Arcadia Discussion Zone

"Henry Lincoln was wrong by being right too soon" - Jean Luc Robin; author and resident of Rennes le Chateau.

Firstly a few rules that have already been discussed at length on this forum.


David Wood using his own theodolite at around Rennes le Chateau.
Bio
- From the intro to his book Genisis.

Anyone questioning the results of David Wood with regard to mapping techniques should immediately reproduce their own qualifications in the field to at least match Wood's expertise. Failure to do so will render the critic merely an amateur and unworthy of further consideration in matters of mapping the area surrounding Rennes le Chateau.

The use of computer programmes using Simple Basic and with little or no understanding of the corrective Mathematics that needs to be applied and the total lack of understanding of the problems of two dimensional mapping will be treated with the utter contempt it deserves.

See here for cartographical mapping problems

Anyone who doesn't understand that a GPS point cannot be extrapolated to a different point and still preserve distance and angle within a certain tolerance is also to be treated with contempt.

No the ONLY way to test legitimacy of the claims of Landscape geometry is shown above using a theodolite and of course the required expertise to use it correctly.

Anyone who claims that Lincoln's recurring measurement of 188mm between churches and related points of interest when measured on the IGN 2347OT Quillan Alet-Les-Bains isn't there has NEVER seen the map. If they say they have then I require proof from them before proceeding with any dialogue with them.

Blind denial of simple facts (as have occurred in past threads) will not be entertained by me unless they produce some proof.

OK, so now you've regaled us with the rules of this thread, how about giving us something to talk about. For instance, could you put up the points that enable us to measure this mythical 188mm directly on the map.

That's easy.

Get the CORRECT MAP (please note this phrase) (Institute Geographique National 2347OT Quillan 1:25000 : 1cm = 250m) and a ruler and perhaps (as past experience has shown) a good pair of glasses.

The reason people are getting short shrift is because all previous attempts to discuss this TRUTH have (like a lot of other threads on this forum these days) decended into oh-yes-it-is, oh-no-it-isn't pantomimes. Couple that with people jumping in on private conversations uninvited and completely destroying the thread.

Bergeredearcadie a classic case.

Roscoe, i'm going to ignore your rudeness because i think its important that the geometry angle is more widely understood.
I'll look forward to being able to check out these 188s when i get back this evening.

Bergeredearcadie a classic case.


At least some people are interested in what i say.

Edited to add: Bit bizarre to think a public forum is a private conversation place too.
But then again, he'll just say 'I deliberatly put that in because i knew bergeredearcadie would jump in and say something blah blah blah'

Hmmmmm, what about the "possibility" that Lincoln found a part of the geometric pattern but not the core blueprint itself?

And: how does his "finding" correspond to what - let's say it popular - "Sauniere" left for us as hints? Any correlation? Any clear "ah now I see" effect?

Roscoe, i was hoping you would list the five points that make up HL's pentagram but as you didn't i searched through 'The Holy Place' to find them. When it comes to RLC he seems a bit confused as to which point to take. Church, castle or as he mentions that most alignments go to the Tour Magdala, should we take that?
By the time i had opened up 'Key to the Sacred Pattern' he had decided on the tower. He also lists the other 188mm coincidences he found. I'll check them on the map tomorrow.

David Wood - Genisis pp 55-56.

Well it may have escaped your notice but I'm not saying anything here - Yet.

We get Mr Renaissance saying he'll he'll check out the map. Like he hasn't done already. The book was out 13 years ago and he hasn't bothered to check the map yet to see if it's either correct or incorrect. This about sums things up. He has his own agenda and any other theories, even if they're from prominent researchers, he's just not interested in.

You on the other hand remind me of roughly where I was about 15 years ago. Going headlong down exactly the same blind alleys.

