Editing Ley line (section)

==Scientific views==
{{see also|Alignments of random points}}
Ley lines have been characterised as a form of [[pseudoscience]].{{sfn|Regal|2009|p=103}} On ''[[The Skeptic's Dictionary]]'', the American philosopher and [[Skeptical movement|skeptic]] [[Robert Todd Carroll]] noted that none of the statements about magnetic forces underpinning putative ley lines has been scientifically verified.{{sfn|Carroll|2015}}

Williamson and Bellamy characterised ley lines as "one of the biggest [[red herring]]s in the history of popular thought".{{sfn|Williamson|Bellamy|1983|p=11}} One criticism of Watkins' ley line theory states that given the high density of historic and prehistoric sites in [[Great Britain|Britain]] and other parts of Europe, finding straight lines that "connect" sites is trivial and ascribable to [[coincidence]]. Johnson stated that "ley lines do not exist". He cited Williamson and Bellamy's work in demonstrating this, noting that their research showed how "the density of archaeological sites in the British landscape is so great that a line drawn through virtually anywhere will 'clip' a number of sites".{{sfn|Johnson|2010|p=5}}

Other statistical significance tests have shown that supposed ley-line alignments are no more significant than random occurrences and/or have been generated by selection effects. The paper by statistician Simon Broadbent{{sfn|Broadbent|1980}} is one such example and the discussion after the article involving a large number of other statisticians demonstrates the high level of agreement that alignments have no significance compared to the null hypothesis of random locations.

A study by [[David George Kendall]] used the techniques of [[Shape analysis (digital geometry)|shape analysis]] to examine the triangles formed by standing stones to deduce if these were often arranged in straight lines. The shape of a triangle can be represented as a point on the sphere, and the distribution of all shapes can be thought of as a distribution over the sphere. The sample distribution from the standing stones was compared with the theoretical distribution to show that the occurrence of straight lines was no more than average.{{sfn|Kendall|1989}}

The archaeologist [[Richard J. C. Atkinson|Richard Atkinson]] once demonstrated this by taking the positions of [[telephone booth]]s and pointing out the existence of "telephone box leys". This, he argued, showed that the mere existence of such lines in a set of points does not prove that the lines are deliberate artefacts, especially since it is known that telephone boxes were not laid out in any such manner or with any such intention.{{sfn|Ruggles|2005|p=225}}

In 2004, John Bruno Hare wrote:

{{quote|Watkins never attributed any supernatural significance to leys; he believed that they were simply pathways that had been used for trade or ceremonial purposes, very ancient in origin, possibly dating back to the Neolithic, certainly pre-Roman. His obsession with leys was a natural outgrowth of his interest in [[landscape photography]] and love of the British countryside. He was an intensely rational person with an active intellect, and I think he would be a bit disappointed with some of the fringe aspects of ley lines today.|John Bruno Hare, ''Early British Trackways Index''{{sfn|Watkins|1922|p={{pn|date=May 2023}}}} }}