Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Miniature Stonehenge Discovered In Wiltshire, UK

kdawson posted about 5 years ago | from the druids-at-work-and-play dept.

Earth 152

CmdrGravy weighs in with exciting archaeological news, "one of the most important prehistoric finds in decades" according to the article: a miniature Stonehenge a mile from the famous site. "Bluehenge," as the find is being called because of the assumed color of its (now-missing) stones, is believed to have been put up around the time of Stonehenge, 5,000 years ago. "All that remains of the 60-ft.-wide Bluehenge are the holes of 27 giant stones set on a ramped mount. Chips of blue stone found in the holes appear to be identical to the blue stones used in Stonehenge. The four-ton monsters, made of Preseli Spotted Dolerite — a chemically altered igneous rock harder than granite — were mined in the Preseli Mountains in Pembrokeshire and then rolled, dragged, and floated the 200 miles to the site on the banks of the Avon in Wiltshire."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

HOW CAN THIS BE ?? I GOTS TO KNOW !! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29632775)

Tell me now, tell me !!

Builders (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29632789)

So it was built by little blue men instead of little green ones?

Your official guide to the Jigaboo presidency (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29632981)

Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.

INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.
You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.

CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER
Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat

HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.

FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.
Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.

MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.
Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most prominent anatomical feature, after all, its oversized buttocks, which have evolved to make it more comfortable for your nigger to sit around all day doing nothing for its entire life. Niggers are often good runners, too, to enable them to sprint quickly in the opposite direction if they see work heading their way. The solution to this is to *dupe* your nigger into working. After installation, encourage it towards the cotton field with blows of a wooden club, fence post, baseball bat, etc., and then tell it that all that cotton belongs to a white man, who won't be back until tomorrow. Your nigger will then frantically compete with the other field niggers to steal as much of that cotton as it can before the white man returns. At the end of the day, return your nigger to its cage and laugh at its stupidity, then repeat the same trick every day indefinitely. Your nigger comes equipped with the standard nigger IQ of 75 and a memory to match, so it will forget this trick overnight. Niggers can start work at around 5am. You should then return to bed and come back at around 10am. Your niggers can then work through until around 10pm or whenever the light fades.

ENTERTAINING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger enjoys play, like most animals, so you should play with it regularly. A happy smiling nigger works best. Games niggers enjoy include: 1) A good thrashing: every few days, take your nigger's pants down, hang it up by its heels, and have some of your other niggers thrash it with a club or whip. Your nigger will signal its intense enjoyment by shrieking and sobbing. 2) Lynch the nigger: niggers are cheap and there are millions more where yours came from. So every now and then, push the boat out a bit and lynch a nigger.

Lynchings are best done with a rope over the branch of a tree, and niggers just love to be lynched. It makes them feel special. Make your other niggers watch. They'll be so grateful, they'll work harder for a day or two (and then you can lynch another one). 3) Nigger dragging: Tie your nigger by one wrist to the tow bar on the back of suitable vehicle, then drive away at approximately 50mph. Your nigger's shrieks of enjoyment will be heard for miles. It will shriek until it falls apart. To prolong the fun for the nigger, do *NOT* drag him by his feet, as his head comes off too soon. This is painless for the nigger, but spoils the fun. Always wear a seatbelt and never exceed the speed limit. 4) Playing on the PNL: a variation on (2), except you can lynch your nigger out in the fields, thus saving work time. Niggers enjoy this game best if the PNL is operated by a man in a tall white hood. 5) Hunt the nigger: a variation of Hunt the Slipper, but played outdoors, with Dobermans. WARNING: do not let your Dobermans bite a nigger, as they are highly toxic.

DISPOSAL OF DEAD NIGGERS.
Niggers die on average at around 40, which some might say is 40 years too late, but there you go. Most people prefer their niggers dead, in fact. When yours dies, report the license number of the car that did the drive-by shooting of your nigger. The police will collect the nigger and dispose of it for you.

COMMON PROBLEMS WITH NIGGERS - MY NIGGER IS VERY AGGRESIVE
Have it put down, for god's sake. Who needs an uppity nigger? What are we, short of niggers or something?

MY NIGGER KEEPS RAPING WHITE WOMEN
They all do this. Shorten your nigger's chain so it can't reach any white women, and arm heavily any white women who might go near it.

