Anda di halaman 1dari 2

Date: 30-03-2008

Subject: Letter in Archaeology.

Dear Editor-in-Chief Naomi Norman…


Greeting…

Re: Human Eye Solar Earth Analogy as a Stonehenge Code.

Editor…While you are in your way for evaluating the strength of evidence which
are illustrated in the above mentioned manuscript article and conferring how
mush confidence to place in the research conclusions and the emphasis on
evidence – based facts that led to the development of a system that incorporates
data from three fields, I would like to ask an important questions; Did these new
findings worth taken into consideration?, Is this strategies, within the scope of
anatomy and astronomy are effective in managing archeology related issue like
Stonehenge?

I hope that I succeed in drawing a picture that pay an integrative research look
begins with a problem statement and question: what is the meaning that the
human eye ball has the same tilt of the planet earth ball?

I know will that question for integrative archeological review should be evidence
based, focusing, for example on a particular type of intervention, or more
inclusive, examining a range of alternative interventions or evidence based
practices, but also we all know that there is something called Conceptual
Utilization refers to situation in which scientist – users are influenced in their
thinking about an issue based on their knowledge of studies but do not
necessary need to put this knowledge to any specific, document use.

A solid research base also could point in different directions. For example the
evidence might support existing practices like what is the scientific method or
architectural process used by the builder of Stonehenge (which might lead to an
analysis of why the practice question emerged and what might make existing
practices work more effectively).

Another possibility is that there would be clear cut, compelling evidence that a
scientific look change is warranted, which would interpret the activities described
above, and could re-write the history at least of Stonehenge civilization.

Editor…Suggestive model of the research observations postulate that as the


human eye ball is similar to the planet earth ball especially in their angular radius
which utilized in Stonehenge interpretation as Stonehenge is perfectly aligned
with the summer solstice, moves directly from the conclusion that evidence
supports a similarity relation between the suspended human eye ball and the
suspended earth ball to the pilot tested logical assumption that launch from as
the two balls are similar in tilt they could produce similar motions work in a similar
plane and a round the same axe of rotation i.e. ( The Maximal Conjugate Eye
movement and the Apparent Motion of the Sun that contains the summer and
winter solstice at its extremes which rotate a Simi circle a round the “Z” axe in
the two balls) the model also include steps to first evaluate the appropriateness
of the similarity within the specific organizational context; Stonehenge and a
horizontal sectioned eye ball, such a similarity (or aspect of it) may be warranted
even before embarking on efforts to assemble best evidence.

This model suggest evaluating issues of fit after we change our look to ancient
practices that may exist and was been implemented.

I think a preliminary assessment of the implementation potential of these


observations is often sensible, although there may be situation in archeology with
high need for such a formal assessment to look for an evidence based practice
that augment the assumption that postulated in my article.

Editor…Coast – benefit ratio is a critical part of any decision to proceed with the
research utilization project which is a careful assessment of the costs and
benefits of the novel insight and observations. The cost – benefit assessment
should encompass likely costs and benefits to various groups of the scientific
community.
A cost – benefit assessment should consider the opposite side of the coin as
well: the cost and benefit of not implementing the observations.

In critiquing integrative data of the research, we should determine whether the


problem statement and question are clearly worded and sufficiently specific,
whether the observations or phenomena under study are adequately defined and
weather the population of interest has been stated. And of course, it is also
important to evaluate the relevance of research question or its importance to
some other aspect of science fields or science workers.

Finally I hope I could discuss the consistency of findings across this short letter
that mention in its body the importance of data revealed from the inside of human
being that has been presented in my article titled: Human Eye Solar Earth
Analogy as a Stonehenge Code, and provide an interpretation of why there might
be no inconsistency.

Sincerely,
EMAD