Oh but Roscoe, i have checked out the map. Except that i didn't bother with HL's pentagram because i considered it too basic. The grid geometry he derives from it, yes, interesting but it has been done before. And don't forget, as i have stated on this forum previously, it is a study of the ley line system and the discovery of symbolically interconnected landscape figures that brought me to the RLC mystery to start with.
No, what i found interesting was David Wood's geometry. That is truly fascinating - but only with a big if.

And as for getting stuck on theories ...... well, don't lets go there!!

You on the other hand remind me of roughly where I was about 15 years ago.

Mmmm....Sandy, I'll bet you're looking forward to your state of mind in 2025...

Really ? who by ? I don't recall a grid geometry in Genisis.

BTW I agree with you about avoiding David Wood's interpretations of his findings !

No, there isn't a grid geometry in David Wood's Genisis. I meant the grid geometry in Henry Lincoln's The Holy Place.

As for Wood's Genisis, yes i would agree his conclusion is embarrassingly ridiculous but i was referring to another if. If you could find a duplicate - because a one-off can always be looked on as a string of co-incidences. I found my duplicate - and what a duplicate it is!!!

OK, down to business.

For anyone that doesn't know, Lincoln gets his 188mm measurement from the pentagon of hill peaks he found as shown below.



As Henry assures us the 5 points form a perfect pentagon that is where we should start. Both his books describe this pentagon but as by then he had time to finalise his theories i will use the description from Key to the Sacred Pattern Ch 13 Basic Facts, Groundwork: The Key.

"Point A is fixed upon Sauniere's Tour Magdala at RLC.
Point B is the small ruin of the watchtower which crowns the mountain of Blanchefort.
Point D marks the high rocks on the summit of the mountain of Bezu marked on the map as Chateau Templar Ruines.
The above three points form the triangle of castles which were the first step in the discovery.
Points C and E are the spot heights indicated by the map-makers of the IGN on the Serre de Lauzet and the mountain of la Soulaine as the highest positions in each locality.
The five points are clearly visible mountain features."

To make it easy for us he mentions elsewhere what the two spot heights are:

Point C is the spot height of 587m at la Soulaine.
Point E is the spot height of 559m at Sierre de Lauzet.

Finally, as the ruins of the watchtower at Blanchefort coincide with the 476m spot height on the map i have taken the spot height as Point B.

Then Henry goes on to describe how the 188mm measurement (the measurement D to F in the map above) is arrived at:

"Point F does not indicate a visible structure. It is simply the intersection of the lines A-C and B-E. The point is fixed by the geometry of the mountains, as, obviously, is the distance D-F."

So at the end of it all we should find D-F to be 188mm.
But first lets have a look at his pentagon.

Lincoln was prompted to look for a pentagon on the map by Professor Cornfield after he had checked the Poussin and confirmed that it contained pentagonal geometry. As Henry says the points A,B,D were the first step we should start there.

From his account in The Holy Place he first found the angle of 36 degrees between RLC, Bezu and Blancheforte and then checked the distance from Bezu to RLC and found it was the same as that from Bezu to Blanchefort, which is easy enough to check.

Results:
As measured on the map the angle RLC, Bezu, Blancheforte (A,D,B) is 38 degrees.
As measured on the map the distance Bezu to RLC (D-A) is 251.8mm.
As measured on the map the distance Bezu to Blancheforte (D-B) is 254.5mm.

ie There is a 2 degree inaccuracy in the angle and a discrepancy in the lengths of over 2.5mm.

Note: Despite Henry Lincoln stating that Point A is the Tour Magdala, I have used the church at RLC as Point A to measure both the angle and the distance. If the Tour Magdala is used, the angle is even more inaccurate at 38.75 degrees but the distance from Bezu is not changed.

Next, completing the pentagon and measuring D-F.

Comments anyone?

Certainly!

At the bottom of page 185 of Key to the Sacred Pattern Henry Lincoln says the following:



Any use of any other map or device will simply not work. It will NOT be 188mm as the map projection may be different.