WILL MY NIGGER ATTACK ME?
Not unless it outnumbers you 20 to 1, and even then, it's not likely. If niggers successfully overthrew their owners, they'd have to sort out their own food. This is probably why nigger uprisings were nonexistent (until some fool gave them rights).

MY NIGGER BITCHES ABOUT ITS "RIGHTS" AND "RACISM".
Yeah, well, it would. Tell it to shut the fuck up.

MY NIGGER'S HIDE IS A FUNNY COLOR. - WHAT IS THE CORRECT SHADE FOR A NIGGER?
A nigger's skin is actually more or less transparent. That brown color you can see is the shit your nigger is full of. This is why some models of nigger are sold as "The Shitskin".

MY NIGGER ACTS LIKE A NIGGER, BUT IS WHITE.
What you have there is a "wigger". Rough crowd. WOW!

IS THAT LIKE AN ALBINO? ARE THEY RARE?
They're as common as dog shit and about as valuable. In fact, one of them was President between 1992 and 2000. Put your wigger in a cage with a few hundred genuine niggers and you'll soon find it stops acting like a nigger. However, leave it in the cage and let the niggers dispose of it. The best thing for any wigger is a dose of TNB.

MY NIGGER SMELLS REALLY BAD
And you were expecting what?

SHOULD I STORE MY DEAD NIGGER?
When you came in here, did you see a sign that said "Dead nigger storage"? .That's because there ain't no goddamn sign.

Re:Builders (4, Funny)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | about 5 years ago | (#29633413)

According to the article it was actually built by the same druids, they were just following a a set of instructions that said each stone should be nine spans [wikipedia.org] high instead of the intended 9 cubits [wikipedia.org] high. Needless to say, the head druid was furious at the unveiling ceremony and was reported to have had the stones crushed by a dwarf that wandered by.

Re:Builders (2, Funny)

badzilla (50355) | about 5 years ago | (#29633595)

But these were not the druids you were looking for...

Whistle while you work (5, Funny)

unlametheweak (1102159) | about 5 years ago | (#29632791)

Miniature Stonehenge Discovered In Wiltshire, UK

Built by dwarfs, I would presume.

Re:Whistle while you work (1)

corbettw (214229) | about 5 years ago | (#29632939)

Nah, if dwarfs had built it they would've used gromril.

Re:Whistle while you work (1)

ari_j (90255) | about 5 years ago | (#29632953)

A single dwarf, whose name was Mini-Dunker.

Re:Whistle while you work (1)

SlashWombat (1227578) | about 5 years ago | (#29633423)

If they start looking carefully, they will probably find them everywhere! I suspect it was a Druid franchise arrangement, along the lines of MukDonalds.

Re:Whistle while you work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633707)

Bluestone = smurfs

Perhaps (1)

mandark1967 (630856) | about 5 years ago | (#29632795)

it was the Nelwyns just making a play pen for a Daikini baby?

Spinal Tap references in... (1, Funny)

Chris Tucker (302549) | about 5 years ago | (#29632797)

...3...2...1...

Re:Spinal Tap references in... (2, Funny)

ari_j (90255) | about 5 years ago | (#29632925)

I was going to make a Spinal Tap reference, but I prefer not to tread water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry.

Re:Spinal Tap references in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633133)

Slashdotter nerdiness references in 3...2...1...

And now for something completely different. Have you ever noticed how "Slashdotter" could almost pass for an Icelandish name?

Re:Spinal Tap references in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633369)

It works in sweden too. Slashdotter = Slashdaughter = the daughter of Slash [wikipedia.org]

Re:Spinal Tap references in... (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 5 years ago | (#29634249)

"I prefer not to tread water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry."

And yet, you still post to Slashdot?

There once was a girl from Nantucket...

Re:Spinal Tap references in... (1)

skine (1524819) | about 5 years ago | (#29634213)

This is even sadder than the person who posts "F1RST!!" assuming that they actually are but end up being fourth, since this actually would be a worthwhile first post given two of the three afore you.

What do you mean, the "actual" piece? (4, Funny)

darkhitman (939662) | about 5 years ago | (#29632805)

I'll bet it went something like this...

Artist: Look, look. Look, this is what I was asked to build. Eighteen inches. Right here, it specifies eighteen inches. I was given this napkin, I mean...
Ian: Forget this! F**k the napkin!!

