karenellen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Geotio Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > karenellen Wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > they are there and
> > > they align: end of story.
> >
> > And the same type of "discoveries " can be
> found
> > quite easily .What is always missing is the
> use of
> > controls .
> > I have suggested that you give me the
> > co-ordinates for a couple of sites that are
> > obviously not prehistoric nor have any
> obvious
> > intentional alignments "encoded" and I
> suggest
> > that I will find similar "alignments " .
> >
> > In the book he does
> > > explain how he came about this
> pragmatic
> > approach.
> > > Some folks, myself included have been
> testing
> > his
> > > data. As you say,off hand there is no
> > apparent
> > > reason, until you look closely and
> reproduce
> > his
> > > measurements, as one should to prove or
> > disprove
> > > the claims. He provides the data and
> the
> > > methodology used, simple
> straightforward
> > survey
> > > geometry.
> >
> > As well as the the spatiotemporal problem
> of
> > connecting sites that were built millenia
> and
> > thousands of miles apart the methodology is
> also
> > flawed ,it is simply choosing a site , then
> > connecting it with another by using GE which
> > ignores the rhumb /great circle problem .
>
> The generalized case of a Rhumbus is the sphere in
> non Eucledian geometry; exactly on which this is
> based. It is simpleminded to argue, what you are
> saying: New York is aligned with Paris on the
> same circle. But, if they were also aligned with
> Rome and Beijing, that would not be a coincidence.
> An alignment on the surface of a sphere requires
> at least three points or a point and a line;
> simple solid geometry. The Abbas Giant's club
> equals a line(an arc segment) which points to Giza
> plus minus one degree (the age of the sites is
> irrelevant).


You didn't reply to the following questions
"You didn't say if the book actually mentions great circles . Does it ? Could you provide a page where the term is used ?
and
Where did I say the angle didn't change in a great circle ?

The age is relevant , lots of post medieval examples can be shown to point to prehistoric sites whether nearby or hundreds or thousands of miles away ,we know that they are non intentional because we can ask the builders or have the plans .Think of the number of straight major roads and airport runways that can be shown to be "aligned " on prehsitoric sites using GE ,it's nonsense .
And worse , the whole thing collapses because of the great circle , by maintaining the same bearing you will not arrive at the sites suggested in the book , to do so requires changing the bearing , making a nonsense of the belief that the Cerne Abbas club points to Giza or it's penis Machu Pichu .

You still haven't come up with a couple of sites where I will show you the same type of imaginary lines and examples as are found in the book .