them isn't hypocritical. While you're at it, also explain how your uncritical acceptance and defense of Wolter's revisionist history doesn't make *you* an enabler, and therefore, a hypocrite.

5/21/2016 11:25:36 am

Princess Only Me, have you ever won and argument? Everything you’ve said is to duck and dodge my point which I’ll repeat the critical parts here to save you the exertion of scrolling up to read it:
_______________________

Colavito wrote, “David Brody may think I intentionally falsify material,…”

Not just David, Colavito, but any careful reader and non-acolyte of your tripe.

In your “critique” of my Sinclair DNA website http://www.StClairResearch.com, I had to correct an outright lie of yours -

The Second factual inaccuracy - in your post's first paragraph, you state "Despite his denials, his website states that he has had “no choice” but to investigate whether Native Americans intermarried with the Knights Templar and thus inherited Sinclair DNA."

This is a lie Jason. Show me where I wrote that the Native Americans intermarried with the Knights Templar.
_______________________

Colavito was attempting to defend himself from others who think he might “intentionally falsify material.”

I accused him of precisely that and I stand by my accusation.

In your response, Princess, you did nothing to protect the one you adore. You merely attempted to distract.

5/21/2016 12:38:12 pm

I think you'll find the key is the word "whether".

5/21/2016 03:39:20 pm

"Princess Only Me, have you ever won and argument?"

Numerous times. By the way, the word should be "an" not "and". According to your style, that error has immediately discredited the rest of your "argument".

"Everything you’ve said is to duck and dodge my point"

I've actually addressed it, twice. I've said you're wrong and haven't provided a satisfactory answer to the original point Jason made.

"I stand by my accusation"

And I stand by my opinion you're wrong.

"In your response, Princess, you did nothing to protect the one you adore. You merely attempted to distract."

Do you have any capacity for understanding irony? I don't need to protect Jason. You, however, have an all-consuming need to defend Wolter, which includes attacks on Jason and the regular commenters to this blog. You claim I'm avoiding your point, yet, you have purposefully avoided mine.

When you're done attempting to protect the one you adore through distraction, ask yourself: Why can't I stop projecting my own flaws onto other people who disagree with me?

Killbuck

5/18/2016 11:45:39 pm

Once more I must draw upon my savior in these dark times, Douglas Adams and quote the last thought of the bowl of petunias as it fell into Earth's atmosphere....

"Oh no, not again."

Term paper help link

5/19/2016 05:56:31 am

Generate exciting adventures that we wish to be true!

5/19/2016 10:23:11 am

Jason, I've got a question for you: what do you think is the weirdest and/or most interesting fringe theory you've ever heard?

Kal

5/19/2016 02:49:10 pm

This is the first time I've heard of there being some kind of axe, but it is not related.

The KRS is utterly a forgery fake by a local Minnesota farmer who wanted people to visit his old tree and his property for profit, perhaps an early SW.

So that makes all this number mumbo jumbo just that, fake too.

The KRS is similar to a holy relic in a way, and surely modern colonial people descended from Vikings who live there now would want to capitalize on a viking find on their land.

They are acting like it's some great mystery that some Norsemen inhabit Minnesota. Ugh, duh. It's not. We all know from actual history that Vikings made it there. It's therefore not a mystery. Later on they settled there. Much later on.

The tree would have indeed destroyed the inscription if it was from the 1300s, but if it was actually from the 1800s, it still could be intact.

The last part of the obvious faked and backward runes, tip them all sideways, indicates the signature of the landowner, from the time when it was faked.

SW isn't being given secret knowledge from the Masons. They find him a joke and wish he would stop coming to their meetings peddling his insane books.

5/23/2016 11:38:08 pm

...no...no, sweetie. No VIKINGS ever reached Minnesota. For one, "viking" was a verb that meant "raider," and the Viking era ended WELL before the 1300s, so even the KRS doesn't support that VIKINGS made it to Minnesota. And SCANDINAVIANS didn't reach there until well after the colonization from Europe, either, so far as we have proof. It is, after all, nearly 3,000 miles from the only known pre-Columbian settlements of Scandinavians to Minnesota. 3,000 miles that is mostly moving INLAND, away from the ocean that was the primary source of transportation and food for that culture. NOT likely to have been something they did BEFORE colonizing the rest of the coastal areas. And DEFINITELY not somewhere they went to wage piracy on the high seas while viking.