Re:What do you mean, the "actual" piece? (1)

ari_j (90255) | about 5 years ago | (#29632935)

That tended to understate the hugeness of the object.

Re:What do you mean, the "actual" piece? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633479)

No the mini one was the original spec.

StoneHenge is the the version with feature creep and user input.

Recent Stonehenge Excavations (4, Informative)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | about 5 years ago | (#29632813)

I live 50miles from Stonehenge but pass it regularly on my way to customers.

Over the past two years ther have been a huge amount of archaeology excavation work in the Stonehenge area. Last year it was mostly close to the henge itself.

This year the excavations have been off to the North West up the A344 closer to Airmans Corner

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=412500&Y=142500&A=Y&Z=120 [streetmap.co.uk]

Even this article is published in the "Daily Wail" I suspect there is a lot more details to emerge over the coming months.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29632823)

Pip, pip cheerio. Ring 'round for some scones and tea, eh guvnuh?

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633131)

Don't you mean; sconces?

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633195)

You seem to have started on 'aristocrat', gone via 'edwardian mill-owner' and ended up on 'hackney carriage driver'.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (5, Interesting)

osu-neko (2604) | about 5 years ago | (#29633613)

You seem to have started on 'aristocrat', gone via 'edwardian mill-owner' and ended up on 'hackney carriage driver'.

Yes, alas, a lot of Americans don't seem to grasp that there are many quite different British accents. It all gets lumped into one non-existent "British accent", presumably spoken by aristocratic Scottish chimney sweeps born to the sound of the Bow Bells in Victorian-era Calcutta, growing up as Oxford educated street urchins in the back-alleys of Serbiton and eventually settling down in the East End of Cardiff.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (1)

arethuza (737069) | about 5 years ago | (#29633995)

To be fair, quite a lot of us Brits forget that there are many quite different native languages, let alone accents, on these fair and drizzly isles. English is arguaby the language of some fairly recent immigrants who were invited in to do a job and then didn't want to go home again afterwards.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (1)

rve (4436) | about 5 years ago | (#29634055)

To be fair, quite a lot of us Brits forget that there are many quite different native languages, let alone accents, on these fair and drizzly isles. English is arguaby the language of some fairly recent immigrants who were invited in to do a job and then didn't want to go home again afterwards.

That could never happen again these days

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (1)

digitalhermit (113459) | about 5 years ago | (#29634721)

No kidding. I was watching an English comedian playing in Canada and he did the same, mixing a Texas drawl with a Georgia twang. And don't get me started on all those comedians doing Jamaican accents who mix up everything.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (3, Funny)

SEWilco (27983) | about 5 years ago | (#29632957)

You have to pass Stonehenge to reach customers?
What do you sell to the ancient dead?

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (4, Funny)

Architect_sasyr (938685) | about 5 years ago | (#29633357)

What do you sell to the ancient dead?

Life insurance.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (4, Informative)

Don_dumb (927108) | about 5 years ago | (#29633393)

Of course the other local secret we don't tell people is that Stonehenge isn't half as good as Avebury, about 30 miles North of Stonehenge. If anyone is going to have a look at stone circles and old mysterious things. I would say that the better place is the one with the pub in the middle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avebury [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633563)

Don't forget Silbury Hill - that has the remains of a Roman Tourist Visitor Centre just to the east of it

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (1)

Patch86 (1465427) | about 5 years ago | (#29634285)

I love that pub. Forget the stones, it's worth the bus trip all by itself.

Re:Recent Stonehenge Excavations (1)

Pogue Mahone (265053) | about 5 years ago | (#29633959)

I asked about the Airman's Corner excavations at in the visitors' centre when I visited Stonehenge this summer. Apparently they're hoping *not* to find anything interesting there; they are looking for somewhere to put a new visitors' centre, and want to make sure that there won't be any archaeological remains under the car park.

Well, they intended it to be big... (1)

Landshark17 (807664) | about 5 years ago | (#29632855)

Well, they intended it to be big, but the designers got the signs for feet and inches mixed up.

Re:Well, they intended it to be big... (1)

Adaeniel (1315637) | about 5 years ago | (#29632969)

Did these designers go on to work for NASA?

Re:Well, they intended it to be big... (2)

Animixer (134376) | about 5 years ago | (#29633007)

Did these designers go on to work for NASA?

