[marron]

Your reference to eskimo attack implies that the Vikings were entitled to displace the local population (if any) and, reflects a strictly Viking/European view. A more balanced view would be "eskimos repelling an invader".

Whatever.

Actually, I did not pass judgement on the merits of an Eskimo attack, since I was not there, and there are no records to describe any conflict between them. But if memory serves, the Eskimos were not present when the Vikings arrived, but migrated in from the north later. If I am mistaken, I invite correction. (Thats what I love about this website; mess up and someone is bound to set you straight).

Studies of Eskimo linguistics suggest that they spread from Siberia, across the Americas, to Greenland, and then later began a reverse migration westward, back across the Americas, and ultimately back to Siberia. The Siberian eskimos of today are direct descendents of Alaskan eskimos that migrated there in the twenties. Again, if memory serves.

Eskimo culture fascinates me.

[WhoisAlanGreenspan?]

Okay, I don't want to get into the horrible war between the eskimos and the vikings, but on the subject of global warming...
Does anyone remember this oldie but goodie? Sea level rise You know the story, as the earth warms the ice caps...bla bla bla.
More evidence as far as I'm concerned that the debate about the existance of global warming is political and not scientific. And that no scientific evidence to the contrary, (tree rings, sea level) is allowed.

[bert]

.....Thats what I love about this website.....

As a pretty fair student of world history, I must confess my failing and debt to FR for enlightening me on the previously unknown notion that there was even the possibility of war between Vikings and Eskimos.

We live, We learn....