Featured Title:
Watchers of the Dawn DVD and ebook |
 |
| Ancestral Geographies of the Neolithic, Edmonds, Bender |
 |
| 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, 144 guests and 7 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : davidmorgan , TimPrevett , Andy B , Klingon , MickM , bat400 , sem , Runemage , TheCaptain
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries >> Ancient star map explains Megalithic locations
|
 |
| Page 6 of 7 ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 ) |
| Author |
Ancient star map explains Megalithic locations |
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 31-07-2011 at 20:25
The facts seem quite clear and I for one agree fully with this discussion:
"We are now getting repeated overlap between data present in Britain, and large scale alignment centers located in Chile, Peru and Russia.
I think the easiest way to make sense of it all is to look at things with new eyes.
Everyone agrees that Pyramids are located around the world. The are found in China, Peru, Mexico, Egypt, and Japan.
The only difference now is to say that Nazca-type alingment lines are also located all around the world (in Russia, Scotland Chile,Peru and Australia)
So far every single test agrees with this..... I think I've undertaken about 15 tests in total? Some of which have probabilities far less than one in a million for an overlap between the prediction and observed results.
With respect to the Nazca no test until now has successfully aligned more than 30% of the Nazca lines to anything. Over 80% of the lines aligning to the proposed star map bird drawing."
 Profile
 Reply
|
Kagaku
Joined:
15-05-2011
Messages: 120
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 20:28
George
To answer your question about pictures of geoglyphs.
There are 24 papers and the sites are discusses in several papers.....The first two papers published at Midnightsciencejournal.com are simple observation papers introducing waht at first appeared to be nothing more than a chance observation.
The first two papers then create the outline of a basic theory - the idea that the Pyramids were aligned to a star map- and also introduce a few simple tests were attempted to see if the theory has any substance...By themselves they do not prove anything.
You can find the pictures you are after in the first two papers.....and also later in the series where the Iona patterns surprisingly seem to fit numerous attacks on the theory
Now...when I first seen the lines. I also thought there was nothing there.
The lines are very indistinct, could easily be over-analyzed and hardly look important.
but the problem is.....the larger pattern they create do fit a world map....that also fits teh pattern of megaliths around the world
and that is where we are
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 20:34
There needs to be a reason, a reason to construct megalithic sites at specific locations.
And the stars are involved in a cyclic manner, IMHO.
The number 72 been involved in this cyclic alteration, and I would offer the suggestion this is because it is half of 144...fibonacci two way flows.
Astrology offers some comments on the consequences of the apparent movements , and the transfer of the consequences via the more local planets, andWe are discussing the surface area of a planet...earth.
http://www.constellationsofwords.com/categories/natalrobson.htm
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 20:52
Here's a similer thought about the stars and the relationship to constructions on the earths surface.
http://www.earthportals.com/Portal_Messenger/draco.html
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2634
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 20:58
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-31 20:28, Kagaku wrote:
George
To answer your question about pictures of geoglyphs.
There are 24 papers and the sites are discusses in several papers.....The first two papers published at Midnightsciencejournal.com are simple
|
|
David , you mentioned a geoglyph/petroglyph from Iona on this discussion forum ,I asked a number of posts ago if you had a pic .why can't you answer that question simply ,all it requires is a yes or a no .,if yes hopefully where it can be seen .,even if it is on your web site . I don't believe there is a geoglyph/petroglyph as you described from Iona but I'm giving you the opportunity to put me right .
You also made some comments about me which you have not explained ,
for the 4th ? time
Where did I introduce myself as an expert ?
Why assume I will be defending anything ?
What current theory ?
I think it is possible that you cannot answer them but I have given you the chance to do so .If you can't answer them best not make them in the first place ,and maybe you can detract them .
George
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 21:17
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-31 20:58, tiompan wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-07-31 20:28, Kagaku wrote:
George
To answer your question about pictures of geoglyphs.