No, but I think they did some work once for Spinal Tap.

off-topic: One of many reasons IRIX was cool -- run audiopanel with the -spinaltap option. All volume controls go to 11! There. I have given away my big secret.

btw if my sig doesn't make sense try it on HP-UX 10.20 or so.

Ancient Gods (2, Funny)

cjfs (1253208) | about 5 years ago | (#29632861)

No one knows what gods they worshipped, but the alignment of Stonehenge to the solstice shows that the Sun - and maybe the Moon - was important.

Looking at the monument and knowing what it would take to build it, I think it's obvious.They may have worshiped the Sun, but they prayed to Joe Pesci.

Re:Ancient Gods (1)

ari_j (90255) | about 5 years ago | (#29632941)

No one knows who they were, or what they were doing there.

Logistics (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 5 years ago | (#29632923)

I find it absolutely amazing that people 5000 years ago were able to move 4000 kilo rocks over hundreds of kilometres of landscape.

Re:Logistics (1)

cjfs (1253208) | about 5 years ago | (#29632963)

I find it absolutely amazing that people 5000 years ago were able to move 4000 kilo rocks over hundreds of kilometres of landscape.

It was definitely an achievement [thinkgeek.com]

Re:Logistics (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 years ago | (#29633049)

It's only a model.

Re:Logistics (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | about 5 years ago | (#29633421)

My guess is that it was an ancient tourist trap.

Soon they'll dig up a dunk tank and other related stuff. "Come to Stonehengeland! See, um, rocks! They're not quite as big as the real thing, but they're still pretty bitchin'!"

Re:Logistics (4, Insightful)

petes_PoV (912422) | about 5 years ago | (#29633871)

Yes, it's amazing what you can achieve with a limitless amount of slave labour and no planning regulations to hold you back.

Just discovered? (1)

Tibia1 (1615959) | about 5 years ago | (#29632927)

So the site was only 1 mile away from Stonehenge, along a path directly from it, with 27 holes each made by a 4 ton rock? The holes must have been preserved seeing as the blue remains of the rocks still remained in them. What's next, additional pyramid discoveries?

Re:Just discovered? (1)

AndGodSed (968378) | about 5 years ago | (#29633011)

I was thinking something along the same line.

Maybe stonehenge is part of a complex of structures? Maybe an ancient city? Or a temple complex...

Two words... (1)

P. Legba (172072) | about 5 years ago | (#29633191)

Landing site.

Re:Two words... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633247)

yeah we have all read "A Trace of Memory"
http://www.webscription.net/p-247-legions-of-space.aspx

Re:Two words... (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 5 years ago | (#29633257)

Landing site.

Why would UFOs need a purpose built landing site? Don't they have inertial navigation?

Re:Just discovered? (1)

johnw (3725) | about 5 years ago | (#29633441)

Or maybe it's a slightly earlier monument, and its blue stones were recycled when a larger one was built nearby? People have been nicking stone from existing constructions to use for new ones for millennia.

The fabled gift shop (4, Funny)

jpmorgan (517966) | about 5 years ago | (#29632959)

At last! The fabled gift shop of the druids has been found!

Re:The fabled gift shop (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about 5 years ago | (#29633099)

The druids (although we don't know much else about them) were several thousand years later.

Re:The fabled gift shop (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 5 years ago | (#29634267)

... but gift shops were contemporary to ancient britons?

4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (4, Funny)

sixwings (1648941) | about 5 years ago | (#29633015)

The four-ton monsters, made of Preseli Spotted Dolerite â" a chemically altered igneous rock harder than granite â" were mined in the Preseli Mountains in Pembrokeshire and then rolled, dragged, and floated the 200 miles to the site on the banks of the Avon in Wiltshire."

Four-ton stones are miniscule compared to the 50-ton trilithons at big Stonehenge or the over 1100-ton Stone of the South [vejprty.com] at Baalbek in Lebanon.

It boggles the mind that primitive people would want to erect such monumental structures when smaller stones would have been orders of magnitude easier to cut and transport. As the Romans, the Aztecs and the Maya have shown, it's possible to create impressive monuments with smaller stones. In my opinion, some among the ancient priesthoods had secret knowledge of a technology that allowed them to levitate and transport huge stones over great distances. Too bad they died without leaving a record of it. I have excellent cause to believe that the secret of levitation will be uncovered soon.

