When you put it like that, "just to please the Archaeologists" it sounds stupid, I know. But I DO think you're postulating something totally different from previous thinking (not for the first time!) so they'll be reluctant to accept it. The thing is, with stone rowing they can see there's no equally efficient method. But with this they've got an option to "prefer" what they've previously believed.
Anyway, truth to tell, it's not just them, it's me. I just feel "it's leaning so let's pull it up" is a natural reaction and would have formed at least part of their thinking.
It's a bit like head-butting really. You could demonstrate it works, and I'd pay to watch, but it wouldn't convince me it was the most likely method for non-chippies.
 Reply | with quote | Posted by nigelswift
31st August 2003ce
12:32 |
Stone Shifting 2 (nigelswift, Aug 26, 2003, 17:00)- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (Jane, Aug 26, 2003, 17:16)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (Steve Gray, Aug 26, 2003, 17:46)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (GordonP, Aug 26, 2003, 20:44)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (FourWinds, Aug 27, 2003, 11:24)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (nigelswift, Aug 29, 2003, 09:10)
- Steve's idea to fix a pivot log under the stone (nigelswift, Aug 30, 2003, 08:24)
- Which Method? (nigelswift, Aug 31, 2003, 07:09)
- Pi in the sky (baza, Aug 31, 2003, 17:44)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (jimit, Sep 01, 2003, 19:39)
|
|
Head To Head 
Re: Which Method? (GordonP)