There are 24 papers and the sites are discusses in several papers.....The first two papers published at Midnightsciencejournal.com are simple
|
|
David , you mentioned a geoglyph/petroglyph from Iona on this discussion forum ,I asked a number of posts ago if you had a pic .why can't you answer that question simply ,all it requires is a yes or a no .,if yes hopefully where it can be seen .,even if it is on your web site . I don't believe there is a geoglyph/petroglyph as you described from Iona but I'm giving you the opportunity to put me right .
You also made some comments about me which you have not explained ,
for the 4th ? time
Where did I introduce myself as an expert ?
Why assume I will be defending anything ?
What current theory ?
I think it is possible that you cannot answer them but I have given you the chance to do so .If you can't answer them best not make them in the first place ,and maybe you can detract them .
George
[/quote]
As for the picture of petroglph, I thought this was the picture shown of an underwater square section stone said to have been found there?
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2634
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 22:02
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-31 21:17, cropredy wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-07-31 20:58, tiompan wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-07-31 20:28, Kagaku wrote:
George
To answer your question about pictures of geoglyphs.
There are 24 papers and the sites are discusses in several papers.....The first two papers published at Midnightsciencejournal.com are simple
|
|
David , you mentioned a geoglyph/petroglyph from Iona on this discussion forum ,I asked a number of posts ago if you had a pic .why can't you answer that question simply ,all it requires is a yes or a no .,if yes hopefully where it can be seen .,even if it is on your web site . I don't believe there is a geoglyph/petroglyph as you described from Iona but I'm giving you the opportunity to put me right .
You also made some comments about me which you have not explained ,
for the 4th ? time
Where did I introduce myself as an expert ?
Why assume I will be defending anything ?
What current theory ?
I think it is possible that you cannot answer them but I have given you the chance to do so .If you can't answer them best not make them in the first place ,and maybe you can detract them .
George
[/quote]
As for the picture of petroglph, I thought this was the picture shown of an underwater square section stone said to have been found there?
Kevin
[/quote]
No , that was found near Lindisfarne .
George
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 22:35
George,
Lindisfarne,
This is all getting foggy,
Do You think someone has gotten lost in the fog, and got their holy islands confused??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF5xVnTo8gs
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-07-2011 at 22:52
Iona,
I like the music on this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_lqxUl9lxk&feature=fvsr
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
Kagaku
Joined:
15-05-2011
Messages: 120
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-08-2011 at 05:17
Andy,
Thanks a lot for inviting me to discuss the theory on this website...
At the beginning I received a lot of hard-hitting comments and some much needed modifications were made to the first three papers. So the help I got was much appreciated.
I also managed to develop a new test...which involved looking for a major star overlap between constellation Draco and a possible underwater site in the Kara Sea.
So overall the discussion has been beneficial....
But as you can this forum has went about as far as it can.
I have to say I'm not used to these types of forums, so its been some experience.
Anyway thanks again
Derek
Profile
Reply
|
Kagaku
Joined:
15-05-2011
Messages: 120
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-08-2011 at 13:00
.....Just to tidy up.
I finally worked out what you guys have been talking about.
You guys are talking about Volume 4 paper 7 paragraph 16 line # 1?
Where I entered the word Iona by mistake......????
And the comment about Holy island?
That seems to be about Volume 4 paper 7 paragraph 9 line # 2?
where I had entered Scotland for the location of Holy Island.
That was part of an earlier unpublished edit where the I noted that the land of Holy Island had transferred between three different countries. Arguably Holy Island was part of Scotland, then it became part of the empire of King Cnut when England and the southeast of Scotland were conquered. And then it became part of a border dispute between Scotland and England with both sides claiming it. Essentially Scotland saying they really wanted it back and England saying no luck.
Historically this all seems to tie back to the time of the Vikings.....where their first ever attack was at Holy Island of Lindisfarne
These comments were removed before publication and before you read the paper...as they did not add anything to the discussion and were not relevant to the discussion of the star pattern/Earth map. But in editing the paper, Holy Island was mistakenly entered as being part of Scotland. Clearly it is part of Northern England.
I'm sorry it took me THREE PAGES of being totally confused about all the strange comments before I FINALLY worked out what was being talked about.
