Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
A quick sketch
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 26 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 18:27
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
In the latest edition of British Archaeology (digital subscriprion, get me eh) there's a feature on Rock Art and the findings from recent excavations at a couple of sites in Scotland. Part of the feature concerns quartz stones found near the panels, which are thought to have been used to create the motifs.

Something that surprised me was learning that experiments using similar quartz stones found that it took between only half an hour and an hour and a half to create simple motifs.

Given this relatively short amount of time (relative to, say, hauling a rock 5 miles and standing it upright) I would have thought we might expect to see much more elaborate and physically larger designs on rock panels.
This leads me to think the motifs were kept deliberately 'minimal', as if people were developing the most efficient way of communicating information, important information which needed to remain visible, but with the least possible effort.

I haven't read much concerning theories for British rock art and I was wondering if any work has been carried out to construct a 'language' of sorts from the motifs, perhaps attempting to correlate recurring motifs with recurring features in the landscape, sources of water etc and if so have there been any particular ideas which seem to fit?
Is there any reason to think the motifs were created to impart information to others?

At lot of regions [ maybe all ] where there's rock art is water that's got a lot of metal in it [ water at places like Ilkley and Kilmartin have high iron contents ] and would have been poisonous over quite a short time, so finding good clean water in these places if you didn't know the region would have been a matter of live and death, the places that have mainly clean water don't seem to have rock art, one thing i think they show is where the clean water is in an area, i discovered this by realising that the tree of life stone in yorkshire was a map of the landscape you could see from it, i then looked at the map and realised that the cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ] in the valleys between the hills and cups without rings with still water, i think the way in is seeing cups with rings as moving water [ thats why it looks like a stone been thrown into water- as it signifies moving water and the lines between cups is where that water goes and cups without rings as still water [ never the best to drink, even without the metal content ], and i've got a feeling [ because of the slope of a lot of rock art panals ] that if you put water or a liquid on it in a certain place they may even show how the water moves though that area, if so it's fucking genius, i could use the tree of life to find clean water even now, i think this proves something.


You have come up with a lot of interesting theories bladup that you should put into print before someone else does if you feel confident enough. Some will be proven correct others not so but prehistory is like that and you have to take the rough with the smooth. You never seem afraid to state your case so good on you for having the balls to do it.


Thanks a lot, these places would have had dangerous water [to much iron can kill in weeks- fact], therefore knowing where the only safe and clean water was would have been massively important, clean and safe for them was moving water [ eg springs ], and these people who seem so interested in cup and rings don't seem to like someone saying that over years and years [13] i've learned about 1 aspect of them and i can actually use [ if the landscape is still natural ] them in that respect [ i never said i knew EVERYTHING about them just one aspect ], i must be on to something to create the utter bollocks that was written in response to my theory, and you know i can take the rough with the smooth [ like you do ] because i don't care [ beyond my family ] what other people think, these people think they are experts because they are so interested in this stuff, it makes them think they know, but have no answers at all, there isn't even a "go on explain more", you would think because their so interested in them they might want to know more, even if that is to then take the piss, instead it's just a piss take dismissal, it's really easy to not care what know it all's, know nothing sort of people think, what i like about you is your truly open mind, and there's not many of them about around here, i'm afraid.


You have completely avoided all the points raised against your suggestions , I'll list them on the next post if you like .Note , that rather than moan and say your suggestion was a narrow minded load of bollocks I explained why it was .
There was a cue to "go on explain more" , simply post a pic of the map or point out on the various maps available on the web where the springs or streams on the map mirror those on the stone .


I stopped reading, it's quite simple what i'm saying- I CAN ACTUALLY USE ONE ASPECT OF THEM, and i've even explained how, if you think it's rubbish well that's your right, you don't have to even read what i've written, just don't press on my name, you seem know what i'm going to say is bollocks already, but just for you- on the os25000 of that part of yorkshire the land that the tree of life stone looks over matches the pattern on the stone completely, the spring, rivers, wells the pattern of the water matches the pattern on the stone completely, have a look but keep going till the scales right, i tell you it matches, even if you can't see it , i tell you it matches, i've shown it over time to lots of different people and they all say straight away [ after i've shown them ] that they can see it, it definitely does it.



