reply to post by BlueOrb
Well, of course, Skyfloating being the initiator (and MAJOR contributor) of this thread, it goes without saying that without him probably there would
be no thread.
But since its teen age this thread has grown a beard and started taking prolonged naps, much like those mythical emperors that seem to be inhabiting
Untersberg and other mountains of the region. And so...
This thread won't die. I won't let it!
Yeah, I think people are kinda counting on that...
I agree that the whole dimension (no pun intended) of the Untersberg mystery may never be cracked in its entirety – at least not in a
The problem, as I see it, is in gauging the true weight of folklore of each of the (many!) elements involved in thre myth that surrounds it, not to
mention the purely physical aspects of the purported anomalies.
We don't even know WHAT exactly we are looking for.
That's why I believe that diligent collecting of all sorts of data - and even speculations - might be a very good idea.
Among all the chaff, there may very well be a few grains. ;-)
Years ago I was researching an artist who lived many centuries ago. I developed a sort of intuitive connection with his
personality and modus operandi
(it probably sounds more kooky than it was
One night, I had an unusually vivid dream: in it, not only did I find out the exact date of the artist's birth (currently not even the year is
known), but also saw a series of events and procedures that are in opposition to what is currently known about him – but would actually make perfect
And even though I earnestly try, every now and then, to puncture that bubble of certainty that I carry from that day on, it doesn't work: I simply
that what I saw really was the truth.
The problem, of course, is... how do you cite
this source of information in a peer-reviewed article?
[edit on 2-12-2009 by Vanitas]