I'd say I fall into the third camp - an intelligent observer. And from
what I've read it seems to me that an intelligent observer not blinded
by wishful thinking would grasp that specialists know what they're
talking about when they say this ain't no duck. If it doesn't resemble
any known Viking axe head then why waste money on testing it? The money
would be better spent on testing where there are real questions.
> So I think that a case can be made for chemical and/or physical
> testing when an object like this axe goes public. After all, the
> archaeological experts can only improve their reputations and the
> outcome will discourage extravagant claims about future discoveries
> (says he, hopefully).
> Richard Wright