The HENGES of North America (was something about X mt DNA)

[Tiompan]

What is obvious o me is that the archaeo-astronomers would have
an easier time of it if they had an easy to use and widely understood
word for a wooden post or stone placed in a circular astronomical alignment.

What is obvious to people who know the correct terminology for monuments and archaeoastronomy is that the
terms exist . You have been told them , you just ignore the info .


" "Henge" presents itself a a good candidate. "


No it doesn't , this is obvious to anyone who understands simple english and can read the various links pointing your error .
We have the the terminology and henge has nothing at all to do with astronomy and is confined the morphology of the monument .

Any putative or even actual astronomcal function that might be associated with the monument also has it's terminology .

I'll try to retrieve the colonial account of that Yuchi henge site when time permits .

[/quote ]
If it was a colonial account they wouldn't have used the term henge . Why not provide a modern archaeological reference ?

To bring this back to topic, if Fletcher and I find an Adena monolith in astronomical alignment,
we'll call it a "henge", as it would be nice if people understood us

.

Lol , some of the alt nuts might "understand " but anyone who knows anything about archaeology , henges , archaeoastronomy ,would realise that
they were dealing with people who didn't know what they were talking about .[/quote]

[Tiompan]

]

What is obvious o me is that the archaeo-astronomers would have
an easier time of it if they had an easy to use and widely understood
word for a wooden post or stone placed in a circular astronomical alignment.

What is obvious to people who know the correct terminology for monuments and archaeoastronomy is that the
terms exist . You have been told them , you just ignore the info .


" "Henge" presents itself a a good candidate. "


No it doesn't , this is obvious to anyone who understands simple english and can read the various links pointing your error .
We have the the terminology and henge has nothing at all to do with astronomy and is confined the morphology of the monument .

Any putative or even actual astronomcal function that might be associated with the monument also has it's terminology .


"I'll try to retrieve the colonial account of that Yuchi henge site when time permits . "


If it was a colonial account they wouldn't have used the term henge . Why not provide a modern archaeological reference ?

To bring this back to topic, if Fletcher and I find an Adena monolith in astronomical alignment,
we'll call it a "henge", as it would be nice if people understood us

.

[/quote][/quote]

Lol , some of the alt nuts might "understand " but anyone who knows anything about archaeology , henges , archaeoastronomy ,would realise that
they were dealing with people who didn't know what they were talking about .[/quote][/quote]

[E.P. Grondine]

If the site had of been excavated, then we'd all know about it.
If/When I find that colonial record again, I'll post you a copy.

I've decided that word is "henge", tiompan.
If you have a better candidate, then share it
You and spice can look forward to it coming to dictionaries.
Fun with neo-logisms.

[Tiompan]

Given your obvious inability to understand the simplest , clearest and most reputable of descriptions , nobody pays any attention to and it doesn't matter what you decide might be a better candidate .
It's not your choice .
It's one thing believing fantasies but when you also fail to use the correct terminology the fantasies take on an even great depth of gobbledygook .

Provide a decent description of the site from a reputable source and it should have a proper use of of the correct terminology , if not I'll give you one .
If it has timber posts in a (rough) circle ,it's more than likey best described as a timber circle , if it has the attributes of a henge i.e. "Archaeologists define a 'henge' as having a ditch on the inside and a bank on the outside; Stonehenge is the other way round. Having a ditch inside a bank is not a practical arrangement for defensive purposes," and countlessother definitions that you have been given , then it is a hnege .
If there is any archaeoastronomy associated with the site , fantasised or otherwise , it doesn't change the description i.e. a timber circle is still a timber circle whether there is any astronomy involved or not .
The same applies to a stone circle , henge , stone row or passage grave etc .

[circumspice]

In other words... It is what it is. You really can't make something fit your agenda as long as people are knowledgeable of the criteria required for whatever it is. It's wishful thinking on your part. You desperately need an ancient astronomical observatory to fit your agenda, therefore you try to attach that appellation on anything that might suit your purposes. EP the money you claim you need to further your studies won't come if you're found to be a crackpot. Try to stick as close to the truth as possible & make no false claims. Just sayin'...

