Problematic Discoveries

[Springhead]

Hello Min,

The art is so difficult to see. Over a lot of time I have developed an eye for this which may end up being a curse because without a great amount of personal time with the rocks it is a steep curve for the viewer. As witnessed, two dimensional images have limited conveyance abilities without tons of "practice." It may be time for another sonata.

[Tiompan]

If you click on the link you will see , in red in the middle of the page , “Streetmap.co.uk “ , among others .Click on it for a map view of the site . It is derived from my 10 figure gps reading . The button for “Flash earth “ should provide a satellite view , but it appears to be broken .
The point wasn’t the quality of the markings or setting but simply it was a very recent find that could be seen and recognised from an armchair with no need for any acceptance or otherwise by the status quo ,it is obvious to anyone . None of your examples look anything like man made markings yet you believe you can see the markings in the material that you have presented here , i.e. the pics . The common denominator is not man made engravings , but pareidolia .

I’m not sure what you are suggesting about the winter solstice sunset but like the markings the alignment consists of natural features i.e. a pinnacle , a cleft and a sunset , an incredibly common type of occurrence with no salience whatsoever .

[Springhead]

[img][/img]

Hi Tiompan,

The suggestion of the knoll and terrace complex was to associate them with the seated mammoth boulder, an association that I think has significance. I suppose if you reject the reality of the boulder as art, then the terrace complex and knoll/solstice association immediately and unequivocably cease to exist. How tidy!

The image depicts a dry surface found artifact of carved and painted quartz from the mountain site. The image is preliminary but I think adequately shows rather thick applied white paint used to represent some being with a collar or necklace in profile. A carved face peers out a little above and to its immediate left. Other carvings are visible to the armchair viewer as well. On the left side of the rock is more painted art. The paint has become quite fragile, hence I have never photographed this artifact before. The paint is a yellowish cream white and appears to have been applied as a paste due to its very thick nature. There is partial coverage of the entire rock, and with other carvings shows a variety of subject matter. This is not patination or some light colored clay or other soil. Though carefully handled, a small piece of the paint fell of from an unknown part of the artifact.

I do not believe this paint or subject matter is a figment of imagination. It is human conceived and executed art.

[Tiompan]

“I suppose if you reject the reality of the boulder as art, then the terrace complex and knoll/solstice association immediately and unequivocably cease to exist. “

No , the problem is that the solstice suggestion has no salience regardless of what is in the area . The fact that there is no art on the boulder has nothing to do with the meaningless pinnacle to cleft natural features . No archaeoastronomer would consider what you have described as being salient , and if you believe that the markings seen in the pic were man made then you won’t find anyone who knows about rock art to agree either . If you think it is paint get it analysed and dated it will save us all time .

[Springhead]

Circumspice,

I appreciate your stance on the subject artifacts, but I think I need to clarify a few points. There are many locational sources for the artifacts considering the mountain site alone. These vary from springs and spring branches to topographic features, i.e. the "central knoll" to terrace complexes to areas adjacent to water to gorges, waterfall environs, small rock shelter formations, along road cuts, and on the more level grounds of ridges and hollows. Each of these areas may subject the rocks to various forces of nature and processes emphasized by random geologic influences. Why these rocks are basically on the surface is not understood and won't be until the general environment there is analyzed geomorphologically. I have few to no resources to enact those and other analyses that would be called for. So, in the meantime I am doing what I can to locate surface finds and try to understand what I can about them. I will not excavate anything unless I am able to have the guidance and assistance of a professional in the appropriate field/s. My purpose here in this thread is to get feedback, as I have received, useful in guiding me forward albeit my limitations.

As a layman I cannot expect and do not receive the designation of being credible. Does any professional give a layman credibility? I do not know for sure, but it does not appear so within the parameters of mainstream thought. The vicious circle of seeking some semblance of credibility from non mainstream sources then appears to negate being taken seriously by mainstream professionals in an automatic way. However, I do not want to just go away with this assemblage any more than a professional would want to abandon a project held to be important. Put up or shut up is a little too open and shut for someone lacking funding, connections, paper degrees, tenure, and credibility. The implication is that to contribute to the accumulation of knowledge one must belong to the "club." What club did the first person to use fire need to belong to?

[circumspice]

Circumspice,

I appreciate your stance on the subject artifacts, but I think I need to clarify a few points. There are many locational sources for the artifacts considering the mountain site alone. These vary from springs and spring branches to topographic features, i.e. the "central knoll" to terrace complexes to areas adjacent to water to gorges, waterfall environs, small rock shelter formations, along road cuts, and on the more level grounds of ridges and hollows. Each of these areas may subject the rocks to various forces of nature and processes emphasized by random geologic influences. Why these rocks are basically on the surface is not understood and won't be until the general environment there is analyzed geomorphologically. I have few to no resources to enact those and other analyses that would be called for. So, in the meantime I am doing what I can to locate surface finds and try to understand what I can about them. I will not excavate anything unless I am able to have the guidance and assistance of a professional in the appropriate field/s. My purpose here in this thread is to get feedback, as I have received, useful in guiding me forward albeit my limitations.

As a layman I cannot expect and do not receive the designation of being credible. Does any professional give a layman credibility? I do not know for sure, but it does not appear so within the parameters of mainstream thought. The vicious circle of seeking some semblance of credibility from non mainstream sources then appears to negate being taken seriously by mainstream professionals in an automatic way. However, I do not want to just go away with this assemblage any more than a professional would want to abandon a project held to be important. Put up or shut up is a little too open and shut for someone lacking funding, connections, paper degrees, tenure, and credibility. The implication is that to contribute to the accumulation of knowledge one must belong to the "club." What club did the first person to use fire need to belong to?

