Arcadia Discussion Zone

For two weeks...

And David Wood got it wrong about the sunrise line - it does not rise over Blanchefort on 22 July, but over the village of Missègre. Brian Innes also got it wrong before him in The Unexplained magazine.

" "

Certain someone keeps repeating the non-sequitur of sunrise line on 22 July as if it were "established fact" - read the messages.

David Wood used the supposed sunrise line simply as a starting point. It connected two places and he saw a connection between them. From this he found his circle of churches and from there his extended pentagram. Whether or not the first line pointed to the sunrise or not is absolutely immaterial. As far as Wood is concerned it was just the trigger for the rest of his discoveries. Asking whether anyone else has been able to repeat Wood's geometry on the map might be a more sensible topic.

Mr Norton, I totally sympathise with you on the view you take on the whole RLC enigma. It doesnt make any sense and is totally illogical. Its played out by bit part players who wouldnt rate a second look in the RLC panto. Everything tangible, as you say, can be explained away by ordinary explanations that are all there in the public domain. All the changes to the Stations of the Cross in the church can be explained by a bored priest's sense of humour and the devil in the doorway by his disgruntlement with the Church. Boudet and his book, the product of a frustrated author. All the Rosicrucian stuff, people playing out their fantasies. Looked on like that you are quite right - its all a load of nothing and people should stop wasting their time on it.

Henry Lincoln, who you probably have a fairly low opinion of, has said that the only thing provable in this whole thing is the geometry. Have you ever given your opinion on that side of it. For instance, it is generally accepted that for things not to be just coincidence, there has to be at least two instances of them. What do you think the chances are that, for instance, there are two instances of David Wood's geometry. That would have to be the whole thing with all the check lines and circles and crossing points in place so that it can be proven to be the same thing. I should think that the chances of that ever happening would be millions to one. In fact you could almost put that up as a James Randii type test of the whole RLC thing, seeing as how the 'father' of the whole RLC carbuncle thinks its so provable. What do you think?

Renaissance Man,
You are quite right to ask about the repeatability of David Wood's mapping results. Have you attempted this? Or tested Lincoln's results?
I have a bit of training in mathematics and decided to test these hypotheses at length in 2005.

The methods of geometric probability are based on the methods of the the French mathematician Comte de Buffon. Imagine if you will a tile floor upon which you through a handful of coins. The tiles form a grid - which is an idealized geometry. The 'coins' are our targets - churches, peaks, etc. Now the question becomes: what is the probability that a coin will fall on on one of the lines of the grid? With a little thought you will realize that this depends upon the number of coins (opportunities), the diameter of the coins (accuracy), and the spacing and length of the grid lines. The bigger the coins or the more the number of lines the less compelling are the correlations. Obviously, coins that fall on intersections are of greater interest.

In the case of Lincoln and Wood their results are statistically meaningless. This is because the opportunities for coincidence approach infinity even within the limited constraints of the 2347OT map when there are no apparent constraints on scale, rotation, and approximate location of the geometry. Other than vague ideas about 'pentagonal geometries' there are very few apparent constraints on the geometry itself - they can stretch, tweak, and reinvent until they find something of interest. These points have been cogently argued by Bill Putnam and Edwin Wood, although not to the depth I would have preferred.

It is very easy to find meaningless coincidence using geometry on a map. I have many examples that are more interesting and accurate than anything in print - but these too are meaniningless. Having said all of this I must add that a geometric solution has always been indicated by the available clues.

Kind Regards,
A. Nesos

" "

A.N.
Thank you for your reply. I whole heartedly agree with everything you have said. As you (and Jake) say, the kind of statistical analysis you described is totally unsuitable here as if it did exist and was man made all you would be analysing would be the accuracy of the people who made it. The alternative, again assuming it does exist, would be that it is a natural phenomenon of some kind.(?) How would you set about analysing that?

