'Stonehenge was built in 1954' (No, it wasn't. HOAX)

[sweety]

https://www.google.nl/search?q=construction+of+stonehenge+1954&num=100&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjw-IDygZbPAhXCzRoKHWhPAxUQ_AUICCgB&biw=1033&bih=674


Why would they lie?

Why not, they always lie!

[Cidersomerset]

There was a thread put up by Snoweagle last year
that did touch on whether Stone Henge was a hoax

Lf119qOXQaA


Re: Has Stonehenge been found on Mars?

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?85589-Has-Stonehenge-been-found-on-Mars&p=1003673&viewfull=1#post1003673

[ozmirage]

HOAX
http://wafflesatnoon.com/stonehenge-built-modern-times/

Photos offered as “proof” of this are merely evidence of excavations which occurred at the site in the 20th century.

- - - -
K.A.O.M.B.N.S.O.T.Y.B.F.O.
Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out.

[Cidersomerset]

Stonehenge is genuine imo and here's my response post to the above vid
posted by Snoweagle originally on his Mars thread.....

====================================================

Interesting Vid and heres an article from Before its news , my first thought was
they were renovating the site in some way ? Or is this a replica ? There are a lot of
bystanders watching so it was not secret. There must be news records
somewhere ? and many of the people are probably still alive ?

http://beforeitsnews.com/img/b4in/logo.png

http://fishki.net/picsw/102012/12/post/restavraciya/restavraciya-0013.jpg

http://beforeitsnews.com/blogging-citizen-journalism/2013/12/shock-1954-photos-show-stonehenge-being-built-2449888.html

====================================================

This photo is reportedly from 1885

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Stonehenge_with_farm_carts,_c._1885.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge

===================================================
===================================================

There is less film material than you would expect that I can find so far...But I'm
pretty sure its genuine.


Druids Ceremony At Stonehenge (1949)

wVPcyQ27T7I

Published on 13 Apr 2014
Stonehenge, Salisbury Plane, Wiltshire.

Several shots of the sunrise over Stonehenge. LV. Deserted Stonehenge. Various
shots of the Summer Solstice ceremony in progress, unopened urn in foreground.
CU. Urn being opened. CU. Man. MV. Druids parading in front of Chief Druid.
Lighted urn in foreground. MV. Chief Druid bowing. MV. Druids parading during
their ceremony at Stonehenge. SV. Druids chanting. LV. Dog walks into ceremony.
SV. Dog lying on ground. SV. Druid holding pipe. MV. Towards, druids leaving in
procession, leader holding a cup. SV. Dog, scarred by the crowd moving towards,
moves away. Procession leaving.

===================================================

Druids Ceremony At Stonehenge (1948)

a-QKlKBMG5Q

===================================================
===================================================



https://mikepitts.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/1896-sketch.jpg

https://mikepitts.wordpress.com/tag/press-cutting/


10th Battalion marching en rout 1915
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/10thBttnstonehenge_1915_zps0cb98bde.jpg

http://britishmilitariaforums.yuku.com/topic/15647/Album-of-period-images-showing-Ross-rifles-in-use#.Vggw1s6FN9A

Penny Postcard 1935
http://columbiariverimages.com/PennyPostcards/Images/PC_stonehenge_near_salisbury_ca1935.jpg
http://columbiariverimages.com/Regions/Places/stonehenge.html

http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/actvssurgconvol2/chapter2figure16.jpg

==================================================
=================================================


In pictures: Stonehenge tourism

Stonehenge’s long heritage as a tourist attraction comes under the spotlight this
month, in an exhibition that features historical souvenirs, guidebooks, postcards
and photographs

http://www.historyextra.com/stonehenge-tourism

other links....

https://www.facebook.com/AmesburyMuseum

http://history.wiltshire.gov.uk/community/

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history/

[sweety]

There was a thread put up by Snoweagle last year
that did touch on whether Stone Henge was a hoax

Re: Has Stonehenge been found on Mars?

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?85589-Has-Stonehenge-been-found-on-Mars&p=1003673&viewfull=1#post1003673

I did check for an earlier post.
With the check option...
Nothing was found.

[Cidersomerset]

I did check for an earlier post.
With the check option...
Nothing was found.

You would not have , I remembered the hoax vid coming up on the thread and its
about Mars, and knew I had answered it. So it would not have come up.....

