55 replies to this topic

[Pete G]

Silbury hill is a giant multi size doughnut maker and Avebury is a giant mould for a birthday cake!

[beatles]

shiny, on 28 March 2008, 10:52, said:

I get the feeling that I'm not being taken seriously.

the granary at stonehenge theory is absolutely serious but, there is no reason that we can't have some fun with it too.    it is very interesting that this theory has brought two opposite camps together.   the new age crowd and the professional archaeologists both hate it........  go figure.   this is the first time they can agree on something.

both groups can't change their current beliefs about the use of stonehenge.   there is one group of people who find this idea interesting and with merit.  they are engineers and builders.

future soil tests at stonehenge will confirm or disprove this theory.  until then, it is up for debate.     i hope i have not offended any new age folks or archaeologists.  

clyde

[Pete G]

I don't hate the idea clyde I just think your having a laugh.
Post onto BritArch to see what the pro's think if your serious.
PeteG

[beatles]

shiny, on 28 March 2008, 10:52, said:

I get the feeling that I'm not being taken seriously.

the granary theory http://www.granaryatstonehenge.org  is a most serious new idea but, that doesn't mean that we can't have some fun with it too.

clyde

[beatles]

Pete G, on 28 March 2008, 12:34, said:

Silbury hill is a giant multi size doughnut maker and Avebury is a giant mould for a birthday cake!

peteg

if silbury hill is a ginat doughnut maker   then the neolithic people would have needed a huge amount of flour....hence the need for the granary at stonehenge...........
clyde

[beatles]

Pete G, on 28 March 2008, 15:03, said:

I don't hate the idea clyde I just think your having a laugh.
Post onto BritArch to see what the pro's think if your serious.
PeteG

i have requested  britarch to review my thesis.  
i am not laughing at you but i see no need to be so serious as to not enjoy the jokes.
clyde

[Pete G]

looking around other forums you don't seem to have made a single convert yet clyde.
It's up to you to prove it, you cannot expect the UK tax payer to fund soil analysis on your behalf just because you have an idea.
I don't see this theory taking off and I doubt it will survive the summer.

Maybe you should come to the UK and look at the stones up close.
PeteG

[beatles]

Pete G, on 29 March 2008, 10:01, said:

looking around other forums you don't seem to have made a single convert yet clyde.
It's up to you to prove it, you cannot expect the UK tax payer to fund soil analysis on your behalf just because you have an idea.
I don't see this theory taking off and I doubt it will survive the summer.

Maybe you should come to the UK and look at the stones up close.
PeteG

peteg

yep, you are right in that other forums such as modern antiquarian have given this theory about the same reaction.  i would like to point out that there is still heated debate about darwins theory of natural selection even after a hundred years.....   so i expect  that this will take a while to gain ground.      but, gain it will when you consider that the theories of aliens, vortexes, and stonehenge time portals are still around and publishing books like wildfire.

i think my theory will survive, if for no other reason than people will wonder, " what if it is true."    i expect to be here answering questions about it, far past this summer.   at that time we can re-discuss whether on not this theory will gain ground.  my website has only been up about a month...

i will say that the working model has a very positive effect on people who actually see it operating in the wind.   we now have plans for a much larger permanently grounded model and would like to someday build a full size stonehenge granary and grind grain.... a working model must count for something when discussing stonehenge theories.  

as for paying for soil tests,,,,,  i do not have the funds and ,you may have noticed that we have made no appeal for financial support.    i personally do not like websites that solicit funds for all sorts of things.  all things will come in good time.

if this theory survives past the summer, will you become a convert?

enjoy the debate.
clyde

[Pete G]

beatles, on 29 March 2008, 20:34, said:

if this theory survives past the summer, will you become a convert?

I would need some proof, so far I have found nothing in your thesis that rings true.
You would have to build a full sized model that works to convince anyone.
PeteG

[beatles]

Pete G, on 29 March 2008, 15:57, said:

beatles, on 29 March 2008, 20:34, said:

if this theory survives past the summer, will you become a convert?

I would need some proof, so far I have found nothing in your thesis that rings true.
You would have to build a full sized model that works to convince anyone.
PeteG

i will send you a sack of ground wheat when we get the full sized mill built.   hows that?     perhaps we will start a grain company and call it "stoneground" .       at this point consider yourself owed one sack of stonehenge ground wheat.

later,
clyde

[Pete G]

If your theory were proved it might explain why the druids all wear white frocks!

