Featured Title:
Stone Lord: The Legend Of King Arthur, The Era Of Stonehenge by J P Reedman |
 |
| Serpent’s Gold by Sam Osman |
 |
| 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, 119 guests and 5 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 >> Spirals
|
 |
| Author |
Spirals |
ledgehammer
Joined:
29-06-2011
Messages: 722
from Surrey
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 02-03-2012 at 21:47
Quote:
| True that is a rebuttal to the debunking but the cycle continues .http://www.supernaturalresearch.com/2010/07/nassim-haramein-answers-his-critics-with-respect-and-logic/ .
This is what debate is about |
|
George,
But this is much less valuable compared to actual research, fieldwork and conclusions. Especially when most people would live inside a safe comfort zone of knowledge, fuelling a hell of a lot of circlular debating. Sometimes the truth is hidden between two lies.
Tom
 Profile
 Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-03-2012 at 22:13
Do You think that spirals can be created from straight lines?
http://www.archaeologydaily.com/news/201202297992/Stone-Age-Pebble-Holds-Mysterious-Meaning.html
cropredy the link king.
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-03-2012 at 23:32
Tom ,what is much less valuable than actual research, fieldwork and conclusions .?
Whatever the answer much depends on the quality of the research ,fieldwork and conclusions .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-02 21:47, ledgehammer wrote:
Quote:
| True that is a rebuttal to the debunking but the cycle continues .http://www.supernaturalresearch.com/2010/07/nassim-haramein-answers-his-critics-with-respect-and-logic/ .
This is what debate is about |
|
George,
But this is much less valuable compared to actual research, fieldwork and conclusions. Especially when most people would live inside a safe comfort zone of knowledge, fuelling a hell of a lot of circlular debating. Sometimes the truth is hidden between two lies.
Tom
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
LittleEnki
Joined:
22-01-2012
Messages: 202
from Largo,FL
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 01:36
Yes, cropredy, they can, thanks for showing me that!
I bet the piece was part of a larger rock like they said, and it might have been part of a spiral. But spirals can be created from straight lines if you observe the polygonal parts of a fibonacci spiral,(Ive never used the name yet, but Im starting to get it), wont the sides of the polygonal segments be straight, too?
Or, if the spiral is large enough it will have parts that LOOK straight, but are still arced.
Maybe the spiral is a result of a straight creational Bar interacting with something that coils it up. Like differing flows, perhaps?
Am I close?
Littleenki
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 08:05
Littleenki,
Polygon is one of my favorite words ( the parrot has left the house)
I had an encounter with a huge parrot in a house in the middle of France when a frozen coca cola bottle exploded.....long story.
Least resistance.
One line crosses a near orientated other, but it offers less resistance to the flowon the first line, thus the flow takes the pathway of least resistance, therefore whatever the patterning of crossing lines is will determine what the spiral route will be of the flow .....always attracted to the least resistance.
Biefeld Brown.
Water is acting the self same to invisable pathways when it creates a whirlpool.
Viktor Schauberger.
hobbit
Profile
Reply
|
rogeralbin
Joined:
08-10-2010
Messages: 189
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 09:54
There is also an interesting article on the genetic make up of Otzi the iceman.
[ This message was edited by: rogeralbin on 2012-03-03 09:57 ]
Profile
Reply
|
ledgehammer
Joined:
29-06-2011
Messages: 722
from Surrey
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 11:19
George,
Rebuttal to the debunking, debunking web sites constructed by those who are not engaged in actual research by the definition given by myself.
This research irrespective of position is more valuable because it is actually based on something, the debunking e.t.c may be true but without a physical source it is just circular reasoning no different to what you labelled as dodgey websites.
Irrespective of whether research has been peer reviewed or not I consider it still more valuable that a guy with a lot of time invested in debunking e.t.c, and I base this on my own conclusions but only after they have been cross referenced with what I respect as a reliable peer.
Hope this is clear
Tom
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 11:25
Tom, debunking/rebuttal /debating are all important in coming to a better understanding of a problem . If a researcher provides poor research then it needs to be refuted/debunked etc and that service is far more valuable and productive than the poor research .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 11:19, ledgehammer wrote:
George,
Rebuttal to the debunking, debunking web sites constructed by those who are not engaged in actual research by the definition given by myself.
This research irrespective of position is more valuable because it is actually based on something, the debunking e.t.c may be true but without a physical source it is just circular reasoning no different to what you labelled as dodgey websites.
Irrespective of whether research has been peer reviewed or not I consider it still more valuable that a guy with a lot of time invested in debunking e.t.c, and I base this on my own conclusions but only after they have been cross referenced with what I respect as a reliable peer.
Hope this is clear
Tom
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
ledgehammer
Joined:
29-06-2011
Messages: 722
from Surrey
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 13:08
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 11:25, tiompan wrote:
Tom, debunking/rebuttal /debating are all important in coming to a better understanding of a problem . If a researcher provides poor research then it needs to be refuted/debunked etc and that service is far more valuable and productive than the poor research .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 11:19, ledgehammer wrote:
George,
Rebuttal to the debunking, debunking web sites constructed by those who are not engaged in actual research by the definition given by myself.