Your original comment was "cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ]"
For a start the much sought after iron comes from springs and there are no springs close to the rock marked on the map .There is only one spring marked in the area on the map (and one well ) and there are cup marked rocks closer to it than the TOL .The Tol has about 25 cups with about 15 involved in the TOL interconnected groove design .Why don't you post a pic of your idea drawn on the map ?


I can match them completely, i've shown it to loads of people who would tell me if it was bollocks or that they couldn't see it [ my kids could see it and they would love to tell me they couldn't ], you can see a long way from there and this is the territory the stone shows so i imagine you have to look at a bigger area, if you can't see it then maybe this info is meant to be unknown, i was just been nice trying to answer the first question asked, i don't need or really want to tell anybody about it, i did laugh out loud when i read people who know the places just dismiss someone claiming to be able to use an aspect of them out of hand, you haven't, even though you admit you think it's bollocks, your still interested just in case your wrong, this shows your mind is open and i respect that. In respect to a photo, i have no desire to show anybody, i don't think you'll see it as i don't think you really want to, if i could show just you, it would blow your mind how exact it is, mapping the landscape is a little older than people realise, like i said i was just answering honestly the first question as i know it, i've done it lots of places over the years [ this is nothing new, i've known it years ], lots of times all over the country i've worked out on the rock compaired to the map where we are on the rock and worked out on the rock where water should be a low and behold there's always water where it should be, the beauty is i can now do it without a map as they seem to use a universal scale, but i'll leave it at that, i know what i know and you know what you know, and i think it's best i keep what i know to myself a little bit more in future.
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 18:46
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
In the latest edition of British Archaeology (digital subscriprion, get me eh) there's a feature on Rock Art and the findings from recent excavations at a couple of sites in Scotland. Part of the feature concerns quartz stones found near the panels, which are thought to have been used to create the motifs.

Something that surprised me was learning that experiments using similar quartz stones found that it took between only half an hour and an hour and a half to create simple motifs.

Given this relatively short amount of time (relative to, say, hauling a rock 5 miles and standing it upright) I would have thought we might expect to see much more elaborate and physically larger designs on rock panels.
This leads me to think the motifs were kept deliberately 'minimal', as if people were developing the most efficient way of communicating information, important information which needed to remain visible, but with the least possible effort.

I haven't read much concerning theories for British rock art and I was wondering if any work has been carried out to construct a 'language' of sorts from the motifs, perhaps attempting to correlate recurring motifs with recurring features in the landscape, sources of water etc and if so have there been any particular ideas which seem to fit?
Is there any reason to think the motifs were created to impart information to others?

At lot of regions [ maybe all ] where there's rock art is water that's got a lot of metal in it [ water at places like Ilkley and Kilmartin have high iron contents ] and would have been poisonous over quite a short time, so finding good clean water in these places if you didn't know the region would have been a matter of live and death, the places that have mainly clean water don't seem to have rock art, one thing i think they show is where the clean water is in an area, i discovered this by realising that the tree of life stone in yorkshire was a map of the landscape you could see from it, i then looked at the map and realised that the cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ] in the valleys between the hills and cups without rings with still water, i think the way in is seeing cups with rings as moving water [ thats why it looks like a stone been thrown into water- as it signifies moving water and the lines between cups is where that water goes and cups without rings as still water [ never the best to drink, even without the metal content ], and i've got a feeling [ because of the slope of a lot of rock art panals ] that if you put water or a liquid on it in a certain place they may even show how the water moves though that area, if so it's fucking genius, i could use the tree of life to find clean water even now, i think this proves something.


You have come up with a lot of interesting theories bladup that you should put into print before someone else does if you feel confident enough. Some will be proven correct others not so but prehistory is like that and you have to take the rough with the smooth. You never seem afraid to state your case so good on you for having the balls to do it.


