Stone Circle Greetings Cards
|The Ancient Celts, Barry Cunliffe
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page.
There are currently, 128 guests and 4 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here
Forum: General Forum|
Moderated by : Andy B , TimPrevett , Klingon , sem , MickM , TheCaptain , bat400 , coldrum , davidmorgan , Runemage , SolarMegalith
Respond to: Graham Hancock is one of the best researchers
|Review your Reply|
| New Message Posted!2006-10-25 00:00  |
And does his cause no good.
from Surrey, UK
| New Message Posted!2006-10-24 23:41  |
Yes Jeff and Sem I agree.
I saw Graham give his talk on his latest book 'Supernatural' live at the Megalithomania conference. I've been a bit of a fan of his - in small parts - so it was a great disappointment to hear how - well - completely looney this latest book is, he seems to have totally lost it.
Personally I was also not keen on his pro-drugs message - it got everyone (well most) standing up and cheering at the prospect. I mean talk about pandering to your audience of old Glastonbury hippies that it's scientifically justified to take mind altering substances, and indeed that all curbs on such things should be completely abandoned.
That's done it - I won't be invited back now
Anyway, anyone has read Supernatural (I haven't) I'll be interested to hear what you make of it.
[ This message was edited by: Andy B on 2006-10-24 23:47 ]
| New Message Posted!2006-10-24 23:26  |
The one thing that Hancock did was reveal how the archaeological establishment defend orthodoxy over investigation.
Now Hancock's theories may or may not be sound, but is up to the archaeological establishment to investigate definitively, not just simply dismiss it out of hand. It reminds me too much of the past where people like Darwin were castigated. Two years before sputnik was launched the British Astronomer Royal pronounced that space travel was so much bunkum and could never be achieved.
Too much elitism and orthodoxy has crept back into the academic world of all disciplines.
| New Message Posted!2006-09-01 20:13  |
Interesting bloke is our Graham. I've been reading his books for about 15yrs (I think the Sign and the Seal was the first). He writes a good story and his observations on conventional archaeologists/historians can be spot on. Like everyone else though he is fighting his own patch and ignores evidence that contradicts this, a trait in common with many from the establishment.
I do have a little personal experience of him. About four years ago I was short-listed for an expedition to S India to investigate undersea remains ( I dropped out due to work problems). At the interview for this, the organisers told me that the 10,000yr old city we were to investigate was in all probability a Roman outpost.
One thing about Graham though, is he asks questions that people from the establishment don't dare to, and in doing so raises awareness and stimulates debate about these subjects.
The thing I regret about not going on this expedition is the missed chance of discussing with him what he believes and what he publishes to generate an income.
| New Message Posted!2006-09-01 16:13  |
Peter Pans jacket is the same shade of green as the portal?
I thought you prefered Vivaldi, theres a thought, torvil and dean could mark out perfect lines?
By the way, I am not a total moron, I took off my shoes when jumping up the knights, I think I was meant to?
I am not saying I condone this in any way and would be the first to throw anyone off who acted in any way that would cause damage, but, I did stand on the knights with lets say damp feet, I was really in touch with them, if these were origonally a portal tomb, with a cap stone on top, how do you know that standing on this very point wasn't one of the very reasons they were built?
There would have been a ramp of covering materials where easy acess could be achieved. the stones are earthed?, they are stood in the earth, if you had bare feet and the stones were wet, anything of an electrical frequency may earth through you?
As I said, I feel I was meant to, the moment may have been right?
Imagine if you were about six thousand years ago, and were told to stand there, and you heard what I heard and felt what I felt, what do you consider they may have deduced about that?
I had to take the ballockings to be able to discuss what happened, I could do without the ballockings, but sense a reason and a need to understand what was happening, I feel I know, you all will at least remember that I told you of this.
It may simply annoy you, or it may just sew a seed?
| New Message Posted!2006-09-01 14:20  |
"I haven't got supernatural powers."
OK, supra-scientific. Same difference.
"I want to shut you up, not in a nasty way"
Me too. Only you can do it, for either of us.
So let me know when you've marked a 100 yard square to within a tenth of an inch. If you can't, no need to mention it, I'll let you off, but really there's no point in us goading one another any more until you have is there?
I'll leave you with my Home Page. How did you know?
| New Message Posted!2006-09-01 13:59  |
I haven't got supernatural powers.
I have natural senses, Some people can play a guitar, I cant, some people can paint, i cant, etc, etc.
What I can do, is align some rods held in my hands with a very subtle set of signals, the basic set of these are dead straight.
