A Commentary on "Uru Photography"

Emor D'ni Lap · **Joined:** Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:15 am **Posts:** 587

Mod note: This topic split from Uru Photography

Dear Mr. LeDeay,

I'm writing as a representative of the D'ni Research Association (DRA), an organization active for several years now, based in Europe but with members from around the globe.

We've been enjoying your postings here, and have been following them with enthusiasm. Generally, DRA members have approved of the way you have assimilated D'ni history with your own observations, and the care with which your photography has respected the intents of the original Agewriters, as we understand them.

However, we now find that we must take exception to several matters in your recent postings.

We notice that in recent weeks, you have increasingly stated your own personal theories as fact rather than conjecture, and you have in many cases failed to support these notions with either any generally-accepted science, established history, or even your own further research. You have mingled these assumptions adjacent to established history and writings, perhaps to give your findings greater credibility. We have further concerns, to be stated later.

As an example, let's look at several items in your recent post regarding the Age of Teledahn, in no particular order.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You write

Quote:

"They installed the feeders to lure the arthropods close to the dock, where they could be shot at with the cannon. The arthropods do not eat the spores spread by the feeder devices. Instead, the spores excite the flappers, which do feed on them. The increased flapper activity is what lures the arthropods."

The DRA's observations cause us to believe that the flappers do indeed feed on the spores, but only the airborne spores, and not in an isolated fashion. The flappers also seem to require some part of the algae that feeds on the decaying spores, and may actually be grabbing bits of algae each time they briefly land on the water's surface. An adhesive slime component of the algae may also be what enables them to stick and ingest the airborne spores: we surmise that their incessant flapping/floating motion is really just their incessant need to feed on spores!

The devices you refer to as "feeders" may only supplement the algae growth in places where there are no large spore-bearing mushrooms in the immediate vicinity; we're not certain. But we are sure that the spore-dispensing devices are not only for the flappers, otherwise there would not be a dispenser where there are no flappers present.

We believe that the arthropods ("shroomies") either consider the spores a delicacy as well, or the spores spread the mushroom scent as a potent lure for the shroomies. Not that we understand why the D'ni would have wanted to lure the arthropods, unless they too hunted them for food. We know the gun on the bayside walkway was installed not by the D'ni as you state, but by Sharper at the DRC's request (see Sharper's Journal, 6.1.01). But we estimate the dispenser at the end of that same walkway, like the rest, was likely there from D'ni times.

There is no evidence that mechanical dispensing of spores in any way "excites the flappers", as you state with certainty: our tests show their activity remains exactly the same, whether or not spore dispensers in their immediate proximity are used.

The DRA think this algae cannot grow in salt water, and the dam ("barricade gate") may also help in retaining the fresh water from the waterfall that feeds the lagoon. Obviously some freshwater leaks through the barrier, even when the gate is open. But the fact is that, even with the gate lowered for prolonged periods, the algae do not grow much beyond the barrier; our guess is that a freshwater/saltwater equilibrium is somehow established at that point, possibly due to the very calm, current-free conditions in the saltwater bay.

In summary, our speculation is that
- the material you said "resembles Sargasso seaweed" (a saltwater flora) is a type of freshwater algae. The open water beyond the barrier is salt water; the open water seen on the opposite side of the Age is a large body of fresh - but relatively stagnant - water, where the algae can proliferate.
- the mushroom spores decay quickly once in water; the algae require the decayed spores both for nutrients and for ph balance
- the flappers require both the airborne spores and the algae for survival; they cannot be found where this combination does not exist (and are therefore not seen in the open saltwater sea area)
- the arthropods/shroomies are essentially saltwater creatures, but can certainly tolerate fresh water when feeding on mushrooms and flappers. They can be lured by the mushroom scent imparted by the spores
- Since - aside from possible use as shroomie lure - the dispensers have no directly observable effect, we are not positive of their purpose, nor who built and placed them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You describe

Quote:

Level 1, The pumping tank:
A fairly large cylindrical tank below the hut room, normally submerged well below the hut room's waterline. It has an intake hole in the ceiling and an outflow pipe on one side of the wall. A ladder leads up to the metal bowl at the base of the hut room through the intake hole.

We believe the tank was actually what you describe as the large "metal bowl at the base of the hut room". This was filled with water that, we think, very, very slowly filtered from the lagoon through the base wall of the mushroom that forms the central tower, and once provided a source of potable water for the Age's inhabitants (even though it did absorb the spore drop within the hut room).

