Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 New glacier theory on Stonehenge The debate over how the stones arrived at Stonehenge continuesA geology team has contradicted claims that bluestones were dug by Bronze Age man from a west Wales quarry and carried 240 miles to build Stonehenge. In a new twist, Open University geologists say the stones were in fact moved to Salisbury Plain by glaciers. Last year archaeologists said the stones came from the Preseli Hills. Recent research in the Oxford Journal of Archaeology suggests the stones were ripped from the ground and moved by glaciers during the Ice Age. Geologists from the Open University first claimed in 1991 that the bluestones at one of Britain's best-known historic landmarks had not come from a quarry, but from different sources in the Preseli area. The recent work was conducted by a team headed by Professor Olwen Williams-Thorpe, who said she and her colleagues had used geochemical analysis to trace the origins of axe heads found at Stonehenge and this backed up the original work. There has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story Dr Brian John "We concluded that the small number of axes that are actually bluestone derive from several different outcrops within Preseli," she said. "Axes found at or near Stonehenge are very likely to be from the same outcrops as the monoliths, and could even be made of left-over bits of the monoliths." The research Archaeologists claimed the stones came from a quarry at Carn Menyn Dr Brian John, a geomorphologist living in Pembrokeshire, said he always thought the idea that Bronze Age man had quarried the stones and then taken them so far "stretched credibility". But he said the debate would go on until someone was able to prove beyond doubt what happened one way or the other. "This is very exciting, and it moves the bluestone debate on from the fanciful and unscientific assertions of the past," he said. "Much of the archaeology in recent years has been based upon the assumption that Bronze Age man had a reason for transporting bluestones all the way from west Wales to Stonehenge and the technical capacity to do it. "That has been the ruling hypothesis, and there has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story. "Glaciers may move very slowly, but they have an excellent record when it comes to the transport of large stones from one part of the country to another." Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 the stones were pulled by hundreds of chihuahua's strung together under the direction of merlin... peter VV Jun 13, 2006 1:46 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge New glacier theory on Stonehenge The debate over how the stones arrived at Stonehenge continuesA geology team has contradicted claims that bluestones were dug by Bronze Age man from a west Wales quarry and carried 240 miles to build Stonehenge. In a new twist, Open University geologists say the stones were in fact moved to Salisbury Plain by glaciers. Last year archaeologists said the stones came from the Preseli Hills. Recent research in the Oxford Journal of Archaeology suggests the stones were ripped from the ground and moved by glaciers during the Ice Age. Geologists from the Open University first claimed in 1991 that the bluestones at one of Britain's best-known historic landmarks had not come from a quarry, but from different sources in the Preseli area. The recent work was conducted by a team headed by Professor Olwen Williams-Thorpe, who said she and her colleagues had used geochemical analysis to trace the origins of axe heads found at Stonehenge and this backed up the original work. There has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story Dr Brian John "We concluded that the small number of axes that are actually bluestone derive from several different outcrops within Preseli," she said. "Axes found at or near Stonehenge are very likely to be from the same outcrops as the monoliths, and could even be made of left-over bits of the monoliths." The research Archaeologists claimed the stones came from a quarry at Carn Menyn Dr Brian John, a geomorphologist living in Pembrokeshire, said he always thought the idea that Bronze Age man had quarried the stones and then taken them so far "stretched credibility". But he said the debate would go on until someone was able to prove beyond doubt what happened one way or the other. "This is very exciting, and it moves the bluestone debate on from the fanciful and unscientific assertions of the past," he said. "Much of the archaeology in recent years has been based upon the assumption that Bronze Age man had a reason for transporting bluestones all the way from west Wales to Stonehenge and the technical capacity to do it. "That has been the ruling hypothesis, and there has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story. "Glaciers may move very slowly, but they have an excellent record when it comes to the transport of large stones from one part of the country to another." Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 Wouldn't there be other bits of bluestone around if that was the case? Surely if someone built the pyramids, people could transport the stones for Stonehenge. Jo - peter VV Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:46 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge New glacier theory on Stonehenge The debate over how the stones arrived at Stonehenge continuesA geology team has contradicted claims that bluestones were dug by Bronze Age man from a west Wales quarry and carried 240 miles to build Stonehenge. In a new twist, Open University geologists say the stones were in fact moved to Salisbury Plain by glaciers. Last year archaeologists said the stones came from the Preseli Hills. Recent research in the Oxford Journal of Archaeology suggests the stones were ripped from the ground and moved by glaciers during the Ice Age. Geologists from the Open University first claimed in 1991 that the bluestones at one of Britain's best-known historic landmarks had not come from a quarry, but from different sources in the Preseli area. The recent work was conducted by a team headed by Professor Olwen Williams-Thorpe, who said she and her colleagues had used geochemical analysis to trace the origins of axe heads found at Stonehenge and this backed up the original work. There has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story Dr Brian John "We concluded that the small number of axes that are actually bluestone derive from several different outcrops within Preseli," she said. "Axes found at or near Stonehenge are very likely to be from the same outcrops as the monoliths, and could even be made of left-over bits of the monoliths." The research Archaeologists claimed the stones came from a quarry at Carn Menyn Dr Brian John, a geomorphologist living in Pembrokeshire, said he always thought the idea that Bronze Age man had quarried the stones and then taken them so far "stretched credibility". But he said the debate would go on until someone was able to prove beyond doubt what happened one way or the other. "This is very exciting, and it moves the bluestone debate on from the fanciful and unscientific assertions of the past," he said. "Much of the archaeology in recent years has been based upon the assumption that Bronze Age man had a reason for transporting bluestones all the way from west Wales to Stonehenge and the technical capacity to do it. "That has been the ruling hypothesis, and there has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story. "Glaciers may move very slowly, but they have an excellent record when it comes to the transport of large stones from one part of the country to another." Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 Did we have chihuahuas here back then. Did we know about Mexico? Jo - fraggle Tuesday, June 13, 2006 10:24 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge the stones were pulled by hundreds of chihuahua's strung together under the direction of merlin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 i think some of the controversy has to do with the distance the stones had to be moved... peter? second question..wot is the evidence for how centralized any government/civilization was when stonehenge was supposed to have been built? (wot, 2500-2600 bc, wasn't it?) jo Jun 13, 2006 2:35 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Wouldn't there be other bits of bluestone around if that was the case? Surely if someone built the pyramids, people could transport the stones for Stonehenge. Jo - peter VV Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:46 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge New glacier theory on Stonehenge The debate over how the stones arrived at Stonehenge continuesA geology team has contradicted claims that bluestones were dug by Bronze Age man from a west Wales quarry and carried 240 miles to build Stonehenge. In a new twist, Open University geologists say the stones were in fact moved to Salisbury Plain by glaciers. Last year archaeologists said the stones came from the Preseli Hills. Recent research in the Oxford Journal of Archaeology suggests the stones were ripped from the ground and moved by glaciers during the Ice Age. Geologists from the Open University first claimed in 1991 that the bluestones at one of Britain's best-known historic landmarks had not come from a quarry, but from different sources in the Preseli area. The recent work was conducted by a team headed by Professor Olwen Williams-Thorpe, who said she and her colleagues had used geochemical analysis to trace the origins of axe heads found at Stonehenge and this backed up the original work. There has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story Dr Brian John "We concluded that the small number of axes that are actually bluestone derive from several different outcrops within Preseli," she said. "Axes found at or near Stonehenge are very likely to be from the same outcrops as the monoliths, and could even be made of left-over bits of the monoliths." The research Archaeologists claimed the stones came from a quarry at Carn Menyn Dr Brian