Thanks a lot, these places would have had dangerous water [to much iron can kill in weeks- fact], therefore knowing where the only safe and clean water was would have been massively important, clean and safe for them was moving water [ eg springs ], and these people who seem so interested in cup and rings don't seem to like someone saying that over years and years [13] i've learned about 1 aspect of them and i can actually use [ if the landscape is still natural ] them in that respect [ i never said i knew EVERYTHING about them just one aspect ], i must be on to something to create the utter bollocks that was written in response to my theory, and you know i can take the rough with the smooth [ like you do ] because i don't care [ beyond my family ] what other people think, these people think they are experts because they are so interested in this stuff, it makes them think they know, but have no answers at all, there isn't even a "go on explain more", you would think because their so interested in them they might want to know more, even if that is to then take the piss, instead it's just a piss take dismissal, it's really easy to not care what know it all's, know nothing sort of people think, what i like about you is your truly open mind, and there's not many of them about around here, i'm afraid.


You have completely avoided all the points raised against your suggestions , I'll list them on the next post if you like .Note , that rather than moan and say your suggestion was a narrow minded load of bollocks I explained why it was .
There was a cue to "go on explain more" , simply post a pic of the map or point out on the various maps available on the web where the springs or streams on the map mirror those on the stone .


I stopped reading, it's quite simple what i'm saying- I CAN ACTUALLY USE ONE ASPECT OF THEM, and i've even explained how, if you think it's rubbish well that's your right, you don't have to even read what i've written, just don't press on my name, you seem know what i'm going to say is bollocks already, but just for you- on the os25000 of that part of yorkshire the land that the tree of life stone looks over matches the pattern on the stone completely, the spring, rivers, wells the pattern of the water matches the pattern on the stone completely, have a look but keep going till the scales right, i tell you it matches, even if you can't see it , i tell you it matches, i've shown it over time to lots of different people and they all say straight away [ after i've shown them ] that they can see it, it definitely does it.



Your original comment was "cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ]"
For a start the much sought after iron comes from springs and there are no springs close to the rock marked on the map .There is only one spring marked in the area on the map (and one well ) and there are cup marked rocks closer to it than the TOL .The Tol has about 25 cups with about 15 involved in the TOL interconnected groove design .Why don't you post a pic of your idea drawn on the map ?


I can match them completely, i've shown it to loads of people who would tell me if it was bollocks or that they couldn't see it [ my kids could see it and they would love to tell me they couldn't ], you can see a long way from there and this is the territory the stone shows so i imagine you have to look at a bigger area, if you can't see it then maybe this info is meant to be unknown, i was just been nice trying to answer the first question asked, i don't need or really want to tell anybody about it, i did laugh out loud when i read people who know the places just dismiss someone claiming to be able to use an aspect of them out of hand, you haven't, even though you admit you think it's bollocks, your still interested just in case your wrong, this shows your mind is open and i respect that. In respect to a photo, i have no desire to show anybody, i don't think you'll see it as i don't think you really want to, if i could show just you, it would blow your mind how exact it is, mapping the landscape is a little older than people realise, like i said i was just answering honestly the first question as i know it, i've done it lots of places over the years [ this is nothing new, i've known it years ], lots of times all over the country i've worked out on the rock compaired to the map where we are on the rock and worked out on the rock where water should be a low and behold there's always water where it should be, the beauty is i can now do it without a map as they seem to use a universal scale, but i'll leave it at that, i know what i know and you know what you know, and i think it's best i keep what i know to myself a little bit more in future.


All that repecting open mind /shut mind , negative /postive , binary oppostion stuff is bollocks .You either think good or bad , have a point you can support or not . You failed to respond to a variety of points and the one opportunity you have of showing something concrete you avoid . Don't kid yoursef ,just because you believe something , or as you would have it "know " something doesn't make it true . Yeah maybe it's meant to be unknown and only special people with an insight can get it , where have I heard that one before .
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 19:16
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
bladup wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
In the latest edition of British Archaeology (digital subscriprion, get me eh) there's a feature on Rock Art and the findings from recent excavations at a couple of sites in Scotland. Part of the feature concerns quartz stones found near the panels, which are thought to have been used to create the motifs.

Something that surprised me was learning that experiments using similar quartz stones found that it took between only half an hour and an hour and a half to create simple motifs.

Given this relatively short amount of time (relative to, say, hauling a rock 5 miles and standing it upright) I would have thought we might expect to see much more elaborate and physically larger designs on rock panels.
This leads me to think the motifs were kept deliberately 'minimal', as if people were developing the most efficient way of communicating information, important information which needed to remain visible, but with the least possible effort.