[sweety]

https://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrB8o7IKN1XxkQAcjkunIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTIzMHE1bzRmBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZANmM2U4YjIxZjgwMDkz ZmZkZmI1OTQ5YzkyMTk0NjE1ZgRncG9zAzE1BGl0A2Jpbmc-?.origin=&back=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3Fp%3D1954%2Bstone%2Bhenge%2Bobama%26n%3D6 0%26ei%3DUTF-8%26y%3DSearch%26fr%3Dyhs-mozilla-001%26fr2%3Dp%253As%252Cv%253Ai%252Cm%253Asb-top%26hsimp%3Dyhs-001%26hspart%3Dmozilla%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D15&w=992&h=558&imgurl=www.cieliparalleli.com%2Fimages%2Fstories%2F024img2015%2F140905_vod_orig_stonehedge0_16x9_992 .jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cieliparalleli.com%2FCostume%2Fstonehenge-costruito-artificialmente-nel-1954.html&size=83.2KB&name=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&p=1954+stonehenge+obama&oid=f3e8b21f80093ffdfb5949c92194615f&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&rw=1954+stonehenge+obama&tt=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&b=0&ni=21&no=15&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12o9ejhpu&sigb=15rv27jns&sigi=12pevk8p5&sigt=11vvn0n1d&sign=11vvn0n1d&.crumb=.mkxbLd7nd7&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=mozilla

Photo doesn 't show.
https://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrB8o7IKN1XxkQAcjkunIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTIzMHE1bzRmBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZANmM2U4YjIxZjgwMDkz ZmZkZmI1OTQ5YzkyMTk0NjE1ZgRncG9zAzE1BGl0A2Jpbmc-?.origin=&back=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3Fp%3D1954%2Bstone%2Bhenge%2Bobama%26n%3D6 0%26ei%3DUTF-8%26y%3DSearch%26fr%3Dyhs-mozilla-001%26fr2%3Dp%253As%252Cv%253Ai%252Cm%253Asb-top%26hsimp%3Dyhs-001%26hspart%3Dmozilla%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D15&w=992&h=558&imgurl=www.cieliparalleli.com%2Fimages%2Fstories%2F024img2015%2F140905_vod_orig_stonehedge0_16x9_992 .jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cieliparalleli.com%2FCostume%2Fstonehenge-costruito-artificialmente-nel-1954.html&size=83.2KB&name=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&p=1954+stonehenge+obama&oid=f3e8b21f80093ffdfb5949c92194615f&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&rw=1954+stonehenge+obama&tt=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&b=0&ni=21&no=15&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12o9ejhpu&sigb=15rv27jns&sigi=12pevk8p5&sigt=11vvn0n1d&sign=11vvn0n1d&.crumb=.mkxbLd7nd7&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=mozilla

Guess it's link is to long

The stones are hollow.
@Cidersomerset
The pictures (authentic evidence) are all false.
Photoshopped as we call it today.
We can see the artists drawing the ¨old¨ pictures.

The real stone henge from Huxely somewhere the 1700's, contained just a few little stones.
They made fake old drawings, to convince the public.

Off topic;
Of the Egyptian pyramids they made even a few postcards and post-stamps.
The rest is almost the same.

No photo's from the nineteenth century and fake drawings added to the Napoleon campaign.

[Akasha]

.....This photo is reportedly from 1885.....

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Stonehenge_with_farm_carts,_c._1885.jpg


http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history/

.....the (not so) A303.....

[Bill Ryan]

.
Please be a little more intelligent, and diligent, before posting idiocy like this. (I changed the thread title to clearly show the hoax the story actually is.)

It took me less than 60 seconds to find this explanation:

http://wafflesatnoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/stonehenge-full@2x.jpg

[Nick Matkin]

I feel it's daft posts like this that just make the forum look really stupid to onlookers.

For anyone to even consider this as a possibility reflects badly on intellect and critical thinking skills.

I expect someone will suggest the earth is flat or that some huge astronomical object is hurtling towards us and is visible if you just bother to look.

Oh - they've both already been suggested...?

