tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post7351773450909295080..comments2024-01-30T06:35:10.103+00:00Comments on www.Sarsen.org: Monumental Roots in ScienceTim Dawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10667360714222841797noreply@blogger.comBlogger31125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-41226752116599556802014-01-12T10:11:51.354+00:002014-01-12T10:11:51.354+00:00I did wonder if you would comprehend the use of qu...I did wonder if you would comprehend the use of quotes on barrow , clearly not .<br />In even simpler language . <br />The features that are commonly referred to as the North and South barrows at Stonehenge are no more barrows than Avebury is circular (although often described as a stone circle ) . Those interested in the monument fully understand this and when referring to the features tend to give the benefit of the doubt to listeners , once again clearly a mistake in your case .<br /> It appears you are one of those that have to be told more than three times before it finally sinks in .<br />A further problem with your post is that the quoted comment had little to do with any argument , it was just pointing out another of your errors noted along with the primary one i.e."none of the Neolithic Barrows have burials in the middle of the barrow " which , as expected , has been avoided .<br />Do a bit of study in between the sandwich making Hudson /Davis .Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-71113150655991939722014-01-12T07:06:39.944+00:002014-01-12T07:06:39.944+00:00"The north and south "barrows " as ..."The north and south "barrows " as you have been told before , are not barrows"<br /><br />Well that perfectly sums up your argument Sherlock!<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-27959869835663166442014-01-11T11:26:27.751+00:002014-01-11T11:26:27.751+00:00So you are not a character from a work of fiction ...So you are not a character from a work of fiction after all .<br /><br />Just as Neolithic barrows had burials , you have also learnt how to spell the fictitious character's name , it had a G after all , <br />Hudson is so much more fitting though ,(the sandwiches and the cleaning ) , don't you think ?, at least Doyle can write .The Dan Brown connection is very unfortunate , nobody would borrow a name from such a source knowingly ,would they ?<br />btw , your'e still having problems differentiating between deduction and induction .<br />Not much to do with Stonehenge though . Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-60703990770064926952014-01-11T10:32:15.520+00:002014-01-11T10:32:15.520+00:00The usual response when confronted with evidence c...The usual response when confronted with evidence contrary to your fantasies is either to ignore it or make some attempt at squirming around it . The latter on this occasion .<br /> “Don’t have time on pointless exercises “ a euphemism for ,incapable of responding . <br /> You had said “So why do none of the Neolithic Barrows have burials in the middle of the barrow? “<br />Now that you have seen the evidence proving that comment deluded you decide to change the quantity to majority of barrows ,ignore Neolithic and introduce a qualifier ,”not the object “ . Yet again you got it wrong .Stick to what your’e good at Hudson ,making sandwiches and cleaning the rooms . <br />The north and south "barrows " as you have been told before , are not barrows , we wouldn’t necessarily expect to find burials in them .<br />Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-79169185003582719982014-01-11T10:22:17.887+00:002014-01-11T10:22:17.887+00:00OK lets try again!
Dan Browns character is Robert...OK lets try again!<br /><br />Dan Browns character is Robert Langdon (no middle name)<br /><br />Mine is Robert John Langdon - notice the word JOHN. Now do tell me if they are the same person Sherlock??<br /><br />RJL (note the J!)Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-36122057487973547972014-01-11T10:20:39.895+00:002014-01-11T10:20:39.895+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-37264629645041310182014-01-11T10:07:34.397+00:002014-01-11T10:07:34.397+00:00Don't have time to waste on pointless exercise...Don't have time to waste on pointless exercises to appease the deluded sadly Sherlock!<br /><br />We have already pointed out 'original' barrow markers - the North and South Barrows at Stonehenge. Both have centre holes for the Standing stones and none had bodies underneath.<br /><br />The fact that a majority of Barrows do not have any form of burials within them would normally suggest (to intelligent scientists) that primary burials were not the object of these monuments - but clearly archaeologists do not full into this category.<br /><br />RJL<br /><br /><br />Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-59674207760833015512014-01-10T16:55:02.699+00:002014-01-10T16:55:02.699+00:00 Describing the Winterbourne Stoke group as being ... Describing the Winterbourne Stoke group as being BA is like describing Stonehenge as being BA , which isn’t quite the full story .<br /> Look at the basic description , see the term Neolithic ?.<br />http://www.pastscape.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=219525<br />Odd that you didn’t manage to mention the other examples ,which have no BA associations . Looks like I’ll have to spell it out . Check the links by clicking on them and note the mention of Round Barrow associated with the word Neolithic even you might manage to appreciate that the association means that the barrow in question is Neolithic complete with burials . http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/26384/details/pitnacree/ .<br />http://www.pastscape.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=61899<br /><br />Read this general comment related to round barrows look at the number and note the term Neolithic .<br /><br />http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1008383<br /><br /> Round barrows in the Neolithic contained primary burials as I had mentioned earlier ,this is falsifiable and can be proven . The waymarking ,standing stone ,barrow nonsense is not falsifiable and is merely another fantasy .<br /> Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-31664941840873509802014-01-09T19:10:35.268+00:002014-01-09T19:10:35.268+00:00Tim might chase you , I would do something else mo...Tim might chase you , I would do something else more destructive but comical , and not only to the hat .<br /><br />BTW you can't even get the Dan Brown character right . <br />"Dan Browns Character is Robert Landon "<br /> check again .Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-8398016891849456192014-01-09T19:00:11.882+00:002014-01-09T19:00:11.882+00:00Thank you - interesting method!
