BL> I didn't know Atlanteans measured things in miles!
BV> Where do you think the term Nautical Mile came from 
BL>  ROFL! As a little kid, I always had a soft spot for nautical miles.
BL> I thought it had something to do with being naughty on a large scale!

No, that's aero-nautical miles :)

BL> I wonder if Concord is on the alignment? But if he misses
BL> Concord, Burwood has to be on it! Or Five dock...
BV> Shit...You may have hit on it...Perhaps you should write him a
BV> letter and tell him that Five Dock is really the key to the
BV> whole puzzle :)
BL> Aha! Did you know that if I draw a line from Renne-le-Chateau
BL> through Mecca, it goes straight through Hobart!

Yoikes ! I wonder if Peter Nielsen has sen God recently :)

BL> And if I draw a line from Rennes-le-chateau to Five Dock, it actually
BL> misses Mecca and goes straight through Mt Cook in New Zealand!

I always knew that the Muslims shouldn't be trusted :)

BL> How about that for proof! The Templars discovered New Zealand!
BL> Must have. It stands to reason.

Unquestionably :)

BV> Aw, shucks Bob. Your spirit of adventure is being killed off by
BV> all the precision correctness you have been getting into
BV> lately.
BL> Have I? I'm disappointed Henry doesn't examine the possibility that
BL> the naughty priest was in league with the Devil. That was the whole
BL> point of Languedoc, the Moors, Templars, and that - they knew ways to
BL> do `things'.

I think you have to consider most peoples beliefs and that would be
pushing it just a wee bit to far for most. It wouldn't sell. However,
I don't have a problem with it. In fact after following that stuff and
some other things, I think you are not that far from the truth.
Sorta like there being a bit of bad in anything good.

BL> The whole theory is built on a silliness... that a single step
BL> takes 3.6 seconds!
BV> But if you didn't get to the part where he was walking on water
BV> and how everyone is the same person but called someone different,
BL> you missed the best parts. That gets __REALLY__ screwy :)
BL> Yair... I got to that. The way she tied it all together was in
BL> pacing off a kilometre in an hour. Her thesis was that everyone was
BL> someone else, and there were two sets of everywhere... a sort of scale
BL> model Galilee and Jerusalem at Qumran. Bloody hell!

Yeah, it's the sort of thing that you would just love to say,
"Where's the proof" to, but you know that in reality it can't be
either proven or disproven. Just because it seems a bit screwy to
us doesn't mean that it couldn't have been as she claims.

BL>  I'm more than halfway into Pimple and the Lodge, and that makes
BL> a bit more sense... but they keep skirting around the occult bits.

I've noticed this with anything that deals with Masonry and older
beliefs. I think this is part of the "sanitising" process. That's
why I think you have to learn as much as possible so you can try to
piece the puzzle together for yourself. Henry gets pretty close to
some occult stuff in the Whole Mace, but again he starts to drift
when he should try to get closer to it. Once again, I think this is
probably more to do with sanitising it for public consumption.

BL> I thought that was the whole point of it: the secret knowledge
BL> handed down through the ages.

That's certainly the principle behind Masonry. If nothing else the
stuff you have is a good intro to it and could serve as a basis to
spur you on to look further. It is all there if you care to look.

BL> It's interesting. I know the history of Robert the Bruce, and I kept
BL> waiting for them to say something silly, but they were quite accurate.
BL> It's thje on ly way you can test a thing like this: wait till they
BL> get to a part where you know a bit. I find that anthing can read
BL> sensibly until they come to an area of your own expertise - when it
BL> suddenly turns ridiculous - but this one hasn't, so far.

In fact I don't think that much of it does. There could even be
something in Henrys lines. It's just a wee bit hard for us to
comprehend, so it's easier to pass it off as rubbish. The original
mystery is so well covered that I don't see how he could possibly do
anything other than follow any and all possibilities as he is doing.

BL>  The whole thing is fascinating, but like you said, it all happened
BL> so long ago and has been fiddled so many times that we'll never know
BL> what actually happened. That's what annoys me with old Henry; he's
BL> onto a genuine fact (the sudden wealth), and he's running around in
BL> circles instead of centreing on the money. You're right, too... it's
BL> easy to see where the two interests diverge.


(Continued to next message)

--- PQWK199