:facepalm:

[Billy]

https://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrB8o7IKN1XxkQAcjkunIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTIzMHE1bzRmBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZANmM2U4YjIxZjgwMDkz ZmZkZmI1OTQ5YzkyMTk0NjE1ZgRncG9zAzE1BGl0A2Jpbmc-?.origin=&back=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3Fp%3D1954%2Bstone%2Bhenge%2Bobama%26n%3D6 0%26ei%3DUTF-8%26y%3DSearch%26fr%3Dyhs-mozilla-001%26fr2%3Dp%253As%252Cv%253Ai%252Cm%253Asb-top%26hsimp%3Dyhs-001%26hspart%3Dmozilla%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D15&w=992&h=558&imgurl=www.cieliparalleli.com%2Fimages%2Fstories%2F024img2015%2F140905_vod_orig_stonehedge0_16x9_992 .jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cieliparalleli.com%2FCostume%2Fstonehenge-costruito-artificialmente-nel-1954.html&size=83.2KB&name=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&p=1954+stonehenge+obama&oid=f3e8b21f80093ffdfb5949c92194615f&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&rw=1954+stonehenge+obama&tt=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&b=0&ni=21&no=15&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12o9ejhpu&sigb=15rv27jns&sigi=12pevk8p5&sigt=11vvn0n1d&sign=11vvn0n1d&.crumb=.mkxbLd7nd7&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=mozilla

Photo doesn 't show.
https://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrB8o7IKN1XxkQAcjkunIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTIzMHE1bzRmBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZANmM2U4YjIxZjgwMDkz ZmZkZmI1OTQ5YzkyMTk0NjE1ZgRncG9zAzE1BGl0A2Jpbmc-?.origin=&back=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3Fp%3D1954%2Bstone%2Bhenge%2Bobama%26n%3D6 0%26ei%3DUTF-8%26y%3DSearch%26fr%3Dyhs-mozilla-001%26fr2%3Dp%253As%252Cv%253Ai%252Cm%253Asb-top%26hsimp%3Dyhs-001%26hspart%3Dmozilla%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D15&w=992&h=558&imgurl=www.cieliparalleli.com%2Fimages%2Fstories%2F024img2015%2F140905_vod_orig_stonehedge0_16x9_992 .jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cieliparalleli.com%2FCostume%2Fstonehenge-costruito-artificialmente-nel-1954.html&size=83.2KB&name=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&p=1954+stonehenge+obama&oid=f3e8b21f80093ffdfb5949c92194615f&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&rw=1954+stonehenge+obama&tt=Immagine+satellitare+su+centri+preistorici+intorno+a+Stonehenge&b=0&ni=21&no=15&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12o9ejhpu&sigb=15rv27jns&sigi=12pevk8p5&sigt=11vvn0n1d&sign=11vvn0n1d&.crumb=.mkxbLd7nd7&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Ai%2Cm%3Asb-top&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=mozilla

Guess it's link is to long

The stones are hollow.

The pictures (evidence) are all false.
Photoshopped as we call it today.
We can see the artists drawing the ¨old¨ pictures.

The real stone henge from Huxely somewhere the 1700's, contained just a few little stones.
They made fake old drawings, to convince the public.

Off topic;
Of the Egyptian pyramids they made even a few postcards and post-stamps.
The rest is almost the same.

No photo's from the nineteenth century and fake drawings added to the Napoleon campaign.

Having been to Stonehenge many times, i can assure you the stones are not hollow. The picture you show of Obama visiting the stones shows some concrete reinforcement to strengthen the bottom of a crumbling stone.

34216

I think you misunderstood the reason for this "Known Hoaxes and OTHER BAD INFORMATION" forum Sweety. By accident you actually posted in the correct place.

More scientific research before you post please.

[Atlas]

Here is a previous thread: projectavalon.net/What-is-going-on-here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?74963-What-is-going-on-here--)


Here is what National Geographic wrote about the 1958 restoration:




It required one of the largest cranes in England to lift Stonehenge's massive rock lintels during a rehabilitation project at the site in 1958. The size of the stones used to build the ancient monument—some pillars are 30 feet (9 meters) long and weigh 50 tons (45 metric tons)—and the distances they were moved have led to wild theories of supernatural involvement in the building of the structure.

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/247/cache/stonehenge-crane_24769_600x450.jpg
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/archaeology/photos/stonehenge/#/stonehenge-crane_24769_600x450.jpg

[Sueanne47]

I feel it's daft posts like this that just make the forum look really stupid to onlookers.

For anyone to even consider this as a possibility reflects badly on intellect and critical thinking skills.

