Featured Title:
Redhead, the new thriller by Ian Cook 'a compulsive read' |
 |
| The Henge Monuments of the British Isles: Myth and Archaeology |
 |
| Login |
|
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. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 103 guests and 3 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
| Review your Reply |
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 909
from Brecon Beacons
 OFF-Line
|  New Message Posted!2013-05-22 22:52
True according to who, George, and what are the criteria for the definition of " relating to the cardinal points of the sun" or "an alignment" ?
cerrig
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2652
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 18:33
I don't see any general inference in the Hutton comments about megalithic monuments “ not intended to have any relationship with the heavens “ . He said "the vast majority of prehistoric monuments in these islands do not relate to ... the cardinal points of the sun" and “the vast majority of prehistoric monuments in the British Isles are not accurately aligned on sunsets or sunrises at the solstices and equinoxes.” And both are true .
George
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5547
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 18:28
This is a link about the alignments of the round towers of Ireland.
I do like how the moth reacts to the radiation of a light bulb in spiral fashion, they do have very advanced senses , nes pas?
http://www.whale.to/b/callahan.html
cropredy
|
jonm
Joined:
12-07-2011
Messages: 819
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 18:17
Quote:
| Once again we are back to the sticking point as to what is meant by an " alignment", as the inference in Mr Huttons statement is that , generally, megalithic monuments were not intended to have any relationship with the heavens ( for want of a better expression ) |
|
Interesting one this. Perhaps it's correct in that the monuments are not generally aligned on things that modern astro-archaeologists would realise were relevant to them? We define an "alignment" by how important it is relative to our own world-view.
|
cerrig
Joined:
25-09-2009
Messages: 909
from Brecon Beacons
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 17:12
Once again we are back to the sticking point as to what is meant by an " alignment", as the inference in Mr Huttons statement is that , generally, megalithic monuments were not intended to have any relationship with the heavens ( for want of a better expression )
I think he's wrong, and every time I visit an ancient site I think he's wronger.
cerrig
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2652
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 15:42
Ric , "the vast majority of prehistoric monuments in these islands do not relate to ... the cardinal points of the sun" was clear enough to most who read it and was clarified by the author i.e. “the vast majority of prehistoric monuments in the British Isles are not accurately aligned on sunsets or sunrises at the solstices and equinoxes.” .However the initial comment was read it was true , as was the confirmation .
You may not like the the use of language but I think it was the content that was really the sore point .
George
|
megalith6
Joined:
28-10-2001
Messages: 129
from London UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 15:04
George Posted [edit] 10-05-2013 at 10:02
Ric, Hutton didn't mention alignments in his correct comment
"the vast majority of prehistoric monuments in these islands do not relate to ... the cardinal points of the sun"
....................................................
Ric replied: If by this somewhat oblique above statement Hutton means that not all megalithic monuments reference solstices and / or equinoxes then that is a simple fact, and to state it as some form of scholastic revelation seems rather absurd to me. Why not use direct speech to convey prosaic facts, but instead employ potentially ambiguous if not misleading terms like ‘cardinal points of the sun’ and especially ‘stations of the sun’, whatever these are?
.......................................................
Orpbit had earlier posted 05-12-2012 at 23:29
“...As far as I'm concerned in archaeoastronomy there are only four important (Cardinal) positions of the Sun. These are the Summer and Winter solstices and the Spring and Autumn Equinoxes...the most important festival (ritual) days were Quarter days in England”
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2652
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 13:39
About time , maybe we can get back to the discussion .
You can't claim that language or other problems were involved in a simple counting exercise that would have shown to be wrong .
Stick to stuff that is unfalsifiable ,you should have learnt that by now .
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5547
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 12:03
The constant barrage directed at Me, is from YOU.
This is definately My last reply to You, it is a waste of time answering your constant drivel directed at Myself.
Kevin
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2652
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-05-22 09:34
"I do not fail , at all. "
Lol .
Then why not do the simple counting task to show that you are not wrong . Anyone can do it to confirm the result .
And that is why you won't do it .
It might also get this thread back on to topic instead of a constant barrage about you .
| |
|
Main News