[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: sacred geometry
I do not need anybody to apologize for me. I do apologize for my outburst. I
understand very well the dedication and intelligence that is involved in
studying an involved subject like sacred geometry. But the fact is anything
outside of the Human Brain is not an established fact.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Toni Sinclair" <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 4:48 AM
Subject: Re: sacred geometry
> Darwin - Whenever you open your "big-mouth", I know I will read something
> intelligent, with understanding and experience (and an open mind)behind
> statements. To all of you on the list, I humbly apologize for my Canadian
> cousin. 'Nuff said.
> Toni S.
> darwin ramsey wrote:
> > Now to the Sacred Geometry thing... Wasn't it on this list a few years
> > that I met a mathematician who specialized in studying sacred geometry?
> > not, it was on the archaeology list I subscribed to at the time.
> > sent me his web address and there is considerable information out there
> > this subject. It is a real field of scientific inquiry.
> > However, to address Ken's statement, it doesn't matter whether one
> > the subject of sacred geometry. When one is studying motives and
> > as expressed in the historic architectural and archaeological record one
> > must try to understand the knowledge and belief system of the
> > under study.
> > When I was doing archaeology, I didn't need to believe that the human
> > sacrifices of the Maya actually brought about a fantastic harvest. I
> > needed to understand that the Maya felt that way.
> > Studying the Chapel in these terms makes perfectly good sense. Sacred
> > geometry was/is very important to such groups as the Masons. They built
> > Chapel as they did every other religious structure in Europe. Their
> > have a much greater influence over the construction of that building
> > Prince Henry's voyage or even the sponsor of the project.
> > For those of you who know my skepticism over the whole carved corn thing
> > wonder how I can accept sacred geometry so willingly... Sacred geometry
> > know fact. The Masons are a known group. Accepting that they influenced
> > Chapel's construction is easy. As to the the voyage to North America,
> > I can accept the fact that it was possible, I can accept the fact that
> > was even likely, however, my problem is with the rock structures and
> > being the only "evidence". Rocks can't be dated. Marks on the rocks
> > rock structures can be fabricated by modern people. To make me a
> > I want a European femur, or a European trade item in situ with an
> > inhabitant's grave of the right time period, I want information that
> > be faked. I want known facts rather that supposition.
> > Sacred geometry is a known fact not a supposition.
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, firstname.lastname@example.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html