I expect someone will suggest the earth is flat or that some huge astronomical object is hurtling towards us and is visible if you just bother to look.

Oh - they've both already been suggested...?

:facepalm:

Ahh yes, but its nice to have Avalon to talk about these things to dispel the doubt going on in the real world. Nibiru..I'm on the fence about that one, but there is no real evidence of 'another planet' ~ yet!

[sweety]

.....This photo is reportedly from 1885.....

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Stonehenge_with_farm_carts,_c._1885.jpg


http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history/

.....the (not so) A303.....

Sorry, it is an obvious fake.

[sweety]

I feel it's daft posts like this that just make the forum look really stupid to onlookers.

For anyone to even consider this as a possibility reflects badly on intellect and critical thinking skills.

I expect someone will suggest the earth is flat or that some huge astronomical object is hurtling towards us and is visible if you just bother to look.

Oh - they've both already been suggested...?

:facepalm:

Ahh yes, but its nice to have Avalon to talk about these things to dispel the doubt going on in the real world. Nibiru..I'm on the fence about that one, but there is no real evidence of 'another planet' ~ yet!

Believing in aliens makes you look good.
Or Nibiru for that matter.

I either believe in aliens nor in (the authenticity of) Stonehenge.

[Citizen No2]

sweety wrote:


I either believe in aliens nor in (the authenticity of) Stonehenge.

Which one is it then? The Aliens', or Stonehenge?



Regards.

[Bill Ryan]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/Stonehenge_with_farm_carts,_c._1885.jpg

Sorry, it is an obvious fake.

Well, thank you for apologizing! :)

Here's another old photo, showing the same cart track.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Stonehenge_1877.JPG

Seriously, you're wasting members' time -- and your own -- with poor research (and unintelligent opinions) like this. As Billy wrote above (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?93395-Stonehenge-was-built-in-1954--No-it-wasn-t--HOAX-&p=1099443&viewfull=1#post1099443),

More scientific research before you post please. The mods are only keeping this thread open because this has also been discussed elsewhere on the net, and one of our jobs here is to present good information to members and guests in an often-confusing climate which is increasingly full of idiocy and false claims. Please don't add to that unhelpful noise.

[Citizen No2]

The mods are only keeping this thread open because this has also been discussed elsewhere on the net, and one of our jobs here is to present good information to members and guests in an often-confusing climate which is increasingly full of idiocy and false claims. Please don't add to that unhelpful noise.

Are we going to see a more stringent, due diligence performed, Avalon Bill?


Regards.

[sweety]

[QUOTE=Bill Ryan;1099430].
Please be a little more intelligent, and diligent, before posting idiocy like this. (I changed the thread title to clearly show the hoax the story actually is.)


Are you serious Bill?
Believing in aliens is not idiotic?

I like to debunk aliens and Stonehenge alike.
Both ain't real in my view.

I can't make that claim without placing the photo's.
People are smart enough to decide for their own, what to believe and what not.

Most of the people that is.

Better close this topic.

Letś waste more time on Nibiru and aliens

[Bill Ryan]

Are we going to see a more stringent, due diligence performed, Avalon Bill?

Regards.

Well, we do our best! When someone posts something that's not very well thought out, members almost always jump in with good information, and that all adds to the very valuable integrity of the 'library'. A tiny number of threads we just delete -- pretty rarely, but we sometimes do -- as they have no place here.

It's always a judgment call, and we really don't want to be book-burning censors. As I mentioned above, this thread we've kept open (so far!) because it gives members good information to counter bad information that they may encounter elsewhere on the net.

[Bill Ryan]

.
Please be a little more intelligent, and diligent, before posting idiocy like this. (I changed the thread title to clearly show the hoax the story actually is.)

Are you serious Bill?
Believing in aliens is not idiotic?

I like to debunk aliens and Stonehenge alike.
Both ain't real in my view.



Well, your view may need a little enhanced magnification.

I'll say this straight, if I may: from what you have posted and shared, you're not a very good (or maybe not a very experienced) researcher.

That's not a hanging offense (as we say in English, as an idiom) ... but at least, please TRY. Casually copying a YouTube video you may have stumbled across is not 'research'.