When I looked at Wood's work I was looking for coincidence of the geometry (eg significant points coinciding with things like churches) and the overall meaning of it. The circle of churches for instance was either very accurate or not very accurate depending on what you were hoping to see. The meaning Wood gave to it, I found as daft and obscene as most others did. Despite having an interest in symbolism I was unable to find another meaning.

Two things impressed me. 1)Wood found the thing by using a tried and tested method used by the military for finding anomalies on reconnaissance photos. He was not just messing about with a pencil and ruler. 2)There were a lot of things lining up when he did find the geometry and the things he found from the alignments then became major parts of the next stage that in turn meshed in with things found previously. There were several 'check circles' and the like that seemed to work well.

Overall the one thing I really thought should have been in Wood's work was some kind of clear unambiguous meaning that meshed in with the RLC mystery. Without the symbolism necessary we are reduced to using just statistical analysis. With clear symbolism it could have been a startling find.

If this find of Wood's is more than mere coincidence, then whether man made or natural, there is a chance there is another one. Though the chances of it being there at all, let alone finding it, must be next to nil. That is why I thought Mr Norton might like to offer his view, as it is probably a topic an RLC skeptic could easily rip to pieces.

" "

David Wood's GENESET co-author has more than once asserted (in my presence) that the "Sunrise Line" and initial steps in the construction of the geometry as detailed in GENISIS (chapter 6), were essentially fabricated by Wood in order to "get people into the geometry". If true, then it leaves me somewhat curious as to exactly how Wood found his pentagram (but, really, is such a feat of discovery so incredible when one considers that Henry Lincoln -- not an Army-trained trig surveyor -- found just as much landscape geometry in the RLC area?).




Depends what we mean exactly by "Wood's geometry". Are we talking about just the (extended) pentagonal figure? Or some or all of the periphery (The Temple, The Vagina Of Nut, The Crescents, etc., -- see GENISIS for details). If we were talking only about the pentagonal figure then yes, there are about a dozen other such "extended pentagrams" on the Quillan Map (i.e., the 1:25000 scale map we all know and love). If, on the other hand, we were talking about Wood's overall geometry beyond the mere pentagram, then it's surely not reasonable to expect to ever find anything comparable elsewhere (anywhere in the world, I dare say).


My own personal view on this RLC geometry stuff hasn't changed: it's most probably all coincidence.


Now cue Roscoe with that ol' challenge.


Regards,

David.

David Williams seems to think that repeated measurements being less than 10 metres out over several miles is confirmation that the geometry is happenstance. These are using his own findings.

remember this:



Perhaps I should point out that these five circles interlink as Vesica Pisces, where the circumference of one circle goes directly through the centre of the neighbouring circle. You will notice that Coustaussa church features in every circle. The figures are from David Williams.

I did ask David Williams what would convince him of a deliberate construction but he has yet to answer this question.

Basically if you go out to prove something wrong, you will do. The trick is to break it up into parts and ignore large swathes of data and hope other people don't notice.

Try to repeat these five interlinked circle using telephone boxes in London. It should be easier because you have thousands to choose from. Failing that try using tube stations.

Oh by the way you MUST use em all. Any unused boxes (tube stations) within the five circle area will render your effort void.

Thinks: That's the last well hear of David Williams for some time. David Williams always gets "Bored with the whole thing" the instance his theories are challenged

David Wood's "sunrise line" runs parallel with the St Michael Ley line that runs through Glastonbury and Avebury.



Basically down this line. In the background the snow capped mountain's are Bartholemey (son of Ptolemy: the mapmaker) and Soularac (Solar Rock in Occitan)

That would be initials BS.

In between the two mountains we have Etang de Truites (corruption of Pond of the Druids [See note]) and Etang de Diable (Pond of the Devil. The former has an endemic species of Salamander in it.

Remind you of anything?

The legend says that the Celtic king Brenus threw the cursed treasure of Delphi into these ponds. The area is linked to Montsegur via the Trac des Grailles.

