Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Ley lines
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Earth Mysteries - the land
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
FraterLibreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Total posts: 2235
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 07-12-2003 18:29    Post subject: Re: some comments on reasoning and the form of ley lines Reply with quote

Quote:
[i]Originally posted by julianpenrod

And Frater Libre insists on indulging in what they try to represent as "legitimate scientific investigation" while, in reality, engaging in little more than obfuscation. "It remains a valid question", they demand repeatedly, "Are Ley Lines actual or are they projections from our expectations? Are they artifacts of our brains' pattern-finding tendency?"

If you represent any pattern that is perceived as the remnant of an automatic "pattern-finding tendency" in human brains, then you cannot assign reality to anything! If you release a pencil a thousand times, and it falls to the ground, is that because there is such a thing as gravity, or is that a pattern you are assigning, based on the repetition of events? Certainly, Frater Libre seems willing to say that a thousand ceremonial sites, all located on the same straight line, does not connote that something is causing them to be located there; why, then, should a thousand pencils falling be interpreted as sign of a universal and reliable force?



Julian Penrod


--I insist? lol I only suggest.

Nor do I say that any pattern is merely due to perception. I'm asking why they perceived them this way. What prompted the observation in the first place? Was the prompt in our minds or in the land or in some combination of the two?

Further, yoiur attempted dismissal of valid scientific investigations is piffle. Why? Because unless and until some actual "energy" or other physically-based reason for the supposed ley lines to be where they are said to be, then we're left only with human pattern-finding, as you say.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Anonymous
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 03:29    Post subject: further responses to comments and "arguments" agai Reply with quote

To all:

One has to wonder if there is some kind of a siren call to the unreasonable that makes the weak-minded pursue it, or whether sheer ill will and callous manner causes some to maintain a discredited concept.

Yet again, JerryB mouths the "explanation" for ley lines that they are formed by "trackways (which in open countryside tend to follow straight, shortest point to point A to point B lines)". Straight ley lines connect important sites, nay-sayers insist, because "a stragiht line is the shortest distance between two points, and, if people wanted to travel the shortest way to important places, they would site them all on a straight line path"! A straight line may be the shortest path between two points, but, as I've demonstrated several times - and the nay-sayers seem to insist on determinedly ignoring! - a straight line is not the most efficient plan for siting a number of significant spots! As I showed, if you have ten spots, along a straight line path, all one mile from the next spot, to travel from the first to the last, then back home, would be a distance of 20 miles or more! If they were placed in a circle of about 3.2 miles diameter, traveling between points would take up far less time! Deliberate siting of points - or even happenstance placement, to facilitate travel from existing spots - would never lead to a straight line placement!

It would be interesting to see what kind of "justifications" might be provided for "explanations" of straight line siting, that run counter to this reasoning! It would be interesting to see if anyone would try to argue that a 20 mile round trip could be easier than walking in a circle, and ending up back where you started after only 10 miles! If no legitimate explanation can be provided, then it would be hard to see if anything other than dim-witted inability to understand what was being said, or out-and-out malingering, could be at the root of continuing to insist that it is "natural" for peoples to lay out their important places in a straight line!

The conniving often try to gull the unwary by invoking professorially a technical fact, then proceed to misuse or misinterpret it! The unjustified extending of the "shortest distance between two points" characterization to more than two points appears a patent demonstration of just that! So much does it appear that way that it seems it should be established, right now, that any repetition of the "shortest distance between two points" statement, to "explain" ley lines, should be automatically viewed as a likely attempt to obfuscate the truth, by misleading the unwitting!

At this point, separate salient features should also be brought in.

JerryB asserts, too, that: "Things like pertrol [sic] stations, hospitals, libraries, etc. or pratically [sic] anything could possibly line up. This doesn't mean that there's any esoteric connection bewteen [sic] such sites." To be sure, in a densely populated area, it is possible to construct straight lines connecting any number of individual structures. But those JeeyB mentions cover a wide range of functions! The sites connected by ley lines constitute churches, shrines, birthplaces of saints, and so on! They all perform only the one, spiritual, function! Too, when the places sited along ley lines were built, the land was not as densely populated as JerryB posits in their "demonstration"! Finding ten points out of twenty thousand that lie along a line is not so difficult: finding ten points in a population of thirty that lie along a straight line is not so simple! Unless something was causing them to line up!

An important, but also apparently desperately ignored, point needs to be invoked here, as well.