Many members' responses here will give you valuable clues and tips on how to check fact from fiction. It'd be smart (and wise) not to cling to and defend provisional personal opinion, but to take the opportunity of being a member here as one to learn a very great deal about a whole bunch of things, maybe literally every day. This absolutely is one of the very best places on the net to do that.

[AutumnW]

Before it's News is not the best site. Lots of easily disproven stuff on there.

[Sueanne47]

I like to debunk aliens and Stonehenge alike.
Both ain't real in my view

??????!!! The last time I went past it on the motorway ...its still there! & aliens DO exist.





Edit from Bill: sometimes you drive past aliens on the motorway, too. :bigsmile:
(Not so commonly in Wiltshire, but definitely in Nevada)

:focus:

[ghostrider]

People think that the generation now is the most advanced , when thousands of years ago very high technology was present on earth... global as well as cosmic wars destroyed everything , i refer to one example , the destruction of Atlantis somewhere around 40,000 years ago ...The great pyramids of Egypt, one of the many huge stone structures found around the globe that has science still baffled... They debate how did they do it ??? Obviously the past civilizations were much smarter and more advanced , note in the past 100 years no one has built a stone pyramid in the mountains or on sand in the middle of nowhere with no resources nearby ... muchless align structures with the movement of stars ...

[Citizen No2]

Am of the opinion that since the Industrial Revolution we have devolved in so many ways.


Regards.

[Bill Ryan]

Am of the opinion that since the Industrial Revolution we have devolved in so many ways.

Regards.

I'd strongly agree. :thumbsup:

In fact, maybe we've all degenerated quite a lot since the Ancient Greeks over 2,000 years ago -- who were gifted, wise and often brilliant people. If Archimedes hadn't been killed by a Roman soldier who had no idea who he was, he'd almost certainly have perfected a workable steam engine... and then the Industrial Revolution might have happened round about the time of Christ. Following that, someone could have landed on the moon around 200 AD. That's how quick it can all move. Interesting stuff.

[Sierra]

(Hi. We unsubscribed sweety, for poor research skills.)

:focus: (wherever it's going :) )

[Bill Ryan]

.
Side note, but we'll keep the thread open... it's interesting to talk about Archimedes (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?93395-Stonehenge-was-built-in-1954--No-it-wasn-t--HOAX-&p=1099512&viewfull=1#post1099512) ^^, one of mankind's very greatest geniuses. :star:

sweety has now been unsubscribed. Not my decision (the mods work as a consensus), but based on his posts in recent hours, I do actually fully support that. We wish him no ill at all -- we never wish ill on anyone -- but the mods concluded that he did not properly belong in this particular community.

[Cidersomerset]

Hi Sweety I always try not to be rude when disagreeing with other members and colleagues
in work and friends and family. But you are a little off the mark with some of your claims.
( I like enthusiasm ) . Its fine not to agree with others but you may like to ' look before
you leap ' into some of these threads. I like a good theory and even the odd 'crack pot'
or two , but there is a difference from sensationalism and asking a question imo.

Stonehenge was built over several phases over thousands of years and some of the
Stones may well have been used on other monuments ? or brought straight to the site.
I have watched many mainstream documentaries on the subject, and yes some
alternate researchers speculate it could be older ? and question who may of built it.
But not any I can recall think its a recent hoax , it is definitely thousands of years old .

That does not mean you have to believe it or not but I would suggest trying to
find more corroborative evidence , research or theory before posting if possible.

There is still plenty of speculation of who ? , why ? and when? it was built.
But it is definitely genuine and a real historic monument to something ?

So there are plenty of questions to ask......I'l post links to a few if you want
to look or not.....


pAJ-TYFJzfM

====================================================
BBC Operation Stonehenge What Lies Beneath 1of2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B54SP0Q2NlM

====================================================

Stonehenge Documentary | Stonehenge facts and mystery english subtitles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3Sddbz_cac

====================================================

Stonehenge rediscovered.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slTrDp08pLc

===================================================

BBC - Stonehenge: A Timewatch Guide (2016)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upUBtSiq6DE

[Cidersomerset]

(Hi. We unsubscribed sweety, for poor research skills.)

(wherever it's going )




That's typical ...LOL I need not bothered with post above. Though it might be
interesting to somebody....

Good luck Sweety on your journey......

[DeDukshyn]

I find it funny when people grossly underestimate the collective research ability and general intelligence of many members of this forum. I am glad to say we have an excellent ratio of critical thinkers and incredible researchers, that cover broadly almost any and all topics / specialties.

