A number of things.

1. Is the translation of the stone agreed upon whether fake or real? That is separate from the new calligraphy research. Is it agreed that the stone says they came from the north?

2. Your geography requires a prior knowledge of the area. Miss a river and you are in portage to the black hole.

3. The supposed description of the rear area base makes sense. it also highlights lanse meadows. A central larger station for going inland south and east as well as west and south.

4. In regards to Roxana's comments she is right. If the stone is real then the extensiveness of the Norse incursions were much larger than expected. She is wrong about the evidence would already show this. When one is not looking because it is assumed there is nothing there evidence will also be missing.

5. A possible larger picture view. Climate is part of this story. It is assumed that the Norse areas always looked like they do now. Climate as opposed to weather is much larger. The climate of Mesoamerica is considered a primary reason for the failure of the mayan areas. HEAT. At the same time the north was verdant. And it might be the real reason for the northwest passage legend. The survivability in the north country would have increased measurably. That and vinland would not have been as attractive as it was similar to the northern NA areas. The onset of cold and the little ice age would have eliminated much of any norse presence.

6. Speculation is always more fun than skepticism.

As I mentioned in a previous post. The dismissal of the Canadian archaeologist makes me uncomfortable. Too close to the Virginia scenarion