Lincoln then goes on page 186 to define the following: (Note all the statements are preceeded by the words "On the map" Meaning On the IGN 2347 OT Quillan.

Rennes le Chateau church to Rennes le Bains church is 188mm. - It is.

Rennes le Chateau to Campagne sur Aude is also 188mm - It is.

Rennes le Chateau to Antugnac and Roquetaillade are both 188mm - They are.

A mile to the west of Antugnac is the church of Croux this is 188mm southwest of the church of Bouriege. - I've measured it and it is. (Using the correct map of course)

At each time Lincoln agrees that all of these could be nothing more than coincidences. However he goes on:

He then looks at the church at Terroles and it is 188mm from St Salvayre AND the church at Arques.

Note that my measurements (using the correct map) will reject anything that is nearer to 187mm or 189mm.

There's much much more but I'll leave you to digest this.

Note that I haven't even mentioned the Pentacle of mountains yet.









Usually the reason this is rejected is because everyone starts with the premise that the Holy Roman Church laid out the pattern. The Holy Roman Church did not lay out the pattern they merely placed their places of worship over former places of worship. But with no understanding of the need for accuracy within the landscape.

The church at Rennes le Chateau is not the datum point. The church is from a much later epoch. Similarly the point marked Chau des Templiers on the map at what most wrongly call Bezu (the place was never called Bezu that is a point 2km ENE called Le Bezu) is not the correct point either. The correct points are La Tour d'Alchemie and the point to the east of Lincoln's point marked Rnes Ruins.

The line from Rennes le Chateau (La Tour d'Alchemie) to La Soulane (The Sun Line in Occitan) is the point where the sun rises on the first day of the Celtic New Year.

Part 2 Completing the Pentagon.



In The Holy Place we are told that the pentagon was completed when:

".... it was decided first to extrapolate the two missing pentagonal points from the triangle already found. The angles were measured, the distances matched and the lines drawn. The result was scarcely to be believed. Each of the other points is also upon a natural mountain feature."

From the map above we can see what we have to do. To find point C, la Soulaine, we draw lines at a 36 degree angle from Lincoln's original triangle A,D,B at both Bezu and Blanchforte. To find point E, Sierre de Lauzet, we draw lines at an angle of 36 degrees from triangle A,D,B at both Bezu and RLC. We should find these pairs of lines intersect on the spot heights and that the lengths of lines C - D and C - B are the same and that E - D and E - A are the same. We may even find that all four lines have the same length - now that would be truly astounding!

Results
The line from Bezu to la Soulaine missed the spot height by 0mm. It was spot on!!
The line from Blancheforte to la Soulaine missed the spot height by 4mm. (treble checked)
The line from Bezu to Sierre de Lauzet missed the spot height by 1mm.
The line from RLC (church) to Sierre de Lauzet missed the spot height by 0mm. It was spot on!!

The length of the line from the la Soulaine spot height to Bezu (C - D) is 163mm.
The length of the line from the la Soulaine spot height to Blancheforte(C - B) is 155.5mm.
The length of the line from the Sierre de Lauzet spot height to Bezu (E - D) is 156.5mm.
The length of the line from the Sierre de Lauzet spot height to RLC church (E - A) is 157.5mm.
and, just to finish the set
The length of the line from RLC church to Blancheforte (A - B) is 164.2mm.

Mmm, now, if Blancheforte and la Soulaine could be moved ....


Part 3 Finding point F and the length D - F.

This is what Henry says about point F and D - F.

"Point F does not indicate a visible structure. It is simply the intersection of the lines A-C and B-E. The point is fixed by the geometry of the mountains, as, obviously, is the distance D-F."

So yet again it is an easy matter to draw the lines and then measure D - F. If all goes well we should end up with a measurement of 188mm for the distance D - F.

Results
As measured on the map, the distance D - F is 182mm.

