Talk:Megalithic yard
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pseudoscience? Thom was working backward, and suspected that there was some kind of common measurement, but I'm not sure how this is pseudoscience, except in what it's been used for subsequently. --MacRusgail 18:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- It is not really pseudoscience. What has happened is that Thom has made a grave mistake in how he derived error (+/- 0.003) from his measurements of the stones. See http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/davel/MY.htm. Basically he measures many stone circles, all of which have errors of about 1 ft. He graphs these and see periods in the graph, he measure the distance between peaks and consoles that each distance is accurate to +/- 0.003 feet, thus he assumes that the yard they were measuring with is accurate to 0.003 feet. Which is completely groundless. There is only 1% confindence that the yard with error he gives would result in the stone formations, it takes a varying yard of (not surpisingly) almost +/- half the whole yard value (ie just random number) because you get any significane. So his data actually supports the idea that there was no megalithic yard, rather than that there was.--Dacium 12:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