[E.P. Grondine]

spice, tiompan -

I have set out the evidence for 2 cometary impacts at the start of the Holocene.
It is in no way dependent on the definition of the word "henge".
That data is in now way dependent on the function of Gobeklli Tepe.
In particular, the spikes in 14C and teh sudden spikes in water flows are in no way dependent on Gobekli Tepe.

While Gobekli Tepe most likely reflects to some degree
the condition of the night sky at the time it was built,
the data for those two cometary impacts does not depend on anyone's interpretation of Gobekli Tepe,
whether that is Collins or the Edinburgh team's or Hanccok et al's.
I have also given you both my best estimate of that.

The two of You can live with that or die with it.

I use a functional definition of "henge" based on North American usage, not British usage.

[Tiompan]

You are now saying that two putative cometary impacts are not dependent on the definition of the word henge , or on the function or interpretation of GT .
That is totally underwhelming but at least it is not in realms of fantasy or error that we are so often used to .

Your definition of henge is wrong whatever continent your'e in . There is no shortage of people , of all ages , working in archaeology in N America who understand the proper definition .
In the unlikely event that they would listen to your fantasies , the result would be further confusion .

But your constituency , the alt crowd , wouldn't know any better and would probably accept it without appreciating the error .

[E.P. Grondine]

Timpan, spice -

Hibbens was slandered for years.
That is until photographs and other materials from the deposits her observed were recovered.
The interesting part in all of this is that the folks who slandered him
now deny that they did it,
and are not held accountable in any way for their poor judgement.

Arguing about the definition of "henge' is a convenient way of avoiding
the issue of whether any of the stones at Gobekli Tepe were placed in any astronomical alignment.
But that is not central to the question.

So I ask the two of you to clearly state whether you think there were cometary impacts at the start of the Holocene.

[Tiompan]

Yes arguing about the meaning of the term henge is a waste of time . You are wrong and you have been proved wrong .
Let's not waste any more time on this .
It was you who brought it up in order to avoid problems you evaded in relation to GT ,as can easily be seen by looking over the original posts .

If you think I have said anything that is wrong in relation to cometary impacts ,quote me and refute the comment . Just as I continually do with you and your fantasies .

[circumspice]

Timpan, spice -

Hibbens was slandered for years.
That is until photographs and other materials from the deposits her observed were recovered.
The interesting part in all of this is that the folks who slandered him
now deny that they did it,
and are not held accountable in any way for their poor judgement.

Arguing about the definition of "henge' is a convenient way of avoiding
the issue of whether any of the stones at Gobekli Tepe were placed in any astronomical alignment.
But that is not central to the question.

So I ask the two of you to clearly state whether you think there were cometary impacts at the start of the Holocene.

I can only answer your question for myself. Tiompan can likewise answer for himself.

I believe that many millions of extraterrestrial objects have hit this planet over its 4+ billion year history. In recent times, terrestrial objects abandoned in the space around our planet have also been hitting earth. So what? You want to narrow the field as to the type of object that impacted earth & the putative time frame for when such objects struck the earth, right?

Now you ask me confirm or deny whether or not I believe that two cometary fragments struck the earth & ushered in the Holocene...

My answer is this: If EP Grondine states that two cometary fragments struck the earth, causing the onset of the Holocene I'd need to laugh & say "Prove it EP". The only 'proof' you show are your own interpretations of native American mythology. And to put the cherry on top, you're tentatively trying to make a case for c14 dates to be unreliable in relation to impact events so that when the c14 dates don't match the time frame of your agenda you can wave away those pesky 'wrong' dates & insert your own dates.

So, EP... Prove it.

