Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 738383.eceThe henge may have been carefully positioned on a route from the Blue Stone Hills at Preseli (where, apparently, there used to be another henge) and the route for transporting the bluestones to Stonehenge may have made use of inland waterways,” say the investigators. One such stream runs close by the Llanddowror site
Digit wrote:Ther's no proof required Shark. Chemical analysis of the stones sampled came from west Wales. I take it you meant the mode of transport, if so the report neither adds nor subtracts from what we aleady know. The mere existance of a supposed Henge doesn't help much. There was one near Carn Meini and there's another down the road from me, which is north of Carn Meini.
spacecase0 wrote:some guy figured out how to move large stones fairly easy.
www.theforgottentechnology.com
I have tried it, it works really well.
are there 2 wear points on the stones slightly off center of gravity ?
if so, then they likely moved them in this method.
if not, then did they clean up the stones on location after they were moved ?
Minimalist wrote:I still want to see it go uphill or across a muddy creek bank.spacecase0 wrote:some guy figured out how to move large stones fairly easy.
www.theforgottentechnology.com
I have tried it, it works really well.
are there 2 wear points on the stones slightly off center of gravity ?
if so, then they likely moved them in this method.
if not, then did they clean up the stones on location after they were moved ?
Good point. To add to this thread, and I will try to find the reference, someone has suggested that the blustones were moved by a much earlier glacial epoch, something in the order of 1.5M years ago. I realize this has been beaten to death here, and I do not wish to flog the poor horse further, so perhaps we can let this one be ? Personally, I have no idea how the stones made their way from Wales, as muscle power just seems so ... impossible!Digit wrote:I am indeed Shark, but I feel I must correct a common error made yourself.
The original suggestion that the stones might be glacial erratics dates back, I believe, to the 1920s, and no serious investigater has suggested that the stones were dumped on SP.
If you read my earlier posts on the subject you will see that a possible source for such erratics is both north and south of the Bristol Channel.
I was more meaning how they got them from the boat to where they are now. I see lots of modern engineers say how big a boat would have to be to move stones like that, but the modern engineers always want the block out of the water, they forget how much easier it is to have the block under the water level, all you have to do is keep your raft from hitting the bottom, and that is way easier.I still want to see it go uphill or across a muddy creek bank.
that is what I was thinking, and why I posted it, I don't think that it is that hard to move stone around, even if you have to wait for a dry season to do it.It does make you think.
If one old guy can do this by himself. what could 10 or 20 guys do?
Egyptologists are displaying irrational and unscientific fixations by stubbornly clinging to ideas that have already been discredited. Mr. Lerhner and Mr. Hawass use every public forum to repeat their unproven speculations about how the ancient (Egyptian) builders quarried, transported, lifted, dressed and precisely positioned blocks of stone weighing from 50 to 200 tons.
The problem is that they have not proven that the primitive tools and methods that they assert the builders used are equal to the task. In fact, several well-documented attempts over the past 30 years have actually failed to replicate what the builders achieved. In the 1970s a Japanese team funded by Nissan tried to build a one-third, scale model of the Great Pyramid using the methods Egyptologists claim the ancient engineers employed. They could not duplicate a single step of the process.
