|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » John Michell lecture |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Andy Norfolk 58 posts |
May 05, 2016, 17:09
|
||
And by the way I don't mind what people believe about alignments, but I don't think John Michell deserves to be maligned.
|
|||
|
Andy Norfolk 58 posts |
May 05, 2016, 17:14
|
||
|
"Then you should say what you mean," the March Hare went on. "I do, " Alice hastily replied; "at least I mean what I say, that's the same thing, you know." "Not the same thing a bit!" said the Hatter. "Why, you might just as well say that "I see what I eat" is the same thing as "I eat what I see!" Alice in Wonderland.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
May 05, 2016, 17:27
|
||
|
Well, the confusion lies in the fact that visual alignments are often called leys and non-visible alignments (the ones that are said to be capable of being "dowsed") are also often called leys. I contend that probably everyone here accepts the former and you were mistaken to suggest otherwise. Speaking personally I currently don't accept the latter exist, having never seen any convincing evidence for them. Maybe one day some will be forthcoming, who knows?
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
May 05, 2016, 17:40
|
||
|
Andy Norfolk wrote: "Then you should say what you mean," the March Hare went on. "I do, " Alice hastily replied; "at least I mean what I say, that's the same thing, you know." "Not the same thing a bit!" said the Hatter. "Why, you might just as well say that "I see what I eat" is the same thing as "I eat what I see!" Alice in Wonderland. See below. I think I've made myself very clear there. There is a fundamental difference between visible leys and invisible ones. I can't see much sense in accepting the latter without evidence. Can you? It really is no different from the status of goblins (which many people say they have seen).
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
May 05, 2016, 17:59
|
||
|
Andy Norfolk wrote: And by the way I don't mind what people believe about alignments, but I don't think John Michell deserves to be maligned. Actually Andy nobody deserves to be maligned if they don't agree. We have had many enthusiastic members here in the past and present who have been ridiculed and cynically humiliated because their hobby, whether it be ley lines, dowsing, crop circles, ghosts, UFO's etc don't fit in with our resident 'experts' views. It's not enough for them to 'put the hobbyist straight' then let it lie, but to grind them into submission by post after post cynically hammering their point home. If someone has a hobby that they are enjoying, then yes, this is a discussion group so we all have our say, but once you've had that say shut the f*ck up and give that person a break. Nobody here is an expert in any of this stuff but certain members probably spend their nights googeling away to arm themselves up for the next days onslaught on some poor mug to make them sound like they actually know something, when all the time they are using someone else's work. To balance that up we also have a few left (the rest departed long ago) that are sensible and bring interesting ideas and discussion to the table. I have no time for the others and of course they won't have any time for me but that's no hardship. The big difference is that I have a life and get immense satisfaction out of my hobbies whether they are understood by everyone or not and will support others with theirs. Right that's me done. See you around.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
May 05, 2016, 18:19
|
||
|
Oh well, at least none of these people who act so badly in your eyes has been slung off here several times for being a complete and utter tiresome knob! ;) (You can have the last word but the point has been made).
