Head To Head
Log In
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
John Michell lecture
Log In to post a reply

353 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
5758 posts

Re: John Michell lecture
May 06, 2016, 23:12
I am giving you data , if it is wrong point it out , just as I am showing where Michell was wrong .
Nearly all the grid refs are wrong , some to a great extent , e.g. 1000 yards and six miles , it fits in with all the other problems related to the methodology that have been avoided as it is old hat . Maybe we should discuss them .

If the fault lay with the publisher why didn't the author pick up on it ?

Of course the type of bearing makes a difference . I realise Michell was no astronomer but he should have realised that you don''t use grid north for astro calc .He should have realised that the bearing to the bs is actually 65 degrees and not on the line of the cross quarter day sunrise .

I keep asking you to tell me what is misleading , you never reply , just repeat the term .

A round field is not a dolmen , menhir or stone circle . The men an tol "alignment "1 has only one feature that fits the criteria mentioned by Michell .
The boundary stone does not fit that bill either and can't even be seen from the monument .If the point where the sun would be seen on the horizon is extended towards the stone the bs proves to be 132 yards out .
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index