Stonehenge forum 180 room
Image by Howburn Digger
Stonehenge

The Blue Stone Enigma

close
more_vert
Pete G P
Pete G Jun 25, 2009 02:32:23
Replying to tonyh

same here Tony but Brians book raises some interesting points that I had never considered before.
Like why so many bluestones were from different quarries and why some of them are considerd rubbish stones.
I'll lend you my copy of the book, no one here seems to want to read it.
it's a bit like the crop circle Believers eh?
Pete

T tonyh
tonyh Jun 25, 2009 17:34:42
Replying to Pete G

Yep, You have to wonder about that..

It would have been a long way to transport second rate stone especially when the very best would have been available..

Tony

P Pilgrim
Pilgrim Jun 27, 2009 12:14:04
Replying to Pete G

Pete G wrote:
I'll lend you my copy of the book, no one here seems to want to read it.
it's a bit like the crop circle Believers eh?
Pete
Hi Pete,

I'd read it, but was put off by the website. Whilst I can see Brian's argument, banner headlines like "STONEHENGE BLUESTONES: NEW RESEARCH DISPROVES HUMAN TRANSPORT THEORY" and "NEW BOOK SLAMS ARCHAEOLOGY'S "FAIRY TALE" OBSESSION" tend to turn me off. Sorry, but it lumps it in with the "justyouwaituntil2012" brigade in my view.

Also, I've looked at the available models from the BritIce project,and it seems to my untrained eye that only in their "extreme" example http://www.ies.aber.ac.uk/en/fileshare/files/5492/3+-+E109b2bc.wmv does the MODELLING meet with Brian's supposition; and I'd have to say that the potential variance between their "potential minimum and maximum behaviour" scenarios is geographically quite large! I don't think any academic would use a single outlier from any large dataset (in this case 350) as being representative of the general findings of the dataset.

Peace

Pilgrim

X