PeteG

[beatles]

Pete G, on 29 March 2008, 16:21, said:

If your theory were proved it might explain why the druids all wear white frocks!

PeteG

yep, millers like chefs have always worn white.......    here is a perfect example of a stonehenge theory that is highly in question and still exists in the popular culture.  druids did not build stonehenge.    millers did.......haaa

clyde

[Pete G]

http://www.gazettean...nge_mystery.php
here's your chance to find out clyde.
EH have started a dig inside the stone circle.
PeteG

New dig probes Wiltshire's Stonehenge mystery
By Gazette Reporter

Archaeologists today began a historic dig which they hope will unravel the ancient mystery of Stonehenge.

A trench is being excavated at the World Heritage site in a bid to establish the precise dating of the Double Bluestone Circle, the first stone structure that was built there thousands of years ago.

Timothy Darvill and Geoffrey Wainwright, the professors leading the first dig inside the stone circle in 44 years, believe their project could answer the "eternal questions" of when and why Stonehenge was first built.

Prof Darvill, of Bournemouth University, and Prof Wainwright, President of the Society of Antiquaries, will compare samples with their research in the Preseli hills in south west Wales, from where 80 such stones were carried an estimated 4,500 years ago.

Dr Simon Thurley, chief executive of English Heritage - which maintains Stonehenge - described the dig as "tremendously exciting".

He said: "The bluestones hold the key to understanding the purpose and meaning of Stonehenge.

"Their arrival marked a turning point in the history of Stonehenge, changing the site from being a fairly standard formative henge with timber structures and occasional use for burial, to the complex stone structure whose remains dominate the site today."

Prof Wainwright added: "This small excavation of a bluestone is the culmination of six years' of research which Tim and I have conducted in the Precelli hills of North Pembrokeshire and which has shed new light on the eternal question as to why Stonehenge was built.

"The excavation will date the arrival of the bluestones following their 250km (153 mile) journey from Preseli to Salisbury Plain and contribute to our definition of the society which undertook such an ambitious project.

"We will be able to say not only why but when the first stone monument was built."

The last time an excavation was allowed inside the sarsen stone pillars was in 1964.

The hole, which will eventually measure 3.5 metres wide and 1.5 metres deep, will be dug by hand in a previously excavated area on the south-eastern quadrant of the Double Stone Circle with the hope of retrieving fragments of the original bluestone pillars.

Prof Darvill said he had consulted druid groups before carrying out the dig.

He said: "It is an incredibly exciting moment and a great privilege to be able to excavate inside Stonehenge.

"This excavation is the first opportunity in nearly half a century to bring the power of modern scientific archaeology to bear on a problem that has taxed the minds of travellers, antiquaries, and archaeologists since medieval times - just why were the bluestones so important and powerful to have warranted our ancestors to make the gargantuan journey to bring them to Salisbury Plain?"

The two-week dig will also investigate the "Stonehenge Layer", a layer of debris and stone chippings spreading across the whole extent of the stone circle and comprising a high proportion of bluestone fragments.

English Heritage agreed to the excavation on Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, following consent by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.

Stonehenge will remain open as normal and visitors will be able to observe up close the excavation as it happens on plasma screens inside a special marquee.

BBC Timewatch in association with Smithsonian Networks will fund the excavation and post excavation analysis and will also film it for broadcast on BBC2 in the autumn.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ire/7322238.stm

[Pete G]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...mes/stonehenge/
you can also follow the dig online
PeteG

[Maju]

beatles, on 29 March 2008, 13:40, said:

the granary theory http://www.granaryatstonehenge.org  is a most serious new idea but, that doesn't mean that we can't have some fun with it too.

clyde

Shouldn't we need some evidence or indication that it was used for such a strange purpose? Stones used for milling (basically hand milling in the Neolithic and Chalcolihic ages) always show clear signs of erosion and often have remains of the milled grain that can be analyzed spectroscopically. Besides: there's not one but thousands, as the needs of the people would not be satisfied by just one mill, no matter how large. Also we should know something about the mill stones, a key evidence that is lacking.

I have no doubt that this "theory" ("hypothesis" or "speculation" are more correct terms actually) is wrong. You don't go building up theories upon no evidence whatsoever and against all we know (nothig similar to that imagined in this weird speculation is known at any time).