Avalon is not a forum for "conspiracy theorists" - it is a forum for people who have eyes to see when things don't add up and when they do; to critically evaluate scenarios utilizing a large talent base; we are researchers and fact finders, but also speculators where speculations have the potential to bear fruit; we are spiritual warriors and lovers of life. It just so happens that these types of people have the skills to be able to examine and unfold the destructive conspiracies that plague our times that we should be aware of as a species, and debunk those that have no relevance (distractions), or those that are specifically crafted to deceive the "conspiracy theorists", as well as provide guidance to the confused. Avalon is not just another "conspiracy theory site" -- those relying on or believing so will be left disappointed.

[Ewan]

It's not nice to be pleased for someone elses misfortune, I understand, but this timely departure has avoided the near certaintly of me being quite rude to him in the future.

[Citizen No2]

Ewan wrote:


It's not nice to be pleased for someone elses misfortune, I understand, but this timely departure has avoided the near certaintly of me being quite rude to him in the future.

Yep. I've never understood the people that thank mods on the Record of Forum Actions thread when they ban people. Comes across as a little sycophantic to me, in fact, I find it quite disturbing.......


Regards.

[bogeyman]

Lets settle the argument on Stonehenge, I built it in my back yard, along with faking the Crop Circles and all the UFO reports in the world. Hence problem solved.:clapping:

[Bill Ryan]

Ewan wrote:


It's not nice to be pleased for someone elses misfortune, I understand, but this timely departure has avoided the near certaintly of me being quite rude to him in the future.Yep. I've never understood the people that thank mods on the Record of Forum Actions thread when they ban people. Comes across as a little sycophantic to me, in fact, I find it quite disturbing.......

Regards.

Well, it may just be rather like someone thanking the action taken when it's the right one, to benefit the community as a whole -- as it sometimes can be. :)

One has to consider what we also do behind the scenes, literally every day: screen out membership applications which never make it here, because the fit would not be a good one, or potentially sometimes even damaging.

When we consider the new applications, of course it's an imperfect process, as we cannot know all the information about an applicant member. Sometimes, that only comes to light soon after they've joined, as in this particular case. But it works pretty well maybe 95% of the time.

Here, it may be more helpful to think of it as correcting a bad decision we made ourselves. We're not trying to punish anyone here, and we are not saying sweety was a bad person, because we're sure he is not. We do, genuinely, wish him well.

But this was not the right online community for him, and it's our job to make that judgment, as best we can. If he'd replied saying: "Hey Guys, sorry I got this all wrong, I'm new around here, and I'll do a little better next time"... then it might have all been different. He, like all of us, are on a journey that is always changing.

[Cidersomerset]

Comes across as a little sycophantic to me, in fact, I find it quite disturbing.......


Where as I acknowledge your view , you have reminded me of the ' Thank You ' button
I have said this before , it means different things to different members.....

For me I use it to say thanks for the info or interesting article/post. On my own
threads its an acknowledgement that people have posted and have looked in
usually.Or it might be I read a post and acknowledge it whether I agree with it or
not.So for me it has multi functions .....

I deleted pics myself , a little OTT on reflection....:dog:

[Citizen No2]

Well, it may just be rather like someone thanking the action taken when it's the right one, to benefit the community as a whole -- as it sometimes can be.

One has to consider what we also do behind the scenes, literally every day: screen out membership applications which never make it here, because the fit would not be a good one, or potentially sometimes even damaging.

When we consider the new applications, of course it's an imperfect process, as we cannot know all the information about an applicant member. Sometimes, that only comes to light soon after they've joined, as in this particular case. But it works pretty well maybe 95% of the time.

Here, it may be more helpful to think of it as correcting a bad decision we made ourselves. We're not trying to punish anyone here, and we are not saying sweety was a bad person, because we're sure he is not. We do, genuinely, wish him well.

But this was not the right online community for him, and it's our job to make that judgment, as best we can. If he'd replied saying: "Hey Guys, sorry I got this all wrong, I'm new around here, and I'll do a little better next time"... then it might have all been different. He, like all of us, are on a journey that is always changing.

