Musings and bookmarks about Stonehenge and related stuff.
Interesting Post Tim." However, they could also support therecent indications of a higher water table in the upperreaches of the Kennet during the 3rd millennium(Leary et al. in press; Whitehead & Edmunds 2012"Supporting my Post Glacial Flooding hypothesis - sorry Neil fantasy!RJL
There's a small problem with the flooding hypothesis: There is not enough water in the world for the flooding to be due to sea levels (even if the South Polar region melted), so it would have to be due to rainfall. Based on your maps (showing the increase in river volumes), the increase in rainfall would be equivalent to approximately 20+ inches per day, or an average rainfall, throughout the entire year, in the region of 1 to 10" per hour. (some of your maps a hydrologically inconsistent)Over a prolonged period, this would result in vast canyons throughout the region. There's not much evidence of canyons in Wiltshire.Interesting idea, but needs a bit more work spent on hydrological assumptions: You'll just get summarily dismissed if a hydrologist looks at it.
Jon"There is not enough water in the world for the flooding to be due to sea levels "Sorry don't understand your logic?It has nothing to do with rainfall - its Post Glacial Flooding. Its accepted by hydrologists and on my web site the British Geological Society has even produced a flood map which reflect my own findings.Every-time you turn your tap on you will be drinking some water from the aquifers that lay under the ground of Britain - a high percentage of that water originates from the melt water from the last ice age - which means that the landscape must have flooded in the past 10,000 years.Detailed analysis from the groundwater forum and a documentary is available again on my blog site.RJL
Post Glacial Flooding. Its accepted by hydrologistsThe flood map produced by BGS is just a risk based assessment. The Environmental Agency produces very detailed maps for this now. These flood maps are produced by combining layers drawings of both tidal flood risk and inland (rainfall) risk. The EA produces a map showing four layers of risk (slightly more up to date than the BGS layers)It would be worth your while to produce a short technical introduction explaining how you came to these conclusions. If you can quote the hydrologist(/s) who accepts your theory, then all the better!On the note of my particular tap, we do not have our supply from aquifer water. However, aquifer water was widely extracted in the London basin up until the start of the last century. The extraction resulted in low water levels below ground which have been rising ever since.You can read a bit more about this here:http://www.groundwateruk.org/rising_groundwater_in_central_london.aspxYou can also get a lot of information about local aquifer layers from the Environmental Agency. However, just because a layer is designated as an aquifer does not mean that it is currently used for water extraction.
JonThank you, I know all about Hydrology as it's contained in Chapter One of my book 'The Stonehenge Enigma' which includes a technical introduction and documentary.Flood risk areas are not due to just "rain fall" but the subsoil structure - otherwise we would ALL be flooded and Scotland would have floated away some years ago!! The BGS map on my blog site shows 'alluvium' deposits found on BGS's superficial deposit 1:50 000 series (again in chapter one of the book) they have been laid down over just the last 10,000 years when the tides were much lower than today and consequently did not influence this sediment layer. This Alluvium layer comes directly from Higher River Levels due to post glacial flooding that affected Britain after the last ice age as a result of raised groundwater levels (chapter one again).This can easy be seen in the Thames where the groundwater was so high it cut a new exit from it's original point in East Anglia to the existing point between Kent and Essex. see blog:http://robertjohnlangdon.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/irrefutable-proof-of-my-hypothesis.htmlAnd it is the same reason "higher water table in the upperreaches of the Kennet during the 3rd millennium(Leary et al. in press; Whitehead & Edmunds 2012" as you can see if you consult my or BGS map of the area.and its also the reason ""The Avenue as a ceremonial way leading to whatever watercourse lay in Stonehenge bottom at the time (Neolithic)"Archaeology in Wales and updates in CA (issues 212 and 252). The re-dating of Stonehenge is published in Antiquity 86, Darvill and Wainright.Moreover, this is secondary river deposit (incorrectly called 'head' in my view) which obviously feed into the higher Mesolithic rivers (which left the alluvium you see on the maps) as we are now see when rivers flood. But as the Professors correctly observed was still flooded in the Neolithic period of Stonehenge.Sorry about your tap water!! If I remember correctly your drinking 100% recycled toilet water in London....... enjoy.RJL
Thank you, I know all about Hydrology as it's contained in Chapter One of my book 'The Stonehenge Enigma' which includes a technical introduction and documentary.Okeydokey. Just trying to be helpful. From a hydrological point of view, the presentation looks inconsistent. But I only studied hydrology at University so you may well have a better knowledge. It's up to you whether or not you try to rectify the apparent inconsistencies.
And at University I was told by a lecturer from Wessex Archaeology that Stonehenge Bottom had not had water present for about half a million years - not always an accurate source of information.RJL