| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
| Only one team of academics (from the Open University) believes that the bluestones are natural Wiltshire 'glacial erratic's'. |
I trust all AE-ists will note the significance of the OU experts. We are always led to believe that the bluestones come from Preseli because geologically they are identical (ie they must have ... it's science). If this is true then the OU people cannot dissent. All they can do is to claim they are erratics, which leaves open the possibility that glaciation removed Preseli rocks to Wiltshire. They are still geologically identical and therefore 'scientifically' identifiable.
But obviously, as AE-ists, we can immediately see the sheer unlikelihood of glaciers shifting rocks specifically from Preseli to Wiltshire. So unless Preseli bluestones are found all over the country (and I think we would have heard of this if true) we can conclude that in fact geologists cannot tell where 'bluestones' come from.
It only remains to find out whether geologists know this already and are keeping quiet (presumably because they like being archaeological arbiters) or whether (my own preference) they just haven't thought about it very much. If the latter it points to some pretty significant lacunae in geological thought and practice.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Angus McOatup
In: England
|
|
|
|
True, Mick. Most go for coastal transportation by barge up the Severn and then via land. small river bed erratics do occur in Wiltshire but not big ones (I think have been found). I'll try and retrieve the OU paper for us.
P.S Are the sarsens glacial erratics? (dunno myself)
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Angus McOatup
In: England
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| small river bed erratics do occur in Wiltshire but not big ones |
That's part of the strangeness. So many people obsess about the "Bluestones From Preseli", the elephant in the corner gets forgotten.
The Bluestones weigh up to 4 tons each. In case anyone is unfamiliar with the layout of Stonehenge, these are actually the smaller stones. But what about the bigger Sarsen stones? The bigger ones are 8ft wide by 5ft thick and 25ft long, and weigh 20 tons or more. They came from the Marlborough Downs, twenty miles North of Stonehenge. Coincidentally, about three miles from Avebury.
Why aren't the Marlborough Downs stones called glacial erratics?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
They are all erratics. See the following picture which shows how the edge of the ice sheets closely match the Michael line.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
After the ice retreated the first humans encountered a bleak landscape littered with massive stones. They used the stones as markers in their explorations. Eventually the stones assumed a mystical importance in their lives, and were still of practical use.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Grant wrote: | | ...the edge of the ice sheets closely match the Michael line. |
That's quite the coincidence.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Actually it's a better fit with the (orthodox) route of the Icknield Way. The argument still holds.
However, most Ice Age maps show the ice didn't get anywhere near this far south so perhaps neither case arises.
But the consensus (used to be, perhaps it's changed) was that the Thames Valley is the southern ice limit ie London to Cardiff on this map.
PS I doubt our understanding of erratics (never mind, on this evidence, our estimation of glaciation reach) is sufficient to rule much in or much out.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | I doubt our understanding of erratics (never mind, on this evidence, our estimation of glaciation reach) is sufficient to rule much in or much out. |
Yet, it would be an even bigger coincidence if, by mere happenstance, an erroneous map were to unintentionally trace the Icknield Way/Michael line.
I must conclude on AE grounds that, either the map-maker's error was influenced by the existence of the Icknield Way, or the existence of the Icknield Way was influenced by the very real presence of a glacier, accurately drawn.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to take this opportunity to remind our readers that this is precisely what I have been advocating for some time now: That wide-spread glaciation in Europe was relatively recent and contemporaneous with vast, human civilization. I arrive at this conclusion with some reluctance.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boreades
In: finity and beyond
|
|
|
|
| wide-spread glaciation in Europe was relatively recent and contemporaneous with vast, human civilization |
But would it have covered Doggerland?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chad
In: Ramsbottom
|
|
|
|
| Boreades wrote: | | But would it have covered Doggerland? |
The southern half remained ice free.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
Don't tell the newbies why Siberia was ice-free.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Angus McOatup
In: England
|
|
|
|
|
ah come on mick...has it anything to do with the Flem'Aths theory of instant crustal displacement?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
I am rather surprised you would think I could ever believe in somebody else's theory. I am of course referring to M J Harper's Split Level Ocean Theory. But as I say, mum's the word.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
