Arcadia Discussion Zone

Hi bergeredearcadie ,

Thanks for letting me know about the recent forum topics. You suggested I might find them amusing, and you were right, it was all very entertaining. I had the impression a conspiracy theory was forming - for example, men did not land on the moon, or Aliens are living amongst us, or JB1717 Grail Star is important and actually solves something.

As you know because of time restraints, I very rarely get involved with Forums, but it was good to read that some people on the forum had something positive and supportive to say about myself and the Bloodline film, and for this I thank them and it is only because of their support that I am replying to some of the comments in this topic.

I cannot really blame the doubters as they are not privileged to what has happened with the tomb etc, at this time, but if they would wait until the film and my book is released all will become clear. Myself or Bloodline are hardly going to release everything in advance as it would ruin the book and/or the film. Imagine going to see a film or read a book when you know in advance every plot twist and the ending, it would be pointless.

JB1717 keeps commenting on the tomb and shroud differences, which BTW, no one from our side has ever said that the actual shroud itself dates from the Middle Ages, but the evidence for this is there for everyone to see if only they looked. And where's that candlestick that used to be on the chest?

Let me look at this logically from an outsiders point of view reading these forums.

Hmmm, the shroud looks slightly different, its folds have changed. But didn't I read that they had taken a hair sample from the body underneath, meaning that they would have had to get under the shroud somehow, maybe even lifting it back over the body? I wonder what else they did to the body and other stuff in the tomb while they had the camera, and using something to pull back the shroud over the body, perhaps it was a hook of some kind? If it was me I would have tried to get a closer look at some of the objects, maybe even try to open some of the chests to see what was inside them , or move objects to see them more clearly, I know I would have. Ben said he fixed the camera to lengths of bendy rods, well I bet that wobbled and waved all over the place when he was moving it around the tomb.

Is it conceivable that these investigations may have dislodged a few artifacts?

As to JB's comments about the hairs 'on mummies', his quote was taken from a website dealing with the decomposition of a normal un-mummified body left outside in the open, like a murder victim. He completely ignores all the other occurrences he must have found during his search, that proved hair can survive many hundred of years or much longer. This is something you would expect from someone like Smith, so don't fall to his level JB, or are you already there?
I easily found one example of hair surviving from as long ago as 3300BC, as well as many other examples. To check, just type in 'mummified bodies with hair' in any search engine.

As for JB comparing the Bigou parchment to Douzet's mould, WHAT! I think this speak volumes about the man's frame of mind and needs no further comment from me.

I believe why some people are so desperate to discredit or belittle other peoples research comes about when some new find or theory, (whether it be mine or someone else's), threatens their own research, even when this may not always be the case. The Rennes-le-Chateau mystery seems to be far reaching and one researcher may concentrate on one particular area of research, and may even make a discovery, but it still leaves many areas of research open where other discoveries may be made.

I have never used the Paintings or Parchments associated with the mystery, I concentrated on Sauniere's church decorations, that's it, nothing else.

As to JB's version of Henry Lincoln's comments about the tomb's location, Henry has no idea where the tomb is and so is in no position to comment on who has or has not been there before. JB is obviosly a fan of Henry's, though if Henry ever heard some of JB's theories, his response of laughter would be a lot louder and longer than any from his recent interview.

JB - How do you know the camera falling segment is not in the film, have you seen the finished film already? I haven't.

I have no problem with showing the camera falling footage, infact the complete 1st film, along with the camera falling segment was shown at a Rennes meeting to all those present. Just another one of your many random comments shown for what they are, false accusations.

BTW JB, what does your Grail Star actually mean or lead to? What is the point of it?

Hi Fillip - You asked about the various test results - these will be available in due course on my website. To answer your other question, the Drac have been informed of all relevant details and any documents, test results, etc, that they requested were passed on to them.

While we are talking about test results Fillip, as you probably know what we have been through in having the Hammott finds tested, showing them to experts, etc. and as you seem to be heavily involved with Douzet, and by the way you keep requesting information about test results from us, I would imagine that you would have advised Douzet to get the 'Sauniere letter' he found with the Maquette, and his other finds, tested. Can you tell me what Forensic laboratory he used - as I am having trouble getting someone to do a certain test on the 'Sauniere Messages' to determine how long the ink has been on the paper, and I thought the laboratory he may have used might be able to help me with this test. Maybe you could start a new thread on this forum about the expert analysis on Douzet's discoveries and any proposed excavation of his tombs by the DRAC, and maybe post any test results he has had carried out? I am sure everyone here will be interested in seeing them.

