| Author | Canada's Stonehenge... |
BERNARDQUATERMASS
Joined:
19-03-2006
Messages: 682
from Oldham, Lancashire
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 31-01-2009 at 21:04
In response to Condros's instant chat message....
http://canadastonehenge.com/
.....And there's an image of Stonehenge for Aluta.
[ This message was edited by: BERNARDQUATERMASS on 2009-01-31 21:16 ]
 Profile
 Reply
|
BERNARDQUATERMASS
Joined:
19-03-2006
Messages: 682
from Oldham, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 31-01-2009 at 21:18
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5io8DJMYkhiWKCUshwFVc2dTnvmxw
Profile
Reply
|
Aluta
Joined:
06-04-2002
Messages: 1598
from PA, USA
OFF-Line
|  Posted 31-01-2009 at 23:54
Haha! Of course these American archaeologists say it was glaciers. The things done by ancient people in Europe were done by glaciers over here--I guess glaciers in prehistoric America were smarter than the people! What kills me is that they often say these things without even deigning to actually visit and examine the site. Okay, end of rant.
Well, not really--I have something to add. Why is it so unlikely that a people who live out under the stars should develop a knowledge and understanding of them? Why could it happen 5000 years ago in other parts of the world but not the Americas? Don't we all live under the same sun and stars? What else did they have to watch at night?
It just seems like racism and another kind of discrimination--that of assuming that hierarchical civilisations were the only ones to accumulate and pass on knowledge. Just because people were hunter/gatherers doesn't mean they were stupid or unable to share knowledge with one another. Am I the only one who thinks these quick judgments made by our archaeologists seem smug and arrogant? Okay, I think I got it all out for now. 
And thank you, BQM, for pointing out the Stonehenge pictures. It's incredible where it shows up sometimes. We bought a mini-laptop for Christmas and one of only a few wallpapers that came with it was a picture of Stonehenge (of course none of the others were megalithic). I just started laughing. If my blog were about gratuitous use of the word Stonehenge and pictures thereof, I could go on indefinitely and never catch up! As it is, I just posted my 99th post.
[ This message was edited by: Aluta on 2009-02-01 00:03 ]
Profile
Reply
|
BERNARDQUATERMASS
Joined:
19-03-2006
Messages: 682
from Oldham, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-02-2009 at 00:15
Hi Aluta................Will this be 100.............
http://www.justsimplycharming.com/stonehenge-sterling-silver-charm-p-529.html
Profile
Reply
|
BERNARDQUATERMASS
Joined:
19-03-2006
Messages: 682
from Oldham, Lancashire
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-02-2009 at 00:25
Aluta wrote.......
""" Well, not really--I have something to add. Why is it so unlikely that a people who live out under the stars should develop a knowledge and understanding of them? Why could it happen 5000 years ago in other parts of the world but not the Americas? Don't we all live under the same sun and stars? What else did they have to watch at night?"""
I agree with you entirely. If the stones had been found near, lets say Babylon, they would have been instantly accepted.
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 2819
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-02-2009 at 00:52
Hi Aluta
You're just coming at this from the wrong angle. The evidence for any theory of this sort is based on two things only.
1 Professional Archaelogists/Scientists - Is there funding available, will it enhnance my career, will I be laughed at if I get it wrong.
2 Professional writers - Can I make money from this theory?
These have the common of trying to survive (ie get an income) on their researchs.
Neither of these avenues seek to obtain knowledge, just income.
Think on it
Cheers
Sem
Profile
Reply
|
Aluta
Joined:
06-04-2002
Messages: 1598
from PA, USA
OFF-Line
| Posted 01-02-2009 at 00:52
BQM: Thank you! I hadn't seen that one. It won't be number 100, though. I actually do plan ahead. I just received permission from the estimable Wally Wallington to lift photos from his site and post them. And I considered posting Spinal Tap for the 100th. I've been saving it for the end but now I've started to wonder whether the end of this will ever arrive!
sem, I posted at the same time and didn't see your post. No doubt you're right. It can be maddening, though, for naive amateurs who think it's all about learning and adding to our knowledge of the past!
[ This message was edited by: Aluta on 2009-02-01 00:58 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 12312
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
|  Posted 01-02-2009 at 10:15
AB: I know Canada's a big place but have we got anyone in the area?