This research irrespective of position is more valuable because it is actually based on something, the debunking e.t.c may be true but without a physical source it is just circular reasoning no different to what you labelled as dodgey websites.
Irrespective of whether research has been peer reviewed or not I consider it still more valuable that a guy with a lot of time invested in debunking e.t.c, and I base this on my own conclusions but only after they have been cross referenced with what I respect as a reliable peer.
Hope this is clear
Tom
|
|
|
|
George,
In principle this works. In practice on this thread as well as others it doesn't.
Tom
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 13:50
Tom, could you give examples and explain why they don't work .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 13:08, ledgehammer wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 11:25, tiompan wrote:
Tom, debunking/rebuttal /debating are all important in coming to a better understanding of a problem . If a researcher provides poor research then it needs to be refuted/debunked etc and that service is far more valuable and productive than the poor research .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 11:19, ledgehammer wrote:
George,
Rebuttal to the debunking, debunking web sites constructed by those who are not engaged in actual research by the definition given by myself.
This research irrespective of position is more valuable because it is actually based on something, the debunking e.t.c may be true but without a physical source it is just circular reasoning no different to what you labelled as dodgey websites.
Irrespective of whether research has been peer reviewed or not I consider it still more valuable that a guy with a lot of time invested in debunking e.t.c, and I base this on my own conclusions but only after they have been cross referenced with what I respect as a reliable peer.
Hope this is clear
Tom
|
|
|
|
George,
In principle this works. In practice on this thread as well as others it doesn't.
Tom
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 13:57
On 2012-03-03 11:25, tiompan wrote:
Tom, debunking/rebuttal /debating are all important in coming to a better understanding of a problem . If a researcher provides poor research then it needs to be refuted/debunked etc and that service is far more valuable and productive than the poor research .
George
For written research where we can all read and evaluate, that's the usual way to find the most likely truth. With the caveat that the internet will provide evidence for both the for and against so the endless circular arguments are mostly an exercise in frustration and futility on both sides and peter out when one side has had enough mental tennis-watching.
However, that's not an applicable system for the sort of personal research Tom's talking about. It's simply not evaluated by the same methods. Perhaps we ought to begin a discussion of the more metaphysical topics by prefacing that in order to be discussed, it needs to be accepted that these things exist or are possible. Otherwise, the discussion of the topic itself never starts, it's just trapped in an endless cycle of pantomime on its possibility for existence.
Oh no it isn't
Oh yes it is
Rune
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-03-2012 at 14:36
In many cases the refutational info is not available on the web and it requires someone on a discussion group to expose claims as being false . This can take time as people cherish their beliefs but eventually through debate we can come to a better understanding of the problem , I don't believe that is futile .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-03 13:57, Runemage wrote:
On 2012-03-03 11:25, tiompan wrote:
Tom, debunking/rebuttal /debating are all important in coming to a better understanding of a problem . If a researcher provides poor research then it needs to be refuted/debunked etc and that service is far more valuable and productive than the poor research .
George
For written research where we can all read and evaluate, that's the usual way to find the most likely truth. With the caveat that the internet will provide evidence for both the for and against so the endless circular arguments are mostly an exercise in frustration and futility on both sides and peter out when one side has had enough mental tennis-watching.
Rune
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
LittleEnki
Joined:
22-01-2012
Messages: 202
from Largo,FL
OFF-Line
|  Posted 04-03-2012 at 02:46
Thanks Cropredy, and I HAVE seen the water as it spirals, and thought"there is the perfect example of the spirals, and their creation." Do you know if the spirals in the Southern hemisphere rotate the opposite, or do they remain in the same direction of rotation down there(coriolis effect?)
A parrot named Max once had a stranglehold on the Williams house, and I went over to him in his cage and picked him right up the first meeting, and we were buddies ever since.
Kind of like the flows, cropredy, and how they are my new friend in the world of spairal creation.
I have to say, I cant wait to dowse, after the new realizations I have this week, and Im still going to draw that map, just too busy to make a poopy even! (kids are getting me to speak their way LOL!)
Tonight Im reading Raymond's Sprite post, and seem to be liking the idea of sprites, and elves, being a new part of my life's studies, in that they are another observable phenomena to add to the truth soup.
Of course, hobbits are still my favorite!
Cheers!
Littleenki
Profile
Email
Reply
|
rogeralbin
Joined:
08-10-2010
Messages: 189
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2012 at 03:06
What really leaves me exasperated is "gullible" and before I get howled down by the pedantic I do realise that as it is omitted from dictionaries that it is not a "proper" word but I do believe that we all have an understanding of the term!
Profile
Reply
|
LittleEnki
Joined:
22-01-2012
Messages: 202
from Largo,FL
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2012 at 04:33
No howling here, Roger, just humming and typing!
And, I'm noticing the minutiae of my minds eye! Pedantics or not!
Yes, some are Gullible, but at least theres a word for it, even if no one admits it.
