The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian

Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   General Discussion Forum Start a topic | Search
The Modern Antiquarian
Re: John Michell lecture
353 messages
Select a forum:
"Then there's the other type of thing, the 'this stone lines up with that one', which is demonstrably true or untrue. So should be put in a different, more scientific category. "

The problem is much bigger than that .
Some stones do align , nobody has a problem with that .
It's the interpretation ,that is the problem .

"And obviously, you're requiring proof that if he says X is Y degrees from Z, that that's correct. But, you're claiming that actually Michell didn't measure these things properly in the first place. "

There are errors in the accuracy , this is old hat ,and was shown by Bob Forrsest decades ago .

"So what happened there? Did he mismeasure? Did he just make it up to fit his theory that this stone and that one lined up because of earth energies or somesuch? "
Earth energies followed on from the original problems with ley lines , when they shown to be inaccurate and not in straight lines or associated with ufos ,the unmeasurable energies explained the presence of the stones .

So I'm intrigued to hear Cerrig's response to this.

"Are the measurements in fact correct (and so Michell's theories are supported)?"

The suggestions about the accuracy of leys was blown out of the water a long time ago ,with converging evidence . Michell's theories changed to adapt to the problems .

"Or does it not matter if the measurements are wrong and don't prove anything because the whole thing isn't supposed to be scientifically true, it's more about being "Visionary"?"

The latter .

Reply | with quote
Posted by tiompan
5th May 2016ce

In reply to:

Re: John Michell lecture (Rhiannon)

1 reply:

Re: John Michell lecture (Andy Norfolk)

Messages in this topic: