Just speculating but, it seems more likely to me that this construction was originally meant to be a fortress than a temple.
Speculating is all fine and good, but keep in mind there's a known history to the site. When speculation runs counter to that, then it's pointless
speculation. During the Arabic occupation of these lands (long after Rome) they did re-purpose the site as a fortress. I speculate
paved road used in bringing the trilithons and other stone blocks to the site was ripped up by these Arabs for building their fortress and perhaps
other town construction. The Romans themselves may have taken up this road - why leave perfectly good building material in the ground?
Image: Frederick Ragette: Arab fortification of Baalbek.
You can't compare that to a little bity 250 ton stone, which is about the biggest the Egyptians, or the Romans ever managed to move as far as
They moved far heavier blocks than that, and they left plenty of records on how they did it.
The heaviest known blocks to be brought from Aswan to Giza were the massive granite stones used for the roof of the King's Chamber in the pyramid
of Kufu. Each weighed about 50 tons. 5th and 6th Dynasty pyramids included gabled roofs with blocks weighing up to 90 tons. The mortuary temple of
Menkaure included limestone blocks weighing 200 tons. In the 18th Dynasty, two colossal statues of Amenhotep III (the "Colossi of Memnon"), each
weighing more than 700 tons, were moved an overland distance of 700 km. Fragments of statues in the Ramesseum (built under Ramesses II) suggest an
original weight of 1,000 tons. How was it possible for objects of this size to have been moved?
Read the rest at Catchpenny.org - moving large objects.
The Romans moved the Lateran Obelisk
from Egypt to Rome, some 450 tons, over extremely rough
terrain. Took them a long time and they may have had to lop off a part of it to accomplish their goal, but they did it.
More from catchpenny.org:
Images: Catchpenny.org - Moving a statue in 12th Dynasty Egypt.
Images: Catchpenny.org - Moving a stone in Assyria.
Herodotus described moving the 580 ton "Green Naos" under Nectanebo II: "This took three years in the bringing, and two thousand men were
assigned to the conveying of it ..." (History, 2.175)
The Assyrian image shows them helping along a large block with the use a gigantic levers - so large they have to lasso them to pull them down. Like
Archimedes said, "Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world."
Something that should be addressed by the "ET / Anti-gravity builder of Baalbek" crowd, are these points:
would ETs rely on crude copper/stone tools to quarry these blocks (as indicated by the markings)? Surely an advanced space-faring race
would have mastered the use of lasers for cutting stone?
, if they possessed anti-gravity lifting technology, weren't there hundreds
of Baalbeks, scattered all over the globe?
did Egyptians, Romans, and Greeks (just to name a few) leave such an extensive illustrated record of themselves moving heavy objects, with
crude manual labor?
wouldn't this advanced, space-faring race have just used reinforced concrete? It's easier, it's faster, it's more economical.