@Springhead: Just a little heads-up for you... You're not Prometheus...

Using the 'Das Klub' argument is pretty lame considering that nobody is trying to suppress your 'artifacts'. I don't see the correlation. In actuality, it appears that nobody cares one way or the other. If you can't accept the fact that no-one else sees what you think you see we're at an impasse.

Let the chips fall where they may. You've flogged this subject to death. You've become as annoying as a cloud of gnats.

[Tiompan]

As a layman I cannot expect and do not receive the designation of being credible. Does any professional give a layman credibility? I do not know for sure, but it does not appear so within the parameters of mainstream thought. The vicious circle of seeking some semblance of credibility from non mainstream sources then appears to negate being taken seriously by mainstream professionals in an automatic way. Put up or shut up is a little too open and shut for someone lacking funding, connections, paper degrees, tenure, and credibility. The implication is that to contribute to the accumulation of knowledge one must belong to the "club." What club did the first person to use fire need to belong to?

Springhead that is nonsense . It has already been explained to you that it is accepted in professional circles that those who know most about rock art and are involved in the greatest number of discoveries are not the professionals .
Ironically the one person you mention agreeing with your beliefs is professional .

[circumspice]

Ah...

Cue Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata...

Ah...

[circumspice]

lmao!!!

I think that the theme song for Jaws was partially plagiarized from Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)... Listen to the opening...

Look at how easy it was to sue Led Zeppelin for a mere riff on Stairway to Heaven...

[Tiompan]

Cue Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata...

Wrong impairment . Rodrigo or the older Bach or Handel would have been more appropriate .

"I think that the theme song for Jaws was partially plagiarized from Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)... Listen to the opening.."

4th movement , not symphony (it was the 9th sym.) ,immediately after the two note repeat they diverge .
Most of the Williams themes or at least some parts of them can be shown to have been "borrowed " .

"Look at how easy it was to sue Led Zeppelin for a mere riff on Stairway to Heaven... "

And unsurprisingly lost .The"lament "descending bass is centuries old and just because the L.Z. was in the same key , tempo and similar timbre to the Sprit track was never enough . The fact that the L.Z. intro had contrary motion (probably "borrowed" from the bouree in Emin from one of the Bach lute suites ) and the Spirit didn't , was another major factor .

[circumspice]

Cue Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata...

Wrong impairment . Rodrigo or the older Bach or Handel would have been more appropriate .

"I think that the theme song for Jaws was partially plagiarized from Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)... Listen to the opening.."

4th movement , not symphony (it was the 9th sym.) ,immediately after the two note repeat they diverge .
Most of the Williams themes or at least some parts of them can be shown to have been "borrowed " .


"Look at how easy it was to sue Led Zeppelin for a mere riff on Stairway to Heaven... "

And unsurprisingly lost .The"lament "descending bass is centuries old and just because the L.Z. was in the same key , tempo and similar timbre to the Sprit track was never enough . The fact that the L.Z. intro had contrary motion (probably "borrowed" from the bouree in Emin from one of the Bach lute suites ) and the Spirit didn't , was another major factor .

I designated the symphony by its name "New World Symphony" & its movement "(4th)"...

What part of that did you fail to grasp?



And if I feel that Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata is appropriate, who the hell are you to naysay that?



Grow a sense of humor Tiompan & get a life...

[Tiompan]

"I designated the symphony by its name "New World Symphony" & its movement "(4th)"...
No you didn't . You didn'mention a movement at all ,you said " Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)."
You didn't mention a movement for the Beethoven either , try the 4th movement of that one for something that would be really inappropriate .
Try not to be so defensive and get a sense of humour , you completely avoided the bad taste commnet about impairment .
No mention of the waste of time suing LZ ?

[circumspice]

"I designated the symphony by its name "New World Symphony" & its movement "(4th)"...
No you didn't . You didn'mention a movement at all ,you said " Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)."
You didn't mention a movement for the Beethoven either , try the 4th movement of that one for something that would be really inappropriate .
Try not to be so defensive and get a sense of humour , you completely avoided the bad taste commnet about impairment .
No mention of the waste of time suing LZ ?

What the hell are you talking about ya auld buzzard???

It doesn't get any more evident than "Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)". Obviously you can't admit that.

Don't you have anything better to do other than to circle this forum like a buzzard over roadkill?

Who appointed you to be the forum police?

[Tiompan]

You didn't mention the movement at all you said " Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)."
Why can't you admit that ?
If there is a number to be found after the name of symphony and the composer had written more than one , then that number will be the number of the symphony e.g. “From the new World (9th ) . If there is a reference to a movement from a numbered symphony then the term movement will be included e.g. From the New World , 4th movement . Fact , nothing to do with you being defensive .
Still missed the bad taste joke , LZ references ,and Beethoven sonata 4th movemnet being worth a listen and very far removed form the mood music of "ah" .

[circumspice]

You didn't mention the movement at all you said " Dvorak's New World Symphony (4th)."
Why can't you admit that ?
If there is a number to be found after the name of symphony and the composer had written more than one , then that number will be the number of the symphony e.g. “From the new World (9th ) . If there is a reference to a movement from a numbered symphony then the term movement will be included e.g. From the New World , 4th movement . Fact , nothing to do with you being defensive .
Still missed the bad taste joke , LZ references ,and Beethoven sonata 4th movemnet being worth a listen and very far removed form the mood music of "ah" .

Tell ya what ya auld buzzard...

Fixate on whatever you wish to fixate on.