The much narrower vertical pipe at the tank's base - that you claim was the tank itself - is in fact not much wider than the horizontal pipe leading away at the bottom. This horizontal pipe is long broken, corroded, and at its far end leads to a near-vertical open end, so we cannot surmise its original destination. Nor can we determine the exit point for the real drain that lies below the grate at the base of the vertical pipe, or where the actual pump lies. We have also tried to refill the tank: the control's safety devices require the Hut hatch to be re-closed, then the safety can be reengaged and the tank's drain sealed from the panel controls. But the tank refills too slowly to be seen, if at all.

You state that spores were collected into the large buckets carried by cable to the third floor of the main tower, where a fan drew them...

Quote:

"...into a series of pipes that led down to the hut room's ceiling. The spores fell into the room, and drifted down to the water below the hut. When there were enough spores in the water, the giant pump in the bay (which has been nicknamed the “Giant Hairdryer” due to its appearance) would draw the spore-laden water through a long underground pipe that terminated in the pumping tank."

When the added weight of a stowaway passenger causes an automatic bucket release inside the tower, the fan does indeed draw the residual spores into tubes there. But there is no indication that these tubes lead "down to the hut room's ceiling". On the contrary, the vertical tube below the fan ends in a wire mesh basket, probably intended for heavy contaminants that were not drawn into the horizontal tubes leading away from the fan.

There are pipes leading along the hut room's ceiling to just below the hut floor, terminating in a box that can be seen when climbing down the ladder, but we believe these are for some of the system controls rather than for water or spore flow: you can see that the pipes connect with an area near the control panel in the room above, and do not go to the location of the fan and pipes there.

Also, the DRA's tests show that the spore fall in the hut room is constant, unaffected by the fan's activity... or lack thereof. Test for yourself: stand in the hut room and watch as another explorer is dropped from a bucket in the room above. There is no increase in the amount of spores falling within the hut room. Since the rate of spore drop remains the same even when the fan has been off for very long periods, we have to assume that the spores are generated only by the enormous mushroom forming the tower, and that - even though the mushroom is missing the majority of its head - this is still very much a living, functioning organism.

You claim:

Quote:

"When the spore slurry reached the pump, the spores were filtered out and dumped into a transport which was tied to the dock next to the pump."

We have already stated our belief that the spores decay rapidly on exposure to water. There would be little advantage to wetting the spores in the hut tank and then drying them out again after a short trip to the "hair dryer" since, as we both agree, the spores can be blown through tubes in their dry state. The original large tube beneath the tank leads 120 degrees AWAY from the destination at the saltwater harbor and the "hair dryer" (though we are still uncertain as to the destination of the drain beneath the tank-bottom grating).

Collecting all the above pieces, the DRA's best estimate is that:
- the fans in the tower mechanical room push the spores through horizontal tubes that enter the mushroom's wall but exit at an unseen point below water level, traveling toward the saltwater harbor where the tubes exit through solid rock and terminating at the "hair dryer" device
- this device's size is mostly due to its function as a storage hopper as well as possibly performing some other processing functions
- this device seems to contain a fan - the land-side end shows what are likely intake vents - but the fan may be used both as a pulling (draw) for the spores on their way from the tower dump station and as a blower (push) when emptying the hopper's contents.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the prison cell, you claim as fact that

Quote:

"... the bones there belong to unfortunate slaves that were trapped when the Age was abandoned"

and you state with certainty that the bones in the cell are those "of the last prisoner".

But look at the image below, taken with one of our members for size reference. The shackles in the Age are all scaled to fit human-sized creatures (or perhaps even slightly larger). The bones are clearly not from any human, nor from any Bahro, nor from anything that would have fit in the shackles. We very much doubt these could be from any prisoner of that cell.

Even what might be a thigh bone appears to be disproportionately large, relative to bones that are likely a ribcage of a separate, smaller though still large creature. The DRA theorizes that these are the remains of entire carcasses of various cattle-like animals so far unseen in this Age, thrown to these prisoners to devour.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The above are but a few examples where you have stated your unsupported opinion as unequivocal fact.
Worse are instances where you may be using altered linking books, or altering images in order to sensationalize your findings.

You claim

Quote:

"There is a telescope in the office has a view of the ridge the “sun” passes in front of, and if you watch, you can see the radiant part of the disc pass with the ridge clearly behind it".

Then as proof you show us an image supposedly taken from a vantage point unattainable from any path intended by the Writer of the Age. (link)

First, the "radiant part of the disc" is not attached to the disc at all, it is a common optical phenomenon known as a lens flare.