A Roman proconsul of the name of Cæpion took from a votive lake 80 tons of gold and money and immediately re-melted this into ingots. This apparantly disappeared during its transport towards the port to Narbonne following an attack from Volkes tectosages upset by this profanation of their sacred offerings. They would have then withdrawn to the high valley of the Aude and would have hidden the treasure in this area which is easy to defend. You are reminded that a gold ingot weighing 20 kilos was found close to Brenac in the Garrigue in 1830.

Note: This word switch (Truites - Druides) is confirmed by Boudet in the book La Vraie Langue Celtique.

The two mountains can be clearly seen from Notre Dame de Marceille at Limoux. They are at an angle of 23.5 degrees from due west. Basically on the winter Solstice the sun will set over these mountains for four days running when viewed from this church.

The twelve labours of Hercules is given to him by the Oracle at Delphi. Hercules (the kneeling one) features in the Poussin painting Les Bergers d'Arcadie.

Looks like the threads are starting to come together for someone.

So how near to marking the X of the labarum are you?

Bill might lend you his radar if you ask him nicely.

Wood plagiarised the "Sunrise Line" in his book GENISIS from an article by Brian Innes entitled "The Priest and the Pentagram" published in "The Unexplained" magazine number 13. Both Innes and Wood got it wrong.

Without historical evidence (ie, the existence of ancient or medieval scrolls explaining that certain spots were created on the basis of alignments), there is nothing. Joining spots on the basis of alignments can be done today, NOW. Maps are readily available to play this amusing game and Alfred Watkins' Ley-Line hypotheses sprang-up when ordnance survey maps became available for everybody to buy at a cheap price.



That's the problem with books like David Wood's GENISIS and Henry Lincoln's THE HOLY PLACE and THE KEY TO THE SACRED PATTERN - everything is so selective - spots that do not fit in with the respective authors' alignments are conveniently omitted from their arguments and are - "forgotten".

I find the precision of the distances between the said churches more amazing than any perceived pentagons on the landscape. Yep we can complain about omissions and selectivity but to my untutored mind that doesn't explain the remarkable precision shown above.

Half of the problem with these people is that they neither know nor understand half of what is there. They think there's just Lincoln's pentacle of mountains, to be honest that's the least amazing of the whole thing.

There's no historical evidence for the Origin of Species but it doesn't seem to stop them speculating. As for maps laid out on the ground, did you not notice the standing stones all over europe?

The St Michael Ley line is man made just like the position of the churches. It is a self fullfilling phenomena but this does not make it less interesting.

Heaven above, Heaven below
Stars above, stars below
All that is over, under shall show
Happy thou who the riddle readest

Tabula Smaragdina




Oh they're being selective now? Sorry I had to read this several times before I stopped laughing long enough to give a measured answer.



And these are?

Look before you start mixing it with me on this subject you'd better have a talk with David Williams he too thought that he could get away with glib remarks like the one you just made and not get challenged on it.

So some points have been omitted have they? On yer go then Sonny name them?

The trouble with you people is that you cannot see that "I do not Believe" is just as much an act of faith as " I Believe"

You know whenever I see a line like this it always seems to me that it is posted more to placate your own pseudo religious belief system in your own mind than to convince anyone else.

So the "sunrise line"(sic) wasn't Wood's. And your point is?

One thing I know about the truth is that there is only one correct answer. When several people start to converge on it then they may start to inadvertently repeat each other.

That'll teach me to type quickly. I keep forgeting the Olympic standard Pedantry atheletes on here. It's been corrected.



They did but the Brenus Delphi treasure was cursed in their mind. They suffered from the day it was removed.



Cue the German Miners(?)

The trouble with you is that you are so stupid that you'll never see that you are completely wrong when you say that.

" "

Try telling that to Richard Dawkins who can readily supply the physical evidence for it. The carbon dating demonstrated the historical evidence.

Nelson liked to place his telescope to his blind eye as well.

The "sunrise line" argument does not exist because sunrise at Rennes-le-Chateau on 22 July does not occur over Blanchefort.

Some people need to do some "on the ground research" in relation to this.

German miners were brought in because they were more experienced and better at it than the French and did it cheaper - this is explained in the 1633 source.