Dang!! Disappointing by any standards i think.
And in case anyone is wondering what effect moving Blancheforte and la Soulaine to knock the pentagon more into shape would have on D - F, it would actually make the distance shorter!!
(In fact, to make D - F = 188mm the sides of the pentagon have to be around 160mm, co-incidently half way between the average of the three shorter sides and the average of the two longer sides.)


Part 3 The 188mm distances on the map.

In Key to the Sacred Pattern Henry lists six 188mm distances between pairs of churches (p 186). Lets see what the demonstrable facts really are:

Results
As measured on the map the distance between RLC church and Rennes-les-Bains church is 189.5mm.
As measured on the map the distance between RLC church and Campagne-sur-Aude church is 190mm.
As measured on the map the distance between Antugnac church and Roquetaillaide church is 184.2mm.
As measured on the map the distance between Croux church and Bouriege church is 186.8mm.
As measured on the map the distance between Terroles church and St Salvayre church is 186mm.
As measured on the map the distance between Terroles church and Arques church is 184.5mm.

Not one is exact. The nearest to 188mm is out by just over 1mm, one is out by very nearly 4mm.

Conclusion
I think the word 'disappointing' just about sums it up. I am very disappointed to have discovered what i have and very disappointed to have spent a large part of a holiday Monday doing it.
Does it matter? No, i don't think it does. What Henry Lincoln has accomplished goes way beyond mere numbers and angles. We all owe him a debt of gratitude for inspiring all those who have come after him. And oddly enough, it is by mistakes that great advances connected with RLC geometry have been made. Henry himself found that 'the sunrise line' as described by David Wood is not entirely accurate. Yet, as he acknowledged, without that error David Wood's geometry would not have come about.
So, all power to productive mistakes, and all power to Henry Lincoln!!!

Roscoe, i now see you have added another section to your last post.
Do you really think slightly altering those two pentagon points you mention will make it a more regular shape? We shall see.
However, that will not give us the 160mm side needed to get the famous 188mm.
Neither will it change those church distances.

Edited to add this:
Roscoe, regarding these supposed ruins east of the ruins HL refers to. I think you are misreading the map. There are no other ruins. The letters 'Rnes' refers to HL's point. The dot under 'Rnes' is part of the labelling for a ruin. Compare with all the other ruins similarly marked.

Also, so theres no confusion heres the point i used for what HL calls Bezu (point D). Its at the centre of the green cross-hairs. The image also shows the pencil line i get using a 0.5mm lead.

And I think you are misreading what is actually on the ground. I've been there and I've seen these ruins. They are different from the one's on the peak. You can even see it using Google Earth.

This is utterly incredible. Methinks you need some tuition in map measuring. Or a new ruler or a new pair of glasses. Perhaps you're having difficulty identifying the church. At Campagne sur Aude the church is in the centre of the ring in the centre of the town. It was a Templar commanderie.

Nope, I make everyone of these spot on 188mm. (except Antugnac I will explain below) Like I said I reject everything that is either 187mm or 189mm



I think you don't want it to be true. If true it will negate your theory.

However. The situation at Antugnac has been resolved. The IGN placed the church in the wrong place, Lincoln wrote to them and put them right. They have corrected it on newer maps. This is explained in The Holy Place.

However you are quibbing about what amounts to a maximum error of 50m over more than two and a half miles. And as these prove, the church may well not have been erected precisely in the correct place.

In a letter sent in the year 601 Pope Gregory advised King Aethelberht to "repress the worship of idols" and "destroy the shrines", but only one month later Gregory had changed his mind (Marcus 1970), when he wrote to Abbot Mellitus on his departure for Britain, that'..



They destroyed the megaliths and placed a Christian church next to the spot. What they didn't realise of course was that they were inadvertently making a pattern on the landscape.