John, a geomorphologist living in Pembrokeshire, said he always thought the idea that Bronze Age man had quarried the stones and then taken them so far "stretched credibility". But he said the debate would go on until someone was able to prove beyond doubt what happened one way or the other. "This is very exciting, and it moves the bluestone debate on from the fanciful and unscientific assertions of the past," he said. "Much of the archaeology in recent years has been based upon the assumption that Bronze Age man had a reason for transporting bluestones all the way from west Wales to Stonehenge and the technical capacity to do it. "That has been the ruling hypothesis, and there has been a great reluctance to allow facts to interfere with a good story. "Glaciers may move very slowly, but they have an excellent record when it comes to the transport of large stones from one part of the country to another." Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 the atlanteans brought them over... jo Jun 13, 2006 2:43 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Did we have chihuahuas here back then. Did we know about Mexico? Jo - fraggle Tuesday, June 13, 2006 10:24 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge the stones were pulled by hundreds of chihuahua's strung together under the direction of merlin... Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Fraggle >i think some of the controversy has to do with the distance the stones had to be moved... >peter? I had nothing to do with it. I refute any suggestion that I am 6000 years old. :-) >second question..wot is the evidence for how centralized any government/civilization was when stonehenge > was supposed to have been built? >(wot, 2500-2600 bc, wasn't it?) More like 4,000 BC according to most experts. And yep - there's absolutely no evidence of what life was like at all in England back then beyond a few archaeological remains, and those are pretty scarce. There's also no evidence for what technology was available in England at the time, but considering the technology that was available in places like Egypt and Sumer that shouldn't have been, it's probably more than we give the credit for... BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Jo >Did we have chihuahuas here back then. Did we know about Mexico? Of course we did... until they were all killed off by a sadistic Merlin ;-) BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 well...hmmmmm... just cuz someone has something in one place, doesn't mean they are gonna be everywhere tho, right? see..just wondering/ruminating....theres' lotsa evidence for more complex/consolidated civilizations in places like sumer, egypt, southern turkey, caral, china, etc... i'm making an assumption that to build monuments, temples, etc you are going to need a society that has some sort of structure(above tribal)... but....maybe someday they'll find more evidence of civilization around the time of stonehenge... didn't the raft sink or the stones fall off the raft er something when they tried to recreate the move? Peter Kebbell Jun 14, 2006 12:59 AM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >i think some of the controversy has to do with the distance the stones had to be moved... >peter? I had nothing to do with it. I refute any suggestion that I am 6000 years old. :-) >second question..wot is the evidence for how centralized any government/civilization was when stonehenge > was supposed to have been built? >(wot, 2500-2600 bc, wasn't it?) More like 4,000 BC according to most experts. And yep - there's absolutely no evidence of what life was like at all in England back then beyond a few archaeological remains, and those are pretty scarce. There's also no evidence for what technology was available in England at the time, but considering the technology that was available in places like Egypt and Sumer that shouldn't have been, it's probably more than we give the credit for... BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 killed off? i thought he turned em into hedgehogs....? Peter Kebbell Jun 14, 2006 1:08 AM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Jo >Did we have chihuahuas here back then. Did we know about Mexico? Of course we did... until they were all killed off by a sadistic Merlin ;-) BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Fraggle >killed off? >i thought he turned em into hedgehogs....? You reckon there were some left alive after he'd got them to pull those blue stones all that way? BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 sure takes a lot to keep a chihuahua done...they never quite just imagine wot a neolithic chihuahua was like.... Peter Kebbell Jun 14, 2006 12:04 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >killed off? >i thought he turned em into hedgehogs....? You reckon there were some left alive after he'd got them to pull those blue stones all that way? BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Fraggle >takes a lot to keep a chihuahua done...they never quite >just imagine wot a neolithic chihuahua was like.... Ah - are