|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge and its Environs » The bluestone debate |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Edited Nov 22, 2008, 22:15
Nov 22, 2008, 22:11
|
||
|
For goodness sake! "My God Man, do you not not believe I don't know who you are.. I apologized to Steve becauce I was wrong Wrong, wrong, wrong.. You Mr.. lets just call you N.. are trying to stir it up .." Look, you obnoxious little paranoid thick trolling oik, TMA Eds will know who posts what and if they announce it's me I'll pay £10,000 to charity - will you take the bet? Thought not. A metaphor about not digging an ever deeper hole springs to mind but in your case I'd suggest that having demonstrated you know bugger all about pulling with ropes it's hardly a good move to publicly string yourself up with one. Best just sod off and be paranoid elsewhere. Hey Littlestone, how about locking this troll-trashed affair?
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Nov 22, 2008, 22:15
|
||
|
Bump. re: http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=36791&offset=1500 Apologies to those who feel they were contributing something useful in the recent thread requesting certain users behaviour be 'curbed' by the TMA Eds. The now deleted thread attracted 115 duplicate posts from a user whose behaviour in the past had been 'curbed'. Rather than waste time deleting each of these, the entire thread has been removed. Frankly, we have enough to be going on with attending to the maintenance and development of the site itself, and whilst we obviously appreciate the sense of community engendered by the valuable contributions of you all, both to the site itself, and to the forum, the Eds would like to point out that this is a forum for discussion of matters relating to megalithic topics, it is not an episode of Jerry Springer. We would prefer to hope that contributors are capable of moderating their own behaviour in the forum. There is a great deal of valuable and interesting information on this thread and it would be a shame to see it deleted due to inappropriate behaviour. The thread is locked for 24 hours, when it reopens please try to keep your comments on-topic. Thank you.
|
|||
|
tonyh 247 posts |
Edited Nov 26, 2008, 17:50
Nov 22, 2008, 22:19
|
||
|
Hell. Lets go for it.. Why would anybody re-apply for membership under a new name unless thew were inclined for trouble. My Name is tonyh and that is all I go by.. End Of.. This Watchman is is looking for trouble and I think TW is a twit.. Tony
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Nov 22, 2008, 22:31
|
||
|
"Why would anybody re-apply for membership under a new name unless thew were inclined for trouble." Ummmm, so your theory is I changed my name because I'm scared to say what I really think of you using my own? Right.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Edited Nov 23, 2008, 07:51
Nov 23, 2008, 07:42
|
||
|
Bump. Apologies to those who feel they were contributing something useful in the recent thread requesting certain users behaviour be 'curbed' by the TMA Eds. The now deleted thread attracted 115 duplicate posts from a user whose behaviour in the past had been 'curbed'. Rather than waste time deleting each of these, the entire thread has been removed. Frankly, we have enough to be going on with attending to the maintenance and development of the site itself, and whilst we obviously appreciate the sense of community engendered by the valuable contributions of you all, both to the site itself, and to the forum, the Eds would like to point out that this is a forum for discussion of matters relating to megalithic topics, it is not an episode of Jerry Springer. We would prefer to hope that contributors are capable of moderating their own behaviour in the forum. There is a great deal of valuable and interesting information on this thread and it would be a shame to see it deleted due to inappropriate behaviour. The thread therefore is locked for 24 hours, when it reopens please try to keep your comments on-topic. Thank you.
|
|||
jimit 1053 posts |
Dec 02, 2008, 19:32
|
||
|
Bump. Not wishing to inflame the controversy (IMHO they would have used any method that worked) but the moving of the bluestones and sarsens pales beside the effort involved in shifting these monsters. http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/top50stones.htm (Link posted on Meg Portal) Jim.
|
|||
|
mountainman 90 posts |
Dec 05, 2008, 20:18
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Stoneshifter wrote: Another profitable line of enquiry is to investigate other sites which incorporate stones from outside their immediate area. Long Meg is the most obvious one that I can think of. The stone was probably dragged a dozen miles, at the most. The recumbent at Old Keig weighs over 40 tons , is not local and was dragged uphill , total distance about 3 miles .
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Dec 06, 2008, 07:49
|
||
|
Stumbled across this Jim. Not much detail unfortunately. 1000 young people lifting a northern ireland millenium stone 11x the weight of the Welsh one! http://www.nireland.com/Friends/milleniu.htm
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Dec 06, 2008, 14:53
|
||
|
mountainman wrote: tiompan wrote: Stoneshifter wrote: Another profitable line of enquiry is to investigate other sites which incorporate stones from outside their immediate area. Long Meg is the most obvious one that I can think of. The stone was probably dragged a dozen miles, at the most. The recumbent at Old Keig weighs over 40 tons , is not local and was dragged uphill , total distance about 3 miles . Can't hear you MM .
|
|||
|
mountainman 90 posts |
Dec 13, 2008, 21:46
|
||
|
Good to see the thread is up and running again. Thought it might have been permanently shut off....... Re the moving of big stones here and there, I have no problem with that, although in some cases I bet that some of the movement from A to B was achieved by ice, especially on the fringes of the upland areas of the UK. I suspect that very often, ice has not even been considered as a transporting agent. The point is that just because you believe that Neolithic tribes were capable of transporting stones from A to B, that does not mean they actually did it. According top Steve Burrow, in every single case in Wales where big stones have been used in megalithic settings, the stones have come from the immediate vicinity. In fact, the availability of stone was the prime factor in fixing location. Why should Stonehenge have been any different? If you guys are so determined to maintain the human transport theory, let's see the colour of your evidence. I ain't seen any yet......
|
| Pages: 39 – [ Previous | 1 … 32 33 34 35 36 37 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