In the image above, the sun of course still remains a small disc in the sky.... but the disc is not even visible because it is entirely obscured by the camera's lens flares. The dirtier the lens, the more scratched it is, the bigger the lens flare - and we can see that the office's telescope has both of these flaws. Yes, the DRA understands that this sun flare is also visible to some extent without using the telescope, but the lenses in our own eyes are also to some extent imperfect.
The actual sun image through the office telescope:

The Teledahn sun itself does not pass in front of any solid objects in the Age - as it was written.

Likewise, you have posted images that appear to have originated from linking books originally written by the masters, but have been subsequently altered by other writers.

For instance, you posted the below Relto image. If the circled structure is available through a page in the Ages associated with this forum, please tell us the location of that page.

If the structure is not available in the Ages associated with this forum, then we urge you to post such images at the forums that are associated with these variations on works of the original Agewriters. Posting such images in connection with scholarly research suggests that such additions are in fact the work of the original Writer, which could in turn cause explorers to feel they had searched insufficiently, failing to locate a Page that was never present at all.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intuitively or implicitly, we all understand that no matter how skilled the master Age Writers may have been, they were not entirely godlike; no matter how large and detailed their creations may have been, they could not go on writing forever. Their Ages are not infinite universes and therefore must have limits. And every explorer has seen and felt those limits, placed intentionally - both for the safety of its inhabitants and to maintain the integrity of the writer's work.

It also seems that each Age was also written with a purpose, and once that purpose was fulfilled the Book was considered complete. It is understandable that other explorers, wanting more, would be tempted to alter copies of the original books.

The DRA could, of course, alter linking books ourselves or alter snapshots with image editing programs, to create previously-unseen phenomena. We could travel beyond the intentions of the original Writers, to show "flaws" in their work. We could post these images and then create fanciful theories about their causes and origins. We know you promised to show "...some of the things that are hidden from view normally." But this is a delicate edge, and we think there are already enough unsolved mysteries here to work on, without inventing them by going beyond the Writer's intended paths.

We applaud your research and writing so far, and look forward to your future postings.
We think that your work is likely to be lasting, referred to by future generations of explorers seeking answers.

For this reason, we respectfully request that you make an effort to differentiate your own speculations from the generally accepted D'ni history that you quote and paraphrase.
And, since you are in a sense creating a piece of D'ni history here, we ask that you exercise more care to avoid violating the intentions of - and limitations established by - the Ages' original authors.

thank you,

Emor D'ni Lap
D'ni Research Association

DLordofTime · **Posted:** Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:18 pm

No! Don't do that publicly! That's just plain old mean! Can't you see that his work is simply amazing?

To comment on one of your... 'taking exception's... If you look at Larry's picture of the 'sun' passing in front of the ridge, you will see that the whole disk passes, not just the glare.

Ainia · **Posted:** Tue Apr 03, 2012 1:19 am

Shorah larryf58 et al,

Yet another outstanding survey of D'ni presence and architecture--bravo! Based on the most recent commentary here, you are definitely getting folks interested in the topic, which is all to the good I think. We are getting perilously close to sounding like scientists on the surface, with all manner of differing opinions and salient questions sailing back and forth here! :wink:

There is hope for us yet, both in doing serious scientific research across the Ages and in being recognized for doing so.

There are many interesting questions out there now--exactly what was the process for pollen harvesting? Do the spores deteriorate in water? What do we know about the black market prisoners smuggled through the Age? The observation of the sun disc shining on the fore-side of the hill is extremely interesting and reminds me a bit of the paradoxical sunrise/sunset phenomenon at Payiferen. A most intriguing mystery.

I surmise that Emor D'ni Lap has his own sense of what constitutes IC, and that as in our earlier discussion here, it is at something of a variance with larryf58's definition and with mine. I can understand Emor's concerns about viewing the Age as the Writer intended but have found for myself that staying only on the well-marked DRC paths makes new research all but impossible (very similar to how it works up on the surface, BTW). My best research in the end is oftentimes that which is done off the beaten path; sometimes as both an explorer and a researcher, I must get creative in seeking out the new vistas. I recognize that not all explorers have the time and interest in doing so, which is why I have shared what I've learned here on the forums; I assume that larryf58 is doing so for similar reasons.

At any rate, I have learned that doing serious Age research is both an art and a science. And I very much enjoy sorting through all the various puzzle bits and trying to understand the larger picture; half the fun is in positing my own best theories and discussing them with others, finding out what questions I failed to consider or learning other ways of interpreting my own data. Scientific research at its best!

