|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Silbury updates |
This topic is locked
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 19:11
|
||
|
Oh right, well I am not an astronaut either. I asked a nice woamn on the phone a couple of weeks back and she told me it was being looked at again nearer the time (not 1968) to evaluate if it would do more harm than good. It was not being preserved at the site for historic value, but would be if it was removed. Right, I analyze that tomorrow. Good luck with the woamn. I've started chatting up cold caller woamns. Had one on the phone last night from Birmingham - sold her a piano, and have arranged to meet her on the south bank of the Waswater. Where is the Waswater?
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 19:31
|
||
|
"she told me it was being looked at again nearer the time (not 1968) to evaluate if it would do more harm than good." Well VBB, let me run this past you and the nice lady. Its close to the surface isn't it? So that means its not bearing a load, in fact its nor doing anything except forming part of an opening into which a door has been fitted. So when the jobs done, and the front of the tunnnel is packed tight with chalk, if the lintel is lifted up it will have no structural effect whatsoever and will simply leave the oblong hole that was dug in 1968 to accommodate it. The plan is to fill the slumped area up-slope from it with fresh chalk to reinstate the pre-1968 profile of the hill so adding a couple of bags of chalk into the lintel hole at the same time would seem sensible. The whole process would be the exact reverse of the sequence in 1968, so it would be an actual and symbolic reversal of Atkinson's intervention, which is precisely what EH say their whole project is about. So it seems an obvious thing to do. In addition, I'm unable to think of how it could do physical harm. Could you ask the nice lady if she knows otherwise, and if so what the harm might be? Personally, I'd like to think there was no structures left that would make it easy to fit another door some time in the future, but that's just me I suppose. I could Ask the Experts I suppose, but I'd much rather have an answer.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 21:10
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: "she told me it was being looked at again nearer the time (not 1968) to evaluate if it would do more harm than good." Well VBB, let me run this past you and the nice lady. Its close to the surface isn't it? So that means its not bearing a load, in fact its nor doing anything except forming part of an opening into which a door has been fitted. So when the jobs done, and the front of the tunnnel is packed tight with chalk, if the lintel is lifted up it will have no structural effect whatsoever and will simply leave the oblong hole that was dug in 1968 to accommodate it. The plan is to fill the slumped area up-slope from it with fresh chalk to reinstate the pre-1968 profile of the hill so adding a couple of bags of chalk into the lintel hole at the same time would seem sensible. The whole process would be the exact reverse of the sequence in 1968, so it would be an actual and symbolic reversal of Atkinson's intervention, which is precisely what EH say their whole project is about. So it seems an obvious thing to do. In addition, I'm unable to think of how it could do physical harm. Could you ask the nice lady if she knows otherwise, and if so what the harm might be? Personally, I'd like to think there was no structures left that would make it easy to fit another door some time in the future, but that's just me I suppose. I could Ask the Experts I suppose, but I'd much rather have an answer. Wish I'd thought of saying that.
|
|||
goffik 3926 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 21:10
|
||
|
I though someone as smart as yourself, Mr Carr, could work it out - it's to stir the shit with! ;o) G x
|
|||
|
goffik 3926 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 21:14
|
||
|
Robert Carr wrote: Did this happen? I must have missed it on the news. Anyone arrested? Yes - it did happen. No - nobody was arrested. G x
|
|||
|
Robert Carr 84 posts |
Jul 22, 2007, 06:27
|
||
|
slumpystones wrote: Nope, you still need a bigger spoon, Robert. Oh dear, I seem to have acquired a (weird) little person. Run along now slumpy, the big people are talking. I'll come later and help you get that spoon out of your backside.
|
|||
|
Robert Carr 84 posts |
Jul 22, 2007, 06:57
|
||
|
goffik wrote: I though someone as smart as yourself, Mr Carr, could work it out - it's to stir the shit with! ;o) Thanks Mr Goofik. Makes more sense than Lord Slumpington's explanation. I don't think a spoon is necessary though. Saying anything seems to stir the shit round here!
|
|||
|
VenerableBottyBurp 675 posts |
Jul 22, 2007, 07:07
|
||
|
goffik wrote: Robert Carr wrote: Did this happen? I must have missed it on the news. Anyone arrested? Yes - it did happen. No - nobody was arrested. G x The first was made the subject of a popular BBC prog I recall, and each featured on tv and radio news and newspapers. To be fair it didn't feature in anything published by EH. Your faith in EH may be justified from your experience Robert, but in mine it is not. Perhaps we all might benefit and monuments most of all if EH recognised failings and acted on them rather than spending resources on silences and image, and acted purely and openly in the interests of monuments and public. The sermon this morning was brought to you by the Venerable Botty Burp, Old (and rather silly) Fart of this Parish. VBB :o)
|
|||
|
VenerableBottyBurp 675 posts |
Jul 22, 2007, 07:13
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: nigelswift wrote: "she told me it was being looked at again nearer the time (not 1968) to evaluate if it would do more harm than good." Well VBB, let me run this past you and the nice lady. Its close to the surface isn't it? So that means its not bearing a load, in fact its nor doing anything except forming part of an opening into which a door has been fitted. So when the jobs done, and the front of the tunnnel is packed tight with chalk, if the lintel is lifted up it will have no structural effect whatsoever and will simply leave the oblong hole that was dug in 1968 to accommodate it. The plan is to fill the slumped area up-slope from it with fresh chalk to reinstate the pre-1968 profile of the hill so adding a couple of bags of chalk into the lintel hole at the same time would seem sensible. The whole process would be the exact reverse of the sequence in 1968, so it would be an actual and symbolic reversal of Atkinson's intervention, which is precisely what EH say their whole project is about. So it seems an obvious thing to do. In addition, I'm unable to think of how it could do physical harm. Could you ask the nice lady if she knows otherwise, and if so what the harm might be? Personally, I'd like to think there was no structures left that would make it easy to fit another door some time in the future, but that's just me I suppose. I could Ask the Experts I suppose, but I'd much rather have an answer. Wish I'd thought of saying that. Alright, alright, I was just told the the cross beam's have gone out of skew with the treadle, there's no need for an EH inquisitio... "DA-da! No-one expects the EH inquisition!" How true, how true! VBB :)
|
|||
|
Robert Carr 84 posts |
Jul 22, 2007, 07:36
|
||
|
VenerableBottyBurp wrote: The first was made the subject of a popular BBC prog I recall, and each featured on tv and radio news and newspapers. Thanks Venerable Botty Burp (the mostest). I'll google further. I must confess that I mis-read the date (2004) and thought that this was May this year. My bad. Regarding the face to face discussions between EH and HA, obviously these have broken down over the years. A shame as talk is far better than hate and bile.
|
| Pages: 67 – [ Previous | 1 … 53 54 55 56 57 58 | Next ] | This topic is locked |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