Canada’s Stonehenge Launches at Audrey’s Books, February 5
Gordon Freeman will be at
Audrey’s Books
10702 Jasper Avenue NW
Edmonton, AB T5J 3J5, Canada
(780) 423-3487
Thursday, February 5, 2009
7:30 pm
with a powerpoint presentation
to discuss Canada’s Stonehenge
admission is free
Gordon Freeman will be on hand to answer
questions and sign books after the presentation.
Profile
 Email
Reply
|
Aluta
Joined:
06-04-2002
Messages: 1598
from PA, USA
OFF-Line
|  Posted 01-02-2009 at 18:11
Perhaps I'll try emailing Mr. Freeman to see whether it is being videotaped and ask whether we could host the video on the Portal. May not work but could be worth a try!
Email sent!
Oh, and BQM, I went with Spinal Tap.
[ This message was edited by: Aluta on 2009-02-01 23:58 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Condros
Joined:
02-05-2002
Messages: 45
from Randolph County, West Virginia
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 10:58
Sorry, I should have put the link in, but had to leave before I could write it in- Good discussion though !!!!
And I totally agree with you Aluta, and Thanks BQM and Andy for posting this one
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 3186
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 12:59
I haven’t read the book but have big misgivings about it . I appreciate that Fitzhenry and Whiteside have a job selling the book and possibly suggested the title but Stonehenge despite some astronomy is nothing like the site mentioned ,
architecturally or more importantly typologically , i.e. it has no burials /cremations orthostats ,bank ,or ditch although I can imagine he may have found a wee avenue as there are enough erratics in the area to join up and come up with anything . It occupies an area of 26 2 Km which stretches landscape archaeology to the limits and might include Avebury in the Stonehenge landcape or vice versa . 5000 BC is the given date , from where ? , I assume that it is due to some archaeoastro calculation that would require that date for accuracy (obviously a stellar alignment not solar or lunar ) or more likely it means that the site predates Stonehenge . Accepting that professional archaeos often get it wrong but generally better are more likely to be right about the subject than chemists , none seem to have any support for the theory and the few that get mentioned are negative . It is said to be a medicine wheel , fine ,but they tend to date from the past millennium and their astronomy is not well supported by the archaeoastronomical community . I have read nothing in relation to the Stonehenge calendar or the site at Preseli , Bedd Arthur ? , that should have the Welsh archaeologists jumping so can’t say much on them other than in the light of the other stuff I don’t hold out much hope . It is topped with a smattering of Arthurian legend too all it needs now are some Templars although I doubt if lizards will make an appearance .
George
Profile
Reply
|
Aluta
Joined:
06-04-2002
Messages: 1598
from PA, USA
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 13:51
Of course I haven't seen this site but I have seen others rejected out of hand by American archaeologists on the basis that "native Americans just didn't do this" and then seen the sites accepted. So I can't say all that Mr. Freeman says is true, just that the rejection by American archaeologists has no relationship to whether it is true or not.
The question is, how did people live on this continent for 15,000 years or more and not have the impulse to do anything with stone the way people did everywhere else? And the astronomy question is bogus. Certainly every society that lived under the stars studied them.
As to the Stonehenge designation, there, I must say, I couldn't agree more, tiompan!
On another matter, surely Avebury's and Stonehenge's landscapes would have to be considered at least related? One really can't consider one without taking the other into account, they are so close!
[ This message was edited by: Aluta on 2009-02-02 13:53 ]
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 3186
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 14:26
Hello Aluta , not sure what you mean "astronomy quotation being bogus . It is not a question of whether peolple studied the heavens or built monuments , it is whether this site is one or both . "Where are the precedents ?" is a stock but reasonable response , then consider the site on it's merits or demerits . Just because the professionals get it wrong doesn't make those who disagree right .
Landscape archaeology is a quite a new concept and as it stands at the moment Avebury and Stonehenge are considered two distinct areas separated by a stretch of downland . I suppose it is a question of where do you draw the line , does Marden henge belong to Avebury
or Ell barrow to both ? The 24Km and intervening ridge is enough for me to qualify both being separate landscapes .
George
Profile
Reply
|
Aluta
Joined:
06-04-2002
Messages: 1598
from PA, USA
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 15:23
Fair enough. I see where you're coming from on the Canadian thing. I can't consider a lack of precedent relevant in this case because of my experiences and those of people I know, but I can see where the archaeologists think they're being reasonable.
I completely bow to you on the Wiltshire matters. I just meant that in considering the history of either, one must keep the other in mind. They are part of one another's context, but that's a different matter.