Central to the "argument" of the nay-sayers, that important points naturally fall on straight lines, because those are the pathways people would naturally take, to go from one to the other, is that, in general, the pathways connecting points on ley lines are not straight lines! Many meander around hills, and divert deliberately to cross ancient bridges, or take advantage of natural fords! In fact, many of the sites that lie on ley lines aren't even connected directly by roads at all! When these sites were first constructed, road building was not as advanced as today, with immense earth movers to gouge out the land! Even today, in Chaco Canyon, Anasazi roads travel with geometric exactness, while modern day highways curve through the desert! Taking the path of least resistance!

And, in, for example, issue 111 of Science Frontiers, on www.science-frontiers.com, it is revealed that the sites of Casas Grandes, Chaco Canyon, and a site of Aztec ruins in northern New Mexico all lie within one kilometer of the longitude line 107º 57’! The three sites cover a distance of 450 miles, yet lie very closely on the same straight line! There is no reason to assume that roads were constructed deliberately straightly, in those days, over this long a distance! But, more than that, JerryB’s and FraterLibre’s suggestion would be that, starting at one site - say, northern New Mexico - and moving on, the ancient peoples decided to populate as apparently barren a place as Chaco Canyon, simply because it was on the straight line path south!

Which also invokes another aspect of the nay-sayer “point of view”, which completely denies the human part of siting along ley lines! Namely, the fact that, generally, spiritually significant places are placed along these lines! The “arguments” for “shortest distance between two points” discuss paths “logical” in terms of trade and travel. But many of the spiritual sites do not conform to trade meccas! And people did not, apparently, construct a shrine, then walk a straight distance in a direction, then declare that they’re feeling spiritual again, and decide to construct another site! Too, many of the devoted, in any faith, do not value ease of travel in making pilgrimages! In many cases, they treasure the ability to undergo great privations, and travel hard roads, to reach a holy place! They would not be inclined to deliberately make the roads straight or short! In many ways, opposition to the consideration of the existence of ley lines evidently constitutes a denial of the spiritual side of human nature altogether!

The suggestion that important sites lie on straight lines because "the people traveling from one to the other naturally tended to take a short straight line path" seems little more than calculated fraud! Those who genuinely wish to pursue the understanding of the phenomenon will abandon this line of "reasoning", because it is not a valid line of "reasoning"! Pursuing this "explanation" also cannot easily be interpreted to be anything other than deliberate, and contemptuous, obstruction!

Taking yet another tack favored by those intending to oppose understanding, namely adopting an authoritarian attitude toward valid protestations, FraterLibre addresses my points in a previous post, saying: "yoiur [sic] attempted dismissal of valid scientific investigations is piffle"! Where, exactly, did I engage in "attempted dismissal of valid scientific investigations"? And this is more than a question. I insist that FraterLibre point out where I did that, or admit that they were lying about me! Deceit, in the service of preventing the truth, is rampant, and has to be opposed!

"Unless and until some actual "energy" or other physically-based reason for the supposed ley lines to be where they are said to be", FraterLibre asserts agrammatically, "then we're left only with human pattern-finding, as you say." Their "reasoning" is that, if you have not proved every single aspect of your assertion, then it must be completely abandoned as worthless and void! Yet, throughout the history of "traditional science", numerous subjects, even those FraterLibre has not been shown to "critique", have proceeded, even been accepted and recommended, without the fundamentals being proved! Darwin, for example, posted the handing down of characteristics by a potentially mutable medium, yet he and his adherents knew nothing of genes! Even today, "continental drift" is determinedly defended, yet geologists still do not profess to know what makes the land masses move! They make nebulous references to "conduction columns" in the mantle, but still do not state categorically that that is the cause! Indeed, no physicist even claims to know how photons and gravitons really work, or why mechanical mass should be the same entity as "gravitational charge", but that doesn't discredit relativity or electromagnetism, in the eyes of "traditional scientists"! And what if the influence that causes ley lines to be built upon is not one that is measurable by any instruments, not just the ones presently available? Does the fact that no devices can measure the force behind ley lines make them cease to exist? We are told that, for thousands of years, the equipment to measure magnetic force was not in existence, but magnetism existed, nonetheless!

