Abstract
In his April 2025 paper, Brian John dusts off the creaky old glacial transport chestnut to argue—yet again—that Carn Goedog wasn’t a Neolithic quarry for Stonehenge’s bluestones. Ignoring a mountain of evidence from actual scientists like Parker Pearson et al., John leans on his pet theory that ice, not people, schlepped these massive stones 200 km across Britain. What we get is less an academic paper and more a petulant blog post, stuffed with sneers at professionals who’ve done the fieldwork he hasn’t bothered with, all while recycling his same old unsubstantiated nonsense.
Introduction
Here we go again: Brian John’s latest salvo in his one-man crusade to convince the world that glaciers, not Neolithic ingenuity, built Stonehenge. Published on ResearchGate in April 2025, this so-called paper takes aim at the well-supported idea that Carn Goedog was a bluestone quarry, as meticulously documented by Parker Pearson and colleagues. Instead of engaging with their data—geochemical matches, radiocarbon dates, and actual quarry features—John trots out his glacial fairy tale, spiced up with snarky digs at “biased” archaeologists. Spoiler: it’s as convincing as a flat-earther’s PowerPoint.
The Same Old Glacial Song and Dance
John’s argument is a broken record: Carn Goedog’s dolerite doesn’t perfectly match Stonehenge’s stones (shock!), the site’s features are “natural” (because he says so), and glaciers did all the heavy lifting. Never mind that the glacial transport theory has been laughed out of serious debate for decades—lacking any evidence of ice dragging 4-ton monoliths across Wales to Wiltshire with surgical precision. He cites frost-shattered blocks and smoothed bedrock as “proof,” but offers zero data showing glaciers could manage this feat. It’s the academic equivalent of waving your hands and shouting “magic ice!” while ignoring Bevins et al. (2014), which pins Carn Goedog as a bluestone source with hard geochemistry.
Ad Hominem Attacks: The Real Meat of the Paper
What John lacks in evidence, he makes up for in venom. Parker Pearson et al. get the full treatment: their work’s “biased,” their publications suspiciously sparse (gasp!), their quarry hypothesis a mere “invention.” This isn’t critique—it’s a tantrum. Meanwhile, these professionals have spent years excavating, dating (e.g., 3000 BC from UCL’s 2019 findings), and analyzing—stuff John wouldn’t know about, given his apparent allergy to original fieldwork. His own contribution? A few strolls around Preseli and a stack of self-citations (e.g., John, 2018; 2024a), propping up his glacial obsession like a house of cards.
Logical Fallacies and Cherry-Picking
The paper’s logic is a mess. John dismisses quarry features—platforms, ditches, tool marks—as “natural,” but provides no comparative analysis to back it up. He claims radiocarbon dating doesn’t support quarrying, yet forgets to mention any dates or sources—probably because they’d contradict him (see Parker Pearson et al., 2019). His glacial transport “hypothesis” skips over pesky details like how ice avoids scattering stones willy-nilly or why it conveniently dropped them at Stonehenge. It’s cherry-picking dressed up as science, ignoring the consensus—like Sci.News (2019)—that humans quarried and moved these rocks.
References: A Self-Love Fest
John boasts over 50 citations, but don’t be fooled. A chunk are his own ramblings (e.g., John, 1970; 2024b), padding it out like the stuffing in a Toby Carvery turkey. Sure, he name-drops Bevins and Patton, but only to twist their work into his narrative, not to engage with it. Missing are specific counters to the quarry evidence—like the inconvenient radiocarbon data he vaguesplains away. It’s a bibliography that screams “look busy,” not “look credible.”
Conclusion
This paper isn’t scholarship; it’s a rehash of John’s glacial transport fan fiction, dolled up with academic trappings and a hefty dose of spite. While real researchers like Parker Pearson unearth evidence—literally—John snipes from the sidelines, offering nothing new beyond his tired ice-age daydreams and cheap shots. Carn Goedog’s quarry status stands firm, backed by data John can’t touch. Save your time: read the pros instead.
References
- Bevins, R. E., Ixer, R. A., & Pearce, N. J. G. (2014). Carn Goedog is the likely major source of Stonehenge doleritic bluestones. Journal of Archaeological Science, 42, 179-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.10.013
- John, B. S. (2018). The Stonehenge Bluestones. Greencroft Books.
- John, B. S. (2024a). The Stonehenge bluestones did not come from Waun Mawn in West Wales. The Holocene, 34(7), 20 March 2024.
- Parker Pearson, M., et al. (2019). Megalith quarries for Stonehenge’s bluestones. Antiquity, 93(367), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2018.111
- UCL News. (2019). Quarrying of Stonehenge ‘bluestones’ dated to 3000 BC. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2019/feb/quarrying-stonehenge-bluestones-dated-3000-bc
- Sci.News. (2019). Stonehenge’s Bluestones Were Quarried in Wales 5,000 Years Ago. https://www.sci.news/archaeology/stonehenges-bluestones-06924.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments welcome on fresh posts - you just need a Google account to do so.