Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Sir Napsalot

This is a huge deal....It changes the course of history, the people and events. Proves their work is too loose to make it valid...aka....best guess.


10 posted on 04/20/2013 7:03:31 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Sacajaweau; muawiyah; SunkenCiv; All

Some are confusing the idea that the site is 5,000 years older than previously thought, and that the henge itstelf is 5,000 years older. Because of additional digging, researchers are discovering traces much older than they previously thought. The age of stonehenge is not older. As they pointed out, previously there are traces of a woodhenge. In the US everyone thought there was nothing older than Clovis. Then they started digging below Clovis level, and guess what, US might have been settled earlier than Clovis. Keep digging guys, and if you want to use some of my tax money for exploratory grants, I prefer that to spending on an unnecessary war in Iraq in 2003. [Before someone gives me heck about that, I currently have a son in Afghanistan.]


30 posted on 04/20/2013 8:30:42 PM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson