GS1, on 24 September 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

But what about the small circle around the obelisk ALSO corresponding to the pentagram geometry

It's called an inscribed circle, and people have been doing that for millenia without calling on Satan. Note that the pentagram is not actually there, while the small circle is. Any regular polygon can be drawn in exactly the same way to have the circle inscribed. In this case, the term "regular polygon" has a certain, specific geometric meaning. I assume you know what that is.

GS1, on 24 September 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

and the lines going right to the pentagram legs and what about the Masonic keystone?

Both stars appear to have been drawn within a circle without reason by the claimant (assuming that isn't you.)

There are no points of reference that would suggest these two stars should be drawn in the circle.

By the way, these two stars are circumscribed by the circle. Figured I'd throw that in, since I mentioned inscribing.

GS1, on 24 September 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

That's not even a true ellipse anyway, it's two circles with curves joining them. It just superficially looks like an ellipse. Almost exactly the same, but not quite.

No, it's a true ellipse. A circle broken in two would not "bulge" up or down between the breaks, as is shown in the photo.

GS1, on 24 September 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

Also, notice how the other circle on the ground, which I drew a magenta circle over, corresponds exactly to the two circles. That proves conclusively that it's not an ellipse but two circles.

Are you aware that a circle is actually an ellipse? The ellipse is the general form with the circle being a special case.

GS1, on 24 September 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

Okay, "approximately 1/2 sqrt 10" then. Any problem with that?

No. My question would be why is that significant? Do you know anything about the ratios of long and short axes in ellipses?

Harte