That is the reason why I said ...if you are going to do a line edit of 24 papers here its not going to work. That should have been done at the Midnightsciencejournal website.....with perhaps a few short comments here.
Anyway, I hope that finally your questions have been answered.....and thanks very much for noticing the typographic errors. It does help having other eyes proof reading the papers.
But
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Three pages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Three pages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2634
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-08-2011 at 13:27
Quote:
|
On 2011-08-02 13:00, Kagaku wrote:
.....Just to tidy up.
I finally worked out what you guys have been talking about.
You guys are talking about Volume 4 paper 7 paragraph 16 line # 1?
Where I entered the word Iona by mistake......????
And the comment about Holy island?
That seems to be about Volume 4 paper 7 paragraph 9 line # 2?
where I had entered Scotland for the location of Holy Island.
That was part of an earlier unpublished edit where the I noted that the land of Holy Island had transferred between three different countries. Arguably Holy Island was part of Scotland, then it became part of the empire of King Cnut when England and the southeast of Scotland were conquered. And then it became part of a border dispute between Scotland and England with both sides claiming it. Essentially Scotland saying they really wanted it back and England saying no luck.
Historically this all seems to tie back to the time of the Vikings.....where their first ever attack was at Holy Island of Lindisfarne
These comments were removed before publication and before you read the paper...as they did not add anything to the discussion and were not relevant to the discussion of the star pattern/Earth map. But in editing the paper, Holy Island was mistakenly entered as being part of Scotland. Clearly it is part of Northern England.
I'm sorry it took me THREE PAGES of being totally confused about all the strange comments before I FINALLY worked out what was being talked about.
That is the reason why I said ...if you are going to do a line edit of 24 papers here its not going to work. That should have been done at the Midnightsciencejournal website.....with perhaps a few short comments here.
Anyway, I hope that finally your questions have been answered.....and thanks very much for noticing the typographic errors. It does help having other eyes proof reading the papers.
But
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Three pages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Three pages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
It was nothing to do with reading anything on your web site ,it was what you said here e.g. "I completed a search using Google and could only find this type of Glyph at Irkutsk in Russia, Iona in Scotland, Tasmania, and the Southwest USA. " When asked many times for a pic or evidence you simply ignored the requests just as you ignored later questions concerning comments that you had made .
George
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-08-2011 at 14:07
If the fog is lifting?
Could I just add a comment from a dowsing perspective about the geometry shown by square boxs?
If You look at the steps at the bases of many so called preachers crosses You will see either square bases or polygon bases of steps.
That is because the cross itself was positioned directly upon the meeting points of many lines, and that the dominant local geometry there is either square , or polygonal.
I have checked and plotted countless of these, and they are common on the outside of churchs near the south facing door.
They are of course in many villages also.
The most dominant ley lines are N,S and E,W, but nothing at all to do with compass, nether are they to do with true north.
The geometry involved is of universe, and the spheres are created in that geometry, and the heavens are reflected as such at the surface of each sphere relative to their FIXED positioning in the matrix.
I realise how difficult this FIXED business is, and what ridicule I subject myself in suggesting this, but it is exactly what I detect, I wish it did move about, but it doesn't.
What is moving is the dual spin flows of plasma of't called dragon flows, or male and female...yin/yang etc etc.
the illusion is then of sepeate spheres moving, and is so convincing that all are fooled.
The lines etc scribed or scraped out in Peru desserts are simply what is detectable there, it is mi9nd blowing in complexity, but needs a simple sort to detect it, I am.
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-08-2011 at 14:16
There's a picture here of a square set of steps below the preachers cross,
http://www.stmichaels-llantarnam.co.uk/Churchyard.htm
I should have taken better notice of what the church saint was at each of these relative to the geometry involved.
It is in a typical position near the south doorway , and I assure you is one of the typically six such points externally that the surveying and laying out of the church structure was set out to, by the likes of myself.