To be sure, the nay-sayers may try to counter that humans can detect the influence behind ley lines, why else would they build along them? Use humans to measure the influence and prove it, they might recommend! Yet the nay-sayers also insist that the perception of ley line influence is also an “optical illusion”, in those “devices” suggested to measure the influence! The only “device” that, supposedly, can detect the influence behind ley lines is, thus, “disqualified” by nay-sayers! “Invalidating” precisely the means that can prove a point they don’t want others to know about is another tactic of those who seek to obstruct the truth!

Completely answering every question is not accepted as the litmus test for a legitimate theory, or even hypothesis! More recommended is the ability of a theory or hypothesis to predict occurrences! Specifically, even evolution has not satisfied that criterion, since not one occurrence of observed speciation has ever been predicted to occur! While the exact orientation of ley lines is not predicted in theory, yet, the fact that all places of spiritual import seem to fall on straight lines connecting them with more than one other such site is, apparently, confirmed!

Overall, there is no valid disclaimer that has been mounted against the basic proposition that spiritual sites conform to straight lines totally unrelated to routes of travel between them!



Julian Penrod
Back to top
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 11:21    Post subject: Reply with quote

Julian - you seem to me to be taking things a little too literally. My personal opinion is that the whole subject of ley lines = lines of energy is somewhat flawed. It arose out of Watkins original ideas about simple trackways in the landscape. He made no mention of any sort of energy being involved. But even his idea may just be that and nothing more - an idea, based on patterns he thought he saw in the landscape. For some reason leys have mutated into some sort of strange energy network that criss-crosses the landscape and links various sites. Why this has happened, I'm not sure. But I'd guess that it arose from getting the wrong end of the stick about what Watkins was theorising about. Thus, the whole theory about leys that exists outside of Watkin's ideas are an abstraction of an idea, without any real grounding in anything measurable or tangible. It's all very convenient to say that religious sites were aligned along straight lines, and that these lines are traced out by the energy in leys, but one would have to be able to prove that. Without the energy lines of leys, the straight-line alignement of sites could arise from more mundane things, and even then not necessarily anything of any real import. It could, after all, be accidental, a result of the percipient placing a pattern over what they see. It seems to me that two seperate ideas - stright-line alignment and 'energy' ley lines have collided and mutated into a new theory - a theory which some of us don't think is especially convincing. I don't think there's any point saying that some of us are trying 'gull the unwary' - we're just discussion our ideas about this subject from our own theoretical point of view. This is why I've used the word 'probably' in my previous posts on this subject.

I think you should also explain if you think that leys are ceremonial pathways of some sort, straight or not, or 'lines of energy'.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
FraterLibreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Total posts: 2235
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 17:23    Post subject: Michell Reply with quote

It arose, this connecting perceived ley line patterns to energy grids, when John Michell, (The View Over Atlantis, 1969), linked ley lines with Taoism's dragon lines.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 17:33    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah yes, I remember now. I haven't read that book for a looooong time, so this slipped my mind!
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Timble2Offline
Imaginary person
Joined: 09 Feb 2003
Total posts: 5358
Location: Practically in Narnia
Age: 59
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 18:16    Post subject: Probably double posting... Reply with quote

....but I posted this link on the Evil Towns thread, but it's still relevant here.

It's from 'At the Edge' a now defunct magazine that looked at the interface between archaeology and mythology.

The article is about supposed alignments in Milton Keynes (which by way of explanations for JP and other non-UK board members is a large 'New Town' started in the 1960s, and regarded as in Britain as a bit of a joke and being the dullest place on the planet).

As anywhere in Britain there are historic and ancient sites in the area, but some of the new East-West roads are supposed to form alignments with landscape features and three named after ancient sites are supposed to align with the midsummer sunrise, and also intersect in a significant manner with an ancient trackway.

Article at:
http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/edge/eminmk.htm

Whether this is a genuine piece of geomantic design, a town planner's joke, mysterious forces that compels us to follow ancient patterns, coincidence or another example of the human capacity to form patterns from a random scatter of lines and points is the open question.

The problem with linking significant or loosely defined sacred sites in the UK is that in 50 to 60 centuries of habitation we've built cursuses and henges, erected standing stones (circles, lines and monoliths), built tracks, mounds, round barrows, long barrows, hillforts, temples, and churches: in addition there are holy wells, chalk figures, hills that stand out from their surroundings - we've a very crowded landscape – many major building projects in the UK kick up another piece of archaeology, graves, temples roads. The land may not have been densely populated in the past, but it's been populated for millenia, plenty of time for sites to accumulate.