Now I know you where a surveyor , I can understand your reluctance to consider this, explains a lot to me.
The setting out of a square was a flash thought from talking about pyramids on another thread, I dont really care what method of testing is involved, I want to shut you up, not in a nasty way , just so that you realise I am not making anything up.
( I just had a sudden thought about mazes and labyrinths, I wonder if many have had to pass a test in the past?)
I am remembering things I have said to you now, in the past about not needing to measure my paces, as i know what they are, and you little devil doubting me, when all the time you know you can do that yourself, tinkerbell?
| New Message Posted!2006-09-01 13:21  |
Salopian, I keep trying to say to you " I am not a performing seal"
Every scientist has to be, that's why they're listened to. You must have seen stories about Russian scientists having discovered cold water fusion and such like but not revealing the details?
People listen for about ten seconds. You've had a hearing here for rather longer than that.
"If anyone is a surveyor , perhaps they could come along, a laser could check how staight I was."
By one of life's more delicious happenstances, I happen to be a qualified surveyor and was so for 30 years.
"If I could set out this site to a perfect square, mark the centre spot precisely, and set out how ever many squares inside of this as markers would allow, using only dowsing rods .
Would this make you look at me in a more serious light? "
Sadly no, as I could do the same thing to a considerable degree of accuracy using neither dowsing rods nor surveying rods. I have one ft shoes and one yard paces calibrated periodically against the Imperial Measures set in brass in front of the National Gallery in Trafalgar Square and cultivated and honed over 30 years of use.
"Time to put up or shut up?"
How astoundingly ironic and cheeky that it should be YOU who says that to someone else!
As I have said to you before Kevin I have NO wish to see you fail and if you have supernatural powers I'd be thrilled. However, I have reason to think that you can't mark a square as well as I can and I'm not supernatural so I don't want to spend time and petrol on attending a demonstration I doubt will be up to my own ability to perform.
On the other hand, I cheerfully admit I can't mark a 100 yard square where all sides are the same to within "a tenth of an inch" as you say you can. That's an error of less than one thirtysix thousandth.
So I suggest, as I have before, that you try it on your own first (you can check it with a tape measure). That way, if you can't, it'll save my petrol and if you can it'll be worth me coming.
| New Message Posted!2006-08-31 23:05  |
Salopian, I keep trying to say to you " I am not a performing seal"
On 2006-08-31 21:10, Salopian wrote:
"If you are trying to arrive at a point of proof, you need the help of a variety of knowledgable people from all sides of a particuler subject"
No you don't. You need a bucket of water and an ability to find it - which you say is "easy".
But since you refuse to perform any circus tricks people are entitled to suspect you lack one or the other or both. That's the way it is and the blame's not on the audience.
[ This message was edited by: Salopian on 2006-08-31 21:15 ]
All this talk about pyramids has given me an idea though.
If a reasonably flat area could be suggested, with a good size around it, I will meet you at this sort of place, I would set out the area of a pyramid, to whatever scale, we would need markers , little flags would do?
If I could set out this site to a perfect square, mark the centre spot precisely, and set out how ever many squares inside of this as markers would allow, using only dowsing rods .
Would this make you look at me in a more serious light?
To check out a square is easy by simple methods?
The centre spot then could be checked by lines from the corners, I would not be out by a tenth of an inch.
If anyone is a surveyor , perhaps they could come along, a laser could check how staight I was.
And the more obsticles in the way the better.
Got it, around a round barrow, I could set out several for you, one cutting through the barrow centrally, or a long barrow, the fields have been harvested now , so acess wont be difficult.
Whats near you , or between us?
, I went to the long barrow at bourton on the hill the other week, it was surrounded by wheat fields , so they will be harvested now, and it is covered in dense woodland , so no way could I see through it .
Time to put up or shut up?
| New Message Posted!2006-08-31 22:03  |
Agree with Coldrum re Graham Hancock, in particular, that he has no concept of geology.
However his series and books are interesting, though I found parts 'Heaven's Mirror' to be quite ludicrous, the way he attempted to make certain sites fit constellations(or vice versa). If you have this book look at some of the drawings. (I seem to remember that he got slammed for both this series and book, did he made a number of fundamental errors?)
However he's also very knowledgeable and has been kind enough to help me on certain matters. All the information he has given me has either backed up my own findings or confirmed other peoples. He does answer his e-mails and is both polite and well meaning.
Overall I like him and whether any of us agree with his ideas or not he's certainly produced some very interesting stuff. Mithra.