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 3186
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 15:35
You probably now wiltshire better than me , I havn't been in 30+ years .
Still wondering about the bogus astrro question though .
George
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 2819
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 19:41
Hi T & A
The Archaeoastronomy question is a nightmare as there are so many variables. My own experiences in trying to determine why the row on Carreg Cadnow is aligned as it is, may serve as a good example. I'll take you through it as I did it.
1) The row is aligned to 65deg (by my measurement). As this is magnetic North how do I find true North? By two people, experienced in this field I was given both add and subtract 6deg. A website said subtract 3deg. So, what do I do and more importantly did my forebears use magnetic or true North.
2) The alignment MUST point at something important and the nearest I could find was Beltaine and Lammas sunrises. Further problems, are these on 1/5 and 1/8 or are they just convenient dates for our calender?
3) I am assuming for the moment that the dates are accurate BUT.. how do I check if the sun comes up in line. As far as I know, the sun has moved 1deg (double it's diameter) South since 2000BC. Also, the horizon consists of high mountains. Did they align the row to the visible horizon or calculate it to an horizon where the land was flat?
4) To check the stellar stuff, I've got Starry Night Backyard. This does not give exact angles of view. Do programs that the "Pros" use give this?
JackME told me the only way to do this stuff is by observation and the more I learn the more I agree with him.
Cheers
Sem
[/LIST]
Profile
Reply
|
Aluta
Joined:
06-04-2002
Messages: 1598
from PA, USA
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 19:52
Heh, heh, that was probably just me being overly strident. I went back to look and couldn't find it so I'm not sure what I said, but it has a 50-50 chance of either not having expressed what I meant or just being wrong. I try to be careful to think and express myself clearly but it doesn't always happen when I'm writing quickly. When I'm writing something important I am always rewriting and rewriting because I catch myself failing in my first drafts!
Quote:
|
Still wondering about the bogus astro question though .
George
|
|
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 3186
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 20:18
Quote:
|
On 2009-02-02 19:41, sem wrote:
Hi T & A
The Archaeoastronomy question is a nightmare as there are so many variables. My own experiences in trying to determine why the row on Carreg Cadnow is aligned as it is, may serve as a good example. I'll take you through it as I did it.
1) The row is aligned to 65deg (by my measurement). As this is magnetic North how do I find true North? By two people, experienced in this field I was given both add and subtract 6deg. A website said subtract 3deg. So, what do I do and more importantly did my forebears use magnetic or true North.
2) The alignment MUST point at something important and the nearest I could find was Beltaine and Lammas sunrises. Further problems, are these on 1/5 and 1/8 or are they just convenient dates for our calender?
3) I am assuming for the moment that the dates are accurate BUT.. how do I check if the sun comes up in line. As far as I know, the sun has moved 1deg (double it's diameter) South since 2000BC. Also, the horizon consists of high mountains. Did they align the row to the visible horizon or calculate it to an horizon where the land was flat?
4) To check the stellar stuff, I've got Starry Night Backyard. This does not give exact angles of view. Do programs that the "Pros" use give this?
JackME told me the only way to do this stuff is by observation and the more I learn the more I agree with him.
Cheers
Sem
[/LIST]
|
|
Sem , if your compass gave you a reading of 65 degrees ,then the the "true" bearing is approx 62 degrees . What you need to know if a particular astro event will happen at a certain point on the horizon
is the height of the horizon , the height of the site , the distance to the horizon and the latitude of the site . If the site is in a hilly area the horizon is crucial . The stones may not point at anything but there are possibilities , could you supply the figures for the above ?
George
Profile
Reply
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 2819
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| Posted 02-02-2009 at 22:51
Thanks George
The -3.24deg fits to my theory.
I'll check the other mesurements you suggested get back to you.
Cheers
Sem
Profile
Reply
|
tiompan
Joined:
09-01-2005
Messages: 3186
OFF-Line
| Posted 03-02-2009 at 08:45
Quote:
|
On 2009-02-02 22:51, sem wrote:
Thanks George
The -3.24deg fits to my theory.
I'll check the other mesurements you suggested get back to you.
Cheers
Sem
|
|
Sem , I had a look at the pics and given tha tthe grid ref is accurate and for the apex might be able to work something out . What would be handy is a bit more info on the horizon(s) an approx grid ref would help . Is the horizon "notch " a point on the hillside or where two disticnt hills form one on the horizon ?
George
Profile
Reply
|
