It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Could Stonehenge Have Been Built With Balls?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:31 PM
link   
This is a very interesting sounding theory. Not as exiting as ancient aliens but still. I never heard the balls theory before personally. Pictures of the found balls would be great though if anyone knows a link.

Via
Gizmodo
From
National Geographic
edit on 11/12/2010 by PsykoOps because: Oopsie via from




posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:33 PM
link   
yes, i'm sure it took a lot of balls to lift those large stones

oops, sorry i misunderstood

sorry for the levity

be good

(haven't heard that theory...i'll look into it)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Seems a lot more logical to me than the preposterous ancient astronaut theory.

Interesting find



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Very interesting theory, seems like it may have been possible.

My only questions would be, if they didn't have the wheel, or didn't know how to make a wheel. How then, could they make a ball, or vise versa. I would think if you knew how to make a ball someone would think to make it bigger...and thinner.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Why balls? Why not just 3 inch diameter cured oak saplings, much faster, easier to use and easy to replace. If they didn't break or wear out they could be used for construction. If they did break, firewood. Win, win situation.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Boogalooper
 


That would be the next logical step. Wheels however require something to attach to. Axel or something. Cart of some kind wouldn't be able to handle the weight of the stones like these balls would. For one they're sturdier form and on top of that there is more of them.

reply to post by debris765nju
 


True that.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:22 AM
link   
Sorry but those balls needs precisions machinery to create no one could possibly make those round enough 1000’s of years ago with just stone and hammers to roll seamlessly and perfectly as these stupid errr sorry students want us to believe!

But again, Stonehenge was created in time of magic and magi as the legends/tradition/popular culture says, why would anyone want to destroy the fine cultural beliefs….??



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:26 AM
link   
It kind of makes sense.

You gonna be working with big monoliths, you gotta have balls.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by amkia
 


You can't be serious...

You make the statement that graduate students are stupid, then suggest that magic existed at the time of Stonehenge's inception?

Please tell me you are joking.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 02:54 AM
link   
I am serious mate

Stonehenge is just so simple and insignificant compare to “baalbek” how do you explain those then, Egypt pyramids? Aztec pyramids? Mayan stuff…?

3 things are possible!

- Alien theory and technologies!
- Forgotten human wisdom and technologies from the past (due to some indescribable disaster).
- Or magic…

Any other explanations, are just a theories and futile tryout on our part.



Some of those stones in “baalbek” weigh at least 1500 tons do you think that bunch of people with wooden stuff could possibly carry them..?? People who never had knowledge to make even steel??

edit on 12-12-2010 by amkia because: edited to add



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 03:10 AM
link   
No sir, this is work of something else. Believe me…

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Ruptured balls equal wheels
The Stonehengers accidentally invented the wheel.
Or at least their junk dealer did.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by amkia
 


Since when? It's not like they're going for laser precision. Making balls isn't as complicated as you make it sound.



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 



Seems that you don’t get it mate.

How to build these kind of structures could be explained in numerous ways (mostly impractical anyway), important is the purposes of those!

I have worked with wooden products for many years, first you’ll have to find the right kind of trees, then you’ll have to look for the right structures, then you’ll have to have the right tools to take that structure out intact, then start shaping it. Again, without precision tools or machinery you can’t make two balls in same size (let alone many).

The whole article sucks because these eager students never used primitive tool (belong to that age) to make even the rails let alone the balls…

Again, the purpose of Stonehenge is important..!



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
That's your opinion. I disagree. What precision tools exactly would you need then?



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by BadBoYeed
 
I like your sense of humour, and I thank you for the laugh! It's also good to see there is at least one monitor who isn't a humourless, power-tripping dork!



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by BadBoYeed
 

I am of course only kidding about what I just said about those who monitor the site. They are very much needed to keep this website operating under the higher standards noticeably absent from most sites of this nature. Thanks guys!



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by BadBoYeed
 


Hmm, good theory. If they were wooden, it would make sense. Easy to carve and replace when they wore down.
edit on Sun Dec 12 2010 by Jbird because: Removed OT embed



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
This method is good for short distance - to transport to the Stonehenge site you would need a boat due to two reasons:

1. The River Avon was 30m higher during the construction period

2. Stonehenge was surrounded by a FOREST so no rolling or dragging could be undertaken

these methods are detailed in a new book 'The Stonehenge Enigma'



posted on Dec, 12 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
This is a very interesting sounding theory. Not as exiting as ancient aliens but still. I never heard the balls theory before personally. Pictures of the found balls would be great though if anyone knows a link.

Via
Gizmodo
From
National Geographic
edit on 11/12/2010 by PsykoOps because: Oopsie via from


those who build it most certainly had ball's...:-)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join