|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Trethevy Quoit Forum | Start a topic | Search |
391 messages | Select a forum: |
Sanctuary wrote: tiompan wrote: thesweetcheat wrote: I'm not offended, but if you don't want to discuss the points, then this isn't a discussion! I'm not so sure it is a discussion . I have made quite a few points lately complete with examplars haven't been rude etc , but they have been ignored . What by me George? What were they only I thought I'd replied to all as best I can. You have been busy ,no problem . here's one copied . What matters is the quality of that evidence and the fact that is must be extraordianry to support the extraordinary claims . Thinking along the lines of it being a jigasaw puzzle may not be helpful . It's not about coming up with the most efficient use of building blocks as seen from the perspective of the 21st c . You could spend forever rearranging the component parts of monuments to suit a particualr aesthetic or the way they " should have been ". Take Gaulstown http://www.themodernantiquaria[...]ite/1374/gaulstown.html(scroll to 6 th pic ) it has an unsupporting angled sidestone that is angled in the wrong direction to be of any use in the case of collapse does that make it wrong or suggest that there has been a re-arrangenment ? Reply | with quote |  1st April 2013ce 18:15 In reply to: Re: Similarities elsewhere? (Sanctuary) |
Messages in this topic: |
|