5/20/2016 08:51:17 am

At the Freemason lecture in Atteboro, Massachsuetts that David Brody was one of the numerous speakers his own words will come back to haunt him.
Brody introduces himself to crowd by saying right up front... "I am a lawyer, we don't care about the truth" hahahaha then he carried on about his newest book to sell. He and Scott Wolter are great pals.
I really enjoyed the British speaker Alan Butler ,his research has great depth

5/20/2016 10:26:02 am

A lawyer joke, Annie. I thought that was something everyone could appreciate. "Come back to haunt" me? A joke? Really? This is too silly for words...

5/20/2016 12:07:06 pm

I can't imagine anyone falling for Wolter's flawed historical pronouncements and serial fallacious reasoning to ever have passed a state bar exam.

5/20/2016 12:22:15 pm

Perhaps, Joe, it is time to expand your imagination.

For the record, I concur with much of Scott Wolter's research, but not all of it.

5/20/2016 01:42:30 pm

Which state bar(s) was it then? Could you also clarify what you do concur with. How about the Pirate Treasure of the Knights Templar television show? Was that convincing for you? Or any episode of America Unearthed. Would it be easier to state which episodes swayed you, or which ones did not?

5/20/2016 02:21:28 pm

Joe, I graduated Georgetown Law in 1987, passed the Massachusetts bar that same year, have been practicing law in Mass. ever since. Not sure I want to give out much more personal info on a site where many people don't even use their real names.

Generally speaking, and in haste, I am most swayed by Scott's geological work on artifacts such as the Kensington Rune Stone, the Bat Creek Stone, and the Tucson Lead Artifacts....

5/21/2016 11:26:55 am

Well then, please accept my belated congratulations for such accomplishments. No small feat there. Take comfort then that I do not consider you to be a complete imbecile, but instead a willing coconspirator to the poisoning of the well of knowledge; and all for pure profit from those unfortunate to posses the former qualification. History on the other hand, will not be so kind given the sort of record you are leaving behind.

5/21/2016 12:14:50 pm

It must be nice, Joe, to live in your world. Everything is so black and white, good and evil, right and wrong. The world I live in is more nuanced. What you call poisoning I think of as open-minded questioning. Some of our history will turn out to be correct, other aspects will need to be rewritten. It has always been so. I am truly sorry if this seems threatening to you.

5/21/2016 01:05:06 pm

Please Mr. Brody. Spare me such characterizations. If you wish to truly have a rational discussion, then let me summarize what we have so far. You claim to be convinced of Mr. Wolter's scientific take on objects long found to be modern day hoaxes by those with vastly superior academic credentials. I'm all for open-mindedness when it comes to questioning history, but rationality must prevail. Wolter's scientific work has not been peer reviewed nor submitted to scientific academic journals. Instead it is self-published and for sale. I could walk you through the slipshod methodology, the fallacious reasoning and suspect conclusions, but given your legal training, I believe it to be a given that you already know this to be true. That is why I see you as a co-conspirator in this regard. If you were simply a legal advocate, it could be excused and even understood on my part. However, you've gone beyond this. So I don't know who you are bothering to appeal to at this point with your posturing.

5/21/2016 01:16:07 pm

Joe, I don't wish for this to turn personal. We have an honest difference of opinion: I find much of Wolter's scientific work to be compelling, you believe it to be slipshod. I very much doubt either of us will have any luck convincing the other otherwise, so I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Have a nice weekend.

5/22/2016 07:39:01 am

Let's be clear: Wolter's scientific work is geology - not the bullshit he spews on television about Templars, his KRS fantasies, and Jesus Bloodline rants.

However, Wolter himself has proven even his geological work to be slipshod at best, and fraudulent at worst. Reference: The case of Albert H. Petersen vs. Scott Wolter, where Wolter either failed to recognize the difference between two entirely different agates OR willfully misrepresented one as the other to defraud Albert Petersen of a $2,000 rock.