[E.P. Grondine]

Spice,
I set out that physical data right here.
It is both remarkable, and in some ways not so remarkable,
that those impact events played such as role in Native American "mythologies",
but the physical evidence of the impact events is in no way dependent on those records.

We will now get to see if tiompan is man enough to own up to his view.

[Tiompan]

I am consistently pointing out your errors ,those that you are never man enough to own up to .

All you have to do is refute some some of my comments , there is no shortage of material .
Another constant is that you fail to do so.

[circumspice]

LMAO!!!

Dang EP... You've taken ordinary, run of the mill obfuscation & transformed it into a transcendental art form!!! That's an extremely valuable skill for the hack writer of bullshit, schlock, chicken little, tin foil hatter books.

I am truly in awe of your brilliance...

[E.P. Grondine]

Why look, its a better more complete version of the Yuchi HENGE tale

Yuchi: Why the Cedar Tree Is Red-Grained (U11)
Gatschet 1893:281–82
From a young Yuchi at Wialaka (Oklahoma), Gatschet obtained in 1885 the following myth in the Yuchi language.

An unknown mysterious being once came down upon the Earth
and met people there, who were the ancestors of the Yuchi Indians.
To them this being (Hi’ki or Ka’la hi’ki) taught many of the acts of life,
and in matters of religion admonished them to call the sun their mother as a matter of worship.

Every morning the sun, after rising above the horizon, makes short stops,
and then goes faster until it reaches the noon point.
So the Unknown inquired of them,"What is the matter with the sun?"

They denied having any knowledge about it, and said,
“Somebody has to go there to see and examine.”
“Who would go there, and what could he do after he gets there?”
The people said, “We are afraid to go up there.”

But the Unknown selected two men to make the ascent,
gave to each a club,
and instructed them that
as soon as the wizard who was playing these tricks on the sun
was leaving his cavern in the earth
and appeared on the surface
they should kill him on the spot.

“It is a wizard who causes the sun to go so fast in the morning,
for at sunrise he makes dashes at it, and the sun, being afraid of him,
tries to flee from his presence.”

The two brave men went to the rising place of the sun
to watch the orifice from which the sun emerges.
The wizard appeared at the mouth of the cave,
and at the same time the sun was to rise from another orifice beyond it.
The wizard watched for the fiery disk,
and put himself in position to rush and jump at it at the moment of its appearance.

When the wizard held up his head
the two men knocked it off from his body with their clubs,
[and] took it to their tribe,
and proclaimed that they had killed the sorcerer who had for so long a time urged the sun to a quicker motion.

But the wizard’s head was not dead yet.
It was stirring and moving about,
and to stop this the man of mysterious origin advised the people to tie the head on the uppermost limbs of a tree.

They did so, and on the next morning the head fell to the ground,
for it was not dead yet.

He then ordered them to tie the head to another tree.
It still lived and fell to the ground the next day.

To insure success, the Unknown then made them tie it to a red cedar tree.
There it remained, and its life became extinct.
The blood of the head ran through the cedar.

Henceforth the grain of the wood assumed a reddish color, and the cedar tree became a medicine tree.

Comments
Hi’ki or Ka’la hi’ki - Gatschet states that in popular belief among the Yuchi,
the Hiki or mysterious being is sometimes depicted as an ogre, a dangerous monster, or an animal with human or superhuman faculties.

[With this new information, the cedar may be a winter solstice marker, but feel free to differ.]

[Tiompan]

[With this new information, the cedar may be a winter solstice marker, but feel free to differ.]

This comment further highlights your ignorance about what having a marker for any astro event entails and the subject in general .
A tree is hardly an accurate marker for an event on the horizon i.e. they tend to have branches and can take up quite a few degrees of the horizon .
A timber post erected for the purpose would be much better ,being far more accurate and it's setting can be adjusted to the most convenient spot for the job .

Wherever the tree stood may be it could be said to mark any event , what is all important and what you have forgotten about is where the observer stands in relation to tree .
The observer can stand anywhere and watch any event in relation to the tree .