To what extent is your world-view based on forgeries?

[ivan]

A forgery is a deliberate attempt to mislead the public (readers, spectators, audience.) This notion is generally attributed to an art form and does not imply any deceitful wrong-doing.

In mass consciousness, it is widely held that the Stonehenge is genuinely ancient, supposedly as old as five thousand years. Meanwhile, the island exhibits the tallest megalith ever worked by man, which is the Rudston monolith estimated to be only three and a half thousand years old. Moreover, as lately as seventy years ago, the Stonehenge location was reached out by a railway spur that was subsequently dismantled by the landed proprietors of that time. Here you can view the photos illustrating the process of building this forgery up, as well as acquaint yourself with the list of main sources for would-be etchings of past ages and written testimonials:



Or, may it be that the Stonehenge is genuine? Was the ancient civilization of Britain actually capable of rolling over the heavy tonnage stone blocks, much like the military and railway vehicles of the past century?

Another feature of mass consciousness is the belief in authenticity of the so-called "crop circles". Aside from the fact that as lately as thirty years ago some ninety nine percents of photography and eyewitness accounts on them were coming exclusively from Britain itself, widely known today is the official web site belonging to the main group of creators of these images and allowing one to take a closer look at the technology of creating such circles:



Or, has at least part of the crop circles possibly not been produced by the British hoaxers? What forces, if not people, account for the crop circles' occurrence? Indeed, it is easier to give credit to aliens, along with mutant reptiloids, rather than rationally explain these patterns and acknowledge their authenticity.

Yet again, mass consciousness holds true to the idea of authenticity of a Christian relic known as the Shroud of Turin that is an ancient length of linen cloth bearing the image of a man who appears to have long been unshaven. In past decades, some researchers even went as far as to claim this to be the result of Leonardo's first experiment with photography where he pictured himself. However, a research conducted independently by three laboratories has pretty exactly estimated that the cloth is only some seven hundred years old, so that the church itself has stopped claiming its authenticity (although, Roman Catholics, Eastern orthodox Christians and many Protestants acknowledged its authenticity as long as thirty years ago):



Or, may the shroud be genuine? And, does it have the actual face of Christ printed on it? In this case, we are currently somewhere around the year 700, and not the year 2015 Anno Domini or the so called Common Era.

"M for mystification" - the following work by Orson Welles is the last motion picture he screened some forty years ago. It documents the story of Elemér Albert Hoffmann (Elmyr de Hory), one of the greatest art forger of all times.

ODD# III(a)/3,v;70Bcy3180

[The Wizard Joseph]

Some of that was most interesting and a few of the pics of Stonehenge quite compelling.  SO MANY LARPERS OMG!

The shroud cannot be conclusively carbon dated. The reason is smoke damage and the microbes living on it for centuries, holy relic or not, have continuously deposited carbon. The sample amount allowed to be taken and from where was insufficient according to my reading on the subject. I could be wrong, but the authors of the books had credentials and were on one of the investigation teams that had physical access. Can't cite off the top of my head, read them maybe 8 yrs ago.  Books were tossed out with a tragic number of other things in a sudden need move to a new place.

The image is an unbelievably intricate dot matrix under high magnification. The tiny fibrils on the fibers are individually oxidized. This is well beyond any hand work man is capable of without mechanical assistance and a super powerful microscope if an oxidizing agent of some sort is responsible. It had to be some sort of photonic or energetic reaction, IMO.

The extremely fine detail of anatomy on the shroud is authentic for a person scourged head to toe, crucified, and stabbed in the chest. This could be faked in another medium by a modern anatomy expert, but as I said above the medium and application method is a mystery.



Here's a question,
well two,
for you Ivan.

Ever considered that all perception and memory is a thin forgery of reality? Could it be that our experiences are merely derivatives from a much greater thing that we're also a part of that is meant to experience and alter it?

[ivan]

The shroud cannot be conclusively carbon dated.

Some scholars doubt the reliability of radiocarbon analysis. Maybe radiocarbon analysis is the conspiracy of academics. But academics such researchers called creationists and pseudo-scientists.

Ever considered that all perception and memory is a thin forgery of reality?

Of course, it is.

Could it be that our experiences are merely derivatives from a much greater thing that we're also a part of that is meant to experience and alter it?

It could be.
But there is a deep-seated cultural stereotypes: they are built public education and ideology, their origin is artificial, descendants of the authors of such stereotypes become aristocracy.

