The one thing that is missing is the first word in the link , Evidence .
"Stukeley maintained there were 30 stones in the ring, “
Aubrey recorded 20 stones , 50 years years before Stukeley had seen the five that remained when he first visited .
Stukeley didn’t know how many there were and he also guessed at nice round figures for other monuments in the area all totalling a nice round 650 .
"But there are quite a number of stone circles with 30 stones in the ring, most notably Stonehenge itself, and also Stanton Drew “
Neither have 30 .
Stanton Drew great circle has 26 surviving stones ,it may have had 30 we don’t know .
Likewise at Stonehenge there are not 30 stones belonging to the outer sarsen circle ,there is a gap in the south west which may have had a number of stones allowing for a total of thirty but again they are not there and we don’t know if they ever were .
Why didn’t he actually mention the specific results of the geofizz ?
"If you watch a star coming up on the eastern horizon and then watch where it sets on the western horizon that could mark two sides of this symmetrical axis." You don’t say