Yes it matters. Like I said the first sunrise of the Celtic New year rises directly above La Soulane (The Solar Line in Occitan) when viewed from La Tour d'Alchemie (A to C). The Beltane Sun sets over Soularac (Solar rock in Occitan) (B to A) when viewed from this tower through the special slits in it. The fixing of the points of Lincoln's pentacle are dependent on the rising and setting of the sun in the Pagan Calendar. Wood called it the sunrise and thought it must be Mary Magdalene's feast day. Wrong Saint, Wrong Religion.



"Henry Lincoln was wrong by being right too soon" - Jean Luc Robin



I presume everyone realises that the dotted line is NOT 188mm on the IGN 2347OT Quillan map. However the one from Serre de Lauzet (point E) to it's corresponding cross over point is. This may show the degree of distortion of the map.

I brought ths point up with Roscoe way back when. It goes like this. The planet earth is not a perfect sphere. It has odd bulges that at times can resemble an egg, 'cuz the tilt angle which determines the seasons, eqinoxes, etc causes the water mass to shift, just to stay in balance caused by earth's rotational forces in 2 aspects, 1st is the spin on its north-south poles. Then as earth is spun in an elliptical orbit around the sun instead of a pure circle.

The reason for not bein' a perfect circle is due to the off-balance wobbly axis This tilt factor is compensated for by map makers using a figure of 8 called an analemma. This figure of 8 is a date and location marker at the equator, and compenstes for what is due north in respect to any given spot on the globe.

For purposes of theory applied to practice, How can ya see the Poler star over the north pole if yer standin' upside down at the south pole. Which way is north at the south pole? Magnetic north is not true north, the tilt of earth as depicted by use of a analemma eliminates the use of the north pole as true north.

map makers render the north pole and not the wanderin' magnetic north as bein north, even' tho so-called true north is depicted by usin' the polar star. I hope this is not confusing folk too much. Here is my point. Plate tectonics are affected by the wobbly axis + tilt of our planet, The crust of the earth moves up and down on a sea of molten magma.

Use of a GPS device means for that given moment a specific spot on the planet is at those coordinates. In a 'quake, the earth crust moves, as seen by San Andreas fault. When the 'quake finally settles down, exact location of all the places in the vicinity of the epicenter must be re-calculated. Today this is done by geo-synchronous satellites due to rapidity in response time, as compared to trudgin' around the countryside with surveyors gear.

A 2-D map even with the best measurin' devices means, on the day that map is produces those measurements were where they are depicted. A few years down the line those measurements could easily be off by millimeters or even centimeters. In extreme cases with volcano's triggered by massive 'quakes can make dramatic shifts in the earth's crust.

A recent Icelandic volcano sandwiched 'tween 2 massive tectonic plated divided iceland down the middle. 1/2 of Iceland sits on different tectonic plates movin' against + simultaneously apart from each other, filled in by expanding magma. This filling in mechanism is what caused the terra firma portion of earth as we experience it. The highest mountain on the planet is Mauna Loa volcano which rises from its base on the Pacific Ocean floor to its present height which is greater than Mt Everest.

I bring all this up to ask Roscoe, at this point in time, its absurd to think nature is locked in to a 2-D representation on a curved, moving surface. This discussion is academic at best, mainly 'cuz ideal conditions are rarely gonna stay permanent. The closeness which Lincoln described meets, as ye old sayin' goes.. that's close 'nuff for govt specs...

Even vegetation plays a role, how many man-made structures have been eroded or shifted by roots of trees undermining foundations of walls? A mud-slide in Pakistan caused a temp dam to block a river that eventually will shift the next time a 'quake rumbles thru that area. Folk downstream be forcibly moved. When that river eventually rushes down that valley, many landmarks will get washed away, a new map has to be drawn to show the new contours.

What would be off more academic interest is to ascertain in this present Bezu valley discussion if any of the structures or points demarcated have shifted or not, and in which direction. This area was mapped out in Napoleonic times, what were the coordinates settled upon at that time? Is the entire Greenwich Meridian still at its original '0' start point?

