Comments on: Was Stonehenge a Round Building?

By: c-dub

c-dub — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 05:45:27 +0000

This is incredibly weak thinking. He says, “I… came to the conclusion that Stonehenge must have been a building – and why not?” And why not? Coming up with some random scenario and saying “why not?” hardly constitutes a solution.

By: col mcgillveray

col mcgillveray — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:06:53 +0000

I,ve been stonehenge a few times,at the free festivals of yore and my theory is that it was designed by dogs so that in the future thier “Masters” would gather enmasse to facilitate a huge canine dog orgy!Seriosly thay always looked like they were have more fun that the crusty hippes and druids who gathered to “Worship” the “Sun”!!!

By: Jimbo

Jimbo — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 10:57:24 +0000

They have carbon dated the rocks. That doesn’t help telling us who and when they were put there. This solution is a very real possibility. I’ve always thought that it might have just been a couple of hundred years old, and was a barn or house.

By: aj

aj — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 02:23:42 +0000

They wouldn’t be likely to find any large beams due to rot over the years. If lucky you can dig up a posthole and notice the change in soil.

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:53:41 +0000

Well, if we’re in this line of thinking, yayo, we should ask: why bother with those heavy stones at all? Just build the thing from timber.

By: yayo

yayo — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:04:43 +0000

I think it’s absurd… Why are the stones placed perpendicular to the radial lines? They would fall… So this guy placed those wooden supports…

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:16:28 +0000

is there evidence to support it, such as large beams found at the site?