432 shows harmony of Sun, Moon, Earth Design

[Jiri]

wrong tense.


(I really am not just complaining here I have no idea what you mean, did you mean to say leant them out or maybe will lend them out. This makes no sence)

Did you mean to say "lent them out'? That's what I meant to say. But, you must have leant out the window at that time
When you are not sure about your English, why don't you just ask me? I'll be happy to assist you in learning it.

 

[jsfisher]

You don't see it, and I grow reluctant to assist you and pry your eyes open, but the main difference in the impact of the two theories is that while I should worry about the men-in-black, he has to worry about the men-in-white

Jiri, Religionstudent provided a simple demonstration of how easy it is to attribute meaning where it does not belong. You have not provided any basis for us to accept that you've done anything different. That is not saying etching is or is not significant, just that you haven't built the basis for your claims.

Do you have any scholarly references that support your claims? Publications in refereed journals, even web pages by recognized authorities would be helpful.

 

[ReligionStudent]

Did you mean to say "lent them out'? That's what I meant to say. But, you must have leant out the window at that time
When you are not sure about your English, why don't you just ask me? I'll be happy to assist you in learning it.

Ok, I am not wonderful at spelling. I admit that (and I have in other threads). I was seriously asking for a clarification here. There is no reason to be sarcastic.

 

[Jiri]

Wrong gender.

I must admit your name had confused me since it sounds very masculine in Czech, as any other name with 'kule' in it would.
Yes, it sounds even more masculine than Jonny Five.

Jiri the Caveman

 

[ReligionStudent]

I must admit your name had confused me since it sounds very masculine in Czech, as any other name with 'kule' in it would.
Yes, it sounds even more masculine than Jonny Five.

Jiri the Caveman

How is Jonny Five not masculine? In all the languages I have studied Jonny would be translated and interprated as masculine. Is it different in Czech. (Serious question)

 

[Foster Zygote]

I would like to see them, too.

Me too. He stated that he could easily produce them. Why is he seemingly ignoring the request?

 

[Hokulele]

I must admit your name had confused me since it sounds very masculine in Czech, as any other name with 'kule' in it would.
Yes, it sounds even more masculine than Jonny Five.

Jiri the Caveman

No worries, I was just clarifying. I wasn't offended, as the Internet is an anonymous medium. Hokulele is a Hawaiian term that I like to use for posting purposes.

 

[Jiri]

How is Jonny Five not masculine? In all the languages I have studied Jonny would be translated and interprated as masculine. Is it different in Czech. (Serious question)

I said 'more' which means more of something, so if the 'something' is being implied how could I be negating it at the same time?
You should not twist, sonny.

 

[ReligionStudent]

I said 'more' which means more of something, so if the 'something' is being implied how could I be negating it at the same time?
You should not twist, sonny.

Ok, well I wasn't twisting, I was asking if it is how it could not be masculine in your eyes, John is probably the most common mans name in all of English (at least the top 5) which is why unidentified men are called John Doe.

Also Johny Five is a (presumably) male (at least masculine) character in an American movie.

 

[Jiri]

No worries, I was just clarifying. I wasn't offended, as the Internet is an anonymous medium. Hokulele is a Hawaiian term that I like to use for posting purposes.

Which you then frustrate by revealing yourself as a woman? Else, your purposes are veiled
(That was very maskulene of me

 

[Jiri]

Ok, well I wasn't twisting, I was asking if it is how it could not be masculine in your eyes, John is probably the most common mans name in all of English (at least the top 5) which is why unidentified men are called John Doe.

Also Johny Five is a (presumably) male (at least masculine) character in an American movie.

Well, I see absolutely no resemblance in that to Jonny Five. But, I did not say his name is feminine. There is no water on your paddles..

 

[ReligionStudent]

Well, I see absolutely no resemblance in that to Jonny Five. But, I did not say his name is feminine. There is no water on your paddles..

Never mind, I just asked why you said that his name seemed less masculine, what reason in czech is there, its just curiosity.

 

[Jiri]

Me too. He stated that he could easily produce them. Why is he seemingly ignoring the request?

Or, is he? Maybe, he answered, and it slipped by you.
I definitely answered somebody, who was asking much the same questions, and I did so in detail. Who was it?

 

[ReligionStudent]

Or, is he? Maybe, he answered, and it slipped by you.
I definitely answered somebody, who was asking much the same questions, and I did so in detail. Who was it?

How about you tell us who or just answer again?

 

[Jiri]

Never mind, I just asked why you said that his name seemed less masculine, what reason in czech is there, its just curiosity.

Are you searching for a maskulene name to adopt in your next life? Here is how - Pick a name with a lot of grr, jrr, hrr, and so on - like Jaromir Jagr, pronounced by TV game commentators as JRMR JGR.