[The Wizard Joseph]

Ivan we may just have some good conversation out of this, as time permits. Your answers and lucidity indicate to me that you are not trolling. But I'll not presume you're correct either.

[Cain]

Well given that my worldview requires none of those things to be true, I'd say "not much".

Also, there are historical accounts of Stonehenge going back to the 11th century, and it was subjected to substansial restoration work - not removal - from the 1890s to the 1950s.

[ivan]

Also, there are historical accounts of Stonehenge going back to the 11th century, and it was subjected to substansial restoration work - not removal - from the 1890s to the 1950s.

Historical accounts easy to fake.

Look at these pictures, the photos show clearly that before this "reconstruction" it was a wasteland (with no trace of the previous design):





3. Currently the Ministry of Defence owns 390 sq km (!) in the vicinity of Stonehenge, some of which are closed permanently, to other access is severely limited. (Wikimapia boundary of the nearest military base - a mile from these stones to the North, and the military runway - 5 km on Southeast).
4. In the past, in the vicinity of Stonehenge were conducted by the railway and the airport, both were subsequently removed (there are other sources that the military airfield was located much closer, at a distance of just one mile from Stonehenge)

This link is explained in detail version of how the building turned into a "reconstruction". Unfortunately only in Russian.

[Sung Low]

To the first line of the OP, I'm fairly sure that forgery oes imply eceitful wrongoing. Is forgery not an attempt to pass off an imitation as the real eal for personal gain? As oppose to an almost flawless replica of a painting which you then sign your own name on, to clearly state that it is not the original.

Forgery is a means to eceive others for profit. The secon example might just be for a 'heh, I can o that too, but I recognise who i it first.'

[ivan]

Is forgery not an attempt to pass off an imitation as the real eal for personal gain?

Not for only personal gain. But also for national and ideological.

[Demolition Squid]

Okay.

Lets say that Stonehenge was, in fact, made completely brand new in the 1890s-1900s. That might be a little disappointing on some level but it would not actually challenge my worldview much at all. A large amount of British national identity and history is basically made up wholecloth. It definitely wouldn't change how I think of my government or my country at all.

Now, the convincing evidence that seems to indicate a deep-rooted set of individuals engaging in child abuse at the heart of government, and the complicity of the national security agencies in covering that up? The fact it seems to have been an 'open secret' amongst the tory cabinet of the 1980s. That fucking Jimmy Saville, beloved children's entertainer and national treasure, was in fact some sort of horrifying paedophile rapist gangster?

These are things which actually surprised me and shocked my worldview when they were revealed. Who gives a shit about a pile of rocks when the rotten core of our very way of life has been so gruesomely exposed? We British were supposed to be better than that. Decency and respectability were supposed to be important to us, especially in our public servants.

So, no. You're looking for your 'forgeries' in the wrong places. The lies that form the basis of our society are much bigger ones than 'Stonehenge was made by ancient people'.

They are lies like:

"All are equal before the eyes of the law."
"If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear."
"It wouldn't happen over here."

[Junkenstein]

We British were supposed to be better than that. Decency and respectability were supposed to be important to us, especially in our public servants.

HA HA HA HA HA HA

[Doktor Howl]

This is wandering into conspiracy theory.  Occam's Razor would indicate that thousands of accounts of Stonehenge over the last dozen centuries or so are more easily explained by being legitimate than by being incredibly sneaky fakes.  In addition, there would have to be a large construction crew, none of whom would ever get drunk and blab.

[Doktor Howl]

Also,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge_replicas_and_derivatives

Also,

The crane in your pic was built between 1965 and 1992.

[Pæs]

Stonehenge was constructed in 1953 in fact in an effort to cover up an minor imbalance in the earth's distribution of mass which if investigated would have revealed that the moon is a hologram.

Think about it.

[Pæs]

OH GOD, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC KNEW ABOUT IT ALL ALONG.

http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/archaeology/photos/stonehenge#/stonehenge-crane_24769_600x450.jpg
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/archaeology/photos/stonehenge#/stonehenge-restoration_24768_600x450.jpg

[Faust]

Stonehenge was constructed in 1953 in fact in an effort to cover up an minor imbalance in the earth's distribution of mass which if investigated would have revealed that the moon is a hologram.

Think about it.

Yes we accidentally broke the original stonehenge while restoring it, Jesus get off our backs the one we put in looks practically the same.

And yes we accidentally blew up the moon. Jesus get off our back it was barely used by a dozen or so people anyway.

Illuminati™ Spokesperson,

Faust