close
more_vert

nigelswift wrote:
I'd be interested to know if there are any genuinely accurate alignments of 3 or more prehistoric sites that don't have direct line-of-sight explanations
So , what did you think of the three examples ?

I would like to know what else is on the lines in question with some examples. If I remember rightly, yours are over such a long distance that they can't be anything other than coincidence.There must be hundreds of monuments between them and around them that making a line would be easy. Take a four sheets of A4 and tape them together. cover them with 500 randomly placed dots. I'm sure you'll get several straight lines with three points on it.

With smaller distances it would be possible for a few sites to be built between a celestial event and a landscape feature. Whether the landscape feature was behind the monuments or in front of them, all three monuments would be on a straight line, even though they may not be inter-visible. This could be by coincidence or design, but either way it's nothing to do with energy lines etc.

tiompan wrote:
nigelswift wrote:
I'd be interested to know if there are any genuinely accurate alignments of 3 or more prehistoric sites that don't have direct line-of-sight explanations
So , what did you think of the three examples ?
Bump , all examples as mentioned previously have 10 figure co-ordinates , variables like earth curvature are taken into count and any error bigger than the diameter of the smallest monument discounts the line .