Summary here: http://www.jasoncolavito.com/scott-wolter-lawsuit.html

So... what scientific work of his can really be all that compelling if he fails to even perform to the standards of his actual education?

5/22/2016 08:28:25 pm

Clint:

Regarding Scott's geological work/qualifications:

1. In 2007 the Minnesota Society of Professional Engineers (not sure if I have this name exactly correct) awarded him a prize for excellence for his work on the Kensington Rune Stone.

2. After the 9/11 attacks the Pentagon flew him in from Minnesota to be part of the team to determine whether the foundation of the Pentagon building could be salvaged.

I think even his critics recognize he is a respected geologist. That's why the museum in Minnesota first retained him to examine the Kensington Rune Stone.

5/22/2016 10:59:55 pm

I do hope Clint doesn't mind if I step back in here for a bit Mr. Brody. Though I'm certain one can take great pride in an award from a local civic association, I don't see the MSPC as having the final say on the validity of claimed historical artifacts. Now as to the 9/11 Pentagon study, I did hear that Mr. Wolter was consulted due to his expertise with the structural integrity of building materials. Again, a far cry from competency when dabbling in matters of history, archaeology, anthropology and linguistics.

As an attorney Mr. Brody, I'm certain you're familiar with the Daubert standard for scientific expert testimony. Though Mr. Wolter might pass as an expert at trial on matters of concrete construction, when it comes to his scientific work on the Bat Creek Stone, Kensington Rune Stone and Tucson Lead Artifacts, you must admit... though you personally are swayed... that a court of law would never let him testify as an expert witness in their regard. No, the Daubert standard relies upon such technicalities as peer review and falsifiability for reliability; qualifications Mr. Wolter has never met with his extracurricular endeavors. Unfortunately, As an attorney, you know this to be true. Besides, who would bother to attempt to put an expert witness on the stand who to this day maintains that a hunk of lead is silver treasure. Geology be damned...

Norene Doster link

5/20/2016 11:28:42 am

Give me a break. It's over! You are much too intelligent and creative to continue to rant and rave about Scott Wolter. His TV show is cancelled. Get another topic. How about Curse of Oak Island?

5/20/2016 11:58:16 am

Visit Richard Joltes' site for all you need to know in regard to debunking Oak Island:

http://www.criticalenquiry.org/oakisland/index.shtml

D. Euga

5/22/2016 09:42:01 am

Having met Scott Walther and listened to several of his lectures, I find him to be one of the 21st Century classic hucksters. At this point of human evolution and science, I don't think anyone doubts the pre-Colombian presence of European discovery and exploration of North America.
As a Mason, I respect the history (known and unknown) and spiritual foundations of what it means to be a Mason. Secrets and traditions of the Brotherhood should remain as such and the coincidences of discoveries in the New World be presented as informed conjecture and not "fact derived from compelling assumptions". Yes, opinion has shaped much of the world that we live in. Opinion is vastly different from inspiration. Inspiration is the basis for creativity whereas opinion is divisive and can lead the easily persuaded into revolution. What Scott Wolter has written seems to me to be expanded animation of selected discoveries that have been used as the basis creative thought thereby providing some enlightened entertainment.
Ancient Masonic history is clouded in mystery for a reason (or many reasons). It is much more important to live a life based on the values and standards that a Mason is "charged" with when he is made a Mason rather than continuing to reach back in history trying to find the final resting place of the twelve galleons of gold. Yes Mr. Wolther, you should be writing fiction.

5/22/2016 10:59:19 pm

I came across this about qualifications of a Forensic Geologist, I was very surprised it was from "How to become a Forensic Scientist" CSI work needs Masters, but....
While there is no specific education and training that is required in order to work as a forensic geologist, you sure need to hold a degree in the field of forensic sciences in order to qualify as a forensic geologists. Basic degrees like diplomas and certifications can qualify you for entry-level positions while higher education degrees like bachelor's, master's and doctorates are required in order to get better positions within the field of forensic science.

5/23/2016 03:28:41 pm

And for those that wish to see what a real Forensic Geologist looks like (rather than someone who plays one on TV), see here:

http://forensicgeology.net/