Wyn
  • Wyn
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
15 years ago
I was reading the dowsing thread again and one side comment lept out at me:
Quote:

In a similar way that we don't know what the 90% of our brain that we don't use is for


This old myth has become "fact" over the years. However, it reminded me how all sorts of spurious conclusions are reached by misinterpretation of an initial fact. Examples that come to mind are a researcher (not into mines, but employed by a public body) I met wanting to guage the (major according to him) impact of a trial at Llawr y Glyn, which was due to the fact that some Victorian had called it North Van to bring in the investors and he'd confused it with the other one. Or the numerous tales of site A joined to site B by underground tunnels. Most recently I was hoping to find an underground artifact that I had been told about, only to find from the original source there had been a misunderstanding.
The internet is a wonderfull tool, but not always verifiable.
Has anyone any other examples or comment?
Jimbo
  • Jimbo
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie
15 years ago
There was a thread on the inaccuracies of published works on ME recently 🙂

Here http://www.mine-explorer.co.uk/bbs/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=2963&start=1 
"PDHMS, WMRG, DCC, Welsh Mines Society, Northern Mines Research Group, Nenthead Mines Society and General Forum Gobshite!"

Disclaimer: Mine exploring can be quite dangerous, but then again it can be alright, it all depends on the weather. Please read the proper disclaimer.
© 2005 to 2023 AditNow.co.uk

Dedicated to the memory of Freda Lowe, who believed this was worth saving...