Do you know how they work?

close
more_vert
FourWinds F
FourWinds Aug 20, 2007 13:12:26
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
FourWinds wrote:
nigelswift wrote:
I suspect leylines in terms of visually based long-distance routes will one day make a comeback into respectability. They make such practical sense.
Basically Watkins stuff , difficulties arise at coasts ,very steep cliffs ,rivers ,lochs etc . Animals and people who work and spend time getting from A-B outdoors only ever go in straight lines when the going is exceptional , flat and nothing in the way , generally they follow the easy route keeping contours to a minimum and avoiding difficulties .
Yes. That's why it's a theory. It's not proven and it's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. You see, Watkins missed a few tricks.

However, in a very wooded land, could you have seen the lowland route around contours? Could you navigate around a hill from in a forest? If you could see up to a high marker that you knew pointed to a safe pass through the hills wouldn't you take it?

If you were fit because you worked outside, walked everywhere anyway, and could climb a hill without needing to stop every 10 vertical metres for a fag (like I do) wouldn't it be easier to go up and over if you knew it to be safe rather than around?

I'm not in a position to say. I doubt many folk are today.

As a total aside, but related to all this in a way ... It's silly how some folk will accept one theory, i.e. Darwinian Evolution, and ignore the the gaps in Darwin's version of it, and then totally dismiss another theory because of a gap that could be relatively smaller than the Darwin-theory gap. It's all down to what you've been taught and told is fact I suppose.

T tiompan
tiompan Aug 20, 2007 13:24:19
Replying to FourWinds

FourWinds wrote:
.
Watkins missed a few tricks.

Also mixed his markers from widely differing periods .


If you were fit because you worked outside, walked everywhere anyway, and could climb a hill without needing to stop every 10 vertical metres for a fag (like I do) wouldn't it be easier to go up and over if you knew it to be safe rather than around?

The fittest and pro's don't do that though ,they still zig zag keeping an even rate , even deer do it unless they are fleeing for their lives and then they can only manage so much .


As a total aside, but related to all this in a way ... It's silly how some folk will accept one theory, i.e. Darwinian Evolution, and ignore the the gaps in Darwin's version of it, and then totally dismiss another theory because of a gap that could be relatively smaller than the Darwin-theory gap. It's all down to what you've been taught and told is fact I suppose.

We are lazy and go for the sound bite that's how science and religion can get away with a lot of blethers , at least science gets caught eventually .[/quote]