I haven't read much concerning theories for British rock art and I was wondering if any work has been carried out to construct a 'language' of sorts from the motifs, perhaps attempting to correlate recurring motifs with recurring features in the landscape, sources of water etc and if so have there been any particular ideas which seem to fit?
Is there any reason to think the motifs were created to impart information to others?

At lot of regions [ maybe all ] where there's rock art is water that's got a lot of metal in it [ water at places like Ilkley and Kilmartin have high iron contents ] and would have been poisonous over quite a short time, so finding good clean water in these places if you didn't know the region would have been a matter of live and death, the places that have mainly clean water don't seem to have rock art, one thing i think they show is where the clean water is in an area, i discovered this by realising that the tree of life stone in yorkshire was a map of the landscape you could see from it, i then looked at the map and realised that the cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ] in the valleys between the hills and cups without rings with still water, i think the way in is seeing cups with rings as moving water [ thats why it looks like a stone been thrown into water- as it signifies moving water and the lines between cups is where that water goes and cups without rings as still water [ never the best to drink, even without the metal content ], and i've got a feeling [ because of the slope of a lot of rock art panals ] that if you put water or a liquid on it in a certain place they may even show how the water moves though that area, if so it's fucking genius, i could use the tree of life to find clean water even now, i think this proves something.


You have come up with a lot of interesting theories bladup that you should put into print before someone else does if you feel confident enough. Some will be proven correct others not so but prehistory is like that and you have to take the rough with the smooth. You never seem afraid to state your case so good on you for having the balls to do it.


Thanks a lot, these places would have had dangerous water [to much iron can kill in weeks- fact], therefore knowing where the only safe and clean water was would have been massively important, clean and safe for them was moving water [ eg springs ], and these people who seem so interested in cup and rings don't seem to like someone saying that over years and years [13] i've learned about 1 aspect of them and i can actually use [ if the landscape is still natural ] them in that respect [ i never said i knew EVERYTHING about them just one aspect ], i must be on to something to create the utter bollocks that was written in response to my theory, and you know i can take the rough with the smooth [ like you do ] because i don't care [ beyond my family ] what other people think, these people think they are experts because they are so interested in this stuff, it makes them think they know, but have no answers at all, there isn't even a "go on explain more", you would think because their so interested in them they might want to know more, even if that is to then take the piss, instead it's just a piss take dismissal, it's really easy to not care what know it all's, know nothing sort of people think, what i like about you is your truly open mind, and there's not many of them about around here, i'm afraid.


You have completely avoided all the points raised against your suggestions , I'll list them on the next post if you like .Note , that rather than moan and say your suggestion was a narrow minded load of bollocks I explained why it was .
There was a cue to "go on explain more" , simply post a pic of the map or point out on the various maps available on the web where the springs or streams on the map mirror those on the stone .


I stopped reading, it's quite simple what i'm saying- I CAN ACTUALLY USE ONE ASPECT OF THEM, and i've even explained how, if you think it's rubbish well that's your right, you don't have to even read what i've written, just don't press on my name, you seem know what i'm going to say is bollocks already, but just for you- on the os25000 of that part of yorkshire the land that the tree of life stone looks over matches the pattern on the stone completely, the spring, rivers, wells the pattern of the water matches the pattern on the stone completely, have a look but keep going till the scales right, i tell you it matches, even if you can't see it , i tell you it matches, i've shown it over time to lots of different people and they all say straight away [ after i've shown them ] that they can see it, it definitely does it.



Your original comment was "cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ]"
For a start the much sought after iron comes from springs and there are no springs close to the rock marked on the map .There is only one spring marked in the area on the map (and one well ) and there are cup marked rocks closer to it than the TOL .The Tol has about 25 cups with about 15 involved in the TOL interconnected groove design .Why don't you post a pic of your idea drawn on the map ?