I have a walking/...Thank you - interesting method!<br /><br />I have a walking/sword cane with a very thing blade - not only is it good for maiming annoying archaeologists like Sherlock (joke!) but it can penetrate the top soil effectively showing the depth and constancy of the chalk mound underneath.<br /><br />If the blade stops its not been disturbed (I have several prods) if it slips in the mound has been disturbed in the near past - a 4000 year old chalk mound would have compressed and be solid.<br /><br />This is not destructive method although i'm sure Tim would chase me off if I tried this on the North or South Barrows at Stonehenge (and these do still have the standing stone markers visible as previous posts show - northern barrow points to Robin Hood's ball and Avebury and the south barrow to Old Sarum).<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-56876675758723429892014-01-09T18:37:48.252+00:002014-01-09T18:37:48.252+00:00OK - lets look at Winterbourne Stoke then!
Oh loo...OK - lets look at Winterbourne Stoke then!<br /><br />Oh look it's a Bronze age cemetery what a surprise!! - for goodness sake it's even got a Bronze age coffin in G5 - are you having problems following my conversation with jon, Sherlock?<br /><br />"You need to bear in mind that only Neolithic barrows would have this structure - the later barrows are just copies" - the Neolithic dates we are looking at coincide with the introduction of agriculture as surplus would be traded for other goods and hence the need for the journey and markers. So we are looking for barrows that date from 4500BC to 3000BC - not bronze age!! as the main routes by then would have been established for over a thousand years!<br /><br />Its rather elementary if you have a deductive mind!<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-2009988134963232532014-01-09T17:37:09.362+00:002014-01-09T17:37:09.362+00:00Jon , The mention of "use" was directly ...Jon , The mention of "use" was directly related to the comment "barrows are just copies in homage to their ancestors who were unaware of their original use " so there will be no evidence from the source of that comment .Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-37300952226510411042014-01-09T17:33:05.616+00:002014-01-09T17:33:05.616+00:00PPS the reason I'm being vague about the tests...PPS the reason I'm being vague about the tests and locations is that I don't really want to encourage anyone to go there and to do the destructive tests. You know where they are and what tests were done G: You may not remember (been so long since we chatted about it)Jon Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11264966739582178631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-73706380903050998372014-01-09T17:28:50.788+00:002014-01-09T17:28:50.788+00:00PS. What's interesting about this is that the ...PS. What's interesting about this is that the tests I've been using should, almost by definition, have <i>lower</i> values than natural random sample areas: Man made structures <i>should</i> automatically lower the values unless something quite special was done during the construction phase.<br />Jon Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11264966739582178631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-19929405412819947412014-01-09T17:22:36.230+00:002014-01-09T17:22:36.230+00:00Whatever that "use" may be , we can be s...<i>Whatever that "use" may be , we can be sure there will be no evidence for it .</i><br /><br />Well. that may not be strictly true. Some of the barrows (obviously not most) are unusual in that they are correctly located to perform specific functions. The best case construction for this purpose would leave a trace which would still exist after a few thousand years. Obviously to determine if the trace really exists would require destructive testing: The monuments involved are Scheduled, so this testing can not be done.<br /><br />However, a secondary effect of this type of construction would be a significant increase in certain properties of the soil surface. These can be picked up by non-destructive testing. These properties do exist. The scale of difference actually detected is quite significant. The highest 'dummy' test, in a similar setting only achieving a value about 25% of the figures typically found on the mounds in question. Typically dummy areas only achieve 10% of the values at the mounds in question.<br /><br />I've contacted the people who look after the monuments. Didn't hear back so have shelved further inquiry into it. <br /><br />All the best<br /><br />Jon Jon Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11264966739582178631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-82025573258792914092014-01-09T08:34:44.985+00:002014-01-09T08:34:44.985+00:00Rob Davis , I think you are having another problem...Rob Davis , I think you are having another problem , mention one example where I got it wrong .<br />On the other hand we can list quite a number of cases of where you are wrong .<br />A wee list of Neolithic round barrows with primary internments .<br />In the Stonehenge area Winterbourne Stoke G 5, G37, G54 and G56 .<br />Elsewhere .Norton Bavant 06 ,Callis Wold ,Linch Hill corner ,Boghead , <br />Pitnacree , Duggleby Howe Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-19756077489686431092014-01-08T23:54:38.764+00:002014-01-08T23:54:38.764+00:00Sorry Sherlock wrong again!