Emor D'ni Lap · **Joined:** Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:15 am **Posts:** 587

Dear Ainia,

Thank you for your message.
I will remind you that the D'ni Research Association has been in existence, as I said, for quite some time. A bit more background can be found in this short document from several years ago. Our "interest in the topic" predates any postings here, and most of the findings in the above message were drawn from research done long ago. In order to be certain our speculative conclusions were current, we did travel to the Ages once again and - with kind assistance from some helpful explorers nearby - reconfirmed several points prior to our posting above.

In fact, our reason for publishing just a small portion of our own research on Teledahn was twofold:
- to demonstrate that our findings, just like your own, are nevertheless generally to be regarded as theories only, rather than incontrovertible fact
- to demonstrate by example many ways in which our observations can instead be phrased as theories, speculations, conjectures etc.

You note that the sense of IC in the DRA's posting above differs from yours and that of Mr. LeDeay. If our post somehow violated the IC quality you wish to establish in this topic, then please be specific, as I see no similarity between our posting and the one from Firesign that you cited.

I believe you already understand that we are not asking you to stay within the proscribed boundaries defined by the original AgeWriters - to "stay on the sidewalk" as it were - and that this issue has nothing whatsoever to do with the D'ni Restoration Council's guidelines.
I think you know precisely what we refer to when we request that you not violate the intentions of those master writers by using generally unavailable points-of-view in order to invent (and then "solve") controversies by showing "flaws" that are never seen - and therefore effectively never present - in the Ages as they were written.

As our post demonstrates, there is plenty to discuss within each Age already... even though here we were generally limiting our response to the small portion of the DRA's research relevant to Mr. LeDeay's claims.

I would ask you to re-read the second sentence in the second paragraph of Mr. LeDeay's first post in this topic. By using the Age in ways other than as written in order to suggest normally unseen "flaws" (such as Teledahn's or Payiferen's sun), we feel this pledge has been broken.

Please clarify: is it now the position of Mr. LeDeay and yourself that it is fine to use "radio-controlled planes" and the like to take - and post here - any image whatsoever, from any position at all in an Age?

Emor D'ni Lap

Troi · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:24 am

Emor!
Thanks, Dude!
Being able to access the D'ni Research Association's findings will be a great help in our search for knowledge and understanding.

Annabelle · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:14 am

@larryf58:

Despite the fact you're doing a lot of researches and bring theories to all the community, there's a thin line that you cross a lot...

there's something you bring to support your saying that is much too awesome...

Emor did tell you that in his own way (more subtle). I'm telling you in a more direct way yet still not entirely.

Meditate on this: if an explorer alpha wants to see what you're seeing which is what supports your theories, can they use MOULa to do so?

larryf58 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:17 pm

Annabelle, When I post something that I don't qualify as "maybe", "perhaps", or what ever term I use to express my own opinions, it's because I'm quoting from Mystlore or another source. I ALWAYS try to word the portions that are my theories as theories. If I don't, it's because the "facts" were published elsewhere and I'm trusting the source as being reliable.

Emor D'ni Lap, you have said things that fly in the face of your own complaints. What proof do you have that the sun does not behave the way I observed, or that the spore deteriorate in water? None. Nor do you have any proof other than your opinion that the plant life in the water at the end of the island is not seaweed. Perhaps it is a form of algae that the arthropods find so distasteful that they will not enter it, but you offer no evidence of it. The same goes for every other point you have made. You have made assertions with no visual evidence to back them up.

I will grant this: the air gun was something I could not find a reference to in the source I read, and was so obviously a D'ni device that I simply assumed it dated back to the days of Ventus. I did not remember that passage in Sharper's journal at all.

However, all that said... I was doing all this for fun. If it's going to generate this kind of commentary, it's not fun anymore. I kept saying that it's here in creativity for a very definite reason, and that it's me pretending to be an Indiana Jones style adventurer who is actually going to the places and reporting what I observe, mistakes and all. Far too many people just don't seem to get that.

I really do have a rather fragile ego, and I don't like confrontation or getting into vitriolic arguments with people. When that happens, I generally will back off and let it die. That means I'm leaving this topic, on indefinite hiatus. I won't post any more articles until and unless I can work up the sense of fun and adventure with which I began it.

To those who enjoyed it, and encouraged me, I give my most humble thanks. See you around the Cavern!