There is clear evidence that we are swimming in an ocean of clean energy, lots and lots of it. A new form of transportation and energy production technology will arrive soon, one based on the realization that we are immersed in an immense lattice of energetic particles. This is a consequence of a reevaluation of our understanding of the causality of motion. Soon, we'll have vehicles that can move at tremendous speeds and negotiate right angle turns without slowing down and without incurring damages due to inertial effects. Floating cities, unlimited clean energy, earth to Mars in hours, New York to Beijing in minutes... That's the future of energy and travel.

The Problem With Motion [blogspot.com]

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633115)

anyone follow that link? his response to comments on his blog is illuminating

I had no idea the timecube guy had a separate blog and posted on slashdot

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

sixwings (1648941) | about 5 years ago | (#29633177)

LOL. The Timecube guy, eh? I ressemble that. At least my comment was not modded -1 Troll. Not yet anyway. A Funny rating is better than nothing.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633183)

I call the two linked articles, especially the blogspot post total and utter BULL MANURE [ENHANCED].

Maybe I did miss the joke, so if that's the case, can somebody explain it to me?

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

sixwings (1648941) | about 5 years ago | (#29633225)

You know what they say about opinions, don't you? Coming from an attacker who doesn't have the gonads to identify him/herself, that's not exactly very brave of you, is it? Come on, don't be ashamed of who and what you are. I'm the crackpot (LOL) at the link and I'm not ashamed of it.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633281)

I'm too lazy to make an account here. And no, I don't mean to insult your theories, I'll just tell you what my physics professors at the university have told me before "You mean to say that your 5 dollar research disproves years and millions of dollars worth of investigation?"

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

sixwings (1648941) | about 5 years ago | (#29633313)

Wow. Gonads are rare in these parts. Who would've thunk it?

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about 5 years ago | (#29633455)

Your Physics professor could be the reason years and millions of dollars of investigation hasn't yielded the same results as the 5 dollar research. I mean seriously, if findings are rejected because of the cost associated with the research, then there are problems.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

sixwings (1648941) | about 5 years ago | (#29633493)

Thank you. I wonder if Newton or Calileo would have objected to their work being valued at a mere 5 dollars worth. After all, they were up against centuries if not millenia of scientific research.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633703)

Okay, no, just no, this is where i now step in.

You are really citing the money issue?
Seriously? A probable regular Slashdotter who has seen articles on groups of individuals creating things at significantly lower price points than huge companies devoted to creating such things?

Also, citing the money issue is downright the most pathetic thing ever.
Most things in human history were discovered by poorer people in their backyard, to use a slightly over-exaggerated metaphor.

And finally, most people cling on to GR even though they KNOW it isn't correct.
INFINITIES = WRONG, always.
Don't even get me started on 0, Maths has ruined Physics.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

MartinSchou (1360093) | about 5 years ago | (#29633309)

So what you're saying is that the old technology was huge monolithic building blocks (Windows) and the huge improvement was using tiny building blocks (Unix mindset)?

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | about 5 years ago | (#29634671)

Perhaps you didn't mean it this way, but implying that Unix rests on a older, massive foundation that Windows laid down is wrongity wrong.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 5 years ago | (#29633899)

This guy got modded funny, but there's a nugget of truth in the greater turd.

In science as a whole, and particularly fields like archeology, there seems to be a very unhealthy "not invented here" mentality. It's particularly evident in Egyptology, from what I've read: despite any evidence to the contrary, they insist upon primitive, labor-intensive, and often easily-explained-away methods of construction.

Two examples are the Giza pyramid (ignoring the astounding geometric and architectural complexity which we can only explain by creating 'ancient rituals') and the famous granite sarcophagi also from ancient Egypt.

The Giza pyramid has stones upwards of 60 tons and experimental 'rebuilds' at a smaller scale (1/8th rings a bell) have been attempted in modern times, using modern machinery - and failed. The mechanics of lifting or moving 60 tons simply can't be explained using modern science without completely rejecting the precepts of the field (and even then, it's a bit questionable).

The sarcophagi I mentioned are multiple, identical boxes found at a single location. The contemporary explanation, as I understand it, is that they were pounded out by hand using basalt and maybe rubbed out with sand. Yet the inner corners show inexplicable marks consistent with what might occur if the boxes were cut today using modern machinery - and to an absurdly high precision, at that.

