Stonehenge excavation

[RBH]

I'm not sure where to put this, so I'll start it here. At least it puts some dates back where young earthers are going to have trouble fitting a flood in.

As some may know, there's a current excavation at Stonehenge aimed at finally establishing the date of the original configuration, the bluestone enclosure(s?) that was disassembled when what we now see was erected. The BBC has a series of daily video from the excavation site here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/programmes/stonehenge/).


ETA: For Oolon's special pleasure, the Druids are here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/programmes/stonehenge/video.shtml?video=day2). :D

[ravenscape]

Well that's good. Wouldn't want the Lords of Air pissed off whilst working underneath a bunch of tall rocks stacked like a house of cards.

[Constant Mews]

Stonehenge is a rather rickety construction, I must admit. Stones too short for their holes and support mass; the use of easily weathered bluestone; and those peculiar post-holes in the parking lot.

Clearly they bribed the building inspector.

[Faid]

All this is just sciencey-sounding poppycock. As we all know, the only relaible evidence for historical events are WRITTEN RECORDS. And, of course, the older the records are, the better,since they are closer to the actual events, and are probably derived from EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES.

Therefore, it is reasonable to rely on those records to "interpret" Stonehenge, and determine it's origin:

It is clear that Stronehenge was built by Merlin, who used his magic to make the rocks fly and come from Ireland. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#Arthurian_legend)

What do Darwinists have to offer as evidence, to contradict this reliable, non-ambiguous, written testimony? Some pieces of bone and horn inside a hole! PMWIFOMCL!

And now that we have clearly shown the overwhelming evidence for Stonehenge's true origin...

[Mike PSS]

All this is just sciencey-sounding poppycock. As we all know, the only relaible evidence for historical events are WRITTEN RECORDS. And, of course, the older the records are, the better,since they are closer to the actual events, and are probably derived from EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES.

Therefore, it is reasonable to rely on those records to "interpret" Stonehenge, and determine it's origin:

It is clear that Stronehenge was built by Merlin, who used his magic to make the rocks fly and come from Ireland. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#Arthurian_legend)

What do Darwinists have to offer as evidence, to contradict this reliable, non-ambiguous, written testimony? Some pieces of bone and horn inside a hole! PMWIFOMCL!

And now that we have clearly shown the overwhelming evidence for Stonehenge's true origin...
Poe...????

[SAWells]

Specifically, AFDave Poe.

[Nialler]

All this is just sciencey-sounding poppycock. As we all know, the only relaible evidence for historical events are WRITTEN RECORDS. And, of course, the older the records are, the better,since they are closer to the actual events, and are probably derived from EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES.

Therefore, it is reasonable to rely on those records to "interpret" Stonehenge, and determine it's origin:

It is clear that Stronehenge was built by Merlin, who used his magic to make the rocks fly and come from Ireland. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#Arthurian_legend)

What do Darwinists have to offer as evidence, to contradict this reliable, non-ambiguous, written testimony? Some pieces of bone and horn inside a hole! PMWIFOMCL!

And now that we have clearly shown the overwhelming evidence for Stonehenge's true origin...

So the brits were stealing our stuff more than 800 years ago? That sounds right.

[Lucretius III]

The archaeologists I knew were always a bit dismissive of Stonehenge (I accept that this may have had something to do with the fact that they were never invited to actually dig there :)) and tended to say that Woodhenge was far more important .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodhenge

[Black5]

I think Stonehenge was laid down early in the great flood so all the shrimp could hide under it for protection and then burrow to the surface later.

[Ray Moscow]

The archaeologists I knew were always a bit dismissive of Stonehenge (I accept that this may have had something to do with the fact that they were never invited to actually dig there :)) and tended to say that Woodhenge was far more important .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodhenge

Avebury (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avebury), baby! (and the whole Windmill Hill complex, too)

[Lucretius III]

Castlerigg is my favourite,not just because it's reasonably near where I am ,but it is also in stunning countryside


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castlerigg_Stone_Circle

[Constant Mews]

Castlerigg is my favourite,not just because it's reasonably near where I am ,but it is also in stunning countryside


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castlerigg_Stone_Circle

I had forgotten about Castlerigg. A beautiful spot.

[Cath B]

The Ring of Brodgar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_Brodgar)is stunning.

[Ray Moscow]

The Ring of Brodgar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_Brodgar)is stunning.

Yeah, we were up in Orkney last summer and spent some time in it.

Ray (stone circle fan)

[Cath B]

Minor derail, I like your Upton Sinclair quote Ray.