 

[Jiri]

Your theory then rests on this:
The ancients drew with a certain accuracy, which would require more accurate tools than they are known to have had.
and here's where it falls apart, because you cannot assume these tools to people who where still sitting their knapping when they wanted to go hunting.
Your theory is thus debunked, unless you can say they did not necessarily need to be able to produce the carving with procission (which would mean any values taken from it would not be accurate representations of what they had meant to put in, making the values you measure unrepresentative of the artists agency and pointless) or you can produce the tools.

You debunk yourself, because you are trying to say that the absence of a third element means the absence of the first two elements. That just isn't logical.

BTW if you can measure more accuratly do so. As we have said before the mm is not very accurate here, as even fractions of a mm are easily measurable and important.

First, you forget again that the millimeters are half-millimeters in lifesize.
Half-millimeters are fine enough to preclude working with further fractions of the same. Unless you have special tools. The ancient designers had those tools, but they also set levels of precision. To produce the Frame, you only need to measure to millimeters. That's the level of the Frame, as I presented it. It is still a complete study per se. The actual micro-measurements are superfluous in this case. I am not saying that the micro-measurements are not evident in the work, because I believe they are. I am simply saying that micro-measurements are beyond my means on this level.
And, I am also saying that it is easier for me to work with millimeters than half-millimeters.

 

[Jiri]

How about you tell us who or just answer again?

He knows who, and no, it was a long answer, why do it again? Go back and find out my answer to the question. If you don't know it, there is no modicum of understanding me in you, which I would have expected by now.

 

[ReligionStudent]

You debunk yourself, because you are trying to say that the absence of a third element means the absence of the first two elements. That just isn't logical.

No, what I am saying is that you assume that there is a certain amount of precission in this piece.
You state that the origional creator must have included the precision on purpose, to give us ideas, and that this would have required tools you do not have but that the artist did.

Well their is no evidence for anything but PPN in this area 14000 years ago. Certainly I do not believe they had more accurate tools that you or I do (because there is no evidence of such tools, these people were at best using waddle and daub and knapping.)

So if they did not have the tools, which you state

But, could you draw accurately the same figures on the same small space using the classic tools? No? Well, neither could I, and neither could the ancient designer unless he had better tools than that.

they could not have included the precission you say is necessary to purposefully include the information you want to find.

Anything you have found and stacked up to artistic agency was just an accident. We don't need your lines and all the pie charts etc, since the lack of necessary tools has precluded your conclusion.

QED

First, you forget again that the millimeters are half-millimeters in lifesize.
Half-millimeters are fine enough to preclude working with further fractions of the same. Unless you have special tools. The ancient designers had those tools, but they also set levels of precision. To produce the Frame, you only need to measure to millimeters. That's the level of the Frame, as I presented it. It is still a complete study per se. The actual micro-measurements are superfluous in this case. I am not saying that the micro-measurements are not evident in the work, because I believe they are. I am simply saying that micro-measurements are beyond my means on this level.
And, I am also saying that it is easier for me to work with millimeters than half-millimeters.

Just because you believe something is evident does not mean it is.

 

[ReligionStudent]

He knows who, and no, it was a long answer, why do it again? Go back and find out my answer to the question. If you don't know it, there is no modicum of understanding me in you, which I would have expected by now.

Man, I have got to say this. I read what you write and give you an answer or a challenge.

You read what I write and try to come back with something biting.

 

[Jiri]

Jiri, Religionstudent provided a simple demonstration of how easy it is to attribute meaning where it does not belong.

.
In contrast, I provided you with a demonstration of how hard it is to attribute meaning even where it belongs, when nobody wants to see it there.

You have not provided any basis for us to accept that you've done anything different. That is not saying etching is or is not significant, just that you haven't built the basis for your claims.

The basis for my claims is rooted in the physical. There is nothing unscientific in trying to observe physical realities in graphic design.
"Coincidence abounds' didn't you say this about the Frame?
Yes, coincidence abounds, pages and pages of it, abounding to the point of making complete sense. It crystallizes into complete ideas and becomes a pamphlet.
Unfortunately, instead of being grateful that I provided something anomalously rich in coincidence, you seem afraid of facing it, of saying, yes, Jiri has brought our attention to something that should be investigated.

Do you have any scholarly references that support your claims? Publications in refereed journals, even web pages by recognized authorities would be helpful.

What claims specifically? There is a rich body of anomalies out there, and claims based on those anomalies, some of which I find plausible. Christopher Dunn: ADVANCED MACHINING IN ANCIENT EGYPT would be one.

BTW, did I dispel any of your misconceptions about Golden Ratio misconceptions as presented by the weasley Mr. Markowsky?