Cheers!
Littleenki
Profile
Email
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2012 at 09:51
LOL , You were kidding weren't you ?
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-04 03:06, rogeralbin wrote:
What really leaves me exasperated is "gullible" and before I get howled down by the pedantic I do realise that as it is omitted from dictionaries that it is not a "proper" word but I do believe that we all have an understanding of the term!
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
Runemage
Joined:
15-07-2005
Messages: 2412
from UK
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2012 at 11:21
It's not a term I'm fond of being used on here because of its ad hom implications. It's most often used in discussions elsewhere concerning peoples' choice to use complementary therapies as well as discussions involving boiler room scams.
However, maybe you skim-read this quote online from Urban Dictionary and didn't notice the date?
1. gullible
April 1, 2008 Urban Word of the Day
The only word that is not in the dictionary. Go look.
I swear, gullible is not there.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gullible
Rune
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-04 03:06, rogeralbin wrote:
What really leaves me exasperated is "gullible" and before I get howled down by the pedantic I do realise that as it is omitted from dictionaries that it is not a "proper" word but I do believe that we all have an understanding of the term!
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1704
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 04-03-2012 at 15:04
I've come across this recently, on TV I think. However it is in my Collins Pocket English Dictionary (1981), p377 - meaning easily tricked, credulous.
I was previously going to wade into this argument as I don't trust on-line sources. It's too easy for anyone to type rubbish without having it checked before "publication", unlike having it published in a book. Either this proves my theory or the urbanites of today don't understand words of more than one syllable.
Profile
Reply
|
rogeralbin
Joined:
08-10-2010
Messages: 189
OFF-Line
| Posted 05-03-2012 at 02:43
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-04 09:51, tiompan wrote:
LOL , You were kidding weren't you ?
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-04 03:06, rogeralbin wrote:
What really leaves me exasperated is "gullible" and before I get howled down by the pedantic I do realise that as it is omitted from dictionaries that it is not a "proper" word but I do believe that we all have an understanding of the term!
|
|
|
|
Yes, I was kidding I know we are an opinionated lot on here. I just found it enlightening when confronted with a similar statement that even though I knew the word was obviously in the dictionary that I still wanted to verify it even though I realised that if I did I would fit the defenition.
Years ago in the local I mentioned that a rat had run up a workmates arm, one of the older customers casually asked what colour it was to which I replied brown. This set him off telling me in no uncertain terms that I was wrong as there were only black rats and grey rats. I replied that all european rats were brown so a 3rd, 4th, 5th opinion was canvassed and I was in a minority of one.
They had hooked me and reeled me in.
Years later I recounted the story to my mate Vince and as providence would have it the next occaision I visited his partner returned and mentioned she had seen a rat at the stables. Vince cast me the look and enquired what colour the rat was. "It was grey" came the reply, "No No No I butted in you can only get brown rays and black rats".
She replied it was indeed grey and Vince picked up the baton "Did it have a stick it may have been an old one?" we hooked her, he tortured her for a whole month over it and even though she knew we were taking the mick she still felt obliged to defend the position.
The point being the continuing rebuttals and rebuttals of the rebuttals get to the point that they serve no purpose and raise the risk of deliberate baiting and maybe that is something we should all bear in mind.
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 2638
OFF-Line
| Posted 05-03-2012 at 08:08
Could you give some examples Roger ,and where do you draw the line ? .
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-05 02:43, rogeralbin wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-04 09:51, tiompan wrote:
LOL , You were kidding weren't you ?
George
Quote:
|
On 2012-03-04 03:06, rogeralbin wrote:
What really leaves me exasperated is "gullible" and before I get howled down by the pedantic I do realise that as it is omitted from dictionaries that it is not a "proper" word but I do believe that we all have an understanding of the term!
|
|
|
|
Yes, I was kidding I know we are an opinionated lot on here. I just found it enlightening when confronted with a similar statement that even though I knew the word was obviously in the dictionary that I still wanted to verify it even though I realised that if I did I would fit the defenition.
Years ago in the local I mentioned that a rat had run up a workmates arm, one of the older customers casually asked what colour it was to which I replied brown. This set him off telling me in no uncertain terms that I was wrong as there were only black rats and grey rats. I replied that all european rats were brown so a 3rd, 4th, 5th opinion was canvassed and I was in a minority of one.
They had hooked me and reeled me in.
Years later I recounted the story to my mate Vince and as providence would have it the next occaision I visited his partner returned and mentioned she had seen a rat at the stables. Vince cast me the look and enquired what colour the rat was. "It was grey" came the reply, "No No No I butted in you can only get brown rays and black rats".
She replied it was indeed grey and Vince picked up the baton "Did it have a stick it may have been an old one?" we hooked her, he tortured her for a whole month over it and even though she knew we were taking the mick she still felt obliged to defend the position.
The point being the continuing rebuttals and rebuttals of the rebuttals get to the point that they serve no purpose and raise the risk of deliberate baiting and maybe that is something we should all bear in mind.
|
|
Profile
Reply
| |
|
|
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