There is a line down the aisle at St Sulpice, is it still valid as it courses north + south? Here is another point I brought up with Roscoe, how come a Polaris sub fired missile has that name designator?. I know, but do you know? A small hint, it has to do with navigation to reach a pre-determined point on the planet.

Hi Jake, nice to see your intelligent persona taking a seat in the front stalls.

Yes, we have already discussed magnetic deviation and great circle bearings on here, in those 'real deal' threads i think. We have also been through the accuracy of the RLC maps, with Roscoe and myself having a bit of a tussle. Guess who was proven to be wrong. Theres another example of his willful stupidity / bizarre sense of humour coming up.

Mmm, yes, like your plate movement ripping things apart thing. But if that can be shown with these alignments or something similar that would mean these alignments / ley line things are not man made wouldn't it. In fact it could be the doorway to start to show all sorts of things couldn't it. Interesting Jake, very interesting.

Hi Ren Man.

i found some interesting stuff regarding the Mid Atlantic rift seen in Iceland widening at 1 cm a year, seems small, but every century that goes by Iceland expands an additional 1 meter. This means there be noticeable differences of latitude and longitude occurring on Iceland over a lengthy period of time. Fixed items like pipelines have to be constantly monitored.

Finland is rising up from Gulf of Bothnia due to compaction factor the last ice age caused is now expanding the Finn coastline. Places under water 2 centuries are now relatively higher and definitely drier. Stony outcroppings of the archipelago are a hazard to navigation. These emerging islets have to be re-mapped 'cuz of amount of exposed to air surfaces they are attaining.

Sea faring folk have a greater need for accurate depth + obstacle charts than land surface counterparts, mainly 'cuz land based object are easy to discern. A classic example of relying on out-dated data was how a Soviet sub got grounded off the coast of Sweden near a sensitive Swedish Naval facility.

This embarrassment on the part of Russia demo'd this subtle but on going rise of the Baltic area. It also means the sea floor is rising, not just the high ground land mass. This aspect was obviously not taken into consideration when that Soviet sub discovered the depth they thought they could count on to submerge to was less than optimal. they got grounded for their efforts to avoid detection. ...duh.

Now, back to vagaries of our not so terra firma. Whenever a major shift due to tectonics happens anywhere on the planet a series of adjusts have to allow for this shape shifting. I recall bein' in Berchtesgaden 30 years back when the Friuli 'quake hit in Italy. Folk in Berchtesgaden thought a high speed freight train was goin' thru town, but at that particular point in time no trains were in motion there. The rumbling sound echo'd thru the mountains for a while, sort of like when a jet passes thru the sound barrier.

We felt a shudder like motion in our hotel room. Plaster fell off ceilings, walls show small cracks, etc. Friuli was on the other side of the Alps, down the Pennines in Italy. The point I make here is, did the Alps go up or down in elevation as a result of that 'quake. that point has not been decided on from what I can surmise when checkin' for how it affected that region.

RLC area is nestled into another mountain chain which goes thru annual freeze-thaw cycles. How has this affected elevations there? Are the Pyrenees affected by expansion of the Mid-Atlantic rift? When I was in Colorado some 30 years back The Madrid system had rumblings felt in the Rockies. This is a considerable distance away, but tectonics bein' what they are determine how these shifts play out.

Ren Man, if ya think 1 cm a year is a tiny distance for the separation along the Mid-Atlantic rift, how long a period of time would be significant?