you speaking of the sabre-toothed-chihuahua? BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 no no..they tended to fall over to easily...just like the giant horned chihuahua...they would always pitch forward... merlin brought over the wooly chihuahuas Peter Jun 14, 2006 2:15 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >takes a lot to keep a chihuahua done...they never quite >just imagine wot a neolithic chihuahua was like.... Ah - are you speaking of the sabre-toothed-chihuahua? BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Yep, they failed in their attempt to recreate the trip from the Presli mountains, maybe our boat building skills arent as good as they used to be......... THE jinxed Millennium Bluestone project to recreate the building of a single piece of Stonehenge 4,000 years ago has finally been scrapped. The Bluestone Project was bank-rolled by the Heritage lottery fund and aimed to bring a three tonne rock from north Pembrokeshire to Salisbury Plain. But after being dragged 17 miles across land by a dwindling team of volunteers, the project has been abandoned, and now the stone lies in Milford Haven docks. An artist's drawing released by English Heritage of an ancient boat which dates back to 1900 BC, of the type which could have been used to transport the stones used to construct Stonehenge.The vessel, which was unearthed on the shores of the Humber at Ferriby, East Yorkshire, in 1963, is also the earliest proof of large-scale trading between Britain and Europe. Experts were able to date the vessel after a breakthrough in radio-carbon dating technology, shedding new light on the seafaring capabilities of Britain's prehistoric ancestors. About £100,000 from the National Lottery was used to transport the Bluestone by using prehistoric methods.Historians helped to recreate the techniques thought to have been used 4,000 years ago during the building of Stonehenge.The first attempt came to a sudden halt when the Bluestone was loaded on to two replica Neolithic boats and promptly sank in the Bristol Channel.Divers helped to recover the massive rock using modern cranes and lifting gear but the scheme was temporarily called off after holes were found in the hulls of the two specially built boats.The stone was eventually placed in storage at Milford Haven Port after bad weather made the sea journey too dangerous to contemplate. The Valley Vegan..................fraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote: well...hmmmmm... just cuz someone has something in one place, doesn't mean they are gonna be everywhere tho, right? see..just wondering/ruminating....theres' lotsa evidence for more complex/consolidated civilizations in places like sumer, egypt, southern turkey, caral, china, etc... i'm making an assumption that to build monuments, temples, etc you are going to need a society that has some sort of structure(above tribal)... but....maybe someday they'll find more evidence of civilization around the time of stonehenge... didn't the raft sink or the stones fall off the raft er something when they tried to recreate the move? Peter Kebbell Jun 14, 2006 12:59 AM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >i think some of the controversy has to do with the distance the stones had to be moved... >peter? I had nothing to do with it. I refute any suggestion that I am 6000 years old. :-) >second question..wot is the evidence for how centralized any government/civilization was when stonehenge > was supposed to have been built? >(wot, 2500-2600 bc, wasn't it?) More like 4,000 BC according to most experts. And yep - there's absolutely no evidence of what life was like at all in England back then beyond a few archaeological remains, and those are pretty scarce. There's also no evidence for what technology was available in England at the time, but considering the technology that was available in places like Egypt and Sumer that shouldn't have been, it's probably more than we give the credit for... BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accusedPeter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 luckily wooly chihuahuas are very bouyant seriously..they tried to move a several ton stone on those boats??? peter VV Jun 14, 2006 2:31 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Yep, they failed in their attempt to recreate the trip from the Presli mountains, maybe our boat building skills arent as good as they used to be......... THE jinxed Millennium Bluestone project to recreate the building of a single piece of Stonehenge 4,000 years ago has finally been scrapped. The Bluestone Project was bank-rolled by the Heritage lottery fund and aimed to bring a three tonne rock from north Pembrokeshire to Salisbury Plain. But after being dragged 17 miles across land by a dwindling team of volunteers, the project has been abandoned, and now the stone lies in Milford Haven docks. An artist's drawing released by English Heritage of an ancient boat which dates back to 1900 BC, of the type which could have been used to transport the stones used to construct Stonehenge.The