• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

James_H

And I like to roam the land
Joined
May 18, 2002
Messages
7,644
Do people anywhere still take the idea of ley-lines seriously? It seems to have been quite popular at some point if my 80s "weird" books are to believed, but it seems to have disappeared... did anyone ever take the idea seriously? info? anyone?
 
They did, but it's bollix

It's easy to find 'alignments' - computer analysis shows that these are quite random.
 
good... which computer analysis - when?
(i'm not saying that it isn't bollox btw - just interested)
 
Quite a few people round here still take them seriously-but you can't really take them seriously .
 
The main problem with 'leys' was that, IIRC, they were the term describing actual tracks, not 'lines of power', etc..
 
The alledged St Michael's Ley runs from Marazion in Cornwall to the arse end of England in Norfolk and beyond.
What is interesting is that the Churches on hills found along this Ley - St Michael's Mount, Brentor & Glastonbury are all named after St Michael and all sites of ancient worship which have had contemporary Xtian churches erected.
This Ley also encompasses the Avebury stones and Silbury Hill, again all important ancient sites - one could be forgiven for thinking that there may be something odd going on..............
 
Well, it depends if you draw a line from any other start point through any other area. You're bound to hit something along the way. That said, IMHO 'leys' are simply a misindentification of the tracks noted in Alfred Watkins' 'The Old Straight Track'. Somehow along the way they were turned into 'lines of power' and all that that entails.
 
JerryB said:
Well, it depends if you draw a line from any other start point through any other area. You're bound to hit something along the way. That said, IMHO 'leys' are simply a misindentification of the tracks noted in Alfred Watkins' 'The Old Straight Track'. Somehow along the way they were turned into 'lines of power' and all that that entails.
I believe it also depends on whether you're drawing a straight line on a map, or a geodesic line that takes the curve of the earth into account. When you're talking a bout something as long as the St Michaels Line, there is a difference, so I've been told.
 
Well, it all depends on whether one believes in ley lines as energy lines or that 'leys' are (perhaps) old trackways, which may have once had a religious significance (perhaps like 'corpse paths'). If there was some evidence in the landscape for a 'processional way' along this line of sites, then the case would have more weight.
 
I posted this on another thread:

I'm pretty sure it was Bob Symes who did a report on a university (Kent?) computer analysis of leylines. They concluded that straight alignments were just a matter of chance.

This prompted me to write my own BASIC programs looking for alignments - quite handy, because you can compensate for distortions in paper maps, and include sites that are on different maps. It was a good programming exercise, but I came to the same conclusion - apart from small self-contained sites, the alignments are random. [rynner ducks below parapet yet again.]

(From http://217.206.205.125/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1025 )



Annasdottir wrote:
I believe it also depends on whether you're drawing a straight line on a map, or a geodesic line that takes the curve of the earth into account. When you're talking a bout something as long as the St Michaels Line, there is a difference, so I've been told.
In fact, with the map projection used by the Odnance Survey (a transverse Mecator), there is very little difference.
 
Quicksilver said:
The alledged St Michael's Ley runs from Marazion in Cornwall to the arse end of England in Norfolk and beyond.
What is interesting is that the Churches on hills found along this Ley - St Michael's Mount, Brentor & Glastonbury are all named after St Michael and all sites of ancient worship which have had contemporary Xtian churches erected.
This Ley also encompasses the Avebury stones and Silbury Hill, again all important ancient sites - one could be forgiven for thinking that there may be something odd going on..............

You will find it is fairly normal for churches on top hills to be named for St Michael , whether they are on the Michael line or not , others include Mon San Michel ( sp? apologies) in France and the church on the hill at Burrowbridge in Somerset though I believe these two are on the Michael line anyway . Research time - I will be back!

http://michael.spiralwave.co.uk/ Seems to be a fairly good site with a lot on it though I feel their info on St Michael is a little minimalist . Maybe it will grow !