I can match them completely, i've shown it to loads of people who would tell me if it was bollocks or that they couldn't see it [ my kids could see it and they would love to tell me they couldn't ], you can see a long way from there and this is the territory the stone shows so i imagine you have to look at a bigger area, if you can't see it then maybe this info is meant to be unknown, i was just been nice trying to answer the first question asked, i don't need or really want to tell anybody about it, i did laugh out loud when i read people who know the places just dismiss someone claiming to be able to use an aspect of them out of hand, you haven't, even though you admit you think it's bollocks, your still interested just in case your wrong, this shows your mind is open and i respect that. In respect to a photo, i have no desire to show anybody, i don't think you'll see it as i don't think you really want to, if i could show just you, it would blow your mind how exact it is, mapping the landscape is a little older than people realise, like i said i was just answering honestly the first question as i know it, i've done it lots of places over the years [ this is nothing new, i've known it years ], lots of times all over the country i've worked out on the rock compaired to the map where we are on the rock and worked out on the rock where water should be a low and behold there's always water where it should be, the beauty is i can now do it without a map as they seem to use a universal scale, but i'll leave it at that, i know what i know and you know what you know, and i think it's best i keep what i know to myself a little bit more in future.


All that repecting open mind /shut mind , negative /postive , binary oppostion stuff is bollocks .You either think good or bad , have a point you can support or not . You failed to respond to a variety of points and the one opportunity you have of showing something concrete you avoid . Don't kid yoursef ,just because you believe something , or as you would have it "know " something doesn't make it true . Yeah maybe it's meant to be unknown and only special people with an insight can get it , where have I heard that one before .

Good luck in your seach for knowing everything, and i wonder how many people have stopped using this site because of you alone, i am close but won't let you make that happen, i can think things without having to prove everything to you [ this is not an academic paper ], it is true and even my 7 year old kid could show you, i've never liked know it alls/ know nothings anyway, and if you were that clever you wouldn't spend so much time talking into the void on here, you would be doing something more constuctive than spending your time TRYING to pull other peoples ideas/ knowledge apart, over the times i've spoke to you, you've not answered one of MY questions just in case i could prove you wrong, which i admit was trying to do back to you, your knowledge is what the books say so it doesn't even come from yourself, my knowledge doesn't come from books it comes from within myself, you alone ruin this site for me.
Sanctuary
Sanctuary
4670 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 19:37
bladupYou have completely avoided all the points raised against your suggestions , I'll list them on the next post if you like .Note , that rather than moan and say your suggestion was a narrow minded load of bollocks I explained why it was .
There was a cue to "go on explain more" , simply post a pic of the map or point out on the various maps available on the web where the springs or streams on the map mirror those on the stone .[/quot wrote:


I stopped reading, it's quite simple what i'm saying- I CAN ACTUALLY USE ONE ASPECT OF THEM, and i've even explained how, if you think it's rubbish well that's your right, you don't have to even read what i've written, just don't press on my name, you seem know what i'm going to say is bollocks already, but just for you- on the os25000 of that part of yorkshire the land that the tree of life stone looks over matches the pattern on the stone completely, the spring, rivers, wells the pattern of the water matches the pattern on the stone completely, have a look but keep going till the scales right, i tell you it matches, even if you can't see it , i tell you it matches, i've shown it over time to lots of different people and they all say straight away [ after i've shown them ] that they can see it, it definitely does it.[/quote]


Your original comment was "cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ]"
For a start the much sought after iron comes from springs and there are no springs close to the rock marked on the map .There is only one spring marked in the area on the map (and one well ) and there are cup marked rocks closer to it than the TOL .The Tol has about 25 cups with about 15 involved in the TOL interconnected groove design .Why don't you post a pic of your idea drawn on the map ?[/quote]

I can match them completely, i've shown it to loads of people who would tell me if it was bollocks or that they couldn't see it [ my kids could see it and they would love to tell me they couldn't ], you can see a long way from there and this is the territory the stone shows so i imagine you have to look at a bigger area, if you can't see it then maybe this info is meant to be unknown, i was just been nice trying to answer the first question asked, i don't need or really want to tell anybody about it, i did laugh out loud when i read people who know the places just dismiss someone claiming to be able to use an aspect of them out of hand, you haven't, even though you admit you think it's bollocks, your still interested just in case your wrong, this shows your mind is open and i respect that. In respect to a photo, i have no desire to show anybody, i don't think you'll see it as i don't think you really want to, if i could show just you, it would blow your mind how exact it is, mapping the landscape is a little older than people realise, like i said i was just answering honestly the first question as i know it, i've done it lots of places over the years [ this is nothing new, i've known it years ], lots of times all over the country i've worked out on the rock compaired to the map where we are on the rock and worked out on the rock where water should be a low and behold there's always water where it should be, the beauty is i can now do it without a map as they seem to use a universal scale, but i'll leave it at that, i know what i know and you know what you know, and i think it's best i keep what i know to myself a little bit more in future.[/quote]

