The Þurisaz rune is not the god Thor rune

The Þurisaz rune is not the god Thor rune
As I have pointed out, there are two forms of the thurisaz rune, one with a point we call angular, , the other rounded . Both are equally frequent between CE200 and CE700.
Old Norse Þórr (Swedish Tor); cognate with Old English þunor
Finnish: Thor, Tor (1)
German: Donar (1, West Germanic); Thor (1, 2)
Slovak: Perún m (1)
Swedish: Tor (1,2)
Icelandic Þór : Short form of Old Norse names beginning with the element (which refers to the god Thor).
Thur is a corruption of Middle-English thuner (thunder) any confusion with Thor, which had the same sense. ME þurs-day, from Anglo-Saxon þunres + dæg (thunder + day). Þurs on the other hand is Old Norse word referring to giants. Whilst giants fall into different classes (frost giants and fire giants), it cannot be said that Nordic God Thor is necessarily a Þurs. Surely this is highly speculative?
Cognate: Thurse (in German and French) the name for giants of the frost, (and not cognate to the name of the God Thor!). Runic inscriptions of the Viking Age bear the name of Thor written as ‘Thur’ while the one of the Giants is ‘Thurs’. This helps us understand why some confusion could happen. De Vries’ etymological dictionary of Old Icelandic confirms this very neatly.
It has been my personal belief for some time now based on my research of the subject matter that no singular rune is any more effective magically (assuming that one believes in magic) than any other rune. This is down to the users understanding of the rune and the way the runes have been arranged to effect a change (wish). In its simplest form, this is likened to a wish expressed in runes and again based on the evidence we have discerned from archaeological sources, my money is on two or more runes to cause an “effect” in this reality.