Can you disprove this?

Behold the great circle.... yes I've tacked each site using google earth to see if this is real.... indeed it is.

Now I would imagine UFOs of the Extraterestrial kind would assist in such an endeavor..... how else could you achieve such geometry on a megolithic scale?

Seeing is believing, so here is the link:

home.hiwaay.net...

enjoy and look forward to everyones comments

There is a book that you may be interested in that presents a lot of parrallel information, and strongly presented perspectives.

"The Atlantis Blueprint" cowritten by Rand Flem-Ath (spelling?), which expands on theories of Earth's crust displacement (the shallow crust that covers the liquid core sliding over the entire mantle ??) first presented by Proffesor Charles Hapgood (God bless his soul) who recieved praise from Einstein on his ideas and theories.

I will have to get that book!

Of note, theres a variation of up to 40 miles from the circle and I believe thats quite a lot when you compare things at this scale. Of course things could be moved by the forces of nature.

Nice to see some major interesting stuff aligned exactly on the circle. But then again, you could probably come up with more circles than run through stuff on the planet.. Humans, more or less, live at the same longtitudes (Latitudes? Dont know the difference), so its no wonder that all our 'old stuff' is around the same plane.

Latitude is correct. Longtitude runs north and south which gives us different time zones and days. But it is correct to say the concentration of people inhabit roughly the same latitudes.

Scratching my head.... how is 40 miles a lot? Given that some sites are off by say 5 to 40 miles..... lots of sites are exactly aligned 1000's of miles apart.... exactly.

Science has proven that land mass shifts inches if not less or more every year or decade or whatever.....

The formula for pi and fibonacci on this alignment is hardly something to discount as nothing really significant.

When I read stuff like this like the sacred geometry of mars It seems to me that people begin with a theory and make the evidence fit, mathematics essentially govern every buildling on earth and if you try hard enough you'll be able to 'prove' some special relation using geomerty, trigonometry, calculus, statistics etc....

Seems to me you didn't spend much time reading the website

The problem isn't the number of sites that fit, it's the number of sites that don't fit...... There are thousands of ancient sites: it would be possible to draw hundreds of lines in all directions linking them in different ways.

For the theoiry to work there has to be something thatv singles out these specific site only - something that makes them, and them alone, different from everywhere else.

Otherwise, it's just coincidence.

So you're saying this doesn't fit -

home.hiwaay.net...

Like I said, I don't think many of you are really reading the content here.

Sure, there are tons of ancient sites, I suppose sites that are 100 or even a 1000 years old are "ancient". Perhaps no one gives credit to the date relationship any of these sites have.

Originally posted by Essan
The problem isn't the number of sites that fit, it's the number of sites that don't fit...... There are thousands of ancient sites: it would be possible to draw hundreds of lines in all directions linking them in different ways.

This same discrepancy is addressed in the book "The Altantis Blueprint" that i reference in my previous contribution to this thread. Again a piggy back off of Proffesor Charles Hapgood's studies and Co-authored by Rand Flem-Ath (spelling?).

We fail to take into account that the North pole (Magnetic North Pole) is not the same as when these structures were built, we are also ignoring another profound aspect of these presented speculations:

If we take into account that the magnetic north pole has been changing, and reset the prime meridian (where the Zulu clock, the Western Worlds timepeice is) and place this point of reference for all comparison at Giza, then the longitude and latitude are at equally measurable sacred geometry incorporated sites, all of them from Stone Henge to Asia and the Americas are consistent with what the original poster was trying to convey. I'll edit this to find and supply some suportive links to what I've presented to you in this post.

For the theoiry to work there has to be something thatv singles out these specific site only - something that makes them, and them alone, different from everywhere else.

I'll be editing this shortly to give more info.

First, here is what is stated concerning Albert Einstien's take on Charles Hapgood's proposed theory of crust displacement: I'm sorry I can't seem to find a link that states the correlation of ancient sights as plainly laid out in the book, but what i am stating is known to me from "The Atlantis Blueprint".

Source Links:
www.flem-ath.com...
www.flem-ath.com...

