It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Canada's Stonehenge: scientist says Alberta sun temple has 5,000-year-old calendar

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Kandinsky

Originally posted by Portugoal
Anyone else with any info on North American ancient people and their belief system?

I can't find anything on the subject.

The links were found within ten minutes using Google. You should try it sometime, it's quite popular

Sorry, I tend to use yahoo! Darn that search engine

But in all seriousness, I was looking for ancient (meaning a couple of thousands years old- which is probably not around today, unlike the Blackfoot).

I had already found that blackfoot page
and looked at a bunch of different sites and none of them put an estimation on how old the tribe can trace its roots back.
It seems that most of recorded history came only after the Europeans came, which makes sense but is pretty sad.

I really do have to buy this guys book

EDIT: Actually looking at another link you provided, i realized that it was pretty good

Actually gives a time line

[edit on 1-2-2009 by Portugoal]

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by Portugoal
Hiya, maybe this link is more useful to you. There's also an article in New Scientist that offers ideas about the first settlers from thousands of years ago. I didn't know much about the Clovis people until last year ( thanks to ATS), this article will give you a lot of jumping off points. It contains a wealth of archaeological information and the sidebar links to similar topics.

I read yesterday that as N. America was colonized medicine wheels became piles of stones as the land was claimed for agriculture, towns etc. The vast 'lace works' of interconnected stone wheels Freeman refers to may have have been removed from the archaeological record by farm laborers without a second thought.

Have you read the link (scribd) I posted to a sample paper Freeman wrote? It's on my first post, I think. It's from 2007 and probably reflects the tone of his book.

I owe you one of these

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 08:29 PM
reply to post by Aeons

I was near there about 4 years ago looking at dinosaur pieces in some of the canyons. There is so much land and so few people that I can easily imagine that no one noticed. Hey this is Canada; trying to get info on modern events is tough enough. Thinking of the Avro Arrow...

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 10:48 PM
Is there any information on the exact location of this? The reason I'm asking is I'm only like 50 miles away from it and I'd love to go take a look.

posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 11:01 PM
reply to post by bronco73

I've checked on different articles about it but all it says is near Bow River. It be really cool if you could get there and take some pics

You live that close and you've never heard about it? Why are these things soo insignificant?

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:59 PM
reply to post by Aeons

Actually These sites are important to alot of us Native people. I read other posts here on this site and it astounds me how many people in this world actually cant accept our oral history in our tribes all over this "North America" we are here we all have creation stories! Because our history isnt "nailed" down in a "book" some people cant accept it! We are Here this IS where we come from! We didnt come over from the supposedly "civilized" world. However, one could be flattered that people from over there want to be related to us!
We have done our best to have sites preserved and Governments didnt listen in the past and allowed these sites to be built over. So now we go out to do our best again.
Take it from me we have heard the theories of non natives on OUR HISTORY. Again I state why isnt it enough that the knowledge WE have enough for people and why is it people have such a hard time taking another human beings word? (Maybe because some people know deep down inside that you keeping your word isnt strong) I dont know about that I only speculate on your word LOL.
Just because our Experts dont have a piece of paper doesnt mean they dont know anything.
So some caucasian man writes a book confirming what we have always known! WOW! I think that in its self confims that we are not heard and havent been for a very very very long time.
Thanks might be in order for this man who confirms a theory that has been stated by SOME.

That if Native Americans conformed to the Non Native way of thinking we MIGHT have been taken seriously!
I live in a tribe in alberta and was told of these places I know some people who have worked to get these sites preserved and lost out because $$ is more important!

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:07 PM
A few years ago, I visited Mystery Hill, New Hampshire. The site appears to have been an accurate prehistoric observatory with earliest datings of about 1800 BCE. Sight lines are on the order of 100 meters. Stone structures were borrowed from and used by early 18th century colonists. An interesting dolmen, whose caprock contained a bloodgroove, is called the sacrificial table. I recommend a visit to the site or the website.

[edit on 2/2/2009 by pteridine]

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:42 PM
reply to post by pteridine

but it seems to have sold out-->'s_Stonehenge

You gotta pay to visit it now. It's private property. And the site was reaaranged by a previous owner to back up his own theory.

Still, thanks for sharing. How many different countries have a stonehenge

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:05 PM
reply to post by Portugoal

Possibly, more contrived proof of Irish monks and the miracle of the coracle. What is it about Irish monks and their promoters?
It was interesting, anyway, and the "sacrificial stone" was set atop three boulders. I will investigate ash leaching stones to see if they are commonly arranged this way. The groove was circular, around the periphery of the stone, with a radial outlet groove from the circular groove to the edge. It appeared to have been designed to collect and drain something, either blood or lye.
The sighting stones do seem to be aligned accurately and some are included as anchors in old stone walls. Their points are not centered on the flat sandstones, as one might imagine without considering efficient working of stone, but are the result of clipping the corner of a rectangle. This would form the point with only one, roughly 45 degree, cut.

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 10:05 PM
reply to post by Portugoal

I've read Canada's Stonehenge: Astounding Archaeological Discoveries in Canada, England and Wales. The book is loaded with pictures and diagrams, comparing the various sites. The site featured in the Canadian Press is of course, what is known here as the Majorville Medicine Wheel. Freeman presents an interesting argument about how these sites operate as calendars. It's pretty complex.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:14 PM
I dont know if this has been said but I will try to put in my two cents.

