| Review your Reply |
Orpbit
Joined:
24-06-2012
Messages: 1594
from Shropshire
 OFF-Line
|  New Message Posted!2020-12-18 15:31
Boreades:
With reference to your first post regarding "...cemetery..."...Westminster Abbey..." issue, I have plenty of evidence in a form beyond the scope of this thread. It's a part of my Stonehenge Tunnel proposal submissions, but there is a tremendous amount of saying things at the right time.
At present the decision to go ahead, made by SOS Grant Shapps, is being pursued to Judicial Review(JR), which is something that can only deal with legalities of the decision, rather than any further evidence, and/or theories, however reasonable they may be.
To this end I have been considering as to whether make further input via what's known as the "Intervener" route. I'm more than aware of the possible arguments that could be pursued, but I've decided to hold back for a variety of reasons, having looked into the viability of evidential arguments more deeply. Since JR is being pursued via a crowd-funding initiative I felt it best to let that go ahead, without revealing my evidence, as the way things are going there's a good chance that this evidence might be excluded, and if so considered as having been "rejected" by the Supreme Court.
So, until the JR is concluded - if indeed it is actually allowed to go ahead - I've decided to leave things as per my submitted comments dealing the the issue of the "Model" of a "Cathedral in it's Churchyard". You can find this particular submission at page 4, under Richard Bartosz
https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/south-west/a303-stonehenge/?ipcsection=docs&stage=6&filter1=Secretary+of+State+Consultation+3
https://tinyurl.com/y727pt5d
The direct link to the submission is:
https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/TR010025/TR010025-002024-Richard%20Bartosz%20-%20Response%20to%20SoS%20Consultation%203.pdf
https://tinyurl.com/yd8p7fd7
Obviously, for a new reader, there's an incredible amount of prior representations to go through to understand the content. You only have to look at the document history, but my submissions fall under the heading of "Cultural Heritage" among many other topic headings considered by the Examining Panel, which consisted of five Planning Inspectors of high standing, and which concluded that the scheme should not go ahead!
Cheers
[ This message was edited by: Orpbit on 2020-12-18 15:35 ]
|
Boreades
Joined:
19-10-2009
Messages: 70
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-12-18 14:56
For all the dowsing enthusiasts (and mention of Australia), here's some I prepared earlier (in 2018).
What is water?
In some surprising ways, water turns out to be a very strange substance. You can keep pure water liquid way below zero degrees C. With a bit of electricity you can fuel cars on it. In biology, it is not only a conductor of -ve ions (electrons, electricity), it is also a conductor of sunlight (protons, +ve ions, proticity)
It's been suggested that dowsing is an electromagnetic phenomena. I concur; I do believe there is a scientific basis.
This is my theory (cough) :
- All flowing water is flowing in the earth's magnetic field.
- All ground water (usually) contains soluble material, is ionised to a greater or lesser extent, and therefore it is conductive.
- By definition, when any conductive material moves through a magnetic field, it will generate an electromagnetic current.
- Fleming's Right-hand rule applies.
The only questions then are
(a) how strong that field is, and
(b) how sensitive individual people are to the electromagnetic field (and variations in it).
We are all sensitive to some extent. Some are naturally more sensitive than others, but it is a sensitivity that can be harnessed or acquired. Like being a trained singer, or a martial artist who exercises control and demonstrates the art.
An agronomist friend of mine, from Australia, told me that learning how to dowse was part of his training course (paid for by the Australian government). Finding water (by any means) being that much more important in Australia.
|
Boreades
Joined:
19-10-2009
Messages: 70
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-12-18 14:11
@sem
Quote:
| The general concensus among archaeologists seems to be that in it's early stages Stonehenge was a cemetary. |
|
I accept that is what *some* archaeologists say. However, some people are blind to evidence of purpose.
Playing Devil's Advocate now...
Given enough time to loose the evidence, future archaeologists may well be saying the same about Westminster Abbey. After all, there's lots of people buried there, and what physical evidence is there (even now) that it serves any other purpose?
Calling it an "elite ritual death" place is a good way of avoiding any evidence that it had any higher purpose.
|
Virgo
Joined:
11-10-2020
Messages: 246
from Adelaide
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-11-21 06:40
Since I last commented on this thread I have learnt a lot about the forum and the people on it. This thread appears to be dominated by dowsers. Dowsing is practised extensively in Australia to find underground water. It's not a 'gift' and many people learn it from experienced dowsers. My experience is that they find electromagnetic lines of force. If dowsers in England find 'ley lines' it's just the same. I don't see a reason why Stonehenge was located on the ley lines. Which came first, Stonehenge or the dowsers ?
One man mentioned the Book of Enoch but no-one followed that up. Which shows some prejudice against the ancient texts. I've done a lot of reading and I now think that the site was chosen because of the geometry that exists at about 51° Lat. it is the only latitude that on the solstices the sun rises NE and sets NW. SE and sets SW all on the exact cardinal compass points.
Lat 51° N https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/51st_parallel_north
This geometry was known before Stonehenge was built. Looking around the world the ancients thought the best site for their observatory was the plain found near the edge of the world. It it just coincidence that Greenwich observatory is build about the same latiude,?