All that repecting open mind /shut mind , negative /postive , binary oppostion stuff is bollocks .You either think good or bad , have a point you can support or not . You failed to respond to a variety of points and the one opportunity you have of showing something concrete you avoid . Don't kid yoursef ,just because you believe something , or as you would have it "know " something doesn't make it true . Yeah maybe it's meant to be unknown and only special people with an insight can get it , where have I heard that one before .[/quote]
Good luck in your seach for knowing everything, and i wonder how many people have stopped using this site because of you alone, i am close but won't let you make that happen, i can think things without having to prove everything to you [ this is not an academic paper ], it is true and even my 7 year old kid could show you, i've never liked know it alls/ know nothings anyway, and if you were that clever you wouldn't spend so much time talking into the void on here, you would be doing something more constuctive than spending your time TRYING to pull other peoples ideas/ knowledge apart, over the times i've spoke to you, you've not answered one of MY questions just in case i could prove you wrong, which i admit was trying to do back to you, your knowledge is what the books say so it doesn't even come from yourself, my knowledge doesn't come from books it comes from within myself, you alone ruin this site
[/quote]

Bladup, you come across to me as one of the good guys but Tiompan is a good guy as well known for his meticulous quest for detail. I call on him whenever I need advice on something new to me as I know that I will get as accurate as answer as one can get. He doesn't get it all out of books he gets out there and finds it for himself like you do but he questions EVERYTHING so that he doesn't kid himself. Be patient and stick with it and you'll find him a useful guy to have on your side.
You're proving to be an asset to this forum with your new ideas and theories, but don't let any bad feeling you may have spoil it for yourself or others.
You can tell me to feck of now if you like but just keep on posting afterwards okay :-)
harestonesdown
1067 posts

Re:Bladup.
Sep 12, 2012, 19:58
Having visited the wonderful rock art of the area and indeed the TOL i'd be very interested in seeing and map/RA/water comparison if you have one, either here or via e-mail.
Not to "pick apart" btw, just out of open minded interest in your findings.
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Edited Sep 12, 2012, 23:13
Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 21:09
Sanctuary wrote:
[quote="bladupYou have completely avoided all the points raised against your suggestions , I'll list them on the next post if you like .Note , that rather than moan and say your suggestion was a narrow minded load of bollocks I explained why it was .
There was a cue to "go on explain more" , simply post a pic of the map or point out on the various maps available on the web where the springs or streams on the map mirror those on the stone .[/quote]

I stopped reading, it's quite simple what i'm saying- I CAN ACTUALLY USE ONE ASPECT OF THEM, and i've even explained how, if you think it's rubbish well that's your right, you don't have to even read what i've written, just don't press on my name, you seem know what i'm going to say is bollocks already, but just for you- on the os25000 of that part of yorkshire the land that the tree of life stone looks over matches the pattern on the stone completely, the spring, rivers, wells the pattern of the water matches the pattern on the stone completely, have a look but keep going till the scales right, i tell you it matches, even if you can't see it , i tell you it matches, i've shown it over time to lots of different people and they all say straight away [ after i've shown them ] that they can see it, it definitely does it.



Your original comment was "cups with rings were matched up with the springs [ flowing clean water ] and the lines linking the cups matched the water lines [ and the flow of the water ]"
For a start the much sought after iron comes from springs and there are no springs close to the rock marked on the map .There is only one spring marked in the area on the map (and one well ) and there are cup marked rocks closer to it than the TOL .The Tol has about 25 cups with about 15 involved in the TOL interconnected groove design .Why don't you post a pic of your idea drawn on the map ?[/quote]

