The proof of a proto Stonehenge is surely not disputed, there are clearly reused bluestones of a pillar and lintel monument, at Stonehenge itself, so there was an earlier bluestone monument somewhere that predated the sarsen monument. This is not speculation, unlike the possibility of glacial transport, which has the mechanism to do half a job, but not the means to carve and assemble lintels onto pillars.
Human intervention is a certainty, glacial intervention is not.
 Reply | with quote | Posted by cerrig
12th December 2015ce
11:54 |
Stonehenge is second hand (nigelswift, Dec 07, 2015, 08:55)- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (tiompan, Dec 07, 2015, 09:34)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Monganaut, Dec 07, 2015, 20:11)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (tiompan, Dec 07, 2015, 21:06)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Monganaut, Dec 07, 2015, 21:42)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (tiompan, Dec 07, 2015, 22:13)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Monganaut, Dec 07, 2015, 22:21)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (tiompan, Dec 07, 2015, 22:36)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Monganaut, Dec 07, 2015, 23:22)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Evergreen Dazed, Dec 07, 2015, 23:51)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Monganaut, Dec 08, 2015, 00:09)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Evergreen Dazed, Dec 08, 2015, 00:20)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Evergreen Dazed, Dec 08, 2015, 00:28)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Monganaut, Dec 08, 2015, 00:53)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Evergreen Dazed, Dec 08, 2015, 07:55)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (moss, Dec 08, 2015, 07:59)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (Evergreen Dazed, Dec 08, 2015, 07:59)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (tiompan, Dec 08, 2015, 08:31)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (goffik, Dec 08, 2015, 13:55)
- Re: Stonehenge is second hand (tjj, Dec 09, 2015, 10:00)
- Stonehenge wasn't first second hand monument (thesweetcheat, Dec 12, 2015, 13:33)
|
|
Head To Head 
Re: Stonehenge is second hand (mountainman)