Pre-Stonehenge Complex Found via Crop Circles, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times

Topic started on 17-6-2009 @ 07:31 PM by whiskeypoet

Finally a crop circle that gives us something more than art and speculation, and reported by National Geographic no less...

Given away by strange, crop circle-like formations seen from the air, a huge prehistoric ceremonial complex discovered in southern England has taken archaeologists by surprise.

Seems that we are pushing the envelope further and further in regards to "pre-historic" man…

A thousand years older than nearby Stonehenge, the site includes the remains of wooden temples and two massive, 6,000-year-old tombs that are among "Britain's first architecture," according to archaeologist Helen Wickstead, leader of the Damerham Archaeology Project.

Though not true "crop circles", the manner of the find was as such;

Discovered during a routine aerial survey by English Heritage, the U.K. government's historic-preservation agency, the "crop circles" are the results of buried archaeological structures interfering with plant growth. True crop circles are vast designs created by flattening crops.

You can read the remainder of the original article here.

I look very forward to getting Graham Hancock's take on this and it's relation to Stonehenge, existing lay lines and any astronomical data.

[edit on 17/6/2009 by whiskeypoet]

reply posted on 17-6-2009 @ 07:51 PM by jerico65

Very interesting.

I remember reading in "A Bridge Too Far" that KLM was doing some aerial mapping or something and saw the outlines of "aircraft" on the ground. They did some research on these outlines and figured out they were from gliders that were burned in place after Market Garden.

reply posted on 17-6-2009 @ 08:02 PM by JayinAR

Very cool story.

The pattern in which the sites are situated in is intriguing.
Looks a bit like a crop circle.

reply posted on 17-6-2009 @ 08:43 PM by bismarcksea

GREAT FIND! Evidence of early man is still out there and it is exciting to see it found from time to time.

reply posted on 17-6-2009 @ 10:42 PM by The Cyfre

Reading about this kind of stuff is so interesting. Right under our noses the whole time. I'm surprised this hadn't been noticed before, considering planes have been flying over England for awhile now. But I digress, it's great to have a new find.

I'm not sure about the origins of these sites, as I understand the sites are likely where the remains of their ancestors were stored. Not really much in history to indicate that there would be anything all that surprising there. Even so, can't wait to find out what's inside. You never know!

reply posted on 17-6-2009 @ 11:34 PM by whiskeypoet

The article pointed out that they show up due to the way the crops grow, so I imagine they eluded notice due to a combination of time of year, rainfall, size of crops (length) etc...

If you like this thread, check out this story about The Topper Site in South Carolina It very well may help to re-write (accepted) history.

I for one have always been a proponent of the Paleolithic Mariner theory.

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 06:07 AM by coredrill

Why does it have to be Graham Hancock?
Why not legitimate archaeologists??
The guy is not a credible archaeologists at all but a journalist by profession.

Besides that...

The find is wonderful.
God knows what is buried under our fields...and rivers etc.

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 12:04 PM by whiskeypoet

reply to post by coredrill

Why Graham Hancock you ask?

Well, mostly because it was my thread and I find his ideas thought provoking and interesting. But as with most things I make my own informed decisions based on all evidence, canonical as well as speculative.

I didn’t say anything about credible archeologists. We all know that the site will be exhumed painstakingly slow with great care as usual.

But if by credible you mean guys like Zahi Hawass, well, you can have them.

Remember, I said I wanted his "take", I certainly didn’t want him on the dig!

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 01:17 PM by RuneSpider

I remember back when I was a kid reading a book that discussed using plant growth as a way to find ancient sites. I think the example they used was Herculaneum, where the city was covered by a mud slide about the same time.
Crops over it grew in relation to the building that were buried beneath.

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 01:23 PM by whiskeypoet

reply to post by RuneSpider

That's interesting. I'll have to make a note to look up other sites that have been found in the same manner.

It’s hard to keep up with the flood of data coming from satellite imagery, Google earth etc.

I think we will be saying wow for years to come.

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 01:42 PM by dizzylizzy

Woodhenge was also discovered through aerial photography in 1925.
Link
www.english-heritage.org.uk...

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 05:58 PM by Blackmarketeer

You gotta wonder how many years farmer Brown was driving over his tractor over these outlines without seeing them! Perfect example of being too close to see something, or the guy was just willfully ignorant.

Same method is used in discovering ancient ruins in jungles, the Discovery channel had one of their shows on researchers that took to the air looking for interesting or unusual patterns in the flora.

reply posted on 18-6-2009 @ 11:28 PM by Viking04

As I recall, last year (or so), a man in Italy discovered the ruins of a Roman dwelling the same way. He was looking at his property on Google Earth, noticed a regular shape, went out, scratched around and there it was.

Of course, per Microsoft Maps, both of my brother in law's chicken houses have this 3 foot offset about 1/3 of the way back that we can't see in person, but they do if you look online.