Bonjour monsieur Andrew Gough, etc.
Dear Mr Fagioli,
I shall seize the opportunity your are affording me through your post to set the record straight, and I'll do it in English out of respect for my hosts on this forum.
I am glad for you that professors Eisenman and Barattolo have agreed to "follow and support your dossier"
, and I welcome any "answer"
by professor Barattolo on this or any other forum.
As I said, I would be surprised to see them turn up in RLC after having experienced their own application for an excavation permit being rejected -in the curtest of terms- by their fellow archeologists at CIRA in april 2003, and again after their August 2003 fiasco, where a boulder was unearthed beneath the Magdala Tower in lieu of "Saunière's trunk full of secrets"
, all this under the gaze of of the History Channel and throngs of media reporters, who all went home laughing.
On a personal note, let me say I was -and still am- truly sorry that Robert Eisenman's efforts did not succeed. He had all the aces up his sleeve but failed to use them to their full potential.
Now about my comments on the "Chercheurs à l'ancienne"
These comments were not about your book "Le Testament du Duc d'Enghien ou le Secret du Fabuleux Trésor de Marthille"
which I have not read and which is beside the point here, but about your purported discovery of crypts and galleries beneath the RLC church.
Let us first glance at your credentials, gleaned from your blog:
You claim to be a radiesthesist
, that "radiesthesy is a formidable method of clairvoyance that allows one to discover many aspects of one's future"
and that "clairvoyance through radiesthesy is an art most remarkably suited for dilettantes"
You claim to possess magnetic capabilities
, magnetism being "a principle of life, an electrical principle that evaporates into symbolism and that one remembers in the palm of one's hand. It is then that the pendulum becomes the simplest physics tool in the world"
Let us then look at your RLC curriculum, gleaned from the documents you sent me in 2008:
You claim to have located "three galleries departing from, and on the same level as, the large crypt underneath the nave, with a direct access through the cemetery adjoining the church"
and "other galleries beneath the large crypt"
including "a sixth gallery leading to another crypt, cave or grotto"
in which said "third crypt" "there is a monetary deposit"
You claim "these data are the fruit of researches conducted on paper and archives at more than 1,000 km of Rennes-le-Château"
and that you had "no prior knowledge of the site"
In may 2009 you conducted "a more advanced in situ research using a dowser -the equipment used by water diviners- so as to verify the authenticity of the revelations you made on the web"
and that 3 eyewitnesses "followed your day-long investigations and were able to testify to the location of several starting points and crypt sites in the church, therefore comforting your sayings"
Now hear me out:
First: your approach is purely subjective and gives no consideration whatsoever to any historical and architectural data regarding the site.
Second: along with a majority of scholars, I believe that there is no accepted scientific rationale behind the concept of dowsing and that there is no scientific evidence that it is effective.
Third: I find it amazing -if not outright deceiving- that you allow yourself to conclude that your discoveries on paper (using a pendulum, I guess) have been "verified in situ"
, while this "verification"
was carried out by none other than yourself, using a piece of equipment -whether scientifically doubtful or not- that you alone have manipulated and interpreted. Your 3 witnesses saw nothing except you aknowledging your own theories.
Fourth: I must congratulate you on completely fooling André Galaup (one of the 3 witnesses) who promptly reported your investigations in "La Dépêche du Midi"
(his former employer) with an unabashed piece of journalism-cum-publicity stunt starting with "André Galaup wants to do away with hearsay and phantasms"
and ending with "André galaup has witnessed magnetic powers"
If you seriously believe you will succeed where professors Eisenman and Barattolo failed, I wish you the best of luck with your application for an excavation permit.
Provided you get the financing you are eagerly clamouring for, which I am sure will come pouring in since you claim there is "a monetary deposit"
at hand, and provided of course you don't get Maggie's drawers from DRAC and the archeologists at CIRA who -without doubt- will entertain your credentials as a water diviner and radiesthesist with utmost reverence and have their socks knocked off by your scientific report based on pendulum researches and dowser investigations.
PS. Why is your book not on sale at Librairie Empreinte in Rennes-le-Château ?