These are things which simply don't make sense within our contemporary understanding. In the case of the large granite (etc.) pillars throughout the world, it would make sense that some machinery, of some sort, was employed. Having done a fair amount of "large heavy lifting" and seeing it take 6 people and a 1 ton motor to lift and maneuver a 1500lb, 4x8x8 stage prop, and then over 10 people to move it while on wheels on a flat, smooth surface, I'm highly skeptical of any claims to hemp ropes and wooden block and tackle being able to handle something of this scale. Possible, I suppose, but it seems just as likely that they might have invented internal combustion (or some other technology) and their lesser machines (the ones made from metal) have all since decayed - as to believe that a bunch of relative primitives could do something which a group of highly determined (and not particularly fond of failure - they were Japanese) engineers couldn't do with modern technology at a significantly smaller scale.

Re:4 Tons vs. 50 Tons vs. 1100 Ton (2, Insightful)

porl (932021) | about 5 years ago | (#29633985)

that was the least scientific 'scientific blog' i have ever read... with the obvious exception of timecube...

you need to learn the physics you are debating, saying 'from my perspective' doesn't a theory make...

Before Stonehenge... (4, Funny)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 5 years ago | (#29633027)

"Bluehenge," ... is believed to have been put up around the time of Stonehenge, 5,000 years ago.

Before Stonehenge, there was Woodhenge [wikipedia.org] and Strawhenge. (But a big bad wolf came along...)
- Eddie Izzard

Re:Before Stonehenge... (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 years ago | (#29633097)

Before Stonehenge, there was Woodhenge and Strawhenge.

It was claimed that Tittyhenge was discovered, but it was a bust.
     

Re:Before Stonehenge... (1)

gringofrijolero (1489395) | about 5 years ago | (#29633425)

...there was Woodhenge...

Yeah, I was there. The acid was awesome, man!

Re:Before Stonehenge... (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about 5 years ago | (#29634003)

Bluehenge is the one from the Bluetooth age

Re:Before Stonehenge... (1)

cynyr (703126) | about 5 years ago | (#29634439)

and the druids were standing around saying, "this one and that one, can we swap them around?"

But what's really cool is (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 5 years ago | (#29633033)

the discovery of 13-inch Beatles nearby. Their best tune is "No. 3"

Blueprint (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 5 years ago | (#29633035)

It's blue and it's a small scale of the real thing.
That's what we call a "blueprint".

They found another in Redmond, WA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633077)

it's called Bluescreenhenge.

Keeping Up With The Joneses (4, Funny)

mindbrane (1548037) | about 5 years ago | (#29633087)

Isn't that just the way it goes, you put up a great circle of stones, your house smartly in the middle; the missus, the kids and the in laws are all finally giving you the praise you deserve, and what does your neighbour go and do?

Spinal Tap's stonehenge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633137)

Wasn't there a miniature stonehenge in This Is Spinal Tap? Who knew such a movie could be so prescient.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpaG-L0zTJ4&NR=1

IBM? (2, Funny)

TheCybernator (996224) | about 5 years ago | (#29633151)

Bluehenge? sounds like IBM made

Hogwash (1)

P. Legba (172072) | about 5 years ago | (#29633165)

Rolled? Floated???

Occam's Razor.

They were simply transported there by the Ancients' extraterrestrial guides using their interstellar spacecraft.

One of the most important finds ? have a look : (4, Informative)

unity100 (970058) | about 5 years ago | (#29633173)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe [wikipedia.org]

Its lowest layer is dated 9130-8800 BC. That's fucking 11,130 years ago. its the oldest place of worship. Also :

 

Göbekli Tepe is the oldest human-made place of worship yet discovered.[2] Until excavations began, a complex on this scale was not thought possible for a community so ancient. The massive sequence of stratification layers suggests several millennia of activity, perhaps reaching back to the Mesolithic. The oldest occupation layer (stratum III) contains monolithic pillars linked by coarsely built walls to form circular or oval structures. So far, four such buildings, with diameters between 10 and 30m have been uncovered. Geophysical surveys indicate the existence of 16 additional structures.
 