Dan Browns Character ...Sorry Sherlock wrong again!<br /><br />Dan Browns Character is Robert Landon (no middle name) mine is Robert John Langdon - google 'Robert Langdon' and you will get 50+ people with the same name.<br /><br />I have a face, a name and even a shop where people visit and buy my books and question me in person directly on my hypothesis - All you have is an anonymous name to hide your embarrassment when you get it wrong - as in this case.... name one?<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-80611931130419836502014-01-08T23:52:08.276+00:002014-01-08T23:52:08.276+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-9331456367779746332014-01-08T16:57:09.273+00:002014-01-08T16:57:09.273+00:00Must you continue with the names Davis , by all me...Must you continue with the names Davis , by all means play at Dan Brown characters in the playground but it gets tiresome around adults . <br /><br />There are countless Neolithic barrows with burials that date from prior to the construction of the mound .Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-8852207639119460202014-01-08T16:43:59.454+00:002014-01-08T16:43:59.454+00:00"There is an implication that Neolithic barro..."There is an implication that Neolithic barrows did not have burials ,which is obviously wrong "<br /><br />Is that right Sherlock?<br /><br />So why do none of the Neolithic Barrows have burials in the middle of the barrow? ceremonial, religious or another archaeological fantasy?<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-89735000437206048072014-01-08T15:31:55.930+00:002014-01-08T15:31:55.930+00:00"he later barrows are just copies in homage t..."he later barrows are just copies in homage to their ancestors who were unaware of their original use and hence the funeral remains."<br />There is an implication that Neolithic barrows did not have burials ,which is obviously wrong .<br />Another is that the BA barrow builders and everyone since , apart from you , have not been aware of the "original use " .Whatever that "use" may be , we can be sure there will be no evidence for it .Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-20173761016423684122014-01-08T11:59:13.125+00:002014-01-08T11:59:13.125+00:00Jon
Most barrows (particularly over south downs) ...Jon<br /><br />Most barrows (particularly over south downs) have been plundered by Victorian "archaeologists" and in some case refilled in others the excavation holes just left. You need to bear in mind that only Neolithic barrows would have this structure - the later barrows are just copies in homage to their ancestors who were unaware of their original use and hence the funeral remains.<br /><br />What equipment do you use?<br /><br />RJL<br />Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-81727008520405331612014-01-07T23:19:05.530+00:002014-01-07T23:19:05.530+00:00I would suggest that thees barrows would have had ...<i>I would suggest that thees barrows would have had 'standing stones' in the centre</i><br /><br />Unlikely in most of the cases. I have tested (using non destructive equipment) the surface layers of some barrows in that area and found an unusual construction signature: In the case of these barrows, this signature would not show up if there had been a standing stone.<br />Jon Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11264966739582178631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-10172080308201824292014-01-07T20:13:20.857+00:002014-01-07T20:13:20.857+00:00The "work " is riddled with errors .
Th... <br />The "work " is riddled with errors . <br />The vast majority of rock art is not discovered by archaeologists . <br />Similar theories have been suggested since the 19 th C ,all have been refuted .<br />The Slaughter Stone was dressed , that is not the same as being engraved in the tradition of Atlantic rock art Geo Curhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03616965043116389325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5787185370858787658.post-45635178032909346442014-01-07T19:53:09.598+00:002014-01-07T19:53:09.598+00:00Now, now, Sherlock - I know you don't get on w...Now, now, Sherlock - I know you don't get on with Moriarty but his work is valid!!<br /><br />There are large 'swathes' of milestones missing and they are less than 2000 years old and your ignoring that over a 6000 year period erosion would be immense. Archaeologists do not look for or have the finance to scan isolated stones for carve marks that would no doubt prove the theory. Even so, there are some well known stones (like the Slaughter Stone) that have been scanned and show original sculpted features as well as modern pagan hacking.<br /><br />RJLBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16886732338349957214noreply@blogger.com