With respect Sanctuary, your opinion that it was built 'primarily' as a tomb is not based on any evidence, just on superficial similarities to others. It may well be that there are bones waiting to be discovered, but even that would not be evidence of 'primary' intent.
To say the builders were of 'normal' intelligence for their time would be a bit like comparing an architect to a navvy. I agree they would probably have used 'the tools available in their time', whatever and whenever that may have been, although they may have used methods lost to us for now.
The build, as you call it, is quite obviously open to question, but once we present you with evidence of intentionality in the positioning, not only of each stone, but of the entire structure, your conjecture that some of the stones may have been re-positioned will probably become redundant.
Enjoying the research is, I fully agree, an enlightening process, and is probably the best reason for us all to pull together in attempting to find some of the truth regarding the when, how and why of this structure.
I totally disagree with your last statement, simply because that's all we have to go on at this point in time, so to disregard it would be folly![/quote]
You've rendered me speachless again with your 'holier than though' attitude. I see no point at all in carrying on a discussion with you at all as you simply disregard other ideas out of hand viewing your ideas as being without question. You don't wish to discuss just put your ideas forward for us to all be thankful for. I'm out of this discussion now.