Albert Einstein wrote about Charles Hapgood's theory of earth crust displacement in a letter (14 January 1954) to William Farrington of the Department of Geology and Minerology at the University of Massachusetts.
I obtained this letter from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation in July 1995. The then Vice President G. Thomas Tanselle was kind enough to send it along with Einstein's "Confidential Report on Candidate for Fellowship" (strongly supporting Hapgood for a fellowship) dated 18 November 1954.
I cannot post this letter as it is copyright protected by Albert Einstein's Archives, the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation and William Farrington.
The mathematics in the letter are beyond me but I have tried to interest qualified scientists (e.g, Robert Schoch, Victor Clube) but none have been willing to make a public statement about it.

"I think that the idea of Mr. Hapgood has to be taken quite seriously."
-That Einstein character

Some more info on Charles Hapgood / Albert Einstein / Flem-Aths corrospondance: Source:www.flem-ath.com...

Charles Hapgood first came to public attention in the mid-1950s with his theory of earth crust displacement, a radical geological idea which attracted the curiosity and support of Albert Einstein. The Einstein-Hapgood correspondence is a forgotten page in the history of science. Rose and I obtained these letters (ten from Einstein to Hapgood) from Albert Einstein's Archives in the Fall of 1995. They show, for the first time, just how extensively Albert Einstein was involved in assisting Charles Hapgood in the development of the theory. This correspondence is detailed in The Atlantis Blueprint. Here is a brief summary:
In his second reply (24 November 1952) to Hapgood, Einstein wrote that the idea of earth crust displacement should not be ruled out "apriori" just because it didn't fit with what we wanted to believe about the earth's past. What was needed, Einstein claimed, was solid "geological and paleontological facts."
For six months, Hapgood gathered geological evidence to support the idea of an earth crust displacement. On the 3rd of May 1953 he forwarded thirty-eight pages of this evidence to Einstein. Central to his argument was Hapgood's evidence that Lesser Antarctica was ice-free at the same time that North America lay smothered in ice. Einstein responded (8 May 1953):
"I find your arguments very impressive and have the impression that your hypothesis is correct. One can hardly doubt that significant shifts of the crust have taken place repeatedly and within a short time."
He urged Hapgood to follow up on evidence of "earth fractures". A month later
(11 June 1953) Hapgood sent Einstein forty-two pages of evidence on earth fractures and the evolution of the ice sheets.
Einstein wrote (17 December 1953) Hapgood urging him to address the "centrifugal momentum" problem. Hapgood responded with four pages on this problem and thirty-seven pages of "paleontological evidence" including the frozen mammoths of Arctic Siberia. Einstein was now convinced. On the 18th of May 1954, Einstein wrote a very favorable foreword for Hapgood's book EARTH'S SHIFTING CRUST: A KEY TO SOME BASIC PROBLEMS OF EARTH SCIENCE (published in 1958 by Pantheon Books, New York). The Foreword begins:
"I frequently receive communications from people who wish to consult me concerning their unpublished ideas. It goes without saying that these ideas are very seldom possessed of scientific validity. The very first communication, however, that I received from Mr. Hapgood electrified me. His idea is original, of great simplicity, and - if it continues to prove itself of great importance to everything that is related to the history of the earth's surface. ... I think that this rather astonishing, even fascinating, idea deserves the serious attention of anyone who concerns himself with the theory of the earth's development."
Hapgood and Einstein continued to correspond and finally met in January of 1955.
Einstein's last letter was dated the 9th of March 1955 just weeks before the great physicist died on the 18th of April 1955.
Einstein's Archives are held in Jerusalem (with copies at Princeton) where they hold the record of an unique and unheralded collaboration on the theory of earth crust displacement.
We began corresponding with Hapgood in 1977.

They make an extremely well stated case to point out the way ancient structure do resemble intelligent planning the world over, like some scavenger hunt with a prize .. . . . . .

This is great stuff.... thanks for posting this!

What I'm currious about though is the significance of the alignments. I know Tesla was working on some sort of global energy grid using aligned sites to transmit or transmit energy through the earth.... I might be wrong though.

Something in my gut though says that there's a relationship here that Tesla was privy to.....

Not only Tesla but Masons seem to know what the significance is with alignments on the earth.... many many many examples can be proven, Washington DC is a great example