Stratum II, dated to Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) (7500 - 6000 BC), has revealed several adjacent rectangular rooms with floors of polished lime, reminiscent of Roman terrazzo floors. The most recent layer consists of sediment deposited as the result of agricultural activity.

Moreover, this is more important - it seems to be the place where mankind first domesticated wheat :

While the site formally belongs to the earliest Neolithic (PPN A), up to now no traces of domesticated plants or animals have been found. The inhabitants were hunters and gatherers who nevertheless lived in villages for at least part of the year.[7] Schmidt speculates that the site played a key function in the transition to agriculture; he assumes that the necessary social organization needed for the creation of these structures went hand-in-hand with the organized exploitation of wild crops. For sustenance, wild cereals may have been used more intensively than before; perhaps they were even deliberately cultivated. Recent DNA analysis of modern domesticated wheat compared with wild wheat has shown that its DNA is closest in structure to wild wheat found on Mount Karaca Da 20 miles away from the site, leading one to believe that this is where modern wheat was first domesticated.[8]

enjoy.

Re:One of the most important finds ? have a look : (4, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 5 years ago | (#29633359)

It's almost twice as old as the earth!

Re:One of the most important finds ? have a look : (1)

telomerewhythere (1493937) | about 5 years ago | (#29634239)

Imagine, these people were worshiping crosses (or cross-like objects) long before "Christians" started to do so.

From GP's cite on wikipedia:

They soon discovered T-shaped pillars, some of which had apparently undergone attempts at smashing.[...]GÃbekli Tepe is the oldest human-made place of worship yet discovered.

Re:One of the most important finds ? have a look : (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | about 5 years ago | (#29633729)

9130 - 8800 BC? That is an important find! I remember when I was digging through information about older cultures out of boredom (I know...seriously) I was impressed that most of the oldest cultures documented extensively existed in Egypt and Asia (China, India, and even Japan). I had hard time finding any information about ancient European and Semitic cultures. That is pretty impressive that there is a temple predating the Egyptian civilization in Turkey. I wonder if any influence or link can be traced between it and the Phoenician culture...

Oh I know what this is... (1)

3seas (184403) | about 5 years ago | (#29633415)

Its not uncommon when taking on a project, to first create a scaled down model first, so to help discover and work out project problems. To bad they can't find teh blue prints huh?

slashdothenge more like (4, Funny)

rarel (697734) | about 5 years ago | (#29633433)

even back then they had problem with dupes. Dang.

Dolerite: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29633587)

That tough blue mineral that doesn't cop out when the heat's all about.

Frigging obvious! (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 5 years ago | (#29633611)

Smaller and nearby? It's the GPU!

(Also, insert obligatory IBM/BlueHenge joke.)

Henges? (1)

Trip6 (1184883) | about 5 years ago | (#29633711)

How many more henges are we going to find? Why isn't the word henge used more in day-to-day conversation?

Re:Henges? (3, Informative)

Frogg (27033) | about 5 years ago | (#29634555)

How many more henges are we going to find?

evidence exists for literally hundreds and hundreds of henges across the UK - a lot of them don't have any stones (not because they've been removed, a lot of them just never had them) - the term 'henge' is generally taken to be a circular/oval bank and ditch earthwork.

Why isn't the word henge used more in day-to-day conversation?

...uhm, maybe it's because in day-to-day conversation people don't generally talk about pre-historic / neolithic sites very much? (sorry, couldn't resist pointing out the obvious there! ;)

people familiar with ancient / pre-historic sites do often use the term henge when talking about this kind of thing - i guess it depends on where you live, and who you speak with? -- i'm kinda assuming from your question that you likely aren't living in the UK (or France) where there are a lot of henges (and barrows and standing stones / stone arrangements) scattered all over the countryside - some are big and impressive, like Stonehenge [wikipedia.org] (obviously), Avebury [wikipedia.org] and Thornborough [wikipedia.org] , all of which are in the UK, and Carnac [wikipedia.org] in France -- whereas others are only known about because of circular markings left in farmers fields (often only visible from the air nowadays), eg. Bow Henge [megalithic.co.uk] .

hth

Re:Henges? (1)

Trip6 (1184883) | about 5 years ago | (#29634845)

The word henge has never come up here in CA in any conversation I've ever been in except as a reference to the infamous Stonehenge, and even then, I doubt very many people here know that the noun is henge and Stone is a modifier used to call out a specific henge.