I hope this answers some of the comments made, and JB1717, my comments about your postings are done in a lighthearted fashion and no malice is intended, as am I sure that you're comments towards me are not to be taken maliciously.

Yes, please feel free to post this as a reply on the forum on the understanding this is a one off, whatever questions may be posted in reply to any comments I have made, I am sorry but I do not have the time to continually post replies but if anyone has a specific question they want answered please feel free to send me an email.

regards, Ben Hammott

Ben

On the off-chance that you're reading this (if you're not, maybe Bergeredearcadie would be kind enough to pass this on), I just want to say many, many congratulations on making such an exciting discovery. And not just for finding the tomb, and all the other artefacts, but for sticking with it for so long and not giving up, despite all the difficulties you must have faced, and all the unwarranted derision that has been directed your way.

Can't wait to see the film (and read your book).

Good luck with everything.

Richard

Yeah, I'm sure they moved that whole large box with their hook do-dad. Rather odd that they didn't bother to hook one of the easily hooked objects, like the pitchers. They were apparently able to manipulate that rod so precisely that they could peel back the shroud, grab some hair, and then go to the trouble of putting the shroud back over the head again. Since they had the head exposed, why not leave it exposed so they could get nice images of it anytime they wanted from that point on? Hammott's excuses are more ludicrous than his claims in the first place. He slipped up, got caught and has no valid way to explain it away. So a candlestick also got moved, huh? Thanks for pointing that out. Where'd THAT go?

Hammott asked where the Grail Star leads to. Just shows his immense ignorance. I explained and showed years ago how it leads to Oak Island. To bad he was lost in his little tomb world. He actually has the gall to ridicule something so far beyond his mental level that he only proves that I severely underestimated his degree of boobness. The guy's a joke and so hungry to inject himself into the RLC mystery that he made up his own discoveries and now I think he actually believes them himself. I also think he actually believes his name is Ben Hammott.

I only compared the parchment to the mould because the outrageously overdone distressing of it makes it look more like a relief map than a piece of flat parchment. I agree that I should have known better than to think that it might actually be connectible to something legitimately associated with the RLC mystery. I knew it was probably just folds and stuff but it did look so 3D that I gave Hammott the benefit of the doubt, momentarily. I sure won't make that mistake again. Fortunately, by ridiculing me for even attempting to connect something of his to the RLC mystery, he proved just how unintelligent he really is.

..

So Ben is too busy to check into this forum once a day to respond to serious criticism and questions about his "discoveries". Gee, what's more important than that, does he have to put a lot of time in on making the new models? Yeah, that can be time consuming.

..

And I now await the torrent file. Not that I recommend that, the quality is usually pretty poor, but I'm just not that finicky and I hate theaters. Who wants to fight their way over a bunch of legs to go to the washroom?

Sure, we'll watch it. How could we not after all this buildup and controversy?

'*'

'*'

You worked with Ben to figure out where the tomb was in 2000, or whenever it was? I can recall when he first showed up on the rennes-le-chateau.com forum years ago as the Tombman, at least I think that's where it was. Or are you talking about finding the bottles and chest by using the measurements from the church?

I know there's a chance the tomb is real. I won't look bad if that happens to be verified, though, because i am merely basing my opinions on what I have seen, Things HAVE been moved in the tomb. It DOES seem odd that Ben found it and everyone else missed it all this time. Things like that. Better to err on the side of caution than be shown later to have been gullible. I haven't said I stake my pride on it being a setup. Just that it has a lot of elements that seem to suggest a good possibility of that. Not necessarily set up by Hammott, but maybe somebody else.

So the Roc Fuarbe deal is off then? Or how about the place which Henry Lincoln scathingly calls "The Bill Kersey corner"?

We've been here before haven't we? It didn't come to much before did it?

Perhaps you were called in because of your expertise in dragging people through thick bracken on a wild goose chase.

If you see Ben congratulate him on the timing of the find will you. Isn't it lucky that people are still interested enough after Dan Brown's book?

So tell me this, how do Hammott or Kersey explain the reason for the statues of St Germaine next to St. Antoine l'Hermite and them being across from St. Roch, Mary Magdalen and St Antoine de Padua? Those are all of the Saint statues in the main area of the church. John the Baptist is simply opposite the devil stoup and Mary and Joseph are in a separate area at the front of the church. Those three being standard Biblical figures. All the saints in the Magdalen group, aside from her, are more recent figures who are not from the Bible at all. Why those particular saints and why with Magdalen?