Emor D'ni Lap · **Joined:** Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:15 am **Posts:** 587

Dear Mr. LeDeay -

We are sorry you feel our two requests are "confrontation" or "vitriolic arguments". In our first post to you, you will see that we were complimenting your work in the extreme, saying how much we had been enjoying your posts, that they are likely to be valuable and enduring works, and that we are looking forward to their continuation. We stand by all of that.

Please understand that rather than "complaining", the DRA is trying to demonstrate that there is often more than one theory about the nature of things, that there are ways to back up one's theories with some amount of logic, and that there are ways to state personal theories in order to separate them from established fact and accepted history.

In our above post, please note that each one of the DRA's hypotheses about Teledahn were stated as "beliefs", "speculation", "best estimations", "assumptions", and so on....not as proof. We simply requested that you exercise the same care, and provided several examples from your post where you had not done so.

When personal opinions are clearly phrased as such, no one can deny you your own beliefs.
But when opinion is stated as fact, one has to expect other opinions to be voiced...even if you're Indiana Jones.

And we did not offer proof that the sun does not behave the way you claimed, we stated that it does not do so from any vantage point available in the Age as it was written. We asked whether photos from all unwritten vantage points were now accepted policy in this topic.

Also please recall that I did PM you with these same requests, prior to making any post in this topic. Your reply concluded by telling us to "Just go to the Age, look at the evidence for yourself, take some pictures to back up your contention, and post your argument in the topic"... so we took your advice.

We are glad you've been enjoying yourself with your research and, as we've said, we sincerely hope it continues. We are only asking for a little bit of care in the process.

with thanks,
Emor D'ni Lap
D'ni Research Association

Annabelle · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 4:56 pm

...And what I'm asking is simply this: use photographies that are possible within normal use.

I tried hard to tell you in a smoother way not to put that right in your face but you seem to not have understand. You're on an official forum here, you walk on a very very thin line and some of your photographies are really questionnable.

It's great to bring theories and explain URU background to the whole community. You can do it without posting questionnable pictures :wink:

DLordofTime · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:50 pm

Annabelle, what Larry does is simply not possible without going off the beaten path. If he stuck to it, most of what you see here would not be here. Besides, this topic is pictures of Uru itself. If you want to know more about Uru, attend my Q&A and Age tour sessions. I have a thread about it.

Main_Avvie · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:36 pm

Why do people have to ruin things?

Ignore them Larry. Don't give them any say in the matter.

I and others I'm sure are fascinated by your analysis and findings. Keep up the great work.

On the matter of the Mining Gun. I think that was Sharpers own unique addition to the Age. From what I can gather from an entry in his journal, some Big Wig at the DRC requested the gun be added. Sharper himself seemed a bit perplexed by this but just did as he was told anyway.

I get the impression that it wasn't original to Teledahn. It was probably used most extensively for burrowing tunnels in D'ni or when developing new ages. I also presume that Sharper used it to hunt the Shroomies. The details in his journal are rather nondescript but much can be inferred from them anyway.

Quote:

6.1.01 Back to work here. I'm installing a gun of some kind down on the docks. It's a D'ni mining instrument I believe. Regardless, the DRC, of all people, want it set up. Strange.

DLordofTime · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:37 pm

I thought it was of D'ni design...

Main_Avvie · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:25 pm

DLordofTime wrote:

I thought it was of D'ni design...

The Mining Gun, you mean? It is of D'ni design.

DLordofTime · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:56 pm

Alas, if only tone of voice could be conveyed... That was meant as a remark of realisation, not of contesting a point.

larryf58 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:43 pm

Maybe I should have written this as a journal, instead of a series of articles. It might have gotten the point across better. This topic was escapism, and never meant to be taken as an authoritative work that seriously tried to uncover every little detail of every little thing. The fact that I tried to stick with the known facts in my little adventures was a side issue. The bottom line was that it was an escape from my real life and solely meant to share my sense of wonder about the places I visited.

But when people started to tell me "you can't write your story that way" and "you have to say this and that" and "you can't post those pictures because they show things that people can't see online", it stopped being fun. Showing things that couldn't be seen online was one of the stated purposes of the topic to begin with. Now it's just making me tired and I'm left feeling heartsick about it. Thanks for the vote of confidence, Main_Avvie and DLordofTime, and many thanks go to my friend, Ainia. But I'm dead serious. I can't do this anymore because it's depressing me instead of being my refuge. I hadn't even intended to check back this time, until I saw that DLord was the last poster.

A Commentary on "Uru Photography"

Who is online