There seems to be a misunderstanding that native people were a primitive people. This is not true. The problem here is that native people and native culture is generally seen through western perspective. The western perspective is based on anthropological reports and understandings of the culture. The problem with anthopology is though that it lacks a true understanding of the culture, its history and its people. Anthropologists generally judge the cultures they are studying with a westernized view point. Native Americans are one of the most studied people on earth (anthropologically speaking) because it seems like people are always trying to figure out all their great mysteries.
There are several probelms with this. The first being that as much as you can study and learn, anthropology is mostly about observing and taking notes and making educated guesses based on observations and facts. Even if you understand the language, you will never understand the people without living their and learning how to think differently.
The second problem is that although the anthropologists or whoever listen to the stories of the Native people the myths and legends of the people are generally chalked up to being fairy tales of a primitive peoples. The accepted method is to try to use science to uncover the "truth" (which seems to always be changing) when it may in fact be right in front of your face in a "myth". I guess it is hard to explain if you dont understand where I am coming from.

This all affects how native people are seen in this western world. The fact is that Native people are generally always viewed as having been a primitive people. I even saw some one mention this on the first page of this thread. That assumption is simply NOT TRUE. Native people are or were no less advanced than any other race. The assumption comes because western thinking means we use western society as a yard stick to measure all other forms of civilization. This is just plain wrong. It is impossible to measure the achievements of one civilization against another to determine their place on the evolutionary scale. Im not sure how to describe this but it seems to me on the same line as comparing a chiwawa to a rotweiler. Saying the rottweiler is more advanced because it is bigger and has larger teeth doesnt mean anything. Civilization is created to adapt and fit into the circumstances around it. If a people are able to live and function and thrive (which was what was happening on North America before colonization) than the civilization is exactly where it should be for those people.
People using stone tools, and a hunter gatherer lifestyle as a way to classify a people as primitive may be surprised to learn that the Iroquois (Haudenosaunee) people of the great lakes area had a system of true democracy set up, including a sort of senate of 50 chiefs. Others knew important things about agriculture, like crop diversity.

The Bering Strait theory of American population is generally considered by anthropologists NOW to be incorrect. It was originally considered because people assumed that native peoples were too primitive to be able to use boats or ships, and because if native people were actually not native and just recent inhabitants than a claim to this land was legit (although im not sure how the original thought of 12,000 years *now greatly disproved* is considered recent).

I am running out of room but I guess what i am trying to say is people underestimate the accomplishments and history of native peoples because they dont understand them and refuse to look at the history outside of a white mans eyes.

A final thought is, if a christian says, "Man was made from dirt into flesh by God." people generally let him accept that as his belief. If a native man says, "My people came from a giant hole in the ground." and he can showyou that hole, his beliefs are still wrong.

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Brainbow]

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:16 PM
Im sorry if my last post rambled on or was off center, but I was just reacting to a few of the posts i saw on the first page. I hope it had some kind of relevance. .

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:44 PM
reply to post by Portugoal

because northamerican people covers a broad range of people. Its like asking for information on ancient asian people, its just way to large of a populace to get good information on. From the many many many many tribes that populated the americas before colonization they all had DIFFERENT languages and cultures. and not like slightly different, but in most cases COMPLETELY different.
So unless you specify and really whiddle it down what ever information you get is probably going to be of no real help.

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:01 PM
reply to post by Brainbow

Whiddle it down to NW Canada 5000 years ago... If that helps.

And as for the anonymous poster, thanks for explaining a little on what the book is about and how his theory is complex and explained

(which could means he searches leaps and bounds to stretch his theory or he has a lot of evidence that connects everything).

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:24 PM
Well Freeman just might be on the right tracl as my Granfather told me it came from outer space as his grandfather told him. I have pictures of this rock with myself standing on them. We have been in that part for over 237 years. Best of luck .

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 02:18 PM
I hard of celtic druids supposedly making it to new england, bu never heard of their getting as far north as canada

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 03:39 PM
The "civilized world" was not particularly "civilized" when the genetic split between the Americas and the Asian groups happened.

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 03:47 PM

Originally posted by Gren
I hard of celtic druids supposedly making it to new england, bu never heard of their getting as far north as canada

The first touch down point was in Greenland, Labrador and Newfoundland. "Vinland" was there.

posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 08:40 PM
Im wondering if anyone could give me the GPS coordinates to any of the Alberta sites... Im planning a large trip of Alberta strangeness photo documentation this summer. Would love to add this to the itinerary.

posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 06:32 PM
There is another stonehenge discovery, also connected to First Nations and the Gallactic Federation. This one was discovered near Montreal, Quebec, Canada. It was kept a secret for over 50 years by the man who discovered it when he was 7 years old.
The story is available at Astraelia has dedicated the site to the ascension community because of the light orbs there and a seer, Bonnie, that Mark Kimmel, the renowned Galactic Federation channel of' was telepathically told to bring to the site. She saw that intra-terrestrail energy was at one site, a crater, and she also saw, clairvoyantly, a crystal skull buried on the site.
Many of the beautiful crystal outcropings are seen on his well constructed web tour of how the story unfolded for him.

Check it out, it is really, by far the most amazing story of all the Stonehenge circles!

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in