I get it Bill and understand that these actions have to be taken, and also understand that I'm not privy to information behind the scenes. When someone is banned, rightly or wrongly, and you get loads of members 'thanking', it always leaves me with the image of a high-fenced, ringed village, with the now ex-member walking away, with the Mods (gatekeepers) shutting the gate. Then loads of members rushing up to the Mods and thanking them. I think my use of the word, 'sycophantic' was probably wrong.

That's just the image I get. Am not saying I'm right, am not saying I'm wrong. I don't think there is any 'right' or 'wrong' in that situation.

It also makes me wonder of how we would handle this in a 'Real-World' situation. If the sh*t does hit the fan and we have to band together in small groups to survive...... how will people who's views do not fit the consensus be handled?

Getting a mod to un-subscribe them won't cut it. And what do we learn of tolerance, of how to deal with people who do not conform to the group consensus? What of that?


Regards.

[ulli]

Well, it may just be rather like someone thanking the action taken when it's the right one, to benefit the community as a whole -- as it sometimes can be.

One has to consider what we also do behind the scenes, literally every day: screen out membership applications which never make it here, because the fit would not be a good one, or potentially sometimes even damaging.

When we consider the new applications, of course it's an imperfect process, as we cannot know all the information about an applicant member. Sometimes, that only comes to light soon after they've joined, as in this particular case. But it works pretty well maybe 95% of the time.

Here, it may be more helpful to think of it as correcting a bad decision we made ourselves. We're not trying to punish anyone here, and we are not saying sweety was a bad person, because we're sure he is not. We do, genuinely, wish him well.

But this was not the right online community for him, and it's our job to make that judgment, as best we can. If he'd replied saying: "Hey Guys, sorry I got this all wrong, I'm new around here, and I'll do a little better next time"... then it might have all been different. He, like all of us, are on a journey that is always changing.

I get it Bill and understand that these actions have to be taken, and also understand that I'm not privy to information behind the scenes. When someone is banned, rightly or wrongly, and you get loads of members 'thanking', it always leaves me with the image of a high-fenced, ringed village, with the now ex-member walking away, with the Mods (gatekeepers) shutting the gate. Then loads of members rushing up to the Mods and thanking them. I think my use of the word, 'sycophantic' was probably wrong.

That's just the image I get. Am not saying I'm right, am not saying I'm wrong. I don't think there is any 'right' or 'wrong' in that situation.

It also makes me wonder of how we would handle this in a 'Real-World' situation. If the sh*t does hit the fan and we have to band together in small groups to survive...... how will people who's views do not fit the consensus be handled?

Getting a mod to un-subscribe them won't cut it. And what do we learn of tolerance, of how to deal with people who do not conform to the group consensus? What of that?


Regards.

At least in my case, and I can't speak for others, I often thank the mods for the banning note as an expression of
"At last! What took them so long?"
Because sometimes I actually find them a bit too democratic, too patient.

[Citizen No2]

I like the feather-rufflers. I like to see the group dynamic challenged. I think it's important for growth.

If it comes to out-and-out personal attacks, then I agree, something has to be done as there are ways to disagree without resorting to nastiness. As someone posted in this thread, when someone first has the blinkers taken off, everything can be seen as a conspiracy of some sort, and the temptation to 'run around screaming' can be quite high.

As some clever person once said, "if you find you are the cleverest person in the room, you need to go to a different room".............. Or words to that effect.


Regards.

[Bill Ryan]

It also makes me wonder of how we would handle this in a 'Real-World' situation. If the sh*t does hit the fan and we have to band together in small groups to survive...... how will people who's views do not fit the consensus be handled?

Getting a mod to un-subscribe them won't cut it. And what do we learn of tolerance, of how to deal with people who do not conform to the group consensus? What of that?


I fully understand, I really do. All the mods do. It's a paradox. We really do need to take care of our neighbors in a crisis, even if we may not like them very much. Ask anyone who's been a real-world war zone.

But (and this is a rhetorical question to illustrate the dilemma) -- do we remove the membership application process, and allow anyone at all out there to jump in and say anything they want?

It'd then be just like Godlike Productions (or the comments on Infowars.com :facepalm: ). The whole forum would be destroyed within a week... like allowing a bunch of rioters with Molotov cocktails in a quiet library.

[AutumnW]

Lets settle the argument on Stonehenge, I built it in my back yard, along with faking the Crop Circles and all the UFO reports in the world. Hence problem solved.:clapping:

My grandfather says it was built before 1954 and he should know as he helped build the great pyramid of Cheops when he was a boy. :bigsmile:

[Citizen No2]

Yes, fair comment Bill.

I understand that a SHTF scenario would be an entirely different scenario to an unruly member of a forum.


I fully understand, I really do. All the mods do. It's a paradox. We really do need to take care of our neighbors in a crisis, even if we may not like them very much. Ask anyone who's been a real-world war zone.

But (and this is a rhetorical question to illustrate the dilemma) -- do we remove the membership application process, and allow anyone at all out there to jump in and say anything they want?

It'd then be just like Godlike Productions (or the comments on Infowars.com ). The whole forum would be destroyed within a week... like allowing a bunch of rioters with Molotov cocktails in a quiet library.


AutumnW........... That actually made me laugh out load. Brilliant.


My grandfather says it was built before 1954 and he should know as he helped build the great pyramid of Cheops when he was a boy.

Regards.

[Did You See Them]

Some interesting photographs of the building of Stonehenge.

http://www.ancient-code.com/the-images-stonehenge-dont-want-see/

[Nick Matkin]

Some interesting photographs of the building of Stonehenge.

http://www.ancient-code.com/the-images-stonehenge-dont-want-see/

Does anyone REALLY think it was built in the 1950s? REALLY? That's maintenance only :facepalm:


See this thread http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?93395-Stonehenge-was-built-in-1954--No-it-wasn-t.-HOAX-&highlight=stone+henge

[Akasha]

The word "Build" in the thread title should be changed to "Repair" or "Maintenance" or more ideally the whole thread should be merged with The one Nick just linked to. This is very old news. Again, members should take full advantage of the search engine before creating similar threads to those already in existence.

[norman]

The word "Build" in the thread title should be changed to "Repair" or "Maintenance" or more ideally the whole thread should be merged with The one Nick just linked to. This is very old news. Again, members should take full advantage of the search engine before creating similar threads to those already in existence.

It DOES throw into question the more 'esoteric' claims people make about the "energies" they experience while at the site though. I hardly think those contractors with their crane were doing much 'tuning' of the energies.

[Pam]

The word "Build" in the thread title should be changed to "Repair" or "Maintenance" or more ideally the whole thread should be merged with The one Nick just linked to. This is very old news. Again, members should take full advantage of the search engine before creating similar threads to those already in existence.

It DOES throw into question the more 'esoteric' claims people make about the "energies" they experience while at the site though. I hardly think those contractors with their crane were doing much 'tuning' of the energies.



Good point, Norman. Is it a placebo effect or is the location a sort of energy vortex, similar to those found in Sedona, Arizona?

[Nick Matkin]

The word "Build" in the thread title should be changed to "Repair" or "Maintenance" or more ideally the whole thread should be merged with The one Nick just linked to. This is very old news. Again, members should take full advantage of the search engine before creating similar threads to those already in existence.

It DOES throw into question the more 'esoteric' claims people make about the "energies" they experience while at the site though. I hardly think those contractors with their crane were doing much 'tuning' of the energies.



Good point, Norman. Is it a placebo effect or is the location a sort of energy vortex, similar to those found in Sedona, Arizona?

Just because it has been patched up over the years, doesn't mean that's affected theses 'energies'.

It could be simply a marker for these energies, not the generator.

As an obvious sceptic I'd be more convinced about this and related ley line stuff if someone could come up with some proof that these energies exist in the first place. Repeatable measurements perhaps? Otherwise if no one can measure or detect them, it's rather like them not being there at all isn't it?

[Did You See Them]

Some interesting photographs of the building of Stonehenge.

http://www.ancient-code.com/the-images-stonehenge-dont-want-see/

Does anyone REALLY think it was built in the 1950s? REALLY? That's maintenance only :facepalm:


See this thread http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?93395-Stonehenge-was-built-in-1954--No-it-wasn-t.-HOAX-&highlight=stone+henge

I was being a little sarcastic saying "building" in thread title (now a post since thread merged ) thats all - Never meant to suggest that that is WHEN they were "BUILT" - Can't imagine anyone actualy thought that that was what I meant !

Anyway - I thought people might have been interested in the old photos of the "restoration" and of the base of some of the stones (were any pictograms discovered below the ground level on any of the stones ?
Would love to read more on the actual dig that those photos came from, who was involved and what is any conclusions they came to.