The clues are left visually, but are only apparent to such as myself.
kevin
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-08-2011 at 14:35
If this link works , there are lots of village so called crosses, they may have been later xianised, but normally a well is detectable some 22 feet aside of these, and their construction will have enticed the water nearer to the surface...see solitron towers.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/majorclanger/5302818383/in/pool-englishmarketandvillagecrosses
kevin
Profile
Reply
|
jonm
Joined:
12-07-2011
Messages: 815
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2011 at 05:57
If Kagaku were able to locate a new woodhenge or stonehenge, does anyone know if any compulsory purchase order could be applied to a discovery in England?
In other words, is the landowner free to do as he wishes (providing he doesn't develop the land) or would it be subject in some way to the Treasure Act?
Profile
Reply
|
chimera
Joined:
09-09-2006
Messages: 1508
from Australia
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2011 at 11:47
Probably it would belong to Finland of Cygnus. If the Lascaux bull=Europe, then Kakagu uses a very wide brush so to speak and the X mark henge is between E and W Britain. The Megalithic yard may belong to Treasury or else to the Pentagon of Thomas Jefferson, DC.
Profile
Reply
|
Kagaku
Joined:
15-05-2011
Messages: 120
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2011 at 18:43
...regarding different ideas
....I never criticize them if tehy are thought out discussions.
The reason is modern archaeology has a problem... a very big problem
Archaeology.... is more like a crime scene than a research lab.
Try thinking that "universities" are the Forensic lab in a movie.
But in all murder movies who's the star? It's not the forensic scientist it's the criminal detective.....Ok there is a few exceptions but you know what I'm saying.
You can never really solve a murder using forensics only. The criminal detective in criminal law is the lead. He's the one that bring it all together, and finally solves the mystery.
But in archaeology who are the detectives? They are the much maligned "pseudoscientist"
And this is the problem......How can we make the "pseudscientist" work with the scientist stuck in his box?
I talked to a number of archaeologists and historians and I could clearly see their problem...
Archaeologist cannot study something that is not there.....
If there is no pottery remains, bone fragments or flint remnants they cannot study the problem.
and if the amateur sleuths (that means us) do not provide them a workable testable model....."science" is quiet. Their hands are tied - exactly the same as the forensic scientist.
Professional archaeologist will not admit it, but they need detectives to help them uncover the really ancient past.
They need help to uncover ancient patterns and test them. And test them again and again until it becomes so clear that it is impossible to ignore.
For example there is the double twin circles of churches in south England, sites built upon extended lines, and other features which if gathered together might produce useful data.
The thing I like about Midnight science journal is that it is open to publications that show these patterns, even if they are not fully understood. I don't think they take papers though that just show one single picture of a site...or papers that have little supporting evidence. But if a short paper shows a clear logical link between several sites I think it will be published.
Profile
Reply
|
Kagaku
Joined:
15-05-2011
Messages: 120
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2011 at 18:54
Jonm
I'm now only taking comments over at Midnightsciencejournal.com
I sent a private email to you.
If you want to discuss further contact me over at the msj website.
Profile
Reply
|
jonm
Joined:
12-07-2011
Messages: 815
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-08-2011 at 19:04
Quote:
|
On 2011-08-03 18:43, Kagaku wrote:
...regarding different ideas
Professional archaeologist will not admit it, but they need detectives to help them uncover the really ancient past.
They need help to uncover ancient patterns and test them. And test them again and again until it becomes so clear that it is impossible to ignore.
|
|
I'm not so sure. Aren't Archaeologists there just to provide well researched data to allow others to solve and understand?
Why would archaeologists be interested in things that are out of their normal professional sphere? For instance, If a new Stonehenge were to be built to physically show what it did, the assistance of archaeologists is unnecessary; All it needs is to be offered a site, to have professional verification, to have a reason that the build would attract money-men and for all that to be enabled by a sympathetic council.
In other words, a theory needs to be proved by some other means before archaeologists will become interested. New theories are a penny a dozen.
Profile
Reply
| |
| Go to Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTES: This site uses COOKIES. Please do not use this web site if you do not agree to our Terms and Conditions of use.
If you plan to visit ancient sites in person, please make sure you follow our Charter.
Articles, photographs and comments are the property of their respective authors or contributors, please contact them for permission to reproduce. Site design ©1997-2012 Andy Burnham.
|
Main News