Thanks for the henge references - I shall seek them out on my next trip to Europe!

Hmmm (1)

smoker2 (750216) | about 5 years ago | (#29633849)

I disagree with the notion that the stones were dragged from Wales. Surely if the stone was so impressive, the henge would have been built near the actual source. The whole area would have been sacred, and mined into temples. Alternatively, there were ice sheets extending down pretty much as far as Wiltshire, certainly covering the Bristol Channel. The whole area was probably littered with drop stones brought from Wales, which have been spotted and collected by the ancient builders. And I'm pretty sure there was a TV program regarding Bluehenge some years ago. This is standard Daily Fail "news".

Re:Hmmm (2, Informative)

Vulch (221502) | about 5 years ago | (#29633967)

Unfortunately for your ice sheet theory, the large bluestones are all there is in the area. Glaciation would also have brought huge quantities of identifiable smaller bits right down to gravel size.

Re:Hmmm (2, Informative)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 5 years ago | (#29634303)

There's no reason to suggest they were dragged, mostly they were floated down over the Bristol channel and then probably across the flooded plains of Somerset. Wiltshire's only a short drag from there.

Blue? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29634019)

If the stones are no longer there, how do they know they were blue?

And with absolutely no written records about Stonehenge dating to the time of it original use, scientists somehow know exactly how it was used and why. What arrogance.

Stones are *missing* (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 5 years ago | (#29634023)

So how the hell can you be sure what they looked like? They could have been totem poles or something.. just happened to be arranged in a similar round pattern, which is most likely common for that era of man ( think sun/moon god worship ).

Re:Stones are *missing* (2, Informative)

Frogg (27033) | about 5 years ago | (#29634717)

i think they concluded the holes were sockets for stones for a number of reasons - one of which is because of the amount of chippings of Bluestone they found in the area, and another being that holes which have had stones in them have a variety of archaeological evidence to support such a conclusion, including the way the earth is packed, the way the hole is cut, and whether there's evidence for packing stones, etc, having been used to hold the stones in place.

the combination of this kind of evidence plus the lack of evidence needed to support the hypothesis of wooden posts being in the holes (organic material would likely be left if wooden posts had been in the sockets) is generally how archaeologists draw their conclusions -- it's become quite a science over the years, and, as time passes, technological advances combined with a greater understanding gathered from other excavations/investigations allows them to build a better picture.

they have found sites with sockets which they believe held wooden posts - so it's not as if they discount such a possibility outright, such things do indeed exist (see Woodhenge [wikipedia.org] for example - but there are plenty of other sites which feature 'post holes', although not usually in large circular arrangements such as discovered at Woodhenge)

of course none of these conclusions/hypotheses can be proven as totally and absolutely 100% accurate, and it is often the case that archaeologists will draw new conclusions in later years, as technology improves and more information is gathered from other digs - which is exactly what they've been doing with these recent excavations in the Stonehenge area.

personally, i'm of the opinion that if they say they don't think it was wooden posts but it was stones, then they're likely right - they are experts after all, and they don't really just make this stuff up, it's based upon the evidence at hand at the site and the culmination of years of study and research across many similar sites.

(in some ways it's like if i repair a pc, and tell my customer that i think it's a hard-disk failure - i've based my decision upon years of experience and the evidence at hand - in such a situation, ie. being the repair-man, i am the 'expert' in that equation - of course, Joe Public may say 'how do you know? it could be the motherboard or the power-supply or something' - and sure, it could be open to interpretation and later discoveries of related information, but i'm likely to be right)

Channel 4's Time Team (3, Informative)

Frogg (27033) | about 5 years ago | (#29634421)

here in the UK Channel 4's "Time Team" covered some of the recent excavations in the Stonehenge area in a couple of episodes earlier this year - this includes the initial discovery of this 'Bluehenge' site, although when the programmes were made they had not got as far as finding the evidence for a complete henge at this site.

check out the two 'specials' here [channel4.com] and here [channel4.com] . fwiw, the second programme is the more detailed of the two and covers more of the later discoveries.

these recent digs are particularly interesting because they're the most up-to-date excavations to have taken place in the Stonehenge area so far, and they also include the re-excavations of older digs which took place before we had some of our modern techniques, technologies and understanding.

truly fascinating stuff! :)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?