nigelswift
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 12:30
|
|
Interestingly, in a field containing 500 cowpats all 500 form isosceles triangles.
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 12:53
|
|
nigelswift wrote: Interestingly, in a field containing 500 cowpats all 500 form isosceles triangles.
Oh ye all of little faith... Wait until something really 'out-of-this-world' comes along (mind, until then I'm keeping to my big pigpen theory ;-)
|
moss
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 13:56
|
|
Littlestone wrote: nigelswift wrote: Interestingly, in a field containing 500 cowpats all 500 form isosceles triangles.
Oh ye all of little faith... Wait until something really 'out-of-this-world' comes along (mind, until then I'm keeping to my big pigpen theory ;-)
Well talking of fields and pigs, (and I was keeping this bit of news quiet -hunting and slaughtering of pigs Rupert)
Macabre sacrificing of pigs 2000 years ago is making the headlines in Hallaton. It does'nt bear thinking about, they had their front legs cut off poor creatures....
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/Macabre-ritual-Leicestershire-field-key-past/article-1339343-detail/article.html
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 14:20
|
"Leicester University's Vicki Score, who has been working on the discovery, said: "What is very intriguing is that the front right legs of all the animals are missing."
That would allow the poor porkies to rummage for food while preventing them from doing a runner.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 14:28
|
OMG!
But do we know the legs were removed before they died, not after?
And why the right one?
|
StoneGloves
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 15:02
|
|
It already has - you missed it !
|
StoneGloves
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 15:05
|
|
It's this kind of discovery that makes the idea of fantastical energy systems so completely daft. Yes, we had the country completely surveyed, with grand monuments at all the big intersections, but we still divined the future from chicken entrails and sacrificed handicapped children at the equinoxes.
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Prehistoric Geometry in Britain: Tom Brooks
Sep 16, 2009, 16:25
|
|
nigelswift wrote:
But do we know the legs were removed before they died, not after?
And why the right one?
Ahh, good point about before or after death (they should be able to tell) but assuming it was to stop the little trotters from trotting too far, I reckon you'd be sitting astride the poor fella (who'd be on his tum) and you'd both be facing forward. The front right leg would then be the easiest to... emm... 'detach' :-(
|
Branwen
|
Re: Books of possible interest
Sep 16, 2009, 18:58
|
|
gjrk wrote: Speaking of bb's...
There's an interesting article in this quarter's Archaeology Ireland about what may be two 'bog feet'. Found, believe it or not, in an attic while doing up a house late last year.
An adult foot dated to AD 52 - AD 230 and a child's foot at 60 BC - 52 AD (both calibrated, two sigma variation). National Museum is investigating. Bizarre.
Yeah, bizarre.
A few bits of Irish folklore have footless creatures, but not bodiless feet...
|
tiompan
|
Re: Books of possible interest
Sep 16, 2009, 19:01
|
|
Branwen wrote: gjrk wrote: Speaking of bb's...
There's an interesting article in this quarter's Archaeology Ireland about what may be two 'bog feet'. Found, believe it or not, in an attic while doing up a house late last year.
An adult foot dated to AD 52 - AD 230 and a child's foot at 60 BC - 52 AD (both calibrated, two sigma variation). National Museum is investigating. Bizarre.
Yeah, bizarre.
A few bits of Irish folklore have footless creatures, but not bodiless feet...
Lots of feet in rock art but certainly not on the Forteviot cist cover .
|