I can match them completely, i've shown it to loads of people who would tell me if it was bollocks or that they couldn't see it [ my kids could see it and they would love to tell me they couldn't ], you can see a long way from there and this is the territory the stone shows so i imagine you have to look at a bigger area, if you can't see it then maybe this info is meant to be unknown, i was just been nice trying to answer the first question asked, i don't need or really want to tell anybody about it, i did laugh out loud when i read people who know the places just dismiss someone claiming to be able to use an aspect of them out of hand, you haven't, even though you admit you think it's bollocks, your still interested just in case your wrong, this shows your mind is open and i respect that. In respect to a photo, i have no desire to show anybody, i don't think you'll see it as i don't think you really want to, if i could show just you, it would blow your mind how exact it is, mapping the landscape is a little older than people realise, like i said i was just answering honestly the first question as i know it, i've done it lots of places over the years [ this is nothing new, i've known it years ], lots of times all over the country i've worked out on the rock compaired to the map where we are on the rock and worked out on the rock where water should be a low and behold there's always water where it should be, the beauty is i can now do it without a map as they seem to use a universal scale, but i'll leave it at that, i know what i know and you know what you know, and i think it's best i keep what i know to myself a little bit more in future.[/quote]

All that repecting open mind /shut mind , negative /postive , binary oppostion stuff is bollocks .You either think good or bad , have a point you can support or not . You failed to respond to a variety of points and the one opportunity you have of showing something concrete you avoid . Don't kid yoursef ,just because you believe something , or as you would have it "know " something doesn't make it true . Yeah maybe it's meant to be unknown and only special people with an insight can get it , where have I heard that one before .[/quote]
Good luck in your seach for knowing everything, and i wonder how many people have stopped using this site because of you alone, i am close but won't let you make that happen, i can think things without having to prove everything to you [ this is not an academic paper ], it is true and even my 7 year old kid could show you, i've never liked know it alls/ know nothings anyway, and if you were that clever you wouldn't spend so much time talking into the void on here, you would be doing something more constuctive than spending your time TRYING to pull other peoples ideas/ knowledge apart, over the times i've spoke to you, you've not answered one of MY questions just in case i could prove you wrong, which i admit was trying to do back to you, your knowledge is what the books say so it doesn't even come from yourself, my knowledge doesn't come from books it comes from within myself, you alone ruin this site for me.[/quote]

Bladup, you come across to me as one of the good guys but Tiompan is a good guy as well known for his meticulous quest for detail. I call on him whenever I need advice on something new to me as I know that I will get as accurate as answer as one can get. He doesn't get it all out of books he gets out there and finds it for himself like you do but he questions EVERYTHING so that he doesn't kid himself. Be patient and stick with it and you'll find him a useful guy to have on your side.
You're proving to be an asset to this forum with your new ideas and theories, but don't let any bad feeling you may have spoil it for yourself or others.
You can tell me to feck of now if you like but just keep on posting afterwards okay :-)[/quote]

I think your a great guy but his rubbishing everything i say [ even though i say it's just what i think ] would get to anybody and it's rude, i don't do it to him because everytime i get him in a corner he doesn't answer me and i answer everything he asks, if he thinks what i say is rubbish why does he even read what i write, if he thinks i talk shit he just shouldn't even bother reading it and i don't mind if he thinks"i won't even read what he writes as i know it'll be shit", but it feels like a vendetta where he thinks" i will read what he says just to ridicule it", do you think my answer to someones question deserved what it got? [ you seemed to like my answer- he acts threatened by it ] the person asking was asking EVERYONE probably to get a wide range of answers, i offer one at least, other people probably don't bother answering what they believe because they know it'll get torn apart from people who don't even know the answer themselves, this last bit on that subject makes me so mad- They don't even know themselves but are so quick at telling me i'm wrong , how can they be so sure i'm wrong when they don't have an answer themselves, some of the things he thinks about cup and rings are nothing to do with how i think ancient people thought, i don't tell him [and never will ], i think he's in the wrong because i believe people are entitled to their opinions, he might act like a good guy to you but he certainly doesn't to me, i think i've got loads to offer on here, he clearly doesn't, i don't know who he thinks he is to me [ i can read how nice he is to others, that's why it feels like he has some sort of vendetta against me ], i notice a lot of people on here take him at his word but i think he often talks shit [ like the rest of us ] i think he knows i think this even though i don't tell him like he does me, i think he's actually trying to make me think i won't bother on here, i will not let him make me stop, as even though i started writing on here quite recently i've been reading the site since 2001, all our opinions are as important as each others, he clearly thinks his is more important than anyone else's[ not just mine ], can't you give him a little of your open mind to use please!!!!!
Evergreen Dazed
1881 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 21:18
Forums. We all become victims of their inadequacies for clear communication at some point don't we? If you and Tiompan could spend 20 minutes in each others company it might all become a little less fraut. I think same goes with any difficulties anybody gets into on here, and I should know!

