76
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 56:
Line 56: + + + +
→Why isn't this article being reverted?: new section
::::Fair enough, you're the historian. --[[User:Toffeeman|Toffeeman]] 12:23, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
::::Fair enough, you're the historian. --[[User:Toffeeman|Toffeeman]] 12:23, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
== Why isn't this article being reverted? ==
Does anybody else find it strange that once it was pointed out that Leif Ericson was a christian Schlafy sort of gave up on his claims that there was no real evidence for the settlement? What happened to Schlafy's claims that there was only a tiny amount of evidence and what little there was could be explained by other means?