It would be surprising if you couldn't draw straight lines, that connect, or at least pass within spitting distance of several of these sites. Again the question is whether these are meaningful or whether it’s just our capacity to spot apparent patterns and make links.


JP I don't know what the sitution is with the Anasani roads, I only know of them from a few TV documentaries, though I seem to remember it being suggested that the Chaco Canyon wasn't as arid as it is now.

And as for building straight roads, the Romans built them straight from preference, making angled bends only when they came to something that they really couldn't go through or over, and they only had shovels, picks and manpower.
Back to top
View user's profile 
FraterLibreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Total posts: 2235
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 20:01    Post subject: Density Reply with quote

Sheer density of sites and the smallness of the Isles contributes to this, yes. It'd be amazing if a straight line drawn at random DIDN't connect at least three ancient sites.
Back to top
View user's profile 
brianellwoodOffline
MAD HATTER
Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Total posts: 721
Location: kernow,u.k.
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 20:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

Similarly, I imagine that stone circles and so on were dotted all over the landscape and not just concentrated in certain energy areas, most having been robbed and destroyed by building and farming etc. over the years, so drawing a line anywhere would connect with something from the past. There is only one circle on the common behind me now, but acc. to early archaeological maps there were many.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
FraterLibreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Total posts: 2235
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 20:22    Post subject: Mounds Too Reply with quote

Same with the mounds of variious sorts found in the tens of thousands all across the northeast USA and south-westward into the Mississippi valley when Europeans began settling. They destroyed most of them, flattening them so they could farm and, later, looting them for pottery to sell to collectors. Damned shame.
Back to top
View user's profile 
gyrtrashOffline
Manflesh
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Total posts: 1118
Location: On the Quest for the Holy Ale
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 11-12-2003 21:25    Post subject: Reply with quote

brian ellwood wrote:

Similarly, I imagine that stone circles and so on were dotted all over the landscape and not just concentrated in certain energy areas, most having been robbed and destroyed by building and farming etc. over the years, so drawing a line anywhere would connect with something from the past. There is only one circle on the common behind me now, but acc. to early archaeological maps there were many.


I was wandering around Calderdale last weekend and was absolutely staggered by the number of standing stones, circles, enclosures, burial mounds etc.
Some are shown on old O.S. maps (1800's), lots aren't. Some are recorded by the 'gentlemen antiquarian' travellers of yore; many more by spoken folk-tale.

There's even references to old, long-lost stones in my suburban neighbourhood!

We musta been practically tripping over the things!Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile 
pizzed_offOffline
with the luggage
Joined: 06 Nov 2002
Total posts: 1706
PostPosted: 08-01-2004 15:20    Post subject: Reply with quote

i think this is the place for this?

if lays are "power lines" as (1) other(s) have suggested

could they (lays) have been used by shamens/healers in either a "oobe" way to travel to nodes of power to seek answers etc from others like themselves?

or in a physical sense like "levatition" to meet other shamen/healers?

what im trying say is:-
maybe lays "are/were" a ancient form of modern travel networks?

(sorry if the above doesnt sound articulated. but i have differculty trying to get ideas/thoughts across to other people on paper as it were). oh please move/alter (not too much tho Smile ). i may have posted something similar else where)


Last edited by pizzed_off on 08-01-2004 16:15; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8072
PostPosted: 08-01-2004 16:43    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is some debate as to whether leys are some sort of OOBE 'sprit paths' used by shamans. Of course, this could be seen an idea which muddies the waters even further Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
FraterLibreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Total posts: 2235
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-01-2004 16:49    Post subject: Spirit Paths Reply with quote

Yes, Paul Devereux was looking into the spirit path thing, and I think the shamanic experience does likely play into those places -- look at our own response to them. However, it muddies things when one goes on the assumption that ley lines have mysterious powers and all that.

That's when it does get murky.
Back to top
View user's profile 
gyrtrashOffline
Manflesh
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Total posts: 1118
Location: On the Quest for the Holy Ale
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 08-01-2004 17:43    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have a read of 'Shamanism and the Mystery Lines - 'Ley lines, Spirit Paths and Out-of-Body travel' by Paul Devereux, Melf.
Back to top
View user's profile 
pizzed_offOffline
with the luggage
Joined: 06 Nov 2002
Total posts: 1706
PostPosted: 08-01-2004 18:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

i will eventualy Smile
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Earth Mysteries - the land All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 10 of 11

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group