I say that the St. Germaine (the Holy Shepherdess) and St. Antoine l'Hermite refer to the Poussin and Teniers paintings and that St. Roch and Antoine Padua flanking Magdalen refer to a painting by Giorgione showing the same two saints flanking a woman with child, supposedly the Virgin Mary. How do Hammott or Kersey relate those saints to their proposed treasure locations, which I'm guessing don't involve those paintings?

Since the statues are without question the major features of the church, if you can't explain how they relate to your theories, you don't have valid theories.

Now observe this. This is what that boob Hammott scoffed at, the incomparable Grail Star figure, something vastly beyond his level of comprehension and, I suspect, Kersey's as well;

Here is another interesting painting I just found. Having read that Titian was a student of Giorgione I checked some of his paintings and found this one of St. Mark Enthroned with Saints. Notice St. Roch second from the right. He even has the same knob topped staff as in Giorgione's painting. You can tell it's Roch because he points to the sore on his leg. One of the characters at the left may also be St. Antoine of Padua and that looks like John the Baptist at the right. As we know, John the Baptist is another of the statues in the RLC church. The interesting thing with John in this painting is that it obviously resembles da Vinci's depiction. Thing is, this painting by Titian was done four years BEFORE da Vinci's. Da Vinci imitated Titian. And why has John got an arrow stuck in him? Probably because the passage from Isaiah 49: 1-6 which says "he made me a polished arrow, in his quiver he hid me away" is supposed to be a prophesy about John the baptist.
As we also know, Titian did a few Magdalene paintings too.

Let's see it, please.

You can run but you can't hide.

You specifically said there was something wrong with the translation of the phrase Cité Sainte

I said it means Holy City

What is wrong with this translation?

How many Holy Cities can you name from western culture?

Here's the definition of the word Priory from the several Dictionaries.

pri·o·ry /ˈpraɪəri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[prahy-uh-ree] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ries.

a religious house governed by a prior or prioress, often dependent upon an abbey.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1250–1300; ME priorie < ML priōria. See prior2, -y3]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This pri·or·y Audio Help (prī'ə-rē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. pri·or·ies

A monastery governed by a prior or a convent governed by a prioress.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Online Etymology Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
priory

c.1290, from Anglo-Fr. priorie (c.1240), from M.L. prioria "monastery governed by a prior," from L. prior (see prior (n.)).

Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper
WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This priory

noun

religious residence in a monastery governed by a prior or a convent governed by a prioress

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

That was the definition of the word Priory.

Here is the definition of the word Pedantry

ped·ant·ry /ˈpɛdntri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ped-n-tree] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ries.

1. the character, qualities, practices, etc., of a pedant, esp. undue display of learning.
2. slavish attention to rules, details, etc.
3. an instance of being pedantic: the pedantries of modern criticism.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1575–85; It pedanteria. See pedant, -ry]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This ped·ant·ry Audio Help (pěd'n-trē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. ped·ant·ries

Pedantic attention to detail or rules.
An instance of pedantic behavior.
The habit of mind or manner characteristic of a pedant.


(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source - Share This pedantry

noun
an ostentatious and inappropriate display of learning

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
Pedantry

Ped"ant*ry\, n. [Cf. F. p['e]danterie.] The act, character, or manners of a pedant; vain ostentation of learning. "This pedantry of quotation." --Cowley.

'T is a practice that savors much of pedantry. --Sir T. Browne. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
On-line Medical Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
pedantry

..

I agree. However, if Roger is right, then I think someone's got some explaining to do!


Regards,

David.

..

..

..

..

'*'

So how does your Poussin theory explain that big Grail Star in the painting, and if you deny the existence of said Star then how do you explain those three very prominent staffs and the fact that the same star figure fits a Teniers painting and a Giorgione painting which shows St. Roch in a very similar position to the right shepherd. You have solved none of the major clues of the RLC church, namely, the saint statues which clearly relate to these paintings.

Your fraking star can be used in many paintings because all paintings were made by the same measuements, they did use triangles to gibe the painting depth-that´s all my holy triangle constructor jb! I will place it on every painting if you want! 4 me THAT´S Bulls...! Like Ben already did ask: Where does it lead to?????? NOWHERE!!!!! And you will discuss about things you don´t understand. Please answer me just one question-here-now: HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU BEEN IN THE RENNES LE CHATEAU AREA???????????????

'*'