As that's not possible, bladup - how about marking a map or drawing your claims somehow and taking a photo to show on here so we can see what you mean?

Is that fair?
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 21:23
Maybe you're starting to get it , what you think or believe doesn't make it so . You seem to get an idea and when the flaws are pointed out ,rather than take stock ,you get in fluster and try to defend it even more but not with an argument just bluster . You had a opportunity to back up one your beliefs , i.e. put your money where your mouth is , but failed to take it . All the other problems about the idea/dream , iron , other marked rocks , the lack of springs on the map that you suggested was the basis for the mirroring , why anyone should go to the bother in the first place , maybe it was iron deficiency "I know carve a stone " whilst elsewhere sensible people merely moved away if places were toxic (although iron was not a problem ) or learnt and told the kids to avoid them .
What questions ?
Too often what you have believed to have been "knowledge " is a belief and you find it difficult to accept that beacuse it "comes from yourself " it might be wrong .
bladup
bladup
1986 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 21:44
tiompan wrote:
Maybe you're starting to get it , what you think or believe doesn't make it so . You seem to get an idea and when the flaws are pointed out ,rather than take stock ,you get in fluster and try to defend it even more but not with an argument just bluster . You had a opportunity to back up one your beliefs , i.e. put your money where your mouth is , but failed to take it . All the other problems about the idea/dream , iron , other marked rocks , the lack of springs on the map that you suggested was the basis for the mirroring , why anyone should go to the bother in the first place , maybe it was iron deficiency "I know carve a stone " whilst elsewhere sensible people merely moved away if places were toxic (although iron was not a problem ) or learnt and told the kids to avoid them .
What questions ?
Too often what you have believed to have been "knowledge " is a belief and you find it difficult to accept that beacuse it "comes from yourself " it might be wrong .


You think what you want, i say" it's what i think or believe", i don't have nothing to prove to you, and i don't think it's your right to ALWAYS pick fault with my SENSIBLE ideas, if my ideas were right out there i would understand the way you are, but they're not way out there they are always within the realms of it's possible, i know i could write ANYTHING and you'd try to pull it apart, Why do you think you have a right to pull everything i say apart and ram books down my throat, my beliefs come from within me, concentrate on what you know not on what you think i don't.
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: A quick sketch
Sep 12, 2012, 22:05
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Maybe you're starting to get it , what you think or believe doesn't make it so . You seem to get an idea and when the flaws are pointed out ,rather than take stock ,you get in fluster and try to defend it even more but not with an argument just bluster . You had a opportunity to back up one your beliefs , i.e. put your money where your mouth is , but failed to take it . All the other problems about the idea/dream , iron , other marked rocks , the lack of springs on the map that you suggested was the basis for the mirroring , why anyone should go to the bother in the first place , maybe it was iron deficiency "I know carve a stone " whilst elsewhere sensible people merely moved away if places were toxic (although iron was not a problem ) or learnt and told the kids to avoid them .
What questions ?
Too often what you have believed to have been "knowledge " is a belief and you find it difficult to accept that beacuse it "comes from yourself " it might be wrong .


You think what you want, i say" it's what i think or believe", i don't have nothing to prove to you, and i don't think it's your right to ALWAYS pick fault with my SENSIBLE ideas, if my ideas were right out there i would understand the way you are, but they're not way out there they are always within the realms of it's possible, i know i could write ANYTHING and you'd try to pull it apart, Why do you think you have a right to pull everything i say apart and ram books down my throat, my beliefs come from within me, concentrate on what you know not on what you think i don't.


What books do I ram down your throat ?
What were these questions ?
Nothing I have said about the problems with your idea , which you seem to avoid discussing ,has come from a written source , unlike your idea about the TOL which has .
Pages: 26 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index