I hope these links will be helpful from a strictly EU area perspective...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/rift_valley.aspx
http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/lemke/g ... d_usgs.gif
http://scienceblogs.com/highlyallochtho ... url=http:/
http://jerdees.blogspot.com/2009/07/rif ... ibition-of geology.html

http://www.qpg.geog.cam.ac.uk/research/ ... s%3Disch:1

http://www.focusonnature.com/IcelandTou ... m&usg=__-W Neq4J4i5WXg 1kJnkK7mKIzg= &h=528& w=357&sz=28&hl=sv&start=7&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=YQQnGoqg0cBdM:&tbnh=132&tbnw
=89&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmidatlantic%2Brift%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dsv%26sa%3DX%26tbs%3Disch:1

http://www.semp.us/_images/biots/Biot32 ... idatlantic%
2Brift%26start%3D20%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dsv%26sa%3DN%26ndsp%3D20%26tbs%3Disch:1

I was thinking of far more violent tears in France and UK back before recorded time. Nearer to when the hills were being formed. What were the influences on them etc.
Just ideas but i have thought a lot about it in the past as an explanation of torn patterns.

But we digress from the thread.

Roscoe, i don't even know why you bother arguing. I should think most people who read this thread are going to have a map of the area and i certainly can't imagine anyone not having a ruler marked in mm. Sometimes you just make me chuckle.

I thought the idea of this thread was to show some demonstrable facts. You have got what you asked for.

Whats all this about Antugnac church being in the wrong place on the map? Which edition of the The Holy Place is this mentioned in. Mine is the 1991 1st ed and its not mentioned in there. Neither is it in the 1997 Key to the Sacred Pattern, yet the 188mm measurements are all listed there. Both my maps are 1994. I'm not sure what year my steel rules were made. Do you think that could have a bearing on it??

I have cross checked the church on Google Earth and i would say the centre of the circle of the church symbol on the map falls on the western end of the building. I would say that is accurate enough.

Cannot understand your Google Maps link. You have centred it a fair way to the left of HL's point. That is WEST of it. You have previously said it was east of HL's point, actually describing the dot under the word 'Rnes' which is in fact part of the whole Ruins labelling.
Then you say i need some help understanding the map.

At this point i should probably say that for two years in my mid twenties i ran in orienteering events competitively. I presume you know what that would entail. Plus of course the years spent hill walking etc etc.
And if you want something provable, take a look at my web site.

What next? Oh yes. Whats with the using every thread to bang on about the Sun God / sun alignment connection? Yes, we all know how religion developed. Rain told you that weeks ago. If you want to harp on about it how about discovering something new. Have you ever done that? You might enjoy it.

You also seem to be trying to relabel HL's pentagon points for him. He says "Point A is fixed upon Sauniere's Tour Magdala at RLC." I was trying to be charitable by using the church because it gives the best fit for his pentagon. If you want to rejig everything to fit a theory of your own i await the grid references so that i can check them out with the same accuracy that i have for HL's.

Then there is this:


Why on earth should anyone at all have the slightest suspicion that a distance on a diagram that is assured to be 188mm is in fact only 182mm?? Unless of course someone actually checks it. Maybe you could enlighten us as to where this has been done before?
"This may show the degree of distortion of the map." What!!!!! Are you trying to say the map is distorted. Maybe this particular sheet of the IGN's mapping catalogue is like one of those rare stamps. They have all suffered from some freak machinery malfuntion. IT MUST BE A CONSPIRACY.

As you are so sure that the 'real' 188mm can be found by measuring from point E to the crossing point opposite i suppose i had better check. Why is the word "sap" ringing in my ears?

Ten minutes later and back with the answer. Not too far out at 190mm. And guess what ..... if Henry's written instructions are followed, this time it actually helps him. If the crossing line from la Soulaine is taken to the Tour Magdala instead of the church, the error reduces to only 1mm at 189mm. Not bad. Pity it distorts the "perfect" pentagon even more though.
And if you think about it, if you have a shape that is too big on one side and too small on the other, somewhere around its circumference you are going to find you have a length that is just about right.
So tell us Roscoe, how long did it take you to measure the five possibilities and come up with the nearest?

And that is the real problem isn't it. We are not idiots on this forum yet you insist on treating us as though we are. Want to argue THAT point? I have the proof.

Well this man disagrees with you.



He's a professional in the field.

Perhaps this is a good opportunity to place your qualifications in the field on here.