|
|||
|
carol27 747 posts |
May 05, 2016, 18:44
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: Andy Norfolk wrote: And by the way I don't mind what people believe about alignments, but I don't think John Michell deserves to be maligned. Actually Andy nobody deserves to be maligned if they don't agree. We have had many enthusiastic members here in the past and present who have been ridiculed and cynically humiliated because their hobby, whether it be ley lines, dowsing, crop circles, ghosts, UFO's etc don't fit in with our resident 'experts' views. It's not enough for them to 'put the hobbyist straight' then let it lie, but to grind them into submission by post after post cynically hammering their point home. If someone has a hobby that they are enjoying, then yes, this is a discussion group so we all have our say, but once you've had that say shut the f*ck up and give that person a break. Nobody here is an expert in any of this stuff but certain members probably spend their nights googeling away to arm themselves up for the next days onslaught on some poor mug to make them sound like they actually know something, when all the time they are using someone else's work. To balance that up we also have a few left (the rest departed long ago) that are sensible and bring interesting ideas and discussion to the table. I have no time for the others and of course they won't have any time for me but that's no hardship. The big difference is that I have a life and get immense satisfaction out of my hobbies whether they are understood by everyone or not and will support others with theirs. Right that's me done. See you around. I'm no new ager. I want to know more about these places & what they mean,or meant. All I know is how they make me feel which is, I presume, for most people on this site, a sense of wonder, fascination & awe. This new enthrallment of mine is making my later life a magical time for me. Explain that. Best wishes x
|
|||
moss 2897 posts |
May 05, 2016, 19:05
|
||
|
carol27 wrote: Sanctuary wrote: Andy Norfolk wrote: And by the way I don't mind what people believe about alignments, but I don't think John Michell deserves to be maligned. Actually Andy nobody deserves to be maligned if they don't agree. We have had many enthusiastic members here in the past and present who have been ridiculed and cynically humiliated because their hobby, whether it be ley lines, dowsing, crop circles, ghosts, UFO's etc don't fit in with our resident 'experts' views. It's not enough for them to 'put the hobbyist straight' then let it lie, but to grind them into submission by post after post cynically hammering their point home. If someone has a hobby that they are enjoying, then yes, this is a discussion group so we all have our say, but once you've had that say shut the f*ck up and give that person a break. Nobody here is an expert in any of this stuff but certain members probably spend their nights googeling away to arm themselves up for the next days onslaught on some poor mug to make them sound like they actually know something, when all the time they are using someone else's work. To balance that up we also have a few left (the rest departed long ago) that are sensible and bring interesting ideas and discussion to the table. I have no time for the others and of course they won't have any time for me but that's no hardship. The big difference is that I have a life and get immense satisfaction out of my hobbies whether they are understood by everyone or not and will support others with theirs. Right that's me done. See you around. I'm no new ager. I want to know more about these places & what they mean,or meant. All I know is how they make me feel which is, I presume, for most people on this site, a sense of wonder, fascination & awe. This new enthrallment of mine is making my later life a magical time for me. Explain that. Best wishes x A nice note Carole to end on, and Roy forget the sideshow and do what you do best ;) xxx
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
May 05, 2016, 19:12
|
||
|
[quote="Rhiannon"] "Then there's the other type of thing, the 'this stone lines up with that one', which is demonstrably true or untrue. So should be put in a different, more scientific category. " The problem is much bigger than that . Some stones do align , nobody has a problem with that . It's the interpretation ,that is the problem . "And obviously, you're requiring proof that if he says X is Y degrees from Z, that that's correct. But, you're claiming that actually Michell didn't measure these things properly in the first place. " There are errors in the accuracy , this is old hat ,and was shown by Bob Forrsest decades ago . "So what happened there? Did he mismeasure? Did he just make it up to fit his theory that this stone and that one lined up because of earth energies or somesuch? " Earth energies followed on from the original problems with ley lines , when they shown to be inaccurate and not in straight lines or associated with ufos ,the unmeasurable energies explained the presence of the stones . So I'm intrigued to hear Cerrig's response to this. "Are the measurements in fact correct (and so Michell's theories are supported)?" The suggestions about the accuracy of leys was blown out of the water a long time ago ,with converging evidence . Michell's theories changed to adapt to the problems . "Or does it not matter if the measurements are wrong and don't prove anything because the whole thing isn't supposed to be scientifically true, it's more about being "Visionary"?" The latter .
|
|||
|
Andy Norfolk 58 posts |
May 05, 2016, 19:18
|
||
John Michell did not make mistakes with measurements. That wasn't how he worked when it comes to the alignments of menhirs in West Penwith. He went and looked at what was on the ground and used large sale OS maps and aerial photos to plot his alignments. It's all set out in The Old Stones of Land's End.
|
| Pages: 36 – [ Previous | 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