vessel, which was unearthed on the shores of the Humber at Ferriby, East Yorkshire, in 1963, is also the earliest proof of large-scale trading between Britain and Europe. Experts were able to date the vessel after a breakthrough in radio-carbon dating technology, shedding new light on the seafaring capabilities of Britain's prehistoric ancestors. About £100,000 from the National Lottery was used to transport the Bluestone by using prehistoric methods.Historians helped to recreate the techniques thought to have been used 4,000 years ago during the building of Stonehenge.The first attempt came to a sudden halt when the Bluestone was loaded on to two replica Neolithic boats and promptly sank in the Bristol Channel.Divers helped to recover the massive rock using modern cranes and lifting gear but the scheme was temporarily called off after holes were found in the hulls of the two specially built boats.The stone was eventually placed in storage at Milford Haven Port after bad weather made the sea journey too dangerous to contemplate. The Valley Vegan..................fraggle <EBbrewpunx wrote: well...hmmmmm... just cuz someone has something in one place, doesn't mean they are gonna be everywhere tho, right? see..just wondering/ruminating....theres' lotsa evidence for more complex/consolidated civilizations in places like sumer, egypt, southern turkey, caral, china, etc... i'm making an assumption that to build monuments, temples, etc you are going to need a society that has some sort of structure(above tribal)... but....maybe someday they'll find more evidence of civilization around the time of stonehenge... didn't the raft sink or the stones fall off the raft er something when they tried to recreate the move? Peter Kebbell Jun 14, 2006 12:59 AM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >i think some of the controversy has to do with the distance the stones had to be moved... >peter? I had nothing to do with it. I refute any suggestion that I am 6000 years old. :-) >second question..wot is the evidence for how centralized any government/civilization was when stonehenge > was supposed to have been built? >(wot, 2500-2600 bc, wasn't it?) More like 4,000 BC according to most experts. And yep - there's absolutely no evidence of what life was like at all in England back then beyond a few archaeological remains, and those are pretty scarce. There's also no evidence for what technology was available in England at the time, but considering the technology that was available in places like Egypt and Sumer that shouldn't have been, it's probably more than we give the credit for... BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Peter H Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Fraggle >no no..they tended to fall over to easily...just like the giant horned chihuahua...they would always pitch forward... >merlin brought over the wooly chihuahuas I thought they were long before Merlin's time... more like the time of the Brontohuahuas, the Diplohuahuas and the Tyrannosaurs Chihuahuas.... BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Fraggle >seriously..they tried to move a several ton stone on those boats???Yeah... but you know the best bit about that.... it was paid for out of the Heritage lottery fund, which is supposed to be for charitable causes to help people... not quite sure how dragging a stone across Wales counts.... BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 sorry my friend, you were miss informed... wooly chihuahuas roamed the vast mexican plains with such venerable beasts as the giant chulupa and the horned NAFTAbird.... Peter Jun 14, 2006 3:06 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >no no..they tended to fall over to easily...just like the giant horned chihuahua...they would always pitch forward... >merlin brought over the wooly chihuahuas I thought they were long before Merlin's time... more like the time of the Brontohuahuas, the Diplohuahuas and the Tyrannosaurs Chihuahuas.... BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hi Fraggle >sorry my friend, you were miss informed... >wooly chihuahuas roamed the vast mexican plains with such venerable beasts as the giant chulupa and the horned >NAFTAbird.... But how did they manage to survive with all that chocolate getting stuck in their wool? BB Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 dunno wot that is.... but...it helped them develop strong arms, by makin em lug a huge boulder? Peter Jun 14, 2006 3:31 PM Re: New glacier theory on Stonehenge Hi Fraggle >seriously..they tried to move a several ton stone on those boats???Yeah... but you know the best bit about that.... it was paid for out of the Heritage lottery fund, which is supposed to be for charitable causes to help people... not quite sure how dragging a stone across Wales counts.... BB Peter Defending this corruption on which you are sat You tell me what to think, you tell me this and that `Freedom is O.K. you scum` but make sure it`s never used In your defence of liberty I always stand accused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.