Actually I will admit to , on more than one occasion when the weather is clear , going up the Tor on May day to watch the sun rise . I tell myself it is for the morris dancers :D
 
rynner said:
In fact, with the map projection used by the Odnance Survey (a transverse Mecator), there is very little difference.
Thanjs, Ryn. That's my new thing to be learned today!
 
Marion said:
You will find it is fairly normal for churches on top hills to be named for St Michael , whether they are on the Michael line or not , others include Mon San Michel ( sp? apologies) in France and the church on the hill at Burrowbridge in Somerset though I believe these two are on the Michael line anyway . Research time - I will be back!

http://michael.spiralwave.co.uk/ Seems to be a fairly good site with a lot on it though I feel their info on St Michael is a little minimalist . Maybe it will grow !
Mont St Michel is actually over a hundred miles south of the St Michael Line (although it does have historical links with Cornwall's St Michael's Mount).

The map on the spiralwave website illustrates the problem with leylines - these sites are not on the same straight line! So which sites are included is purely subjective.

My computer progs had a variable 'error factor', and - surprise, surprise - the larger the error I allowed, the more leys I found!

What really convinced me that leys are just random alignments was the fact that I found just as many when I used things like phone boxes and pubs/hotels instead of ancient sites like churches, etc!

EDIT: The fact that the St Michael line is one of the longest lines in southern Britain is the reason it contains so many sites. My analysis of Cornish sites found many more leys with a SW-NE orientation - purely because this reflects the shape of the peninsular. (A NW-SE direction quickly ends up in the sea!)
 
What really convinced me that leys are just random alignments was the fact that I found just as many when I used things like phone boxes and pubs/hotels instead of ancient sites like churches, etc!

But couldn't this just mean that modern people are still in tune with the planet, even if they don't realise it?

Whatever that means :confused:

Jane.
 
It surely should be possible to create new places of power or sacred places , or are they a finite resource from a lost time?
 
It could be argued that churches and cathedrals are fulfilling that role now.
 
Places of Power

Places of power was a notion stemming from shamanistic rites performed at "holy" places where the gods were thought more likely to be in residence or apt to visit. Caves worked well.

Ley lines were the Western equivalent of Taoist notions of energy flow, (qi, or chi), and power nodes, (either blockages or pools, depending, where the energy is collected to good or ill effect).

Stukeley simply projected this onto spots where it seemed to him the ancients had built temples and other structures to exploit such genius loci, or spirit of place.

Animism, pantheism, and so on, thus flowered once again during the Flower Power epoch. Perhaps John Michell's A View Over Atlantis was the pivotal book back then to spread these notions.

Later, the tireless work of the ever-changing Paul Devereux has pretty much stripped away the notion of ley lines being taken seriiously. What power, these more sceptical folks ask. They also ask: What dreams may come?

We simply phase through explanations that best fit out current frames of reference and mind. New boxes, same crystal skull, I'd guess. The real place of power is portable and located inside us.
 
I've tried following Ley lines, I think there is something in it.
I drew 4 random straight lines on a map and I followed them and then followed 4 ley lines (2 I plotted myself and 2 from Ley Line king, Alfred Watkins), all were roughly the same length.

I did find a lot more things (wells, earthworks etc) on the Leys than on the random lines.

Eight journeys not an exhaustive study I know, but i'm convinced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lee
Confirming Ley Lines

Yest - It's good you've done even eight journeys -- most don't do even one, or can't, depending on where they live. I'm sure sites were chosen for some reason according to straight lines, I'm just not sure which explanation of why applied at any given time.

We act on belief much more often than on fact, after all.

I agree there's something in it. People, is my guess as to the common element.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lee
Intervisibility of sites may be a factor. This doesn't mean that they are actually linked by anything more than a conceptual power WRT their place in the landscape and what that meant to the peoples that created or used the sites.
 
Indeed

Jerry - Yep, that' what I tried to say in clumsier terms. That it's the human being that's the common factor "linking" these sites, conceptually, with the concept depending on each individual and also on the culture involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lee
Also, lines may occur as patterns between intervisible sites either through chance or perhaps because the fastest route from point A to point B is a straight line. This may also be why 'processional ways' are also straight features.
 
Ghostly Paths

Jerry - Maybe, maybe not. We have no real clue in any direciton, but many of the ghost paths are winding, not straight.
 
That's true - but I was just thinking out loud ;)
 
Devereux

Have you read Paul Devereux's books on ghost and spirit paths and so on? Fascinating speculations and also some solid investigations and experiments.
 
No, but I'm familiar with the theories behind it. But I always get the feeling that some of it is perhaps a bit too speculative. I have the same problems with Devereux's theories about the sound qualities of certain sites too.
 
Yest said:
I did find a lot more things (wells, earthworks etc) on the Leys than on the random lines.
.

But the leys were chosen for having a greater than average number of things on in the first place. Naturally they are going to have more sites on than your average random line.
 
Percentages

Originally posted by JerryB -- No, but I'm familiar with the theories behind it. But I always get the feeling that some of it is perhaps a bit too speculative. I have the same problems with Devereux's theories about the sound qualities of certain sites too.

I understand how subjective Devereux can be, but I must also say he's much more sensible and cogent than he or his work is portrayed by others, especially critics. Give him a try sometime. What I've admired most about him is his refusal to become dogmatic. He continues to evolve as he tries, then discards, each successive theory. I believe he's on the right track when he moved into the metaphysical, as this material is, like most paranormal things, at least 98% noumenal and subjective anyway. It's the seach for that elusive possible 2% that drives us all nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lee
Epona said:
But the leys were chosen for having a greater than average number of things on in the first place. Naturally they are going to have more sites on than your average random line.

Yes, but I did plot two ley lines myself from what I thought were significant points that made me suspect there might be a line, I hadn't seen these lines mentioned or documented by anyone else, I 'chose' them myself.
 
I believe that Paul Devereux was mentioned in support of an argument. I can't comment on the subject here, but beware of experts and resist accepting expertise through the back-door of someones opinion, especially when their argument requires it.

I don't want to get all horrible about this but I just read the review of Stoneage Soundtracks and my opinion the expertise is in seemingly getting this published without even a school-level understanding of physics. Avoiding logic to suit. It's bizzarre!
Don't believe me - this has a site review.
And I'd like to point out his conclusions might be correct,- I don't know, but they certainly don't follow from this flawed contrivance, unless the review is way shoddy?? check yourself.

remember your basics though
Opposite walls, bounce , bounce, whatever the distance apart there's always a wavelength that fits.
Science; intention, ? maybe but not required.
110hz is not the baritone or any other range. it is a frequency. A 55hz signal is a bit low, we hear better its harmonics (eg110)-as created when bouncing 55hz around.
human bodies all too readily carry 'mains hum'. its in the air and we act like antennaes. try using electrical equipment that doesn't account of this and it often dominates. Although the hum is 50hz in fundament you could hear it as 100hz- if you wanted to.- or 110 even in such a complex environment, the world is your baritone range as they say.
Standing waves aren't likely to stabalize between walls more hole than rock. I'd look for another source myself - see above.
Finally, if you require the effect described, which is caused by the reinforcement of audio waves bouncing back and forth, then remember that wavelength - frequency thing from school?
100hz has a wavelength of what? - work it out.
Such an effect is from node to anti-node,(quater-wavelength)
So to be of any point, the user would have to be small,,,very small.
Those rocks are big and heavy.

So, what have we got.?
mini-baritones with machines.
Is it possible that ancient civilisation of bull-frogs, with access to Plant Hire Outlets who could provide drivers also, are the real answer to Stonehenge.

Daft but at least the physics works. I'd hate it to be simply daft.
 
Back
Top