How many other ancient sites are about 51°N ?
[ This message was edited by: Virgo on 2020-11-21 06:53 ]
|
Virgo
Joined:
11-10-2020
Messages: 246
from Adelaide
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-10-16 04:56
Yes Rune, getting ' off topic'. One of my friends who died left me a 'Kindle Fire' full of books, a vast collection of alternative science. They're not all spurious. I started a thread, ' The destruction of Stonehenge' but it didn't get very far.
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 3944
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-10-15 11:10
The internet truly is a great source of information, but it's also a great source of misinformation.
Anyone can write whatever they like and assert it's true. but sometimes it's not.
You have to have a good "is that likely" filter. So many people believe things to be true solely because they read it online. So many people write about things online and forget to say "In my opinion" before a statement, so it's presented as a fact, whereas it's no such thing, it's only one person's opinion.
We're wandering way off-topic for this thread, perhaps you'd like to start a new thread where you could outline your ideas?
Rune
[ This message was edited by: Runemage on 2020-10-15 14:04 ]
|
Virgo
Joined:
11-10-2020
Messages: 246
from Adelaide
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-10-14 01:59
Hi Runemage
>" We know from skeletons and artefacts that date from the time the megaliths were constructed " What date was that ? Dating artefacts dates the artefacts not the site.
I contracted meningitis at age 10 which left me with chronic epilepsy for which there is no cure but 50 years of constant medication. I rarely attended school and had little formal education so I am not bound by conventional ideas and theories. Friends have taught me to read and write. My latest good friend introduced me to the internet. What a marvelous world of information. I knew about the Holy Bible, God, creation and all that. No 'God' ever did anything for me so I regard creation as just mythical nonsense.
Searching for a 1st cause of everything is a futile exercise. So that leaves 'evolution'. Or does it ? Why not 'genetic engineering' ? Why after millions of years of evolution is humanity the only species to develop speech and language ? Why are humans the only ones to develop technology and science ?
' And the surgeon caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam (or an anaesthetist did). An incision was made and a bone sample was taken and the flesh was closed up.' The DNA was used to create Eve.
Why are ancient scripts discussing stuff that was (re)discovered in the last century.
Enoch, the 7th descendent was taught by the 'Angels' I wish I had the ability to take Enoch's data about the variations in the daylight hours and calculate the latitude of the observations. I'm sure it could be done.
Catching up on some of the threads on Megalith I often see ' cherry picking' is frowned upon. But surely cheery picking can highlight fact from fiction even in the works of Von Daniken and Sitchin.
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 3944
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-10-13 23:08
Thanks Virgo, you said " The ancients were either larger more powerful beings or they had the technology"
We know from skeletons and artefacts that date from the time the megaliths were constructed that they weren't a race of huge folks, so the technology seems to be the likeliest way to the truth.
Thing is, they did things we don't know how to do today, but there again we don't look at the world like they did.
I love reading about different ways to move huge stones to construct these monuments, some of the ideas people come up with now are great.
Gordon Pipes has "rowed" a large stone across land. https://brian-mountainman.blogspot.com/2016/05/gordon-pipes-and-stone-rowing.html
Endless block tackle and pulley systems have been built and tried.
On a programme about Orkney, narrated by Neil Oliver on TV recently, people were trying to drag a stone across moorland with ropes when a local lad said his Dad had heard that laying a track of seaweed - a local plentiful resource - would make the stone slide and it did.
There's a video of a man in the USA moving huge concrete blocks on his own very easily.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5pZ7uR6v8c&ab_channel=MysteryHistory
By all means do let us know your theories, an outline will do for a start as it often happens that people will want to debate the small details rather than the big picture and discussions can get bogged down pretty quickly.
I've been interested in megalithic mysteries for many years now and it's interesting to see how peoples' opinions both archaeological and 'the public' have changed since the 70's and Von Daniken's theories right through to present when the general opinion is the ancients were just men and women like us, intellectual and physical equals who used their own natural resources.
But they knew their environment intimately and saw and used things we never would consider.
|
Virgo
Joined:
11-10-2020
Messages: 246
from Adelaide
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-10-13 08:05
Hi Runemage and thanks. In reply to your questions the short answer is that all over the world ancient buildings were made from massive stones too large to be handled easily or comfortably. Until just recently we used bricks and mortar. Now with concrete panels we have cranes to lift them. The ancients were either larger more powerful beings or they had the technology. The long answer would be many pages and I will write on request.
Josephine,
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 3944
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2020-10-13 03:11
Hi Virgo and welcome. This is a good place to discuss alternative ideas of why SH and a lot of other ancient monuments could have been built.
You said , "SH was a masterpiece of engineering built by the Angels, Annunaki or whatever you like to call them for the purpose of determining the movement of the astronomical bodies."
What makes you think SH and all the other ancient structures weren't just conceived of and built by humans?
Or put another way, why do you think ancient humans were not capable of conceiving of a way to measure the movements of the planets and stars?
Of all the ancient monuments, SH attracts the most theories for its existence, including its location. Have you read the work of one of our members, jonm?
Here's a link to an article on his theory for starters, there are quite a few forum threads too. https://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=2146414114
|
|
